"I think I've found a track, what do you think?"

Discuss your experiences with and ideas about Stardust@home here.

Moderators: Stardust@home Team, DustMods

icebike

Post by icebike »

Mighty Pete wrote:
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... =9880492V1


It's a interplanetary dust particle, a small micro meteorite, Everyone is going to say no way there is no entrance mark, No Track !.. Yes there is... It hit the glass on the other side and was travelling toward you.
Yeah, thats it...!

Weird how in pierced the metal backing of the areogel holder and went all the way through the gel, and then stopped right on the surface like that.
woowoo
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:33 pm

Post by woowoo »

How about this one people? Seems I'm one of few who thinks there's something here:
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... =7512610V1

Slightly above the space in "100 microns" (the text below the image). It's tiny but there's something there me thinks :)
Wolter
DustMod
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 2:23 am
Location: Enkhuizen, the Netherlands

Post by Wolter »

There is indeed something but only just in toplayer of the gel. I do not think it is a track.
Just dusting... Image
Mighty Pete
Posts: 146
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 7:47 am
Contact:

Post by Mighty Pete »

Weird how in pierced the metal backing
There was no metal backing, just a metal frame. They have the collector sitting right now probably sitting over top of a stainless steel tray so nothing gets lost. It also adds contrast to the movies. It is glass both sides.

Oh sorry it's not a stainless steel tray.
a mirror underneath gives the best possible contrast.
Image

There are people here that would still say the above image is still No Track. :wink:
Last edited by Mighty Pete on Tue Aug 29, 2006 5:56 pm, edited 2 times in total.
sub212
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 4:27 pm

VERY challenging to find

Post by sub212 »

http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... =8892384V1

I'm sure it's nothing, but just on the last frame, approx. 85 microns right of the centre, one of the specs darkens slightly.
That's the precision I use for these pictures, probably overdoing it here.
comments highly welcome
Mighty Pete
Posts: 146
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 7:47 am
Contact:

Post by Mighty Pete »

Re: Sub212

Awful close to the surface. Ya there is something there. I personally think it's a surface feature that is just going out of focus. Turning from a single spot to a oval. Add jpg compression. Any tracks should be kind of obvious but at depth they may look like that. This is really too close to the surface. I think it's that comet flake feature going out of focus or surface flaws.

A few frames up you can see comet dust or oxide on the surface as you go down one side of that feature turns darker. That's what you are seeing. A shadow from that.

Sould be sort of obvious :

http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... =6252989V1

146 views, 13 votes so far. Some people are clicking way to fast. Although this is probably not one I don't think you can eliminate it just yet. The focus needs to go deeper.
Last edited by Mighty Pete on Tue Aug 29, 2006 8:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
fjgiie
DustMod
Posts: 1253
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 8:47 am
Location: Hampton, SC, US

Spot on lens

Post by fjgiie »

Hi sub212,

I do believe you have found Shemp!

There is Larry, Moe and Curley, that is Shemp. :) (possibly)

Spots on the mocroscope lens.http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... .php?t=573

Thanks,

fjgiie It' pretty definately Shemp, read link provided.
Last edited by fjgiie on Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mighty Pete
Posts: 146
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 7:47 am
Contact:

Post by Mighty Pete »

85 microns right of the centre,
Is not Shemp, I don't think his mark is near that. I can't see Shemp on this monitor.
minkiemink
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 7:55 pm
Location: Topanga, California

Post by minkiemink »

It is out of focus, but I thought it was a calibration track at first. http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... d=527417V1
“The true harvest of my life is intangible - a little star dust caught, a portion of the rainbow I have clutched”
-Henry David Thoreau
sub212
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 4:27 pm

Post by sub212 »

Oh, yeah, it's not one those mike specks, as it isn't there unchangengly all the time.
I figured it's probably just a jpg compression thingy. Probably show nothing in full resolution...
sub212
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 4:27 pm

Post by sub212 »

[quote="minkiemink"]It is out of focus, but I thought it was a calibration track at first. http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... d=527417V1[/quote]

Sure, that's no calibration movie and no track.
sub212
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 4:27 pm

Post by sub212 »

hgmm, actually, on second thought, it might exactly be Shemp, but why does he only show up on the last two slides?

Need certificate: Found dirt on the lens....
minkiemink
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 7:55 pm
Location: Topanga, California

Post by minkiemink »

Curly is just to the right and a little lower. I haven't managed to catch a glimpse of the elusive Shemp yet....although this may well be him.
“The true harvest of my life is intangible - a little star dust caught, a portion of the rainbow I have clutched”
-Henry David Thoreau
Wolter
DustMod
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 2:23 am
Location: Enkhuizen, the Netherlands

Post by Wolter »

Mighty Pete wrote:<...>

http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... =6252989V1

146 views, 13 votes so far. Some people are clicking way to fast. Although this is probably not one I don't think you can eliminate it just yet. The focus needs to go deeper.
If seen this one and since it only focusses on the surface about 4 or 5 bars from below there is no way you can be sure about anything in it. So i click them bad focus.
This does not increase the count but does not mean i click way to fast ;)
Just dusting... Image
Mighty Pete
Posts: 146
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 7:47 am
Contact:

Post by Mighty Pete »

I'm reluctant to use bad focus unless it is bad focus. If you look at the picture they plotted of bad focus movies there is so many. I just have a feeling there never going to look at those again. This isn't my movie, I was not first I'm just sending it along for a second look. It needs a second look. Unless they do all the bad focus movies manually you will just get a new bad focus movie to replace this one. I can't see them doing thousands and thousands manually. My two cents. really they are all bad focus movies. Over compressed, hardly diagnostic quality. That's what we have to work with well then they might have to look more closer at a few of them then.
A second look will answer it once and for all and we can move on.
Post Reply