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.

 

Ceres, NASA's new take on bright spots. After dawn shut down?

page: 2
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 09:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: 1questioner
It has always been very easy for NASA to prove the lights on Ceres are only reflections off a natural substance like water or salt. The Dawn spacecraft revolves around Ceres and has the ability to take photos of the lighted area when Ceres is not facing the Sun. Ergo, if the lights were caused by sunlight reflection there would be no lights in that area when Ceres has rotated away from the Sun. NASA could have shown us a photo of this area when Ceres rotated away from the Sun months ago. NASA hasn't shown us these photos. Why?



Um wouldn't the sensitive cameras then be staring back in the direction of the Sun?


At certain angles, yes. But not every angle.




posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 09:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: 1questioner

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: 1questioner
It has always been very easy for NASA to prove the lights on Ceres are only reflections off a natural substance like water or salt. The Dawn spacecraft revolves around Ceres and has the ability to take photos of the lighted area when Ceres is not facing the Sun. Ergo, if the lights were caused by sunlight reflection there would be no lights in that area when Ceres has rotated away from the Sun. NASA could have shown us a photo of this area when Ceres rotated away from the Sun months ago. NASA hasn't shown us these photos. Why?



Um wouldn't the sensitive cameras then be staring back in the direction of the Sun?



At certain angles, yes. But not every angle.


Well have you been through the entire series of Ceres imagery? I suspect that since Ceres is so dark that such a photo would be black as night. Perhaps look for those?

There's this....



Read more here...
edit on 14-7-2015 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: JadeStar

My point, precisely... In the animated photo we see here, if we are seeing the lighted spot area rotate into total blackness NASA could easily prove the lighted area is caused by sunlight reflection only and we wouldn't have a mystery.
edit on 14-7-2015 by 1questioner because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 10:43 AM
link   
There have been a few animated sequences of images of Ceres rotating, which seemed to show the much-discussed bright spots illuminated, even when the area surrounding them was dark. This caused at least one of the mission scientists to suggest that the spots were elevated above the floor of the crater, allowing them to catch very low angle sunlight.
Images of the bright spots, including a three dimensional one, and some taken of them edge-on, don't seem to indicate that the bright spots have any substantial height, though.
Ceres' small size, and the fact that the bright spots lie in a large crater suggest a possible answer. The tight curvature of Ceres' surface may render the center of the crater floor nearly level with its rim. Even a slight, and so far undetected, elevation above the crater floor might be enough to bring the spots into the light of the sun, when it is very near the horizon.
Of course the curvature may be insufficient and the supposed elevation on the crater floor nonexistent, but this possibility will have to be definitely eliminated before some more profound mystery is indicated.



posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: BlackProject

Reflective, eh?


photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov...

Reflective. Sure shot.
Obey much, do we?





S&F for every Ceres-thread, as usual.

Cheers!
edit on 14-7-2015 by PublicOpinion because: source



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 10:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: BlackProject

They then changed there story from the bright spots being ice to bright spots being 'reflective salt'. Strange. After detecting an anomaly, to shutting down, to change of story, odd.


The salt hypothesis has been around for months; it's not new. Nor has NASA "changed their story".

'"Salt Deposits" was one of the possible explanations that NASA wanted people to vote on a few months ago:
What's the spot on World Ceres? -- Cast Your Vote


In fact, I cast my vote for the bright spots being salt deposits over two months ago:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here's an article from March 10 in which a NASA Dawn mission scientist discusses the possibility of salt being the explanation.:
Studying Dwarf Planet Ceres: Q&A with Dawn Scientist Chris Russell

Excerpt from the article:

But there are people who are holding out for salt — not necessarily table salt, but salts of various minerals that may be white in appearance. So we have sort of a dichotomy of opinion in the team as to whether this has a dry or wet explanation. But we'll get to the bottom of this when we can resolve the bottom of the feature.


We here on ATS have been discussing the possibility that these are salt deposits for over 4 months now -- ever since Dawn first arrived at Ceres:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


So no -- NASA did NOT suddenly change their story. The problem is that you have not been paying close enough attention to the research and science being done.


edit on 7/15/2015 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: BlackProject

Reflective, eh?


photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov...

Reflective. Sure shot.
Obey much, do we?





S&F for every Ceres-thread, as usual.

Cheers!

