Flawless second day on Mars for Curiosity, high-res pic (including R/B 3D)

reply to post by openminded2011


The color photo presented in this thread did look like once the surface was on the bottom of a body of water, the first time I see anything like it on Mars. Almost looks like pebbles to me. Scary.

Hello

try this, i dont know if it alredy was posted?! Its a panaorama 360 picture with zomm in and out..

www.panoramas.dk...

reply to post by LiberalSceptic


Me too, but I am more interesting in building giant space habitats and stations that launch and recieve space ships. More science fiction stuff I guess, but we should have turned the space surrounding Earth into our own playground by now.

To bad Curiosity didn't have a microphone so we could hear what Mars sounds like. I believe the only rover that had a mic was the Mars Polar Lander which disappeared after landing or crashing.

What a waste of money. Why'd they land it there? If they were at all curious, they would have landed that sucker nearby those weird moving sand dunes with funky looking trees sticking out of them, one of those spots where water has moved sand in the past 10 years, or even one of those 'forest' looking areas with the lakes/water evidence.

Why they chose the utmost boring, pebble covered desert in the shadow of a really boring mountain is beyond me. Does no one else think Olympus Mons would be WAY more interesting to see? It is only the BIGGEST VOLCANO IN THE SOLAR SYSTEM!

People? A moment of reflection for Mars rover Spirit.

xkcd.com...

reply to post by Xterrain

Does no one else think Olympus Mons would be WAY more interesting to see?

It is not a sightseeing trip.
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

Originally posted by OneNationUnder
why do they invest so many millions and billions and they only get black and white photos?

Because a grey scale CCD is better for scientific imaging over a colour (Bayer pattern) CCD that you find in your typical consumer digital camera. All probes, rovers, landers that have cameras, carry a selection of filters (infra red, green, ultra violet etc). When you place a colour filter in front of a grey scale CCD. Every photosensor is equally exposed to that particular colour of the filter in use. A colour CCD already has built-in filters over each of the photosensors. 25% are red, 50% green and 25% blue. When you place an infrared filter in front of that, not every photosensor will be equally exposed to the infrared light. It will still work well enough, but it's not as good as one without built-in filters.

But with that said. They decided to go with a colour CCD this time for Curiosity's main camera.

I don't understand these people thinking that 2 billion dollars disappear in tin air. The money was being used to pay materials, people, etc... the money have gone to people that build every single piece of the rocket and rover. Thousands of people got paid in the process.

The knowledge gained during the process to build the rover and send the rover to mars is knowledge that will be used by other fields.

People say we should spend that money to feed the hungry people... and I would ask in return "how?" Do you think just because you have 2 billion dollars at hand you can feed all the people in the next day? Sorry to bust your bubble but reality don't work that way. We need increase the production first, you can't just "pray" and everything will be solved... research in science must be done to help do that and SURPRISE it take time. Breakthrough in different fields help each other to better understand how things work.

Just to give an simple idea: increase food requires better understand:
- climatology (which need satellite, and how do you think you put them there in space?)
- chemistry (which need study at Physics)
- biology (need a lot of chemistry)
- engineer (machines: metallurgy, mechanics, etc)
- etc etc etc
The interconnection between the fields are countless.

and these advances you can not earn in a single day, week or year... it take time!


A nice letter explaining Why Explore Space
www.lettersofnote.com...

Descent and landing.
To give an idea about the process.

reply to post by Matar


Yep posted before, but since there is always people whom skip some pages in the thread and sometimes one just miss a post or two, thanks to you, they will still see that cool 360 picture

Looking at a Space book I had purchased couple years ago on the clearance table of Borders before it went out of business thinking about how many more beautiful pics are going to be in updated versions of the future generations to browse thru. Assuming of course book stores still exist . I love books, the texture and smell of them, the feeling of flipping thru the pages and bookmarking sections of intrest. It is just an experience all in itself that browsing the web can't match. Now Im not saying they are better just a whole other experience thats a nice change sometimes.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


I share that thought. We should be building above our planet, not on the ground.
Both the infrastructure for people to go up in a much grander scale, and ships to send out.
BUT, money money money






reply to post by interupt42


I really can not understand why a microphone would not be included.
Even though nothing special will be recorded, one never knows. How much extra would it have cost...? Probably allot, but in comparison to everything else, it would not have hurt.

reply to post by Xterrain


You mean this pic?

