# Mars features caused by electricity not water



## RJM Corbet (Jun 24, 2011)

These two videos are scientific and convincing. Water erosion is not a wholly convincing candidate for the features on Mars. Electric arcs in laboratories cause exactly the type of effects observed on the Martian surface? 

1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_T6__JDeyw&feature=player_detailpage

2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-qrnsh83f4&feature=player_detailpage

Sorry, but these two 20 minute videos got lost in the wash in the crop circles thread and I think they deserve their own. Part one is more general, part two more specific ...


----------



## Nik (Jun 24, 2011)

Once again, my paranoid fire-wall has taken exception...

( Hey, yesterday, it slapped down an apparently innocent site for having a virulent root-kit infestation, so I can't complain ;-)

Would these electric features match the scale of the Martian landscape ? Were these videos taken by lander/rover ? As far as I remember, the orbiters' best resolution was about 1 metre^2 per pixel. eg an orbiter saw a lander's parachute, glimpsed linear features due wheel ruts of rovers, glimpsed rovers' solar panels...


----------



## RJM Corbet (Jun 24, 2011)

Nik said:


> Once again, my paranoid fire-wall has taken exception...
> 
> ( Hey, yesterday, it slapped down an apparently innocent site for having a virulent root-kit infestation, so I can't complain ;-)
> 
> Would these electric features match the scale of the Martian landscape ? Were these videos taken by lander/rover ? As far as I remember, the orbiters' best resolution was about 1 metre^2 per pixel. eg an orbiter saw a lander's parachute, glimpsed linear features due wheel ruts of rovers, glimpsed rovers' solar panels...



You Tube search: 'The Lightening Scarred Planet Mars'

No, it's not essentially _Rover _data. I don't know about the images you're referring to? But the surface of Mars has by now been photographed in close high resolution. 1 meter per 2 pixel? Maybe. But surely that's good enough? Like the well known one of the Rover on the edge of the Victoria crater? Yes, that type of resolution. 

Anyway, no secret conspiracy theories -- the images are easily available everywhere. The channels on Mars observed by _Orbiter_ are far more like the dendritic scarring caused by lightening or the scalloped multiple-crater channels created an electric welder, than water channels. The video examines them quite carefully ...


----------



## J Riff (Jun 24, 2011)

Oh stop. Please.
I sat and watched the original photos worked on.
 When she started slapping those weird black lines on various pics, I sneered openly, thinking it wouldn't fool a child.
 Have they really digitized the whole place for GooGoo Mars? I've never looked. A lot of work for a photoshop wizard, one more lie added to the mountain.


----------



## RJM Corbet (Jun 24, 2011)

J Riff said:


> Oh stop. Please.
> I sat and watched the original photos worked on.
> When she started slapping those weird black lines on various pics, I sneered openly, thinking it wouldn't fool a child.
> Have they really digitized the whole place for GooGoo Mars? I've never looked. A lot of work for a photoshop wizard, one more lie added to the mountain.



There _is_ water on Mars, and I don't know what else. There may even be life on Mars. Who knows yet? But it doesn't seem to be water that caused that scarring of Mars' surface -- electricity may be a more likely explanation. There are canyons there a-third of a planet long ...


----------



## Metryq (Jun 25, 2011)

Interesting. I haven't watched part two yet, but the theory requires an electrical source. The Io flux tube produces discharges that would dwarf terrestrial power stations. If Io shows similar patterns, they probably do not last very long on Io's dynamic surface. Still, it leaves one wondering when and how Mars got zapped.

(I am not a fan of the theory that the planets of our Solar system accreted in place, and Hans Alfven's strictly plasma model does not cover all the potential problems, such as the conservation of momentum in the system. The reality may turn out to be a combination of the various models that have been proposed. In regard to Mars, the planet may show both electrical and erosional patterns.)

The comparison with micro patterns developed in a lab is not _proof_ any more than Hans Alfven's plasma experiments were proof of galaxy formation. But it does open a possible avenue for exploration. Does this have anything to do with other fractal patterns found in nature? Did god shuffle his feet on a cosmic carpet and then touch Mars on the nose? (The cat hates that, but she'll lean forward every time to inspect my finger.)


----------



## RJM Corbet (Jun 25, 2011)

Yes, well that's the obvious question: what did that huge electric arc come from?

Some of those dendritic scars, on crater walls, for instance, are raised, not cut in ...


----------



## Metryq (Jun 25, 2011)

It was the super-bomb that wiped out the entire Martian civilization and razed everything on the surface with a global plasma—an early prototype of Mr. Gazoo's "little orange button no bigger than your fingernail." 





Or perhaps the "fission" model of planetary formation is correct. (The basic idea is that as the Solar nebula contracted, the central mass would spin faster and faster. Ultimately centrifugal force would blow that mass apart, unless it fissioned off blobs of matter that became the planets. If the blobs were tossed off symmetrically, you'd end up with pairs of planets: Uranus and Neptune, Jupiter and Saturn, Mars and "Planet 5" where the asteroids are now, and Earth and Venus. The fissioned bodies would have cometary orbits at first that would circularize in time.) 