Yes, reflective, as it's an underexposed daylight shot. It's not a nightside you're seeing, otherwise the surface would be completely black.

~~~

I wonder when the poster of this thread will show up to comment on our replies. Or, perhaps, it's fine for some people to just throw some unfounded accusations at NASA/ TPTB / anything mainstream and move on, leaving us to pick the pieces.
edit on 15-7-2015 by wildespace because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 12:56 PM
link   
a reply to: wildespace

Take a look at this one:
Dawn Survey Orbit Image 16/ PIA19584


photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov...

Pretty dark dawn, reflective traffic paint?
edit on 15-7-2015 by PublicOpinion because: Just nobody on ceres. Everything is reflective.



posted on Jul, 15 2015 @ 01:11 PM
link   
I can see the curving edge of Ceres near the bottom of the image. The surface is a very dark grey, but not black. The exposure of light has been reduced to try to render the bright spots more clearly. If Ceres were actually turned away from the Sun in this image the surface would be as black as the background of space, which it is not.

It seems significant that even with these low exposure attempts, the largest and brightest of the bright spots not been clearly resolved. It is still too bright for its structure to be fully seen. This seems to indicate that this bright spot is extraordinarily bright.



posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 07:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Ross 54

Thanks for your reply, I'm going to link this answer in the other thread (again). In case you missed it:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Cheers!



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 07:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shadowhawk
a reply to: EA006

It was a spacecraft anomaly. The onboard computer detected a glitch of some sort and put Dawn into safe mode until the engineers could sort it out. That is standard procedure to prevent loss of the spacecraft/mission. There is nothing sinister going on here.

On another note, if NASA ever discovered evidence of extraterrestrial life they would crow the news from the rooftops. A discovery of that magnitude would guarantee a huge increase in funding for the space agency, which now struggles to survive on the crumbs it is offered. Anyone who thinks otherwise is nuts.


You think so? I don't cuz as soon as Nasa declares existence of extraterrestrial lifeforms, our world will lose sanity and go ape #.
That's how humans are still primitive when faced with unthinkables.
TPTB would make sure something like that doesn't happen and will take over Nasa to hide as much as possible.
That's better for our primitive minds, yeah certainly until we become more civilized as a world.
edit on 17-7-2015 by chosonone because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 07:24 AM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion

The picture is very dark due to Ceres having such a low Albedo. This means that any light that is much brighter, in this case the spots, will overexpose.

For reference(from respective wiki pages), the Albedo of a couple of dwarf planets:

Pluto: 0.49 to 0.66
Eris: 0.96
Haumea: 0.804
Makemake: 0.81
Sedna: 0.32
Ceres: 0.090
Ceres Bright spot Albedo: 0.4

Now for say, something different:
Ocean Ice: 0.5–0.7
Fresh Snow: 0.8–0.9
Sea Salt: 0.97
Salt Flats: 0.4

FYI, the range albedo is measured in goes from 0 to 1. 0 meaning reflecting no light, with 1 reflecting almost all light.

Ceres reflects very little light. The spots reflect A LOT of light.
edit on 17/7/2015 by Aarsvin because: added surface spot albedo for reference



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Aarsvin


But why is this picture so damnd dark, is it the darkside then?
We've seen others as well, the contrast was lower but the overexposure still pretty obvious.

For example:


dawn.jpl.nasa.gov...

The high Albedo (from the bright spots) is still the same. Again: why is the other picture that dark?
I'm still going with reduced exposure and it somehow really doesn't matter. But it's a nice riddle and I can't bring myself to ignore this question.

Thanks for your reply anyway!



edit on 17-7-2015 by PublicOpinion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 10:47 AM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion

Because Ceres is about as dark as coal.

The images that show Ceres to be brighter have higher exposure settings, making it look lighter than it really is. The bright spots still have a high enough albedo (reflectivity factor) that they still look overexposed when Ceres is shown in more of its natural dark color.


edit on 7/17/2015 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

I know, the Albedo is 0,09. Pretty dark. The folks at NASA have to mess around with light-exposure to get at least something to view at.
Otherwise we would only see a black eagle on black.

That leaves us with two possibilities for this darker picture:
a severe overexposure of the darkside or a proportionally reduced exposure of the dayside.

Your guess would be?



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion

No, it's not the dark side. It's because as Soylent says, Ceres' surface is just really dark. The dark side would be fully black.

A material with high albedo always stays a material with high albedo even in pure darkness. Albedo does not change in different lighting conditions. It is simply said the percentage of incoming light it reflects back. Ceres reflects around 9% of the light it receives. Snow, or say a Cummulus cloud reflects more than 80% of the light that it receives.

The reason(according to the ice/salt theory) the bright spots are so incredibly bright is because of overexposure. If we go with the salt flats albedo, the lowest in my list, it would still be easily 400% as bright as the brightest feature of the rest of Ceres' surface. In the case of the albedo of snow it would be around 1000% as bright.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Aarsvin




No, it's not the dark side. It's because as Soylent says, Ceres' surface is just really dark. The dark side would be fully black.


Not if the material would get a little bit more light. I think they could do that, every decent photographer can.

This whole discussion would be completely useless if they could provide us with a clear shot of this spot from the darkside.
But I think that's a big problem - this source of light might be self-illuminating indeed. Would be the end of every salt/ ice-story and that's exactly why we keep arguing in the dark, literally.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 05:58 PM
link   
a reply to: admirethedistance




"unknown anomaly", what else are they going to call it? Just because those words seem scary and mysterious to you, doesn't mean that there's any conspiracy about it. Get over yourself.


Does not mean it is a conspiracy does not mean it isnt.. Just some brain candy...

thanks for thread OP hopefully time will tell..




posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 06:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
This whole discussion would be completely useless if they could provide us with a clear shot of this spot from the darkside.

As others have already said (several times), it's impossible to take a "clear shot" of the dark side, as it would look like this:



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 06:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People



In fact, I cast my vote for the bright spots being salt deposits over two months ago:
www.abovetopsecret.com...



my suggestion was the bright spots were the debris field from a impact long ago of a object that had a couple tonnes of the element Mercury ~ Quick Silver in it's composition....Mercury laden salts ...hmmmm?!
edit on th31143717617817362015 by St Udio because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join