Rover captures light source on Mars!!

DenyObfuscation

Miniscuzz

DenyObfuscation
reply to post by Miniscuzz

 

The second time in two days that the rover has snapped a picture of the same event happening in the exact same spot while in different positions.

saying that. It's not true. If you would take your own advice:

Perhaps you'd like to read the thread before making comments?

You would know this.

What are you even talking about?? April 2nd and April 3rd. Two separate events from different positions appearing to come from the same location.


LINK: www.nbcnews.com...

Neither the location in the frame nor on the planet is exactly the same.

ETA: And from your link here to NBC News

He noted that the rover team usually determines the source of a bright spot by checking both the left and the right views from the navigation camera. If it doesn't show up in both views, it's probably a cosmic ray glitch. "In this case, it's not as straightforward because of a blocked view from the second camera on the first day," he said.

edit on 8-4-2014 by DenyObfuscation because: (no reason given)

No...and I never claimed they were exactly the same either. They are close enough according to Blistrs last post to justify the source being Alf with a flashlight as they are to be cosmic rays. Now we're gonna argue semantics?? So they're not exact. They're still the biggest anomaly those NAVCAMS have ever produced and I don't see the scientific community settling on ANY source yet either. So I could be just as right as you at this point.

Miniscuzz

eriktheawful
reply to post by Blister

 

Very well presented!

Yup...gotta agree there lol. Nicely done! I'm just glad that the quote from your source said that cosmic rays probably weren't the cause because of the repeat event. Been trying to convince someone here of that and as childish as this is....I'm glad that person is wrong lol.

I'm going back to JPL to find something new. C'mon Arken!

Perhaps then, you should look to Blister's post as an example of how to present material and debate things on here then.

Looking at Blister's post I see:

A lot of information, well researched ideas, and presented in a positive manner.
No insults. No belittling others. No rude comments.

Blister did exactly as the mods here at ATS advice: "Go after the ball, not the person."

squishygewgaw
reply to post by Miniscuzz

 

edit on 4/8/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)

" I'm sure that scientist was aware of everything concerning that picture or he wouldn't have been interviewed right? When asked if it was a cosmic ray strike he replied that it was a reflection. Are you paying attention? I've posted that link once already at your request.

Also, while he doesn't say it can't be a cosmic ray, he doesn't say it can't be Alf either. Noone will ever know who is right. I claim your theory is asinine. I'm entitled. Just as you're entitled to not walk away two posts ago when I called a truce so as to further the discussion for others. Sometimes in life...we learn that we cannot be right all the time...this is one of those times for you Phage."






I guess phil plait (a professional /Explanation=cosmic ray) is wrong.
I guess Emily Lakdawalla(a professional /Explanation=cosmic ray) is wrong.
I guessDoug Ellison(a professional image expert for nasa /Explanation=cosmic ray) is wrong.
I guess Ziya Tong and Dan Riskin (hosts of Discovery Channels "Daily Planet"/ Explanation= Cosmic ray) are wrong.


I guess they are all asinine and you (an undercover genius?) are right... you sound silly






You have your sources, and I have mine....that's the way the scientific community operates.



First, the man who built the camera speculates that it's NOT a cosmic ray, but light entering the housing unit.

Next...from Blistrs post: Source:
www.lpi.usra.edu...

In conclusion, the light "source" is local to the rover and probably unique to the Navigation Camera Right B. Please note that investigations of Navigation Camera Left B images and data (later date) are continuing, specifically to rule-out any similarities that may undermine the current understanding that the light "source" was unique to Right B. If it is confirmed that the light "source" is unique to Right B, as seems initially to be the case, then we understand two serious options to remain: Cosmic Ray (highly unlikely due to repeated incidence), and Light Leakage (probably the Detector Head).

If the Detector Head internal shielding is leaking light, then MSL may have a problem - but only a minor one in my opinion. Close inspection of the detector head may be possible to help investigate any incurred damage or wear to the detector head. However, given the minor and non-scientific nature of the inquiry I would expect a negligible chance of follow-up at the current time.

reply to post by Miniscuzz

So I could be just as right as you at this point.

You are just as right as me. I haven't said one thing about what it is. But you are wrong about many things you have said, as is shown repeatedly in the thread.

ETA:

No...and I never claimed they were exactly the same either.

Then what did you claim here?

The second time in two days that the rover has snapped a picture of the same event happening in the exact same spot while in different positions.

If you didn't mean what you said is that my fault?

eriktheawful

Miniscuzz

eriktheawful
reply to post by Blister

 

Very well presented!

Yup...gotta agree there lol. Nicely done! I'm just glad that the quote from your source said that cosmic rays probably weren't the cause because of the repeat event. Been trying to convince someone here of that and as childish as this is....I'm glad that person is wrong lol.

I'm going back to JPL to find something new. C'mon Arken!

Perhaps then, you should look to Blister's post as an example of how to present material and debate things on here then.

