connect us
contact us
Index
Back
Search
Project
Index
Back
Search
Project
Mars Map
Blog
Language
Contact
Change Language
Mars Analysis Project
Learn more...
◀
Aram Chaos - The Snake Heads in Detail
▶
9
Explanatory Note
General Overview
The Individual Reconstruction Steps
Comparison
Evaluation of the Visualization Method
Introduction
We encourage you to verify the source images for yourself, rather than just simply accept the facts that are presented here. Exact details of the used image templates can be found
here
.
Some reports on this website are based on previous ones. So it is extremely important to read the reports in chronological order. Details can turn up that were probably already been analyzed in detail. If you are new here and you directly start reading the recent reports without prior knowledge, then it could happen, that the required context is not recognizable. You do yourself and us a favor when you first start with the oldest reports.
We recommend that you first review the following reports, if you have not read them yet:
3.
Many details of the facility complex in Aram Chaos
2.
The Aram Chaos facility complex
1.
Structures in Aram Chaos
Explanatory Note
The reconstruction of the snake heads at the structure that we call the Ladon Cave belongs to one of the most important discoveries of our preceding image analysis. However, this is part of the less distinctive details concerning this structure. The techniques for image enhancement and the methods for visualization allow the viewer to understand this structure better. Without this information it is very difficult to get a spatial idea of how the recordings can be seen. The spatial detection of such structures on two-dimensional images requires practice. It does not contribute to the understanding of this extremely important issue if we simply assume that everyone sees the same thing.
The visualization methods used here allow the reenactment of the published results with relatively simple means. The value of the image reconstruction is only given if an independent assessment is possible and the result is reproducible. Neither blind confidence nor dogmatic skepticism leads to the truth. If the relevant details are not immediately apparent, you should accept the results of an unbiased review. Everything else is left to common sense.
While the reconstruction of the great dragon head is relatively easy, it is much more difficult to do the same with the sideways lying head formations. That may be due to the fact that we have here structures that are only about half as large as the main dragon head. Forming characteristics are therefore much weaker. But also structural damages to the figures make a reconstruction more difficult.
Structural anomaly: The dragon mouth entrance to the Ladon rock cave
Click on image to enlarge
General Overview
The following image section shows the general overview of the rocky outcrop with the snake-head structures, which appear on the left side in the form of three dark foothills.
Click on image to enlarge
Taken alone, these structures are too weakly expressed, to assume that it could be an artificial construction. Only the conspicuous structural abnormalities in the environment have caused a sensitization of the examination within this area. Without the surrounding anomalies the head formations would have been completely overlooked.
The Individual Reconstruction Steps
The description of the reconstruction steps is attached to the respective images.
On the left side the enlarged image section from the original recording. On th right side the same image treated with the option 'Auto Contrast'. The 'Auto Contrast' option is a standard feature in modern image processing software. The contrast-altered template should always serve as the basis for all further analyzes. By emphasizing the contrast ratio the lines and contours can be seen much better now. It is now easier to delineate the individual elevations. It is important to emphasize the border areas
Specific details could be already identified at least by narrowing the individual elevations one can guess where we're heading. It is a behavioural characteristic that our subconscious attempts to see faces in such structures. Striking points, for example, would be the eyes, the nose and the mouth. The drawn border lines allow an estimattion of the possible orientation of the head and its perspective (The mirror axes are shown in red). So an indication is given to show where we would most likely suspect the eyes. As this necessarily requires a symmetric pattern it is easiest to find this feature, if the head theory is correct. If this striking facial features can not be found, then it's over, because the reconstruction is based exclusively on the underlying facts. Wishful thinking must be strictly avoided here
The next step is to gradually trace the existing contours and lines. Here it is useful to edit the lines that emphasize the symmetry characteristics of the structure. Areas that represent the mouth and nose are good transition points to classify areas in left and right hemispheres. It is important here to be sure that only the existing lines are being traced. No imaginary possible lines should be introduced
Regarding the eye positions it is striking, that in the area of the left head-like formation, the shape of the left eye can be found, but not the corresponding right eye on the opposite side of the face. There is an appropriate eye shape offset from the expected range. Overall, it seems to be difficult to find symmetrical basic patterns in the left formation. The reason may be that this formation has suffered damage. The red dashed line indicates the range of visible brim. The brim runs through the area of the left head-like formation, which accordingly does not happen without consequences. Prior to the brim, the area appears smooth but behind the brim we can see jagged rocks. One can assume that a fragment with the right eye has become detached from the head formation and slipped away
From this point on all further steps consist of tracing all remaining striking lines and contours
To enlarge click on the appropriate image
At the end of this report there is an animation showing the transition between the original image and the finished reconstruction.
Comparison
The chart below shows the comparison of the currently created reconstruction with another reconstruction version, that was created several months ago. The differences are minimal. They mainly show which areas have particularly striking features.
Click on image to enlarge
The reproducibility of the results is essential for the validity of the generated images.
Evaluation of the Visualization Method
The highlighting of the contours and lines over self drawn lines is an alienation of the original template. In addition, the end result differ from person to person. Therefore, the similarities of the different results must be found. This visualization techniques represent only a tool to abstract a complex form into its most distinctive elements. As the sole method for determining the artificiality of a structure this technique has no value!
The usage of such a visualization method is only useful if the environment already has shown clear evidence of artificiality. In the present case it could be demonstrated with this method that the multibeam foothills are head formations that have great similarities with snake heads. Surprising here is the finding that the heads are different in style from each other. Here the visualization technique shows its strengths and highlights the details that one would not take aware, if you only look at the original template.
The following animated image shows the transition from the original image back to the currently generated reconstruction result.
Animation: Original image / Reconstruction result
Thereby there are now several examples of artistic depictions of snake heads that say something about the perception and the form of expression of its builders.
You can send an anonymous comment on this report directly to the analysis team.
For the online form, click here
