Er, didn't NASA spend time testing whether or not the rover would be able to negotiate assorted terrain types before sending it off to Mars? It's the first thing I'd have thought of.

Calilasseia wrote:Er, didn't NASA spend time testing whether or not the rover would be able to negotiate assorted terrain types before sending it off to Mars? It's the first thing I'd have thought of.

Yea, who would make such a foul-up on a multi-million $ mission. Oh, hang on....

Calilasseia wrote:Er, didn't NASA spend time testing whether or not the rover would be able to negotiate assorted terrain types before sending it off to Mars? It's the first thing I'd have thought of.

Yes, but they could not of course duplicate all the possible conditions that might be encountered, and evaluating the terrain via the cameras on the Rover is more risky than standing there looking at a dune in Nevada.

the_5th_ape wrote:Light source on Mars
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images ... 0262M_.JPG
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images ... 0252M_.JPG

It's called "the sun", the_5th_ape. Have you got any problems with that?

DavidMcC wrote:

the_5th_ape wrote:Light source on Mars
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images ... 0262M_.JPG
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images ... 0252M_.JPG

It's called "the sun", the_5th_ape. Have you got any problems with that?

That confirms you did not click the link Why do you even bother replying?
Sun can only appear in the circumference(event horizon?), or in the sky. But thats not the case in those pics

Nonsense. I did click the link, but didn't see any evidence of any mysterious "light source on Mars", apart from a possible lamp on the rover itself, of course. Mars isn't like the moon, because it has at least some atmosphere that scatter light.
Perhpas you should specify exactly what illumination you are claiming must be part of Mars itself.

DavidMcC wrote:Nonsense. I did click the link, but didn't see any evidence of any mysterious "light source on Mars", apart from a possible lamp on the rover itself, of course.

First you said it has to be Sun. And now you say you don't see any "light source".
This either means you:
1) lied
2) are partially blind

Sun can only appear in the circumference(event horizon?), or in the sky. But thats not the case in those pics

Are you trying to say the sun appears as an apparent disc in the sky 5th? An 'event horizon' is where gravitational acceleration exceeds the speed of light.

BlackBart wrote:

Sun can only appear in the circumference(event horizon?), or in the sky. But thats not the case in those pics

Are you trying to say the sun appears as an apparent disc in the sky 5th? An 'event horizon' is where gravitational acceleration exceeds the speed of light.

The pic I posted has nothing to do with light source in the sky. So lets not waste time elaborating on it.
I was not sure about the word "event horizon", and thats why I used question mark in brackets.

Could be anything. Cosmic ray hitting the imager... lens flare... compression artefacts...

the_5th_ape wrote:

DavidMcC wrote:Nonsense. I did click the link, but didn't see any evidence of any mysterious "light source on Mars", apart from a possible lamp on the rover itself, of course.

First you said it has to be Sun. And now you say you don't see any "light source".
This either means you:
1) lied
2) are partially blind

More, nonsense. My second post was merely going into more detail. The MAIN light source in theimages is obviously the sun.
The onus is on you to clarify what aspect of those images you are claiming show that there is a light source on Mars that couldn't be located on the rover itself.

DavidMcC wrote:

the_5th_ape wrote:

DavidMcC wrote:Nonsense. I did click the link, but didn't see any evidence of any mysterious "light source on Mars", apart from a possible lamp on the rover itself, of course.

First you said it has to be Sun. And now you say you don't see any "light source".
This either means you:
1) lied
2) are partially blind

The MAIN light source in theimages is obviously the sun.

Which one? And how do you know this?

the_5th_ape wrote:

BlackBart wrote:

Sun can only appear in the circumference(event horizon?), or in the sky. But thats not the case in those pics

Are you trying to say the sun appears as an apparent disc in the sky 5th? An 'event horizon' is where gravitational acceleration exceeds the speed of light.

The pic I posted has nothing to do with light source in the sky.

Unless it's a lens flare. How did you eliminate that particular possibility?

So lets not waste time elaborating on it.

Okaayy!

I was not sure about the word "event horizon", and thats why I used question mark in brackets.

You may have used the word 'parsnip' for all it had to do with anything. Here's a tip; if you don't know what a word means, either look it up or don't use it.

If there really was evidence of an event horizon in any picture from Mars, that would kind of dominate the science news!!

I think we would have found out about already!

BlackBart wrote:I think we would have found out about already!

True! If it was close enough to see, it would be way TOO close to not destroy the solar system, no doubt!

BlackBart wrote:

the_5th_ape wrote:

BlackBart wrote:

Sun can only appear in the circumference(event horizon?), or in the sky. But thats not the case in those pics

Are you trying to say the sun appears as an apparent disc in the sky 5th? An 'event horizon' is where gravitational acceleration exceeds the speed of light.

The pic I posted has nothing to do with light source in the sky.

Unless it's a lens flare. How did you eliminate that particular possibility?

We can not be sure if its the lens flare. But we can see clearly the light is not in the sky. Not even close

I was not sure about the word "event horizon", and thats why I used question mark in brackets.

You may have used the word 'parsnip' for all it had to do with anything. Here's a tip; if you don't know what a word means, either look it up or don't use it.

I already said I might have used the the wrong word. Next time don't pay much attention to the words I put inside brackets with question marks, so that we don't end up blurring the actual focus of our lens.

the_5th_ape wrote:

BlackBart wrote:

the_5th_ape wrote:

BlackBart wrote:



Are you trying to say the sun appears as an apparent disc in the sky 5th? An 'event horizon' is where gravitational acceleration exceeds the speed of light.

The pic I posted has nothing to do with light source in the sky.

Unless it's a lens flare. How did you eliminate that particular possibility?

We can not be sure if its the lens flare.

Precisely. as I've already stated, it could be anything.

But we can see clearly the light is not in the sky. Not even close

That's your particular strawman argument, nobody else has claimed that it was. However, there's this there are these things called 'reflection' and 'refraction', which means the 'light source' being the sun is a possibility.

I already said I might have used the the wrong word. Next time don't pay much attention to the words I put inside brackets with question marks, so that we don't end up blurring the actual focus of our lens.

Er, no. You don't get to dictate what I do or do not criticise. If I see non-sequiturs in your posts, no matter what punctuation marks delimit them, I'll draw attention to them.

What is with the 'scratches and holes' on the Al wheels? They have worn so much they have holes in them? That doesn't sound good.