Mount Sharp on Mars - Covered with ice or has remains of a Glacier.

originally posted by: LookingAtMars
a reply to: wildespace
Looking at images of Mount Sharp on Mars, I get the impression it has remains of a Glacier and maybe is covered with ice.

If it's naked ice, wouldn't it look white? If it's ice covered with dust and rocks, it would be the same colour as dust and rocks around it.

For example, here's a colour image of a dust-covered glacier on Mars:


www.uahirise.org...

Glaciers also have a very recognisable "flowing" shape, which I'm not seeing on Mt Sharp.

Lighter-tones clays seems a lot more probable explanation.

a reply to: wildespace

a glacier that has been subliming away and is dust covered

a reply to: wildespace

If it's ice covered with dust and rocks, it would be the same colour as dust and rocks around it.

If it was covered by dust I think it would be lighter, due to the fact ice is under it.

originally posted by: LookingAtMars
The problem with NASA view is that is all you can do is look, and only 16 bit so you are missing image information. I have not used it in a very long time but doubt that has changed.

Most people only want to look at the photos, and 16 bits is enough for most missions, as they usually use 12 bits for greyscale photos, at least those that I remember.

originally posted by: LookingAtMars
I was talking about why Mount Sharp is so bright in this image. I do not think it could just be the contrast of the image but at least that was an answer. Why are almost all of the rocks at ground level not that bright also? Elevation does not affect contrast.

The rocks are not as bright as the mount, so they are not affected by the increase in contrast as much as the mount. The fact that the rocks are on the darker ground makes us think they are brighter than they are, but if you use an image editing program you can see that the rocks are darker than they appear to be.

And what the brighter different looking material in this image is. Since we know Mars has ice, I said it could be a glacier. What do you think it is? Why does it look different, brighter and somewhat out of place?

All that area looks made of sediments, and sediments deposition can change during time, either because the depositing agent (water or wind) changed and is bringing sediments from a different area or because the sediments themselves changed. I may be wrong, but to me it looks like the brighter areas are made of finer sediments, while the darker areas are made of coarser sediments with a different composition, probably with more iron.

originally posted by: LookingAtMars
Can you link to me where NASA or ESA published information about the existence of water ice deposits anywhere near this size, that is easily accessible and not at the polar regions?

That "not at the polar regions" part makes me say "no".


So, are you saying NASA is hiding the existence of ice at lower latitudes? Wouldn't that mean that the temperature is lower? That would be easy for other space agencies to know.

a reply to: ArMaP

So, are you saying NASA is hiding the existence of ice at lower latitudes? Wouldn't that mean that the temperature is lower?

Do you think only the polar regions get below freezing on Mars, I don't understand.

So, are you saying NASA is hiding the existence of ice at lower latitudes?

As I have said before:

The US does not want to let others know an easy source of clean water is available. NASA spent a lot of time and money to gain it's info and will not just give it away, so that China, Russia, India and others can start making plans to set up a base on Mars. If the fact that Mars is more Earth like than we are told got out, a lot of countries would make plans to go there.

And it is more of a "what if" or maybe, than an ingrained belief.

a reply to: ArMaP

The rocks are not as bright as the mount

Really, I never noticed that. Maybe so, do you have some images that show that.

a reply to: ArMaP

That would be easy for other space agencies to know.

Only NASA has the knowledge of how to land a craft safely on Mars (or even orbit Mars). NASA has control through knowledge, of all space agencies except Russia and China. Russia and China are realizing what NASA has known for decades. You can tell by the plans they are making.

That is how the US has been able to put off a mission to Mars. If no one else has plans to go, you can put it off till you get more data from the rovers and build up the tech. Or who knows maybe there really is a secret space force?

How do you explain the US not having any real plans for Humans landing on Mars, or even the Moon. Truthfully, how do you explain the US not having at least a Moon base? They are either putting it off untill they have to (approximately now), or they are already there on the ground I lean to they are just putting it off, because the US gov only does what it has to do.

originally posted by: LookingAtMars
a reply to: ArMaP
As I have said before:


The US does not want to let others know an easy source of clean water is available. NASA spent a lot of time and money to gain it's info and will not just give it away, so that China, Russia, India and others can start making plans to set up a base on Mars. If the fact that Mars is more Earth like than we are told got out, a lot of countries would make plans to go there.

Refuted by me several posts ago, by linking NASA's and other science releases about glaciers on Mars. And they found (and anounced) glaciers at mid-altitudes.

Let's take a look again: www.uahirise.org...

The material on the floor of this crater appears to have flowed like ice, and contains pits that might result from sublimation of subsurface ice. The surface is entirely dust-covered today. There probably was ice here sometime in the past, but could it persist at some depth?

