Mars Rover Finds Unusual Rocks at 'Home Plate' 90
An anonymous reader writes "After several months of driving nearly a kilometer, the Mars Rover Spirit has reached the semicircular plateau dubbed 'Home Plate' in Gusev Crater and has unearthed a puzzle. Spirit first got a good view of Home Plate in late August from 'Husband Hill'. The layered appearance is unlike anything yet seen by the rovers."
Late Breaking News: (Score:5, Funny)
Outrage and disgust swept through the community today as the Council of Elders confirmed the rumours that one of the mechanized invaders from the sinister blue planet third from our star has defiled one of our holiest landmarks.
Recently declassified vision-waves from the elite team of warriors dispatched to track the invader's progress clearly shows the horrible automaton stretching out its spindly claw towards the Tracks Of The Founder, a most sacred site for G'loshnaks and Z'treems alike.
K'Breel, Speaker for the Council, stressed yet again that there was no cause for alarm: When asked if citizens who viewed the sacrilige via the declassified vision-wave would also be required to satisfy the honor of the Founder by ritualistic gelsac puncture, K'breel replied,
YAY! :D (Score:2)
Kudos to you.
Funny, but also well written (Score:2)
To the parent: Despite the brevity and intended humour, that was still very well done. You have a concept, and an idea to base it on. Why not write a book?
Heck, if you're not into it, maybe a bunch of us can start one together. WikiBooks [wikibooks.org] is intended for textbooks, but a multi-author novella might do just as well.
Re:Late Breaking News: (Score:1)
Re:Late Breaking News: (Score:1, Offtopic)
Yes, yes, it's off topic. I have karma to burn. But just because this view might be unpopular doesn't mean that it's not correct. Then again, this *is* Slashdot.
Re:Late Breaking News: (Score:1)
The comment about stalking came from the fact that someone's obviously gone to the trouble of creating an account to shout inanities at him/her.
However in TMM's defence their original post was fairly entertaining, so it's not quite the same as your average "FP!!!!1" post is it?
Re:Late Breaking News: (Score:1)
Re:Late Breaking News: (Score:1)
Re:Late Breaking News: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Late Breaking News: (Score:1)
Re:Late Breaking News: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Late Breaking News: (Score:1)
Keeps going, and going, and going... (Score:4, Insightful)
Unbelievable.
Yay engineers! Yay Science! Yay School!
s
Re:Keeps going, and going, and going... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Keeps going, and going, and going... (Score:4, Insightful)
This is a machine... a very well built one. The fact that both are running just shows that many of the NASA assumptions were incorrect, such as how well a machine would function on the surface, the effects of the varying temperature on components and the overall dependability of a machine.
We should be thinking of the 3 months number as nothing more than a warranty. The engineers(whoever they were) gave a conservative number that these things would run for 3 months. Just as car makers give me a 2-3 year warranty, I still expect my car to work well after that warranty is up.
Anyways, it is amazing, but demonstrates a problem with goverment research projects and the importance of a tangible success/failure as opposed to just saying, it will run until it stops and we will collect as much data as possible. This is also the same problem with Hubble. While Hubble gives us tons of useful scientific research, it is a project without an end and without a tangible success to be stamp on a piece of paper to justify all those tax payers money. (Man... where did this rant come from:-/)
In all fairness (Score:5, Informative)
They never expected the Martians to clean the panels off periodically. (Dust devils, actually) Check out some of the recent photos- the panels are amazingly clean, far better than they ever hoped. Even so, the rovers aren't in good shape- Spirit has no teeth left on the RAT and has several steering motors with issues, Opportunity has major problems with it's robotic arm and how the mini-TES is still working without nighttime heat is unknown.
Re:In all fairness (Score:1)
Define issues with steering motors (Score:2)
Huh???? Several of it's motors have steering issues. That only lea
Re:Define issues with steering motors (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Keeps going, and going, and going... (Score:2)
Re:Keeps going, and going, and going... (Score:2)
Re:Keeps going, and going, and going... (Score:2)
Two hours later they then received the following transmission from the rover computer:
All these worlds are yours, except Mars.
Attempt no colonies there.
Oh, and don't bother with those stones. There really isn't anything exceptional beneath them. No sir. Absolutely not. Now bugger off this planet.
Re:Keeps going, and going, and going... (Score:2)
Interesting. I can only guess that to the Rovers our extra-planetary network connection counts as us being "on" Mars.
That makes sense because to a robot its very consciousness is embodied within its internal network of parts. To them we probably seem like one massive electronic consciousness via the Internet. Could they even comprehend that in us the "meat" is doing the thinking?
Re:Keeps going, and going, and going... (Score:1)
not bloody-well likely....
Re:Keeps going, and going, and going... (Score:2)
Re:Keeps going, and going, and going... (Score:1)
>>...Unofficially, I advise that we erase the records and forget the whole thing...
How inimatabley poignant. "Absolute power..." no matter what the container, still corrupts.
Re:Keeps going, and going, and going... (Score:2)
And automated mass-production?
Re:Keeps going, and going, and going... (Score:4, Interesting)
Lets face it, Nasa hasn't had a lot of success as of late. If they sent a couple of rovers to Mars and suggested they would last 3 years, and then they died 2 days into the mission, it would be egg on Nasa's face. Instead, they said the rovers had a 3 month life expectancy, and everyone is slapping Nasa on the back after 2 years into the mission. I think Nasa purposely make the 3 months comment just to reap the benefits of finally having a successful mission to mars.
Nasa over designs things, so I was dubious when they said the Mars rovers would only last 3 months. Barring any significant dust or wind storms, there is no reason why the rovers should not have lasted this long if they are solar powered and reasonably well engineered.
What is unbelievable is that Nasa designed something that didn't f*ck up in the first 3 months, or even on landing. But I would take the whole "only designed for a 3 month mission" with a big spoon full of sugar, internally the rovers were probably designed to last a decade. Your car would last a century if some company put 800+ million into creating it, I would expect the same from a couple of 400 million dollar platforms with wheels on them. Remember, the mars rovers we over budget and delayed, so lowering expectations is Nasa's typical method for covering up budget overruns and delays. Once something demonstrates apparently unexpected success, everybody forgets about the price tag.
Re:Keeps going, and going, and going... (Score:2)
Why are you so critical of NASA? Is there some other space agency that's been wildly sucessful that makes NASA look foolish? Seems to me the britsh Beagle smashed into t
Re:Keeps going, and going, and going... (Score:4, Informative)
Instead, they said the rovers had a 3 month life expectancy, and everyone is slapping Nasa on the back after 2 years into the mission. I think Nasa purposely make the 3 months comment just to reap the benefits of finally having a successful mission to mars.
Then you would be wrong. The 3-month designed life expectancy is the period it takes to accomplish the mission's primary goals. If the primary goals are accomplished, the mission is a success, if not it is considered a failure. Anything after that is gravy. Generally, mission operations are initially approved/funded only for the designed life expectancy, and any operations after that requires additional approval and funding. Try to remember that the satellite in space or a rover on another planet is only a part of a mission's costs.
Barring any significant dust or wind storms, there is no reason why the rovers should not have lasted this long if they are solar powered and reasonably well engineered.
Stuff happens. Like when they unexpectedly found what appeared to be saline mud under the rover wheels that certainly weren't designed for it. Supposedly, the Titanic was "reasonably well engineered", and we had far more experience with ship building at the time than we do now with building semi-autonomous exploration vehicles for other planets.
What is unbelievable is that Nasa designed something that didn't f*ck up in the first 3 months, or even on landing.
Over twenty years ago, NASA launched a satellite with a 3-year mission. There have been 13 points of failure, but thanks to built in redundancy, some clever engineers, and the ability to reprogram (for lack of a better term) the craft, it is still doing its job. Some years back NASA sent up a satellite with an experimental sensor and a 1-year maximum mission. Due to scientific interest in the data being returned, it is still flying after more than 5 years although it is out of fuel. First, you claim NASA over-engineered the rovers and then claim that NASA can't engineer anything in the first place.
Your car would last a century if some company put 800+ million into creating it, I would expect the same from a couple of 400 million dollar platforms with wheels on them.
The actual cost of the vehicle is a small part of the mission cost. The satellite I just mentioned was built for under $500,000, while the cost of the mission has been much greater. Royal Caribbean is building a cruise ship for over a billion dollars. Even with people to service and repair it, I doubt it will still be sailing cruises in 100 years (and that doesn't include operations costs as long as we're comparing cruise ships to Mars rovers).
Re:Keeps going, and going, and going... (Score:2)
Of course it's the solar power that's the issue - because they expected the panels to covered in dust by now. The dust devils that cleaned them were totally unexpected.
Re:Keeps going, and going, and going... (Score:2)
Re:Keeps going, and going, and going... (Score:1)
I guess the option package that had the wipers was just too expensive.
