Crater Chains

[funbox]

ArMaP
, , , , , There are many places on Mars that show no CSCCs (Concise Systematic Crater Chains) then there are the places that do show MANY!

, , , , just sayin, , , 

are you suggesting the artifacts are put there to obfusticate the real crater chains?

another sly one if so

funbox

[Norval]

, , , , , there are a few Crater Chains on Phobos, one of Mars's two moons that orbit backwards by the way. 

[funbox]

, , , , , there are a few Crater Chains on Phobos, one of Mars's two moons that orbit backwards by the way. 

ill bet that causes some interesting waves

funbox

[ArMaP]

, , , , , There are many places on Mars that show no CSCCs (Concise Systematic Crater Chains) then there are the places that do show MANY!

Sure there are, but don't you think that we should know which are real and which are not?

[Norval]

reposted so ALL can see the images, , , , , ,

chains of craters all over phobos, , , , hmmmmm
Aint no image arty facts here, , , LOL 

[ArMaP]

, , , , , there are a few Crater Chains on Phobos, one of Mars's two moons that orbit backwards by the way. 

It doesn't orbit backwards, it orbits in the same direction as Deimos, but as it orbits faster than Mars rotates on itself it appears to orbit backwards when seen from Mars' surface.

[Pimander]

Yet another member who just ignores the actual point made.  Norval, ArMaP is not denying that crater chains exist so your post was utterly irrelevant.

[ArMaP]

Aint no image arty facts here, , , LOL 

That's true, no apparent artefacts on that image, but I don't see any reason to LOL about it, aren't you interested in truth?

[Toltec]

Parehidolias are one thing, and another the obvious. There are many people who see ruins on Mars, personally I see as plagioclase geological forms, for example, in the case of the crater chains are so long, straight and methodical that the probability of being natural is difficult. attached a picture of a craterchain along a ridge on Mars

[ArMaP]

Looking again at this photo I noticed something: the craters in the crater chains do not show signs of having been made by objects hitting at different angles, as they should if the objects that created the craters came from only one direction and hit Phobos, as the objects hitting at a 90º angle would create more or less circular shaped craters but when the objects hit Phobos' edges the should create elliptical shaped craters, and I don't see that, it looks like all craters were created perpendicularly to Phobos' surface.

[Pimander]

I'd agree that the beautiful chain in Toltec's last post does not look like impact craters.

If the chains on Phobos are along lines of latitude then it looks as though a number of objects have struck the surface in a line (they came from a single point) and hit the surface as it rotated.  That would cause the chains to be along lines of latitude.

There are some chains crossing those lines.  They may be caused when Phobos was rotating differently. But....

Here is another explanation.  Jupiter's Thunderbolts!

ArMaP, electrical arcs normally strike the surface perpendicularly explaining what you just observed.  A nuclear war does not explain the phenomenon.

[Dyna]

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap950715.html

Their explanation has it been discussed?

[ArMaP]

I'd agree that the beautiful chain in Toltec's last post does not look like impact craters.

According to the page for that image, those are craters created by the collapse of the ground into an empty space below it.

If the chains on Phobos are along lines of latitude then it looks as though a number of objects have struck the surface in a line (they came from a single point) and hit the surface as it rotated.  That would cause the chains to be along lines of latitude.

For that to result in what we see then the rotation and the speed at which the objects were hitting Phobos would have to be more or less the same. I think that's possible to happen once, but Phobos is covered with those, and I find it hard for that to happen so many times.

ArMaP, electrical arcs normally strike the surface perpendicularly explaining what you just observed.  A nuclear war does not explain the phenomenon.

An electrical arc follows the shortest route between the its source and its destination, so it's usually perpendicular to the surface of the target, but I have yet to see something that looks really like the result of an electrical arc.

[Pimander]

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap950715.html

Their explanation has it been discussed?

I don't know whether it has been discussed in this thread because it started so long ago and I don't have enough time to re-read it.

That explanation is a good one for many chains but....

If these chains were formed in a solar system by many objects subjects surely many would impact at different angles.  ArMaP seeems to have picked up on one of many examples where a planet or Moon seems to have a high proportion of round craters.  You expect a round crater when an object strikes perpendicular (straight down?) to the surface.  Where are all the oval craters on say the Moon from impacts at angles?

Yes there are a few but not enough.





How many oval craters can you see in the two images of the lunar surface above?  Where are all the oval craters from angular impacts?

This video is interesting. LOL

[Pimander]

This video shows how some of the chains in this thread were possibly formed.