Moon Mystery House/ Mystery Hut/ Cube: Secret Buildings in Background of the Photo

a reply to: peaceinoutz

Zoomed in some and some rectangle and straight line outlining.

Until the rover gets much much closer…it’s still subjective as to what it really is….



👽🛸🥃

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
a reply to: peaceinoutz

Zoomed in some and some rectangle and straight line outlining.

Until the rover gets much much closer…it’s still subjective as to what it really is….

👽🛸🥃

^Awesome, thanks! You've provided what is probably the single best image of the "Mystery House" from a different source, and different perspective.

Your link's mention of the Von Karman crater, prompted me to look up its coordinates, and then type it into Google Earth's Moon. (Whereas previously I was trying to search for keywords in Google Earth's Moon, unsuccessfully.)

Alright so the coordinates of the crater are:
44.8°S 175.9°E



And it works to copy/paste the coordinates, to locate it.

Unfortunately, there's absolutely nothing to see.

It's nothing but an arrangement of very low-res, low-detail scans. Very indistinct and blurry.




You can't even get a clear look at the natural landscape. The smaller craters are just chunky pixels, when zoomed in.

It's the worst to zoom in on the lunar soil itself, because it's nothing but an expanse of ugly, extremely low-res pixels, of varying shades of grey. Like a videogame that was glitching out its texture mapping.

Nothing to click on either. Only one thing and it brings up a link for retired Adobe Flash downloads. It's absolutely a bad science fiction story, lol, in real life: We've located the crater, and the only thing to see is a link for outdated Adobe Flash downloads.





So Google Earth is not going to provide anything to the topic...

Alright, now we're getting somewhere, re: finding new photo's of the area on the moon.

The linked EarthSky website has a link for LROC.. which is apparently Arizona State University's website devoted to the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter.

So it has that photo in hi-definition, and able to be downloaded. I believe this is the clearest image that we have of that area of the moon.

I'll post later, once I look into my downloaded copy of the image. (You can also zoom into the pic on the website.)

www.lroc.asu.edu...

Ok now we can zoom in on the Mystery Hut with that LROC pic but the problem is that it's such a small part of the image, that it's rendered in chunky pixels.

But I think I've got the Mystery House right here:




The Mystery House is the cube shape at the bottom of the vertical long wall. Above, it connects with the rectangular building which even may have a light on top.

It seems to correspond quite well.


Rotated to correspond with the topic photo:




Heck I think I can see the surrounding buildings too.

originally posted by: imdfreek
Hey check this out its rather in depth and just as fascinating. Its from the Clementine space mission in the late 90s. This amazing man has a lot of knowledge unfortunately he is no longer with us, which is sad because he knows his stuff. It shows a large cube/ building/ structure on the far side of our moon.
www.marsanomalyresearch.com...

reply to: JamesChessman

The image is interesting but it's useless for research purposes 'cause there is no reference info such as coordinates.

originally posted by: JamesChessman
Ok now we can zoom in on the Mystery Hut with that LROC pic but the problem is that it's such a small part of the image, that it's rendered in chunky pixels.

But I think I've got the Mystery House right here:

The Mystery House is the cube shape at the bottom of the vertical long wall. Above, it connects with the rectangular building which even may have a light on top.

It seems to correspond quite well.

Heck I think I can see the surrounding buildings too.

I don't see a damn thing! Someone needs to know what "sharp detail" means before making unsupported claims.

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
a reply to: peaceinoutz

Zoomed in some and some rectangle and straight line outlining.

Until the rover gets much much closer…it’s still subjective as to what it really is….

👽🛸🥃

Keep moving, folks. Nothing to see here. Such poor posts.

Hey everyone.

I used the 25MB tiff file from the LROC site linked above to get a true look at it.

Cropped the heck out of it to get a close view. I did increase the dpi to 300 as the result was a wee bit too small. No other adjustments were made. Saved it as a png for web-friendly usage.

Here's the thumbnail link:



I almost never post, so I don't know if this will fit, but here's the full size:



I think it's remarkably clear and I am very much impressed with this image from orbit as opposed to the rather mushy image from the rover... from only 262 feet away.

I don't get that at all. Not like there's atmospheric haze or anything.

I do hope they send pics periodically as it gets closer to the thing.

Ah, well, hope you like.

Be well.

a reply to: PixelDuster

that image from the rover was not a photo.

it's an obvious frame from a live video feed, which had very bad quality.

still photos, even from mars, have much, much higher quality than that crap.

originally posted by: PixelDuster
Hey everyone.

I used the 25MB tiff file from the LROC site linked above to get a true look at it.

Cropped the heck out of it to get a close view. I did increase the dpi to 300 as the result was a wee bit too small. No other adjustments were made. Saved it as a png for web-friendly usage.

Here's the thumbnail link:



I almost never post, so I don't know if this will fit, but here's the full size:

I think it's remarkably clear and I am very much impressed with this image from orbit as opposed to the rather mushy image from the rover... from only 262 feet away.

I don't get that at all. Not like there's atmospheric haze or anything.

I do hope they send pics periodically as it gets closer to the thing.

Ah, well, hope you like.

Be well.

Sorry but what you zoomed on, is the Chang’e lander, inside the square. It’s what landed the rover.

The actual Mystery Hut is pointed at with the arrow (in the same image).

There’s also a version of the same image without the arrow and square overlaid.

It’s a great image but lacking in detail when it’s zoomed, unfortunately. I think my recent posts zoomed onto the Mystery Hut as well as possible in that image…

Now that makes sense, thank you.

Embarrassed to say I didn't know they had a live video feed. But with bandwidth and bitrate being what they might be, yeah, video would look like that.

a reply to: jedi_hamster

Oh my! My bad. I'll have to have another go at it...

Peace.

a reply to: JamesChessman

^I don’t think he knows for sure that it’s a “live video feed,” I think it was more his way of criticizing the overall image quality. He thinks it’s so bad that he assumes it’s a video…

Well: Either way it’s disappointing low detail when it’s zoomed close.

I was trying to repost my zoom on the actual Mystery House inside the same image:

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

I like your approach, and it is a more subtractive process than I used. Gaussian and Fourier filtrations attempt to inject noise, (actually out of phase copies of original noise) and using FFT, transform the data to reveal hidden frequency harmonics that represent the discovery of hidden solid objects and is injected back into the broadband raster. In the military Radars, it was called COAC (Clutter Operated Anti-Clutter) and was highly classified for years until it was implemented into weather Radars.

The trouble with data copies, not realtime, is that once once a frame is created and published the noise components are re-combined and so that missing channel must be approximated using some really fancy math. It is far less than perfect.

Even that said, I thing both our approaches show that this is most likely irregular surface rocks rising above the moon horizon that cannot show the base levels. The presentation shows that the objects are farther than the curvature of the Moon surface would allow us to see ground level and they appear to float on an artificial horizon that has no detail.

As the rover gets closer, this anomaly should get taller, if we are correct. I would also think that the experts that would change the mission to look at this structure know what we are talking about very well. In a NASA mission, there is never a second visit due to risks of chasing false data that could expose the rover to other hazards that could disable it.

a reply to: JamesChessman

A Fav……

Some could probably be explained…..some not so much

Best viewed full screen

(Previously posted a-w-h-i-l-e ago)



This series of shots shows what “appears” to be…. for lack of scientific fact….two buildings, towers, even call them huts…..at the edge of a crater. Notice they cast possible shadows.

What they really are is anybody’s guess. It comes down to perception/perspective. I’ll go with natural formations for now…….




👽🛸🍺🍕

It's a rock:

twitter.com...

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
It's a rock:

twitter.com...

Bravo 🍺



👽🛸

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

I'd stick with natural formations - esxpecially as the video makers always seem to avoid zooming in as far as possible, or checking other sources. There's nothing there that can 't be explained by lighting and landscape.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: Ophiuchus1

I'd stick with natural formations - esxpecially as the video makers always seem to avoid zooming in as far as possible, or checking other sources. There's nothing there that can 't be explained by lighting and landscape.

I agree…..as I mentioned in a previous post……basically reserve judgment until the rover gets much closer…..

Rocks will be Rocks 🍻



But what does that say about the range and optics of the camera used?

The original picture looks deceiving in that the rock (hut) looks far away……and as mentioned by charlyv previous post….the assumption, that getting closer to the rock, should theoretically look bigger…..

Welp….the Chinese are known to produce cheap products, possibly even for use in space 😆

👽🛸

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

People have an expectation that space probes ofd any kind are going with a top of the range multi-megapixel camera, on "yeah but look at my phone" grounds.

The problem is that when you're going to space the thing that gets launched is the technology from when the probe was designed, not when it was launched - it is never going to be this year's model. Added to that is the need to balance other science needs with the desire to have a pretty picture, and the ability to broadcast the pretty picture and all the other data back to Earth - in this case via another satellite. The cameras aren't the only thing the little rover is carting around, and the technology all has to be robust - there's no dumping it in a bowl of rice here.

And the rock definitely got bigger the closer you got to it.