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.

 

Martian sky at night, pictures.

page: 1
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Mast cam pictures of the martian sky at night.






I don`t know what this is but it looks to be about the same distance from mars as our moon is from earth.Martian moon?

mars.jpl.nasa.gov...
These are nice pictures, much clearer than our own night sky.


More pictures here.
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...
edit on 13-8-2013 by Tardacus because: Edit to add links



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Tardacus
 


Amazing photos I wonder which one of those tiny pixel size dots is us.



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tardacus
These are nice pictures, much clearer than our own night sky.


Really?



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 10:00 PM
link   
So who wants to start comparing these images to Earth-based star charts...?


That would provide fairly strong evidence to support/deny the whole "these pics aren't from Mars" debate.


ETA: Separating the content of these two posts. Comments about objects/artifacts in the image moved to the post below.
edit on 13-8-2013 by Heliophant because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 10:11 PM
link   
The odd object in the second image is probably Phobos - the Space Potato that some (including Buzz Aldrin) say has a monolith on it. Also involved in the incredibly odd Russian Phobos Mission...


The one in the third image might be Deimos.

The first image has some "lines" in it, indicative of a long exposure... But those "line" objects would have to pretty close and/or fast to have such longer "lines" than the rest of the stars.

Interesting. Maybe Mars was having a meteor shower that night.

edit on 13-8-2013 by Heliophant because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-8-2013 by Heliophant because: Grammar



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Tardacus
 


I can see Phobos and Deimos in the second picture, but I'm kind of wondering about the third pic. It is too round to be either of the martian satellites. Both satellites should look like russet potatoes.



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 10:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Kratos40
 


Yeah, I guess you're right... That might not be Deimos. Hmm...



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 10:37 PM
link   
The second picture is interesting because it comes from a series of 21 pictures that were taken over approximately a 3 minute time frame. The smaller white object in the first picture is below the larger object and over the course of 3 minutes it moves up and behind the large object and then reappears above it and continues moving up and away until it`s just a small point of light.


first picture in the series taken at 2013-08-01 08:41:07 the smaller object is below the larger object.


Last picture in the series taken at 2013-08-01 08:44:15 the smaller object is above the larger object and much less visible..


The complete series of 21 pictures of these 2 objects is here:
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Heliophant
So who wants to start comparing these images to Earth-based star charts...?


That would provide fairly strong evidence to support/deny the whole "these pics aren't from Mars" debate.


ETA: Separating the content of these two posts. Comments about objects/artifacts in the image moved to the post below.
edit on 13-8-2013 by Heliophant because: (no reason given)


The stars will look pretty much the same from mars as they do from Earth. There is a slight difference, but you would need some precise measuring equipment to notice a difference.

Think of this example...the Earth is on the totally opposite side of the Sun in January as it is in July -- two very different parts of the solar system. However, if I look North, the stars look pretty much the same from both of those locations.


edit on 8/13/2013 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Tardacus
 


It would be cool to see the more well known constellations from mars.



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 10:52 PM
link   
Wait...why did you include this image:


Originally posted by Tardacus

mars.jpl.nasa.gov...


That was taken on sol 360 while the others (showing a sky with stars and the 2 moons) were taken on Sol 351. I'm not even sure that picture with the round circle in the pure black field was even of the night sky, but maybe some internal image or some test image.

I don't think that is a night image of the sky at all.

The reason I say this is here is another image from that same sol (sol 360) taken 7 minutes early than the black one withthe perfectly round circle. This picture looks to be taken in daylight, not night:



Original Image:
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Tardacus
 


awesome....just awesome. thanks for this.

eh, one can dream....



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


That was the first "night" picture I saw,I thought it was a night picture of the sky which is why i searched for more, but now that you mention it that picture does seem odd from the other night pictures.
It seems to reappear in some of the other SOL picture sets. sometimes the white circle is near the bottom of the picture and sometimes it`s a blue circle.
At this point I would agree that it`s probably not a picture of the sky.

Here are the ones with the blue circles and the dark background.
SOL 348
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...



posted on Aug, 13 2013 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Fair enough, point well made.

However, if you can find planets in that image, it would be interesting to see if they are where they should/shouldn't be.
edit on 13-8-2013 by Heliophant because: Grammar



posted on Aug, 14 2013 @ 01:21 AM
link   
There is a series of Deimos and Phobos images.
Check out my thread here
www.abovetopsecret.com...
It includes one image, and a link to the page of additional images.
Also some great information from other members.

The round image, is of the sun.
Opportunity has dark filters for this purpose.
They are usually small images, and are used for determining the rovers position and orientation.

Curiosity also has a dark filter

Besides the affixed red-green-blue filter grid, the Mastcams have wheels of other filters that can be rotated into place between the lens and the CCD. These include science spectral filters for examining the ground or sky in narrow bands of visible-light or near-infrared wavelengths. One filter on each camera allows it to look directly at the sun to measure the amount of dust in the atmosphere, a key part of Mars' weather.

www.nasa.gov...



posted on Aug, 14 2013 @ 02:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Tardacus
 


Sorry to disappoint, but almost all "stars" in these night images are digital noise. Only a few stars have been identified, including Regulus.



The Mastcam isn't designed to take pictures of stars. See this UMSF thread: www.unmannedspaceflight.com...



posted on Aug, 14 2013 @ 11:52 AM
link   
According to my theory, it is the atmosphere on Earth that lets us see the stars, so with Mars having a much thinner atmosphere the stars should be less visible. The mastcam should be perfectly capable of taking images of the stars, but would need a longer exposure than we need on Earth for the same number and brightness of stars to be recorded. Does anyone know if the exposure settings are available for these images?



posted on Aug, 14 2013 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by GaryN
According to my theory, it is the atmosphere on Earth that lets us see the stars, so with Mars having a much thinner atmosphere the stars should be less visible. The mastcam should be perfectly capable of taking images of the stars, but would need a longer exposure than we need on Earth for the same number and brightness of stars to be recorded. Does anyone know if the exposure settings are available for these images?


Have you ever provided a physiological reason for explaining why you think the human eye cannot detect photons of light in a vacuum, such as in the vacuum of space, or on a planet/moon without atmosphere?


edit on 8/14/2013 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2013 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People

Originally posted by GaryN
According to my theory, it is the atmosphere on Earth that lets us see the stars, so with Mars having a much thinner atmosphere the stars should be less visible. The mastcam should be perfectly capable of taking images of the stars, but would need a longer exposure than we need on Earth for the same number and brightness of stars to be recorded. Does anyone know if the exposure settings are available for these images?


Have you ever provided a physiological reason for explaining why you think the human eye cannot detect photons of light in a vacuum, such as in the vacuum of space, or on a planet/moon without atmosphere?


edit on 8/14/2013 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)


Because there are no photons of light travelling in the vacuum. The space based 'telescopes' are in effect wavefront sensors that rely on some very complex hardware AND software to reconstruct those wavefronts.
Our eyes are not capable of performing the functions that are required. If the mastcam was on the Moon it would see no stars, as it uses optics similar to how our eyes work. On the Moon you would need a camera like ILO-X
that relies on the recently (2011) declassified optics technology. You still have to buy a license from Goddard to use it though.



posted on Aug, 16 2013 @ 11:41 AM
link   


Have you ever provided a physiological reason for explaining why you think the human eye cannot detect photons of light in a vacuum, such as in the vacuum of space, or on a planet/moon without atmosphere?


I'd say the most probable reason is, that the person would be dead.




top topics



 
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join