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.

 

Ancient Mars

page: 23
191
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by fooks
lets figure out the rocks first, mind-set. well rocks maybe the key to all life, ok, lol.
let's get out there and study rocks coz there is no sense to look for life while we are at it.


Study rocks GREAT IDEA!!! never would have thought of it....

MARS - Rock Hunting with Spirit and Opportunity
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I gotz work to do I got a good one... one that has been bothering me for some time...
I will put up a thread on it this afternoon




posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by OrionHunterX
Yep! That means the Solar System is teeming with life! Heck, those Venusians must be pretty to look at!


They are actually...



But it is quite obvious that you are only here for one purpose... to disrupt the thread and make fun of every ones beliefs.. so forgive me if I do not waste any more time on you :~P

Sometimes we all fail to remember this..




posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
And why do you want audio? To ear the wind?


While hearing the wind on Mars might indeed be interesting, would it not be a good idea to hear any other sounds that might be there? To assume that the only sound on Mars might be wind is not very scientific. A microphone only costs a few bucks.. sending audio back to earth is no big deal...

What are they afraid of? that we might hear the Rover repair crew cussing?



I happen to like space audio. Have you ever listened to the heart beat of the Sun? Or the magnetic field of Jupiter's moon Ganymede? Quite fascinating... one could almost say "ET phones home..."


www.spacesounds.com...

And yes those are radio signals converted to audio... but then isn't that how we transmit sounds, by converting them to radio waves transmitting them then reconverting them to sound?

And don't forget the one Cassini found near Saturn..

Alien Speech? Found in NASA's Saturn Radio Signal

It may NOT be alien speech, but NASA is puzzled and at the very least it is interesting




So to ask "why would you want sound?" I say because we have ears


The success rate is getting better with the latest missions.


Really? Like the success of the latest "Bomb the Moon" mission LaCross? The Temple1 hit where they had no idea what happened and are sending a second mission to go see? uh huh



The resolution is good, the colour is superfluous, the monochromatic cameras are more versatile.


Superfluous? Really?

www.thelivingmoon.com...



Rocks may give us the clues to what happened, looking for life that we do not know what it looks like would be more difficult, but I think it was already done.


NASA will soon send a probe to Europa the water moon... since the water in our deepest oceans is teeming with all sorts of life in the deep dark trenches where no sunlight reaches them I see no reason to NOT believe we will find things on Europa beneath the ice. The water on Europa will be the same temperature as the bottom of our seas, because and colder than 32 degrees F and it would be ice. It's actually closer to 40F as and deep sea diver can tell you




posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
To assume that the only sound on Mars might be wind is not very scientific.

That's true, but I don't see anything that I would expect to produce any sound, so I don't see a reason to have a microphone and more electronics.

Also, with a much lower atmospheric pressure, the sounds are (probably) much fainter.


And yes those are radio signals converted to audio... but then isn't that how we transmit sounds, by converting them to radio waves transmitting them then reconverting them to sound?

Yes, that's one of the ways of transmitting audio, but we convert them back to the original format to ear them, while in this case we have to convert them to a format that is not the original because they were not sounds when they were captured.


Really? Like the success of the latest "Bomb the Moon" mission LaCross? The Temple1 hit where they had no idea what happened and are sending a second mission to go see? uh huh

I was talking about Mars missions, I forget to specify that.




Superfluous? Really?

Yes, for this type of mission.

And I will say it again, several monochromatic filters are better than one colour camera.


NASA will soon send a probe to Europa the water moon...

I was talking about Mars...

But are you saying that deep sea divers know the temperature at the bottom of the oceans? How do they get there?



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
That's true, but I don't see anything that I would expect to produce any sound, so I don't see a reason to have a microphone and more electronics.


So because you don't 'see' something... we shouldn't look for it?





Also, with a much lower atmospheric pressure, the sounds are (probably) much fainter.


Ah so perhaps a more sensitive mike? Seems the crews on top of Mount Everest can hear each other talk




Yes, that's one of the ways of transmitting audio, but we convert them back to the original format to ear them, while in this case we have to convert them to a format that is not the original because they were not sounds when they were captured.


Of course... you could just try listening to them



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


If that's the case then the habital zone in a solar system would greatly extend. I'm lead to believe we are the lucky ones living in the exact orbit that sustains life. If life existed on Mars then that zone must be extended.

I argue it must be extened both ways. To include Venus.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
So because you don't 'see' something... we shouldn't look for it?
Do you see something that looks like it would make a sound?

In this case it's more something like "we don't see something that would make it, so we are not going to look for it", because what we see is not directly related to sound.

I see it in the same way they didn't equipped the rovers with floaters, although they didn't saw any lake (I suppose).



Ah so perhaps a more sensitive mike? Seems the crews on top of Mount Everest can hear each other talk
30 kPa is much more than 0.87 kPa, they would need a good amplifier.


Of course... you could just try listening to them
I don't have antennas instead of ears.



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 12:51 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 

Oh? So those who cannot digest and do not subscribe to your conspiracy theories are 'trolls'? C'mon man, you can do better than that!


Ok, apologies for being sarcastic, if that's what you really mean!
It does seem I've rubbed some of you guys the wrong way!


Peace!



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
Do you see something that looks like it would make a sound?



Any life form large enough to displace soil/rocks?

The point is, there are only 5 senses that we humans are accustomed to dealing with, and each provides us with a lot of information that our brains are able to process. Sound is one of the big ones (i would think sound is second only to sight, which is another complaint for us with the use of monochromatic filters). Why make multiple missions that ignore the processing capability?

It is poor science, as it is ignoring the concept of "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." It needs to be looked into.



