MSL ULTRAVIOLET RADIATION AND PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS

15. ULTRAVIOLET RADIATION AND CLOUD COVER AT MSL.

      Before looking at the REMS (Rover Environmental Monitoring Station)/NASA ultraviolet radiation data, it's important to understand that the criticism we offer here is unlike that found anywhere else because we have had an impact on the NASA data. NASA publishes their MSL data, we analyze it, and look for data off the (politically) expected curve. We then publish our color-coded spreadsheets complete with print screens of the odds NASA data, and wait for NASA to change the figures on their side. Almost always they do, although with respect to pressure, what they change is, we believe, still wrong by two orders of magnitude. When NASA alters its data we again capture it by print-screen and we publish it to prove that NASA takes its cues for what they can get away with from us. For purposes of clarity the spreadsheets and print-secreens are the work of Barry Roffman. Questions about them or suggested corrections should be sent to Barrysroffman@gmail.com. By corrections that are politically driven we mean that if pressures are varying on a steady downward trend from 750 to 715 Pascals, the sudden insertion of pressures that are over 1,167 Pascals are out of place. This is especially true when 1,167 Pa reading is on the exact sol (2002) that a month earlier we had predicted would see the minimum annual pressure.  Since their obvious error was on the day we predicted and since they corrected it after we mocked it (see http://davidaroffman.com/images/merged_2.png) it appears that there are people at NASA who like to play games with Mars weather data.

     Where can you find our data with included printscreens? Here:

       Now, let's look at what NASA had published and revised for the first two Martian years of MSL operation and update it with what they currenly offer after three Martian years.  The next two tables show what we found after two Martian years there. A Martian has 669 sols (Martian days) with each about 37 minutes longer than an Earth day.

Table 23D: Ultraviolet radiation reported through 2,007 sols at MSL after the REMS Team read our sites, and dropped all 19 original low µv values.

Table 23D Initial ultraviolet radiation reported through 2,007 sols at MSL. 

           Our initial exact count of medium and high µv values might have been slightly off because the REMS reports relied primarily on a color code to denote µv level, and the colors they chose for medium and high values were almost identical. We noted on 2/22/2016 that after a visit to our sites by the Fininish Meteorological Institute which, working for the REMS Team and NASA bears responsibility for all MSL weather instruments, all 19 low µv values were altered to N/A or medium. All low µv values after 2/22//2016 were also altered.  There were new low µv values posted by the REMS Team for Sols 1,610 and 1,611. We noted them on at http://marscorrect.com/photo4_19.html and have a print-screen of Sol 1,610 at http://marscorrect.com/images/sol_1610_error_fixed.png. Within three days of posting the low values JPL again altered them both (to Not Available). Evidently  low pressure is not politically correct.

       The µv results shown on Tables 23B through 23D were a bit surprising. If we use a number of 5 to represent a µv index of extremely high, 4 for very high, 3 for high, 2 for medium, and 1 for low, then (ignoring 111 sols where there was no data on Table 23D, the average µv index was only about 2.8349 – between medium and high. This is suprisingly low because NASA often cites what sounds like extremely high radiation (due to its allegedly thin atmosphere, lack of an atmospheric ozone layer and lack of a magnetic field) as reason why it is so difficult for life to survive on the surface of Mars, however there are other types of radiation - not included on the REMS weather reports - that are supposedly measured by MSL Curiosity. In addition to identifying neutrons, gamma rays, protons, and alpha particles (subatomic fragments consisting of 2 protons and 2 neutrons, identical to helium nuclei, the Radiation Assessment Detector (RAD) RAD identifies heavy ions up to iron on the periodic table.

       While Viking 1, Viking 2 and MSL high pressure air measurements were close to perihelion (closest approach to the sun) as shown on Table 2 in Annex U (http://marscorrect.com/ANNEX%20U.pdf) of this report, the relationship of perihelion to UV was far less certain. Table 2 there details what the current JPL position is with respect to each sol’s Solar Longitude (Ls), pressure, and reported UV value. Before their major revision there were 4 categories given by JPL/the REMS team) for µv values found – low, moderate, high and very high. The revision only included moderate, high and very high. With respect to very high µv it was recorded on 175 sols in MSL Year 1, but only on 17 sols in MSL Year 2. In Year 3 so far (sols 1,339 to 1,844, there were 13 such sols in the spring, and 42 sols with very high µv for the summer.

      When I did a data check on 2/22/2016 I wasn’t surprised to find that I had made the wrong color judgment for about 10 sols, and the corrections were immediately made on my website spreadsheet for µv reports at http://marscorrect.com/photo2_17.html. However, I was shocked to find that after I went to a great deal of trouble to graphically illustrate exactly where Mars was in its orbit around the sun when low µv was reported, all 19 incidents had been removed by the REMS Team and NASA. We believe that this action is another response to critiques seen throughout our websites. Figure 75 in our Basic Report shows print-screen records of several low µv values before they were tossed out of what was presented to the public after all such data was massacred. But while we thought we had summed up in the µv situation with Figure 75, again REMS shocked us reading our Report and restored at least 12 low µv values by October, 2017. The restored data is captured on Figures 1 and 2 below. Without these 12 restored values there were only 6 lows UV sols that survived for 2,007 sols of the first 3 Martian years of MSL.

       Why are low µv values problematic for NASA? One might think that with the ultra-thin atmosphere espoused by them, and no ozone layer, ultraviolet radiation on Mars would be extremely high on at least some days. But at least up to Sol 2066 on June 10, 2018 it never was, even though the REMS Team alleged that every single day at MSL so far has been “sunny.” However, this claim by the REMS Team is easily refuted with data provided by the Malin Space Science Systems.

       Why is the REMS Team indecisive about the idea of low µv values? Quite simply, 19 sols with low µv does not fit well with an atmosphere <1 % of Earth’s, no ozone layer, and clear sky. That NASA threw out all low µv values after they read our concerns makes their action all the more suspect, especially because they have thrown out all wind reports after our objections, changed their totally wrong sunrise and sunset times to match David Roffman’s calculations, and we document many changes made to their temperature and pressure data after we color- highlighted obvious concerns on our weather spreadsheets for MSL Years 1, 2, and 3 (see Table 23A above for links to all our data). Now again, after we recorded our observation of them removing low µv values, we record them read them reading our critique again and restoring most of these values. Eight years ago (now) Dr. David Roffman set out to understand Martian weather. At my sugestion, he wrote a simple 10-page paper (Case for Higher Than Advertised Martian Air Pressure – see http://davidaroffman.com/rich_text_6.html) for a technical writing course at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. That 10-page paper grew into this 1,030+/- page full Report (including our Annexes and Appendices). Indeed, with NASA and foreign space agencies constantly at our web sites reading the latest edition of this Report we can state that this Report is becoming a controlling factor in what NASA tells the world about Mars and in what the world believes about NASA’s credibility on this topic. As such, we never took down our graphics about the original low µv values posted by the REMS Team. We are right. NASA is wrong. They know it, and thus as Figures 1, 2 and 6 show, even on this they caved in to us and restored most of the low µv values.