"The Sphere": Curiosity Sol 610...

Oh no look, another spehre in nature

engineering.purdue.edu...

originally posted by: wildespace

originally posted by: Arken
How it was formed this absurd spherical anomaly?

Water erosion? A displaced concretion? Glacial erosion?

There is nothing absurd about spherical rocks. Why are you calling it an anomaly?

Is this a photo of the Moeraki Boulders? They are unusually large and spherical boulders lying along a stretch of Koekohe Beach on the wave-cut Otago coast of New Zealand. Therefore, this would prove that that area was at one time glacial and coastal. Sadly, there is only one example on Mars. Which begs the question," where did it come from and why is there only one?"
Another excellent thread from Arken...SnF

originally posted by: Arken
An amazing spherical anomaly right in front of the NASA rover called "Curiosity!" (What a strange name for a so indifferent machine...) on Sol 610. How it was formed this Bizarre Sphere? Wind erosion, Water erosion, both, or something else? How it was formed this absurd spherical anomaly? The unique feature of the Sphere, cast many questions. If you were the JPL "puppeteers" of the Rover, would not want to look more closely at such anomaly to understand its characteristics?

mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

nice one arken.

but i am curious about the hut with the white interior or door behind it.

What's that saying? A rolling stone collects no moss?

Anyway, that's what I thought of when I read your OP. Thanks for sharing! It's definitely weird, to me anyway, to see something so round on Mars!

originally posted by: JohnTheSmith
I'll have to agree with your statement that Curiosity (or it's operators) seem quite indifferent to things we here on ATS would consider exciting, or anomalous.

I agree. The thing that bothers me the most about NASA is the fact that ordinary people like us see these interesting things on Mars and would love to get a closer look and detailed analysis, and the "scientists" at NASA see no reason to investigate further? They seem to be telling us that dirt is the most interesting thing up there.

Why are they taking my tax dollars just to go 4-wheeling?? I say let Arken drive for a while!

Just Google up "round rocks." There are a ton of examples. They are hardly uncommon. It's already known there was water on Mars in the past. So hardly surprising there are round rocks there as well.

Cool, sure.. but nothing mars-shattering about it. : )

It is cool. Round rocks mean a decent surf, as that is how they are made on Earth. Rock chunks continuously rolled by crashing waves in the sands and other rocks and pebbles, just turn round. Most are oval, or not symmetrical, but many indeed make it to the spherical stage.

So it does have scientific value, in that what ever kind of water conditions made this rock round, it was significant, perhaps there were waves there like Big Sur (well, perhaps not that big), but who knows?

I remember the rock tumbler I had when I was a kid. Open the container, put in grit sand and the rocks you want to smooth,and .. Water. Seal it up and put it on the roller and after a few weeks, you had some really smooth rocks, and.. some near perfect marbles.

Cool thread Arken, another significant one.

a reply to: eriktheawful

you can estimate it's size, which in this case means it is at least a couple of meters across.....so instead of rock, we should be saying boulder now.

Hope this helped.

The Sphere is two meters in diameter? :

a reply to: tsingtao

nice one arken.

but i am curious about the hut with the white interior or door behind it.

Me too, tsingtao. I've noticed that.

But I'm quite interested in this HUT... that appear more like a VAULT in a cemetery...
(The Rover, in its indifference has passed very close, and ignored IT,... officially....)

originally posted by: AntiNWO

Why are they taking my tax dollars just to go 4-wheeling?? I say let Arken drive for a while!

If Arken was driving, that rover wouldn't have travelled more than six feet by now - he'd still be probing every rock he saw in the first mastcam image

Curiosity is driving towards Mount Sharp to hopefully discover interesting things in the sediment layers, things that will tell us what Mars was like when it had oceans, hopefully. Why detour to look at rocks which look much the same as every other rock in the vicinity, and risk jeopardising the real chance of discovery? It is called "Curiosity", not "OCD".

Arken:
The Sphere is two meters in diameter?

