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.

 

NASA's $1 billion Jupiter Probe Taking Unreal Photos of the Gas Planet

page: 5
97
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2018 @ 10:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

Barcs...come on mate. I'm not attacking NASA by any stretch of the imagination. I made a viable observation which has always puzzled me. Everything you listed is not a result of NASA development. NASA simply expounded upon existing machinery on Earth and adapted it for use in space and the Moon.

All of the planets in our solar system were discovered before NASA ever came into existence. Remote star systems were discovered by ancient man. My question was meant to spur some thought.

I never once stated NASA does not explore space. However, I will never be naive enough to believe NASA is spending these massive sums of money simply to take pictures. Therefore, I find it truly disappointing people rarely stop to ponder exactly what NASA is doing OTHER than taking pictures with billion dollar pieces of equipment. This is our tax payer money mate. You and I both have a right to know where and how it is being spent. And if you and others genuinely...and I mean GENUINELY think it is for space exploration then why would you not question where the additional evidence is that supports something more than JUST PICTURES.




posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 04:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Outlier13
Please see my yesterday's post, which you seem to be ignoring: www.abovetopsecret.com...

There's a whole bunch of piblically-available data portals, as well as all the various NASA articles and anouncements.

Even the updates about the Juno mission often have the actual scientific findings along with the pretty pictures: www.nasa.gov...

Another surprise comes from Juno’s Microwave Radiometer (MWR), which samples the thermal microwave radiation from Jupiter’s atmosphere, from the top of the ammonia clouds to deep within its atmosphere. The MWR data indicates that Jupiter’s iconic belts and zones are mysterious, with the belt near the equator penetrating all the way down, while the belts and zones at other latitudes seem to evolve to other structures. The data suggest the ammonia is quite variable and continues to increase as far down as we can see with MWR, which is a few hundred miles or kilometers.

Prior to the Juno mission, it was known that Jupiter had the most intense magnetic field in the solar system. Measurements of the massive planet’s magnetosphere, from Juno’s magnetometer investigation (MAG), indicate that Jupiter’s magnetic field is even stronger than models expected, and more irregular in shape. MAG data indicates the magnetic field greatly exceeded expectations at 7.766 Gauss, about 10 times stronger than the strongest magnetic field found on Earth.

That was just some of the science from Juno.

One thing you can do in your quest to find if NASA have done any science in these 60 years is to go to Wikipedia pages (or NASA's own pages) for each particular space missions, and read about what kind of scientific instruments were on that spacecraft, and which findings they produced. It's fairly easy to do, and I've done that myself a few times.

For example, the Cassini spacecraft: saturn.jpl.nasa.gov...


These instruments studied the dust, plasma and magnetic fields around Saturn. While most didn't produce actual "pictures," the information they collected is critical to scientists' understanding of this rich environment.

Cassini Plasma Spectrometer (CAPS)
Cosmic Dust Analyzer (CDA)
Ion and Neutral Mass Spectrometer (INMS)
Magnetometer (MAG)
Magnetospheric Imaging Instrument (MIMI)
Radio and Plasma Wave Science (RPWS)

edit on 10-1-2018 by wildespace because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 04:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: elysiumfire
Great pictures! Just remember that NASA do indeed colourize their images to enhance speculative detail.

Or, as is the case with Juno, NASA just provide the raw image data, and it's the members of the public ("citizen scientists") who colourise it and enhance it.

"Colourise" usually simply means combining images taken through red, green, and blue filters to make a single true-colour image. Actually, it's something your own digital camera does each time you take a picture. If the filters included infrared or ultraviolet wavelengths, you get a false-colour image, which is not what you'd see with your eyes, but can still be scientifically useful.
edit on 10-1-2018 by wildespace because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 07:11 AM
link   
Its like a big lava lamp.



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 07:28 AM
link   
a reply to: sapien82



not at my age, old enough to have watched the Moon landings and 2001 when released.
edit on 10-1-2018 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 07:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Outlier13
a reply to: wmd_2008

You do realize the Image of the Day is 100% colorized right? Or are you going to try to say this picture is actually how it "looks" in space to the human eye?



And lastly I will ask this for a 4th and final time. Point me to something other than pictures that NASA has produced over the past 60 years. You keep avoiding this.


