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.

 

Titan and Mars

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 15 2005 @ 05:27 PM
link   
After seeing the pictures of Titan one question pop up;

why is the Titan's ground so alike the Mars'? They both seem to be covered by sand and alot of small rocks all over.

Our deserts here on earth is sand without all those small rocks. At least Sahara is. So is the local sand-dunes here in Sola, Norway.

Why this difference?




posted on Jan, 15 2005 @ 05:47 PM
link   
They are infact very different dont judge a planet or moon buy a few pics. Titan has oceans , lakes and rivers and even rain. Its methane and ethane not water but that is way different then mars.

If you wiped out every animal and planet on earth it would be sandy and rocky just like those pics. It might look just like a pic of Titan but would be very different.



posted on Jan, 15 2005 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ghaele
After seeing the pictures of Titan one question pop up;

why is the Titan's ground so alike the Mars'? They both seem to be covered by sand and alot of small rocks all over.

Our deserts here on earth is sand without all those small rocks. At least Sahara is. So is the local sand-dunes here in Sola, Norway.

Why this difference?


Alot of those rocks on titan arent rocks at all,but hunks of frozen water,alien ice cubes
.
also if you notice,the ice and rocks on titan are very rounded,meaning they were probably shaped by liquid.
Mars does seem to have huge dunes,and from the satellite pics,looks much like earth dunes.

[edit on 15-1-2005 by Samhain]



posted on Jan, 15 2005 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Thanks

will wait for more pitures then!



posted on Jan, 16 2005 @ 08:01 AM
link   
sorry double post..read the one below..

[edit on 16-1-2005 by Daedalus3]



posted on Jan, 16 2005 @ 08:03 AM
link   
Those aren't confirmed to be ice boulders as yet but they could very well be..
Even I noticied the uncanny similarties between the Huygens rock pics and the Viking Mars pics..except for the shape of the rocks..

See the Similarity:

Mars:

www.msss.com...


www.webwombat.com.au...

Titan:

www.nasa.gov..." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

Sorry couldnt get the Mars pics up for some reason..
Compare the upper portion of the titan pic with the maartina lanscape..no diff there to me..


Ghaele,
You from Norway? Where? I lived in Oslo for 3 years; been to Kristiansund,Bergen,Stord etc..Never saw the midnight sun or the aurora borealis though ..




[edit on 16-1-2005 by Daedalus3]



posted on Jan, 16 2005 @ 08:41 AM
link   
So far as I am aware we're looking at rocks that are approximately 14 cm or so in size. I believe the rocks are thought to be 85 cm from the lander. So we're looking at a pretty small section of the planet there. With such a focused view it is difficult to make assumptions one way or another about the terrain. We're only seeing a few feet away from the lander.

However, like Shadow said, on chemistry alone, Mars and Titan are two totally different worlds. And I think that the glimpses we've had of the landscape during the descent of the Huygens pretty much put to rest any comparisons between Titan and extant Mars (you know, oceans, islands, rivers, etc.). It may bear a rough resemblence to Mars 3 billion years ago, but not to the present day version.

Also, I don't think all Mars landscapes are similar. We have to land on the easiest of terrain there--e.g. essentially flat, relatively featureless plains. There are a lot of geologically interesting features (as in interesting to non-geologists) there that are, at present, pretty much inaccessible to rovers because of the roughness of the terrain. I'm sure we'd love to get into some canyons for instance, but, we just don't have the rovers that can do it yet. Thus, we have the impression that everywhere are Mars is relatively flat and strewn with rocks.

And as for Huygens, lets just be happy it landed where it did. It could have easily just fallen right into the methane ocean.



posted on Jan, 16 2005 @ 09:17 AM
link   
YEah ..why didnt they install bouyancy devices to the probe??Or is the probe lighter than CH4??

But I want better res pics..



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
You from Norway? Where? I lived in Oslo for 3 years; been to Kristiansund,Bergen,Stord etc..Never saw the midnight sun or the aurora borealis though ..



I live in Sola (wich would be 'The Sun' in english).
And I haven't seen the midnight sun and I've never heard of 'aurora borealis'... what is it?


As to the rocks... I think the russians sent a satelit to Venus and landed, taking picture(s?) and those rocks was more like Titan... but then again those photos was of bad quality. Antique techno in those days compared to now.

[edit on 17-1-2005 by Ghaele]



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Northen lights=Aurora Borealis I think..
Where is Sola in Norway..
See Ican speak Norwegien...
Jeg kann ikke snakke Norsk!! ..



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ghaele


As to the rocks... I think the russians sent a satelit to Venus and landed, taking picture(s?) and those rocks was more like Titan... but then again those photos was of bad quality. Antique techno in those days compared to now.

[edit on 17-1-2005 by Ghaele]


I remember that probe the only one anyone has ever sent to the surface of Venus. I think the thing melted after a few minutes though


Perhaps when we get some better materials to withstand the conditions there we will go back its a very interesting planet.



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Probably color altered using the same techniques. You may also be picking up on the artists particular style of cloning and manipulation.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join