Looks Like Fog.....In the Distance

[rdunk]

Well, here is an article that provide some corroboration about the for-certain-reality of some types of fog on Mars. This information was published in 2011, however, it is "new" to me and maybe also to some others here. It does add a bit to what we are discussing in this thread.

Martian-Fog Study Finds Thick Haze, "Diamond Dust"

National Geographic News
By Brian Handwerk, for National Geographic News
PUBLISHED APRIL 6, 2011

Scientists probed the Martian fog using NASA's Phoenix Mars Lander. The craft touched down on Mars in May 2008—during the planet's late northern summer—and collected data for about five months before succumbing to frigid winter conditions.

Pictures from Phoenix revealed, for example, that there's water ice in the shallow Martian soil, but scientists aren't yet sure whether that ice is a relic of ancient times or is formed by ongoing processes.

During four nights near the middle of the Phoenix mission, scientists aimed a green laser beam affixed to the lander into the Martian skies and used a pair of cameras to record the result.

The new analysis of this data shows that Martian fog contains about 1.7 milligrams of water ice per cubic meter. Most of the fog is made of particles a little smaller than a thousandth of an inch wide, with an occasional larger particle settling out and falling toward the surface.

"If you went outside on a dusty or foggy night with a laser pointer and pointed it straight up, you'd see what we saw on Mars," said study co-author Mark Lemmon, a planetary scientist at Texas A&M University.

"You'd see the green beam and points of light every once in a while as a particle drifted through that beam."

More:http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/04/110404-nasa-mars-fog-water-cycle-phoenix-space-science/

[zorgon]

Wispy Clouds Passing Overhead
Opportunity Rover Sol 950




Wispy Afternoon Clouds
Rover Opportunity Sol 956



More Clouds on Mars
Mars Pathfinder Sol 16

[zorgon]

Here is a color-enhanced video of moving clouds passing over NASA's Mars Lander. See http://phoenixonmars.wordpress.com for more on the Mars landing.

[ArMaP]

The point is the 'fog' is there to be recorded on that green channel  so we can see it as green fog

It's there, being "fog" is some people's interpretation.

My interpretation is that it's a dust devil.

Dust however being mostly iron oxide red dust on mars SHOULD appear brownish red not GREEN

I hope you are joking, because if you aren't that is one of the most ignorant things you have said. 

[zorgon]

[zorgon]

It's there, being "fog" is some people's interpretation.
My interpretation is that it's a dust devil.

Nasa disagrees with your interpretation  

I hope you are joking, because if you aren't that is one of the most ignorant things you have said. 

NASA has been pushing the 'Dust is Red' line for decades

The red colour we see in images of Mars is the result of iron rusting. Rocks and soil on the surface of Mars contained a dust composed mostly of iron and small amounts of other elements such as chlorine and sulhpur. The rocks and soil were eroded by wind and the dust was blown across the surface by ancient volcanoes. Recent evidence points to the very fine dust also being spread across the planet by water, backed up by the presence of channels and ducts across the surface of Mars.


The iron within the dust reacted with oxygen, producing a red rust colour, while the sky appears red as storms carried the dust into the atmosphere. This dusty surface, which is between a few millimetres and two metres deep, sits above hardened lava composed mostly of basalt. The concentration of iron in this basalt is much higher than that on Earth, contributing to the red appearance of Mars.

As to your "Dust Devil" interpretation... NASA disagrees  THIS is what a dust devil looks like on Mars



Perhaps YOUR interpretations are not correct

[ArMaP]

Nasa disagrees with your interpretation

OK, point to where NASA says that instead of posting a useless image.

As to your "Dust Devil" interpretation... NASA disagrees  THIS is what a dust devil looks like on Mars

My interpretations may be wrong, but, apparently, you haven't learned a thing about digital photography in all these years, and that's disappointing.

This is how the green channel of the red dust photo you posted looks.



The photos from Opportunity and Spirit are all greyscale, so to create colour images we have to use one image for each chanel (red, green and blue).