You do know your eye & brain don't work exactly the same as a camera, if you were close to objects and enough light is available you would see similar colours to most photographs, on that site they list the equipment & filters used and what they want to show and the technique used ie certain gas clouds dust etc.

Look here Red Blue Green

As for the your other question why don't you extract the digit from your @$% and look yourself tell you what download and have a read through this.

NASA Spinoffs

Then please stfu.


edit on 10-1-2018 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008

Triggered mate? Flexing your keyboard muscles? lol...

Was that a rhetorical question regarding the human eye vs. a camera? Proving the point NASA enhances and colorizes its images.

So it took you how many posts of BS before you could actually link to something which shows NASA has produced other than pretty pictures. Thanks. I enjoyed reading that. But that is technology improvement and enhancement. They've done nothing more than taken existing tech and modified for the rigors of space exploration. Much of it has benefited mankind in some way but none of it is original.

You think NASA is spending hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars so they can lay claim to spin off tech? That's nothing more than convergent evolution.

NASA is not spending hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars so every 50 years they can print a brochure trying to justify why they blow through money to take pictures that are colorized and enhanced.

If you don't know why NASA spends this money then just say so and stop being so sensitive. I don't know why NASA is spending hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars but it sure isn't to take pretty pictures.



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Outlier13

My question again is very simple. What has NASA presented the public other than photographs for the last 60 years?



Calculations....a lot of calculations. Have you ever went through physics courses, let alone astrophysics, at university level? NASA is pretty much that times 5. Numbers have to be as accurate as those on financial statements accountants prepare (minus the cooking the books).


Edit:

Oh yeah, IT (Information Technology) personnel cost a # ton of money...do you know how much computer geeks make??? If a server goes down or a computer goes off grid and has to be re-networked, etc...there are a lot of wires, same with software (updates and preventing hacks). Cha-ching!!!!!
edit on 10-1-2018 by Skywatcher2011 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 01:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Outlier13

Are you trying hard to part of a bell say the end of one, do your own digging you are the one making the claim, they employ thousands of people thay all have to be paid, projects are life long for some people.

From conception to design and exicution they can be 20+ years.

They haven't just taken current tech and modified it for space I suggest you read more or would you like the documents in crayon so you can undestand them.

A few examples


here's "memory foam," for example, which today pads the helmets of football players and is used to manufacture prosthetic limbs. NASA scientists invented the substance in 1966



NASA research investigating the nutritional value of algae led to the discovery of a nutrient that had previously only been found in human breast milk. The compound, which is thought to be important to eye and brain development, has since found its way into 95 percent of the infant formula sold in the United States



NASA research led to the development of sunglasses that block damaging blue and ultraviolet light, for example. One-third of all cell phone cameras use technology originally developed for NASA spacecraft.



And in the 1960s, NASA scientists who wanted to enhance pictures of the moon invented digital image processing. The technology later found many other applications — particularly in the medical field, where it helped enable body-imaging techniques such as CATScans and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)


There are many more if you actually put as much effort into looking for them as posting on this thread.



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 05:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Outlier13
a reply to: wmd_2008
I don't know why NASA is spending hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars but it sure isn't to take pretty pictures.

Space missions are very expensive. Not just planetary missions, but also the Space Shuttle and the ISS.

(P.S. still waiting for you to acknowledge my previous posts about science results from NASA's missions)
edit on 10-1-2018 by wildespace because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 05:25 PM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008

Spin off tech is nothing more than a by product of their attempts and efforts to explore space. It is not a derivative of their exploration of space. But pretty pictures seem to be.

What is NASA really doing? You nor I know. Stop pretending you do.



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 05:53 PM
link   
a reply to: wildespace

I did read the links you posted. Read them all. "Science" is used a bit loosely at times don't you think? Aside from collecting data what is the value that data provides other than knowing something we did not before? I don't know which is why I ask. I'm not being argumentative. I'll leave that to the other butt hurt guy in this thread.

Back on topic. Why is it important that we study and analyze the composition and density of the dust particles that make up Saturn's rings? I'm being serious. How does that advance us as a species? Maybe there is some correlation I am unaware of but it would be interesting to know. If it's just to know then that seems illogical.

I'm all for science, however, I do think there is such a thing as purposeful vs wasteful science. I have that condition myself. I enjoy reading the most useless data that will absolutely in no way what so ever benefit, improve, or further me in any way. Yet I still pursue it when I could be using that time more wisely.

I am not claiming to have the answer. I made an observation that is valid. The only thing we (the public) generally see from NASA are pictures of planets, space, etc. I get that NASA is more than just pictures, however, they do a pretty poor job of making the public aware at the mainstream level. I still hold that we do not know the vast majority of what NASA is doing and why they are doing it.

I believe what is printed publicly is for the purposes of misdirection. It's like when we hear about a new "telecommunications" satellite recently launched that "will improve your signal beyond belief!". Sure it can transmit and receive signals but it's true purpose is as a spy satellite. Sure to someone it is important to know the composition and density of Saturn's rings but come on...really? For what purpose? Again, I'm being genuine.

These are the questions I want answered because I am inherently curious. So when I ask why NASA spends hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars and the only mainstream result always seems to be enhanced pictures I believe a ask a very valid question.

Thanks for posting the links. They were interesting.



posted on Jan, 10 2018 @ 11:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Outlier13
Ah, ok, I now see that you simply don't understand the value or purpose of data-collection done on those space mission, thus declare that all they do is take pictures. I'm not sure how to address that sort of viewpoint (at least without wasting too much time and energy, possibly to no effect). But whether you understand it or not, data-collection from space missions is valuable and is science. It helps us learn about our "home" the Solar System and its history.

You could compare the study of the Solar System to the study of Earth - geology, meteorology, oceanology, etc. A lot of those earth studies have direct implication on your life, such as predicting the weather, knowing where earthquake-prone zones are, and ofcourse simply allowing us to know our home planet better, learn its history and its possible future.

Space research is like that. There are planetary physicists who use all that collected data to get a better picture (no pun intended) of the planets and moons in the Solar System, their compositions, their history, their interaction with the environment. A big part of that research is to see wether extraterrestrial life could have existed out there in the past, or perhaps exists even now.

This kind of thing might not affect you directly in any way, but it is affecting the humanity as a whole. Wanting to know more is part of human evolution. It's what allowed us to circle the globe, make discoveries on our home planet, and eventually go into space.

In fact, a lot of NASA's research is directed at Earth studies, helping us to see how the Earth "lives and breathes", which has direct impact on people living on its surface. science.nasa.gov...

Earth is a complex, dynamic system we do not yet fully understand. The Earth system, like the human body, comprises diverse components that interact in complex ways. We need to understand the Earth's atmosphere, lithosphere, hydrosphere, cryosphere, and biosphere as a single connected system. Our planet is changing on all spatial and temporal scales. The purpose of NASA's Earth science program is to develop a scientific understanding of Earth's system and its response to natural or human-induced changes, and to improve prediction of climate, weather, and natural hazards.



posted on Jan, 11 2018 @ 12:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Outlier13
a reply to: Barcs

Barcs...come on mate. I'm not attacking NASA by any stretch of the imagination. I made a viable observation which has always puzzled me. Everything you listed is not a result of NASA development. NASA simply expounded upon existing machinery on Earth and adapted it for use in space and the Moon.


That is a HUGE exaggeration. Yes space probes and satellites are direct results of Nasa. They figured out how to launch things into orbit. LOL @ they just adapted it for use in space and the moon. Because, you know, that's so simple, right?

"Oh yeah, here's a car. Good thing everybody else did the research for us, let's just convert it to a space ship. No biggy!"

Every piece of technology ever developed incorporates previous knowledge. It really seems like you just don't want to give them credit for anything.


All of the planets in our solar system were discovered before NASA ever came into existence. Remote star systems were discovered by ancient man. My question was meant to spur some thought.


Yes, and what did ancient man know about any of these planets or star systems? Pretty much nothing. Nasa is the single biggest factor in our advancement of knowledge of the universe. Plain and simple.


I never once stated NASA does not explore space. However, I will never be naive enough to believe NASA is spending these massive sums of money simply to take pictures.


I don't think anybody is that naive because most people know that they do MUCH MORE than take pictures. The probes can analyze samples and break down elements and do much more than just that. Nasa scientists research and develop new technology, work in orbit on the space station and maintain satellites.


Therefore, I find it truly disappointing people rarely stop to ponder exactly what NASA is doing OTHER than taking pictures with billion dollar pieces of equipment. This is our tax payer money mate. You and I both have a right to know where and how it is being spent.


