Wils' Tetrahedron

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Zip Monster</i>
<br />Wils' Tetrahedron<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">That's a nice one. However, take note of the direction of the Sun (to the right in the orientation you showed). This means the feature is a pit, not raised above the surface. So there is no "fourth face". -|Tom|-

Tom, sorry for the confusion, the link is to the USGS site, the image posted above is a crop from the inverted strip featured on Malin's site.

It's not a pit.

Zip Monster

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Zip Monster</i>
<br />Tom, sorry for the confusion, the link is to the USGS site, the image posted above is a crop from the inverted strip featured on Malin's site. It's not a pit.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Thx. I agree. I did one too many inversions when drawing the original into Photoshop. -|Tom|-

Wil Faust's mound is a good find. By comparing to the adjoining map-projected context image, E0600270, my double check shows the "not map-projected" narrow angle gif for E0600269 to be oriented correctly for NSEW in the MSSS gallery.
www.msss.com/moc_gallery/e01_e06/images/E06/E0600269.html

Measured with a ruler, I get around 300 meters across, so that checks out with ZM's numbers. Local time is 14.70, so the shadows are right for a mound also, and not a ditch.

This three sided mound has sharp, straight edges and apparenly flat sides, so it definately looks artifiical, much more so than the D&M. My only caution would be that resolution of the image is only fair at 5.73 m/p, so I would make any conclusions contingient on better imaging. But it looks promising. Here's Wil's mound enhanced a little more with a histogram adjustment.




Neil

This is, I think, a much better candidate for artificiality than any of the faces.

Emanuel

I second emanuel's observation.