T or E

[quote
-that the bulk of the Martian crust was extracted from the mantle at around 4.5 billion years ago (Ga). Obviously this flies in the face of the EHP model which places the outer crust of the southern dichotomy hemisphere at around 65 Ma, the proposed date of the Planet V explosion.

The methods used to calculate the 4.5 Ga date are apparrently related to radioactive dating, information gathered from in situ analysis by the Viking Missions, remote sensing observations by Mars Pathfinder, and analysis of Mars meteorites.

Neil
[/quote]

If the dating of 4.5 Ga is by radiometric analysis yet there is a conflict with 65 Ma, then this brings up once again the fundamental issue about radioactive decay. Is it intrinsic to the nucleus and immune from outside entities or can decay be initiated by a <b>collision</b> with an outside entity.

Gregg Wilson

Under the assumption that there was a dying civilization on Mars that wanted to be known (to us?) by the faces and images they etched into the surface of their dying world, there should logically be many such faces in certain places. This is similar to Trinket's theory, but they should be faces which upon analysis could be shown to be of artificial origin. On that assumption, I made a small search and came up with some. Here's one example. As usual it's best to let the reader decide. (source: MSSS # M0300647)

M0300647 "Mugsy" (may also be "Archie;" note comic book features, strong chin and brows, wavey hair, and round hole for mouth)


And here's Mugsy colorized as a viewing aid.



Neil

Would building faces and other images really be the best way for this fading civilization to alert a future civilization? After just a few million years the original face at Cydonia has weathered enough that the artificial orgin hypothesis can be easily challenged.

But suppose that they had built 11 simple mounds instead, each about the same size as the face and arranged to signify the first four prime numbers? The patterns would still be obvious even if erosion had been worse. If so I believe that we would already have several permanent bases on Mars.

LB

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">But suppose that they had built 11 simple mounds instead, each about the same size as the face and arranged to signify the first four prime numbers? The patterns would still be obvious even if erosion had been worse. If so I believe that we would already have several permanent bases on Mars.

LB
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

That certainly would have been much less ambiguous, as understood by a scientifically minded people. But I get the feeling that these people were quite different from us in that respect. We get the impression, from their artifacts, that they were much more intuitive, emotive, artistic, than the mainstream of science is today in its effort to be precise. Imagine what it would be like if the ancient Greeks had progressed to modern times without declining. The "style" of their science might have been very different from ours.

And besides, we may yet find the type of mathematical message you're seeking. Something along the lines of the Embedded Triangles in Tom's slide show, qualifies to some degree, doesn't it? And the T or E may also, when we see the whole thing in hi-res. Another factor: we don't know that it was the scientists who survived to leave these messages; it could have been a fringe group of survivalists, or politicians, or even priests. We just don't know yet; we only have the evidence that is before us.

Here's another possible stylized image of their culture (source, MSSS # M0300647). Or maybe I'm imagining the whole thing.

M0300647 "Devil" (centered, other faces surrounding; note classic devilish features)


And here's Devil colorized.



Neil

But I get the feeling that these people were quite different from us in that respect. We get the impression, from their artifacts, that they were much more intuitive, emotive, artistic, than the mainstream of science is today in its effort to be precise.

Neil
[/quote]

I will suggest a speculative alternative to the "dying" culture on Mars. Suppose they originally came from Earth. They are on Mars because of anticipated destruction on Earth. If a large planet were to come close to Earth and Mars, the effect would be very different for each globe. Such a planet would block the gravitational flux between itself and Earth. The rotation of the Earth, without gravity over a particular "orange segment" of Earth, would cause a massive tidal wave that would advance at 1,000 mph at the equator. The surface of the Earth would be scrubbed clean. All civilization would be erased. On Mars the effect would be some impacts and a change in orbit. Survivable. A selected, small group of persons would retreat to Mars to escape total destruction on Earth. In waiting a very long time to return to Earth, they would create art on Mars reflective of life on Earth and of themselves.

I wouldn't bet money on their extinction.


Gregg Wilson

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by neilderosa</i>
But I get the feeling that these people were quite different from us in that respect. We get the impression, from their artifacts, that they were much more intuitive, emotive, artistic, than the mainstream of science is today in its effort to be precise.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">I think we just got Neil's definition of an ideal scientist. If I were a Psych grad, I could do a thesis from the material in this forum.[]

JR