Curiosity: Potential Anomalies (Update 01/2014)

a reply to: ArMaP

so your saying refractivity doesn't contribute to the colours you see ? reflectivity is the only contributing factor , or what are you saying ?

as for silt not being translucent , that depends on the piece of silt your going to pick to conduct an experiment to find out it refractivity index , I would have thought most things are translucent to one degree or another .. wouldn't you agree?

funbox

originally posted by: funbox
so your saying refractivity doesn't contribute to the colours you see ? reflectivity is the only contributing factor , or what are you saying ?

On opaque materials, yes, or at least reflectivity is the biggest responsible for the colours we see.

as for silt not being translucent , that depends on the piece of silt your going to pick to conduct an experiment to find out it refractivity index , I would have thought most things are translucent to one degree or another .. wouldn't you agree?

If most things were translucent finding fossils would be much easier.

If that silt is 90% opaque and only 10% of the light passes through it, when that light reaches the next silt particle behind it only 10% of that 10% (1%) will reach the third particle, so I don't see how some translucency would be enough to make a noticeable difference in colour, I see the mixing of particles of silt and the clays from the layers above that as much more responsible than any possible translucency.

PS: one familiar example of something with some translucency is human skin, that's one of the reasons why it's hard to reproduce in artificial images (either in "old fashioned" paintings or modern CG images), as the translucency gives it that familiar aspect.

PPS: I know that silt well because, some years after my fossil hunting I was diagnosed with a blocked salivary gland, and besides some homoeopathic medicines I took I also used some of that silt to apply on the affected area of my face for 10 minutes every day during some 10 or 15 days. I will try to find more information about that specific silt, seeing that we don't have much information about the one on Mars.

a reply to: ArMaP

On opaque materials, yes, or at least reflectivity is the biggest responsible for the colours we see.

reflectivity lies about colour , go look in the mirror and see, are mirror's ArMaP'ed coloured?

or are they silver, metallic coloured ?.. unless you are the colour of silver ? erm , you're not a robot are you ?

funbox

originally posted by: funbox
reflectivity lies about colour , go look in the mirror and see, are mirror's ArMaP'ed coloured?

No, reflectivity doesn't lie about colour, the fact that objects reflect light is what makes them visible.

In an object that has specular reflectivity we see other things reflected in it because they reflect most of all the light that hits it in the same way they receive it, and the reflection is affected by the colour of the surface reflecting it, that's why a reflection on a golden surface looks difference from a reflection on a silver surface.

In the more common objects that have diffuse reflectivity we can see the colour of the object.

or are they silver, metallic coloured ?.. unless you are the colour of silver ?

What's the colour of silver?

erm , you're not a robot are you ?

Sometimes I have some doubts.

a reply to: ArMaP

No, reflectivity doesn't lie about colour, the fact that objects reflect light is what makes them visible.

yes it does , an object that's reflecting such as a mirror is lying *not purposeful* about it true color .
the mirror is a extreme example .. but if you was to grind the mirror down to powder .. tell me what color that powder is

or the element of sulphur , or of argon gas , or of kryptonite

im chalking this down ... here's one .. what colours chalk?

notevermentioningcolouragainbox

originally posted by: funbox
yes it does , an object that's reflecting such as a mirror is lying *not purposeful* about it true color .

It doesn't "lie" about its colour, that's why a gold mirror and a black mirror reflect things in different colours, their own colour is always added to the colours of the objects reflected in it.

When something that has as their real colour a neutral colour, like the aluminium used in mirrors with its light grey colour, we don't see a noticeable change in the colours of the objects reflected in it, but if you compare them you can see that the colours are not exactly the same.

the mirror is a extreme example .. but if you was to grind the mirror down to powder .. tell me what color that powder is

That depends on the material of the mirror, in a common glass mirror with aluminium as the reflective material, if we grind the glass it usually looks white, as non-polished glass has diffuse reflectivity (besides transparency). Ground aluminium is whitish grey, and it reacts almost instantly with oxygen, turning to aluminium oxide.

In an obsidian mirror you would probably get a blackish grey powder.

or the element of sulphur

Yellow.

or of argon gas

How do you grind a gas?

or of kryptonite

That you have to ask Superman.

im chalking this down ... here's one .. what colours chalk?

It depends, pure calcium carbonate? White.

notevermentioningcolouragainbox

I have that effect on people.

originally posted by: funbox
a reply to: jeep3r

to me it seems far fetched to have any rigid protocols for this mission, if indeed it is a mission and not some on the fly scripted drip drip

No rigid protocols, of course ... I was thinking along the lines of an agenda determining in which order certain targets are prioritized. The same may be true for the order in which discoveries are eventually released to the public.

The past press conferences show that the new findings always go just a tiny bit further than the previous ones, going from general to more specific.

