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.

 

A Second Source of Light detected by the Rover. Curiosity Sol 568.

page: 10
82
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 12:21 PM
link   
Did someone check if it´s the same camera showing this (L/R) and the position of the light relative to the other "light source"-picture? Arken?

reply to post by Deaf Alien
 

This is relative
. Certainly, there is a difference that matters.... They differ some nanoseconds or even way less for sure. So if something is not recorded on both cams, this could also mean it was faster than the difference between the shutters.

Like a cosmic ray possibly could.




posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Iamnotadoctor
This must be a joke... Please say its a joke


It's a joke



posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


I don't think you know what unbiased means...



posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 


OK let me explain.

I know you are familiar with the mars rover and its camera assembly. I know you know that there are two simultaneous image captures. it seems in your OP you intentionally left off any mention of the second image that was captured. This to me indicates that you know full well this is an imaging artifact more than likely caused by cosmic rays yet you want to intentionally mislead people.



posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


Surely you see the irony of your statement?



posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by MysterX
 


It would be in both images if that were the case. It isn't, indicating a cosmic ray strive on the sensor of the right camera.



posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 07:43 PM
link   
ARKEN, if you would take the time to simply click on this: www.darkerview.com...
It explains how CCD cameras do this ALL the time and that is the source of this mans experiments!
He was getting 5 to 10 hits per hour and this is from earth.
You take hours to mull over a Mars photo and come up with a definite conclusion yet someone posts a link that will explain it in detail and you won't click it!
Is it because you don't want to know the truth?
Everyone loves a mystery, but when it's proved to be false it's time to move on!
You should think of your credibility on ATS, it's not exactly stellar!



posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 08:06 PM
link   
a reply to: wulff

Whatever they are, they've learnt to fly!!




(they're cosmic rays)



posted on Apr, 17 2014 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Rob48

Watch and see, he will see those cosmic rays again on another image in a few weeks and come out with another thread (I'll even help him name it) "A Third Source Of light On Mars Images!"



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Well, If it is a Methane venting, then the WAR OF THE WORLDS has started. People in New Jersey watch out.

If it is an underground base, well they are getting sloppy. With all the other mapping satellites and rovers we have sent and it is only now we are seeing these light. They must have a buck private in charge of the camouflage equipment


The thing is we don't know. This is more reason that we need to go there. The Mars One might get there by 2030, But NASA can get us there in 10 years.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: DarthFazer




Can't say what it is, but cosmic strikes is something new. Because if you can't explain something invent a phenomena.


Well, if it is 1913 then yes they are new.

But, it isn't and they aren't something new.


: Cosmic rays were discovered in 1912 by Victor Hess, when he found that an electroscope discharged more rapidly as he ascended in a balloon. He attributed this to a source of radiation entering the atmosphere from above, and in 1936 was awarded the Nobel prize for his discovery.


www.srl.caltech.edu...
edit on 18-4-2014 by tsurfer2000h because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 03:13 PM
link   
a reply to: wulff




Watch and see, he will see those cosmic rays again on another image in a few weeks and come out with another thread (I'll even help him name it) "A Third Source Of light On Mars Images!"


That is probably how and why this thread was started.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Arken

After looking at image it's either:


Phobos or Deimos (Mar's moons)

Earth (I've seen images of earth from Mars and it looks a lot like that)

scienceonthewing.files.wordpress.com...

Jupiter

Nothing interesting, except that it's a photo from another planet of course.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 05:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Antigod
a reply to: Arken

After looking at image it's either:


Phobos or Deimos (Mar's moons)

Earth (I've seen images of earth from Mars and it looks a lot like that)

scienceonthewing.files.wordpress.com...

Jupiter

Nothing interesting, except that it's a photo from another planet of course.


I have to admit, that was my first thought too. But if you look again, you can see the hills behind it.
I'm with the cosmic ray crowd on this one.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 05:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Pauligirl

Yes, it is easy to mistake land for sky in these monochrome images at first sight. As you say, that is land behind the white "light". The dark features above/behind it are rocks, not clouds.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 03:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: wulff
ARKEN, if you would take the time to simply click on this: www.darkerview.com...
It explains how CCD cameras do this ALL the time and that is the source of this mans experiments!
He was getting 5 to 10 hits per hour and this is from earth.
You take hours to mull over a Mars photo and come up with a definite conclusion yet someone posts a link that will explain it in detail and you won't click it!
Is it because you don't want to know the truth?
Everyone loves a mystery, but when it's proved to be false it's time to move on!
You should think of your credibility on ATS, it's not exactly stellar!


I seen that. Thanks for the link, wulff.
I know those problems with cosmic particles detected on camera during the night or in the dark.
As your souce states, they can be detected into dark frames overnight.


As an experiment I took a camera based on an E2V CCD87 back thinned CCD and took continuous 10 minute dark frames overnight. In the morning I processed these frames by subtracting a master dark frame from each. What was left in each frame was a few bright points or streaks, each representing some high energy event that had occurred during the night. There were and average of five to ten events on each frame.


From your source


How it's possible detect those presumed "cosmic rays" during the daylight, like the camera Rover's do?

And, how we can be absolutely sure that those "streaks" are really cosmic rays and not "something else"...?




You take hours to mull over a Mars photo and come up with a definite conclusion


I don't have a definitive conclusion, instead of you or someone other like you. Mine are hipotesys based on the odds...
How many odds to detect the same phenomenon in a so restricted area and in a so short period of time?

edit on 19-4-2014 by Arken because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 04:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Arken




I don't have a definitive conclusion, instead of you or someone other like you. Mine are hipotesys based on the odds...
How many odds to detect the same phenomenon in a so restricted area and in a so short period of time?


Is there some special space rule that says you can't have cosmic rays detected in more than one picture within a few days?

You say your basing your opinions on the odds, but the odds are greater that this is a cosmic ray strike because it is in only one camera of a stereo set that takes pics at the same time.

And the man who leads the curiosity team even says so himself...


Cosmic rays are charged particles that fly through the universe in every direction all the time. Every so often they'll collide with something like a camera. One sign of a cosmic ray hit, Maki said, is the appearance of the ray in images taken by one of Curiosity's eyes but not the other.


news.nationalgeographic.com... mpaign=20131016_rw_membership_r2p_us_sm_w#

So it seems the odds are in favor of a cosmic ray strike, although it isn't the end all answer but the odds swing in favor of it being that.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 05:10 AM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

The daylight. They can't be detectded in broad day light, according to the source.
And Why your cosmic rays was never detected before?
Why only in these recent Sols?
What if the Rover will detected again the same phenomenon, in broad daylight, in the same area for more than one time?



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 05:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Arken




The daylight. They can't be detectded in broad day light, according to the source.


That would be here on Earth where the atmosphere usually takes care of them, but on a planet where there is virtually not one it can and does happen.



And Why your cosmic rays was never detected before?


They were, and are at least once a week.



Why only in these recent Sols?


Again it isn't just recent Sols these were detected, you just seem to think these cosmic ray strikes are new when it has been shown they are not.



What if the Rover will detected again the same phenomenon, in broad daylight, in the same area for more than one time?


It did which is why we have this thread.



posted on Apr, 19 2014 @ 06:33 AM
link   
Could Jean-Michelle Jarre be touring there?



new topics

top topics



 
82
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join