Re:Keeps going, and going, and going... (Score:2)
that's the oldest trick in the book (Score:2)
nasa just did the oposite. tell the public the rovers are expected to last only 3 months. if they live 9 months or more... presto. they're miracle makers.
Just concrete... (Score:2)
Re:Just concrete... (Score:2)
Re: (Not) Just concrete... Hoffa? (Score:1)
At home plate... (Score:5, Funny)
/So sorry.
//Couldn't resist.
///Slashies are fun.
Re:At home plate... (Score:2)
Re: This is easy (Score:2)
You still have to pass the "It's Just A Theory" social service exam.
Nah, just claim... (Score:1)
Insensitive Clod! (Score:5, Funny)
has unearthed a puzzle
That's unmarsed a puzzle. Typical terran bias.
Re:Insensitive Clod! (Score:2)
The word for earth (Score:1)
It's also Terran bias to use the Terran name of the planet. I thought the native name of each planet was the word for "soil" in the language of a political superpower on that planet. What's the word for soil in a major Martian tongue?
Re:The word for earth (Score:2)
[grin - look, it's all meant in fun]
Dang, so that's where I left my fusion reactor (Score:1)
Um, any chance they can return it to me any time soon? Those things are real expensive
Black Monolith? (Score:1)
BTW: Did you ever notice that HAL has one eye - like the cyclops in Homer's Odyssey?
What a relief! (Score:3, Funny)
Cricket? (Score:2)
Re:What a relief! (Score:1)
Sediment? (Score:4, Interesting)
Then again they could just be volcanic rocks.
Can any of Slashdot's resident geologists solve this mystery in three of less posts?
Re:Sediment? (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm not a geologist either, althoug I have been following the discussion at Unmanned Spaceflight [unmannedspaceflight.com]. There are as many hypotheses as hypothesizers. When you have that many thin layers with significant cross-lamination, then it seems to me to point to deposition by wind or water. It can't just be slabs of lava. Of course, everyone is hoping that water will be the answer.
In some of the images from late last week [nasa.gov], there appears to be a spherule, not unlike the ones foundon the other side of the planet by Op
Re:Sediment? (Score:1)
I think Spirit has merely lost its marbles.
Re:Sediment? (Score:1, Troll)
Can any resident Slashdot oncologists solve this mystery?
Re:Sediment? (Score:2, Informative)
The structure looks somewhat like the sediments that have been observed by Opportunity at Meridiani, sans "blueberries" (hematite concretions), though one possible blueberry has turned up (e.g., the far left of this image [nasa.gov]), and there might
Re:Sediment? (Score:2)
Looks like sedimentary rock to me. (Score:5, Interesting)
Anyway, if there is at all a chance of proving that Mars might have once harbored life THIS IS THE PLACE to look. Because its within sedimentary rock that you find the greatest proliferation of fossils. Any self-respecting paleo-geek can tell you that.
Re:Looks like sedimentary rock to me. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Looks like sedimentary rock to me. (Score:2)
Re:Looks like sedimentary rock to me. (Score:3, Funny)
Next, they'll find a fossilized human tooth.
Re:Looks like sedimentary rock to me. (Score:1)
What if...? (Score:2, Interesting)
What if the rovers did come across something which was undeniably manufactured. Say the rovers happened upon a rock with a sheet of bent and rusted steel laying against it. What if the robot caught a picture of what would look like a circuit board or some motorized assembly. What then? Would we be seeing pictures of it right away? In a day? In a month? In a year?
What if the evidence began stacking up that there had been a civilization on Mars but
Re:What if...? (Score:1)
Re:What if...? (Score:2)
Re:What if...? (Score:2, Interesting)
I once herd a NASA scientist give a response to such views.
His point was this: Like any other agency, NASA's biggest problem is the limited funding. If they released pictures that indicated something created by intelligent beings and asked to investigate further, the money would pour in. Thus they would have NO motiviation to keep such a find secret, and EVERY motivation to share it. Such a find would end their finantial difficulties for a very long time.
(After all, it's not like some unauthorized perso
Re:What if...? (Score:1)
We found BEAGLE II!!!!!!
Re:Pointy thing (Score:2)
Here's the bigger picture [nasa.gov]
Re:Pointy thing (Score:1)
It looks like one of those ventifacts you see all over this jumbled up formation [flickr.com]. Eons of wind erosion can result in weird shapes sticking out, which look even stranger through a wide angle lens.
Home Plate? (Score:2)
'Home Plate' is a buried star gate! (Score:1)