Curiosity: Potential Anomalies (Update 01/2014)

reply to post by Char-Lee


lets hope we find a tame one , it might be more generous with its blueberrys

eyesonstalksBox

Think they killed this guy also
areo.info...


Maybe they should have

funbox
not even if the elements were found in combination with camera information , say the rover bored into a white shell like structure , found a lot of elements that can be found in earth shells .. and nasa put two and two together ?

You were talking about elements, not about camera information.

With enough camera information (something moving by itself on several photos, for example) there wouldn't be any need to search for specific elements.

Char-Lee
Think they killed this guy also
areo.info...

Good face, wearing a hat or bonnet or Martian/Roman helmet. I see a clear face facing downwards towards the sand, "looking" to our left and down. It's well featured, although the part under its nose is partly buried in the sand. You can call this one Facey. Facey is either kissing or "biting" the dust, a well-honed theme of Martian head sculptors.

ArMaP

funbox
not even if the elements were found in combination with camera information , say the rover bored into a white shell like structure , found a lot of elements that can be found in earth shells .. and nasa put two and two together ?

You were talking about elements, not about camera information.

With enough camera information (something moving by itself on several photos, for example) there wouldn't be any need to search for specific elements.

as usssual ArMaP you dissect a contextual body of a post and answer it in segments,


funbox says:
its puzzling , I understand that they have chemical analysis to determine if there is life on mars
Armap says:
Curiosity doesn't have any instrument to determine if there is life on Mars.

well I actually said chemical analysis, which is not an instrument put a process of study of elements and compounds
abundance is the key issue, and camera evidence along with chemical analysis can indicate life. they run alongside one another as pieces of evidence, making the whole rover one multi- faceted instrument .. its easy to dissect a thing down to its base components, not so easy to see the whole , and the wholes combined usefulness for determination or conclusions based on many information streams,

funBox

Arken found more globs of goo and gruncy granola gritters on the same pic where people found the gnome. His new thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

funbox
as usssual ArMaP you dissect a contextual body of a post and answer it in segments,

It's how I read things, it makes it easier to understand, but even with that I have, some times, a hard time trying to understand what you write.

well I actually said chemical analysis, which is not an instrument put a process of study of elements and compounds
abundance is the key issue, and camera evidence along with chemical analysis can indicate life.

Seeing that, as far as I know, nobody is on Mars, chemical analysis must be done by instruments, right?

they run alongside one another as pieces of evidence, making the whole rover one multi- faceted instrument ..

Sure it is, but not to find life, it was not made for that.

its easy to dissect a thing down to its base components, not so easy to see the whole , and the wholes combined usefulness for determination or conclusions based on many information streams,

If part of what is written doesn't make sense, does the whole make sense? That's the best way of propagating wrong/fake information, mixing it up with something that is a known truth, that's one of the reasons I separate what is written/said/presented in the smallest understandable pieces I can.

ArMaP

funbox
as usssual ArMaP you dissect a contextual body of a post and answer it in segments,

It's how I read things, it makes it easier to understand, but even with that I have, some times, a hard time trying to understand what you write.

well I actually said chemical analysis, which is not an instrument put a process of study of elements and compounds
abundance is the key issue, and camera evidence along with chemical analysis can indicate life.

Seeing that, as far as I know, nobody is on Mars, chemical analysis must be done by instruments, right?

they run alongside one another as pieces of evidence, making the whole rover one multi- faceted instrument ..

Sure it is, but not to find life, it was not made for that.

its easy to dissect a thing down to its base components, not so easy to see the whole , and the wholes combined usefulness for determination or conclusions based on many information streams,

If part of what is written doesn't make sense, does the whole make sense? That's the best way of propagating wrong/fake information, mixing it up with something that is a known truth, that's one of the reasons I separate what is written/said/presented in the smallest understandable pieces I can.

