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.
ipfreely32
reply to post by Phage
Yeah, sure i did *rolling eyes*. Has anyone else?
Maybe you didn't read correctly, the film itself would be exposed to cosmic rays similar to light exposure. Would this not be like a litmus paper and foul the entire roll?
Maybe you didn't read correctly, the film itself would be exposed to cosmic rays similar to light exposure. Would this not be like a litmus paper and foul the entire roll?
inquisitive1977
Too much may be made of this showing up on only one of the mast cams. If the cameras themselves were the same that would hold more weight.
However one is a high resolution camera (specifically to be able to study terain further away) where as the other one is mid level resolution. If the phenomenon is far away it may simply be beyond yhe capabilities of the second camera to catch it.
Of course it still could be a cosmic ray but I am leaning towards a geyser of some sort. Not sure what a geyser being there would mean for mars.
Nice thread, wish I had time to read it all.edit on 15-4-2014 by inquisitive1977 because: (no reason given)edit on 15-4-2014 by inquisitive1977 because: spelling
You are talking about the Mastcam pair. These images are from a Navcam pair.
However one is a high resolution camera (specifically to be able to study terain further away) where as the other one is mid level resolution. If the phenomenon is far away it may simply be beyond yhe capabilities of the second camera to catch it.
originally posted by: Kandinsky
It does, doesn't it? It's low on the list as Mars is thought to be *almost* geologically dead. Without such activity, there shouldn't be much chance of the processes occurring that cause geysers. No heat, no pressure and that's before we begin to think about where the water could come from?