Nasa is severely under funded. Do you hold the military to the same standards? Do you demand to know all of their top secret info and exactly what they fund? Afterall, MOST of your tax dollars go toward that and only a small fraction actually goes to NASA in comparison. Space exploration is expensive. I'm not sure if you realize how much work goes into it. Building and launching a single probe can take several years and tons of research and planning.


And if you and others genuinely...and I mean GENUINELY think it is for space exploration then why would you not question where the additional evidence is that supports something more than JUST PICTURES.


I don't doubt that there is top secret research that goes on there, but to say they just take pictures is silly. If we are ever going to transcend this planet and survive the next extinction level impact event, it will depend on how advanced our knowledge becomes. If we can't learn enough to prevent it or colonize another planet, then we are doomed for extinction. This is why I don't take these things lightly. We have a chance to achieve greatness, but people complain about tax dollars. We should be spending 10 times as much on NASA as we do now. Our future is at stake here. We waste so much money fighting wars and killing each other instead of working together to save the human race. That could end up being our downfall, and it's kind of sad. The question isn't IF an impact will occur, it's when. Space Agencies should all be combining funds and working together to advance us as fast as possible because something like that could easily happen and give us little to no warning.

We can either spread our seed across the galaxy, or we can be a bunch of artifacts that some future species digs up out of a crater (if we're lucky). I prefer the first option.

edit on 1 11 18 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2018 @ 12:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: wildespace
a reply to: Outlier13

Ah, ok, I now see that you simply don't understand the value or purpose of data-collection done on those space mission, thus declare that all they do is take pictures. I'm not sure how to address that sort of viewpoint (at least without wasting too much time and energy, possibly to no effect). But whether you understand it or not, data-collection from space missions is valuable and is science. It helps us learn about our "home" the Solar System and its history.

Wrong but if you feel the need to make yourself feel intellectually superior then go for it. You cannot answer the question on what is purposeful science vs wasteful science. I gave you an example and you side stepped answering the question. It's ok to admit you do not know.

You could compare the study of the Solar System to the study of Earth - geology, meteorology, oceanology, etc. A lot of those earth studies have direct implication on your life, such as predicting the weather, knowing where earthquake-prone zones are, and ofcourse simply allowing us to know our home planet better, learn its history and its possible future.

Wrong here too. The study of the Sun and the Sun's activity provides us with meaningful data on the Earth's weather patterns since it is the Sun that is the first domino in what we refer to as weather on Earth. Earth studies have direct implications on our lives? Really? Wow...that's enlightening. Glad I have such an intellect in my midst to reveal this previously unknown basic 3rd grade info.

Space research is like that. There are planetary physicists who use all that collected data to get a better picture (no pun intended) of the planets and moons in the Solar System, their compositions, their history, their interaction with the environment. A big part of that research is to see wether extraterrestrial life could have existed out there in the past, or perhaps exists even now.

Wrong again. Here I thought because I was in the midst of such an esteemed intellect I may learn something. Ironic how ancient astronomers were able to make discoveries of other planets by simple observation from the ground. And how ironic you reference ET life outside of Earth when it was the Greeks who fist theorized about panspermia in the 5th century BCE. Pretty sure NASA wasn't around then. Yet, NASA needs to spend hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars to study the composition and density of the dust particles of Saturn. Interesting.

This kind of thing might not affect you directly in any way, but it is affecting the humanity as a whole. Wanting to know more is part of human evolution. It's what allowed us to circle the globe, make discoveries on our home planet, and eventually go into space.

Wrong yet again. It does affect us all directly and indirectly. It's inherent in human nature to explore and why we have a thriving race of humans on this planet and some day beyond. I get the next stage of evolution is space exploration and herein is my still as yet unanswered question. After 60 years what we see from NASA is nothing more than pretty pictures. We both agree on the fundamental make up of the human race's desire to "know what is out there" so why is this question so challenging to answer? Do you think NASA is conducting research considered black projects?






edit on 11-1-2018 by Outlier13 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2018 @ 02:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Outlier13


You said this


originally posted by: Outlier13

Agree 100%. I'm a huge advocate for space exploration. It's the evolutionary next step for mankind. However, it has struck me as particularly odd that in my entire lifetime the only thing NASA has ever produced after the hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars are...pictures. And they aren't even "real" pictures. They are manipulated and colorized.

