A First Look At Meridiani Planum

loconet writes "After Opportunity 's successful landing on mars , NASA has recieved the first images showing the landing site revealing a surreal, dark landscape unlike any ever seen before on Mars. The terrain is darker than at any previous Mars landing site and has the first accessible bedrock outcropping ever seen on Mars. The outcropping immediately became a candidate target for the rover to visit and examine up close."

Comments

Hopefully fewer Mars-rats this time

[ewg]

Hopefully there will be fewer Mars-rats chewing on the cables this time. It would be a shame if they did to Opportunity what they're doing to Spirit!

Re:Hopefully fewer Mars-rats this time

[Anonymous Coward]

Nah. We tricked 'em. They're all 6600 miles away playing with Spirit. You see, Spirit was the decoy, and now we use Opportunity without worries!

Re:Hopefully fewer Mars-rats this time

[jbrader]

I thought it was flash-eating Mars termites

Re:Hopefully fewer Mars-rats this time

[deathcow]

Dude, I told you, it wasn't Mars rats, it was the gang trouble, see.

Re:Hopefully fewer Mars-rats this time

[dellis78741]

Does anyone have any idea about the interior of the nearby large crater(seen in the descent images)? There appears to be two parallel light colored strips down inside it. They aren't perfectly parallel or uniform but they sure are odd!

Too bad...

[Anonymous Coward]

Too bad it doesent have big lights to light up the place for an alien party :)

Waiting for the "big" discovery.

[Bender Unit 22]

All I am waiting for are these guys to find "machinery" there too.
Who knows what the pixelated'n'smoothed zooms will bring. :D

Re:Waiting for the "big" discovery.

[TrueBuckeye]

I was looking at those pics at EM the other day. So what do you think...does he actually belive this crap or is it all an intentional hoax? And if so, to what end? He spends an awful lot of time coming up with this crap. If it is just for fun, then the guy seriously needs a girlfriend.

Re:Waiting for the "big" discovery.

[BigHungryJoe]

Well, Hoagland does write books on this stuff occassionally, so money might be a factor, but I think he really believes this stuff.

I can't even tell what he is suggesting with the latest photos. Is he suggesting that rock is alive and attacked the rover?

Re:Waiting for the "big" discovery.

[FrostedWheat]

Someone has spent to many hours finding shapes in the clouds! Thankfully there are no large rocks in this new landing site. At least until it gets out of that crater.

What we need todo is gather all these nuts in one place, and send them all to the Moon or Mars to see there 'evidence' up close. Briefly.

Re:Waiting for the "big" discovery.

[Syre]

It's obviously the shadow of a mini-horse.

The mini-horses of Mars have stampeeded and trampled the rover!

Re:Waiting for the "big" discovery.

[oogoliegoogolie]

All I am waiting for are these guys to find "machinery" there too.

I'm sure you wont have to wait long.
I go to that site once in a blue moon just to get a good chuckle. Pretty much on any picture from any mission to any planet he can find "evidence" of alien artifacts, buildings, cities, sewer systems, irrigation pipes, drive-in theatres, etc.

Re:Waiting for the "big" discovery.

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone has spent to many hours finding shapes in the clouds!

There's a cool name for that - 'pareidolia'. Phil Plait of Bad Astronomy fame has got a page on it, or more precisely on how he found Lenin on his shower curtain.

Some people seem to be more susceptible than others. I seem to be immune - in all these pictures of rocks from Mars, I've yet to see a single alien building or artefact. I'm very disappointed. :-)

Re:Waiting for the "big" discovery.

[WormholeFiend]

you know those light-colored things poking out of the ground somewhat far in the background, those are actually fossilized bones from some giant martian animal, which was probably sentient too, and also probably designed all that machinery from the other side of the planet. /i got nuthin

Re:Waiting for the "big" discovery.

[ShawnDoc]

I wish they'd at least write some explanations of their "photo processing". All I see are large .jpgs of rocks run through a Photoshop filter with vague statements about "artifacts" and "cover ups". What am I supposed to be seeing?

Re:Waiting for the "big" discovery.

[Neop2Lemus]

I like the rocks as alien artifacts, they're cute. In fact, if it weren't for the 25cm of snow outside, I'd probably find a few myself. The world is alien if you spend too much time inside I think.

What a nutcase.

Re:Waiting for the "big" discovery.

[Tablizer]

He spends an awful lot of time coming up with this crap. If it is just for fun, then the guy seriously needs a girlfriend.

This advice coming from a slasdotter???

Re:Waiting for the "big" discovery.

[Jade E. 2]

Whoa, that guy's really onto something. The top artifact in this picture is obviously a fury artifact from Activision's Battlezone! (I can't find a screenshot or my Battlezone CD... someone want to post one?)

Re:Waiting for the "big" discovery.

[FrostedWheat]

in all these pictures of rocks from Mars, I've yet to see a single alien building or artefact. I'm very disappointed

You and me both, tho I did notice a rock near Spirit that looked like a weird deformed version of the OpenBSD fish. Can't find the image now.

Re:Waiting for the "big" discovery.

[ratsnapple tea]

(offtopic)

If they have access to OUR jobs, then give me access to THEIR cost of living

Not to be snide, but (assuming I'm understanding your reference) you do have access to their cost of living--just move there.

Of course, in return you'll have to put up with a tidal wave of beggars who will plaintively ask you for tea, and strange public toilets with no toilet paper but a bucket of questionable water. Them's the breaks.

Spirit is indeed a software problem

[LedZeplin]

After some more diagnostics, the flash memory is ok, and it's looking to be a software problem.

2106 GMT (4:06 p.m. EST)
"Spirit is still serious but we are moving toward guarded condition now," rover project manager Pete Theisinger reports. "I think we got a patient well on the way to recovery." In the past day, engineers have determined that Spirit's flash memory hardware is OK. A leading theory today is that a portion of the rover's software simply couldn't cope with all that was happening on Wednesday when the trouble began.

Source

Re:Spirit is indeed a software problem

[mrsev]

Bet they tried to compile the 2.6 kernel!

Re:Spirit is indeed a software problem

[Anonymous Coward]

"Spirit is still serious but we are moving toward guarded condition now,"

Wow, I think that's the first time it's gone from Red to Blue. Guess we took care of those damn martian terrorists.

the oil...it is ours, mwuwahahahaaa

Re:Spirit is indeed a software problem

[shepd]

>I suppose that Opportunity may have the same software issue.

IIRC, the software for each rover was independently developed, and therefore totally different. I might be wrong, though.

Re:Spirit is indeed a software problem

[bluGill]

Considering that Spirit seemed to work fine for seveal days, I suspect they will just scale back the missions a little bit until they figgure out what is wrong. If nothing else, since Spirit got outside succesfully, we can be pretty sure that Opportunity can leave normally.

The fix needs to be found (assuming it isn't some other hardware...) so they don't run into this again. However this gives some hope that they can work while looking for the fix.

Re:Spirit is indeed a software problem

[Jugalator]

Sounds great! :-) I mean, it could be worse and hopefully they can recover from it pretty well.

However, since this is a software problem they might not yet know why it appeared (I haven't heard they do so far), and Opporunity is probably using very similar if not identical software, well... what now? Another round of QA before letting it move off the lander and do its analysis stuff? Or just cross fingers?

Re:Spirit is indeed a software problem

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

A leading theory today is that a portion of the rover's software simply couldn't cope with all that was happening on Wednesday when the trouble began.

Yep. That's real-time Java for you ...

Re:Spirit is indeed a software problem

[avalys]

I realize this is a popular (and funny) joke, but despite Sun's claims to the contrary, the rover doesn't run Java.

Mission Control for Spirit and Opportunity does (quite extensively), but they don't run it themselves.

Re:Spirit is indeed a software problem

[orionbelt]

You are indeed wrong. The two rovers are identical (PDF file). And indeed, they are trying to make sure that what happened to Spirit won't happen to Opportunity as well.

Re:Spirit is indeed a software problem

[shepd]

>Why wouldn't NASA just develop the same software for both?

Because then errors on one wouldn't necessarialy be present on the other, perhaps?

It seems I am wrong, but it also seems NASA would have been prudent to use two different teams.

Re:Spirit is indeed a software problem

[Tablizer]

but despite Sun's claims to the contrary, the rover doesn't run Java.

And I bet they stopped suggesting it after the problem cropped up. Fair-weather marketers.

Re:Spirit is indeed a software problem

[cheekyboy]

Maybe they just forgot to write a scandisk program on the filesystem. And a basic diskscan/sector verifier on boot/shutdown with a proper boot.log that needs to be uploaded to JPL. ;)

Re:Spirit is indeed a software problem

[Greyfox]

The last rover they sent which actually worked probably used asm or fortran. Put that in your object oriented crack pipe and smoke it.

Re:Spirit is indeed a software problem

[shepd]

>And then fixes developed for the one would have no bearing on the other.

Exactly. That's the whole point. One is broken from a problem, while the problem shouldn't exist (and therefore doesn't need fixing) in the other.

While common problems can exist, it's about as likely as linux and windows having similar problems. ie: It has happened, rarely, but in the norm, never happens.

>Having the two the same gives you another identical platform to compare readings against

A particularly bad thing when trying to investigate something completely foreign. You want different units to check that the readings *do* come out identically. Any discoveries that are particularly different are suspect until another mission.

>you can apply it to the other as soon as you're confident of the fix.

That's no good if the problem turns out to be unrepairable. This one might be repairable, but they still haven't implemented a fix yet.

Fortunately, for more dangerous missions, NASA does employ a strategy of independant teams when building a Space Shuttle (although the independant teams are mostly separated by development and test procedures).

Re:Spirit is indeed a software problem

[meadowsp]

Object oriented Fortran

Well done NASA!

[Stween]

It's fantastic to see that both Rover's have now landed successfully on Mars (with Spirit to become operational again soon :) ).

This, that Colin Pillinger is discussing sending more Beagle II probes up to search for signs of life, and that President Bush has announced man will set foot on Mars within my lifetime, can only be considered good news :)

Re:Well done NASA!

