Dust bunny returns under the lander!
Larry Shultis
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/spotlight/opportunity/b19_20040304.html
Larry
MarsMud
"Johnson took the visual color clues a step further. He measured the
visible light spectrum from the Pancam image of the "bunny ears" and
compared it to the spectrum of a sample of airbag material. The nearly
identical spectra are distinct from typical martian soil or rock spectra
and lead Johnson to believe that the "bunny ears" are, indeed, a wayward
piece of airbag material or something similar. "
Uh, is that to say that the airbags are white and the 'bunny' is white?
As Homer would say "Oooh Ahhhhh. V i s i b l e Light Spectrum...Does
this doughnut have a similar V i s i b l e Light Spectrum? Let me
seeeeee. Must look closer.... Must look closer.... OH! The doughnut d i
s a p p e a r e d. JUST like the bunny. So...therefore...according to my
V i s i b l e Light Spectrum Analysis, the bunny is a DOUGHNUT!"
"I'm so smart.. I'm so smart. S-M-R-T!"
Give me a break!!!!
Allan Robertson
bit information about objects by looking at the light it reflects,
NASA's explanation about this is very sound indeed. There is no need to
make a fool of yourself or act in that way.
MarsFossils
well. See ..
http://aix1.uottawa.ca/~weinberg/mars/Mars_bunny_Spirit_nav_045.jpg
This bunny was much further away from the lander than the one at the
Opportunity Terra Meridiani site. Its like a ghost that doesn't leave
footprints.
Maybe instead of assuming right off that it is a bunny, I think it
would be more scientific instead to refer to it as "lagomorphus
Spiritus", one of the order lagomorpha from the Greek "lagos"=hare; +
Greek "morph"=shape.
See the Spirit Navigation Camera images for Sol 045, especially
http://marsrovers.nasa.gov/gallery/all/2/n/045/2N130364919EFF0900P1817L0M1.JPG
http://marsrovers.nasa.gov/gallery/all/2/n/045/2N130364919EFF0900P1817R0M1.JPG
You might want to look at my Mars fossils page ...
http://aix1.uottawa.ca/~weinberg/mars/
I still think that the Rover rolled over the first bunny despite their
denials and cover up. That thing under the lander doesn't look at all
like our bunny -- unless he is there hiding and quivering in fear.
The whole issue very strange.
Best regards,
Michael
Marsf...@canada.com
Robert Casey
> http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/spotlight/opportunity/b19_20040304.html
>
> "Johnson took the visual color clues a step further. He measured the
> visible light spectrum from the Pancam image of the "bunny ears" and
> compared it to the spectrum of a sample of airbag material. The nearly
> identical spectra are distinct from typical martian soil or rock
> spectra and lead Johnson to believe that the "bunny ears" are, indeed,
> a wayward piece of airbag material or something similar. "
>
> Uh, is that to say that the airbags are white and the 'bunny' is white?
>
There's different ways to make light that looks white to the human eye.
And then throw in
the human brain's automatic compensation systems (why a color film
picture taken in a room
lit by florescent lights looks greenish compared to a picture of a room
lit by incandescent
light bulbs, and you didn't notice it when you took the pictures).
But the camera on the rover has carefully selected filters to get some
science
(spectral colors) from the pictures. Not as good as using a real high
res spectrograph like the
planet hunters use, but better than the eye. The landing pad likely has
some exposed air
bag material exposed, so you could compare that known air bag material
to the bunny.
Same sunlight lighting up both, and the same camera, so those sources of
confusion
are canceled out.
The fact that the modern Martian atmosphere is capable of blowing around
a lump of
fuzz should provide a bit of science in itself. Though the lump of fuzz
isn't well calibrated.
And this is likely not Mars-shattering scientific results anyway. That
it can blow
fuzz bunnies around without kicking up much Mars dust.
