Comet flies over Mars rover Curiosity Sol 504

Comets do not zoom across the sky. Their position changes a bit from day to day while they are visible. Since it is not visible in an image taken six minutes later, it is not a comet.

I would tend to lean strongly toward an imaging artifact. A cosmic ray strike, perhaps but I don't really think so.


On second thought, it could be a cosmic ray strike. More examples, from the NAVCAM.
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

reply to post by Phage

Phage to the rescue

Good thinking there, even though i don't really believe in the "imaging artifact", it somehow looks to solid, but could be.

Edit:Your edit made me rethink.

I have been noticing how many painting centuries old depicting a comet and a ufo in the same picture.

reply to post by 0bserver1


maybe it's a twister or massive dust devil as it's just about to completely dissipate and we can only see the top?

...or maybe that's what a meteor looks like entering the thin atmosphere of mars?

reply to post by Phage

On second thought, it could be a cosmic ray strike

And how can we interpreted that, Like lightning in the Martian sky?

keep believing the LIES.

reply to post by 0bserver1

No.
It's the result of a cosmic ray striking the camera sensor. It would not be visible in the sky.
It happens on Earth too but since Mars has no magnetic field and its atmosphere is so thin it gets more energetic cosmic ray action. Enough so, apparently, the hits can be seen in daylight images.

Since the night time image I posted would have a longer exposure time, it captured several hits.

darkerview.com...

reply to post by jaytay

Which lies?
Are you calling me a liar? Is my opinion a lie?

Phage
On second thought, it could be a cosmic ray strike. More examples, from the NAVCAM.
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

That's a 30 second exposure, with all the differences that makes.

Edit: I see you already explained the differences.

reply to post by Phage

On second thought, it could be a cosmic ray strike. More examples, from the NAVCAM.
mars.jpl.nasa.gov…

Thats what I proposed in my post on page one. The only question I still have about that conclusion is the "misty" appearance of the "tail" in the Mars Photo. Usually a strike on a camera image chip crosses pixels that don't have enough resolution to produce the "foggy" appearance of the "tail" in the photo.


No?

reply to post by intrptr

The energy of the cosmic ray gets dissipated to surrounding pixels. But did you notice the jpg artifacts in your blowup?
This is not actually a raw image. It's a jpeg version.

Phage
reply to post by intrptr

 

Did you notice the jpg artifacts in your blowup?
This is not actually a raw image. It's a jpeg version.

The problem with Curiosity photos is that the raw images are jpegs.

reply to post by Phage

This is not actually a raw image. It's a jpeg version.

Ahhsooo… thanks for that bit of information. I learned something new.

I was at my brother's house out by Edwards Air force base the other week, I was looking at the sky at what seemed to be a daytime star. It was so bright that I could see it through light clouds, but nobody else could see it. I spent the next 10 minutes trying to get them to see it too, when all of a sudden 4 objects came across our field of view. Everyone saw these objects, they seemed to change formations rather quickly and they were traveling at what seemed to be between 100-200 mph. It took a while to leave our field of view and after they were out of sight we started talking about what we thought the objects were. My brother who has been in the Air Force for 22 years thought they were mylar balloons up in some currents making them move faster, my other brother, wife, sister in law all thought they were jets in formation. I on the other hand saw ufo's. Who's right?

My point with this post is that it seem like an exercise in futility to have these discussions. It will ALWAY'S be something to some, and another thing to someone else. Who's right?

the lies are a general statement not to any individual.

It only appears in a single frame, and doesn't appear in the shot taken by the other front HAZ cam at the same time: mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

Ergo, it's not a comet or UFO, but an artifact in that particular camera that took the image. A cosmic ray strike seems the most likely explanation.

Comets indeed do not zoom across the sky, they move extremely slowly by our standards. Besides, if there were any comet so close to Mars, it would be major astronomy news, and you'd see threads about it here on ATS. We'll just have to wait until the comet Siding Springs

reply to post by wildespace


That were my first thoughts too .. Maybe an meteor that just fell down? But what Phage said presumably the most logical assumption we have

Phage
reply to post by jaytay

 

Which lies?
Are you calling me a liar? Is my opinion a lie?

edit on 2/1/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Is there any method to rule out for sure the cosmic ray strike?

reply to post by Char-Lee

Not that I can think of.
The closest would be "it doesn't look like one" and I was sort of thinking that until I found that other example which is very similar.

wildespace
It only appears in a single frame, and doesn't appear in the shot taken by the other front HAZ cam at the same time: mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

Ergo, it's not a comet or UFO, but an artifact in that particular camera that took the image. A cosmic ray strike seems the most likely explanation.

Comets indeed do not zoom across the sky, they move extremely slowly by our standards. Besides, if there were any comet so close to Mars, it would be major astronomy news, and you'd see threads about it here on ATS. We'll just have to wait until the comet Siding Springs

The angle is quite different are you sure it is just not visible in the second photo? I think it is behind the rover part.