[cygnus]

that President Bush has announced man will set foot on Mars within my lifetime, can only be considered good news :)

you haven't followed the Bush presidency very closely, have you? here's my summary:

That guy can fuck anything up, given a decent chance.

Re:Well done NASA!

[Alien Being]

"that President Bush has announced man will set foot on Mars within my lifetime, can only be" ... construed as an election year attempt steal some geek votes.

When Kennedy made his famous speech about going to the moon, there was a much better reason to do it. For one thing, humans had never ventured to another celestial body, and there was an international race to do it. In those days, space missions and inter-continental ballistic missiles were closely related. It was a relatively short trip to the moon, unlike Mars. And, it would have been impossible to bring back the data in those days withoug sending people, although CCCP did do an unmanned lunar rover.

Anyway, manned missions to other planets, while romantic, have little to offer in the grand scheme of learning about the universe. Spirit, Voyager, Hubbel ... those, IMO, are NASA's real heroes.

Re:Well done NASA!

[Stween]

I said he'd announced it, I didn't say it had happened yet, or was guaranteed to happen.

It's my understanding that with the announcement of men on Mars, there was more funding going to NASA. If they use this funding to make a design and build launch vehicle to replace the Shuttle, then at least some progress has been made.

Re:Well done NASA!

[cygnus]

unfortunately, the funding was nowhere near enough to send someone to Mars. which means Nasa has to cut other programs to keep up with the Bush mandate. this precipitated the Hubble Space Telescope announcement recently.

it's not clear that this wasn't a means of hamstringing NASA in the long run...

Re:Well done NASA!

[0WaitState]

Bush has announced man will set foot on Mars within my lifetime, can only be considered good news

Paul Krugman put it best, referring to Bush's Mars initiative when he said something along the lines of "can't we save a great deal of money and take the photo now of Bush in an astronaut suit?"

Re:Well done NASA!

[Mr2cents]

which means Nasa has to cut other programs to keep up with the Bush mandate. this precipitated the Hubble Space Telescope announcement recently.

In fact, the hubble sevicing mission was canceled because NASA intends to fully embrace the columbia accident report. When the shuttle will fly again, it will have to be inspected for loss of heat tiles. For the ISS missions, a plan for doing this can be established. Also, if something goes wrong, the crew can stay onboard the ISS.

For the Hubble, being in a completely different orbit, they would have to work out a completely different plan, and a rescue plan involving launching a second shuttle to pick up the crew should the first one be unable to survive re-entry. This would be used only once, for the servicing mission. Hence, NASA decided to cancel the flight and try to operate the telescope as long as possible in the current state.

I do agree with your view of Bush's talents, but this has nothing to do with it. This man has no interest in space flight whatsoever, it just happens to be an election year.

Re:Well done NASA!

[timeOday]

unfortunately, the funding was nowhere near enough to send someone to Mars. which means Nasa has to cut other programs to keep up with the Bush mandate.

I don't think that's unfortunate, I think it's good. 1) the shuttle/ISS aren't worth what they cost 2) There's no particular reason to get to Mars ASAP = "money no object". Let's give NASA an ambitious, long-range goal and fund at a level to sustain steady progress. Sending unmanned missions to Mars until we can do it repeatedly seems like a very sensible way to make progress.

The Spirit cost $400 million, which is a lot of money, but the ISS lifetime cost will reach $100,000,000,000 which is insane, and for what?

Re:Well done NASA!

[fenix down]

I'm not happy about this "within our lifetime" shit. It always strikes me as a bad sign when world leaders start planning their schedules around my death.

Re:Well done NASA!

[LMCBoy]

Well, NASA *could* design an HST mission that follows the guidelines of the Columbia Accident Report, but they are choosing not to. Besides, every astronaut I've heard from has stated their willingness to take the risk for the sake of Hubble. They love it almost as much as we (astronomers) do.

Re:Well done NASA!

[Mr2cents]

At what cost? The price of a new observatory? And suppose they are willing to take the risk and they all die. Is the public going to say, well, they accepted the risk, we'll just have to replace them. Or will the shuttle program be halted once more, delaying the ISS program even more?
I can understand your view, but even though the Hubble is scientifically more valuable than the ISS, the Hubble will complete his mission duration, it will get replaced, and the ISS is a monstruous international effort that the US simply cannot back out of.

Re:Well done NASA!

[cygnus]

i guess i can't speak directly to your info. it seems to be positive. but offering modest funding increases while grossly increasing the mandate of an organization seems to be a Bush tactic:

Bush Education Law Not Adequately Funded, States Claim

if the Hubble isn't a good example of how NASA just got hamstringed, i'm sure another will turn up.

Re:Well done NASA!

[Mr2cents]

I just cannot imagine those people at NASA aren't intelligent enough to realize this is election-talk.

So I guess NASA is playing the game along, saying "sure, mister president, now give us some extra money". Wouldn't you? I'm sure they'll make some scouting missions to the moon with it, maybe to find water at the poles. Only when you have those results further missions could be planned, IMHO. But to drop everything they are doing just because a baboon in election-heat tells them to, well, I hope NASA is smarter than that.

BTW, I got the info about the Hubble mission from a NASA TV interview with the head of NASA.. damn, I forgot his name..

Re:Well done NASA!

[cygnus]

But to drop everything they are doing just because a baboon in election-heat tells them to

LOL! nice metaphor. :)

Re:Well done NASA!

[Mr2cents]

LOL! nice metaphor. :)
It's just the perverted side of my mind :)

I don't know if you are an American (I'm from Belgium myself), but I have heard of the great financial pit the US is creating under Bush's predicency, newspaper editors over here even claim it's a threat to the world's economy! So how on Earth will it be possible to plan a manned mission to Mars when huge problems are facing us here? I think just returning to the moon will be a challenge! But at least it's more or less realistic, and a moon base would be more rewarding than the ISS (at least you could go out, around the ISS there is nothing but a big vacuum).

please don't drink and moderate.
Whoops :)

Re:Well done NASA!

[Mr2cents]

I agree that the shuttle program is a failure. If it weren't for the ISS, the shuttle program would probably have ended right here, right now (you can read that between the lines). The Soyous capsules are far more reliable in sending men to/from space than the shuttle, so that should be the path to folow IMO.
Unfortunately, the ISS is where it is right now. I think it's worth finishing, especially when you consider the international engagements made. It has a potential, but not when it's manned by a crew of three; they are mostly doing maintenance jobs. Maybe it's time to invite China to the orbital village? The ISS has a modular approach, so they could build their own module.. In retrospect it could be nice if different governments approached each other by means of the ISS. If that would be the case, I think the station will be worth its price, regardless of the scientific return!

Re:Well done NASA!

[Mr2cents]

take a look at http://www.space.com/news/okeefe_congress_040128.h tml
Incidentally, on the same page there is an ad for planet of the apes :) :).

Re:Dark?

[netfool]

No dude, aliens have much cooler things to do then lurking over silly little cars. Like, getting drunk off Listerine. Aliens LOVE Listerine.

Oh wow...

[GeckoFood]

...revealing a surreal, dark landscape unlike any ever seen before on Mars...

This statement wins points for profoundness. Unlike any ever seen on Mars? I thought that was the idea of the mission, to see what's actually up there!

Re:Oh wow...

[adlai]

This ain't too profound either, but of course, we have been there before: with Viking (x2), Mars Pathfinder, and of course Spirit.

I agree with the OP and the Nasa hype that Meridiani is damn cool and imho way more interesting than Gusev in terms of what the rover can accomplish (yay, Hematite!). I'm so psyched it got there unharmed...

Re:Oh wow...

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

This statement wins points for profoundness. Unlike any ever seen on Mars? I thought that was the idea of the mission, to see what's actually up there!

This is by far the most overrated Slashdot comment since Beagle II won't this year's Most Successful Embedded Device competition.

Re-read the phrase : "[a] landscape unlike any ever seen before on Mars" :

1 - Several probes have been to Mars already and photographed several different landscapes

2 - The landscapes we've seen so far were all similar

3 - That last probe saw a landscape significantly different from all the other.

Therefore, the phrase describe the situation accurately and you win your profoundness points back.

Re:Oh wow...

[Nanoda]

...revealing a surreal, dark landscape unlike any ever seen before on Mars...

Not counting stuff that didn't completely land, there have been three previous landers, Vikings 1 and 2, and the Sojourner/Pathfinder pair. Plus of course the Spirit rover, and Opportunity is seeing totally different things so, yes! It's unlike anything seen before on Mars.

This is a good thing. You can't tell me it wouldn't suck to go there and be all "Oh, these rocks again. Could these be anymore regular basaltic igneous and andesite rocks???"

Re:Oh wow...

[Jugalator]

Also, it's seen before since orbiters have mapped the landing area before. I don't think one should take that statement too literally. :-)

Re:Oh wow...

[timeOday]

That last probe saw a landscape significantly different from all the other.

What does that mean? Viking photographed the whole planet back in the 70s, at up to 8 meter resolution. I don't see how it could come as any surprise that the landing spot is "dark and surreal."

Surreal

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

revealing a surreal, dark landscape unlike any ever seen before on Mars

Or perhaps it landed right on top ot Beagle II, and that they see is the charred scattered remains of the ESA probe.

Re:Surreal

[Cranky_92109]

I know that was meant as a joke, but I can't wait until the day when we have rovers or people up on Mars who can go check out some of these things.
I'd really like to see what the Viking landers look like after all this time.

And while I'm at it, I'd just like to say that NASA has done an excellent job not only of putting equipment on Mars, but of keeping us informed here on Earth. Kudos all around.
This has really reinvigorated my interest in space exploration and I hope that it has had a similar influence on others, especially those kids who are interested in science and technology.

Re:Surreal

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

I'd really like to see what the Viking landers look like after all this time.

Probably simply covered with dust and with color paint and cables faded because of UV exposure. It certainly won't corrode with the very low amount of oxygen, and the total absence of water in the atmosphere.

This has really reinvigorated my interest in space exploration and I hope that it has had a similar influence on others, especially those kids who are interested in science and technology.

Agreed entirely. However, I'm a little sad that NASA puts all the hype on Mars alone. Sure, exploring Mars is cool and potentially useful for future colonisation programs, but I reckon that planets such as Venus (to understand how the runaway greehouse gas effect happened), Europa (to map whatever's under the ice, possibly an ocean teeming with life) or Io are much more interesting from a science point of view.

But I guess Mars-Mars-and-Mars-and-only-Mars is better than nothing to get people excited about space and justify spending money on exploration ...

Re:Surreal

[r00zky]

I know that was meant as a joke, but I can't wait until the day when we have rovers or people up on Mars who can go check out some of these things.
I'd really like to see what the Viking landers look like after all this time.

Well... we have some nice satellites up our heads which can make amazingly high resolution photos of our planet surface.
We could send one to Mars orbit and have a peek at all that probes. Or even make a huge detailed map.
In fact the european satellite actually there could have had such abilities.

Re:Surreal

[rebelcool]

However, I'm a little sad that NASA puts all the hype on Mars alone. Sure, exploring Mars is cool and potentially useful for future colonisation programs, but I reckon that planets such as Venus (to understand how the runaway greehouse gas effect happened), Europa (to map whatever's under the ice, possibly an ocean teeming with life) or Io are much more interesting from a science point of view.

There are missions in the works for these planets. It takes several years to build and test probes. There are also missions to one of the least studied planets in the system, Mercury, on the drawing board.

Re:Surreal

[mbrod]

I'd really like to see what the Viking landers look like after all this time.

I like to imagine, although it will likely be after my lifetime if ever, that we will build nice domes over these sites in the future to preserve them before terraforming.

Then they will be the memorials and history exhibits of the future of our first steps off of Earth.

Re:Surreal

[John Courtland]

I think they don't want to put a probe ON Eurpoa because they wouldn't want to interfere with whatever life may be forming/living there.

Re:Surreal

[bill_mcgonigle]

I'd really like to see what the Viking landers look like after all this time.

That got me wondering - who owns the old landers? If I built a salvage vehicle and sent it to Mars to capture and return a Viking, to sell it on eBay (stay with me here...) would that be legal? Does NASA still have a claim on it? Is it abandoned property?

Re:Surreal

[linuxbikr]

Don't forget about Cassini which will reach Saturn this year and drop a probe into Titan's atmosphere and land on the surface. It's taken 7 years for it to get there.

Re:Surreal

[bill_mcgonigle]

nevermind, somebody else covered this in another story.

Re:Surreal

[KoshClassic]

All these worlds are yours, except Europa. Attempt no landings there.

'nuff said.

Re:Surreal

[Artifakt]

It's the general consensus of rocket scientist types that getting to Io or Europa (both moons of Jupiter) in a timeframe allowing humans to go, is a mission for a nuclear propelled craft.
It's the general consensus of US politicians that the word nuclear is shorthand for political suicide, (except for a few politicians who think the same about the word Nukular instead).
So, it's Mars, for now.

Re:Surreal

[khallow]

I was about to mention this project as well. A couple things to remember with these projects. Mars is a high value target that is pretty close to Earth (the closest target with a good chance of life). That's why more probes are sent there than to the Moon.

Re:Surreal

[Anonymous Coward]

if memory serves this already happend , on one of the apollo missions , they went to the crash site of one of an earlier probe that hit the moon a few years earlier, they removed the camera , what was left of it anyway, and brought it back to earth!
i would post a link or something but i'm way to lazy for that...

Re:Surreal

[amightywind]

Agreed entirely. However, I'm a little sad that NASA puts all the hype on Mars alone. Sure, exploring Mars is cool and potentially useful for future colonisation programs, but I reckon that planets such as Venus (to understand how the runaway greehouse gas effect happened), Europa (to map whatever's under the ice, possibly an ocean teeming with life) or Io are much more interesting from a science point of view.

The focus on Mars is understandable considering the challenging environments of some of the other planets and satellites. Venus surface is absurdly hot and corrosive. IO and Europa have a hideous radiation environment that wrecks electronics. Europa's putative ocean is somewhat inaccessable beneath several kilometers of ice. These challenges greatly add to the costs of missions. Missions to Venus/Jupiter will happen again, but these Mars missions are low hanging fruit.

Re:Surreal

[dexter riley]

I can't wait until the day when we have rovers or people up on Mars who can go check out some of these things.

A nice depiction of this day is available here.

Not exactly first look @ Meridiani

[calmdude]

A high-res color picture can be found here

Re:Not exactly first look @ Meridiani

[Afty0r]

Can anyone explain to me what the track from the right side of the picture, halfway down, up around the main crater in the middle of the picture could be... other than a riverbed left by some form of liquid flow + erosion?

Re:Not exactly first look @ Meridiani

[Afty0r]

OOOOOPS, meant left, not right.

Can anyone explain to me what the track from the left side of the picture, halfway down, up around the main crater in the middle of the picture could be... other than a riverbed left by some form of liquid flow + erosion?

Re:Not exactly first look @ Meridiani

[rogerdr]

It's my understanding that these are ancient lava flows coming out of near-surface magma pools.

Using the images

[richard_za]

What are the rules for mirroring the rover images on your website - can this be done legally? I know the images are credited to NASA / JPL.

Re:Using the images

[adlai]

I'm pretty sure they aren't copyrighted, since US government info can't be by law; (ianal, of course). Thus, you should probably be able to mirror the images legally.

It is probably a good idea to keep the attribution to Nasa/JPL there one way or the other, since you wouldn't want people to think that was just a picture of your barren backyard.

Re:Using the images

[Anonymous Coward]

Ask and ye shall receive.

Re:Using the images

[Joey7F]

Do it all you'd like! You just can't use NASA in a way that makes people think NASA some how endorses something you are selling, promoting etc.

Attributing a source is always helpful though :)

--Joey

Re:Using the images

[rogerdr]

I've got to say, considering the oppressive nature of governmental red tape and other beaurocratic crappola I find this rather refreshing.

Space Flight Now has a color photo

[Jordy]

Space flight now has a color photo of the area which has a red tint to it and a decent article about how the surface looks like talcum powder.

Very interesting stuff. I think we should launch another 6 or 10 of these things all over mars after fixing the problem spirit has.

Re:Space Flight Now has a color photo

[kippy]

Very interesting stuff. I think we should launch another 6 or 10 of these things all over mars after fixing the problem spirit has.

I'd suggest sending 4-6 humans next. As advanced as these probes are humans will be able to do vast amounts more science. Not only will they be able to do in 5 minutes what it takes the probes 2 weeks to do, they will be infinitely better equipped to deal with the unexpected.

The tech has been around for 30 years. I'm glad humans to Mars is a priority again since dollar for dollar and pound for pound, it's a much better investment.

Props to the people on this project but I know for a fact that at least a few of the people on the Spirit/Opportunity team agree with me after seeing a presentation they gave at the local planetarium.

Re:Space Flight Now has a color photo

[tftp]

Don't forget that getting away from Earth is priceless :-)

Re:Space Flight Now has a color photo

[FosterSJC]

Troll, troll, troll.

First, the technology has not been available to us for the last thirty years... in fact, it isn't available now. Have we sent people to Mars yet? No. We can't even (super-)reliably get people into a near Earth orbit. And I am not going to spout the same old "how can we deal with the radiation on such a long journey" bullshit. Radiation can be dealt with easily with shielding.

The real question is, how do we get a sufficiently shielded (read: heavy) craft into space in the first place? There are two options for this: One is to simply attach a ridiculous amount of rockets to the ship we want to send and blast off. This is unlikely because it is expensive, dangerous, and just impractical in general. The other option is to build the craft in space.

Do we have the technology to build (i.e. assemble) interplanetary craft in space or on the moon? Probably not yet. Chances are we need the shuttle's predecessor to put the parts into space, as our current shuttle has proven itself unreliable. So add 6-10 years there. Next, we need a manifold in space, aside from the ISS, because God knows we wont be building any spacecraft there. So add 9-15 years there. Then add another 5-10 years for miscellaneous reasons (training, budgeting, technology snafus, big fiery explosions, etc). So conservatively, we will have the technology to send people to mars in anywhere from 20-45 years. This estimate, is, I stress, very conservative. I think 20 years could be tacked on easily, assuming we even want to go to Mars in 50 years.

So, in response to the parent, if you mean by saying that we already have the technology, that we have the ability to send humans to Mars, fine. But if you mean to say we could launch tomorrow, or in 10 years, I think you're crazy.

Landing on the Moon is far easier than landing on Mars.

Re:Space Flight Now has a color photo

[Waffle Iron]

I disagree. If we were serious about sending probes, we could send hundreds of probes over the next decade. We could set up robotic base stations staffed with remote-controlled assemblers that could reconfigure and service modular probes that wander the surface. The stations could be regularly supplied with shipments of new science experiments and rover parts. All of this would cost a mere fraction of a single human mission, and it could run any experiment a human could.

It may take longer to do any one experiment remotely, but we could get such a program underway in a couple of years, vs. decades and hundreds of $Billions before the first human sets foot on Mars. We would end up getting the results at an earlier date.

It may still be worth it to send humans to Mars, but we need to admit that the only justification for undertaking such a mission is the same as that for climbing mountains: "because it's there".

Re:Space Flight Now has a color photo

[kippy]

Troll, troll, troll.

First, you don't need tens of tons of metal radiation sheilding. The radiation is such that you can survive if the craft is built with the water needed for the voyage surounding the humans. a small shielded coffin/chamber is enough to survive solar flares. between that and advanced plastics you're safe. That kills the weight argument.

You don't need to assemble in orbit. that's the Werner von Braun plan that killed the Mars push in '91 and it's an outdated model. Mars Direct is a plan for launching directly to Mars and living on the land. It was developed by actual rocket scientists at the Martin company rather than Slashdot speculators and it's been adopted in one form or another by NASA, the ESA and the Russians.

Landing on the moon is easier yes but living on Mars is far easier. If politics were taken out of the equation, humans could be on Mars in 10 years within the current budget of NASA.

Do some reading.

Re:Space Flight Now has a color photo

[hesiod]

> If politics were taken out of the equation, humans could be on Mars in 10 years

Shit, if politics were completely out of the equation, we could be there already! Unfortunately, everyone (not literally...) is out to make a buck wherever they can.

