We've mapped 100% of the Moon and Mars at ~100 m resolution. For the ocean floor? ~25% at similar resolution (Seabed 2030 target: 100% by 2030). The reasons are physics, not priority.
10 m depth = +1 atm. At 4,000 m (abyssal avg): 400 atm (40 MPa). At 11,000 m (Challenger Deep): 1,100 atm. Hulls must be thick (titanium spheres) or pressure-balanced (oil-filled). Implosion risk is existential.
Photic zone ends at 200 m. Below: perpetual night. Artificial lighting has short range (absorption/scattering). Sonar (acoustic) replaces optics—but resolution trades off with range.
Batteries drain faster, electronics drift, materials embrittle. Human divers limited to ~500 m (atmospheric suits) / ~70 m (SCUBA). ROVs/AUVs are standard.
Saltwater + pressure + microbes = rapid degradation. Connectors, seals, cables fail. Redundancy adds cost/weight.
Ship time costs $30k–$100k/day. Systematic mapping takes centuries at current fleet capacity. Autonomous fleets (Saildrone, Ocean Infinity) are scaling this.
Currents, eddies, internal waves, tides move the water column. A "map" of the seafloor is static; the ocean above is 4D chaos. Understanding ecosystems requires repeated visits.
The ocean isn't "unexplored" for lack of trying—it's hard. Every 1% gained is a triumph of engineering over physics.