So I downloaded the high def picture and panned around. At first I was rather underwhelmed. "Great, another desert landscape. Good use of a few million tax payer dollars. We could go to Afghanistan and get the same picture for cheaper.", I thought to myself.
Then I just let the whole scene soak in. I imagined talking with a founding father about my life. "Sure, I've seen the surface of Mars. Blue rocks and red dirt. Mountains in the back." This really opened my eyes. This is a high def of another planet. I pulled it up on a computer that could hold all of the written words in the time of the individual with whom I was imagining the conversation. The whole thing is rather impressive and inspiring.
The images are a red herring. Yes, it's an inspiring engineering achievement to land a thing on another planet that can snap pretty tourist photos. But that is not the point. Science is the point. The sophisticated geochemistry instruments are the point.
"...Good use of a few million tax payer dollars. We could go to Afghanistan and get the same picture for cheaper.", I thought to myself.
Our daily burn-rate in Afghanistan would buy us a new MSL-sized project every 8 to 10 days. It would probably be cheaper to go to Mars but pull out of Afghanistan a couple weeks early.
The area toward the top center, where you can see the color striations in the hills is, I think, the rover's primary destination.
I played with it a bit in Photoshop to attempt to correct for the atmospheric haze and wound up with this: http://orng.us/faquvj which may be (probably is) highly inaccurate, but it does make it very evident that there are a variety of rock types and a good deal of exposed geological history there to be sampled.
Originals here, in some cases clearer than the corresponding spots on the mosaic. I suppose due to whatever method they use to project the images into a cohesive whole.
(Hopefully this massive browser-crushing 10,000x5,904 jpeg will shut up the endless legion of idiots who complained about "sub-iphone" picture quality.)
The endless legions of idiots are actually right. The sensor on Curiosity is of much power resolution than that of the iPhone. The way (as has been explained a million times now) that Curiosity gets a high resolution image is by splicing multiple images together. Just like a panoramic, or how professional photographers photograph artwork.
Obviously had the sensor been more modern the image would have had better dynamic range and less noise. However, as with the resolution issue, these problems are mitigated by the fact that what Curiosity is point it's lens at isn't moving, because resolution, noise and dynamic range can all be addressed by taking multiple images and joining them all together.
I hope this helps explain so we don't have to go through this again.
This is the first picture of Mars that made me say "wow" -- literally out loud. The image is truly awesome, not only from visual aspect, but also because of the amazing technological achievement(s) it took to obtain it.
The clarity of the terrain, and the mountains/hills in the background, makes Mars feel much more tangible to me; It almost feels like I was there to take the shot myself.
While stitching together the original images to a higher resolution panorama (https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B2Y0xU4gYdrLd1BFNXJiT1JacUE - 50MB, 31K pixels wide, do not open the image in the browser, but download it, you've been warned.) I noticed a very clear difference in brightness between the left and the right end of it (the ends meet in the middle of the image, since I was recreating the angle that NASA chose).
This looks so earth-like... I wonder if we could find a hardy bacteria (or a set of bacteria) to inject life on Mars and kick-start the process of creating an ecosystem there. It might take hundreds of years to get a tangible result, but it'd be a start...
Then, we just need to find the Aliens' Turbinium reactor and start it up, and bingo - blue skies on Mars.
I wonder what happened to all the water on Mars. Unless there were lakes of liquid CO2 or methane in the past, pictures and measurements of Mars' geology strongly indicate that there was a huge ocean and lots of river systems and/or glaciers in the past. The most likely-seeming explanation is that it sublimated to gas and was gradually kicked out of the atmosphere by the solar wind, but there are plenty of experiments we could do to figure out if this was really the case.
If Mars still retains most of its water in frozen form (perhaps trapped under a layer of rock in the northern hemisphere), there is a possibility that the planet could at some point be terraformed. Or at least that it would be much easier than expected to set up a self-sufficient settlement there. There is just so much about the planet we don't know. Sending a lot more probes would be a great way to start exploring further and figure out the answers.
Doubt we would see much progress on this front until the have definitively concluded that their is no current life native to mars. So probably a long way away.
Not to belittle the achievement, but what's up with the HUGE white stripes above and below the panoramic image? Makes browsing the image a bigger hassle than necessary and adds quite some MB in size. 11.5 MB for the full resolution image vs. 8.2 MB without the stripes (in PS saving at best JPEG quality) or 4.8 MB (at second best quality setting).
Something about seeing another planet in high definition makes it feel so very close. One day, people will sit on those rocks and ponder that horizon in person.
Top center/right area of this image definitely looks like a place where water/rivers/streams once ran. But I'm no geologist and these images could be deceiving.
Water streams or lava streams. But mars has been volcanicaly inactive for a long time now, and i am not sure which happened last, water flow or lava flow.
Mars is really disappointing when compared to the Mars we've seen in movies. Thanks to Hollywood my perception of Mars is permanently inaccurate and exaggerated. I thought it would be a lot more... red... and out-of-this-world like.
Honestly, it looks like Namibia, Africa http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SAC_Namibia-escarpment2.jp.... It looks so realistic and dare I say it, "down to earth". On one hand it feels touchable and visitable and on the other hand, boring and visually uninspiring.
Most of the Solar System tends to be dull in color; most publicity photos from NASA are significantly enhanced in the color department. The red of Mars or blue of Neptune are real, but a lot more like #AA8888 than #FF0000. Water ice and silicon-based rock are both predominantly gray, so you need a considerable presence of some other elements to deviate significantly from that. Even Jupiter's atmospheric bands and Great Red Spot are mostly dull browns, and pretty much everything else with an atmosphere is considerably grayer and blander than most photos lead you to think. Here's a few examples of the Solar System in real color:
It doesn't really surprise me. I mean, when I go to the beach, the oceans are sort of gently blue-ish. But when you look at the space photos, it looks like sapphire.
[+] [-] virmundi|13 years ago|reply
Then I just let the whole scene soak in. I imagined talking with a founding father about my life. "Sure, I've seen the surface of Mars. Blue rocks and red dirt. Mountains in the back." This really opened my eyes. This is a high def of another planet. I pulled it up on a computer that could hold all of the written words in the time of the individual with whom I was imagining the conversation. The whole thing is rather impressive and inspiring.
[+] [-] Sharlin|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pohl|13 years ago|reply
Our daily burn-rate in Afghanistan would buy us a new MSL-sized project every 8 to 10 days. It would probably be cheaper to go to Mars but pull out of Afghanistan a couple weeks early.
[+] [-] kellishaver|13 years ago|reply
The area toward the top center, where you can see the color striations in the hills is, I think, the rover's primary destination.
I played with it a bit in Photoshop to attempt to correct for the atmospheric haze and wound up with this: http://orng.us/faquvj which may be (probably is) highly inaccurate, but it does make it very evident that there are a variety of rock types and a good deal of exposed geological history there to be sampled.
[+] [-] dangoldin|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cwe|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cwe|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jakeonthemove|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] waterlesscloud|13 years ago|reply
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/multimedia/raw/
[+] [-] leberwurstsaft|13 years ago|reply
You can find it here: https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B2Y0xU4gYdrLd1BFNXJiT1JacUE (Use File --> Download, beware of opening this file inside the browser…)
Edit: Was wrong link.
[+] [-] balakk|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fla|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hybrid11|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hexagonal|13 years ago|reply
http://www.astrobio.net/interview/625/interview-with-bill-ny...
(Hopefully this massive browser-crushing 10,000x5,904 jpeg will shut up the endless legion of idiots who complained about "sub-iphone" picture quality.)
[+] [-] hnriot|13 years ago|reply
Obviously had the sensor been more modern the image would have had better dynamic range and less noise. However, as with the resolution issue, these problems are mitigated by the fact that what Curiosity is point it's lens at isn't moving, because resolution, noise and dynamic range can all be addressed by taking multiple images and joining them all together.
I hope this helps explain so we don't have to go through this again.
[+] [-] veloper|13 years ago|reply
The clarity of the terrain, and the mountains/hills in the background, makes Mars feel much more tangible to me; It almost feels like I was there to take the shot myself.
[+] [-] leberwurstsaft|13 years ago|reply
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B2Y0xU4gYdrLUU5iMEMzSUdYUzg
Looks to me like changes in weather during the time the pictures where taken.
[+] [-] mertd|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] swombat|13 years ago|reply
Then, we just need to find the Aliens' Turbinium reactor and start it up, and bingo - blue skies on Mars.
[+] [-] marvin|13 years ago|reply
If Mars still retains most of its water in frozen form (perhaps trapped under a layer of rock in the northern hemisphere), there is a possibility that the planet could at some point be terraformed. Or at least that it would be much easier than expected to set up a self-sufficient settlement there. There is just so much about the planet we don't know. Sending a lot more probes would be a great way to start exploring further and figure out the answers.
[+] [-] robryan|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] leberwurstsaft|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] leberwurstsaft|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mostly_harmless|13 years ago|reply
(amazing picture btw)
[+] [-] ceejayoz|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tectonic|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jimktrains2|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dakrisht|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Achshar|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] papalalu|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] option_greek|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] js2|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ChrisNorstrom|13 years ago|reply
Honestly, it looks like Namibia, Africa http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SAC_Namibia-escarpment2.jp.... It looks so realistic and dare I say it, "down to earth". On one hand it feels touchable and visitable and on the other hand, boring and visually uninspiring.
[+] [-] Gibbon|13 years ago|reply
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/image/planetary/mars/vikinglander...
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/wiredscience/2012/07/vikin...
http://mars.spherix.com/spie2003/SPIE_2003_Paper_GVL_files/i...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/37/Mars_Viki...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2a/First_Col...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Mars_Viki...
[+] [-] T-hawk|13 years ago|reply
http://whillyard.com/science-pages/our-solar-system/upload-i...
http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/profile.cfm?Object=Jupit...
http://pirlwww.lpl.arizona.edu/HIIPS/EPO/ganymede_g1_true.jp...
[+] [-] sliverstorm|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gosub|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] andrewfelix|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|13 years ago|reply
[deleted]