Re:Space Flight Now has a color photo

[hesiod]

> we need to admit that the only justification for undertaking such a mission is the same as that for climbing mountains: "because it's there".

No, that's NOT the only reason. There may be valuable resources on Mars. Even though we can't use them yet, it is more than "because it's there."

There may be water on Mars (seems pretty conclusive, now), and therefore, possibly life. If the life is similar to Earth's life forms, we can get a better understanding of nature. If they are VERY similar, we can add weight to the theory that life very well could have gone from one planet to the other (or had similar origins elsewhere).

Maybe there is some element or substance we have never seen before? Maybe that element can make future space travel trivial. Or maybe it can cure some disease. Who knows.

Re:Space Flight Now has a color photo

[Waffle Iron]

As I said, we can find all of those things you're looking for without sending a manned mission.

Re:Space Flight Now has a color photo

[hesiod]

> As I said, we can find all of those things you're looking for without sending a manned mission.

Okay, if that's what your claiming, what does the soil feel like? Smell like?

Plus, manned missions can do things MANY MANY times faster. It took a few days just to move. With humans, it can be done immediately (or at least quicker). Humans also can have many different tests with simple materials, but these rovers can only do what it can with the electronics put on them. Humans can look at something in 3D, REAL color, and say "hey, this looks like such & such, except a foot taller." With digital images, we have a much worse feel for scale.

Humans can do things outside the ability of a pre-made program. See something wierd flash overhead? A human can go up the side of a crater. The object would be LONG gone before JPL even caught a glimpse back on Earth.

Basically, the latency is a horrible holdup to actual "real-time" science.

Re:Space Flight Now has a color photo

[Waffle Iron]

But like I said, the robot program could have a 20-year head start on the first astronaut to set foot on mars. Latency or not, you'd get the results sooner.

As for touch and smell, sample return missions could provide that.

Is it in a crater

[madpierre]

Could the outcrop be part of a craters rim. The pictures seem to show that Opportunity is in some kind of shallow depression?

What do they mean by dark?

[ben_white]

I'm not sure I understand what is meant by a "dark landscape." The landing site is near the equator, so incident light should not be less, perhaps it is in a crator, but unless steep walls are involved (which are not seen on the panoramic images) the landing site would not be darker (shadowed?). I would suspect that the makeup of the soil reflects less of the incident light, hence the "dark" landscape.

Just some thoughts.

Ben

Re:What do they mean by dark?

[Guppy06]

Not dark as in "less light" but dark as in "shade closer to black."

planets

[tsunamifirestorm]

"Opportunity has touched down in a bizarre, alien landscape,"
you mean Mars isn't like Earth?

Governor Schwartzenegger was there

[mikeophile]

He was quoted as saying, "Now get your ass to Mars!"

Re:Governor Schwartzenegger was there

[kippy]

His support is exactly what Mars exploration needs. Anyone who can terraform the planet in 2 minutes as opposed to 2 thousand years knows what he's doing.

Opportunity Gets A Hole In One

[WombatControl]

What's very interesting about the Opportunity landing is that they managed to come down in the middle of a 20-meter diameter crater on the Martian surface. This means that they can study sub-surface details that would normally be beyond the reach of the rover's instruments. Also, the crater isn't very steep, meaning that they should have no problem driving out of it and into the next crater over.

Meridiani Planum is certainly one of the more interesting parts of Mars we've yet seen. It will be interesting to get a better understanding of what's causing all that interesting surface topography as well as exploring the composition of the surface.

Re:Opportunity Gets A Hole In One

[castrox]

If they could drive out of the crater they are now possitioned in and into another crater.. why would it be news to land in a crater if they could just as easily land on the flat surface and drive down a crater :-)

Re:Opportunity Gets A Hole In One

[Anonymous Coward]

I bet not even Tiger Woods could land that shot.

Re:Opportunity Gets A Hole In One

[Randatola]

What I think will be really exciting is when eventually the rover drives out of this crater. As cool as the current pictures are, you are only looking a relatively short distance in any direction. Wait until they get over the crest of the crater and you can see for km's and km's... Who knows what that will look like? It could be a whole new revelation as big as either of the two current landings.

Where are the Watches?

[DumbSwede]

revealing a surreal, dark landscape

I don't seeing any limp, melting watches.

P.S. Arizona You're now considered "surreal"

Re:Where are the Watches?

[Artifakt]

Arizona has always been considered surreal by the reat of the nation. That beats what they have always considered Wisconsin.

Re:Where are the Watches?

[Tablizer]

[surreal?] I don't seeing any limp, melting watches.

Stop picking on poor, disk-shaped Beagle, man.

Re:Where are the Watches?

[Cajun Hell]

This just in -- they found out what went wrong with Spirit. It was auto-sodomized by its own chastity!

IIRC...

[criordan]

IIRC 'planum' is Latin for 'plain', which Meridiani Planum certainly looks to be from those pictures. Wouldn't it have been more worthwhile to drop this rover near some mountains, or like Spirit, in a crater? Seems like there would be more geologically important sites to investigate in those types of terrain. Also, shouldn't the heat shield make a crater of its own? After it seperated it just slammed into Mars without any kind of parachute. Is it close enough to reach and would it be worth investigated the hole it's impact created?

Re:IIRC...

[SalsaFrontier]

I agree that it would probably be more interesting to drop the rover near some mountains or other geologic features, but I think there may have been big problems if the rover was a little off its landing site. It could easily get smashed up if it smacked into a cliff or something. I'm no expert, but NASA probably chose these sites to increase the probability of a successful landing.

Re:IIRC...

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow im glad you dont work for nasa

it might look plain but they saw stuff from the MGS that made them think there might be some of that hematite stuff which could mean there was water (although it could also mean volcanic activity)

and since we have 2 rovers, we sent 1 to a rocky place, why not send 1 to a flat place?... and now it seems we've landed on the most intrest place on mars that we've ever seen.. For example.. WE HAVE BEDROCK! We've never had that before.. all the previous landers landed in areas with rocks and sand that could have came from other crater impacts and dust storms and whatnot.. this bedrock was FORMED where it is rigth now, its also in big chunks, so we can examine the layers and the history of its formation. Also the soil is really weird, its almost powdery and darker than anything we've seen before.. this is the most amazing mission to mars so far.

Re:IIRC...

[haighworld]

With the method used to land the rovers, you need a fairly flat stretch of several miles. If one of the airbags hit a large rock, or went over a cliff, it would have ended the trip pretty quickly.

Meridiani Planum is interesting because of the hematite, which under most conditions forms in the presence of water. That makes it a pretty interesting place to visit, IMHO. :)

c'mon

[TitanOfire]

we landed there first why didnt the robot come with an american flag planting deally? It could have sent back an image of the flag and been like "One small step for man, one giant leap for robots"

Re:c'mon

[BTWR]

the viking landers, pathfinder and rover missions (as well as the Mars Polar Lander, technically) all have painted American flags on them.

Re:c'mon

[DunbarTheInept]

Why plant a flag when you're going to be leaving the rover itself behind? It can *be* the flag.

Mars Raw Images

[Ghotli]

Here is a link to most of the raw pictures beamed back. It's alot of the same thing, but if you just can't get enough of Mars.

Spirit: http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/spirit. html
Opportunity: http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/opportu nity.html

There are currently 132 Raw Images from Opportunity. Spirit has beamed back 1,855 Images.
Enjoy.

the ground material

[rebelcool]

its considerably darker and smoother than the usual dusty red rust we're used to seeing and what spirit sent pictures back of. Take a look at the smoothness of it and the peculiar channels and grooves that have been carved into it.

On mars at least, we've never seen anything like it.

Re:the ground material

[sdo1]

I suspect those "peculiar channels and grooves" came from the airbags.

According to some stuff on NASA TV today (been watching a lot of that lately), that is indeed what those markings are from.

-S

Re:Dark?

[bluewee]

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/2/p/005 /2P126813974EDN0200P2213L6M1.JPG OMG RUUUUUUNNNNNNNNNNNN1!!!1!!11111oneoneoneone

Light story on the solar cells

[AndroidCat]

I noticed this story Mars Solar Photovoltaics Offer Earthly Hope on how the work into making solar panels for space is going to pay off on Earth.

Point green types who are anti-space at this. After all, it's not like money spent on space was shoveled into rockets and fired to Mars. (No comment on the proposed manned mission.) Think of all the work on light-weight instruments that perform under hostile conditions--Turn them around and monitor the environment on Earth. We'd better learn how other planets work, because this one didn't come with a man page!

Re:Light story on the solar cells

[CoolGopher]

We'd better learn how other planets work, because this one didn't come with a man page

No, it only came with man(1).

That's the problem.

Re:Light story on the solar cells

[nautical9]

There are plenty of techs that were initially planned/researched for space but also help directly back here on Earth, although I'm too lazy to do some quick googling right now.

The one I'm really waiting for is aerogel. Well, waiting for it to be mass-produced and affordable, anyway. It's insulation, weight, and strength are just incredible. (It was previously on Slashdot in the Time's Best Inventions of 2002, and was recently used in the collection of comet dust on the Stardust mission).

Pictures, F.A.Q., and a couple more articles.

And a choice quote from this NYT article, by aerogel's current researcher, Dr. Tsou:

"It's the lowest density of any solid, and it has the highest thermoinsulation properties. Though it would be very expensive, you could take a two- or three-bedroom house, insulate it with aerogel, and you could heat the house with a candle. But eventually the house would become too hot."

And it just looks so cool!

Re:Rover?

[calmdude]

Yes, a series of remote-controlled trains.

QuickTime VR

[Trillan]

I'm not exactly happy with how this turned out... but be kind, it's my first time ever using the QTVR tools. :)

Here.

It's on .mac, so it will probably be overwhelmed soon enough. :( Enjoy.

Re:QuickTime VR

[gerardrj]

Nice job. Gives a much more realistic idea of a crater than the flat image. I don't think the crater is as deep as your movie makes it seem, though. Is NASA just too overwhelmed with workload to put out stuff like thus yet?

