It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Rover captures light source on Mars!!

page: 22
95
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 04:59 AM
link   

Phage
reply to post by Miniscuzz
 



BUT...there is a 5.2 millisecond delay from when one cam takes a pic to when its sister takes one. 5.2 milliseconds in Physics is a lifetime.
Source for that delay between cameras? In any case 0.00052 second is hardly a lifetime.
 


You have one too many zeros. 5.2 ms would be 0.0052 seconds. It is a long time for modern computers.




posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 05:04 AM
link   
Reminds me of a hot water geyser blowing !



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 05:37 AM
link   
They have turned on... The Beacons...



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 05:38 AM
link   

eriktheawful

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.


Well it seems my first proposition wasn't so out of the loop after all.

In fact that latency gap may be enough to produce different images
Thus, it might be a strong argument to fight the cosmic ray theory



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 05:49 AM
link   
reply to post by LordAdef
 




Well it seems my first proposition wasn't so out of the loop after all.
In fact that latency gap may be enough to produce different images
Thus, it might be a strong argument to fight the cosmic ray theory


Exactly,
but, beware to "the cosmic ray boy"...



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 06:07 AM
link   

Phage

Fuzzy part?
any shots of cosmic rays with a flat bottom and diffused upper end? when you start playing coy I know you're flailing



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 06:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Rob48
 


the bottom edge is less diffused than the top and I was wondering if anybody had any examples of cosmic ray/pixel strikes that looked like that



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 07:49 AM
link   

LordAdef

eriktheawful

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.


Well it seems my first proposition wasn't so out of the loop after all.

In fact that latency gap may be enough to produce different images
Thus, it might be a strong argument to fight the cosmic ray theory



Turns out that 52 milliseconds is for the data read by the RCE and not a delay between cameras taking the images.

I'm still trying to confirm it, but apparently the RCE is able to command 2 cameras at a time (I posted the specs for that earlier in the thread in one of the PDFs), so that when the command to take an image is sent, both cameras do at the same time.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 08:24 AM
link   
No amount of (multimedia) evidence is going to convince a skeptic or discourage a believer. Having said that,i think its extremely unlikely,almost impossible, that mars rover captured
1) 2 cosmic rays 2)at the same location 3)one day apart 4)showing them in the "position" of JUST hitting the ground.
If you want to calculate the possibility of such thing happening please provide links with the following info:
a) number of cosmic rays hitting a 1 m2 area of mars /sec (NOT particles,number of RAYS),
b)number of pictures taken daily by rover mars aka number of pictures per sec

And if that was sun reflection then that would be almost as weird as aliens, because so far we have seen no indication of martian rock with smooth reflective surface or properties that could somehow reflect the sun light (eg some kind of crystal formation).



Now i am going to make an assumption here, or maybe educated guess. The fact that nasa equipped the rover with 2 cameras so they can take stereo images doesn't mean it captures them simultaneously. In fact that is something the rover shouldn't be able to do as it is not needed. I think it makes much more sense that the rover stops,focuses on a point,takes a pic with one cam, takes a few seconds-maybe even minutes- to store and possibly adjust the image file, add information to the image file such as coordinate of rover,coordinates of the area captured,brightness/colour intensity filters used , maybe even encode it too so it can be temporarily stored on its drive minimizing the space allocated and time needed for sending etc .... Then it ends the "take snapshot with the right cam" procedure to start the "take snapshot with the left cam" process. There is absolutely no need to take both pictures simultaneously increasing the data flow and processing power required for such RAW high res images. This is a dead planet after all,everything is standing still, and the "photographer" is a rover,which has a billion functions including being a mobile chemist lab.There is no need taking video directly in 3D on the move as if it is filming the latest avatar sequel. So yea the two pics CAN be seconds or even minutes apart. Numbers given by nasa are not explained. 52ms could be the time difference they were taken OR temporarily/permanently stored in its drive OR encoded OR sent to the satellite in line of sight OR even received by nasa on earth.

In the end of the day we miss way to much info to give a foolproof answer, this is a matter of belief. So in conclusion, assuming
chance a= (double cosmic ray photo capture) + (weird camera malfunction) and
chance b= (nasa is lying/unaware about ET activity on mars) + (nasa is lying/unaware about US gvt activity on mars) + (nasa is lying/unaware of natural phenomenons occurring in martian subsoil) + (nasa lying/unaware of martian crystal-rock formations on its surface)
i personally believe chance b >> chance a .



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Miniscuzz

Greetings Community.


I just don't know what to say!


I don't see how this could possibly be debunked or debated. It's dark and the light is a very bright white...pointing directly up from the ground about a half a mile to perhaps a mile away from the rover. The picture is a raw JPL image. Link provided below.

Another oddity to check out is right in the foreground of the picture. It looks like either tracks of some sort (not rover) or water was there in the recent past and evaporated.

Looks to me like the Arizona or New Mexico desert. Can't wait to read a replies about Mars anomalies that won't have the word "rock" in them lol.


mars.jpl.nasa.gov...









Wherever I see something they let us see, I always wonder what they're hiding in plain sight. So I enlarged and lightened the image and there it was, just in front of the horizontal rock formation just to the left of the little hill at the right of the image about center of the image. What I can see is what looks like a metallic and shiny drum-like object with what looks like a pole with a cone shaped cover above it. I believe the other object may also be one of these and are probably used in the same way airport runway lights are used to direct air travel above, except that the light was turned off because it was right there in front of the rover.

If you look, you can see it.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 10:02 AM
link   
To me it looks like two things. One can be deduced because there are two cameras, so a gyser is out. It honestly looks like a highly reflective surface that the rover took a pic of while it was moving. Why it didnt show up on the other camera, is beyond me. If it were moving while taking that pic, it could explaine that.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Fromabove
 


Wherever I see something they let us see, I always wonder what they're hiding in plain sight.

What's all this "they" business? It smacks of paranoia. NASA aren't some shadowy "they", they're just scientists, people like you and me. They are just trying to discover more about the universe, which is an admirable goal. Certainly more admirable then spreading fear and paranoia.

Who do you think these mysterious "they" are who are trying to hide something from you?

Believe me, if there is anything unusual on Mars then NASA would love to discover it, because strange stuff to investigate means more funding. Lots of rocks, not so much.

Edit: is this the thing you mean when you say "there it was, just in front of the horizontal rock formation just to the left of the little hill at the right of the image about center of the image. What I can see is what looks like a metallic and shiny drum-like object with what looks like a pole with a cone shaped cover above it."?



Looks like some rocks in front of some other rocks to me, but I'm a chemist, not a geologist

edit on 9-4-2014 by Rob48 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 11:20 AM
link   

stormcell
Though I'm wondering about the contrail line at the top of the animation.

Not a contrail. Just a cut and paste line because the image with the spot at the far left was at an angle and I had to tilt it to get the distant mountain range to fit correctly.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 11:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Miniscuzz
 
We will never know the truth behind any life on any planet.. For all we know the mars rovers were sent to an abandoned desert part of the planet, for example the sahara desert on earth..



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 

LOLL Arken that was hilarious



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by lamphead444
 


Apart from the fact that the MSL craft was tracked all the way to Mars, over 350 million miles and over 8 months, of course. Bit of a waste if you're going to send the rover to Algeria, no?



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 11:41 AM
link   

FromaboveWherever I see something they let us see, I always wonder what they're hiding in plain sight.


What's the point of hiding stuff on Mars? Think they're afraid someone is going to go and mess with it?



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by chester1908
 


a) number of cosmic rays hitting a 1 m2 area of mars /sec (NOT particles,number of RAYS),
What do you think a cosmic ray is?



So yea the two pics CAN be seconds or even minutes apart.
The timestamp for the images shows that they were taken within the same second. There is no reason they cannot be simultaneous.


52ms could be the time difference they were taken OR temporarily/permanently stored in its drive OR encoded OR sent to the satellite in line of sight OR even received by nasa on earth.
52ms is the the time it takes for the image to be "downloaded" from the CCD.



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by chester1908
 

I love the way your post is full of "coulds" and "mights" and wild speculation - it is clear you haven't a clue how the cameras work, or how a CCD works, or what a cosmic ray is ("NOT particles"? Really?), or how the photographs are timed. And clearly you have no interest in finding out, because then you might run the risk of finding a mundane explanation rather than ALIENS!



posted on Apr, 9 2014 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Blue Shift

stormcell
Though I'm wondering about the contrail line at the top of the animation.

Not a contrail. Just a cut and paste line because the image with the spot at the far left was at an angle and I had to tilt it to get the distant mountain range to fit correctly.


Sure it is. "They" are obviously paying you to cover up evidence of martian chemtrails.




top topics



 
95
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join