Insight lander - Page 6

Previous 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 Next
Author Message
Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 101



PostPosted: August 29, 2019 10:25 AM 

A view of the small rock near the IDA or instrument arm, this view at about 6X online or 9X if downloaded. Color balanced some, and altered considerably. The pixel lines are present but the twin tubular 'melt' content drainage is easily seen, and multiple thin lines of undulating material appearing melted partially is distinguished in an enlarged view.
Does this material exist only at the surface or is it an extension from below the surface with the 'erupting' appearing material as a subsurface remnant? It appears metallic as a rock structure, does not appear to have moved during the landing I believe, and while it looks possibly a man-made type suggestive shape, surely the landing does not have the capability to melt metal, rock, or large plastic items that may drop from the lander body.
This must be a hot melt object yet it seems somewhat unusual in the scene. The parallel linear formation and rounded edges, thin undulating lines, and flowing melt material all indicate a original formation in place if not artificial and man-made. I believe that is correct presumption as there was nothing on the internal lander that would melt to that degree at landing after release of all heat shield and other debris from descent above the surface.

Would this piece indicate a in place outgassing or cooling process from whatever lies below the current surface?
Would a local small impact produce the heat to melt and vertically erupt tubular melt to the surface rather than a large underground hot melt source?

This might be the reason the hammer device is not able to proceed downward perhaps?

Original images, credits; NASA/JPL-Caltech

joesmith


Posts: xxx

Reply: 102



PostPosted: August 29, 2019 12:26 PM 

Shurley by now we have a tool that will show better resolution

Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 103



PostPosted: August 31, 2019 6:05 PM 

Yes, these are 1 MP jpg's, and that was here on Earth available back in the '80's' yet we have no updating of cameras on the former missions. I can't make alterations without pixel noise and this is just a tiny section of a full 1024 x 1024 1 megapixel image.
The next rovers are supposed to be much finer devices and cameras. Real color balance would be nice, with a color scale for auto calibration there on Mars, but as you can see from the bright yellow view of the grapple on Earth, apparently we are looking at severe color distortions no matter what we are doing here on Earth.

I have a Black Rock City (Burning Man ) capture from the live view tonight, also apparently 'on Mars' with an ongoing dust cloud storm underway. I altered this by 100 points plus for contrast, and 100 points lesser for brightness, to get this webcam view. The strange creatures there are moving in animal shapes and odd metal 2 wheeled machines. There seem to be buildings and many creatures wandering from place to place. Still the desert can be a difficult place to watch from a distance. If this is Mars, it is very interesting, but I can't tell what I am looking at. They seem to be lighting fires tonight. Some kind of celebration by these little creatures. We will have to wait for the '2020 mission' for more detail.

As for the enlargements and altered crop sections of the JPG's, I apologize for not bringing more detail to the InSIGHT mission images on Mars.

Hope you can tolerate the distracting desert image of what I thought was a vision of a Mars city. I may have had a wrong link, or a missing link.

All prior post's were real I believe.

Hope you are all doing well. Conjunction will be over soon.

Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 104



PostPosted: September 1, 2019 9:11 PM 

With the recent discoveries teasing the public such as the Yutu-2 find of unusual material in a small crater and the recollection of the Apollo 17 find of volcanic flow material on the Moon, I am sure the InSIGHT teams are careful about the possible outflow event at the landing site for this mission.

[link]

Working on a few images for the week. Wish we had Horton and other geology technical persons here.

Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 105



PostPosted: September 3, 2019 1:50 PM 

The same small rock from posts #100 and #101, near the arm when the arm is extended and working on the mole hammer device and housing, this is a view on Sol 227, one of the images taken that day with some alteration of contrast and brightness to better show the thin layered exposures on the surface. The views here are at 3X and dpi 1647, original crop section size 280 x 200 pixels, now 840 x 600.
The differing angle of view shows a 'fossil-like' shape, with a dark object setting on the tubule structure at the largest dark shadow, extensions of the thinning of material on the outer margins, debris blast of the lander thrusters have blown patterns across the area while not leaving debris dust on the darker and 'greener' colored 'rock'.
If I were in a 'dig' I would think I had find, but here we are on Mars, and we know we cannot accept appearances as such.

More angles of view are necessary.

Sol 227, 3X and dpi 1647, original,

Altered, also 3X enlargement,

With the entrained debris this rock clearly was on the ground before the landing. Is this a local rock or something else?

Image credits, originals, NASA/JPL-Caltech

Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 106



PostPosted: September 3, 2019 3:06 PM 

A view from one of the Sol 241 images. Enlarged 3X at dpi 1647, color saturation increased 25 points, contrast altered for the small dual tubule rock crop section, and for the full frame view the hole crop is at gamma 2.5.

The ground has been altered by the drainage from the tubule holes or the particulates were removed by force from the far right side where the tubule hole exists. The saturation was necessary to show the degree of green coloration of the solid versus the particulates around the main mass.

Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 107



PostPosted: September 3, 2019 4:00 PM 

6X view with color and other alteration, still the Sol 241 original,


Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 108



PostPosted: September 3, 2019 5:36 PM 

From the post # 101 I have backed up to Sol 227, then Sol 241, now Sol 246 at an angle similar to the post # 101 perspective view.

The colors in late day images are often much better for color balance. The views of Sol 246 are at 3X and DPI of 1647. The varied color along the semi-liquid in the tubules is clear in this image, and the altered inset crop area shows in some a 'florette' pattern to the right of the rock. It would be nice to know how the patterns originate. There are several variations of this crop section between the posted images which can be downloaded if you can see them when viewing in the photo host list.

What mechanism causes incised patterns, mixed colors in drainage material, and how deep would a source be for this to be influencing the hammer MOLE device?

Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 109



PostPosted: September 4, 2019 1:58 PM 

Over short periods of time, and with different sunlight angles, the details visible around this rock seem altered or undetectable with the current cameras.
The view of Sol 250 in this sequence shows the limitations of the current optics, chip, or other technical limits. Color here is increased in saturation considerably and the color balance changed. The view is at 3X and DPI 1647 but color was 'blocking' some.
In the tubule there appears some ringed tonal pattern, no 'flower' type pattern visible on the soil at the far right rear where it should be, no 'drainage' type depression pattern much on any side of the elevated tubules, yet the appearance of layered or fractured thin sheeting seems present. Basic color is the same, but the image overall shows the rock is in the vignette zone of color swing from red towards blue.
Each day and arm image taking angle causes serious changes in addition to whatever is active in the scene.

A view full frame, then a cropped version size to show both the 'condensation' or ice with shadows cast on droplet shapes, and last a cropped view of only the rock area with a arm tube section.

Sol 250, 3X, DPI 1647,

Image credits, originals, NASA/JPL-Caltech

It still appears to me this is an in-place expression of semi-solid buried vertical movement material from below the surface.
Whether related to a shock cone type effect or fault type upward expression it seems even a surge flow possibly is just below the surface at shallow depth probably.

Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 110



PostPosted: September 5, 2019 11:30 AM 

Moving backward in time to SOl 110, the same 'rock' has a distinct foreground pattern of soil alteration and interaction, and is a single tubule showing drainage out one end. The background and far right side of the cropped portion shows petal type patterned ground around the object possibly from mini-vortex movement or other interaction from the 'rock' object.
If the current surface is actively involved with the material from the tubule, is it a carbon based paraffin or mixed chemistry? Is this intended as a test of hydrocarbon interaction with the soil or is it a by-product of convenience of the attachment of the arm and other landing equipment?
If the material is active at these temperatures why would the product be useful in a study of patterned ground as seen? Would this indicate a method of viewing recent uprising material from below the surface on a larger scale? Can CRISM or another satellite make a detection of tiny amounts of chemistry at this volume?
Is this an experiment underway or simple convenience use of active hydrocarbons?

Sol 110, at 3X and DPI 1647,

I see no 'droplets' on the grapple fingers of the instrument arm in this original and the altered views. There is only a very slight set of lighter toned spots in the same positions as the shadowed 'drops' on only the forward single finger seen. No 'ice' or other chemistry seen. Does this mean there is no connection between the finger droplets and the tubule which seems to have been or is active on the soil below? Is there any chance of a connection between the tubular 'rock' and the finger faces? Is there an active experiment underway around the InSIGHT lander about which we were not advised?

Why no droplets viewed on this day in particular, in addition to the initial image while the arm was still mounted on the lander deck?
Is there active or interactive chemistry between the lander equipment and the ground surface?

Image credits, originals, NASA/JPL-Caltech

Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 111



PostPosted: September 5, 2019 11:52 AM 

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/ames/from-pedicures-to-the-peregrine-rocket-paraffin-wax-proves-its-worth

https://engineering.stanford.edu/magazine/article/rocket-fuel-made-wax

Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 112



PostPosted: September 5, 2019 12:20 PM 

A still closer view at high contrast. Shurly this was not a matter of convenience only.

Will we be looking at launch sites with soil based patterned ground after launches from Mars or will this be explained as a test of actual rocket fuel at a later time?
How much hydrocarbon does it take to signal the orbiters currently?
Is the material or 'rock' under study actually changing?
Is there a process not discussed active here?

Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 113



PostPosted: September 5, 2019 5:52 PM 

This is a desperate attempt to produce a sensible solution for various details, yet we know there is no 'ear wax' in the scene. Recent active surface modifications have occurred so time will give a better Earth bound interpretation.

https://images.app.goo.gl/mJLibJN1YkHVgdcx5

Additionally this is an observation of the mole housing grip and plate after a use of the grapple fingers. Something is transferring from the grapple fingers to the plate by this day.

A full frame view altered with the 'rock' present with similar soil alterations as later images show, and the MOLE housing grip plate marked and altered as in the small crop view. The rock is dark and yet possibly different in surface shape from later views.

The images are at 3X and DPI 1647.