Re:QuickTime VR

[xeer0]

Nice Job!

Re:QuickTime VR

[Trillan]

Yeah, that's what I'M not happy about. The original pictures make a cylinder, not a sphere, but I can't find the an option in the tools to do cylindrical stitching. It gives the impression of a deeper crater than it really is, and lets you tilt.

Maybe for the next panorama I'll be able to figure it out...

Re:QuickTime VR

[Trillan]

I thought about that, but it wouldn't fix the tilting problem. Still, I could at least make a letter-box effect with it...

But I need to head out for about an hour now. Someone will likely come up with a better version by the time I'm back. :)

Re:QuickTime VR

[wildsurf]

I think if you add extra "sky" padding on top to set the horizon line in the middle of the panorama, the effect will be more convincing and less fishbowly. Give it a shot, let us know if it works...

Re:QuickTime VR

[Tablizer]

it's my first time ever using the QTVR tools. ...Here.

There *must* be water there, because I got sea-sick ;-P

Re:QuickTime VR

[Trillan]

LOL! Yeah, I used the wrong tool. I just replaced it with the new version. Hit refresh. :)

New version: here.

Old version (for those curious about context of comments on it) here.

Re:QuickTime VR

[smart.id]

Try using Linux instead.

Re:QuickTime VR

[rogerdr]

Gorgeous! I'm not that knowledgible about the tech details, but for me it's like being in on the private chats of JPL. Your QTVR really shows up the fact that the bag impressions are on two sides of the lander implying that it juggled back-and-forth a little before coming to rest.

Re:QuickTime VR

[Trillan]

I don't think there's any panoramic ones...

Re:Rover?

[britneys 9th husband]

Not really. You want to land something on the surface so you can examine the rocks, soil, atmosphere, etc. up close. However, you don't want to send humans because sending humans would make the mission far more expensive (humans would need a lot more food, oxygen, and energy than a rover, and also the humans would have to be brought back to Earth). With these requirements, you're pretty much left with landing an unmanned vehicle on the surface. By the way, NASA has been doing an excellent job with a very small (by space exploration standards) budget. These Mars rover missions are among the most efficient missions NASA has ever had.

Monolith Fun

[Helmholtz]

I want to be watching when the tech turns on the high-pitched squeal sound right when the rover gets close to an outcropping that looks strangely like a large monolith.

Re:Monolith Fun

[Tablizer]

...high-pitched squeal sound right when the rover gets close to an outcropping that looks strangely like a large monolith.

That is the damned diet alarm my wife put on the fridge.

Re:Monolith Fun

[rogerdr]

No man, that thing isn't finished doing its latest US tour-last seen at the Burning Man and rumored to be causing bonethumping riots at Democratic debates.

Good News for Water Search

[schnarff]

I would think that, given that the landing site was selected for its hematite content, and given the extreme smoothness of the landscape (indicative of erosion of some sort, possibly water-related), this is the best chance yet we've had to discover evidence of former large quantities of water on Mars. Let's all keep our fingers crossed -- imagine what that'd mean for our understanding of the universe, and the chances of the NASA budget going up!

Not to mention, of course, our chances of getting free shrimp. ;-)

Re:Good News for Water Search

[frycarson]

Not to mention, of course, our chances of getting free shrimp. ;-)

Is this some sort of joke? Following the link...

"...will have an opportunity to obtain one free Giant Shrimp at participating Long John Silver's restaurants..."
no, guess not. But not as cool as all you can eat shrimp,
which let me down. And the rest of that Long John Silver's
thing is pretty odd too.
First seafood restaurant in space? Ran by pirates? Giant Shrimp?
I'm all for colonizing mars, but something about a seafood fast food restaurant sounding so excited about setting up a branch in space makes me think the human race has done something horribly wrong. But i guess then you could calll them space shrimp from mars, color 'em green, and profit.

Re:Good News for Water Search

[SharpFang]

and given the extreme smoothness of the landscape (indicative of erosion of some sort, possibly water-related)

Don't forget Mars storms. Sand blown by dry wind at 200+km/h, can polish any surface smooth much better than water - and it's common there!.

Re:Dark?

[devnulljapan]

No no no, This is obviously the dark matter we've been hearing about for years.

Only Left Pan Cam Images

[SmilingBoy]

Why do they only have the left pan cam images - the right camera should be taking pictures as well? And I find it funny that they don't try and send some stereoscopic color images.

Re:Only Left Pan Cam Images

[SmilingBoy]

Well, let me rephrase: I would expect them to prioritize some of the corresponding right images higher than all the other left images, in order to get a stereoscopic picture soon to estimate the size of the crater etc.

Re:Only Left Pan Cam Images

[wiggling]

Some stereo images are here. More are sure to follow, including from the panoramic cameras.

Re:Only Left Pan Cam Images

[dekashizl]

The Pancams have two "eyes", as you noticed. Each has its own unique set of filters. Read more about the Pancam here.

The reason you are seeing mostly single shots now is because they are doing a lot of "real work" at the same time as streaming back pictures, and they need to conserve bandwidth and battery, as well as keeping the commands simple for now until they can run full diagnostics.

Another poster already mentioned it, but check out Hazy Hills Opportunity Stereo Images. It's nicely arranged for eye-crossing stereoscopic fun. There will be many more to come, but they're just getting started now.

--
For news, status, updates, scientific info, images, video, and more, check out:
(AXCH) 2004 Mars Exploration Rovers - News, Status, Technical Info, History.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Rover?

[thorgil]

why return the humans...

A let of people would gladly take a one-way trip to mars....

and.... if you give them means to survive a couple of years, a solution to bring them home might pop up.

Re:Rover?

[thorgil]

typo...sorry:

a LOT of people that is..

Re:Fore!!!

[sirsex]

Yeh, but this green (well, red) has several thousand holes.

Venus

[Detritus]

Venus is an interesting planet. The trick is how to design something that will survive for more than a half-hour on the planet's surface. NASA has already done extensive radar mapping of the planet's surface from spacecraft in orbit around Venus.

Good news?

[ucblockhead]

Bush is not funding NASA enough to get men to Mars. The net result of Bush's announcement will likely be to take money from basic science programs like this to fund programs that won't result in much of anything. We've already seen that Hubble will come down a year early because of Bush's Mars program, yet he wants to spend 12 billion doing what the experts say will cause at least twenty times that.

Re:Good news?

[Stween]

I thought that the Hubble was going to come down because part of the requirements that the Shuttle will ever fly again are that it carries enough fuel to get it to the ISS in an emergency. This puts it onto a very different orbit from the Hubble, throwing out any chance of future repair missions to the Hubble. The Hubble will die before there is any replacement suitable for sending up a standard maintenance mission.

Re:Good news?

[sdo1]

That exactly the reason they won't be going back to Hubble. It has nothing to do with money. NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe explained it very well in a press conference yesterday (the press conference was supposed to be about the impending landing of Opportunity, but all anyone really asked about was Hubble and Bush's Mars initiative). Anyway, he said that in hindsight, those missions to Hubble were very dangerous in many ways. Far more dangerous than other Shuttle missions. The Columbia Accident Investigation Board recommended that for future Shuttle missions that it needs to be able to dock with ISS in case of an emergency. It simply can't do that on a hubble mission due to the differing orbits.

-S

Re:Good news?

[Babbler36]

Not only that, but they were already planning new space telescopes, such as James Webb Space Telescope.

Re:Good news?

[FussionMan]

The Shuttle Investigation Board should also investigate how to make soldiers safe in Iraq.

Space is dangerous at the present time. It is silly to try and make it "safe".

Re:Good news?

[LMCBoy]

What is the assessed risk of catastrophic failure during a shuttle mission, now that the CAIB has investigated the matter? About 2%. What was the assessed risk of a catastrophic failure during a shuttle mission before the CAIB? About 2%

The risk --even the assessed risk-- has not changed at all. NASA is simply chosing to be less courageous now. Why? Did anyone claim that the Columbia disaster was due to recklessness in NASA? I've never heard such a claim. Space travel is dangerous. We have astronauts who choose to accept the risks and achieve for mankind that which cannot be done on Earth. To date, the greatest achievement of these heroic men and women is the Hubble Space Telescope. Now NASA won't return, because they can't get there with significantly less than the 2% risk they've always dealt with before. Instead, they will sit back as one of the greatest scientific instruments ever created wastes away and burns up in the atmosphere, before its time. No risk, no reward. No guts, no glory.

I shouldn't say drawing board

[rebelcool]

Because some of these are in the "build phase". Like Mercury Messenger which will spend time around venus before moving on.

Messenger's Site

What are the challenges of a RAM-only mission?

[Demerara]

If the flash memory cannot be recovered - and it will take quite a while to figure that out - the team must develop new procedures to operate the entire mission with the RAM memory.

Okay /. - you have no Flash memory but oodles of RAM. You have to go to sleep when the sun goes down. How do you reprogramme Spirit to deliver the objectives in these, new circumstances?

I ask out of curiosity and humility - I have NO idea!!

Re:What are the challenges of a RAM-only mission?

[Jubedgy]

Make sure you keep enough juice flowing to have the little RAM bits remember whether they're ones or zeros....shouldn't draw too much power (since iirc, RAM states are kept through voltage, not current, so lots of voltage (relatively) with little current (absolute) means little power (P=VI). Unless things have changed dramatically since I took that class years and years ago.

Re:What are the challenges of a RAM-only mission?

[SharpFang]

End all your activities 3 hours before sunset, fill up your batteries and doze through the night, keeping the RAM on battery backup.
Reformat the flash with high redundancy, store your data in 3-4 copies, mark bad bytes and exclude them from further usage.
Set up bootstrap to aim the antenna at Earth in the morning, to download complete OS as the first daily procedure.

Most probably the first thing though. Just run on battery backup overnight.

Re:What are the challenges of a RAM-only mission?

[k4_pacific]

How do you reprogramme Spirit to deliver the objectives in these, new circumstances?

Interplanetary PXE boot.

Re:What are the challenges of a RAM-only mission?

[Narkov]

> store your data in 3-4 copies Lets hope that flash memory is cheap on mars. Hrmm...does ThinkGeek deliver to Mars?

Re:What are the challenges of a RAM-only mission?

[cheekyboy]

it has 3 types of storage

ROM , the OS etc... code that wont change

Flash, the new code/filesystem etc...

RAM, for usual junk like current files/images/temp files/status logs

ALl nasa has to do is send new code to go to ram, to verify the flash that its 100% ok, or mark bad bits, kindof like a scandisk/fix. Then continue as normal, but keep checking the flash daily and write better code to deal with stuffedup files. Maybe they just had a leak, or crap writeIO code that stuffed up the filesystem. Trivial fix /debug at JPL. Note: jpl, have more flash backup storage/recovery code. Flash Raid4 :) Battery backed up SDRAM too that wont fail even with 2months zero power. Get IBM to make that bouble ram again. :)

Re:What are the challenges of a RAM-only mission?

[dellis78741]

Actually, I think the 'ROM' is an EEPROM and flashable. If they conclude they have a permanent problem with the Flash RAM they will likely reprogram the boot EEPROM with the work-around. The latest comments, though, suggest buggy file system code - good because they can correct it - bad because for the moment Opportunity has the same bug waiting to spring...

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Rover?

[bluGill]

They would need to survive for more than a couple of years. Even if the day they landed someone found a breakthrough that allowed their recovery, it would take more than a couple years to impliment it.

That means we would need to plan on sending enough supplies that they could survive for many years even if we can't.

If these are standard astronaughts, I refuse to be a part of sending them on a one way trip where they will starve to death (or other death do to lack of supplies). These people are too smart and too well trained to throw away like that. I don't object to the one way trip, so long as they can keep busy doing real science until their die of nateral causes. There is plenty of science to do on Mars, so supplies are the problem. (Yes it is a high risk deal anyway, but if they die in an accident that is different from deliberatly killing them)

Now if these people were skum that we wanted to get rid of, I wouldn't object to a starvation trip. I'm not aware of anyone on death row (who really commited the crime he is accused of...) who is qualified to do research on Mars, but I'd be willing to send such a person on a one way starvation trip. I'd make sure there was plenty to do before he died, but anything that doesn't need human intervention isn't in range for him to destroy out of vengence.

In case of trouble NASA should get MAA

[saskboy]

On the advice of another /. user, I've invented the MAA to fix any Auto problems.
MAA

One question

[vlad_petric]

All raw images are black and white - how do they transform them into RGB colour ?

They clearly do a lot of artistic frequency remapping when they present photos of stars/galaxies/nebulae (i.e. convert invisible spectrum into visible one), but I'd really hope they do something more scientific with data from neighbouring Mars.

Re:One question

[iggymanz]

simple - they have a set of color filters they can put in front of the lens.

Re:One question

[Murphy(c)]

All raw images are black and white - how do they transform them into RGB colour ?

Excellent question, which was answered at least twice in the last threads on the subject,

Anyway, this page is really the best at explaining how it's done, and how you can do it yourself IF the images are saturated evenly by a common reference point.

For example, I'm guessing that these 3 images can be made to resemble "human perceivable" colors quite easily.
this on from the L2 lens (Reddish)
this on from the L5 lens (greens)
this on from the L6 lens (blues)

Please note, that I am not all knowing in the matter, I just followed the explanation from the top linked page.

Murphy(c)

Re:One question

[General Sherman]

That's not the main camera that's taking the pictures, it's the navigation camera which sends lower quality black and white photographs so the controllers can navigate without waiting for a 10MB image to load. RTFA.

Haiku...

[criordan]

First ever bedrock
Hematite means H2O
Dark terrain for Mars

Re:Haiku...

[Powercntrl]

Red planet gets probe
hopefully finds ocean proof
U.S. eats free shrimp

Impossible.

[ehiris]

Beagle II is hanging out with Spirit

No

[ucblockhead]

See here.

Re:No

[Stween]

Sounds about right. I wasn't aware of the backup Shuttle plan, however.

Article:
"One reason for the cancellation of repairs, Grunsfeld said, was the requirement that a backup space shuttle would have to be primed for launch when a space shuttle was sent to service the Hubble, a requirement set after the Columbia accident. NASA officials decided then that a backup would have to be ready to help any shuttle going anywhere but the International Space Station."

What was the initial contact point?

[reality-bytes]

Earlier news stories said that the lander spent about 10 minutes bouncing about in its airbags before coming to rest.

So does this suggest that the first point(s) of contact with the surface were outside the crater? (even a long way outside).

It seems like a really lucky shot anyway :)

Re:What was the initial contact point?

[Tablizer]

It seems like a really lucky shot anyway

Not really. If you roll around a bit, like the air-bagged mass probably did, you are more likely to land in a depression just like a ball is more likely to stop in the lowest/lower spot of a lumpy surface.

Re:What was the initial contact point?

[eggstasy]

But arent crater walls usually a bit more elevated than surrounding terrain?

Re:What was the initial contact point?

[Richard_at_work]

The earlier reports were wrong. The reason the signal seemed to indicate that the lander was bouncing was because the arial ended up pointing down, and introduced an interference effect with the signal from earth. This led to a beating type signal which some interpreted to mean the lander was bouncing, when infact it wasnt.

Re:What was the initial contact point?

[richie2000]

It was a hell of a hole-in-one. I wonder what par on the course is?

Too bad everyhting looks like sand bunkers and that Beagle wound up in the club house chimney.

Re:What was the initial contact point?

[hesiod]

> I wonder what par on the course is?

7,076,983. Heck, I would have settled for a double bogey!

Informative?

[Anonymous Coward]

+3 Infomative!?? WTF??

Re:Informative?

[netfool]

I thought the post was funny, but +3 informative is hilarious.

Re:Dark?

[floamy]

yeah, I concur. what's up?

Re:It's Official: Mars is Dead

[skatedog]

That's what we all thought back in '04. Fast Forward 50 yrs as multiple robotic probes begin landing all over the earth. What we soon find out is that back in '04 our Rovers disturbed an Ancient nanovirus long dormant in the martian dust. As we pondered the quick demise of our rovers the nanovirus was quickly overtaking the newly found hardware and multiplying rapidly and in increasingly complex ways. That's right, we created the "rise of the machines" and you guessed it....President Schwarzenegger we need you now......
And on slashdot, they scoffed that "mars is dead" .........coming soon to a theatre near you....Terminator 44 starring Arnold Schwarzenegger III and everyone's favorite martian, Marvin......

Corrupted flash file system?

[Dan East]

Trying to put 2 and 2 together, it sounds like the file system on the flash storage was corrupted by software. That could prevent the system from properly accessing the drive, prompting an endless cycle of reboots.

Two things about that bothers me.

Why would the OS / driver allow software to corrupt the filesystem?

If the system can function without the flash memory ("cripple mode"), then why couldn't the system properly identify (or at least report) the failure, instead of going into an endless loop of reboots?

Finally, if it were a software problem, shouldn't they be able to play back the exact sequence of commands to a duplicate machine at JPL and reproduce the problem?

Dan East

Re:Corrupted flash file system?

[SlightOverdose]

Yeah. All they needed to do is run scandisk In any software project more complex than "Hello World", you get unreproducable errors.

Re:Corrupted flash file system?

[Mr2cents]

good point. Maybe the flash memory is just mapped in the memory space. If the processor has no MMU, memory protection is not a possibility, so memory corruption can occur. I wonder what cpu is used on the rovers..

Re:Corrupted flash file system?

[Tablizer]

All they needed to do is run scandisk. In any software project more complex than "Hello World", you get unreproducable errors.

But "Hello Mars" is less letters.

Re:Corrupted flash file system?

[kune]

As far as I understood Mr. Theisinger, the problem is that programms and config data to operate the Rover are stored on the flash file system. The rover has no other mean to store data permanently. The computer is normally shut down at the end of each Sol (Mars day). So without the mounted flash file system, the Rover can't be fully operational. The software reboots after ca. 40 minutes in the failure mode. Now it seems, that they have to send always a command which prevents the reboot after 40 minutes. Probably they have to reformat the flash RAM, but before that the must transmit they complete flash-ram image to analyze, the cause of the problem. Transferring 256 MByte (2 GBit) over 60 million km is quite a challenge, even if you can compress it. Transmission for a satellite pass are around 20 MBit and the direct to link to earth (estimated 4 hrs a day)is 13 kbit/s maximum, which results in an estimated 182 MBit maximum per day. So we have a maximum capacity of 200 MBit per day, if all goes extremely well. So if half of that capacity could be indeed used for the flash RAM and the compression rate is 0.25, you need ca. 5 days to get the complete disk image. The real numbers will be of course different, but I think this estimation is in the right range. I think, that Theisinger's 3 week prediction before operational mode is not to pessimistic.

Re:Corrupted flash file system?

[sckeener]

Finally, if it were a software problem, shouldn't they be able to play back the exact sequence of commands to a duplicate machine at JPL and reproduce the problem?

I thought there wasn't any duplicate machines on Earth. I thought they were working with simulations.

Re:Corrupted flash file system?

[Curly]

Finally, if it were a software problem, shouldn't they be able to play back the exact sequence of commands to a duplicate machine at JPL and reproduce the problem?

Step 1: Make an in-lab copy of the Mars environment...

Cliff

[phrostie]

it looks like it is on the edge of a cliff looking out across the other side.

Yes he is...

[SuperKendall]

Unless NASA's funding has been cut, they have enough (actually more than enough) to get us to Mars. It's all a matter of priority.

Read "The case for Mars" to learn just how practical a manned mission to Mars can be - even for the government.

Re:Rover?

[Seehund]

If these are standard astronaughts, ... These people are too smart and too well trained to throw away like that.

Judging by the term you use, these people would be less valuable than astronauts.

Astronaughts: n. Expendable space exploration personnel sent on one-way journeys.

Hey, I've grown to like your misspelling. :)

Re:it's in a crater..

[jeff munkyfaces]

but don't let the article put you off.

