Announcement

Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dark Cavern Found On Mars

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Yeah Jim, I agree. This latest photo just reinforces what was initially thought. The fact NASA have even taken such a detailed image of it shows how interested they are.

    Be good if they can time a photo for when the sun is directly above. We'll be able to see much more then.

    Ray

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Ray Palmer View Post

      Be good if they can time a photo for when the sun is directly above. We'll be able to see much more then.

      Ray
      It depends how deep it is Ray.

      One of my all time favorite movies is 'Journey to the Centre of the Earth'. This hole on Mars makes me think about that movie. Who knows maybe now
      that they found this hole they might make another Mars SciFi.

      Comment


      • #18
        Yeah would make a good concept for a movie Ed. I've seen that classic movie you mention though, great flick. Those oldies are awesome. With Mars no longer having any kind of volcanic activity, you probably could venture to the centre of it.

        Ray

        Comment


        • #19
          long time no see mate. I for one would not be going into that dark hole. good chance of finding water down there though

          Comment


          • #20
            G'day buddy. Yeah it's been a while. It would be interesting to pop a camera down and see what lies beneath. I'm sure Mars Global surveyor will be bouncing radar of it soon to figure out what the base consists of. Pretty interesting though.

            Ray

            Comment


            • #21
              This argumenti is very intriguing.
              I created a web page some months ago, after first image release:
              http://lc84.altervista.org/marte/buchi%20marte.html (sorry, only italian...)

              I was really "sure" it was a lake. Now I have some doubts; but I didn't deeply examined both images yet.

              Anyway, here they are a couple of useful infos for those who like continuing investigations!

              First image: http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/PSP_003647_1745
              Detail: http://hiroc.lpl.arizona.edu/images/...1745_cut_b.jpg
              Data:
              Acquisition date: 5 May 2007
              Local Mars time: 3:27 PM
              Latitude (centered): -5.5 °
              Longitude (East): 241.4 °
              Range to target site: 252.5 km (157.8 miles)
              Emission angle: 0.6 °
              Phase angle: 51.7 °
              Solar incidence angle: 52 °, with the Sun about 38 ° above the horizon
              Solar longitude: 233.4 °, Northern Autumn



              Second image: http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/PSP_004847_1745
              Detail: http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/images...1745_cut_b.jpg
              Data:
              Acquisition date: 8 August 2007
              Local Mars time: 2:34 PM
              Latitude (centered): -5.5 °
              Longitude (East): 241.4 °
              Range to target site: 263.5 km (164.7 miles)
              Emission angle: 17.7 °
              Phase angle: 25.5 °
              Solar incidence angle: 41 °, with the Sun about 49 ° above the horizon
              Solar longitude: 292.1 °, Northern Winter

              Question1: What are "Emission angle" and "phase angle"?
              Question2: Having been shot from different longitudes, could the images be used to create an anaglyph? (Just for the border, of course)

              Comment


              • #22
                By resizing and cutting old and new images, I obtained two "overlappable" images, which allow easy comparisons:
                old image (just cut)
                new image (cut and rotated)

                Are we looking at a TUNNEL??? Going down in the ground while going to the left?!?

                edit: fixed image links
                Last edited by jumpjack; September 20th, 2007, 01:08 AM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  First image data:
                  GROUP = VIEWING_PARAMETERS
                  INCIDENCE_ANGLE = 52.334825 <DEG>
                  EMISSION_ANGLE = 0.626095 <DEG>
                  PHASE_ANGLE = 51.723667 <DEG>
                  LOCAL_TIME = 15.45518 <LOCALDAY/24>
                  SOLAR_LONGITUDE = 233.400806 <DEG>
                  SUB_SOLAR_AZIMUTH = 158.979396 <DEG>
                  NORTH_AZIMUTH = 270.000000 <DEG>
                  END_GROUP = VIEWING_PARAMETERS

                  Second image data:
                  GROUP = VIEWING_PARAMETERS
                  INCIDENCE_ANGLE = 41.168794 <DEG>
                  EMISSION_ANGLE = 17.705339 <DEG>
                  PHASE_ANGLE = 25.519371 <DEG>
                  LOCAL_TIME = 14.57412 <LOCALDAY/24>
                  SOLAR_LONGITUDE = 292.105117 <DEG>
                  SUB_SOLAR_AZIMUTH = 150.615206 <DEG>
                  NORTH_AZIMUTH = 270.000002 <DEG>
                  END_GROUP = VIEWING_PARAMETERS


                  How should I use these data???
                  How can I plot a line on the image, to show the sun direction?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by jumpjack View Post
                    First image data:
                    How should I use these data???
                    How can I plot a line on the image, to show the sun direction?
                    ah, ok:
                    http://isis.astrogeology.usgs.gov/Ap...isedrinfo.html

                    Ok, sorry, I'll stop posting till further reading/studyng the images :)

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      SO, here it is the result of my study on new image:


                      Original image for comparison:



                      It really looks like a tunnel! Or, anyway, a very deep crater with very steep borders!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        great pic's there jumpin jack,

                        That baby's about 160m across,you can easily fit two Boeing 747's in there.

                        I haven't read any of the scientific theories yet,but looks like due to the over-hang in the lower right of the pic it would almost have to have been created by the falling away of the soil? from underneath.Also all the way around the circumference there is a slight sloping of the edge.

                        My OP,I think there is probably a VERY large cavern several meters down left over from past volcanic activity.To cause the hole,a meteor(much smaller than the actual hole size)impacted the surface causing an immediate collapse.That is why there is no crater(it fell in with the soil at the time of impact.)Also I would say it's been there a very long time due to the small impact craters in the side of the hole.

                        Basis for my theory is this...I live in what is called a karst region(caves and sinkholes everywhere)ofcourse the caverns in this area where created by water.

                        In town,there was a collapse in two seperate places underneath roadways.This isn't a regular occurrence but it has happened twice.The same effect could be created if say you dropped a 60 ton ball on the ground above a cavern or cave system.In one of our industrial areas,they actually do this to cause any caves to collapse before they begin developing the property.

                        Another reason I think this is because as a young lad,there was a one meter hole on the back of my grandpa's farm.It opened up into a large elongated cavern.You had to be let down into it with a rope.

                        Same scenario,just a bigger hole,and a MUCH bigger cavern.

                        It still gives me goosebumps though...

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Interesting pics Jumpjack. I didn't realise the hole was so big.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            My new page about new image is ready. ;-)
                            http://lc84.altervista.org/marte/buchi-marte-2.html

                            Over 140 meters deep! (against 160m width)

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Awesome mate. 140 metres deep. That new webpage looks good.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Gidday Jumpjack

                                Hmm, your calculations on this hole make it even more intriguing. Well done.

                                Jim

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X