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 04:55 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


zorgon my friend, i was teasing the "it's only a rock with some weird shadow" crowd.

no offence ment! lol.

armap! how do you know there is no sound and with some of the crap theypass for music here on earth, i bet we can get SOMETHING in the audio range.

what's it take to hear vlf? bull to that point of view.

try it!

go to my media and see what i did with saturns music. ya, really?

planets in space make sound but on a planet there is nothing but a waste of time!!??



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 05:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
It needs to be looked into.


Agreed.

And it isn't something that needs to be justified either.


If mars was being explored by a private corporation, I bet they would include a microphone.

But when it comes to government bureaucracies and agencies, not doing something today is an excuse to do it some other time and then get paid for it. It is important to stretch things out over time, like Union men making sure the new guys don't work to fast - they must pace themselves and make the work last (of course, officially they will use another reason to justify their sloth, as do government agencies).

*Just watch: In 2050 they [NASA] will be patting themselves on the back about landing mars rovers which have audio recording devices; acting like it is so great of them and sharing their confidence with us that the devices will work, being forty years in development






edit on 19-9-2010 by Exuberant1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Any life form large enough to displace soil/rocks?
Have you ever seen any sign of soil and/or rock displacement that could not be attributed to non-biologic reasons?

I haven't, that's why I said that.


The point is, there are only 5 senses that we humans are accustomed to dealing with, and each provides us with a lot of information that our brains are able to process. Sound is one of the big ones (i would think sound is second only to sight, which is another complaint for us with the use of monochromatic filters). Why make multiple missions that ignore the processing capability?
I don't think of sound as second only to sight, I think smell is more important in the amount of data it can give us.

I just don't see a reason why sound would be a priority in a mission to Mars.

But having said that, a microphone was included in two missions to Mars, Mars Polar Lander and Phoenix. The first mission was a failure, and the microphone (part of the Mars Descent Imager) was only used during the descent, although a malfunction made it impossible to use the camera. If it had worked it would have delivered 1600x1200 pixels RGB images at five frames per second.

Funny that apparently few people know about it.



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
I don't think of sound as second only to sight, I think smell is more important in the amount of data it can give us.


I dunno Armap.

I think that identifying an elephant or a donkey or a duck would be easier by sound than by smell.

Personally I cannot tell the difference between a rhino and an elephant in smell terms, or a duck and a chicken.

*Maybe when AI is invented we will be able to send it to other planets with a nose of some sort and it can describe the odours.

robonose: "Guys, I'm smelling dung or something"

NASA: "Can you be more specific?"

robonose: "Not really, the something making the dung is behind me, but I'm stuck and since my microphone was only meant for use during re-entry I cannot describe what they sound like. Oh well."



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
I think that identifying an elephant or a donkey or a duck would be easier by sound than by smell.
That only depends on your knowledge.

But while an animal can be silent it cannot stop emitting its own smell. Smell is a chemical analysis, and as such can be extremely accurate, besides remaining after the animal is gone. Dogs trained to find dead bodies' scent can detect just some molecules of cadaverine some days after a dead body had touched a surface.

But I have to admit that sound detection is cheaper and easier to use.



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
]Have you ever seen any sign of soil and/or rock displacement that could not be attributed to non-biologic reasons?

I haven't, that's why I said that.


I have seen some amazing hoops jumped through to find an explanation a few times, too.

Just because you can attribute it to nonbiological origins does not mean that is what caused it.

NASA is "The People's" space agency. Their science should take our interests into account, should it not?



I just don't see a reason why sound would be a priority in a mission to Mars.

But having said that, a microphone was included in two missions to Mars, Mars Polar Lander and Phoenix. The first mission was a failure, and the microphone (part of the Mars Descent Imager) was only used during the descent, although a malfunction made it impossible to use the camera. If it had worked it would have delivered 1600x1200 pixels RGB images at five frames per second.

Funny that apparently few people know about it.


Not saying make it a priority, just to include the capability.



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
I have seen some amazing hoops jumped through to find an explanation a few times, too.
The problem is in all cases I have seen people point to just one thing the they think could have been produced by a biological entity, but there aren't any other clues of the presence of any biological entity, like marks on the ground, for example.


Not saying make it a priority, just to include the capability.
As you can see, they already did that, but without any usable results.



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by fooks
armap! how do you know there is no sound and with some of the crap theypass for music here on earth, i bet we can get SOMETHING in the audio range.
I didn't said that there is no sound, I said that I have never seen anything that could produce any sound, besides wind.


what's it take to hear vlf? bull to that point of view.
It depends, listening to what was originally radio waves is the same as using a sound to create colour patterns like media players do, interesting but not very useful.


planets in space make sound but on a planet there is nothing but a waste of time!!??
No, they do not make sounds.

Remember that in space no one can ear you scream.



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by Exuberant1
I think that identifying an elephant or a donkey or a duck would be easier by sound than by smell.
That only depends on your knowledge.


I figured you would say something like that.


Anyhow, no one has any knowledge of the potential alien life out there and what it sounds like or smells like.

"depends on your knowledge"

Yeah. Okay....



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
Do you see something that looks like it would make a sound?


Dunno... but you never know till you listen


Maybe this?



Maybe not



posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Amazing thread Skyfloating, I have a question, sorry if it's already answered. What are the real colors on Mars, I read and saw some pictures a few years back that said and showed that the colors and atmosphere looks no different then earth and that NASA makes everything look red. Actually the first picture you posted in your opening looks very earth like, Sadona maybe, not saying it's Sadona only that is looks like it.

Thank you.



new topics

top topics



 
191
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join