No. Read my post above. I'm estimating well under a metre at this point but when I get back on the PC I'll measure up properly.

a reply to: Rob48

If Arken was driving, that rover wouldn't have travelled more than six feet by now - he'd still be probing every rock he saw in the first mastcam image

No matter how far you walk on your way, what matters is what you find on your way.

Why detour to look at rocks which look much the same as every other rock in the vicinity, and risk jeopardising the real chance of discovery? It is called "Curiosity", not "OCD".

No. It is called "Idiocy".

Curiosity is driving towards Mount Sharp to hopefully discover interesting things in the sediment layers, things that will tell us what Mars was like when it had oceans, hopefully.

Mars was nothing more than Earth, 200,000 years ago, like these scientists say in this jeep3r's thread that deserve the first page on ATS www.abovetopsecret.com... with its flora and fauna... and something else...

a reply to: Arken

Well, if that is true then the best place to look for any fossil evidence is surely within the sedimentary layers deposited during that era? And that is precisely where Curiosity is going to look. There is much more chance of finding any fossil evidence within those rock strata than just lying around on the surface. Let the rover complete its primary mission, before it goes kicking rocks.

originally posted by: Arken
a reply to: tsingtao

nice one arken.

but i am curious about the hut with the white interior or door behind it.

Me too, tsingtao. I've noticed that.

But I'm quite interested in this HUT... that appear more like a VAULT in a cemetery...
(The Rover, in its indifference has passed very close, and ignored IT,... officially....)

yes, there are so many weird things on mars.

i should dig up my mars pics and send them to you, to see what you think.

a reply to: tsingtao

yes, there are so many weird things on mars.
i should dig up my mars pics and send them to you, to see what you think.

Sure. Feel free to share your discoveries.

How many spheres have been found on mars? Seems to me this is the first right? If there have been others I've not seen them and I have looked at a lot of mars pics as we all have... How many mars pics are out there? If this is not an anomaly then surely you can find many more on mars?

It's a great little find in my opinion...

How much of Mars' surface have we explored using rovers? There might be thousands or tens of thousands of spherical rocks! Stop saying this one is unique.

a reply to: Rob48

Just going back to this size question.

I realise now it is better, when talking about field of view, to consider it was a section of a circle rather than a tangent. The navcam has a field of view of 45 degrees, or 1/8 of a circle.

Therefore at a distance of 37 metres the field of view is pi/4 x 37 = 29 metres.

The navcam images are 1024 pixels square, therefore at 37 metres each pixel represents about 29/1024 = 2.8cm (the program mentioned by Erik says 3.0cm, so we are in the ballpark).

Let's call it 3cm per pixel, then - after all this is only an approximation.

Zooming in in Photoshop to pixel level, I make the diameter to be 19 pixels, possibly 20 depending where you count to. That equates to 60cm.



So assuming the distance of 37 metres from the stereo pair is correct, then the rock is not 2 metres in diameter, but approximately 2 feet.

originally posted by: wildespace
How much of Mars' surface have we explored using rovers? There might be thousands or tens of thousands of spherical rocks! Stop saying this one is unique.

There MIGHT be, but as of yet they haven't been found, this is the first one so therefore noteworthy and so far an anomoly. It's not to say it is something supernatural... Just unusual

a reply to: Meee32

But it's not even all that spherical. If you overlay a circle on the image you can see that it is no more than "roundish". (Contrast enhanced in this image)



It is just the "most round" of a continuum of very similar dark rocks, from rounded to angular, lying all over the place on and below that hill. Nothing in that picture suggests that it is in any way out of place in the setting it is in, so why single it out for investigation?

Doesn't exactly "leap out at you" in the general scene, does it?

originally posted by: Meee32

originally posted by: wildespace
How much of Mars' surface have we explored using rovers? There might be thousands or tens of thousands of spherical rocks! Stop saying this one is unique.

There MIGHT be, but as of yet they haven't been found, this is the first one so therefore noteworthy and so far an anomoly. It's not to say it is something supernatural... Just unusual

A spherical rock is not an anomaly, being located on a planet that in the past had very similar environment and geological processes as on Earth.