Curiosity Just Went Through Mud?

Originally posted by OrionHunterX

Originally posted by AGWskeptic

Originally posted by OrionHunterX
Is the surface really wet? I haven't the faintest clue but take a peek at the image taken by MRO that shows the tracks of Curiosity. Check out the start point that shows a different color. Though the image has been enhanced at source, the color of the surface at the start point is completely different from the surrounding area that shows the typical color of the surface of Mars - a brownish tinge.

Why two different colors? That means the area where the Curiosity started from is different in composition from the rest of the area. So, does that area have moisture? And therefore some 'mud' sticking to Curiosity's aluminum wheels?

Image of the tracks made by NASA's Curiosity rover taken by
Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter.
Courtesy: NASA / JPL-Caltech / Univ. of Ariz.



www.msnbc.msn.com...

edit on 13-9-2012 by OrionHunterX because: (no reason given)

Those areas are where the retro rockets blew the dust away exposing the rock beneath.

NASA has reported this numerous times.

The color difference is to enhance the tracks, it's not water.

I didn't say it's water! However, the retro rocket stuff you are talking about that has blown the dust away is this...

Notice the difference? This one has been made by the retro rockets and not the first image I posted.

That's the parachute and the impact zone from the landing assist vehicle.

So yes, the parachute and impact zone looks different than exposed rock.

Water (or any other liquid) would change the colour and reflectivity of what's below, and nothing like that is noticeable in that photo

Can you explain this a little more please? I am not sure what reflectivity there is going to be in that image and "colour"? What you say does not seem to make sense in the context of that picture.

What else could it be? (But maybe it could be anything but water - because we know there is no running water on Mars - right?)

Originally posted by qmantoo
Can you explain this a little more please? I am not sure what reflectivity there is going to be in that image and "colour"? What you say does not seem to make sense in the context of that picture.

You're right, I got confused somehow and thought of running water over the rock, not, as you said, a "water/soil mixture".

What else could it be? (But maybe it could be anything but water - because we know there is no running water on Mars - right?)

To me it looks just like the rest of the soil, I don't see anything that makes me think that there was some change on that soil, it looks as if it was just blown over the rock.

At least to me.

To me it looks just like the rest of the soil, I don't see anything that makes me think that there was some change on that soil, it looks as if it was just blown over the rock.

So you do not see the 'depth' in the 'paw-print' I pointed out?

If this is soil blown over the rock, then where is the soil blown over other rocks? If this is soil blown over the rock, why does it look like water/dirt mixure like we get on Earth? Why is this so hard for you to believe ? If you do not have a "there's no running water on Mars" idea fixed in your head, then it becomes quite easy to see how this is exactly like what it looks like on Earth too. :-)

The problem now is, if this looks like running water's been there, and it has been hypothesised that there IS water on Mars, then isn't this some evidence for it?

And.. what is that 'paw-print' doing there too?

reply to post by qmantoo


What "paw print"?

The atmospheres of the 2 planets are very different, liquid water does not exist on Mars.

Even the "snow" they get is essentially dry ice.

Originally posted by qmantoo
So you do not see the 'depth' in the 'paw-print' I pointed out?

I see it.

If this is soil blown over the rock, then where is the soil blown over other rocks?

Look at the rock to the right, near the other wheel of the rover.

If this is soil blown over the rock, why does it look like water/dirt mixure like we get on Earth?

To me it doesn't look like that.

Why is this so hard for you to believe ?

Because it doesn't look like it.

If you do not have a "there's no running water on Mars" idea fixed in your head, then it becomes quite easy to see how this is exactly like what it looks like on Earth too. :-)

It doesn't, regardless of what I have in my mind, and I don't have any fixed ideas about anything, much less about things in other planets.

The problem now is, if this looks like running water's been there, and it has been hypothesised that there IS water on Mars, then isn't this some evidence for it?

No, because it doesn't look like running water was there and because the hypothesis of water existing on Mars doesn't include water flowing in plane-like areas.

And.. what is that 'paw-print' doing there too?

Nothing, it's probably a part of the rock that's a little higher, so the soil moved around it.

Thank you.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
Nasa has said that there was once flowing water at the landing site.

reply to post by deadeyedick


That was one of the reasons why they chose that place, because the satellite photos already showed signs of flowing water there.

reply to post by rayuki

Originally posted by rayuki

this thread is why the human race is doomed, its like Idiocracy is coming true. that people actually think this is mud saddens me.

please if you really think it is mud, go grab a childs truck, and go roll it around in the DIRT and see what happens to the wheels....

I've only read up to page 17 so I'm not going to add my input about the thread subject in until I've finished but I do want to reply to this certain post.

What everyone is doing is actually debating, speculating and giving their theories as to "What" this is or "Could" be.

For you to say that the human race is doomed because we are all debating and trying to figure out something that is not that known to us just tells me that you still have a lot to learn in life.

Sure, if you roll a toy truck around on the Earths dirt then some would stick, even if you rolled it in sand it would most likely stick. However, this is not Earth. This is Mars. A planet that we do not completely understand yet. Please do not try to act like you know exactly what is happening because even with all the scientific data we have, none of us are 100% sure.




As for a reply to the thread itself, I think that if it IS clumps of dirst sticking to the wheel then the location of the rover might have something to do with it. Since the Gale Crater is deeper then the surface of Mars one might think that the "Dew", as some of you are calling it, might stick around a bit longer then on the surface. This may give it just enough "Moisture" to make the very fine dust stick. Do I believe that's what this is? I'm going to say no. Is it a possible? Yes.

Phage also pointed out that the rover has not moved in 5 days. To me, this could actually mean a mixture of Phage's theory and yours. Phage pointed out (which Is true) that Electrostatic effects could be what is making the (very) fine dust stick to the wheel. With this, dust sticking to the wheel for awhile along with the small amount of dew that could be caused by the water vapor could cause it to have the "caked" look.

so, does anyone know if it's found anything signifant or not? or are we all just still speculating??

giving it a bump - seems like this has faded away like a fart blowing in the cool summer wind
2nd

reply to post by tawewe


Curiosity has been munching on some dirt. www.nasa.gov...