Phoenix on Mars

[quote]if we find a lot more of them we would take a look[/quote]

this Phoenix object IS a lot like routiny, if you look at routiny with proper resolution.

I am not suggesting that this object is the same as the rover rotini. It is probably hardware. But I am just sick and tired of the pattern of refusing to investigate, discuss or even comment upon strange objects seen on the martian surface. I have always felt there is a NASA directive of some sort to the teams that prohibit them from any such comments or observations on threat of funding loss. Why? I guess it is all based on funding. Too many discoveries too soon might lead to cancellation of some future projects.

Under the lander:

Wow! Looks like the landing rockets blew away the soil covering a rock ( ice? )layer!

Here is a super 3D of the "screw":

with links to the new RAC image of this area.

looks more and more like a piece of the rover. The next press conference will gove it a word or two -- especially if the media asks about it! I wonder how we could draw the media's attention to this object?

And here is the other lander leg area:

RAb11,L1 false color image of some curious rocks:

See the image comments about the false color map.

Even weirder is the rock with what looks like it is associated a meandering slide trail!!

How could this have happened?

First I thought maybe a pad landed on the rock and pushed it -- but the trail is crooked and points away from the lander!

ThenI thought maybe the lander rockets moved the rock -- but there is no loose soil on or near the rock -- and there are no other similar rock trails.

Any other theories?

folks>>>

If its metal, its from the Phoenix. But what bothers me is this. The blasters scarred and removed the topsoil layer, blasted it all away. Lets live with that. Underneath the topsoil layer would be a 'hardened' surface of either rock, mixed frozen substrate[sand-mud granules etc...] or dirty ice!

Now, if its metal then this screw or clip seems to be embedded in the hardened surface. So again if its metal then perhaps it was a hot piece from the blasters machinery and actually fell off and melted in situ. Then this observation would make some sort of sense.

But if it is 'fossil-rock' exposed from the blasters, then that's another issue altogether. Really, isn't that what NASA and the U of A are doing there in the first place? Finding any accessibility to life? Truly, NASA has got to investigate.

So whatever we see here at this time is still a complete unknown.

yt
dx
Thanks for those pics Horton.

Hello Horton>>>

Just saw your 44. Looks like phoenix took a jump on its landing. Its not all smooth surface here, lots of little rocks and somewhat larger ones strewn around the site. I think that rock was hit by one of the pads on landing. At 5MPH, low gravity and resistance could cause Phoenix to hop on first contact. Do you see any suggestions to that idea under the Lander? Say a double pad hit near that rock.

yt
dx

Great images! Thank you Horton.

Regarding reply #43: Maybe we should send an email to Space.com and tell them about our discussions? Who can do that?

The slide trail is totally weird, the only way I think about is that one of the lander leg hit the rock and got the rock to bounce away due to the pressure applied after the landing?

Mizar>>>

Maybe it slid on the ice that NASA expects to be here? LOLOLO

yt
dx

dx,

...We have had some of those guys here before...

More skip and slide rock trails:

OK, I'm convinced. The rocket exhaust moved the rocks.

This image is just to the right of reply 44 and it has another rock at the very bottom of the image that has slide marks -- and one very clear example of a pebble that skipped multiple times away from the lander.

Since the rockets were pulsed ( on - off ) the lateral forces near the ground would not be uniform so a rock could be pushed in multiple directions as it moved. The soil on the sides of all the nearby large rocks and the clean surfaces under the lander shows that there was quite a bit of stuff flying around at the landing.

One curious observation: there is a subtle change in the soil color ( black to red )just above the largest rock. Perhaps this the effective "blast radius" of the exhaust where soil was disturbed? Remember, the HiRise image of Phoenix on the ground showed a soil darkening around the lander.

OOOOPS!

Ignore the "false color" remarks in reply 44. I read the header information in the wrong JPG file. The right eye image has been replaced by the correct R1 / RB / RC color map.

As an aside, I hope the misalignment of some of the filter images does not persist. It is a pain in the but to correct.

Again, what's going on? Is the lander position totally stable? Maybe just the action of changing filters is rocking the boat?

I can believe it bounced a bit on landing, also to find what appears to be ice before even using the shovel is great !!

i noticed that shift too horton. I believe it was in the blue filter no? I have been using notepad to view header information and have noticed that each image at the ASU gallery appears to be a duplicate. They both have the same filter/local taken time. Did you notice that horton?

let me rephrese that because eah image IS NOT a duplicate. Each image seems to be paired in sequence with a duplicate.

RAC RGB / RGB-D image comparisons:

Looks like there is enough light close to the RAC to get a "decent" color image.

Yes, moe, the ASU has duplicates up the wazoo. The lack of a file naming scheme makes the site useless for my purposes.

I am using the NASA Phoenix images site now -- which is a pain in the butt using -- but at least the basic camera date-time / filter data is in the file name.

thanks horton- this would be the test/dump scoop then... could the white frosty appearing stuff be... well frost?

Could the duplicates be rads? They seem to be in released in a time linear fashion with the latest first. The whole release gallery definitely could be better organized.

er, moe, you can't put 12 pounds of #&*% in an 8 pound bag.

The RAD images ( Radiometrically Corrected Data ) ( publicly released about 6 months or so after the original exposures )are in a lossless PDS format that preserves the original 12 bits of precision with flat field and other technical corrections.

I use the plugin "PDS Reader" to input read the PDS RAD images into imagej as 16 bit images.

The JPGs are 8 bit precision with reduced quality ( the dreaded JPGies that are so obvious in the RGB-D image of reply 55. ) and a sometimes wicked contrast stretch and / or brightness clip.

I did image compares on several of the duplicates and the images were identical. Some have made their way through Photoshop -- which by the way zapped the exif metadata ( bad program, bad! Go lay down in the corner! Bad, bad, bad. )

I am frankly puzzled by the poor organization of the ASU "raw" images. There was even an image from a Viking mission! I searched in vain for the location of the Viking rocks in the Phoenix panoramas, wondering how I had missed them - and finally realized where the image was!

Weird.

University of Arizona version of the RGB-D image in reply 55:

Say, what's the "white stuff"?

Here is the original UofA image and press release. The soil was scooped from here.

Sigh.

The scoop of soil was just above the first test scoop press in this image.