The face on Mars

Jeff Findley wrote:
In article l-
september.org, says...

Last night I heard an interview with Richard Hoagland in which he said
that the face on Mars could not be a trick of light and shadow since
it turned up in two images taken 30 hours apart.

Hogland is wrong. There are other pictures, from orbit, which show no
"face". Humans are "hard wired" to see faces in things.


Yes.

There is or was a we site at one time dedicated to to the effect of
humanity need to identify the unknown by building comparisons to the known.

Science even has a name for this well known effect: Pareidolia

I send pictures of three pronged power outlets which look like faces.
Religious people seem to be more prone to seeing the face of Jesus. Even
back in high school defects in wood used in woodworking was referred to as
cat faces.

The problem of false pattern recognition is even described well in
statistics as a type one error, and the larger term Apophenia is often
used.

Hoagland made a career out of the face myth, even to the point of
misrepresenting his employment with NASA. Dozens of books all based upon
the fallacy of false authority.

Hoagland was a contract PR person, never as part of the science team. His
actual contract was canceled after it was found out he had misrepresented
his qualifications.

In article om,
says...

I remember seeing a documentary on that face on mars once or twice. I
think it was aptly called "Mission to Mars".

The "face" starts to emit certain patterns after they try to scan it
with Radar, and they discover they have to respond to it in some way to
prove intelligence. When they do, a door opens and they find a large
room inside with pictures of the universe in 3D and when all is said and
done, they discover there was an ancient civillisation on Mars before
and Gary Sinise (or was it tim Robbins) gets encased in a blob and sent
through space to meet with that civilisation.

There. No need to send those 50 rovers to explore it, we already know
what's inside the face :-)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0183523/...nm_flmg_act_25

Horrible movie.

Jeff
--
All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone.
These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends,
employer, or any organization that I am a member of.

Bob Officer writes:

Jeff Findley wrote:
In article l-
september.org, says...

Last night I heard an interview with Richard Hoagland in which he said
that the face on Mars could not be a trick of light and shadow since
it turned up in two images taken 30 hours apart.

Hogland is wrong. There are other pictures, from orbit, which show no
"face". Humans are "hard wired" to see faces in things.


Yes.

There is or was a we site at one time dedicated to to the effect of
humanity need to identify the unknown by building comparisons to the known.

Science even has a name for this well known effect: Pareidolia

Definitely. Check out this old photograph:

http://www.yoism.org/images/JesusHead.jpg.

What do you see first? Now look carefully at what it really is a
photo of.

Michael Moroney wrote:
Bob Officer writes:

Jeff Findley wrote:
In article l-
september.org, says...

Last night I heard an interview with Richard Hoagland in which he said
that the face on Mars could not be a trick of light and shadow since
it turned up in two images taken 30 hours apart.

Hogland is wrong. There are other pictures, from orbit, which show no
"face". Humans are "hard wired" to see faces in things.


Yes.

There is or was a we site at one time dedicated to to the effect of
humanity need to identify the unknown by building comparisons to the known.

Science even has a name for this well known effect: Pareidolia

Definitely. Check out this old photograph:

http://www.yoism.org/images/JesusHead.jpg.

What do you see first? Now look carefully at what it really is a
photo of.


A family of four.

I used to restore old photos, so I developed a good eye to see what was
there.

I also used to take multiple shots and printed them out on different grades
of paper. You would be surprise what sort of details on could find. I
discovered an address which allowed the photos owner to Id a house.

--
Yep it is me, and Carole believes adding 2+2 can sometimes equal 3 or 5,
and getting wrong answers means you are thinking outside the box.

On Monday, March 14, 2016 at 5:11:37 PM UTC+13, David Dalton wrote:
Last night I heard an interview with Richard Hoagland in which he said
that the face on Mars could not be a trick of light and shadow since
it turned up in two images taken 30 hours apart.

--
David Dalton http://www.nfld.com/~dalton (home page)
http://www.nfld.com/~dalton/dtales.html Salmon on the Thorns (mystic page)
"You've been so long/Well, it's been so long
And I've been putting out fire/with gasoline" (David Bowie)

Pareidolia is a psychological phenomenon involving an image or a sound that the mind perceives a familiar pattern of something where none actually exists.

Though a compelling image can be used by the clever to fool the naive.

Here a sink is warning you of an evil water witch that turns kids who don't wash their hands into sinks!
http://www.scaryforkids.com/pics/faces-in-things.jpg

Or that the mailbox gods are angry at you for not picking up your mail.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...eb0adbd3f5.jpg

Or that your tribe is watched over by an ancient goddess...
http://cdn.coresites.factorymedia.co...5/Faces-13.jpg

Or that gawd is letting you know you are being watched and looked after, always
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...a66050ceef.jpg

There was a person who used to post here who saw all sorts of things on the radar images of Venus. Brad Guth.

Insterest in Venus rose after he died. Saturday March 19 is Brad Guth's birthday btw.

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/12/23/te...us-blimp-city/

His websites are still maintained in several locations.

http://guthvenus.tripod.com

"bob haller" wrote in message
...




plus if we were able to send 50 spirits, the info they return could be
archived, no need to study it all in real time....

so whats the rush.

Exactly, so what's the rush. If you're not going to analyze it now and
simply store it for later, why not wait until later when you CAN analyze
all
that data and launch then?

Also, what exactly do you want to learn that Spirit or Opportunity clones
will tell you? i.e. what is your goal. You're planning on spending
billions w/o an actual goal. That's as bad as SLS.

Once you have a specific goal, then you can optimize for that goal.


just skim it for important stuff, and then keep people busy for a
generation

What's important?


with a large amount of data, it can make future landing site choices
return more data.

Huh? Again, what data exactly are you looking for. Be specific.



picking landing sites for future robot explorers, and human missions

How will a rover with limited range beat out on finding this from orbit?

At the point we're planning actual crewed missions, we'll either have the
data we need, or build specialized landers for just that. Dozens of MER
"class" rovers won't be much good.


hey it looks like active water here, lets follow up with a robotic deep
well drillng rig.

Neither Opportunity nor Discovery have this capability. So you're talking a
whole new lander.

hey these rocks look interesting lets collect and send back to earth.

Neither Opportunity nor Spirit have this capability. So you're talking a
whole new lander.


with a entire planet to explore why not take a closer look. like the face
on mars, go check the old viking landers, how have they stood up to the
martian enviironment? good to know before humans arrive. land near some of
the crashed failed missions, might be something to learn from the debris

so how are the poles different?

a million questions and no doubt more landers would provide more queestions

But again, what you proposed was 50 Spirit/Opportunity probes, which can't
do any of this. Get your wishes straight.

--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net

the low cost spirits scope out areas for more aggresive exploration.

in the case of signs of water.....

spirit says heres a good area,

later landers do the landings

On Saturday, March 19, 2016 at 8:51:37 AM UTC+13, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:
"bob haller" wrote in message
...




plus if we were able to send 50 spirits, the info they return could be
archived, no need to study it all in real time....

so whats the rush.

Exactly, so what's the rush. If you're not going to analyze it now and
simply store it for later, why not wait until later when you CAN analyze
all
that data and launch then?

Also, what exactly do you want to learn that Spirit or Opportunity clones
will tell you? i.e. what is your goal. You're planning on spending
billions w/o an actual goal. That's as bad as SLS.

Once you have a specific goal, then you can optimize for that goal.


just skim it for important stuff, and then keep people busy for a
generation

What's important?


with a large amount of data, it can make future landing site choices
return more data.

Huh? Again, what data exactly are you looking for. Be specific.



picking landing sites for future robot explorers, and human missions

How will a rover with limited range beat out on finding this from orbit?

At the point we're planning actual crewed missions, we'll either have the
data we need, or build specialized landers for just that. Dozens of MER
"class" rovers won't be much good.


hey it looks like active water here, lets follow up with a robotic deep
well drillng rig.

Neither Opportunity nor Discovery have this capability. So you're talking a
whole new lander.

hey these rocks look interesting lets collect and send back to earth.

Neither Opportunity nor Spirit have this capability. So you're talking a
whole new lander.


with a entire planet to explore why not take a closer look. like the face
on mars, go check the old viking landers, how have they stood up to the
martian enviironment? good to know before humans arrive. land near some of
the crashed failed missions, might be something to learn from the debris

so how are the poles different?

a million questions and no doubt more landers would provide more queestions

But again, what you proposed was 50 Spirit/Opportunity probes, which can't
do any of this. Get your wishes straight.

