Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Curiosity Just Went Through Mud?

page: 4
73
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Consequence
Plants don't grow out of water.


You've obviously never heard of Hydroponics. Or been near a river or a creek. There are a lot of plants that grow in water.




posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Larry L
 


"We have water," said William Boynton of the University of Arizona, lead scientist for the Thermal and Evolved-Gas Analyzer, or TEGA. "We've seen evidence for this water ice before in observations by the Mars Odyssey orbiter and in disappearing chunks observed by Phoenix last month, but this is the first time Martian water has been touched and tasted."
www.nasa.gov...

We are going to see life and not just microbes on Mars.



posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Larry L
 


I believe you are trying a little too hard my freind.In the first image,if you look at the ground where the rover has already been you can see that it is turning to the right.I think that as it turns this puts slightly more pressure on the outside edges of the left wheels(the ones you see in images).This results in a different pattern of dirt distribution on the tires,as opposed to when it is moving in a straight line,giving it a slightly darker appearance.This variation in color is what you are mistaking for moisture.That is my take on it.Perhaps some of our more learned ATSers can explain it better.



posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by mardukiscoming
 


I just went back and read some of the posts before mine and I see that perhaps that really is water in the images.If so,then I retract my earlier statement and say...



posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Larry L
 
Definitely a valid point. If it was dry like a desert, it should not stick to the tracks. I'm sure the Nasa Observers have noted this observation themselves and logged. Just have to wait and see what the reports from Nasa reveals.



posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by DeepThoughtCriminal
I think I see what you were talking about, on the second picture. However to me, it does not look wet. Have you ever seen a wet and muddy tire before? Doesn't look like that. This just looks like dirt that has stuck to tire, and been compressed as the tire is rolling. Dirt sticks everywhere and the tire does not need wetness for this to happen.
It doesn't have to be wet. Damp mud/soil/dust can also have the same effect. The track material is way different than the tires on the automobiles on earth.



posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 11:42 AM
link   
It is possible that the ridges are there for the same reason footprints stayed on the moon so crisply. The dust particles have sharper edges due to not having a similar atmosphere to Earth's.



posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by BassAckwards2999

You've obviously never heard of Hydroponics. Or been near a river or a creek. There are a lot of plants that grow in water.


You're missing something. Life.



posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by wildespace
 

Electrostatic effects are a good possibility. Probably better than moisture.
Sort of like scuffing your feet on a carpet or in this case a bit like a Van De Graf generator.
www.grc.nasa.gov...



posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by CynicalDrivel
It is possible that the ridges are there for the same reason footprints stayed on the moon so crisply. The dust particles have sharper edges due to not having a similar atmosphere to Earth's.


no..

The less to no atmosphere quality is what lends a track the ability to stay there, but not the ability to be "crisp" in the first place.

crispness of the moon tracks comes from very fine dust. It's like stepping in baking soda compared to stepping in sand.

The mars "dirt" does seem quite dusty. Small particles "stick" together more easily.



put some dust off a baseball field or dry dirt field onto a wet surface and then wipe it away or turn the surface as the wheels on the mars rover would turn.. You will see this same patterning.. I don't think mars has much good top soil.. I think big life must have died out, much longer ago if it ever existed that is.

I bet a million dollars that 6 inches down into the dirt it is rich with microbes.



posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by wildespace
 

Electrostatic effects are a good possibility. Probably better than moisture.
Sort of like scuffing your feet on a carpet or in this case a bit like a Van De Graf generator.
www.grc.nasa.gov...




doubt it..



An electrostatic precipitator is a widely used dust removal technology for dusty environments on Earth. However, the low pressure of the Martian atmosphere limits the electrostatic potentials normally needed for this technology. This low pressure also affects dust particle charging due to the much longer molecular mean free paths of the Martian atmosphere.

Source

What do you think of my picture I posted?? The different colors. Look closely now. Not just at the arrows. You can tell the darker color dust sticks more readily to the wheels.. IE. It's higher up on the turn of the wheel and yet there is more of it there..
edit on 9/11/2012 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Dustytoad
 


doubt it..

Why? What does an electrostatic precipitator to remove dust have to do with triboelectric charging?

On the Moon and on Mars, conditions are ideal for triboelectric charging. The soil is drier than desert sand on Earth. That makes it an excellent electrical insulator.

science.nasa.gov...



