Someone at TEM posted this. <br /><br />I don't know why, but I thought I'd share it with you.<br />http://www.mroimages.com/msss/M1500062/ <br /><br />(EDIT): I erroniously named this thread referencing MRO, originally. It should reference MOC. Maybe a mod will change that for me.<br /><br />Calli: Done!
- Status
I thought MRO was still aerobraking with its science instruments turned off. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>
The camera was on for a short time in March, but then they turned it off for the aerobreaking phase. But that doesn't really matter, because I made a huge mistake: That is not MRO; it's MOC. (Sorry) <br /><br />A direct link to that image can be found on this page:<br />http://ida.wr.usgs.gov/html/orbits/m15000.htm<br />Scroll down to M1500062. Once you open that, click on the second portion of the image on the left to view the pyramid.<br /><br />Or if you like looking for needles in haystacks, it can be found here: http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/m13_m18/narrowangles.html<br /><br />Would a mod please edit the name of this thread to say "MOC Image of a Pyramid on Mars"? I'd surely appreciate it. <br /><br /><br />
Wow gene, that's a great image of Nandi Vallis. The Viking context image at the USGS site is really nice. The MOC site has processed and map corrected (i.e. rectified) versions at http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/m13_m18/images/M15/M1500062.html<br /><br />I can't see the pyramid though. Do you mean the sharp angles in the walls of Nandi Vallis and its tributary? Or are you looking at something much smaller?<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em> Arthur Clarke</p> </div>
"...are you looking...?"<br /><br />Click the link I posted in the first post of this thread. <br /><br />He labeled it "E."
Suppose this is where it is headed:<br /><br />For now, at this resolution, it is a pyramid.<br /><br />If future higher resolution images continue to show an ever sharper view of what is a pyramid, who will be chagrined?<br /><br />If future higher resolution images increasingly show an angular mountain, rocks, gullies, cracks and angles falling short of mathematical perfection, who will be claiming 'cover-up', or that it still shows a pyramid, and not a mountain? <br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000"><strong>TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#339966"><strong>So many people, so few recipes !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>Let's clean up this stinkhole !!</strong></font> </p> </div>
Ah! that explains it I looked at the original data, not Hoagland's version. No wonder I could not see anything.....<br /><br />So looking at the numbered items:<br /><br />A does not look like anything very other than an over-enhanced jpeg of a wind fretted surface.<br /><br />B ditto. Except here the over enhancing looks really, really bodgy with obvious jpeg artifacts.<br /><br />C ditto<br /><br />D "Peculiar layered depression with internal structure" It's called a crater. Endurance, Victoria, Bonneville are all layered depressions with internal structure.<br /><br />E I agree this is most odd, a faceted knob on the side of the tribuatry to Nirgal Vallis. A higher resolution would be nice!<br /><br />F image of gullied slope over enhanced beyond usefulness.<br /> <br />G ehanced past the point of maximum usefulness but yes its a mesa, why it is peculiar I can't say. Nor is is there a "distinct rectangular structure" visible in the original.<br /><br />H over ehnhanced "Area of deep parallel gouges or collapse features" OK, so what's the point?<br /><br />I over enhanced but yes there is locally a crude "Area of parallel structure" What's the point?<br /><br />J "Deep depression anomalous to rest of image" How is known to be a deep depression? In what way is it "anomalous"? It looks like dark material on the lower part of the slope. Remember "Ultreya"?<br /><br />So apart from E, which certaininly does look odd, there isn't really anything remarkable in this image (apart from the fact that it is on Mars, its wonderful Nirgal Vallis, and there is some beautiful wind fretting on the plateau.<br /><br />Incidently, whoever wrote that page needs to be told the following:<br /><br />Labelling an imaging and over enhancing snippets from it with brief captions it is not analysis in any shape or form.<br /><br />Thus its not an analysis even of M1500062, let alonbe the whole of "Malin Space Systems" (who does this guy think he is - the tax office?)<br /><br />Imapges should not be over enha <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em> Arthur Clarke</p> </div>
The "face" turned out to be a fluke combination of topology and shadows, and I suspect this will be similar. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
Thread title changed by request. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em> -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
Certainly interesting looking. <br /><br />At roughly 130 meters wide, this would fall into the category of acceptable structure sizes.
BTW, is this more of an image analysis thread than a mission discussion thread? If so, it probably ought to move to SS&A. Thoughts? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em> -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
"Ah! that explains it I looked at the original data, not Hoagland's version. No wonder I could not see anything....."<br /><br />Hoagland didn't do that.<br /><br />As far as all those other features, There may be some interesting stuff, but I was only focusing on the most obvious one...the pyramid.<br /><br />"So apart from E, which certaininly does look odd, there isn't really anything remarkable in this image..."<br /><br />One's enough. It's another candidate for possible artificiality. <br /><br /> <br /><br />
"The "face" turned out to be a fluke combination of topology and shadows..."<br /><br />That's still debated. It hasn't been concluded. Nonetheless--off-topic.
Will MRO eventually have a publically request image program?<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em> Arthur Clarke</p> </div>
I could only see ex:E, but that was enough to make me interseted. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
If you look at the large version of the whole picture (by clicking on the image ID near top of page), there are at least two other possible pyramids of the same scale. Neither is anywhere near as well defined. The first and more obvious is a couple inches below the original pyramid and to the left. (This may just go to show that once you go looking for regular features, you start to see them everywhere.)<br /><br />Do we know the scale of the pyramid(s)?<br /><br />Incidentally, as I recall, Thor Hyerdahl's experiments with crude papyrus spacecraft were inconclusive as to whether the ancient Egyptians possessed the technology for interplanetary travel. Of course, maybe one of their lunar shuttles got blown off-course...
"Will MRO eventually have a publically request image program?" <br /><br />I think so.<br /> <br />(EDIT): <br />It's not currently being planned by NASA, but enough public interest could make it so.<br /><br /><br /><br />
I dare say this belongs over in either Seti, science fiction, or phenomena section. Outside of the pictures, the subject line follows a non-astronomy course. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"<font color="#333399">An organism at war with itself is a doomed organism." - Carl Sagan</font></em> </div>
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
A video made by me about space and the loneliness in the universe- Started by drakotol
- Replies: 54
-
NASA's Voyager 1 spacecraft finally phones home after 5 months of no contact- Started by Admin
- Replies: 11
-
Watch 2 gorgeous supernova remnants evolve over 20 years (timelapse video)
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 0
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram