Where are (all) the Photos of Ceres?

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: MysterX

It vanishes once it passes the terminator. Reflection.

Let's say it's a reflection. Most likely it's a pool of some sort at the top of a volcano or mountain inside the crater.

It could also be a plume of some sort (e.g., volcano emission, geyser, offgassing, etc.), with the top of the plume higher than the rim of the crater.

If the top of the plume is as high or higher than the lit rim of the dark crater, then that could allow it to reflect light even when the floor of the crater is in shadow.

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: JadeStar
If these were some type of artificial light source we'd know right away by examining the spectra from those spots because artificial light (of all types) has different characteristics than natural reflected or emitted light.

That's all well and good, assuming "they" aren't using a type of light source of which we are not yet aware.

Which would be what exactly? We know the entire electromagnetic spectrum at this point from extremely low frequency radio waves up to Gamma Rays, Cosmic Rays and other extremely harmful (from a biological point of view) radiation.

And a more important question for you is why would they?

Vision evolved because it uses a light source we all know about, our star: The Sun.

Life on other planets around other stars will have their own Sun's light to make use of. It's easy and free, and nature likes easy.

Using some form of illumination at night for any creatures with optical vision would make sense. I suppose you could theorize that such creatures might have evolved to see in the infrared or something but they still might use artificial infrared sources to flood an area with light. Any form of light be it infrared, optical, UV or even radio light is detectable.

originally posted by: anogiant
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

There are a lot of things Nasa won't tell.

Like what?

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: JadeStar
If these were some type of artificial light source we'd know right away by examining the spectra from those spots because artificial light (of all types) has different characteristics than natural reflected or emitted light.

That's all well and good, assuming "they" aren't using a type of light source of which we are not yet aware.

Which would be what exactly?

If we're not aware of it, how am I supposed to know what it is?

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: JadeStar
If these were some type of artificial light source we'd know right away by examining the spectra from those spots because artificial light (of all types) has different characteristics than natural reflected or emitted light.

That's all well and good, assuming "they" aren't using a type of light source of which we are not yet aware.

Which would be what exactly?

If we're not aware of it, how am I supposed to know what it is?

Then it's a non-argument. It's like asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Light of all sorts are part of the electromagnetic spectrum and we know the entirety of it. So perhaps you meant to use another word rather than light.

a reply to: JadeStar

Ceres is an exciting object and regardless of what the bright spots are, they will tell us something new and fascinating about it.

I know you know your stuff, I was wondering isn't Ceres so cold that if you stood on the surface you would melt into the surface like a hot knife through butter. I read or heard this somewhere, it would be like a geyser of volatilized gasses as your body heat evaporates the surface ices, sinking in till the temperature equalized and you froze solid.

In that light its difficult to imagine a source of heat that would cause a "light" any other than a reflection from a glassy surface. The cold surface temp would extinguish any source of heat quickly.

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Could be an Alien base hitching a ride with some sort of force field protecting them. Well.........somebody had to say it.

~$heopleNation

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: JadeStar
If these were some type of artificial light source we'd know right away by examining the spectra from those spots because artificial light (of all types) has different characteristics than natural reflected or emitted light.

That's all well and good, assuming "they" aren't using a type of light source of which we are not yet aware.

Which would be what exactly?

If we're not aware of it, how am I supposed to know what it is?

Then it's a non-argument. It's like asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Light of all sorts are part of the electromagnetic spectrum and we know the entirety of it. So perhaps you meant to use another word rather than light.

I wasn't making an argument. I simply said that it could be from a source of illumination that we don't yet know about.

You got me on a technicality... well done. I wasn't arguing for it having an alien source, I as making the point that we don't know what we don't know when it comes to space.

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: anogiant
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

There are a lot of things Nasa won't tell.

Like what?

You didn't get the memo? Ill have a talk with management....

So, JadeStar, why do you think the photos are missing?

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: GaryN

Likely not reflected light at all, but an emission line of hydrogen

At what wavelength? 486.1 nanometers? 656.2? Surely you must have some idea or you would not be in a position to say how likely it was.

No, I don't really know how that camera works, any info would be appreciated. Seems it uses an Active Pixel Sensor, which I have looked up, but how that is used in this instrument, I am not aware. I think it means that what used to need complex optics is now done in software, things like wave-front tilt correction, but for the most part, I am in the dark. As is the instrument at Ceres, but it's eyesight is likely MUCH better than mine.

originally posted by: anogiant
a reply to: All Seeing Eye



There are a lot of things Nasa won't tell.