The different colors.

Yes, the dust on the ground is different colors too.

edit on 9/11/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 




Triboelectric charging of nonconducting materials followed by sudden electrostatic discharge (ESD) can damage electronic equipment and become ignition hazard to combustible materials. Mars atmosphere has near zero humidity and therefore natural charge bleeding to surroundings is anticipated to be limited.

from nasa


of course if zero humidity is wrong then you would be more right, but so would I. I like the Irony.


I will also say that I agree with you for most of the dust. The first picture illustrates your point perfectly. I would point more to the second picture, however. Really look at it man, it's no skin off your back or anything.


edit on 9/11/2012 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 12:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Dustytoad
 

Yes.
That means that an electrostatic charge can build up instead of discharging into the atmosphere.

No irony. It is very dry. Static electrical charges build up.
edit on 9/11/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

I edited hardly ever post everything I want to all at once. You respond so fast..

check out the rest.

But yes that was a good point in your last post.
edit on 9/11/2012 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Dustytoad
 


Really look at it man, it's no skin off your back or anything.

I looked at it. I see what you are talking about. I think, at this point, electrostatic charging is a higher probability than moisture (much less mud). In any case I'm sure the guys at JPL are paying just as much attention as you are.



posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


You can speak of probabilities of unknowns? but yea ok this is my stop. I see where we disagree. My experience tells me that the patterning of the dust, especially if you look just beside it on the tire and look at the finer details, you will see that it's "scraped."

On the other hand if you look at the first picture it's, for lack of a better word, "grabbed."

There is static attraction going on NO doubt. I am pretty sure I see water too.

And yes I am sure the guys at JPL and whoever else is noticing this as well. It would be awesome if we were to get to hear their take on it.
edit on 9/11/2012 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 12:24 PM
link   
I was looking at these same pictures last night on the NASA site and the first thing that popped into my mind, when i saw all the dust and dirt stuck on the tires, was a thread here on ATS about the moon landing hoax.
In the moon landing hoax thread there were a number of debunkers explaining,rationalizing why there was NO dust/dirt or other debris in the treads of the moon rover that the astronauts drove all over the moon.
These pictures of curiosity with dust/dirt stuck to the wheels,debunks the debunkers and proves that debris should and will stick to the wheels of any moving object even in low gravity such as on the moon.


As for as these pictures, it defianetly looks like there is moisture/mud on the tires and in the soil.
look at the tread marks that were left on the ground.look at the places on the ground where the treads penetrated the top layer of soil. the soil where the treads have penetrated the top layer is much darker in color than the top layer of soil.
even in the part of the picture where the soil is in the shadow of curiosity the top soil is much lighter in color than the underlying soil where the treads have penetrated the top layer. That darker color isn`t being caused by shadows because there is no direct light shining on that soil,it is in the shadow of curiosity.Shadows within shadows? i don`t think so.

There are two possibilities, there is water or some other type of liquid on mars which greatly increases the odds that there is or was life on mars or the rover isn`t really on mars and the whole mars rover thing is a hoax.
my money is on the former.



posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
In tracking nomenclature what you are seeing is called dulling. It is the result of the fine particulates being churned up in such a way that the surface is not compacted like what you see next to it and consequently there is no reflective quality (or alternately it absorbs most of the light).
Think of it this way; in a tightly packed surface the particles are close together and in this case they appear shiny, if they are packed loosely together then there are many cracks in the surface that trap the light.
Go step in sand or freshly churned earth and you can see the phenomenon for yourself.



dry sand stays the same color when you step in it... Think of the physics of it. There is nothing to change the color.

I grew up around farms. When you "churn" the dirt it does look darker. Why is this? It's because the sun can't bake away the water so much under the surface. There is a LOT of moisture on earth. Turn over some dry dune sand in a pile and get someone else to see If they can find it... I have gone to the beach every summer of my life and I know that dry dirt does not change color...

Phages point that there could be different color dust makes more sense except for the distribution, which looks more like a wet spot to me.. Or maybe a more clay like soil, which would still mean wet..
edit on 9/11/2012 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2012 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Tardacus
 


Here is a moon rover wheel can YOU spot the diffrence



Dust can fall through it,

Also no moisture on the moon surface!


Refer to your own avatar





new topics

top topics



 
73
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join