Moving sunward, the Jovian planets get bigger until Jupiter, then there's a sudden drop-off. Is that when the Sun ignited, and the terrestrials were the last "blobs" of matter thrown off? If there was a flux tube similar to the one between Jupiter and Io, perhaps the Sun scarred Mars while it was closer. Earth and Venus do not show such scarring due to weathering and other erosion. And Mercury? It's awfully small. Maybe it was a moon of Venus, thus making Earth and Venus truly sister planets. Some early catastrophe tore Mercury free and gave Venus its retrograde rotation. The same catastrophe might have created a shower of debris from that moon's own matter, which formed Mercury's intense cratering when the debris rained back down.


----------



## J Riff (Jun 25, 2011)

Mars is probably better than it was in the seventies, it couldn't be much worse, but I wouldn''t be worrying about them. There's been contamination of the Earth while everyone waits for the big lie experts to tell you the next one.
 Nobody under 21 should even be told about Mars... that was the idea, but it's no longer any good. The reason is: People are no good.
 Sorry kids, it's really true. There's no 'we' - no such thing as humanity at this level, just scrabbling gangs who will sell out their friends and family in an instant for a slice of the big pie.
 Imagine, I mean think about it - alien tech. How much is that worth?
Worth more than everything else put together.
 So if it exists, they've got it, long ago. This may be what 2012 will signify - the shock/horror of realizing it's all over already, and military/drug gangs have been hacking up the profits all along.
Of course it's much worse than just that.


----------



## Starbeast (Jun 25, 2011)

RJM Corbet said:


> These two videos are scientific and convincing. Water erosion is not a wholly convincing candidate for the features on Mars. Electric arcs in laboratories cause exactly the type of effects observed on the Martian surface?


 
There would have to be some gargantuan amounts of electrical power blasting Mars, it just doesn't gel with me. It all sounds too hokey.


----------



## Metryq (Jun 26, 2011)

J Riff said:


> Mars is probably better than it was in the seventies, it couldn't be much worse, but I wouldn''t be worrying about them. There's been contamination of the Earth while everyone waits for the big lie experts to tell you the next one.
> Nobody under 21 should even be told about Mars... that was the idea, but it's no longer any good. The reason is: People are no good.
> Sorry kids, it's really true. There's no 'we' - no such thing as humanity at this level, just scrabbling gangs who will sell out their friends and family in an instant for a slice of the big pie.
> Imagine, I mean think about it - alien tech. How much is that worth?
> ...



Hello? What's all of this? And meanwhile we were being threatened with a lock-down the next thread over for going "off-topic."


----------



## J Riff (Jun 29, 2011)

Well. Better safe than sorry. Mars is so fabulous it hurts to even think about it. We are indeed lucky little proto-units, to live next to such a beautiful crazy planet.
Our fabulous, incredible, unbelievable sister planet.
Earth is not too shabby either, but I'm a big fan of wild terrain and caves.


----------



## RJM Corbet (Jun 29, 2011)

There's talk about the huge dust storms on Mars, where the iron-rich dust is whirled into tornadoes 100 times bigger than those on earth, and which last for days -- generating electric arcs, with opposite charge, depending which way they spin? Or flat-storms, where the dust blows for days across the surface, at huge speeds and for days, also causing electricity by friction. Seems to make some kind of sense?


----------



## RJM Corbet (Jun 29, 2011)

Starbeast said:


> There would have to be some gargantuan amounts of electrical power blasting Mars, it just doesn't gel with me. It all sounds too hokey.



The Martian atmosphere also produces a 'natural laser' effect in at least one area. See link:

http://laserstars.org/history/mars.html

If anyone's interested in more about this, please see new thread: *Laser Stars * in Science/Nature forum


----------



## Metryq (Jun 29, 2011)

RJM Corbet said:


> The Martian atmosphere also produces a 'natural laser' effect in at least one area.



Unlikely that either effect (electrical storms or laser) could be responsible for the massive scalloping and other features on Mars. Note that the naturally occurring laser in Mars' atmosphere is not a focussed beam of energy as in man-made lasers. It is notable as a natural mechanism for producing "population inversions."


----------



## RJM Corbet (Jun 29, 2011)

Metryq said:


> Unlikely that either effect (electrical storms or laser) could be responsible for the massive scalloping and other features on Mars. Note that the naturally occurring laser in Mars' atmosphere is not a focussed beam of energy as in man-made lasers. It is notable as a natural mechanism for producing "population inversions."



No I didn't suggest the laser effect could be responsible, it was incidental.

To me, it is EXTREMELY likely that electricity caused the scalloping. Much more likely than water -- or 'crater-chains' or vulcanism. But the  question is: where did all that electricity come from?


----------