They might look like trees on Mars, but they're not. Here, groups of dark brown streaks were photographed by the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter on sand dunes covered with light frost. At that time, the spring sun was melting carbon dioxide ice, revealing dark sand on the interior of the Martian sand dunes. When the melting occurs near the top of a dune, dark sand may cascade down, leaving dark surface streaks.

Except from that, yes they probably could have chosen a more fun place to land, but I am sure NASA/JPL landed Curiosity where they did for a reason. I hope it is a good one...

Originally posted by Vitruvius
People? A moment of reflection for Mars rover Spirit.

xkcd.com...

Ha ha I laughed and then I felt a little bit sad

In other good news, Trosper said the indications are that Curiosity's electricity generator is making "more power that was expected." That's going to keep the rover operating longer, she explained, and added that the team was also able to resolve an anomaly that had been hindering the rover's weather-sensing equipment. She noted that the data shows temperatures around Curiosity are a little warmer than predicted, but they "are still looking at why."

This portion struck me as the most interesting information I have read so far. I don't think it is too far-fetched to believe that global warming exists on more than our planet. I think Curiosity might be able to help break the whole "climate change is purely man-made" debate wide open. Unless our Rover's have been polluting Mars enough to change its climate... *lol*

Now if only Curiosity had room for more the 74 rock samples. To anyone member who might be able to answer this question of mine: "At this location on Mars, would it seem scientifically plausible to expect liquid or hydrogen water on the surface or close to it? Or would the lack of atmosphere prevent that from occurring regardless of location...?"

reply to post by g0dhims3lf


Most people I know have a Kindle.
Not me, I will never stop buying normal books. They take up allot of space, but well worth it. Nothing beats the feeling of a real book

reply to post by LiberalSceptic
I'm sorry my friend, but I think you put up the wrong pic.

I went ahead and corrected it for you...

reply to post by Propulsion


Good one

Originally posted by Xterrain
What a waste of money. Why'd they land it there? If they were at all curious, they would have landed that sucker nearby those weird moving sand dunes with funky looking trees sticking out of them, one of those spots where water has moved sand in the past 10 years, or even one of those 'forest' looking areas with the lakes/water evidence.

Why they chose the utmost boring, pebble covered desert in the shadow of a really boring mountain is beyond me.

The ignorance is STRONG in that one - why not do some research on your own, for a change?

They chose Gale crater and Mt. Sharp because Mt Sharp reveals many different layers of sediment, corresponding to various geological pasts of Mars. By examining those layers they can get a direct view into the history of Mars which would otherwise not possible. (Not unless they would dig hundeds of meters into soil to get to different layers of stones etc.)

>>
Gale Crater, in the northwestern part of the Aeolis quadrangle, is of special interest to geologists because it contains a 2–4 km (1.2–2.5 mile) high mound of layered sedimentary rocks. On 28 March 2012 this mound was named Mount Sharp by NASA in honor of Robert P. Sharp (1911–2004), a planetary scientist of early Mars missions.[27][28][29] More recently, on 16 May 2012, Mount Sharp was officially named Aeolis Mons by the USGS and IAU.[30] The mound extends higher than the rim of the crater, so perhaps the layering covered an area much larger than the crater.[31] These layers are a complex record of the past. The rock layers probably took millions of years to be laid down within the crater, then more time to be eroded to make them visible.[32]
>>

In other words, it's a GOLD MINE for digging into the history of Mars. If there was ever life in any way on Mars, even millions of years back..chances are one of those layers might contain the evidence.

And the mountain must be so "boring" that scientists dreamed already back in the 70s that it would be the perfect landing spot for a Mars probe