Interesting picture of Ceres

If you zoom in on towards the background in this Ceres picture taken by NASA's Dawn spacecraft, these are some unusually bright circles of similar size and shape, spaced rather evenly apart, look out of place and odd to me...around the 11, 12 & 1 o'clock positions. Are these just faculae or something?


www.nasa.gov...

a reply to: M4ngo

There are pretty long threads discussing this. It's some kind of ice, if I remember that right.

Salt crystals or photo shopped alien mining outpost to look like salt crystals

a reply to: Spacespider

Or salt crystals.

Are there other pictures of the same area that were taken of those areas in the background? I'm having a hard time imaging those being salt crystals. Are we talking about the same things?

a reply to: M4ngo

Those are a bit odd, and they look linear.

I favor some kind of artifact, though it is fun to imagine that they resemble lines of light posts, like those along roads if you look out the window of an airplane flying over a rural area at night. The one on the left even follows the underlying topography a little....

Here's the areas of interest marked by the red arrows.




Here's some of those areas zoomed in.

I was setting up some landscaping lights. Solar powered ones, they look nice huh?? I couldn't seem to get anything to grow though. Not enough oxygen and a bit on the chilly side.

That's not a photo, that's a photo superimposed on a 3D landscape, and the white dots appear to be a artefact of the mapping a 2D image or images onto a 3D model.

Edited to add the text on that image's page.

This mosaic of Cerealia Facula combines images obtained from altitudes as low as 22 miles (35 km) above Ceres' surface. The mosaic is overlain on a topography model based on images obtained during Dawn's low altitude mapping orbit (240 miles or 385 km altitude). No vertical exaggeration was applied.

Source

a reply to: M4ngo


Looks like it got smacked by some the tail of some comet.

a reply to: ArMaP

That's fine and all, but in my opinion that does not dismiss the image. NASA makes no mention of it containing artifacts, possibly having artifacts, nor them experiencing any issues or notice any artifacts while constructing image.

Is there any evidence supporting these are artifacts?

a reply to: M4ngo

Because NASA could care less if someone on the internet thinks these are alien bases. Why would they waste energy on that?

I mean, do they need to point out every artifact now so conspiracy theorists can sleep better? You would not believe them so the point is moot.

originally posted by: M4ngo
That's fine and all, but in my opinion that does not dismiss the image. NASA makes no mention of it containing artifacts, possibly having artifacts, nor them experiencing any issues or notice any artifacts while constructing image.

Probably because that's a common thing to happen when mapping a 2D image onto a 3D scene.

Is there any evidence supporting these are artifacts?

The original mosaic they used doesn't have any of those dots, but I don't know if you will accept that as evidence.
photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov...

PS: in the above image we can see that there are several places with a low resolution. On that image's page they explain that they superimposed the higher resolution photos onto the lower resolution photos of that area.

originally posted by: M4ngo
Here's the areas of interest marked by the red arrows.

Here's some of those areas zoomed in.

Yeah thats not "ice"

You can see in the one pic a clear 90 degree angle to the perimeter of something artificial.

a reply to: Urantia1111

Trick question:

What happens if you wrap a flat sheet of paper around any non-flat surface?
It wrinkles.

Now use that new knowledge and transfer it to 2D (=flat) photographs overlayed on rough terrain.

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: Urantia1111

Trick question:

What happens if you wrap a flat sheet of paper around any non-flat surface?
It wrinkles.

Now use that new knowledge and transfer it to 2D (=flat) photographs overlayed on rough terrain.

Yes, but that does not address the bright, circular light-like objects that are spaced apart in a careful fashion in different locations nor the structures associated with them. Do you have any examples of images with artifacts that mimic what we see in this image?

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: Urantia1111

Trick question:

What happens if you wrap a flat sheet of paper around any non-flat surface?
It wrinkles.

Now use that new knowledge and transfer it to 2D (=flat) photographs overlayed on rough terrain.

Yes, but that does not address the bright, circular light-like objects that are spaced apart in a careful fashion in different locations nor the structures associated with them. Do you have any examples of images with artifacts that mimic what we see in this image?

How about not seeing them in other images. Here is all the pictures NASA released

www.space.com...

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: M4ngo

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: Urantia1111

Trick question:

What happens if you wrap a flat sheet of paper around any non-flat surface?
It wrinkles.

Now use that new knowledge and transfer it to 2D (=flat) photographs overlayed on rough terrain.

Yes, but that does not address the bright, circular light-like objects that are spaced apart in a careful fashion in different locations nor the structures associated with them. Do you have any examples of images with artifacts that mimic what we see in this image?

How about not seeing them in other images. Here is all the pictures NASA released

www.space.com...

Where are the images of those same locations? I couldn't find them, do you know if there are any more?

a reply to: M4ngo

I suppose you didn't see my previous post.

photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov...

Image stitching errors I'd say.