--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net

Mars Airplane
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/armstron..._airplane.html

Advanced control systems
http://www.idsc.ethz.ch/research-dandrea.html

Tailsitter Design
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JModZfnVAv4

We're looking at the last one to build a one passenger hybrid powered tail sitter that will be sold to yacht owners that want a rapid way to fly from the ship to shore, or from ship to ship.

A small array of solar powered

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pip.360/full
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/5...t-solar-power/
http://www.google.com/patents/US20050051205

We've achieved 85% efficiency in the lab with solar panels, and very high energy dense batteries,

http://cleantechnica.com/2014/07/30/...nergy-density/
http://phys.org/news/2015-10-path-ultimate-battery.html

Aircraft wingspan is 610 mm and weighs 1.2 kg which requires 4.47 Newtons of force to lift on Mars. A 600 kg payload entering Mars' atmosphere could deploy a swarm of 500 aircraft, that could also operate in a patterned swarm to create a large phased array to communicate with Earth!

With a 16 to 1 aspect ratio average surface area is 0.0244 sq m. On a typical Martian day the wing has a surface area that when covered with thin film solar cells, and filled with high energy density lithium-cobalt batteries, produce 4.8 watts at the peak, and 2.4 watts average over the day and night.

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...rs_Exploration

1.2 Watts are required to maintain 5 Newtons of thrust, and with a L/D ratio of 20:1 far less than that is required to glide in the Martian atmosphere.. This leaves between 1.2 Watts and 2.2 Watts available for other uses.

The region around the Face on Mars is about 25 sq km. So, at 16 drones per sq km we have a coverage of 31.25 sq km and a separation of 250 meters.

http://petapixel.com/2015/07/18/e1-t...rds-4k-camera/

With two 16 megapixel cameras, one on each wing tip, a stereoscopic image with a 6 cm resolution of the ground is possible across the region each aircraft flies over. At an altitude of 327 meters and a field of view of 45 degrees gives a 250 meter field of view. A 20x zoom lens allows zooming in to 3 mm resolution without a change of altitude.

http://flyingmachinearena.org/wp-con...ennaArrays.pdf

Phased array antennae elements aboard swarms of drone aircraft may be made to communicate efficiently with Earth, and also produce accurate ground penetrating radar images beneath the Martian surface.

At 45 m/sec (161 kph, 100 mph) - it takes 133 hours to fly around Mars and arrive back at the point you started. 500 drones separated by 250 meters - in two lines each 62.5 km long - can cover the entire surface in 86 weeks down to a resolution of 6 cm! The line forms and spirals outward, covering a swath 62.5 km long. A single line 125 km long can cover the entire surface in half the time to the same resolution. 43 weeks after entry.

Air sampling, combined with extended colour range and ground penetrating radar data, wind data, temperature data, etc., would provide a rather complete picture of the planet

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CR5y8qZf0Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6b4ZZQkcNEo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvRTALJp8DM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4lPkAlyIVw

Small surface drones are dropped by the aircraft in the swarm, and retrieved by them after a surface reconnoiter and inspection. At 1.2 kg mass budget for each drone extra drones are tasked with high risk maneuvers for detailed inspections of interiors revealed by ground penetrating radars as well as provide back up capacity for the swarm.

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

With an ability to send 12 ton payload to Mars, the Falcon Heavy could send 10,000 drones to the Red Planet. Or, dividing this in half, for surface operations and half for orbiting communications network, this is 5,000 drones in a single launch, and three 2 ton communications satellites in a mars synchronous orbit 17,000 km above the Martian surface.

So, a SpaceX sponsored Mars surveillance mission would consist of;

5,000 solar powered tail sitter drones with 'sand flea' type surface units, 1.2 kg each
3 Mars synchronous satellites, 2000 kg each, that communicate with the 5,000 tail sitters.

The 5,000 are dropped into the Martian atmosphere, slow down, and fly in an array that surveils the entire Martian surface to a 6 cm resolution every 9 weeks, and performs more detailed survey of selected spots as it passes overhead using the considerable capacity of the swarm. The swarm flies a loxodromic spiral

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...e114f75f18.jpg

around Mars every 9 weeks. Allowing up to 4 weeks for loitering at selected spots along each spiral path, data is transmitted to the orbiting satellite array and thence to Earth. There it is analysed, and targets are chosen along with detailed surveillance approaches. So, the martian surface is analysed in detail four to five times per year.

So, 8 to 10 maps are prepared each synodic period.