Joe Knapp
"Robert Casey" <wa2...@ix.netcom.com> wrote
> The fact that the modern Martian atmosphere is capable of blowing around
> a lump of
> fuzz should provide a bit of science in itself. Though the lump of fuzz
> isn't well calibrated.
> And this is likely not Mars-shattering scientific results anyway. That
> it can blow
> fuzz bunnies around without kicking up much Mars dust.
And it just keeps going and going. The navcam shot of it under the lander is
here:
ID'ed by JPL. The caption timestamp is Sol 7, 14:34. You have to enhance the
brightness and contrast to see it well. It shows up in the right and left
images taken at that time.
However, in another of the Sol 7 navcam set, taken at 15:53, a little over
an hour later, it's gone:
Joe
"Show me the bunny."
Anthony Mandic
>
> And it just keeps going and going. The navcam shot of it under the lander is
> here:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/2luxt
>
> ID'ed by JPL. The caption timestamp is Sol 7, 14:34. You have to enhance the
> brightness and contrast to see it well. It shows up in the right and left
> images taken at that time.
>
> However, in another of the Sol 7 navcam set, taken at 15:53, a little over
> an hour later, it's gone:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/2xuvj
That picture doesn't include the area of the dust bunny.
Joe Knapp
"Anthony Mandic" <i...@hotmail.com> wrote
Oh, it does. If you like, here's a couple of closeups:
http://www.copperas.com/astro/haretoday.jpg
http://www.copperas.com/astro/gonelater.jpg
Joe
marc
news:T2_3c.11191$t16.6...@newssvr28.news.prodigy.com...
I could be wrong about this - but : the second image
(without the dust bunny) is taken from a higher angle.
i haven't actually tried to work out any angles - but the
bunny may well just be obscured by the rovers deck.
marc
Joe Knapp
"marc" <b...@uk2.net> wrote in
> > Oh, it does. If you like, here's a couple of closeups:
> >
> > http://www.copperas.com/astro/haretoday.jpg
> >
> > http://www.copperas.com/astro/gonelater.jpg
> >
> > Joe
> >
> >
>
> I could be wrong about this - but : the second image
> (without the dust bunny) is taken from a higher angle.
> i haven't actually tried to work out any angles - but the
> bunny may well just be obscured by the rovers deck.
Don't think so--the rover hadn't moved and the navcam is at a fixed height.
What the navcam did was pan upward, and the same area underneath the lander
should be visible. The shadow is a bit longer in the latter image, at the
sun got lower in the hour or so elapsed time between the shots. Try it
yourself--keep your head still an "pan" your eyes around--it doesn't change
the perspective or parallax on anything, just the point of focus.
Here are the full shots:
http://www.copperas.com/astro/lbunny.jpg
Image info for 1N128816300EFF0215P1518L0M1.jpg
Spacecraft: OPPORTUNITY
Camera: NAVCAM, left
Spacecraft clock: 128816300 (seconds since January 1, 2000, 11:58:55.816
UTC)
Product type: EDR full frame
Site number: 02
Drive number: 15
Command sequence number: P1518 (PMA or remote sensing instrument) NAVCAM
Producer: MIPL/JPL
Acquisition date (Earth): Sat Jan 31 05:06:13 2004
Acquisition date (Mars): Sol 7 14:34:02
http://www.copperas.com/astro/bunnyl2.jpg
Image info for 1N128821177EFF0215P1515L0M1.jpg
Spacecraft: OPPORTUNITY
Camera: NAVCAM, left
Spacecraft clock: 128821177 (seconds since January 1, 2000, 11:58:55.816
UTC)
Product type: EDR full frame
Site number: 02
Drive number: 15
Command sequence number: P1515 (PMA or remote sensing instrument) NAVCAM
Producer: MIPL/JPL
Acquisition date (Earth): Sat Jan 31 06:27:30 2004
Acquisition date (Mars): Sol 7 15:51:29
Joe
marc
Your right - the full images make it easier to see the perspective.
marc.