A closer look

[IPFreely]

You can take a good look at the terrain on this 3D fly over. You can also control the path and view angles. Give it a try. It's pretty cool.
marsquestonline

There are also other Mars terrain flyovers, and current large pan and zoom pics from Spirit and Opportunity.

Water on Mars

[rspress]

If they are so hot to find water on Mars why don't they send a lander to the polar regions? Seems like all the probes send back the same pictures of rocks...At least opportunity gave us a different view this time.

Since the English probes have confirmed water on Mars it would be nice if we actually had a probe there to sample it...maybe even drop off a few species of lichen to start terraforming.

Re:Water on Mars

[Tablizer]

Seems like all the probes send back the same pictures of rocks...At least opportunity gave us a different view this time.

Images like this are so different from anything seen from the other probes. There is hardly an upright rock anywhere in view. It is also kind of odd that there are not more light-colored flat sets of squarish rocks in the distance, as if the probe just happened to land near the only batch.

Re:Water on Mars

[lemsip]

If they are so hot to find water on Mars why don't they send a lander to the polar regions?

There's simply not enough sunlight to power the solar panels in the polar regions.

Re:Water on Mars

[dellis78741]

Mars Polar Lander, which was lost in 1999, was designed to land on the edge of the polar ice cap and dig for ice.

Re:Water on Mars

[rspress]

The Vikings did not have this problem. They used a nuclear decay power source and lasted for quite a long time. Of course it is much colder there than where they are exploring now but if they have any chance of finding any form of life they must go where the water is...frozen or not.

Should be worth one probe!

Re:Water on Mars

[rspress]

The Opportunity site seems much more interesting than the spirit site...I hope the rovers do well. However the Spirit site, the Sojourner site and both Viking sites all look very similar. Opportunity has had the most interesting pix so far and I hope they continue!

Don't get me wrong...I love all the pix from Mars...one of the first spirit color pictures is my desktop picture. I also check the Mars site every day.

Opportunity lucked out and landed inside a very interesting crater. I just wish that with all the probes sent to Mars at least one should be targeted at the polar regions. Since there is water at the poles who knows what they might find. Sure, it is in the form of ice but there is water there and maybe even a form of life. Seems like it would be worth the cost of one probe to find out.

Re:Water on Mars

[rspress]

Well, it may not be so lost after all:

http://www.space.com/news/mpl_found_010319.html

I do wish they would send the second one like they mentioned in the article. It was and still is a good idea.

Re:Water on Mars

[dellis78741]

I suspect that the teaming of NASA scientists with the spy satellite analysts that produced those results probably has a lot to do with their current ability to display Spirit and it's accessories in recent MGS photos. The spooks taught NASA a few new camera tricks.

I've read it

[ucblockhead]

Bush, however, obviously hasn't, as "The Case for Mars" calls for avoiding any Moon or orbital bases and for going straight to Mars. Bush is calling for a moonbase specifically as a stepping stone for Mars, something "The Case for Mars" argues against.

Re:Rover?

[BTWR]

Now if these people were skum that we wanted to get rid of, I wouldn't object to a starvation trip.

I would object! Hell, I don't want some child-raping death row murderer (who admits/100% proven he did it) being remembered for all of history! The word "hero" is thrown out way too often, but Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrein were heroes for the human race. I don't need every 11 year-old for the rest of history remembering the name of Rapy McRape alongside Armstrong, Glenn and Gagarin.

comparison of rover ground images

[goon]

anybody notice the differences between spirit rover 1 landing site and opportunity rover 2 landing site? (high res) anyone care to comment on what the raw images may show? described clockwise from 12 o'clock.

compare the above images with this pathfinder image taken in '97.

spirit image 1:

context

flat, slightly undulating landscape. scattered large rocks. undulations appear to be lighter coloured/different texture.

12 o'clock

flat, slighly undulating granular surface punctuated with small to medium sized rocks scattered evenly. Between the larger rocks smaller fragments appear just beneath the surface causing convex bulging of the surface material. No craters. larger surface features (mountains?) in the distance.

12 o'clock

flat, slighly undulating granular surface punctuated with small to medium sized rocks scattered evenly. Between the larger rocks smaller fragments appear just beneath the surface causing convex bulging of the surface material.

2 o'clock

rocks appear shattered with sharp edges. larger rocks exposed appear untouched by weathering. material on ground has gentle undulations. In some instances the material covers the rocks.

3 o'clock

slight rises in ground material appear from 2 to 7 - facing in the same direction.

5 o'clock

jpl image on rover visible. rocks to immediate left and above appear to be pock marked. In these pock marks appear to be grains of martian surface.

8 o'clock

collections of rocks above and partially hidden in surface. rocks partially hidden show outlines below the surface. compared to 5 there are much less of the larger rocks. looking right to the 6 position just above the largest pock marked rock notice the collection of very small rocks just beneath the surface.

11 o'clock

trio of larger rocks at 12,6 and 9. inside these rocks are smaller rocks. shadows appear from the 5 position. Inside the trio of rocks appear a great many collection of smaller rocks bounded by the other 3. close inspection of the rocks reveal small mounds surrounding them at a short distance.

opportunity image 2:

context:
appears to have landed in a low depression. You can see the a hill on the horizon. The image is taken with the sun at high angle. It is just possible to see what appears to be drag marks against the flat surface. Another image shows the wind swept regular surface devoid of visible small rocks.

12 o'clock

we have what looks like undisturbed/slightly ground with smooth texture. resembles wind blow sand. No inidcation of rock deposits on surface. From this image it is difficult to tell what is original surface. However if we look at this image we see that the surface surrounding image is a fine textured regular surface where the only irregular surface is possibly where spirit has come into context.

2 o'clock

depression of surface that could be drag marks. area shows both smooth surface as described at 12 and scratch marks that expose small darker objects which could be deeper marks in the disturbed surface or small regular sized objects.
Note scratch mark in top left region crossing the previously created marks suggesting it has been made after the other marks.

New version!

[Trillan]

Panormic, with extra space up top.

Unfortunately, I couldn't find out what angle the camera was at, so I had to guess.

Fisheye lens

[smart.id]

Can anyone explain to me why all the pictures look like they're taking through a fisheye lens? Why couldn't they have used a better camera?

Re:Rover?

[cheekyboy]

CHina has 1 billion + people, a few wont be missed, and besides, new supplies could be sent every 2 years. And who knows, they might have enough tech/resource to actually start building houses out of the sand/stones using machinary sent there. Send 4 people at once, and send 3 large landers too that inflate a large living hab too. With that a small vehical/buggy thats solar or nuke powered, hell, even peddle power would be good for the astronaughts. All they need to do is bring enough plant seeds/material to start a greenhouse as well, take water out of the ground using solar powered techniques. And keep sending new supplies/tools/bigger inflateable hab units/seeds/stuff. Oh the only bad issues are how they will cope if its only 4 guys, do you send 2 couples instead?

So 4 launchers every 2years including new supplies for food/energy/plants and new tools/hab units, building materials/mining tools. And away you go. Start building a little town/base.

Now the trick is to find a cool place that is perhaps in a valley that has denser air/better rad cover and places easy to build caves/holes in for new 'houses' and also a place easy to land new supplies that could be 'driven/carried back' easily back to base, unless a tricker landing sequence can accurately land with in 1 mile of the base, but not on it :)

Re:Links

[cheekyboy]

THe gui needs to be better, like hold down CTRL and drag the view window to scroll instead of the scroll bars, wheres the harccore gui makers?

The app also would be ok on a 2-8gig ram box running at 3ghz, but not the average joes 512meg box.

[OT Nitpick] Re:Corrupted flash file system?

[Daychilde]

less letters

Nitpick: "fewer letters", not "less letters".

Usage: Fewer items, less stuff. Fewer letters, less word length (although "less word length" is awkward...)

Disclaimer: Not *meant* as a flame...

That is a *computer rendering*

[dekashizl]

FYI, that picture is a computer rendering of Mars, "created using Bryce and MOLA topographic data from NASA" (info here). Which is not to take anything away from it, because it's a stunning image, but let's not try to pass it off as a real photographic image.

--
For news, status, updates, scientific info, images, video, and more, check out:
(AXCH) 2004 Mars Exploration Rovers - News, Status, Technical Info, History.

Re:Fisheye lens (navcam vs. pancam)

[dekashizl]

Can anyone explain to me why all the pictures look like they're taking through a fisheye lens? Why couldn't they have used a better camera?

The pancam has a field of view similar to a human being. It is 16.8 deg x 16.8 deg (0.293 x 0.293 radians).

The navcam has a wider field of view for use during driving, and to look at the immediate surroundings. It is 45 deg x 45 deg (0.79 x 0.79 radians).

You are seeing pictures from both of these cameras, because they are using both of these cameras. The navcam gives the appearance of a "fisheye" lens. The Pancam is in fact an extremely sophisticated and detailed digital camera, and it has two eyes to create stereoscopic (3D) images that make you feel like you're on Mars. Wait a few days and you'll see some more of these images. Click the link below to see some of the good ones from Spirit.

P.S. Anybody know how to make a degree symbol in a slashdot post?

--
For news, status, updates, scientific info, images, video, and more, check out:
(AXCH) 2004 Mars Exploration Rovers - News, Status, Technical Info, History.

A Crewed Mission to Mars...

[OldEAMOperator]

Here's a link to a complete discussion of a crewed mission to Mars: http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/mars/mars_cre w.html

Rover CPU

[dekashizl]

I wonder what cpu is used on the rovers..

They use a radiation-hardened RAD6000 32-bit RISC chip made by BAE Systems. See their Press Release here. Bookmark the page in the link below.

--
For news, status, updates, scientific info, images, video, and more, check out:
(AXCH) 2004 Mars Exploration Rovers - News, Status, Technical Info, History.

JPL MER2004 Image Archive

[dekashizl]

This is another good source of images, here organized by date. It doesn't have all the raw images, but it has all of the press release images and some extra ones on top of that. Generally images get posted here several hours before they are attached to press releases.
JPL MER2004 Image Archive
--

For news, status, updates, scientific info, images, video, and more, check out:
(AXCH) 2004 Mars Exploration Rovers - News, Status, Technical Info, History.