So either NASA is just a public image front for the real secret space program or we are all being duped over nothing. I choose the former and some of the latter.


NASA has produced a lot more than pictures you avoid info given by other members as well and repeat the same statement all the time. You know you are wrong and just can't admit it.



posted on Jan, 11 2018 @ 04:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Outlier13
Wrong but if you feel the need to make yourself feel intellectually superior then go for it. You cannot answer the question on what is purposeful science vs wasteful science. I gave you an example and you side stepped answering the question. It's ok to admit you do not know.

Nah, I'm not aiming to feel intellectually superior. I'm just a guy in front of a computer, who's been keeping more or less up to date with what NASA's been up to throughout the years, because I'm interested in space and space exploration. For me it simply beggars belief that anyone think that NASA produced nothing else but pictures. Besides, there's no wasteful science. The purpose of science is to advance knowledge and understanding.


Wrong here too. The study of the Sun and the Sun's activity provides us with meaningful data on the Earth's weather patterns since it is the Sun that is the first domino in what we refer to as weather on Earth. Earth studies have direct implications on our lives? Really? Wow...that's enlightening. Glad I have such an intellect in my midst to reveal this previously unknown basic 3rd grade info.

Satellites monitoring the Earth provide a lot of valuable information, including monitoring and managing land use, natural disasters and response to them, GPS, and many other things. Just because you're not aware of them or don't understand their value, doesn't mean they are of no value.


Wrong again. Here I thought because I was in the midst of such an esteemed intellect I may learn something. Ironic how ancient astronomers were able to make discoveries of other planets by simple observation from the ground. And how ironic you reference ET life outside of Earth when it was the Greeks who fist theorized about panspermia in the 5th century BCE. Pretty sure NASA wasn't around then. Yet, NASA needs to spend hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars to study the composition and density of the dust particles of Saturn. Interesting.

Well, ancients discovered the planets (only five of them, btw) because they are visible to the naked eye in the sky. These star-like objects moved over the course of time with respect to other stars, and so they were named "wandering stars". Ancients named them after their gods. That's as far as their understanding of them extended. They wouldn't even have been aware of them being planets like the planet Earth is. It took centuries and the invention of telescope to actually show us the true nature of those objects. But of course NASA's role wasn't to "discover" them, it's to study them and advance our knowledge of them. Which is what they've been doing with their mutil-million space missions. We know a lot more about those planets than we did a hundred years ago.


Wrong yet again. It does affect us all directly and indirectly. It's inherent in human nature to explore and why we have a thriving race of humans on this planet and some day beyond. I get the next stage of evolution is space exploration and herein is my still as yet unanswered question. After 60 years what we see from NASA is nothing more than pretty pictures. We both agree on the fundamental make up of the human race's desire to "know what is out there" so why is this question so challenging to answer? Do you think NASA is conducting research considered black projects?

You're right on the first part - that it affects us all and inherent in human nature, but again you're stumbling over those damned pictures and remain blind to all the actual scientific research that's been done by NASA and other space agencies.

Personally, in the few years I've been following NASA, I've seen plenty of stuff other than pictures. I can't comment on any "black projects", it's a conspiracy territory, and also sounds unlikely given how little budget NASA gets.

In fact, every proposal for a space mission has to get an approval, based on how much scientific value it will bring. A space mission that simply sticks a bunch of cameras on the spacecraft would not get an approval.



posted on Jan, 11 2018 @ 09:11 AM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008

You don't understand the difference between 'literal' and figurative' do you? I understand now you are one of the sheep.



posted on Jan, 11 2018 @ 09:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Outlier13

I just wonder if you will have the same view if we find out an asteroid is heading our way and it turns out we can't stop it because of idiots that think Nasa is useless and push to cut funding. I already see it happening. The human race will be destroyed exclusively because of whiners that complain about funding, yet don't even care that 90% of your tax dollars go to the military, instead of something that could save us all one day....

Sorry, but anti-science agendas are scary. Don't be part of the problem, be part of the solution.
edit on 1 11 18 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2018 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: wildespace

You've managed entirely to avoid answering my question and have instead ventured off on tangents in an attempt to keep from answering the question.

ATS is a conspiracy site mate. It appears as though you are looking for an echo chamber. I would suggest other forums.



new topics

top topics



 
97
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join