The face on Mars

Originally posted by Long Lance

why is it that this so-called lightning seemingly origniates from the middle of nowhere?

any takers?

I was wondering if you could reframe the question as there is no such place as nowhere; so its unlikely if not impossible to be in the 'middle' of a such a place. Even a billion lights years out into space you are 'somewhere'. You probably meant in the middle of a clear blue sky. Oops. We can't be in the middle of a sky. The sky is a name for an illusion created partly by the atmosphere. And being in the middle of the atmosphere is not very precise. Perhaps you cold use 'middle of localized atmosphere' but thats no good because you are talking about well above the tropopause. Maybe 'localized volume of space' and further define it by altitude. But 'middle of nowhere'? (Buzzer sound). Thanks

one electrode seems to be missing or is somehow obscured, lightning erupts between (at least) two points, where's the other? the corkscrew's shape is probably superficially reminiscent of an electric arc, but looks a bit too repetitive for my taste, but i may just be seeing things.

Originally posted by Long Lance

the corkscrew's shape is probably superficially reminiscent of an electric arc, but looks a bit too repetitive for my taste

Repetitive? Taste? I was wondering how you thought electricity worked? (i.e. frequency and modulation) Thanks.

if you view lightning as an act of charge balancing, frequency is not really the issue, is it? the location of the charge is, that's what i was trying to get at.

lightning emits radiation over a wide spectrum, sure, but i'd like to establish how it supposedly started, first. unless it's a combination of viewing angle, unknown camera settings and other adverse circumstances, i cannot locate the origin (the other pole i mean) of the blast. can you? furthermore the alledged arc looks suspiciously faint and last but not least lightning at high altitudes looks a bit different than what we're used to seeing on the ground.

www.albany.edu...

what i meant by 'repetitive' was the undulating pattern of the corkscrew, but that doesn't prove anything, of course.

Originally posted by Long Lance

if you view lightning as an act of charge balancing, frequency is not really the issue, is it? the location of the charge is, that's what i was trying to get at.

lightning emits radiation over a wide spectrum, sure, but i'd like to establish how it supposedly started, first. unless it's a combination of viewing angle, unknown camera settings and other adverse circumstances, i cannot locate the origin (the other pole i mean) of the blast. can you? furthermore the alledged arc looks suspiciously faint and last but not least lightning at high altitudes looks a bit different than what we're used to seeing on the ground.

www.albany.edu...

what i meant by 'repetitive' was the undulating pattern of the corkscrew, but that doesn't prove anything, of course.

Long Lance, let me respectully suggest that the best way out of hole is to quit digging.

and thank you, too, for shifting focus from electric arcs to what appears to be the nature of charge and matter. from what i gathered on these forums, there's a load of theories (hypothesis?) which attribute everything to harmonic oscillations (of what? they never tell..), from matter itself to gravity. if you were talking about something else entirely, sorry, it's kind of hard to decipher when you're stupid and talking to someone writing cryptic one liners, isn't it?

I was wondering how you thought electricity worked? (i.e. frequency and modulation) Thanks.

for the record, what i think of electricity is immaterial, the pic was there for everyone to see and the blatant silence after its appearance prompted me to post what i thought was wrong with certain explanations. i am in no way obliged to be right at all times (or even at any time) and if someone around here was actually debating the subject instead of turning this into a fringe quiz, these posts might actually serve a purpose. i responded simply because i'm sick and tired of seeing the better threads die and will therefore go to certain lengths to keep them running (in vain it seems). the pic is now uploaded to a hosting service and saved to my HDD, in other words it's not going to vanish as easily and if this thread makes only a handful more people start thinking about the incident in question, 'data fidelity'and NASA's policies in general it i will consider posting worthwhile.


now, i'll try to salvage this thread, after badly derailing it.
=========

www.vgl.org...
..
The downtrack resolution of the MOLA instrument is dependent on the "spot" size of the laser shot and the shot frequency. The down rack resolution is said to be about 150 meters. Yet the channel is no wider than 50 meters at the point it appears deepest. It is below the resolution of the MOLA instrument, yet it is clearly visible!

Q: valid criticism, yes/no? seems rather clear-cut if true.

the next link will earn me a lot of flak

www.enterprisemission.com...

i understand that images can be tampered with (esp brightness), but look at the geometric outlines of the 'socket' especially, one smooth line, does it look natural to you?

off topic, concerning nasa in general_www.tmgnow.com...


another peculiar formation ida.wr.usgs.gov... - source

[edit on 5-9-2006 by Long Lance]