Let's remember: first, NASA/JPL identified traces of past water at Gale. Then it was an ankle-deep body of water and eventually a decently sized lake. Then they found minerals, clays and sulfates. Afterwards, the basic building blocks of life. Next, scientists proclaim Mars had a vast ocean ... and so on, just to get the basic idea. It really is a step by step policy.

At times, it almost feels like they wouldn't officially investigate any other targets (even if they looked intriguing enough from a distance, eg. fossils) before going through all these basic steps.

I might be wrong, but up to now the official announcements IMO had been presented in a quite complementary way, perhaps too complementary - almost as if we're being spoon-fed ...

a reply to: ArMaP

It doesn't "lie" about its colour, that's why a gold mirror and a black mirror reflect things in different colours, their own colour is always added to the colours of the objects reflected in it.

tincture would hardly effect its ability to reproduce /reflect colours that are not colours of its base material. mirrors are liars.

surely if fossil hunting in silt you would know the basic colours of the elements, and be able to pick them out within the silt, ie iron flecks , silicates etc etc

That depends on the material of the mirror, in a common glass mirror with aluminium as the reflective material, if we grind the glass it usually looks white, as non-polished glass has diffuse reflectivity (besides transparency). Ground aluminium is whitish grey, and it reacts almost instantly with oxygen, turning to aluminium oxide.

so you admit that its base elements are useless in determining it's elemental colour, whilst in a vibratory pattern apt for reflection ?

following on from this, wouldn't that, then, makes silt a good candidate to ascertain its base elemental components , or some of them due to its low reflectivity , thus giving a truer representation to the eye of that elemental colour?

How do you grind a gas?

jar it and send it through a pig mincer

That you have to ask Superman.

*An mfb steps into a translucent portal and disappears in a flash of phoneboxes*

ill have to get back to you on that , shouldn't be long though

It depends, pure calcium carbonate? White.

chalks not very reflective is it , hence its almost immediate recognition

I have that effect on people.

and you're getting better at it ;D

funbox

a reply to: jeep3r

I agree, acclimatisation is a slow winded thing ,its almost comparable to what I would think itwould be like to engage with a world of brail or sign language or robotic legs, theres no deep end training for shock disability's , or sensory losses
a whole new way of approaching the loss has to be learnt

same goes for ideology , and you cant get more of a 'set in your ways' species than us lot , well most of us I guess , obviously excluding any of the alien walkins or walkonbys

seems to me humanity's main barrier is religious doctrines , especially the monotheistic ones, the multi-god religion's, I feel wouldn't give a hoot

odd how Catholicism is playing the odd one out, what does that ridiculously tiny city know ?

ehh im ranting , it must be all this spoon feeding , all that air going in with the meal, feels like hot air too, making me bloat

funbox

funbox has found something which he posted on the other anomalies thread. This one is pretty interesting, so please take a look and comment and analyze what it could be (posting this for purely selfish reasons - I want to know what this stuff is and if it's a natural geological formation common enough to laugh at me for even posting this). ArMap, please give your views, and if you found this in the silt what would you think it was. Thanks:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: funbox
tincture would hardly effect its ability to reproduce /reflect colours that are not colours of its base material. mirrors are liars.

"Tincture"? What do you mean by that?

surely if fossil hunting in silt you would know the basic colours of the elements, and be able to pick them out within the silt, ie iron flecks , silicates etc etc

Yes, and that's why I know that I didn't find any in that grey silt.

so you admit that its base elements are useless in determining it's elemental colour, whilst in a vibratory pattern apt for reflection ?

What "base elements" are you talking about?

Also, I don't understand what you mean by "whilst in a vibratory pattern apt for reflection".

following on from this, wouldn't that, then, makes silt a good candidate to ascertain its base elemental components , or some of them due to its low reflectivity , thus giving a truer representation to the eye of that elemental colour?

It's probably because it's Friday night and this week as been a tiring one, but I don't understand a word of that sentence.

chalks not very reflective is it , hence its almost immediate recognition

Recognition? I don't understand it.

and you're getting better at it ;D

I do my best.

a reply to: ArMaP

1st . tincture . elemental base colour/ your example of the gold mirror. is an example of tincture . " the colour of itself (the mirror) is added to the reflected colours in a very small way , as in tinted windscreens, or shades , or glasses

the reflected colours are hardly effected by the base elemental colour of the mirror, slightly but not enough for the mirror to be reflecting colours not of its elemental base colour , its powdered , pre mirror shape, colour.

probably a good thing really, imagine the state of women's makeup if they couldn't see the right colours

2nd
powdered mirror versus a complete mirror.
which one shows its true colours to the element identifying scientist

2nd-a "whilst in a vibratory pattern apt for reflection". .. all things vibrate , so do complete mirrors, complete mirrors have aptitude for reflection.

so moving on from this

3rd. silt, having already been ground down, by attrition in tidal forces ,air currents , etc. is a good thing to see base elements in, the colours show through without blinding us with lying reflected colours

having to stop here , re explanation has to take a back burner

continues..

