Curiosity's laser turns Mars rocks to 'glowing plasma' Humanity has unleashed its most awesome high-energy assault on extra-terrestrial geology to date, after the Curiosity rover zapped a martian rock with its Chemistry and Camera instrument (ChemCam) over the weekend. The unprovoked attack was the first time any off-Earth object has been subjected to investigation by laser and …
Yes but they are still editing photos, its criminal what they do to poor Martian rocks with lasers. This was taken just prior to firing the laser:
Edited rock picture:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/46997406@N04/7824372628/
Unedited raw rock picture:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/46997406@N04/7824372888/
First the Pentagon will release a statement claiming independent evidence suggests that the rock was armed. Then there will be counter-claims that the rock was trying to surrender. Off the record briefings will then allege that the rock shot first rapidly followed by the investigating team being unable to find any sign that the rock had weapon at all. The White House will then announce an inquiry whilst senior Republican senators denounce the President for being soft on rocks.
In the beginning, NASA said, "Let's put mold in a petri dish, send it into orbit, bring it back and look at it."
And the reaction was, "YAWN"
Now there's a big laser, "Hooray!"
Next, it'll be a Playboy Centerfold. Bending over a rock, brushing with a feather duster, accidentally losing her knickers...
NASA Science Missions, now Pay-Per-View...
Get yer GimpShops out, and please post links to your 'artist's conceptualisations'!
Like Martin Amis's The Janitor on Mars... sending a message to a dead-tree news outlet on Earth:
"Send me scientists, artists and examples of male and female pulchritude. Don't send me any politicians or religious leaders. [Print the obscenity in full or I go to the New York Times:] I repeat: No fucking monkeys"
But, this bit isn't quite true...
"The unprovoked attack was the first time any off-Earth object has been subjected to investigation by laser..."
Earth based lasers regularly fire at reflective targets on the moon, just to see how far away it is. Sometimes they get half a dozen photos back, but only on a good day.
Still, excellent instrument to have up there in just about every way. Lots of useful scientific data from lots of targets, and a PR masterpiece.
This post has been deleted by its author
If they're that hugely advanced, they might be bright enough to not use an investigative method that is (highly) susceptible to inducing changes into what they want to investigate ?
At least not until they get the results back and discover Justin Bieber, in which case a zap with a CEO-salary-sized laser is a perfectly understandable next step.
> The unprovoked attack was the first time any off-Earth object has been subjected to investigation by laser and unleased awesome forces on a rock named “Coronation”.
The footage that NASA have kept to themselves in that a few seconds after being lasered, the rock got up and ran away
Why do they always land in a crater? For the same reason The Trueman Show was set on an island. It's actually a studio with limited horizons. The 'studio' could be an open quarry. Mark my words, they will never climb high enough up that mountain to see over the edge of the crater.
Why did they not fit large enough program storage to hold both the landing AND the roving software?
Why did they fit black and white TV to the Rover? Most places on earth have been watching colour TV for decades. Probably because last time they fitted colour TV they got caught faking the red colour.
Why did they not fit cameras on the lifter thing? That would have been an excellent show. Probably because that bit never happened.
Why did the Russian mission blow up? Probably so there would be no witnesses.
It makes me sad how people believe these ridiculously badly faked missions are real.
"WTF? Did you just wake up from a coma?"
Well, I for one, am willing to cut the guy some slack (if he's serious). Obviously he has been boggled by the enormity of what has been done, and his brain rejects it!
Seriously, we sent a craft hundreds of millions of miles through the vastness of space, where it launched a frikkin' flying saucer swooping in vast arcs through an alien world's sky, then had a frikkin' laser armed nuclear powered tank parachute from it, then use a frikkin' jet pack to ease it near the surface, where it rappelled the final few meters to the surface of the world, and then starts vaporising frikkin' rocks!
His response? "NO FUCKING WAY!!"
Mine? "SWEEET!!" (Hence the icon.)
"Obviously he has been boggled by the enormity of what has been done, and his brain rejects it!"
Well it is pretty amazing. However what amazes me more is what they failed to achieve.
1. Video if the landing
2. Colour photography
3. A decent telephoto lens on the camera
4. Enough program space in the computer to hold landing and roving software.
5. Not landing in a crater but land somewhere higher up for a better view.
The things NASA failed at any Reg reader would have got right.
Surely it's more nutty to believe this stuff without proper evidence. Can you explain why they did not video the landing? Can you explain why the photos are such poor quality and in black and white? No, you just accept it because it's so far away you expect the pictures to be degraded by the time they get here. Think logically, they use digital cameras and digital communications, any loss of data would be error corrected. This is not the 1960's.
B&W vs colour: unfortunately, they haven't rolled out FTTC in this part of Mars yet, and so they have to use dialup. Colour images and video use a lot more bandwidth than black and white, and the guy driving the rover gets pissed off if NASA are constantly on the phone downloading pictures.
So the only reason you think this is real is that they would never fake something like this?
Don't you think that if they really did this amazing thing that they would have actual video footage of the event rather than some pathetic computer animation which they were showing even before they had actually landed?
Don't you think that they would have some amazingly good pictures and video footage of the surroundings? Why are you prepared to accept such poorly exposed fuzzy black and white pictures? Do you realize how amazingly good modern TV cameras are these days? There is a photo on the web of the crowd at the Diamond Jubilee, it's in full colour and you can zoom in and read the time on a mans watch way into the distance.
If you think NASA are capable of landing the rover on Mars but not capable of excellent photography then I can see why you have been gulled.
Do try some critical thinking and stop blindly following the people you worship.
Why do they always land in a crater?
That's no crater...
... that's Beachfields Quarry!
"It is still a matter of wonder how the Martians are able to slay men so swiftly and so silently. Many think that in some way they are able to generate an intense heat in a chamber of practically absolute non-conductivity. This intense heat they project in a parallel beam against any object they choose, by means of a polished parabolic mirror of unknown composition, much as the parabolic mirror of a lighthouse projects a beam of light. But no one has absolutely proved these details. However it is done, it is certain that a beam of heat is the essence of the matter. Heat, and invisible, instead of visible, light. Whatever is combustible flashes into flame at its touch, lead runs like water, it softens iron, cracks and melts glass, and when it falls upon water, incontinently that explodes into steam." - H. G. Wells
This post has been deleted by its author
[broadcast Eclear, sent 1345465068.4]
xGSV Slightly Perturbed
oGSV No, I Don't Think So
You think that now. Why do you think I'm here? One day they're firing peashooters at pebbles, the next you have an Excession in your back yard. At the moment though, I'm just amused and amazed that they're doing this with state machines. No real intelligence on board whatsoever.
Oh, and adjust your ciphers. I don't care what your headers say, that is nowhere near M16.
∞
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