This crater is at latitude 26 degrees north, and near-surface ice at this latitude (rather than further toward one of the poles) could be a valuable resource for future human exploration. A future orbiter with a special kind of radar instrument could answer the question of whether or not there is shallow ice at low latitudes on Mars.

a reply to: wildespace

Refuted by me several posts ago, by linking NASA's and other science releases about glaciers on Mars. And they found (and anounced) glaciers at mid-altitudes. Let's take a look again:

There probably was ice here sometime in the past, but could it persist at some depth?

A future orbiter with a special kind of radar instrument could answer the question of whether or not there is shallow ice at low latitudes on Mars.

Really? That does not refute anything! In fact it means that they know of NO shallow ice at low latitudes on Mars.

There probably was ice here sometime in the past, but could it persist at some depth?

And IF it is still there, it does not sound like it is easily accessible.

In fact your link reinforces my point that the remains of a glacier at Mount Sharp would be:

a valuable resource for future human exploration

Sorry I missed these images. It was taken the same day as which image in the OP, the Pancam?

The Image link sure seems to show (upper right of image) dust colored ice subliming away, to me anyway.

The images of yours below sure seem to show, what looks like, ice or snow. It is not just the processing, I can see it in the original image.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: wylekat
Now, your fourth image.. it looks just like any mud flats I've seen.. and so help me- what looks like an astronaut walking down the hill up in the top right hand corner.

It's more than likely Pareidolia- but good grief, he's detailed. I can see helmet, backpack... something that looks like an upside down V vest...

Look at the full size photo.

photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov...

As an example of how a reddish photo can have blue skies, just look at this case.

This is the original photo, taken on the same day as the photo from the opening post.

This is after I adjusted it manually.

This is after the automatic adjustment made by Gimp.

edit on 10-9-2018 by LookingAtMars because: (no reason given)

This article suggests glaciers did exist on Mt Sharp, but only in the distant past: planetarygeomorphology.wordpress.com...

originally posted by: LookingAtMars
Do you think only the polar regions get below freezing on Mars, I don't understand.

No, but at that latitude isn't the temperature during the day supposed to be above the freezing point?

This page shows a maximum ground temperature of 5º Celsius and a maximum air temperature of -5. In normal conditions, wouldn't any ice below a thin (so it would be slightly noticeable) dust layer disappear with a temperature of 5º Celsius?

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: LookingAtMars
Do you think only the polar regions get below freezing on Mars, I don't understand.

No, but at that latitude isn't the temperature during the day supposed to be above the freezing point?

This page shows a maximum ground temperature of 5º Celsius and a maximum air temperature of -5. In normal conditions, wouldn't any ice below a thin (so it would be slightly noticeable) dust layer disappear with a temperature of 5º Celsius?

Wouldn't you also have to consider the very low pressure's influence on the behaviour of the various states of matter for water?

originally posted by: LookingAtMars
Really, I never noticed that. Maybe so, do you have some images that show that.

Sure.

I used a very old copy of PaintShopPro I have, as it shows the colour of the pixel under the cursor, so it's easier to see.

Hovering the cursor over the darker area of the mount I got values around 193 and 182.





When moving the cursor over that brighter rock near the bottom of the photo I got values around 189 and 203, which means that the rock is only slightly brighter than that dark area on the mount slope.





The mount itself is much brighter, with values around 220 (I chose one of the darkest pixels on that area).

originally posted by: LookingAtMars
Only NASA has the knowledge of how to land a craft safely on Mars (or even orbit Mars).

Mars Express has been orbiting and photographing Mars for almost 15 years without any problems.

How do you explain the US not having any real plans for Humans landing on Mars, or even the Moon. Truthfully, how do you explain the US not having at least a Moon base?

I never try to explain what other people think, specially Americans.

originally posted by: LookingAtMars
Sorry I missed these images. It was taken the same day as which image in the OP, the Pancam?

The one in the link is a mosaic made with photos taken on sol 387, the other photo is from the same day/sol as the one in the OP.

The images of yours below sure seem to show, what looks like, ice or snow. It is not just the processing, I can see it in the original image.

I suppose we have very different interpretations of how ice would look on a place like that, as I see nothing that looks like ice to me.

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

Yes, but, apparently, the difference in pressure is not enough to affect the freezing point that much, if I am reading this chart correctly.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: LookingAtMars
Do you think only the polar regions get below freezing on Mars, I don't understand.

No, but at that latitude isn't the temperature during the day supposed to be above the freezing point?

This page shows a maximum ground temperature of 5º Celsius and a maximum air temperature of -5. In normal conditions, wouldn't any ice below a thin (so it would be slightly noticeable) dust layer disappear with a temperature of 5º Celsius?

I don't think It goes above freezing for very many hours. With the low density of the air it is harder to melt ice. The lack of wind pressure and don't forget the evaporative cooling from the ice turning to vapor. It is tucked in that valley, like most glaciers, nice and protected. I bet not much ice "melts" off. Some is, that is why I said it is what remains of a glacier. That is one reason why you do not see a lobe.