Suggestions for 'Slanted' Aerogel?

Post here if you are having any kind of problem with the Stardust@home website.

Moderators: Stardust@home Team, DustMods

Belinda
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 4:08 am

Suggestions for 'Slanted' Aerogel?

Post by Belinda »

The movies I find hardest to be confident about are the ones which appear to be slanted.
when NOTHING is in focus I put them down as bad focus, but with slanted images the focus of the surface seems to flow from one side to the other - I have yet to find a track in one of these and am wondering if I am doing something wrong. They have all been 'no tracks' and I am basing this on going from the bottom up and looking for potentials on the lower levels - this should be ok shouldnt it? the track should go almost right the way through the areogel?

Cheers
Belinda

gamalmfalyii
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 7:46 am
Location: New York City
Contact:

Post by gamalmfalyii »

Well the most important thing to note by a project like this is that a good amount of the calibration/testing movies were made by shooting dust into the aerogel with a machine. We simply don't know if the tracks would go all the way through or not because we have almost no "real" data to base that on. In fact, The movies supplied in the training and calibration movies could look completely different from the real deal. It's important to note (and also, to keep you on your toes) that there is a lot of unknown in the equation so far so keep looking sharp and do your best and of course, more importantly, have fun.

icebike

Re: Suggestions for 'Slanted' Aerogel?

Post by icebike »

Belinda wrote:The movies I find hardest to be confident about are the ones which appear to be slanted.
Belinda
I've seen a few of those myself. None with any tracks so far.

I evaluate them zone by zone, comparing the particles to those nearest to them rather than to the whole movie. But I'm pretty careful not to use this approach on regular movies that are not slanted.

cosmicrocker
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2006 8:10 am

Post by cosmicrocker »

I'm glad someone mentioned this. I analyze them just as icebike described. I suspect a lot of people may not recognize a tilted or irregular surface.
...Tom

visit #space on IRC.freenode.net

icebike

Post by icebike »

cosmicrocker wrote:I'm glad someone mentioned this. I analyze them just as icebike described. I suspect a lot of people may not recognize a tilted or irregular surface.
I had a perfect example yesterday. I wish I would have written down the number.

Offering 3 DustBunny Points to the first person that comes up with a GOOD Obviously Slanted Movie number and posts it here.

mwhiz
Posts: 95
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 3:58 pm
Location: Seattle, Washington, USA

Post by mwhiz »

oh! oh! me! me! :roll: here ya go guys: movie 28160 slanted straight up and down (low side is down).
"The Earth is the cradle of mankind, but one cannot live in the cradle forever."
~Konstantin Tsiolkovsky

icebike

Post by icebike »

mwhiz wrote:oh! oh! me! me! :roll: here ya go guys: movie 28160 slanted straight up and down (low side is down).
Oooohhh, Nasty...

I wonder how many people were tricked into clicking that dot at the top which only comes into focus near the bottom of the focus range. If you didn't catch the fact that the whole surface was slanted you could really get fooled.

Three points, and a bonus point for promptness.
ImageImageImageImage

cosmicrocker
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2006 8:10 am

Post by cosmicrocker »

Yeah, that was a good one. They are fairly common, and can slant in different directions. I've also seen related examples where the surface was not simply tilted, but irregular. Everyone needs to consider the surface orientation before clicking.
...Tom

visit #space on IRC.freenode.net

mover
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 5:11 pm
Location: Malden, The Netherlands

Post by mover »

Another one, with a nice regular slant... except at top left: Movie 47394.
Seems some people have already clicked the black dot...
See the universe in a grain of dust...

icebike

Post by icebike »

mover wrote:
Seems some people have already clicked the black dot...
How do you find that out? (other than clicking on it yourself and getting it added to your events list).

Sagastar
Posts: 22
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 6:11 am

Post by Sagastar »

i usually won't click on a dot unless there is some particles near to it by which to judge where the surface is.

mover
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 5:11 pm
Location: Malden, The Netherlands

Post by mover »

icebike wrote:
mover wrote:
Seems some people have already clicked the black dot...
How do you find that out? (other than clicking on it yourself and getting it added to your events list).
I got the movie ID from another thread (don't know which one anymore) where someone said he had clicked it, and that according to his events list there were a few clicks for that movie...
That's why I said "seems" in my post, since it is not in my events list. I didn't get that movie and if I did I wouldn't click that black dot myself.
See the universe in a grain of dust...

TimStrange
DustMod
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 7:12 am
Location: Third stone from the Sun

Post by TimStrange »

On a "slanted movie" remember that even the lowest portion of the surface must be well in the focus range so that you can see into the gel for an appropriate amount. Otherwise, click "Bad Focus". If you cannot see into the gel everywhere within the movie, you chance missing a track.

Wolter
DustMod
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 2:23 am
Location: Enkhuizen, the Netherlands

Post by Wolter »

I'm with TimStrange on this. Just treat each level apart untill you are completly down. When every bit of the movie can be checked below surface click "No track" (or the track if its there ;) ) else click "Bad Focus"
Also check this thread on bad focus: http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... .php?t=645
Just dusting... Image

Mighty Pete
Posts: 146
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 7:47 am
Contact:

Post by Mighty Pete »

We simply don't know if the tracks would go all the way through or not because we have almost no "real" data to base that on. In fact, The movies supplied in the training and calibration movies could look completely different from the real deal.
I see absolutely no reason for this situation. The other side of the glass has over a million hits surely somebody could have use some of those for test images...

I've found only one classic as shown track. It looks just like the test but much clearer. Don't know if it's real or not but noticed lots never found it. I think 12 so far found it out of over a 100 that viewed it. I'd say anything that comes into focus when everything else is going out of focus is suspect.

If it's actually inside the glass then it's suspect. Unless the glass is not perfectly clear there is no way to explain how it got there then.

Everything I have found others have also found. So must be doing something right. They may turn out to not be valid but the thing is from the information given they cannot be ruled out just yet so somebody has to re look at them to eliminate them. Maybe a better view or different lighting angle will eliminate it but till that happens it looks to me and others that it's actually inside the glass.

Post Reply