Re:Mars Raw Images (on bandwidth)

[dekashizl]

I thought i read something somewhere about the bandwidth between Earth and the Spirit Rover being a ~100bps, so how can so many hi-res pics be sent back? Have i missed something here??

Perhaps you would be interested to read NASA's page: How Fast and How Much Data the Rovers Can Send Back, from which I quote:

The data rate direct-to-Earth varies from about 12,000 bits per second to 3,500 bits per second (roughly a third as fast as a standard home modem). The data rate to the orbiters is a constant 128,000 bits per second (4 times faster than a home modem). An orbiter passes over the rover and is in the vicinity of the sky to communicate with the rovers for about eight minutes at a time, per sol. In that time, about 60 megabits of data (about 1/100 of a CD) can be transmitted to an orbiter. That same 60 megabits would take between 1.5 and 5 hours to transmit direct to Earth. The rovers can only transmit direct-to-Earth for at most three hours a day due to power and thermal limitations, even though Earth may be in view much longer.

The ~100bps figure may have been tossed around recently during the debugging of Spirit, while in its fault mode, but this is abnormally slow and not used during normal operations.

--
For news, status, updates, scientific info, images, video, and more, check out:
(AXCH) 2004 Mars Exploration Rovers - News, Status, Technical Info, History.

True.

[SuperKendall]

But Bush also calls for taking a lot longer to get there. Either to mars in six years, or in twenty with a stop to the moon - moneywise it kind of evens out, I figure.

I'm also pretty disappointed in a moon base first, a mars base sure made a lot more sense to me than the moon. I'll bet we see private enterprise get men to Mars before the government. All it takes is a few dedicated people with a whole lot of money.

Mars is also a better stepping stone for places we really want to go, like the outer solar system.

One Percent Solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Do the Math. NASA's annual budget is $15.5 billion, and Bush is asking for an increase of $200,000/year for five years (that way he can say the word billion). That amounts to an increase of 1.3 percent in NASA's annual budget. Big? Big?? What's big about that? Is that even news?

The last professional estimate for a manned Mars mission was $500 billion and that hasn't changed. In the meantime, we've built a space station as the first step to Mars, but Bush is cancelling American participation. Make Sense?

What's changed is that this time Bush can rely on the media not even bothering to ask for a budget estimate, but to crow like stupid children "we're going to Mars!" Yes, we were, once upon a time when the professionals had control over NASA's budget, and California used to have a budget surplus too, until Bush's Enron buddies got their hands on the money.

Bush's rhetorical method, which he uses over and over, is to cover his agenda with an undisprovable assertion about some other grand project. So Bush cancels the Space Shuttle, the Space Station, the Hubble, the budget allocations for every existing space science project, in trade for the gooey phrase, "we're going to Mars in 2030," but meanwhile, NASA's budget decisions are to be made by a newly appointed committee of former Enron executives from Bush's administration. Look it up.

NASA is the next California, where a healthy economy and a billion dollar surplus ended up in the Cayman Islands accounts of the Enron boys, and the new governor is having to ask the people to borrow $15 billion from Wall Street just to fund the current year's budget. Big Mouth, Little Money, Control of NASA's Budget to Texas friends.

When Bush canceled Clinton's funding for hybrid car research, he made a big speech about the future "hydrogen economy" and asked for a small increase in Clinton's existing funding for fuel cell research. Big Mouth, Little Money, Oil Interests Happy.

When Bush wanted to attack Iraq, it was the undisprovable claim they had WMD. Ignore the professionals, fight for your agenda, get the money for your corrupt friends. NASA is just the next target on the pillage list. So celebrate the Mars Rovers and Shuttle while you can, dream about 2030, watch the cancellations, and wait for the bad news, because the funding for science is done, and the money is going with the Enron Boys.

Photos from the crater lip looking down on lander

[Quizo69]

Something I'd love to see from a visual perspective is pictures of the lander module, taken from the lip of the crater if the rover were able to get up and over the lip. Being able to look down on it with the crater in the background would provide the first photo taken from a position HIGHER than the landing site. Most photos of landmarks and feaures usually look better taken from either below the plane or above it, so you can discern depth.

Re:Has OPPORTUNITY landed in MUD?

[Chris Coles]

If I am correct, Opportunity has landed in a thin film of mud. Take a close look at the pictures taken of the immediate foreground in front of the deflated bags. To my mind that looks exactly like the bags have wrinkled up the surface of a thin layer of mud. The original surface has not been touched for ...how long?... yet, it looks just as though it has the surface of mud that has been rained upon with a classic stippled surface. Where the bags have deflated the surface is smooth in places. If this is correct, then NASA have hit the holy grail on first base and have liquid water right under the lander. Again, on the first images of the bare rock nearby, the surface of the rocks looks wet. I understand that when the first tests for life on Mars were done back in the days of Viking missions, if there had been evidence of water at that site, then there would have been no argument whatever that they had detected life. Well done NASA! WE, are not alone, there is life on MARS.

Re: Picture of Jesus on a taco shell

[some guy I know]

What am I supposed to be seeing?

The site is presenting "evidence" of alien artifacts.
By magnifying the pictures, the pixelization causes rectangular artifacts (heh) in the picture that make them look somewhat artificial, i.e., manufactured.
In addition, the site authors seem to have quite an imagination when interpreting ordinary but unusual natural structures as artificial.

Silliness vs Safety

[uberdave]

True, space travel is dangerous, but it is far from silly to try and make it safe. Granted, having a "must be able to dock at ISS" requirement may be silly. But, would trying to develop a better heat shield technology be silly? Would carrying some form of ablative epoxy that could replace a missing or damaged tile be silly?

Re:Silliness vs Safety

[FussionMan]

Yeah but NASA isn't developing a better heat shield technology nor are they providing a repair kit, they are limiting shuttle flights and later sacrificing the shuttle system for safety.

germs etc.

[Iain Morris]

I am wondering how many microscopic organisms might have survived the trip to Mars on the rovers, along with scientist's skin cells, etc. How clean are the clean rooms at JPL? This must have been a big concern during the building process.

Re:darker = late afternoon?

[hesiod]

> Why is it there are no nightsky photos yet?

Since these operate on solar energy, they are turned off at night to conserve power. Plus, if it's night, what do you expect to see? Black on blackness? It's not like there are any city lights to illuminate the sky as on Earth (well, we think so at least).

Somebody enjoys science fiction as much as I do...

[waltc]

How many earth microbes and organisms do you know of which could survive the massive extremes of cold and heat, not to mention radiation, that any earth-borne microorganisms would have encountered over the six-month, several-hundred-million-mile voyage to Mars? This is not to mention, of course, the utter lack of anything for them to eat for six months along the way (even organisms on earth which survive near steam/lava vents on the ocean floor, or deep under the ice, must have food to survive.) So unless you know of an organism native to earth capable of surviving such temperature extremes, and able to feed on radiation and exist in a vacuum, my guess would be that if any microorganisms survived lift off they'd have been long dead before reaching Mars. Then, of course, there's the life-killing Martian extremes of temperature and radiation to consider as well, not to mention the hardship they'd endure during the entry and landing on Mars.

I suppose I could envision some sort of strange stew that could have eaten the spacecraft along the way if it could survive on metal and pastic and survive the temperature and radiation extremes of the journey in a vacuum--but then, even in that case, the space craft (or critical parts of it) would have been eaten prior to landing on Mars--and the landing would never have taken place, would it?...:)

I think we are pretty safe from seeing the "Martian Andromeda Strain" anytime soon on our local newscasts...:) Of course, later on when we get to Terraforming Mars, we'll have to introduce a lot of earth-borne stuff, including microbes, won't we?

Re:Somebody enjoys science fiction as much as I do

[Iain Morris]

I was thinking more along the lines of instrumentation being "polluted" with compounds from earth, such as the mass spectrometer they use, etc. I wasn't suggesting we would introduce fridge mold to the martian topsoil :-)

freaking me out

[theCat]

The comment someone made, about it looking just like Arizona, is what suddenly hit me. It does look like Arizona. This is freaking me out. Look at the "approach" photos; there are windswept craters! We never saw that with the moon photos. This is so strange, in my mind it should not look like Earth but it does.

The Opp probe appears to be resting between some sand dunes, it could be any playa basin or even beach in the world. I half expect the camera to show some scrawny bunch grasses or a bit of dessicated twig next. Then scorpion tracks. Not going to happen of course...but expecting it is a big step.

Say what you like, it starts to freak you out if you let it sink in. We are on Mars! We are fscking there and it is ours to do with as we please. We can send any kind of robot, factory, mining equipment, greenhouses or prebuilt shelter we want to, tons and tons of stuff, have them all come together on their own power and dock, build a whole base station in advance, then send a few couples a la Swiss Family Robinson to just go and live there forever, have babies, study the place, the whole thing. We are there.

Re:Bush's Fuckups

[thelizman]

Lets see, what language do you speak. NOT GERMAN? You're welcome, fucktard.

You're An Idiot

[thelizman]

I'm waiting for some degree of factual information from you. I checked out your site - it's antiquated anti-American rhetoric and nothing else.

Remind me, how many volunteers did your country ante up for Hitlers Waffen SS? was it 700 or 800. Call me back when you've dismounted from your high-horse, you arrogant piece of eurotrash.

Re:Bush's Fuckups

[DrMorpheus]

Yeah, thank the Russian army for that. They did all the heavy lifting against the Nazi army. We Americans more or less waltz in just to make sure we could claim, "We helped too!"

Now as far as the Pacific campaign is concerned, yeah America practically did that alone. But please, don't make the mistake of thinking the US defeated the Nazis. That ain't even close to the truth.

Re:Bush's Fuckups

[thelizman]

Only four. But then, everybody speaks my native language, so why did I need to learn anyone elses? So...du kannst mein arsch lecken.

Re:Bush's Fuckups

[thelizman]

Hmm...maybe I should also point out he doesn't speak Russian. But, I digress - Russia piled corpses all over eastern european fronts for years, and didn't actually have any luck until the US hit the beaches. In short, you ungrateful pricks can thank the English speaking nations for your very existence (and a handful of french-canucks).