To try to reproduce the situation I took three photos of my kitchen above the microwave oven (so I could use it to place the camera and not move the camera); the first photo had only the wall, the second had my hand on the hall, the third only the wall again.

I used the red channel of the first photo, the green channel of the second photo and the blue channel of the third photo to create the image below.


As you can see, the parts that appeared in all channels have the normal colours (although the photos turned out too dark, but I don't want to waste more time with this now), but the part that appears only in one channel appears ghostly and with strange colours.

In fact, it happened something I didn't think about (but that's obvious, if we think about it): my hand looks magenta when over a brighter background, green when over a darker background.

That happens for the same reason the red dust photo you posted has a green channel, unless the colours is pure red, green or blue it will always appear on more than one channel (if it's pure magenta, yellow or cyan it appears in only two channels), if there's even an hint of (in this case) green in the image, the green channel will have the corresponding image, and the less green it has the darker the green channel. Obviously, the opposite happens, the greener the image the brighter the green channel will look.

[funbox]

The time? What time was it on that location when the photo was taken?
Dust can appear in the air regardless of the time of day.

*takes a huge lungful of air a dives in*

it might explain why were getting so many pictures of morning sunrise, someone at Nasa's also interested in the regular bloom.

I don't see how you see it as so unfathomable, given that there's already plenty of observations and pictures of it already.

didn't we discuss fog recently on the oddities thread ?

fogbox

[zorgon]

OK, point to where NASA says that instead of posting a useless image.

In the text  below the 'useless image'

"producing a red rust colour, while the sky appears red as storms carried the dust into the atmosphere."

[ArMaP]

it might explain why were getting so many pictures of morning sunrise, someone at Nasa's also interested in the regular bloom.

Why are you assuming this is morning sunrise instead of looking at the time the photo was taken?

I don't see how you see it as so unfathomable, given that there's already plenty of observations and pictures of it already.

I don't, I just try not to assume things are one thing and disregard all other possibilities.

didn't we discuss fog recently on the oddities thread ?

Yes, but does that mean that dust doesn't exist?

[zorgon]

I don't, I just try not to assume things are one thing and disregard all other possibilities.

The problem with that method is that you NEVER come to a conclusion

[ArMaP]

In the text  below the 'useless image'

"producing a red rust colour, while the sky appears red as storms carried the dust into the atmosphere."

As you said "Nasa disagrees with your interpretation" as an answer to my "My interpretation is that it's a dust devil.", I was expecting a reference to dustdevils, not to the colour of the dust in the air.

[ArMaP]

The problem with that method is that you NEVER come to a conclusion

I prefer to take time until I have enough data, and only then come to a possible conclusion instead of jumping to conclusions and waste time going in the wrong direction.

[funbox]

Why are you assuming this is morning sunrise instead of looking at the time the photo was taken?

look at all the other pictures, never mind this one , the sun scattering is most apparent at sunrise, or are they just for fun

I don't, I just try not to assume things are one thing and disregard all other possibilities

and that's good , but if you was to go with what we can see visually  from the pictures , is that mostly high noon shot , don't have the same scattering of light , and background objects tend to be a little more visible

what mechanism if its dust, clears it up .. the wind ?

funbox

[ArMaP]

look at all the other pictures, never mind this one , the sun scattering is most apparent at sunrise, or are they just for fun

What other pictures? The ones from the same sol or any other picture?

And that's one thing I avoid doing, as it brings more variables to the equation and makes it harder to solve, not easier. If we want to solve a problem, one usual method is to break it into smaller, easier problems; finding more problems as if they are solutions is faking a solution and doesn't bring us closer to the real answer.

what mechanism if its dust, clears it up .. the wind ?

Yes, and maybe humidity, if enough, but I doubt it.

PS: in the case of the photo we are talking about, if you look at this page you can see that the camera was pointing almost directly to west. The time the photo was taken (Mars time) was 01:34:09 P.M.

That's a strange sunrise. 

PPS: if you look at the "fog" you can see the it appears to have a more or less constant density regardless of the place in front (or on) the crater rim; if this was fog I would expect it to remain closer to more specific areas instead of homogeneously distributed along the crater rim.