Jump to content


Photo

July 17 - High Energy Activity near Maginus A

  • Please log in to reply
135 replies to this topic

#126 azure1961p

azure1961p

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10238
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2009
  • Loc: USA

Posted 16 August 2013 - 05:14 AM

Norme that's not ejecta its a pain't or blending tool adjustment via gimp or photoshop or the like. The odd smoothness Glenn refers to that is unlike the graininess of the original pic is the blending product of a photo editing tool. If it were real the same graininess, would be evident in a real plume.
That's the nail in the coffin as far as I'm concerned.

Pete

#127 Asbytec

Asbytec

    Guy in a furry hat

  • *****
  • Posts: 8052
  • Joined: 08 Aug 2007
  • Loc: La Union, PI

Posted 16 August 2013 - 07:09 AM

Yea, I gotta say there is not much in the way of impact ejecta evident. It's curious the projected impact point is that small bright rimmed crater (see the original OP sequence.) Before and after show nothing, IMO.

Glenn is correct, the resolution is less than the other two. And the 'plume' is beginning to look suspiciously like an artifact - intentional or otherwise - with "odd" smoothness compared to the rest of the image. Good point, Pete.

I really wanted to give benefit of the doubt, but I'm skeptical and now more convinced there's nothing to see here.

#128 sc285

sc285

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2008
  • Loc: KS

Posted 20 August 2013 - 05:17 PM

From Dr. Tony Cook on Twitter TLP list:
https://twitter.com/lunarnaut

The images were analyzed by a Dr Arlin Crotts, astronomer and professor at Columbia University. His analysis showed this to be no more than internal reflections in the optical system.

#129 GlennLeDrew

GlennLeDrew

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10501
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008
  • Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Posted 20 August 2013 - 06:09 PM

In my first post in this thread I wrote that my first impression was of a ghost reflection. I seem to recall at least one other respondent here mooting the same notion...

Of course this is merely a best guess based on the evidence. But it's rather more likely than a cloud of debris (or even gas). This goes to show the danger of rushing to a conclusion, and especially of ascribing properties to a phenomenon for which the available data are of poor quality and not supported by another independent observation. Not scientific.

#130 Rick Woods

Rick Woods

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 14391
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2005
  • Loc: Inner Solar System

Posted 21 August 2013 - 07:51 PM

In my first post in this thread I wrote that my first impression was of a ghost reflection. I seem to recall at least one other respondent here mooting the same notion...

Of course this is merely a best guess based on the evidence. But it's rather more likely than a cloud of debris (or even gas). This goes to show the danger of rushing to a conclusion, and especially of ascribing properties to a phenomenon for which the available data are of poor quality and not supported by another independent observation. Not scientific.


Actually, the only hasty conclusion anyone drew was that it was a hoax. I didn't see any rush to believe it was an actual TLP.

What sort of optical reflection might look like that in a system where there was no eyepiece involved, only the objective and the camera?

And where has the OP gotten to?

#131 Rick Woods

Rick Woods

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 14391
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2005
  • Loc: Inner Solar System

Posted 21 August 2013 - 07:56 PM

Hey, wait a minute! Go back to the first two posts. RobDob posted a control image taken last year, which shows the same light smear, just not as extended.

The OP's observation could have just been an effect of the light angle on an existing ejecta deposit.

#132 GlennLeDrew

GlennLeDrew

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10501
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008
  • Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Posted 21 August 2013 - 10:12 PM

Rick,
As the OP wrote, and backed up with a pic of his gear, eyepiece projection was employed. Not that a reflection is necessarily the case, but the kind of variability and irregularity in the image sequence would seem to be more in keeping with an optical effect than a physical event. The other very real possibility is seeing variation.

Indeed, where has 'troublemaker' gone?

#133 Louietheflyisme

Louietheflyisme

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 539
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2013
  • Loc: Australia

Posted 24 August 2013 - 02:06 AM

My conclusion thus far is that of an impact creating a dist cloud. Though I am by no means an expert astronomer. These kinds of impacts apparently happen fairly often, or so I've read. However, I remain open to deabte :)

#134 Starhunter249

Starhunter249

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 267
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2010

Posted 24 August 2013 - 01:25 PM

Post deleted by Starhunter249

#135 GlennLeDrew

GlennLeDrew

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10501
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008
  • Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Posted 24 August 2013 - 03:12 PM

What is the scale on that image? Not intending to be flippant, but if I did not know that was a lunar scene I would seriously think it to be a 2 foot section of ancient asphalt on the edge of a beat up road.

#136 Starhunter249

Starhunter249

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 267
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2010

Posted 24 August 2013 - 08:07 PM

I was asked to remove the NASA images. I forgotten about the rules. Posts deleted.

My mistake on the identity of the crater. The crater is actually a smaller one south east of Maginus (A) within the larger Maginus Crater. To give some kind of scale. The large forked shaped crevasse is about 200 meters in length.

Original blog: http://blog.moonzoo....cking-boulders/

You can visit these two links where I got from the blog from:

http://wms.lroc.asu.....0/M175308014LE

http://target.lroc.asu.edu/q3/

With access to the LRO images, who needs a telescope? Extreme large volume of images at your fingertips.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics