The sol 588 and 589 "strange bright lights" [sic], Using the power of UMSF for good Options

[elakdawalla]

Where would it be in the sol 593 late afternoon Navcams? Behind the butte?

Edit:

Here's another "glint" from the right navcam, on sol 589. Also in the top left corner of the image, somewhat on the apparent horizon. Note the camera is pointing in completely different direction. Left camera shows no glint.

http://curiosityrover.com/imgpoint.php?nam...0000NCAM00262M_

Although the "light leak" notion of Justin's is my least favorite explanation, I'll note that the bright pixel in the image that freddo411 points out is also in the upper leftish area of a right Navcam image so could be investigated as light-leak-related. But if it were that easy to make a bright pixel with a light leak, we'd see them in a lot more images, I'd think.

[djellison]

The rock I think we're seeing glinting is also visible in Sol 582 MastCam as well.

MR - Sol 582
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images/ms...325E01_DXXX.jpg

MR - Sol 580
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images/ms...044E01_DXXX.jpg

[elakdawalla]

Boy, would I like to see less-JPEGgy versions of those images...

[PDP8E]

Boy, would I like to see less-JPEGgy versions of those images...

Me too! Here is a lightly rinsed 3x ... really looks like a CR ... your mileage may vary

Doug, there is that rock off to the left on the ridge,in the image you posted:
MR - Sol 582 (2 posts up)

[fredk]

The 589 blip is very clearly a CR. Note that the bright pixels extend above the far outcrop and are set against the distant Gale rim - see the arrowed part here:

As Emily pointed out in the first post, navcam bleeds horizontally. (This doesn't look like bleeding anyway!) How else could we be seeing bright pixels above the outcrop in question? CRs often form streaks that look very similar to this.

This view also shows that the bright blip/streak is above the outcrop with flattish rock Doug identified above.

Therefore there is nothing to triangulate 588 with. It seems like a stretch to imagine that one of the 588 frames caught a glint off a distant rock and the other 30 seconds earlier didn't.

The other problem is that we have never seen mirror-like specular reflections from large surfaces on Mars. Even if a surface was somehow smooth and flat enough, dust tends to cover surfaces.

If it looks like a CR, and quacks like a CR, and occam's razor dictates it's a CR, then...

[atomoid]

excellent sleuthing, especially on locating the candidate rock face! its still hard to see what exactly is the nature of that rock..? thats it of course!!!!!
It still seems so unlikely for a glint showing up only in the Right eye, but not in the left eye that's just a few inches away yet does appear the previous day in a separate location, though the different shape of the glint is consistent with that, if there were to be two faces of the rock that happened to be configured perfectly for sending reflections to these two locations..
zoomed non-interp 400% shows it blends into image as if its being resolved through the lens.. sol588 on left sol589 on right

[MarsInMyLifetime]

What percentage of the cruise stage may have survived entry and dropped short of the "flown" EDL path? I'd expect any such parts to be small and well ablated, not visibly shiny, but this spot does seem to be in the possible strew field for that stage. I'm not willing to push this idea very hard--I lean towards the CR explanation as well, but Mars EDL being as untidy as it is...

[PDP8E]

The glint on sol 588 does not appear to be a CR !

Here is a straight forward bi-cubic spline 6x image from the original...
the bright spot is concentrated on a central pixel on a ridge ...

The wall of Gale is also in the image, anyone that can triangulate (from the original 588 Nav R B ) may get closer to the 'rock'

[DLC]

Is it ice?
The vertical, light-colored feature seen in the mastcam 580 image looks to me to be a good candidate for something like the well-known Mars gullies, caught in the act.
Consider:
It appears to be precisely vertical, and lighter in color than anything else in the frame, consistent with ice or flowing water.
It extends from the rim-edge of a portion of what appears to be the crater wall.
It appears to be in the same vicinity as something that seems to be producing unusually pronounced specular reflections.
It looks an awful lot like a waterfall or frozen waterfall, and we know that seasonal gullies are seen on Mars. Have any been seen at this latitude or in this vicinity?
It seems that the JPL folks are just saying specular reflection, at this point. That's consistent, and appropriate.

[djellison]

Is it ice?

No. It's also visible in two MastCam images from 6 and 8 days earlier - and it's clearly a well wind polished rock.

A large expanse of ice like that would have sublimated away long, long ago.

[fredk]

The glint on sol 588 does not appear to be a CR !

On what basis do you say that? CR's can take on a wide range of appearances - have a look at some low-light navcams or better nighttime navcams.

Seriously, the speculation is getting a bit out of hand here. There are better places for this kind of discussion...

[nprev]

Is this (possible) thing anywhere near the planned traverse path? The mainstream media is going nuts about it; might be worth a side trip just to let the hot air out of the loonies.

[elakdawalla]

No, it's not near the planned path, and no, it's not worth a side trip. It's either a cosmic ray hit, or something in RNav optics, or a shiny rock. None of those things would warrant taking Curiosity away from the planned path.

[nprev]

Agree scientifically, of course. Too bad, though; great opportunity to place some well-deserved egg on the right faces.

[djellison]

There are better places for this kind of discussion...

Such as JPL perhaps where today Justin Maki, engineering camera team lead, has said a shiny rock 160m from Curiosity is a perfectly plausible explanation, as well as a possible navcam light leak or CR hits.
I appreciate your emphasis on keeping the woo out of UMSF, but your repeated demands to shut down the discussion is at odds with mainstream thinking on the issue.