Egyptian pyramids found by infra-red satellite images(bbc.co.uk)
bbc.co.uk
Egyptian pyramids found by infra-red satellite images
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-13522957
51 comments
Obligatory xkcd:
http://xkcd.com/208/
It seems we've reached the point where there's an xkcd for every situation (on HN at least) now. Maybe a corollary to rule 34[1] is needed.
[1] http://xkcd.com/305/
http://xkcd.com/208/
It seems we've reached the point where there's an xkcd for every situation (on HN at least) now. Maybe a corollary to rule 34[1] is needed.
[1] http://xkcd.com/305/
Definitely! BTW, wetriffs.com is gone but .org is available
wetriffs.com was registered by Munroe, wasn't it?
FWIW, the puppet book [1] was pretty good. Didn't end up using it for the project, but it seemed readable/informative.
[1] http://www.amazon.com/Pulling-Strings-Puppet-Automated-Admin...
[1] http://www.amazon.com/Pulling-Strings-Puppet-Automated-Admin...
Thanks a lot for the link. I've started to read Pro Puppet by the same guy.
Yes. It's a curse.
INDY! NOOOOO
A colleague of mine worked with Sarah Parcak (the researcher featured) and says:
"They use standard satellite images taken by NASA and then apply various photoshop filters to those images to find subtle differences in the terrain. Egypt works great because the starting palette is so clean. They've tried the same technology in South America and haven't had as much success."
Not sure if this is the exact technique they are using in this article, but it's what we featured in an exhibit on Egypt he worked on.
Not sure if this is the exact technique they are using in this article, but it's what we featured in an exhibit on Egypt he worked on.
My searching on this topic turned up this interesting book - http://www.amazon.com/Remote-Sensing-Archaeology-Interdiscip...
Seems like these techniques are going to radically change how we find new archaeological sites. Tech. project idea: Build some tools to help archaeologists learn and share from each other with this data. Build a world wide database of IR imagery just a few meters below the surface?
Seems like these techniques are going to radically change how we find new archaeological sites. Tech. project idea: Build some tools to help archaeologists learn and share from each other with this data. Build a world wide database of IR imagery just a few meters below the surface?
Yes, the idea in the OP is not new.
To my knowledge, the first people to use remote sensing data in an archeological context used radar (SRTM, a synthetic aperture radar mapping mission that flew on the space shuttle). Radar can penetrate the land to a depth of ~meters depending on lots of factors.
They discovered the lost city of Ubar, which was a trading city (ca. 3000 BC) in the Arabian peninsula that had been lost to the desert.
They discovered it because trails that had formerly led into Ubar gave off stronger radar reflections.
Later on-site digs confirmed actual ruins. This was in 1992. A link:
http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA01721
The person who blurbed the book you found, Charles Elachi, was a key member of the team that designed the radar instrument that found Ubar.
All of the SRTM data is online somewhere. The desert turns out to be a really good place to look for stuff. Less clutter.
To my knowledge, the first people to use remote sensing data in an archeological context used radar (SRTM, a synthetic aperture radar mapping mission that flew on the space shuttle). Radar can penetrate the land to a depth of ~meters depending on lots of factors.
They discovered the lost city of Ubar, which was a trading city (ca. 3000 BC) in the Arabian peninsula that had been lost to the desert.
They discovered it because trails that had formerly led into Ubar gave off stronger radar reflections.
Later on-site digs confirmed actual ruins. This was in 1992. A link:
http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA01721
The person who blurbed the book you found, Charles Elachi, was a key member of the team that designed the radar instrument that found Ubar.
All of the SRTM data is online somewhere. The desert turns out to be a really good place to look for stuff. Less clutter.
Build a small sensor array with OTS parts arduino etc and attach to balloon that the Arch can use in the field to look around his position in real time with such techniques.
And mount to DIYDrones for added awesome.
And mount to DIYDrones for added awesome.
>"These are just the sites [close to] the surface. There are many thousands of additional sites that the Nile has covered over with silt. This is just the beginning of this kind of work."
I am very curious as to what else they find through these excavations
I am very curious as to what else they find through these excavations
Exciting news indeed. Another Tutankhamen type excavation fully intact would be very cool
It's fascinating how many relics of ancient civilisation are concentrated in that part of the world.
Many presenting puzzles yet to be solved.
Many presenting puzzles yet to be solved.
It's fascinating how many relics of ancient civilisation are concentrated in that part of the world
Not really. It'd be much more fascinating if you found relics of ancient civilisation which weren't concentrated in that part of the world.
Not really. It'd be much more fascinating if you found relics of ancient civilisation which weren't concentrated in that part of the world.
> It'd be much more fascinating if you found relics of ancient civilisation which weren't concentrated in that part of the world.
The earliest egyptian pyramids were ~2600BC, corresponding with the rise of civilizations in China (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_Emperor) and Peru (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caral). We've found a lot more iconic relics of Egyptian civilization from that time period, however.
The earliest egyptian pyramids were ~2600BC, corresponding with the rise of civilizations in China (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_Emperor) and Peru (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caral). We've found a lot more iconic relics of Egyptian civilization from that time period, however.
On that line, by far the most intriguing and fascinating structure or relic from ancient human history is the site at Göbekli Tepe[1], in modern day Turkey. Shakes up pretty much every theory and timeline we have constructed on how humans probably developed over time and is much too early to fit in anywhere.
[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6bekli_Tepe
[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6bekli_Tepe
Gobekli Tepe is indeed fascinating. There's a good article on it in the latest National Geographic: http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2011/06/gobekli-tepe/mann-...
Wow! That's truly mind boggling.
Thanks for the great link!
Thanks for the great link!
Does anyone know if satellite imagery could be used to map ocean floors for this type of use? Or would the water disrupt the infrared wavelength?
check the absorption spectrum : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Water_absorption_spectrum....
Which also explains why the ocean is blue.
Which also explains why the ocean is blue.
>... by looking at infra-red images which show up underground buildings.
Yeah, I have to: those poor underground buildings... they just don't hold a candle to infra-red images from space, do they?
Come on BBC, "show up"? We need a Ballmer-like "Editors! Editors! Editors!" chant right about now.
Yeah, I have to: those poor underground buildings... they just don't hold a candle to infra-red images from space, do they?
Come on BBC, "show up"? We need a Ballmer-like "Editors! Editors! Editors!" chant right about now.
Maybe we can find Atlantis now.
How does this work exactly? The wikipedia page on Infrared did not turn up any such use... or I missed it.
How can you see a mud brick under sand because it is "much denser than the soil that surrounds it"?
How can you see a mud brick under sand because it is "much denser than the soil that surrounds it"?
Denser == absorbs more of the light/different regions of the spectrum.
This is detectable in the light that is reflected back.
It's not dissimilar to how an ultrasound scanner is used to look at a baby in the womb. In fact, ultrasound is used in archaeology as well to do this sort of stuff, obviously on a smaller scale.
This is the wikipedia page you want: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared_spectroscopy
Although that page discusses things at very different scales to what we're talking about here, (while I am not a physicist,) the principles are basically the same.
This is detectable in the light that is reflected back.
It's not dissimilar to how an ultrasound scanner is used to look at a baby in the womb. In fact, ultrasound is used in archaeology as well to do this sort of stuff, obviously on a smaller scale.
This is the wikipedia page you want: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared_spectroscopy
Although that page discusses things at very different scales to what we're talking about here, (while I am not a physicist,) the principles are basically the same.
I am a physicist, and I'm afraid that the page on infra-red spectroscopy isn't really relevant due to (as you say) the very different length scales.
What I think is really going on is thermodynamics. Suppose I bury a big stone pyramid under the sand. Stone is (I assume) a much better conductor of heat than sand. When the sun comes up after a cold night, it heats the sand, but the sand on top of the pyramid has its heat conducted away more efficiently than the sand far from the pyramid, so it'll show up as slightly cooler when imaged with the infra-red satellite.
What I think is really going on is thermodynamics. Suppose I bury a big stone pyramid under the sand. Stone is (I assume) a much better conductor of heat than sand. When the sun comes up after a cold night, it heats the sand, but the sand on top of the pyramid has its heat conducted away more efficiently than the sand far from the pyramid, so it'll show up as slightly cooler when imaged with the infra-red satellite.
This was what I was wondering, too. But how deep down does the heat actually go? Unless these structures are just a few inches below the ground, it seems the difference would be very small. Just empirically, you don't have to dig down more than a few inches until even desert sand is cold.
The article reads, these pyramids were close to surface and therefore were found so early on.
As for how deep does heat actually go, I would say, that if earth wouldn't have any temperature of its own, it would go all the way down. The process just takes extreme amounts of time. Empirically it takes time for earth to freeze at winter (if you live north enough) and likewise one cannot dig the ground has melted at the late of spring. Other empirical example would be rock near a campfire, they will stay warm long time after the fire goes down. Earth is just a very big rock.
While the ground doesn't freeze at Egypt, they certainly have some seasons, with different average temperatures, to warm up or cool down the deep ground temperature. So within time they should be able to see temperature differences of objects buried deep into ground. Assuming the resolution of satellites is good enough.
Other question would be how much interference does the warm sand over these objects cause. As the sand is somewhat flat, it probably has black body like radiation curve and removing it should be easy, but there always will be some static from these processes reducing the total resolution.
Well all in all, I really don't know how they do all this.
As for how deep does heat actually go, I would say, that if earth wouldn't have any temperature of its own, it would go all the way down. The process just takes extreme amounts of time. Empirically it takes time for earth to freeze at winter (if you live north enough) and likewise one cannot dig the ground has melted at the late of spring. Other empirical example would be rock near a campfire, they will stay warm long time after the fire goes down. Earth is just a very big rock.
While the ground doesn't freeze at Egypt, they certainly have some seasons, with different average temperatures, to warm up or cool down the deep ground temperature. So within time they should be able to see temperature differences of objects buried deep into ground. Assuming the resolution of satellites is good enough.
Other question would be how much interference does the warm sand over these objects cause. As the sand is somewhat flat, it probably has black body like radiation curve and removing it should be easy, but there always will be some static from these processes reducing the total resolution.
Well all in all, I really don't know how they do all this.
Alternate theory: the material scooped and dumped to cover the pyramid has different thermal characteristics than the pre-existing soil surrounding the site. That is, it's not the pyramid that stands out, it's the covering.
I don't know, just formulating another hypothesis for the fun of it.
I don't know, just formulating another hypothesis for the fun of it.
alternate alternate theory: the ancient pyramids, created and dropped there by aliens, are superconducting - they cool the ground above them in a characteristic square gradient.
Do they look at day-night differential images? That would a priori seem to confirm your hypothesis and also provide a better imaging result.
No I didn't read the article.
No I didn't read the article.
That would a priori seem to confirm your hypothesis
I'm not sure that a priori means what you think it means.
I'm not sure that a priori means what you think it means.
a priori - from before, not based on prior study
I use it here in the same sense as "an a priori estimate" as opposed to the more common logical use of something being apparent without requiring study but only the application of reason.
I take it you're more a logician than a Latin student. If the later then I guess you'll probably correct me?
Are you sure now, let me know.
--
Aside I've had chance to read teh article and there was no mention of taking near-IR images at day and night. So presumably it's my language use that's getting me heavily downmodded?
I use it here in the same sense as "an a priori estimate" as opposed to the more common logical use of something being apparent without requiring study but only the application of reason.
I take it you're more a logician than a Latin student. If the later then I guess you'll probably correct me?
Are you sure now, let me know.
--
Aside I've had chance to read teh article and there was no mention of taking near-IR images at day and night. So presumably it's my language use that's getting me heavily downmodded?
Aside I've had chance to read teh article and there was no mention of taking near-IR images at day and night. So presumably it's my language use that's getting me heavily downmodded?
Actually I think you were downmodded for not reading the article and then asking a question that could have been answered by reading the article.
Actually I think you were downmodded for not reading the article and then asking a question that could have been answered by reading the article.
>asking a question that could have been answered by reading the article.
Except I read the article and watched the video and neither answered the question ... so if any of these people had read it they would have known the article didn't answer the point. So it's just pettiness?
IMO part of the benefit of social media such as this site is that others are willing to digest news and information to enable one to get a quick overview of a topic.
Except I read the article and watched the video and neither answered the question ... so if any of these people had read it they would have known the article didn't answer the point. So it's just pettiness?
IMO part of the benefit of social media such as this site is that others are willing to digest news and information to enable one to get a quick overview of a topic.
While I'm not archaeologist that sounds about right in very theoretical level. To explain this more practically it comes down to heating properties of matter.
As specific heat capacity is inverse proportional to density, sand and pyramids react to temperature changes differently. In desert temperature changes between day and night are huge causing sand and pyramids to have different temperatures. As thermal radiation is infrared in temperatures near human body temperatures (didn't check the exact temperatures but pyramids should fit in infrared spectrum), sand and pyramids will show up in different 'colors' in infrared mapping of area.
This is probably the basic idea behind these findings, of course what they are doing certainly goes beyond this level of explanation with use of infrared spectroscopy.
As specific heat capacity is inverse proportional to density, sand and pyramids react to temperature changes differently. In desert temperature changes between day and night are huge causing sand and pyramids to have different temperatures. As thermal radiation is infrared in temperatures near human body temperatures (didn't check the exact temperatures but pyramids should fit in infrared spectrum), sand and pyramids will show up in different 'colors' in infrared mapping of area.
This is probably the basic idea behind these findings, of course what they are doing certainly goes beyond this level of explanation with use of infrared spectroscopy.
I wonder how they get permission to scour Egypt with a satellite camera. And even if permission was given, will Egyptian authorities allow control of the satellite and the images captured to remain with a university outside the country?
Anyone have a better idea how this process works?
Anyone have a better idea how this process works?
I don't think you need permission to take pictures of a country from space.
This is one of those times where I wish I could see how many points your comment got.
I don't know whether you've gotten a lot of votes or not so I don't know if your answer makes sense to other people as well.
Why do you think you don't need permission to take pictures of a country from space? I think there are certain areas in all countries that they would want to keep secret, and if you allow people to photograph in certain areas and not in others, that's exposing where these areas are (which is an invitation for governments to spy on those areas).
I don't know whether you've gotten a lot of votes or not so I don't know if your answer makes sense to other people as well.
Why do you think you don't need permission to take pictures of a country from space? I think there are certain areas in all countries that they would want to keep secret, and if you allow people to photograph in certain areas and not in others, that's exposing where these areas are (which is an invitation for governments to spy on those areas).
Why does it matter how many points my comment got?
But, the closest I could get: UN General Assembly, resolution 41/65, of 3 December 1986: Principles Relating to Remote Sensing of the Earth from Outer Space.
Principle IV: These activities shall be conducted on the basis of respect for the principle of full and permanent sovereignty of all States and peoples over their own wealth and natural resources, with due regard to the rights and interests, in accordance with international law, of other States and entities under their jurisdiction. Such activities shall not be conducted in a manner detrimental to the legitimate rights and interests of the sensed State.
I'm not sure how remote sensing could violate jurisdiction over wealth and resources, but it does not mention territory.
And then there's principle XII: As soon as the primary data and the processed data concerning the territory under its jurisdiction are produced, the sensed State shall have access to them on a non-discriminatory basis and on reasonable cost terms. The sensed State shall also have access to the available analysed information concerning the territory under its jurisdiction in the possession of any State participating in remote sensing activities on the same basis and terms, taking particularly into account the needs and interests of the developing countries.
If prior permission to perform the sensing was required, provisions stipulating that the data should be shared would be redundant, I think?
Source: http://www.oosa.unvienna.org/oosa/en/SpaceLaw/gares/html/gar...
But, the closest I could get: UN General Assembly, resolution 41/65, of 3 December 1986: Principles Relating to Remote Sensing of the Earth from Outer Space.
Principle IV: These activities shall be conducted on the basis of respect for the principle of full and permanent sovereignty of all States and peoples over their own wealth and natural resources, with due regard to the rights and interests, in accordance with international law, of other States and entities under their jurisdiction. Such activities shall not be conducted in a manner detrimental to the legitimate rights and interests of the sensed State.
I'm not sure how remote sensing could violate jurisdiction over wealth and resources, but it does not mention territory.
And then there's principle XII: As soon as the primary data and the processed data concerning the territory under its jurisdiction are produced, the sensed State shall have access to them on a non-discriminatory basis and on reasonable cost terms. The sensed State shall also have access to the available analysed information concerning the territory under its jurisdiction in the possession of any State participating in remote sensing activities on the same basis and terms, taking particularly into account the needs and interests of the developing countries.
If prior permission to perform the sensing was required, provisions stipulating that the data should be shared would be redundant, I think?
Source: http://www.oosa.unvienna.org/oosa/en/SpaceLaw/gares/html/gar...
Although international law doesn't spell it out verbatim, the generally accepted principle is that sovereignty does not extend to the altitude where satellites fly. As such, it's impossible to prevent anyone from taking pictures of any country from space.
Today you can order high-resolution satellite images online.
Some countries will limit the resolution available by non-technical means.
This is awesome.
No word on whether Goa'uld holding chambers have been found in the new pyramids, I guess.
History repeats itself. I wonder what we can find in our past that will inform our future.
(although, one might say, the main thing that one learns from the study of history is that people do not learn from history)
History repeats itself. I wonder what we can find in our past that will inform our future.
(although, one might say, the main thing that one learns from the study of history is that people do not learn from history)
Nice.
OK, back to a rainy day in Chicago and trying to understand Puppet.