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.

 

Opportunity Rover finds Dome

page: 5
143
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 06:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: intergalactic fire
now we know ISIS is serious business. Forget about ruling the world they already rule the solar system, mosques everywhere.
Suck on that USA!
anyway
here is another shot from a bit further of the same mountain area
link


There appears to be a 2nd large "Dome" in that image linked?

Here's a close-up...



BigG




posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 06:39 AM
link   
I disagree that the images shown from Rover so far don't show signs of water erosion. In the NASA photo, there are pebbles in the foreground which appear to have been eroded by water. This might echo what someone else said about the photo being taken from in a riverbed.
I'm no geologist, though..

However, (let's throw this one in for good measure) - I could take a thousand photos of the desert in the Middle East and present them as evidence that life on this planet is scarce. On Mars, as on Earth, there are areas which have been subjected to mother nature over the millenia and currently appear barren. Life exists elsewhere.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 07:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Gordi The Drummer

Ok based on this description of the the camera lenses on the opportunity rover and using the images does anyone know how to extrapolate the size of the domed objects? I think we have to make assumptions on the size of the rocks close to the rover as they relate to the size of the rover to do this. Not a math wiz but I know we have some out there...

link to description of Opportunity's camera lenses

Excerpt:

Each rover has a stereo pair of PanCams. These are the narrow-angle high-resolution science cameras for remote sensing. To make their panoramas, many individual pictures are joined together to form a mosaic.
To get a good view, the PanCams are mounted at about human eye level on top of a mast. Full 360 degree azimuth and ±90 degree elevation pointing is provided by a two-axis turret on the mast. Inside the mast are mirrors to send light down to the infrared Mini-Thermal-Emission Spectrometer, which is protected in the warmer interior of the rover.

The distance between the two PanCams is 280 mm. This separation will yield hyper-stereo images for better depth perception (the stereo separation or interpupillary distance between human eyes ranges between about 54 mm and 72 mm).

The two PanCams are also the color cameras; each has a filter wheel in front. Each filter wheel has 8 positions for filters of various wavebands covering the sensitivity range of the CCD. These allow multi-spectral imaging for quantitative geological and atmospheric studies. The filter selection is different on the two cameras, although there is some duplication to make the color stereo images. A sapphire window seals against dust and protects the filter wheel mechanism.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 07:52 AM
link   
This is one of the coolest anamolies that I have seen on Mars yet. The apparent perfect dome shape and the reflectivity (metallic composition?) make this one a find. Star and flag OP!

Does anyone know the approximate size of this structure?

Why would NASA not go take a closer look?
edit on 26-11-2015 by Jchristopher5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 08:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: tonycodes
I think its so funny that the rover just never gets a close shot of any of this stuff lol we sent it there for close up of this kind of stuff, not distance shots lol great find! we all paid alot for the rover in taxes right? i want to drive it for a day lol

Curiosity has many missions, none of which are to take close-up photographs of 'this kind of stuff'. If NASA were to divert it off its' scheduled course to get closer to (and photograph) every unusual looking or reflective rock it comes across, then it would never achieve any of its' goals.


And what do you think it's goals are?



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 08:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Jchristopher5

I wish we could get the math wizards on ATS to use the lens info I provided along with proximity assumptions to calculate the distance and size. I can't imagin e Opportunity not having some level of range finding capability.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 08:10 AM
link   
Always a distance shot, [for us] I can't imagine any scientist not wanting to take closer looks at what might be a structure of sorts, The least they could do is verify interesting photos like this with some close ups, what else does the rover have to do up there anyway?



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: korath

NASA are just a bunch of monkeys. We continue to feed them bananas (funding) and all they do is through SHAT at us through their cage.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 08:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: bkfd54

What's that to the right of it?



Yeah I wondered that, what is the structure next to that that dome. Two domes, and then what looks like a path, a road.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 08:26 AM
link   
Although an interesting find, we shouldn't look at those resized images as if they are the original, this is how it looks like when the image isn't resampled when resized.



No shiny look, no "snakes", lots of JPEG artefacts.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 08:39 AM
link   
a reply to: bkfd54




Opportunity Rover finds Dome


Seems dome shaped rocks are nothing new to the Martian surface...



en.wikipedia.org...

I guess if seen from a certain angle it could be construed as a dome, but I have to ask how you missed the Shrek mask or alien head in the bottom of the original pic?

Now not saying it couldn't be something other than a rock...but with the original pic, it really isn't enough proof it is anything other than a rock.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 08:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: ArMaP
Although an interesting find, we shouldn't look at those resized images as if they are the original, this is how it looks like when the image isn't resampled when resized.



No shiny look, no "snakes", lots of JPEG artefacts.


Even in the image you provide the pixelation displays obvious hue differences indicating reflective surfaces and angulations and arcs.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

I can't see any in that photo, and I don't think this case in particular is pareidolia, whatever it is it does seem to be fantastically rounded. Even if it's just a boulder of some description, it seems like it would be valuable information considering that it isn't anywhere where a river would have flown.

It would have been nice if NASA released the color version...



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 08:48 AM
link   
There should be more pictures of this area, here is a picture showing the path of the rover around this sol:

mars.nasa.gov...



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 08:50 AM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

While I do appreciate the imagery comparison I don't see this as pareidolia. I also see a lack of similarity as the environmentally created domes in your image are not on a spherical arc whereas this is the case with the one in the NASA imagery.

Then again until the rover rolls up and knocks on the door or at least, nasa provides perspective it and all other images may very well continue to be nothing more than a case of pareidolia.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 08:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn




it seems like it would be valuable information considering that it isn't anywhere where a river would have flown.



Seems we don't exactly know where rivers have flown on Mars, so how can you say it isn't near a river, where one has flown in the past?



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 08:58 AM
link   
a reply to: bkfd54

While it's interesting, comparing the brightest spot on the anomaly with the the brighter areas on the rocks in the foreground, I can get a match close enough that it's imperceptible without color analysis by software.

Now, that's not exactly the most reliable thing in the world, due to differences in position and the fact that the image is in black and white.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 09:00 AM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Because it's on top of a hill. Rivers aren't know for flowing over hills. If it's a rock, it would indicate some fairly large geographical shifts.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 09:06 AM
link   
a reply to: bkfd54




While I do appreciate the imagery comparison I don't see this as pareidolia.


Never said it was...but misidentifying something is a different thing.



I also see a lack of similarity as the environmentally created domes in your image are not on a spherical arc whereas this is the case with the one in the NASA imagery.


The comparison was to show rounded rocks are pretty common in that area, I wasn't saying they were the same.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 09:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn




Because it's on top of a hill. Rivers aren't know for flowing over hills. If it's a rock, it would indicate some fairly large geographical shifts.


Up hill no, but down hill yes.

Problem is you don't see the other side of the hill, so again you can't say it isn't possible there was a river there at anytime in the past.

What we see of the Mars surface isn't the same it had millions of years ago...we see the aftermath of whatever happened there and we make scientific answers based on what we know from the rovers on the surface.



new topics

top topics



 
143
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join