It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Bright spots appear in images from the rover nearly every week. Typical explanations for them are cosmic rays hitting the light detector or sunlight glinting from rocks.
One possible explanation for the bright spot in this image is a glint from a rock surface reflecting the sun. Another is a cosmic ray hitting the camera's light detector, a CCD (charge-coupled device). Cosmic ray patterns in Mars rover images vary from a dot to a long line depending on the angle at which the ray strikes the detector
reply to post by Subterranean13
Just because there's no atmosphere or less/more gravity....doesn't change the parameters of the hardware and how it must be used to capture light it wasn't meant to capture. Much like you can't capture infrared images on your camera phone...the NAV-CAMS cannot, nor ever have caught a cosmic ray. And as of yet...I see no other NAV-CAM image which even comes close to the one I provided.
Some cosmic rays/waves/particles can have the equivalent energy of a baseball travelling 90mph. Not bad for something about the size of an electron.
reply to post by Miniscuzz
This has been explained numerous times on this thread! It is not a particle entering through the lens as visible light. It is a charged particle striking the sensor electronics directly and causing electrons to flow in the sensor. Cosmic rays are NOT visible light so why are you even bringing up that red herring? Just think for a moment about how CCDs and similar sensors work.
Not that I am saying that this one is necessarily a cosmic ray. It could be a sun glint or light leaking through a hole in the housing as suggested by Justin Maki.edit on 8-4-2014 by Rob48 because: (no reason given)
Are you sure?
Cosmic Rays are not in that spectrum which is why no matter how long you keep your shutters open (eyes) you will never see a cosmic ray.
It was determined the astronauts were ‘seeing’ cosmic rays zipping through their eyeballs.
Cosmic rays are not light.
Just because there's no atmosphere or less/more gravity....doesn't change the parameters of the hardware and how it must be used to capture light it wasn't meant to capture.
the NAV-CAMS cannot, nor ever have caught a cosmic ray.
Since cosmic ray strikes are random in direction and energy level, it would be unusual to see very similar strikes in daylight images where, because of the short exposure times, they are not common.
I see no other NAV-CAM image which even comes close to the one I provided.
Um. No. The CCDs are 1200 x 1400 pixels. Each pixel is 12 x 12 microns. About 1/2" by 1/2".
You realize that the sensors on the NC's are 1mm correct?
That would depend upon the number of cosmic ray hits per square meter per sec. On Earth that number is about 200/m2/s. On Mars it would be higher.
So astronomical its completely laughable to even assume that it even happened lol.
What is particle light? Cosmic rays are radiation, silly.
They seen particle light with their eyes closed because they were being bombarded with radiation silly.
Yes, the cosmic rays were producing a physical effect.
They weren't "seeing" anything lol...their bodies were alerting them to the presence of radiation.
It is not exactly the same. It was the same camera but what difference would that make?
how is it possible that the EXACT same light was captured by two separate cameras
Do you understand that particle light is completely different than other light? It doesn't matter what the cosmic ray hit...it's still going to produce a whole other spectrum of light that neither the NC's, the software ICER, the bandpass filters, would allow to be captured in the final image..
reply to post by Subterranean13
I completely understand how cosmic rays are captured on film....YOU apparently DON'T understand that it's impossible for the NAVCAMS to allow for ANY residual particle light to be caught...period.
The light in the original photo was caught twice...by two separate cameras...on two separate days...which you claim is just the same event happening twice...which makes the odds so astronomical that infinity isn't large enough to cover it.