4th

recognition , are you being ironic?

chalks not very reflective is it , hence its almost immediate recognition

ill rephrase into a question,.. because chalk is not very reflected, it being a , matt (low specular value) , light diffusing substance, do you think its recognisable amongst other elements that have varying degrees of reflectivity and elemental colour .eg a chalk vein in a coal mine

funbox

originally posted by: funbox
1st . tincture . elemental base colour/ your example of the gold mirror. is an example of tincture . " the colour of itself (the mirror) is added to the reflected colours in a very small way , as in tinted windscreens, or shades , or glasses

When I was talking about a gold mirror I was talking exactly of that, of a piece of gold polished to act like a mirror, not of a gold tinted glass in front of an aluminium sheet in a mirror.

the reflected colours are hardly effected by the base elemental colour of the mirror, slightly but not enough for the mirror to be reflecting colours not of its elemental base colour , its powdered , pre mirror shape, colour.

In the specific case of a glass mirror with a reflecting sheet (mercury, silver, tin or aluminium) behind the glass it's obvious that the colours of what we see on the mirror are affected by both the colour of the glass and the colour of the reflecting sheet behind it, as in that case we do have refraction before reflection, that's why I wasn't talking about such a case.

An example of the type of mirror I was talking about is the type used by dentists, as those are made from polished metal.

probably a good thing really, imagine the state of women's makeup if they couldn't see the right colours

In some cases that could be a good thing.

2nd
powdered mirror versus a complete mirror.
which one shows its true colours to the element identifying scientist

The ground mirror shows the true colour of the material from which the mirror was made, as it doesn't have specular reflectivity.

2nd-a "whilst in a vibratory pattern apt for reflection". .. all things vibrate , so do complete mirrors, complete mirrors have aptitude for reflection.

What's the relevancy of that in this case? Are you talking about vibrations on the mirror or about the vibratory nature of light?

3rd. silt, having already been ground down, by attrition in tidal forces ,air currents , etc. is a good thing to see base elements in, the colours show through without blinding us with lying reflected colours

Although it shows the base elements' colours, it shows them in the state of the base elements, so if you have iron in it it will appear grey, but if you have iron oxide it will appear a reddish brown.

I don't understand if you use of the word "through" in the above sentence means that you are saying that the light passes through the silt.

4th
ill rephrase into a question,.. because chalk is not very reflected, it being a , matt (low specular value) , light diffusing substance, do you think its recognisable amongst other elements that have varying degrees of reflectivity and elemental colour .eg a chalk vein in a coal mine

Chalk is reflective, it even has a relatively high albedo (diffuse reflection), but it doesn't have specular reflectivity, so yes, chalk is easily seen in something like a coal mine, but not really easily identified, as just by looking at it (specially on a photo) it's hard to know the difference between chalk (calcium carbonate) from, for example, talcum (magnesium silicate) or kaolin (aluminium silicate).
That's why Curiosity has the laser and the ChemCam.

PS: although chalk is white, its base component calcium is a metal, with specular reflections when not oxidised, as you can see in this photo from Wikipedia.

a reply to: ArMaP

It's white because all of the tiny facets and faces of the ground up glass reflect all the spectrum wavelengths and through prism like effects combine and mix all those spectral colours into white light, which reflects from each of these tiny glass grain surfaces to our eyes.

a reply to: ArMaP

so many variables to what we see eh ArMaP , that last picture is a great example of how different looking elements can be compounded to form something completely alternate looking to it's counterpart compound element in look and texture.

great stuff

funbox

Is there an ATS thread following the last six months of the Curiosity Rover's mastcam images, especially one using gigapans produced from those images? If so, where can I find that thread or threads? Thanks for any help.

a reply to: Constance

There's this thread, but it hasn't been updated that frequently.

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: Constance

There's this thread, but it hasn't been updated that frequently.

Thank you for that link. Is no one here using the gigapans that enable close-up scrutiny of anomalous objects?

a reply to: Constance

The problem with Gigapan is that you need large images, I think the minimum is 50 MB. Any image smaller than that (and a photo from the Mastcam has (usually) just around 250/300 KB.

I have made some panoramas that Gigapan refused because of that.

PS: this is last year's thread, have you seen the one for this year?

originally posted by: funbox
reply to post by BuzzDengue

 

hey Buzz ,wondered what had happened to you , should have guessed you was on the case

like the new watermarks

have some interesting formations there , downloading the file now for a butchers , welcome back

funBox

Thanks!!! Hope you are well.