Image credits, originals; NASA/JPL-Caltech

Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 114



PostPosted: September 7, 2019 3:04 PM 

A view from Sol 85, at 3X, of the small trough depressions connecting the 'rock' and one of the circular 'florette' type shapes which have appeared over time near the 'rock' object and the arm above the MOLE housing.

The pattern on this image is similar to the one on Sol 246 at post 108. Would these patterns and the linked depressions leading to the 'rock' object be from stones rolling towards the higher elevation 'rock' or would these undulating linear patterns be related to a liquid or semi-liquid material issuing from the tubule?
Clearly the arced 'bow shock' waves that have formed are directional matching angles of approach and passage, but why?

The high airflow speed and force was shaping these from the landing to Sol 85, or prior. Other than the landing what would cause this much force and ordering of the solids and rock objects in place at Sol 85 or prior?

Image credits, originals; NASA/JPL-Caltech

Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 115



PostPosted: September 8, 2019 1:31 PM 

A possible source of the patterns on the particulate surface in recent timing. The multiple arced ridge/trough distances are similar in measure each to the next, and the 'Flower or florette' type patterns are related to the tendril type shapes on the tubule shape.

https://ipm.missouri.edu/MEG/2018/10/iceFlowers/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frost_flower

Just a suggestion rather than the argument that wind force is alone involved.

Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 116



PostPosted: September 9, 2019 11:05 AM 

Moving back in time somewhat to Sol 76 again, another of the MOLE housing and arm images shows obvious liquid droplets in motion across the grip plate of the housing, with subsequent liquid drops falling and accumulating on the lower section of the housing base as ice. The accumulation of the droplets is so dense that the level has built up in elevation and is running off the base to the soil. Water or wax? I believe the water choice is obviously correct.

3X at DPI 1647,

I have removed all color from these and will improve the view.

Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 117



PostPosted: September 9, 2019 5:32 PM 

A view of the housing base without ice and a closeup of the plate with the same droplets on the Sol 76 day, same as the prior posted day's view of a different timing.

The image is from the DLR site pages here,

https://www.dlr.de/dlr/en/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-10081/151_read-32200/#/gallery/33477

The same droplets on the plate, without base droplets as yet.

Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 118



PostPosted: September 9, 2019 8:27 PM 

3X overlay of the two images which were both taken on Sol 76. The active difference between the two timings is clear. Was and is the process liquid water on the mechanism, or is there an unannounced leakage of wax from the grapple activator for the fingers? If it was wax then, is it disappearing for a reason in rapid timing? Is the drainage from the associated nearby 'rock tubule' also water or is that surface structure and flower pattern a compound such as paraffin, naphthalene, other PAH, or related to a calcium carbonate, vaterite, or aragonite, chemical activating liquid? The pattern on the soil resembles a large scaled version of something similar.
I'm not trying to impress people with the use of terms, just trying to resolve the obvious once looking at altered closeups of the originals here.

The full crop here is 2000 x 1251, so only a downloaded view shows the details clearly. I would like to make good images without alterations so severe, but the sun is where it is and these are small originals.
I also had a damage to my brain which is reducing my eyesight capabilities slightly. A CT scan view is in the host listing for those who enjoy medical images.

Image credits, originals; NASA/JPL-Caltech

Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 119



PostPosted: September 9, 2019 8:47 PM 

https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/32345/why-does-the-mars-insight-lander-look-wet-like-a-cardboard-box-that-came-in-cont

A nine month old question and answer about shiny InSIGHT metal surfaces, but no resolution of the long term details in this discussion.

Is the process sourced from Mars or the lander equipment? Use of the grapple will give a definite answer over time, dependent upon weather possibly.

Dana Johnson


Posts: 1195

Reply: 120



PostPosted: September 11, 2019 4:57 PM 

Images are being returned from InSIGHT again, and the newest of Sol 280, shows spots of material on the uppermost finger of the grapple. The view at 3X is one of the first I have seen with the topmost finger showing whatever the material droplets are.
The accumulation is as usual along the ends of the grapple finger metal, no apparent on the lower section of the finger units.

Sol 280, 3X and DPI 1647, thumbnail view about 1.5X size until viewed at the image host.

A view of the large rock in dark shade near the lander body front with the small rock on the side of the lander under a leg, both altered to compensate for the shadow view. Again both are apparently from a common parent body.

A full frame view at 3X with the areas altered.

A link to the original 1024 x 1024 source image. The small rock overlay inset is from a prior Sol number image.

https://mars.nasa.gov/raw_images/622273/?site=insight

Image credits, originals; NASA/JPL-Caltech

Enjoy these views while we ponder the recently announced discovery of a planet in the habitable zone of a red dwarf star 110 light years distant which seems to have water vapor, possibly rain capable clouds, at twice the size of Earth. with a massive dense atmosphere. K2-18 b

Previous 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 Next


Join the conversation:















Very Happy Smile Sad Surprised
Shocked Confused Cool Laughing
Mad Razz Embarassed Crying or Very Sad
Evil or Very Mad Twisted Evil Rolling Eyes Wink
Powered by MTSmileys