point one

il try to be more understandable to you , were both from different country so there will always be some mistranslation.. you're not so bad at understanding so far I think

point 2
so you say ,but like the other two rovers , they have instruments on board which have the capability to see /detect life past life, ie an ancient ruined city

point 3
im not sure what you are trying to say , in that quote I was referring to the rovers instruments. not text flaming
the instruments make the whole instrument, as the satellite above makes a wider network of instruments , etc etc.. those back on earth , analysing the results, making determinations on the rovers data, making an even wider instrument,
all these instruments working in concert to make determinations .. but according to you ArMaP l, life is not one of them

hope im clarifying myself a little better

funBox

funbox
point one

il try to be more understandable to you , were both from different country so there will always be some mistranslation.. you're not so bad at understanding so far I think

Thanks.
Different countries with different languages, that's the problem.
Many times I don't comment posts because I don't understand what is meant, only answering the ones I understand makes me look like I understand more than I really do.

point 2
so you say ,but like the other two rovers , they have instruments on board which have the capability to see /detect life past life, ie an ancient ruined city

Like I said, in some cases, just a camera is enough.

point 3
im not sure what you are trying to say , in that quote I was referring to the rovers instruments.

So was I, and those instruments were not made to detect signs of life.

but according to you ArMaP l, life is not one of them

Not according to me, according to what the makers of Curiosity stated as the mission's objectives and the capabilities of the instruments aboard Curiosity.

hope im clarifying myself a little better

You are, thanks.

ArMaP

Char-Lee
Yes I am not having fun with the new ones so I am exploring the old stuff. Did you see my coin? Impressive?

And it's not the first "coin" to appear on MER photos.

The markings on my coin show up without enlargement. So it really does have markings on it.

reply to post by ArMaP


ahh sorry ArMap , point 3 was actually referring to

If part of what is written doesn't make sense, does the whole make sense? That's the best way of propagating wrong/fake information, mixing it up with something that is a known truth, that's one of the reasons I separate what is written/said/presented in the smallest understandable pieces I can.

and not to this

Sure it is, but not to find life, it was not made for that

I had skipped this point , many apologies

funBox

reply to post by funbox


I find it interesting that although they know better scientists really are looking for life essentially like earth life. I would assume that they have tryed to envision the other forms life may take but they don't seem to look for it.

Based on what we know of life and biochemistry, it seems likely that an alien biochemistry will need a solvent (like water) and one or more elemental units for its structure and function (like carbon). Solvents are important to enable chemical reactions, as well as physically transporting materials – and in both contexts, having that solvent in its liquid phase seems vital.

We might expect that common biochemically useful solvents are most likely to form from the most common elements in the universe – being hydrogen, helium, oxygen, neon, nitrogen, carbon, silicon, magnesium, iron and sulfur, in that order.

You can probably forget about helium and neon – both noble gases, they are largely chemically inert and only rarely form chemical compounds, none of which obviously have the properties of a solvent. Looking at what's left, the polar solvents that might be most readily available in large volumes to support a biochemistry are firstly water (H2O), then ammonia (NH3) and hydrogen sulfide (H2S). Various non-polar solvents can also be formed, notably methane (CH4). Broadly speaking, polar solvents have a weak electric charge and can dissolve most things that are water-soluble, while non-polar solvents have no charge and act more like the industrial solvents we are familiar with on Earth, such as turpentine.

Isaac Asimov, who when not writing science fiction was a biochemist, proposed a hypothetical biochemistry where poly-lipids (essentially chains of fat molecules) could substitute for proteins in a methane (or other non-polar) solvent. It has been suggested that such a biochemistry could be supported on Titan.

io9.com...

reply to post by funbox


What I meant was that it's easier to have truth mixed with fantasy/lies in a text made of several sentences, and that's one of the reasons I am used to answer each individual part of what is written, and I wrote that because I thought you were talking generically and not about the specific case of each individual instrument aboard Mars Science Lab and the whole MSL and the team of people working with it.

If you were talking about the instruments and the whole MSL and team, then I don't understand why you said "not so easy to see the whole , and the wholes combined usefulness for determination or conclusions based on many information streams", as those conclusions can be based only on the results of the individual instruments.

reply to post by Char-Lee


the potential for extremophiles also, and to what extent could they evolve. was interested to note Asimov's interest in non carbon based forms of life , might start reading his books

funBox

reply to post by Char-Lee


That's the problem of looking for something we don't know how it looks like, and one of the reasons I think we should look at everything (including rocks that look like something else), the only sure (if that's even possible) way of looking for life is as we know it, unless we start seeing rocks that move by themselves.

