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.

 

Curiosity cameras reference images and distances

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 08:12 AM
link   

Then we start to hold grudges, if someone pops in to give an excellent explanation of the physical processes of things that exist in space.Your thread idea is a good premise. So Teach us something!
Yes, all these explanations have ben excellent and very easy to understand.

I have already said that I am no expert in these images in the original post. I have nothing to teach, but I do use hopefully a little common sense when things dont sit right. I am certainly not holding grudges to anyone for telling me what science says is how it is. You believe that, I don't, thats all.

However, there are some scientists saying one thing and other scientists saying the opposite which cannot both be correct. I notice something missing which should be there and I ask a question which should be easy to answer. It seems we are getting all kinds of conflicting stories about this wind business and the time periods involved in this planet are so long that there should be more evidence than we see. The wind cannot be strong enough to erode out the bluueberries yet not strong enough to erode other sharp straight rock edges.

Between rocks there are smooth areas devoid of anything. Have these area been there for millenia - since the atmosphere had wind strong enough to sweep these areas clean? If not, then what has swept these areas clean of blueberries and other small stones?

There is an elephant in the room which no-one is acknowledging.




posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 08:18 AM
link   
There is an obvious big ole lizard in that bottom left of the picture. NASA is covering it up! Or maybe its just a rock...I duno.



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by qmantoo
 


As I pointed out in my last post (about pictures of the MERs with and without dust, so we can date them), do the same thing. Post pictures showing the rocks you question, the dust areas you question, blue berries you question.

It helps to look at certain areas and not assume that you are talking about the entire planet. Visuals also help you point out what you are questioning.

For example the blue berries in a matrix that is eroded away so they fall out, as compared to rocks. The matrix is compact Mars soil, and is less dense than the blue berries or other actual rocks. Even the light atmosphere of Mars will erode the compact soil much faster than it can on rocks.

And actually it's not so much the wind.....but what gets carried in the wind that provides the erosion. That dust itself can act as an abrassive over a long period.

Just as my rock tumbler however, the grade of grit changes the speed at which something erodes. The first week in a rock tumbler with heavy grit (#60) will take rocks and round them smooth. However when I get to the pre-polishing grit, it feels almost like flour, the changes in the rock take a lot longer, and are less obvious.

Anyways, help us help you by showing pictures of what you are talking about in all areas. Visuals help in many cases.



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 10:21 AM
link   
Thanks for the explanations, however i saw somewhere that they did an experiment with a vacuum,a fan and some powder. They deduced that the dust on mars must be many times finer than any dust found on earth. Is that true?
And any explanation for the black figure in the bottom left corner of this image? mars.jpl.nasa.gov...



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 10:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by symptomoftheuniverse
Thanks for the explanations, however i saw somewhere that they did an experiment with a vacuum,a fan and some powder. They deduced that the dust on mars must be many times finer than any dust found on earth. Is that true?
And any explanation for the black figure in the bottom left corner of this image? mars.jpl.nasa.gov...


Here you go a whole wiki article on the soil of Mars:

Martian Soil

A lot of good information and should help answer many of your questions.

As for the image, that's the "Mars Big Foot" picture, taken by either Opportunity or Spirit (can't remember which one off the top of my head), and has been covered here on ATS quite a bit way back when.

It's a very small object. My opinion is it's a rock that looks interesting. Others will say it's a figurine, etc.



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 10:36 AM
link   
Thankyou for the link. The picture is from curiosity, sol 271. I remember the mars lady but not the bigfoot. Also i dont think the object is very small.
edit on 2-6-2013 by symptomoftheuniverse because: added oppinion



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by symptomoftheuniverse
 


Ooops! Yes you are right, from Curiosity.

Can't tell what it is at this distance. More than likely a rock (I know, people hate that answer).

A picture more focused on that area would be better.



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by qmantoo
 


I'd appreciate it if you focused on the topic of this thread, rather than going on a broad attack against Mars sciences. Let's leave the wind and dust alone, and solve the issue you seem to have with Curiosity's cameras and the images we get. ... Although I'm still not clear about what you were trying to say by posting those images.

Saying all that, Mars is a dynamic planet, and MRO images show a varied landscape, some of which changes seasonally (especually at the poles). I'm not an expert on martian geology and processes, so I can't guarantee that everything I say here is a scientific fact, it's just my judgement and impression from what I've seen or read. If you'd like a knowledeable answer to your questions, I suggest you contact the USGS Astrogeology Science Center or ask around at the Unmanned Spaceflight forum.



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 05:01 PM
link   

I'd appreciate it if you focused on the topic of this thread, rather than going on a broad attack against Mars sciences. Let's leave the wind and dust alone, and solve the issue you seem to have with Curiosity's cameras and the images we get. ... Although I'm still not clear about what you were trying to say by posting those images.
The thread was supposed to be about the queries some had about sizes and distances in C's images so the thread was to address that.

It is others who moved it away from the topic of the initial post by focusing on other things. I was under the impressuion that we should not just start a thread and leave it but should 'monitor' it for requested information or further discussion on the thread topic. I have already said I dont know about distance measurements and that I aquired these images and thought they may be helpful. It was someone else who picked up on my comment about shills and we started this wind and dust etc discussion from there.

I will start another thread about the wind and dust if necessary.



posted on Jun, 2 2013 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by qmantoo
 


ah, here we go.

ArMap, one of our moderators, who also is well versed on topics like this, has offered up a link to a program that can help determine the distances of objects, which can help in determining size..
There was a thread, months ago discussing objects on Mars, and I had bookmarked the page for this program.

www.clarkandersen.com...
Apparently it only works for the navigation cameras on Curiosity, at the moment.





edit on 2-6-2013 by spacedoubt because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join