Looking at Blister's post I see:

A lot of information, well researched ideas, and presented in a positive manner.
No insults. No belittling others. No rude comments.

Blister did exactly as the mods here at ATS advice: "Go after the ball, not the person."

I don't care what the mods suggest really and I beg your pardon, but perhaps you ought to follow some of that good advice and post something that actually furthers the conversation?

I presented wonderful information for my side and had a healthy...albeit harsh, debate with Phage. Neither of us resorted to name calling or anything else. I don't really like him and the feeling is mutual, but both furthered our causes. Just so happens we were both wrong.

reply to post by Miniscuzz


Here you are. From NASA themselves. For everyone to see on the home page of their website.
www.nasa.gov...

squishygewgaw
reply to post by Miniscuzz

 

Here you are. From NASA themselves. For everyone to see on the home page of their website.
www.nasa.gov...

Hi, and welcome to ATS. Can you maybe summarize the main points when you post a link, although it is probably quite helpful. Not all of us look at every link. Thanks.

reply to post by squishygewgaw


From your link:

This image from NASA's Curiosity Mars rover, taken on April 3, 2014, includes a bright spot near the upper left corner. Possible explanations include a glint from a rock or a cosmic-ray hit.

Mwahahahahahahaha.

And back and forth we go.

There are so many replies that I don't know if anyone has noticed what looks like the Initials U and A on the hill to the left, the tracks, I cant tell the size, , the square part looks not natural to me. As far as the light, looks like a reflection off of a metal shack in the deserts of Australia which is probably where that was taken..but seriously, looks like gas shooting out of the ground and maybe reflecting from the sun, could be a reflection from an alien craft? its something odd.

reply to post by Miniscuzz


I can't really imagine light getting into the camera to produce that result. A small hole in the assembly would still have a way to travel before it hit the ccd, and then be focused like a laser. Such a hole would I believe produce a large roundish area of over-saturation, not a tightly focused spot. Did he really make the camera to make such a claim? Maybe perhaps it's possible, but seems highly unusual to me.

reply to post by Blister

The angle of the light source did not change over the two images:

Can you explain in more detail how you determined this? It appears to me that the angle did change. In the second, the bright spot appears to be directly beneath the distant high peak which it is to the left of in the first.

reply to post by eriktheawful


I don't see a need to go back and forth. They say those are the 2 possibilities, let the brilliant minds handle it. Cosmic Ray hits seem to be a popular and non asinine verdict.

reply to post by Aleister


Here you go, from the article:

"In the thousands of images we've received from Curiosity, we see ones with bright spots nearly every week," said Justin Maki of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., leader of the team that built and operates the Navigation Camera. "These can be caused by cosmic-ray hits or sunlight glinting from rock surfaces, as the most likely explanations."
If the bright spots in the April 2 and April 3 images are from a glinting rock, the directions of the spots from the rover suggest the rock could be on a ridge about 175 yards (160 meters) from the rover's April 3 location.
The bright spots appear in images from the right-eye camera of the stereo Navcam, but not in images taken within one second of those by the left-eye camera. Maki said, "Normally we can quickly identify the likely source of a bright spot in an image based on whether or not it occurs in both images of a stereo pair. In this case, it's not as straightforward because of a blocked view from the second camera on the first day."

So NASA says it could be reflection.....or a cosmic ray hit.

They also say that they see bright spots nearly every week.

And, the answered another question that has been asked, but no one has been able to answer: how long the time is between shots of the left and right cameras. Answer: within one second.

reply to post by eriktheawful


Yeah, it was answered, about 52 milliseconds apparently.

squishygewgaw
reply to post by eriktheawful

 

I don't see a need to go back and forth. They say those are the 2 possibilities, let the brilliant minds handle it. Cosmic Ray hits seem to be a popular and non asinine verdict.

And let only them have the fun?

Here at ATS, we discuss and debate things. Quite a bit.

reply to post by eriktheawful

And, the answered another question that has been asked, but no one has been able to answer: how long the time is between shots of the left and right cameras. Answer: within one second.

Erm...

The two images were taken at the same second.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Qumulys
reply to post by eriktheawful

 

Yeah, it was answered, about 52 milliseconds apparently.

No, that is the readout time for the CCD.

reply to post by eriktheawful


Thanks, and it seems like NASA and Phage are back in the ballgame (seeing that the OP is defending his/her position like a hockey goaltender).

Qumulys
reply to post by eriktheawful

 

Yeah, it was answered, about 52 milliseconds apparently.

That's half a second.

If the spot is a source originating outside the camera (IE it's really something 160 meters away), and it's sunlight glinting off of a rock......0.052 seconds should have been fast enough for both cameras to catch it.

If it was an outside source that was momentary (a burst of light, source unknown), then yes, it would be possible for just one camera to catch it of course.

Or, of course, if it was a cosmic ray, then it would have affected only one camera CCD.

It's good to know the time difference between images.