Did Titan Land in a River Bed?

Cousins.


Sam Wormley wrote:

md wrote:
"Ken" wrote in message ...

these images look like liquid running by the landing site.

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cassini-05m1.html




uh, Titan did not land anywhere. ;-)



It's all relative. :-)

I dont think so. You're looking at transmission noise and very
likely high winds (300mph?). In factif I see anything in this socalled
motion, I see debris moving around ... in wind?

As for the whole place being "mush", those impact craters on mush
are a new phenominon, and sure hold their shapes well!

Brian Tung says he sees "bathrub rings", as it were. (to the left).

David Knisley has not chimed in - that's a great loss. We need some
averted bison here!

~ pdf





Ken wrote:

these images look like liquid running by the landing site.

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cassini-05m1.html

While the wind can reach high-speeds in the upper atmosphere, wind speeds
near the surface are quite low. For example, from
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=15096, a surface wind speed of
7 meters/second (around 15 Mph) was measured.


"Julia's Cakes" wrote in message
...
I dont think so. You're looking at transmission noise and very
likely high winds (300mph?). In factif I see anything in this socalled
motion, I see debris moving around ... in wind?

As for the whole place being "mush", those impact craters on mush
are a new phenominon, and sure hold their shapes well!

Brian Tung says he sees "bathrub rings", as it were. (to the left).

David Knisley has not chimed in - that's a great loss. We need some
averted bison here!

~ pdf





Ken wrote:

these images look like liquid running by the landing site.

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cassini-05m1.html

Scott M. Kozel wrote:

"Ken" wrote:

these images look like liquid running by the landing site.

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cassini-05m1.html

Is this satire or is this for real? :-)

I'd say its just a way to get people to see the damned advertisement
Cheap and underhanded.
Eric
--
57 channels and nothin's on

md wrote:
uh, Titan did not land anywhere. ;-)

See Newton's Third Law.

(Good catch, though. g)

Brian Tung
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.txt

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005, Michael McCulloch wrote:

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 13:50:41 -0600, "Ken" wrote:

these images look like liquid running by the landing site.

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cassini-05m1.html

How so? It could just as easily be random image noise. Is there
something specific you see that unequivocally suggests flowing liquid?

From lower right to middle left or so of that image, there is clear
geographical structure that is not image artefact and there are features
that appear like difraction from liquid that follow the geographical
features and even seem to stop and bounce around pebbles. A flowing
liquid seems more likely. If I were in charge of the science for this
part of the project, I would be investigating this rather thoroughly.

Dominic

And just HOW are you going to do that? By now the batteys are dead or
dieing, no more photos to be taken and it'll be another 20 years before
another soft landing probe is sent.


--


SIAR
www.starlords.org
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord


"Dominic-Luc Webb" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005, Michael McCulloch wrote:

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 13:50:41 -0600, "Ken" wrote:

these images look like liquid running by the landing site.

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cassini-05m1.html

How so? It could just as easily be random image noise. Is there
something specific you see that unequivocally suggests flowing liquid?

From lower right to middle left or so of that image, there is clear
geographical structure that is not image artefact and there are features
that appear like difraction from liquid that follow the geographical
features and even seem to stop and bounce around pebbles. A flowing
liquid seems more likely. If I were in charge of the science for this
part of the project, I would be investigating this rather thoroughly.

Dominic

By studying the images that are now here on Earth. This could be artefact,
which should be ruled out, if possible. If it appears to be a truly
geographical phenomenon, etc, the nature of it should then be examined.
For instance, is this liquid flow or something blowing in the wind, etc.
I am quite certain many calculations will be made from these images. This
is not my field, but even I am making some calculations, so I would think
these images represent priceless gems for the planetary geologists.

Dominic


On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, starlord wrote:

And just HOW are you going to do that? By now the batteys are dead or
dieing, no more photos to be taken and it'll be another 20 years before
another soft landing probe is sent.


--


SIAR
www.starlords.org
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord


"Dominic-Luc Webb" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005, Michael McCulloch wrote:

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 13:50:41 -0600, "Ken" wrote:

these images look like liquid running by the landing site.

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cassini-05m1.html

How so? It could just as easily be random image noise. Is there
something specific you see that unequivocally suggests flowing liquid?

From lower right to middle left or so of that image, there is clear
geographical structure that is not image artefact and there are features
that appear like difraction from liquid that follow the geographical
features and even seem to stop and bounce around pebbles. A flowing
liquid seems more likely. If I were in charge of the science for this
part of the project, I would be investigating this rather thoroughly.

Dominic