I have a question, What is the system to naming the movies.. I want to be able to figure out what movie is on the right, left, top and bottom of this one:
Of 38 people that so far has viewed it I seem to be the only one so far to spot the dust near the top center zoomed in all the way. The dust lies further in that the maximum zoom available. You can only start to see that something is coming into focus before the movie stops.
On most computers you will not be able to see the spot. I can't on this machine I'm using right now. You need a exceptional computer or the original images to see what I'm talking about.. This should be a calibration movie. Anyway I wanted to be able to figure out what images are around this one so I could look for the entrance mark...
So much for that theory that one vote movies don't contain any useful tracks. I like my idea better of being able to mark where to look for others when they review them.
I am able to see the "item" you're talking about (I will refrain from calling it 'dust' as there's no verification) and it does seem like something coming into focus deep in the aerogel, however, it doesn't seem to meet any other criteria that we've been trained to recognize as a possible interstellar dust track: There is no 'entry wound' and no 'track' that can be discerned as you focus down to that point.
This item seems to resemble the hotly discussed "inclusions" or a possible focus or other artifact.
I don't believe that 1 vote movies are considered to not contain any useful tracks, simply low on the priority list of review- and we volunteers will probably not have the final say on ANY of the focus movies; even if every user clicked "no track" it will eventually be examined by a professional- it'll just take some time.
I feel our contribution is primarily to identify the most obvious candidates quickly so they can be extracted and examined before we all grow old.
As for the numbering system... I don't know, but I recall a comment that they are not numbered in order by location.
My theory is that it's so deep the entry mark will be on a different movie. Possible the top one. That's why I wanted to know how the numbering system worked so maybe I could load it and look for it there.
The numbers are encoded so you can't tell if it's a calibration movie from the number anymore. They couldn't tell you how to find adjacent movies without giving away how to tell if it's a calibration movie.
But anyway, if there was a diagonal track that extended all the way to another movie you'd still be able to see it in this movie. If you can see the bottom of the track theres no reason you wouldn't be able to see the middle.
I don't think the focus has gone deep enough to start to see the track. From different computers I've looked at it it seems to be coming in from the top. It's too deep to see the track. Can't say the track is there or not till you can get it in proper focus. It's seems to be the classic spot though. Just like the calibration movies but it's not in focus.
I still don't understand. Do you think the spot at the bottom of the focus range is a particule at the end of a track, or the top part of a track that extends even lower? And why do you think the track might start in another movie? A track can't start in one area and continue in another without a track inbetween them.
It can't be a particule because there is no track leading down to it.
It can't be a track because it's too far under the surface. Any track has to start within about 5 frames down from the surface. The particule can't just "skip" the top layer and then start leaving a track 35 frames down.
The spot is the dust. You can't see the track cause you have not gone down far enough to see it or even the dust yet for that matter. The top movie would be less than 100 microns away, why could the track not start up there? It's still not in focus so you cannot tell how deep it is. They have the contrast turned so far down that it's almost now impossible to see the tracks or I'm betting those of you track people are going to miss a lot of spots or not clicking on things cause you don't see a track. If it's in the glass it got there somehow. There must be a track. You can't say it's not there just cause the contrast is turn down and you're looking a useless jpg compressed images hiding a track..
Anyway I don't care about the track, if it entered the glass it may have left a mark that's what I wanted to see.
What do you mean contrast turned way down? Look at the examples... See how high they had the contrast turned up there? I figure they turned it down to minimize the "Inclusions." Hopefully that is not the wrong thing to do.
Yes I know different project, different camera for the examples.. But the thing is the movies now are very monotone grey.. Have you noticed? Look at the track that was found, The contrast on that movie is higher than it is now, or at least the last batch on 1000 movies I searched threw.
That would depend on the angle of entrance and lighting conditions if you could see it or not. If it's still out of focus you will not see it. It's still out of focus. That one they found the track is several 100 microns long. There is no reason why the entrance mark could not be on a adjacent movie. The thing is jpg compression almost guarantees that type of information will be lost. It has a habit of removing detail like that. It's a average of a 6 X 6 pixel area or 8 X 8 area. Fine detail tends to get lost. Just look carefully at some jpg text to see the effect. The lighting is strait down, What is it going to reflect off of? If it was sideways lighting the track might show up.
Don't get me wrong you cannot see the dust. You can only see a effect of something there deeper in the glass. You see the spot cause it's a different color than the glass.
It could be that it's strait in and only the air pocket is coming into view.
You will not see the track if it's strait in. Starting at a micron size and growing to what 5 microns by the time it's 100 microns into the glass. What would you expect to see looking down from the top?
The same view you have. Add jpg and no contrast....
I believe I submitted that very movie several nights ago, or at least one very similar to the one you linked to. But that number doesn't show up on the my events page. But I clearly see the little half circle you are talking about. And I remember submitting it because it was in focus when the cursor was at the bottom of the focusing bar and it faded out the same way the calibration tracks do.
They have a pocket hole in the glass from the heat. They don't have a track per say. ie like the one that made it threw 1st review. A track at a angle to the glass. If your looking strait down all you will see is the hole. I am starting to see a hole on that movie but it's deeper than the focus. There is a lack of words here to describe the tracks. I guess they call the one like 1st review a large track and the ones in the calibration movies they call a small track. So I found a small track but it's still out of focus, meaning it's deeper than 100 microns or the focus was not perfect on the movie.
I think I'll just drop this topic. Thought it would be no big deal to get the numbers for the movies that surround this movie.
We are looking threw the world threw a tiny window. We should have buttons on the view to load images around the one we are looking at.
Chances of a track starting and finishing on the same movie are small.
If we see a track we should have the ability to look where the track ends if that happens to be on a different movie we should be able to load it or request it..
BTW nobody has noticed it yet. 38 views, I'm it. One vote.
Chances of a track starting and finishing on the same movie are small.
And you know this HOW?
You are starting to sound like a conspiracy theorist.
You know nothing about the aerogel, yet you seem to suggest the team is manipulating the images to hide inclusions, and preventing you from seeing tracks. What's up with that...?
No I'm not, Your doing that, Look at the length of the found large tracks.. Some are several hundred microns long...
I found tracks and I've actually marked them but the end is not on the movie I'm viewing...Sort of pointless marking it...
All I'm saying is give us the tools to do the job..
The whole square is done once it ends up here. What's the big deal about browsing it ?
We should be able to load the images around the current movie.
I found a micro meteor impact. it's on three different movies. Why can't we look at the whole thing ? I seen the left and right view so far. Never as yet seen the top movie. I marked both that got delivered to me. It's right on the edge of the three. It may even span four movies.
