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

Archived here are older posts which are no longer relevant or were redundant.

Moderators: Stardust@home Team, DustMods

Post Reply
renboeverywhere
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 11:49 pm
Location: Dalian,China

Post by renboeverywhere »

well I think the upper part of the movie is "below surface" in the last 7or8 pictures.well,who knows,but the lower part is absolutely "bad focus"
When nobody becomes everybody, nothing will become everything.

buddhabuddha
Posts: 65
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 2:58 pm

Post by buddhabuddha »

I would have at least marked the one at the bottom that is a little off center as a track. Unless it is very weirdly tilted just in that spot...something appears to be coming into focus under the surface area there. There also appears to be something next to the big blob in the center.

You should remember that if the surface appears to be flat and everything goes out of focus but something comes into focus underneath the surface level...it could be a track.

Directions on Test #10 say, "If you see such a track, or anything that you find unusual, do click on it. You might have found something completely unexpected!"

Also, remember these directions from the first page of the tutorial:
"For the following training tutorial, we have used tracks of extraterrestrial particles that were captured in the ODCE collector on the Russian space station Mir, and tracks of submicron dust particles shot into aerogel at 20 km/sec using a Van Der Graaf dust accelerator in Heidelberg, Germany. It may turn out that the tracks of real interstellar dust will look quite different. They may be deeper or shallower, wider or narrower. We will see once we have the first few examples of real interstellar dust!"

icebike

Re: Holy crap! 3-in-1!!

Post by icebike »

DustBuster wrote:
Are you saying you DON'T see those, icebike? Take another look. Watch as the surface items go out of focus- then the described items start as faint rings that slowly get smaller until the end of the focus range. That's exactly what we're looking for: items that come into focus below the surface. I would definitely click it... I have clicked a number of those. What have you been clicking on?
I take it all back !!

On a brighter monitor I can definitely see them.
They are faint and very deep, but clearly something there.

taterbug
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 9:32 pm

Post by taterbug »

in both of those vids the things you're seeing are the effect of the particle going out of focus, i know this because i play with microscopes alot and stuff on the surface starts to look like that when you go out of focus on it but i dont have a degree or anything so dont worry bout it just click it if you really think thats what it is

taterbug
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 9:32 pm

Post by taterbug »

the surface only comes into focus in the last picture so i would say bad focus as well

Denise
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 8:04 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Post by Denise »

Well, I don't know - looking at the "3" shot in question, there could equally be a fourth bottom left, almost in the corner. I've only just started on this (I received an e-mail from s-dust today, though I applied months ago). So far I've scored 100% on the test shots and on the 13 or so calibration shots (which, so far at least, I'm very grateful for) - but having gone quite carefully through the training images, I seem to be able to spot them straightaway before focussing in (like looking at a sky). And I wonder if I've picked up on "false" signals.
So I too would like to see a "real" one from the project because we are clearly differing in our criteria for reporting possibles I would not have reported any that I have looked at in this discussion - except perhaps the ones that seem to poke out of blobs of dust, but even then I reckon that what we are seeing is a concentration of the "aura" of a number of specks on high focus.
But I endorse the request for an " official" statement. And perhaps a "dubious" button, so that these (or some of them) can be looked at closely and a judgement posted on this site, with examples. (Yes, we'd like this sort of thing reported, or no, this is an example of such and such a phenomenon...)
:|
anyone got the key?

icebike

Post by icebike »

taterbug wrote:in both of those vids the things you're seeing are the effect of the particle going out of focus, i know this because i play with microscopes alot and stuff on the surface starts to look like that when you go out of focus on it but i dont have a degree or anything so dont worry bout it just click it if you really think thats what it is
Things going out of focus get bigger, fatter, and less defined.

When you finally see these tracks you will notice them getting SMALLER, crisper, and more clearly defined.

Therefore, I suspect you are looking in the wrong place.

Denise
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 8:04 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Post by Denise »

.... and while I was writing all that, I think taterbug just hit the nail on the head....
anyone got the key?

taterbug
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 9:32 pm

track?

Post by taterbug »

look closely at the bottom left, right above the size scale, all the way down, could just be bad focus idk
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... e_id=36536

icebike

Post by icebike »

Denise wrote:.... and while I was writing all that, I think taterbug just hit the nail on the head....
Nope. Read my reply.
He hit his thumb instead of the nail.

A mistake that should not have been made by someone who "plays with microscopes".

Lomic
Posts: 20
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 4:51 pm

Post by Lomic »

That section isn't focusing below the surface it appears.

taterbug
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 9:32 pm

Post by taterbug »

heres a little illustration of the original focus vid with caption!!!
now what ice?
http://usera.imagecave.com/Chris654/ScreenHunter_5.jpg

icebike

Re: Holy crap! 3-in-1!!

Post by icebike »

desdema wrote: I'm with the group who don't think that everything under the surface automatically equals a track (including the examples raised in this thread), and it's particularly due to the "faint rings that slowly get smaller".Where in any of the tutorials/calibration movies has this been part of the track behavior?
Sign on as a new user and take the tutorials again. There are SEVERAL in there that taper down the deeper they go.. This is the normal behavior of objects slowing down in a viscous media.

Or just watch for the next calibration movie. about 50 percent of them taper down as you focus deeper. I'm supprised you missed this.

icebike

Post by icebike »

taterbug wrote:heres a little illustration of the original focus vid with caption!!!
now what ice?
http://usera.imagecave.com/Chris654/ScreenHunter_5.jpg
Side your slider all the way to the bottom and look just above the i in the word microns.

taterbug
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 9:32 pm

Post by taterbug »

oh and i suppose that backwards "c" shaped thing is a track according to you also?
whoa im startin to sound a little angry....
and the thing you pointed out just now gets smaller from the point you initially see it not larger unlike you yourself stated earlier, and is the only thing i see in this vid that i might even begin to consider being a track
oh theres one right next to the "c" shaped thing
Last edited by taterbug on Fri Aug 04, 2006 10:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply