Venera Images, VENERA 13 fully calibrated image |
Venera Images, VENERA 13 fully calibrated image |
Sep 14 2005, 09:26 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1091 Joined: 19-February 05 From: Close to Meudon Observatory in France Member No.: 172 |
|
|
|
Jan 9 2006, 03:08 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 1636 Joined: 9-May 05 From: Lima, Peru Member No.: 385 |
Very different type of terrain. Mainly rocky, no sand or silica dust. No water erosion signs. Interesting.
Rodolfo |
|
|
Jan 9 2006, 08:29 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2530 Joined: 20-April 05 Member No.: 321 |
QUOTE (RNeuhaus @ Jan 9 2006, 07:08 AM) Very different type of terrain. Mainly rocky, no sand or silica dust. No water erosion signs. Interesting. Rodolfo While these new presentations are aesthetically wonderful, the old, unnatural-looking presentations of Venera imagery allowed this level of observation, so they are not new to us. The four sites are quite different, with boulders atop/embedded in soil at two sites and large, plate sheets of rock at the other two. It is certainly the case that water erosion could not have acted on any portion of Venus's surface since the last major resurfacing event (if ever) -- if there are any ancient surfaces that show past water influence of any kind, we will have to hunt them down very carefully. Such formations may not exist at all. There is sand/pebble soil visible in Venera 9 and Venera 13 surface views. Fine dust may be rare. It seems likely that chemical production of dust is not a major phenomenon, and mechanical processes that produce dust seem to be rare also. Because the surface temperature is very constant, there are only light winds, so dust will not beget new dust much. |
|
|
Jan 9 2006, 08:34 PM
Post
#4
|
|
Interplanetary Dumpster Diver Group: Admin Posts: 4405 Joined: 17-February 04 From: Powell, TN Member No.: 33 |
QUOTE (JRehling @ Jan 9 2006, 08:29 PM) While these new presentations are aesthetically wonderful, the old, unnatural-looking presentations of Venera imagery allowed this level of observation, so they are not new to us. The four sites are quite different, with boulders atop/embedded in soil at two sites and large, plate sheets of rock at the other two. It is certainly the case that water erosion could not have acted on any portion of Venus's surface since the last major resurfacing event (if ever) -- if there are any ancient surfaces that show past water influence of any kind, we will have to hunt them down very carefully. Such formations may not exist at all. There is sand/pebble soil visible in Venera 9 and Venera 13 surface views. Fine dust may be rare. It seems likely that chemical production of dust is not a major phenomenon, and mechanical processes that produce dust seem to be rare also. Because the surface temperature is very constant, there are only light winds, so dust will not beget new dust much. I have always thought the Venera 9 site looks like a Viking landing site. -------------------- |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 10th November 2024 - 06:10 PM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |