India Far side of the Moon photos - oddities

the following 3 pics are from India's Chandrayaan-1 2008 Moon exploration.

Observe the following 3 photos and look out for anything odd.

Far side of the Moon viewed at NADIR by Terrain Mapping Camera (TMC) of Chandrayaan-1 on 24 Nov. 2008
www.isro.org...

Far side of the Moon viewed at AFT by Terrain Mapping Camera (TMC) of Chandrayaan-1 on 24 Nov. 2008
www.isro.org...

Click for full image Far side of the Moon viewed at FORE by Terrain Mapping Camera (TMC) of Chandrayaan-1 on 24 Nov. 2008
www.isro.org...

1. It appears to be a hill with a flat top or a creater with a flat bottom. strange.
2. there are several objects/things casting shadows around the base(or top/slope) on this hill/mountain/crater or whatever it is.

more photos about the mission and stuff here:
www.isro.org...

Not sure if there are any but anyone find any oddities in other Indian moon photos from other sources?

[edit on 17-6-2009 by warrenb]

Errrr ... where's the rubble that should be laying around if the top of the hill had been levelled by natural forces such as erosion, etc ? That's a sizeable chunk of the hill missing with no sign of the missing material anywhere on the sides of the hill or the surrounding ground ... very unusual !

Gday Warrenb,
Nice post, ive checked out photo 1, there appears to be a tower halfway down the hill at the 4 o'clock position.It casts a tall shadow. Not sure on the dimensions, but the flat peak of the hill is also interesting.

notice the light illuminating on the above and right of "flat top" area?

I would suggest the image has been doctored to hide what is there.

Every photo expept the early ones catalogued in old books released by NASA with hi-def scans seem to be fake.

That isn't a hill, its a crater. The proof? Look at smaller object that cast shadows. The light source (sun) is approximately from the south-south-west.

Hi, moon fans.

As we can see, the light comes from lower-right, with an
up angle from the ground. Or, we could say: comes from the
07:00 o'clock position, at 25 to 30 degrees up.

So that round shape is a hole, with a "lake" of dust/dirt
at the bottom. . .

Blue skies.

I do not believe this is a crater.Definition of the surface gets better toward the peak. There appears to be reflective material on the surface on the northern half of the base, most photos you see of the moon have a dull look, like it absorbs light rather than reflecting it in this case .

Originally posted by C-JEAN
So that round shape is a hole, with a "lake" of dust/dirt
at the bottom. . .

Blue skies.

Is it that or could the crater walls have collapsed inward towards the center for some reason (unstable?), leaving the original floor visible in just that small area?

If it were a hill and the light source is indeed that 1 o'clock position, that would mean there are also dozens of smaller hemispherical hills scattered about.

[edit on 6/17/2009 by EnlightenUp]

reply to post by EnlightenUp


I too think this is a crater after looking at the light and shadows.
It's strange looking though.

[edit on 17/6/2009 by System]

its a crater, for sure

its still an odd shape though

its a crater, for sure

its still an odd shape though

reply to post by warrenb
Interesting. But there seems to be an optical illusion here.
Though my mind sees a hill, the shadows contradict that.

Lets say the bottom of the panel is South and the top North.
The "towers" cast a shadow in a North East direction.
So if that were hill, the SW side would be brightest, but the opposite is true. Thus it would suggest the hill is actually a crater. Notice the smaller craters, easily identified, show this brighter NE side.

But it still shows oddities. What ARE those "towers"?

The images are so poor in quality people are actually arguing if it's a crater or a hill.

I mean come on, how come there's no color? And honestly, what kind of camera are they using?

The shape of the top or center is very interesting, very symmetrical in shape.

A huge ship covered up with some doctoring?

We are biased to see light sources as coming from above, which in normal life is a perfectly valid assumption to resolve ambiguity in images because the world is illuminated by the sun above our heads.

The light source in this picture appears to have a low elevation as well since small craters are almost 50% illuminated with incident light. Shadows from debris on the surface with thus be elongated, making it appear to have greater height.

The pictures were interesting nevertheless.
I tried to look for anything special but didn't see anything unusual at least from these dusty old eyes of mine.

Originally posted by Brothers
The pictures were interesting nevertheless.
I tried to look for anything special but didn't see anything unusual at least from these dusty old eyes of mine.

It's still interesting. It appears to have wave patterns like it was shocked by an event nearby. They are especially visible in the darker area in the lower left.

Heres something,
click warrenb's 4th link, then scroll down to the 6th picture under the moon heading and enlarge that picture....here you will see a similar pic as the one in question, though a strange anomally on the lower hemisphere. An optical illusion again, notice the strange reflective light on the apparent shadow side

Originally posted by EnlightenUp
That isn't a hill, its a crater. The proof? Look at smaller object that cast shadows. The light source (sun) is approximately from the south-south-west.

I've taken the original image and applied a histogram equalize to it, then rotated it. Take a look at the resulting image and it's immediately apparent that it IS a hill based on the the left side of the hill and the flat top being fully illuminated. If instead it was a crater, then at least the right half of the flat area would also be in shadow ... but it's not ... therefore it's a hill.

So back to my original question ... where's the rubble gone ?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/baf58868cf08.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by scubagravy

...ive checked out photo 1, there appears to be a tower halfway down the hill at the 4 o'clock position.It casts a tall shadow.

The 'tower' you see is likely not as tall as you imagine. In fact, when I zoomed in, I saw two other similar shapes, and shadows. AND, from them, when you look at the 10- t0 11 o'clock form them, you see another!

These Lunar photos were taken when the Sun was at a low angle, to accentuate the shadows!! You can see the same effect, here on Earth...depending on your Latitude, and the time of year. THIS is how sundials work!!!!

As to the photo of that crater? The central portion is most likely a depression, NOT a 'mesa'.

We see mesas on Earth because of the centuries or millenia of erosion, to form those features. The Moon has no 'erosion', as we are familiar. No wind, rain, etc. No liquid water, on the surface, either. Its 'erosion' is conducted by the stray events of impacts from meteors.....

IN that photo, the odd shape in the approximate middle is just a depression....likely a result of the rebound, after the impact of whatever formed the crater in the first place. Same with the odd vertical structures we see casting the shadows. Spires, of some sort...but certainly natural in origin.

AND, not nearly as tall as the shadows would imply. Just look to GoogleEarth as an example: When you examine the pictures, they are 'top-down', and mostly try to minimize shadows in order to give the best clarity to features on Earth.

Imagine IF the GoogleEarth photos were taken when the Sun was low on the horizon, and you looked at a line of telephone poles....their shadows would be much longer than their actual height above the ground, because of the angle of the light.

This is how sundials work!! THEY rely on shadows cast....but. Length of shadow, whether on Earth, or on the Moon, are dependant on Latitude of observation, and postion of the body (any body....the Earth, Moon, Mars, etc.) and its inclination in its orbit, relative to the Sun.....

Originally posted by EnlightenUp
We are biased to see light sources as coming from above, which in normal life is a perfectly valid assumption to resolve ambiguity in images because the world is illuminated by the sun above our heads.

The light source in this picture appears to have a low elevation as well since small craters are almost 50% illuminated with incident light. Shadows from debris on the surface with thus be elongated, making it appear to have greater height.

If you flip it, it really looks like a crater. I'd post it, but Paint put strange squiggly lines in it.