It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Phage
Unless an object is very close to the spacecraft it would have to be moving at a very high rate of speed to be in one image and not another. But, if it were moving very fast, it would show a "motion blur" effect. Here's what that looks like, debris from the spacecraft in the near field.
originally posted by: tanka418
originally posted by: Phage
Unless an object is very close to the spacecraft it would have to be moving at a very high rate of speed to be in one image and not another. But, if it were moving very fast, it would show a "motion blur" effect. Here's what that looks like, debris from the spacecraft in the near field.
Do you have science to back up this assertion?
Seriously; I would like to see the math.
originally posted by: draknoir2
originally posted by: tanka418
originally posted by: Phage
Unless an object is very close to the spacecraft it would have to be moving at a very high rate of speed to be in one image and not another. But, if it were moving very fast, it would show a "motion blur" effect. Here's what that looks like, debris from the spacecraft in the near field.
Do you have science to back up this assertion?
Seriously; I would like to see the math.
Of what possible use could that be to you? When pressed you are loath to provide either.