Don't believe everything Jim Marrs DOES tell you. As for no-tells, I never saw any unusual-anomaly-related no-tells while working in Mission Control, anything weird you WANT to get out for discussion to identify possible hazards. Heck, even Gordo Cooper and Ed Mitchell made it clear they never encountered UFO-related secrecy anywhere in NASA in the Apollo dayas, and they were there.

"And it does appear odd that the lights persist even 'after dark' as this screen capture 'reflects', right? "

There's discussion over at Emily Lackdawalla's blog that agrees that the whiteness seems to be above the surface, raising the exciting possibility it's an active geyser plume. Emily says the first post-insertion images have now been made and are being processed, but might not include the crater of interest for another week or so.

originally posted by: GaryN

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: GaryN

Likely not reflected light at all, but an emission line of hydrogen

At what wavelength? 486.1 nanometers? 656.2? Surely you must have some idea or you would not be in a position to say how likely it was.

No, I don't really know how that camera works, any info would be appreciated. Seems it uses an Active Pixel Sensor, which I have looked up, but how that is used in this instrument, I am not aware. I think it means that what used to need complex optics is now done in software, things like wave-front tilt correction, but for the most part, I am in the dark. As is the instrument at Ceres, but it's eyesight is likely MUCH better than mine.

Weren't those images taken by Dawn's Framing Camera? Here are its specs: indico.cern.ch...

Note that it uses a commercial CCD, and that they were concerned with bright sunlight causing strong contrast between the lit and shadowed areas, and also that the camera were able to photograph some very faint stars with a long exposure.

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Check out their blog. I think it might answer some of your questions.

dawnblog.jpl.nasa.gov...

To execute an OpNav, Dawn suspends ion thrusting and turns to point its camera at Ceres. It usually spends one or two hours taking photos (and bonus measurements with its visible and infrared mapping spectrometer). Then it turns to point its main antenna to Earth and transmits its findings across the solar system to the Deep Space Network.

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

In a nut shell, we should ask NASA and If they give you the run around with 400 pages of facts (but still no answer to the question of where all the pictures are) then assume that they refuse to answer the question and the reason is as it always is with them.
In short they could be hiding something important behind a wall of scientific mumbo-jumbo that is of course right on but misleading at the same time. There IS a reason they are often referred to here as Never A Straight Answer. That`s just my two billion cents here so feel free to disagree.

originally posted by: bluemooone2
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

In a nut shell, we should ask NASA and If they give you the run around with 400 pages of facts (but still no answer to the question of where all the pictures are) then assume that they refuse to answer the question and the reason is as it always is with them.
In short they could be hiding something important behind a wall of scientific mumbo-jumbo that is of course right on but misleading at the same time. There IS a reason they are often referred to here as Never A Straight Answer. That`s just my two billion cents here so feel free to disagree.

All I read here is that you don't fully understand how missions like Dawn work. NASA "dumbs it down" and still there are people who don't understand what they're saying for whatever reason and these people lash out and accuse the agency of hiding things simply because they don't understand them.... smh...

a reply to: JadeStar

On the first two points, you are completely correct. On the third point please feel free to put it down to my time on ATS if you so wish, or perhaps to the 80,000 pictures of Mars that JPL had in their `desk` or something for 30 odd years or so before releasing any of them. And honestly, keep that scope pointed up and do not let me discourage you because it is what gives me hope also.

originally posted by: All Seeing Eye

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: anogiant
a reply to: All Seeing Eye

There are a lot of things Nasa won't tell.

Like what?

You didn't get the memo? Ill have a talk with management....

So, JadeStar, why do you think the photos are missing?

There are no photos missing....

It should be noted that the first images will just be a sliver of a crescent. Some people might be disappointed by this.

Since Dawn is currently just emerging from the dark side of Ceres, the first images will not reveal that much of the surface. Those first images will show only an 18% lit surface -- much like a thin Crescent Moon would look. Even on the second imaging opportunity (which comes April 14), only 25% of the face will be lit.

It will be another week or two after that before Dawn is it the proper orbit to be able to photograph the face of Ceres entirely lit up by the sun.

a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

I will tear it apart later and see what I think about it. What would you like to bet that there are frames missing lols. We shall see. Until then goodnight for now.