Edit: I think the first sentence sounds a little strange, I hope everybody understands what I meant with that.

ArMaP
reply to post by funbox

 

What I meant was that it's easier to have truth mixed with fantasy/lies in a text made of several sentences, and that's one of the reasons I am used to answer each individual part of what is written, and I wrote that because I thought you were talking generically and not about the specific case of each individual instrument aboard Mars Science Lab and the whole MSL and the team of people working with it.

If you were talking about the instruments and the whole MSL and team, then I don't understand why you said "not so easy to see the whole , and the wholes combined usefulness for determination or conclusions based on many information streams", as those conclusions can be based only on the results of the individual instruments.

an individual instrument that detects life ? not heard of that before , besides the sub ether sens-o-matic, or the tricorder from startrek, what about unknown life , what instrument do you design for that? there are none , only a range of instruments that have different purposes, one for elemental analysis , one to take pictures, geometric analysis, one to detect tempretures , etcetc

as for mixing truth with lies, I think ive been fairly sceptical in this thread , even with my joking aside, .. observational and critical if I recall correctly, pointless telling lies, they are transparent and easily uncovered, unneeded in this thread

well I actually said chemical analysis, which is not an instrument put a process of study of elements and compounds
abundance is the key issue, and camera evidence along with chemical analysis can indicate life. they run alongside one another as pieces of evidence, making the whole rover one multi- faceted instrument .. its easy to dissect a thing down to its base components, not so easy to see the whole , and the wholes combined usefulness for determination or conclusions based on many information streams,

allow me to re-explain this quote

'abundance is the key issue', by this I mean that an abundance of elements taken from a rock sample , say an abundance of ivory ,obtained by drilling into a rock observed by the camera.. and then analysed on the rover as so

from this pretext I then say

'and camera evidence along with chemical analysis can indicate life'

so geometric observations , a shell form in a rock , photographed by the rover
then drilled and sampled by the on-board spectrometer,

two good indicators first visual , then elemental

I then from that pretext I say

'they run alongside one another as pieces of evidence, making the whole rover one multi- faceted instrument'

see above explanation

I then say

' its easy to dissect a thing down to its base components,'

the word instruments in hindsight would have been a better word

but' single pieces of evidence' or its 'individual instruments' that detect these evidences, could also have been used

which leads to

not so easy to see the whole , and the wholes combined usefulness for determination or conclusions based on many information streams,

the whole rovers combined instruments, then the wider field of satellite information , and the later analysis of the data that comes to the jpl and nasa team.

in retrospect that sentence was a messy one , and not easy discerned, my apologies

hope I've made myself even clearer

funBox

funbox
an individual instrument that detects life ?

No, individual instruments that detect things that are considered signs of life.

as for mixing truth with lies, I think ive been fairly sceptical in this thread , even with my joking aside, .. observational and critical if I recall correctly, pointless telling lies, they are transparent and easily uncovered, unneeded in this thread

I was not talking about you or anyone on this thread, I was only saying that's one of the reasons I got used to this way of reading, interpreting and answering posts.

'abundance is the key issue', by this I mean that an abundance of elements taken from a rock sample , say an abundance of ivory ,obtained by drilling into a rock observed by the camera.. and then analysed on the rover as so

Well, if they find dentine on Mars that would be the same as finding a bone, they don't need (I think) "abundance" of it, just confirmation.

in retrospect that sentence was a messy one , and not easy discerned, my apologies

Now imagine how someone that learned English by watching movies and TV would see that sentence.

hope I've made myself even clearer

You did, thanks.

reply to post by ArMaP


fair enough ArMaP ,I think we are on the same page/*quazi-page*
anything new from the rover today ? not far to the crossing now , will their be harpies awaiting in them there cliffs ?

funBox

funbox
anything new from the rover today ? not far to the crossing now , will their be harpies awaiting in them there cliffs ?

One thing I noticed on the last photos and confirmed just now with this page is that Curiosity has been moving away from its destination.

I hope that just to look for a smoother path.

reply to post by ArMaP

or maybe it got the questions wrong



odd all the same , maybe there'll be an announcement by them in the near future

nasa news feed
"rover got questions wrong ! had to go the long way"



funBox