US Space Fleet

originally posted by: sirChill

originally posted by: tanka418

Sophisticated "ray tracing"...you mean like what is built in to virtually every 3D rendering engine today?

He was going to say vector graphic, but figured that wasn't hip enough.

Yes, well I see stuff like this quite a lot; people who are overly impressed by some naturally occurring and quite simple phenomena making the whole system far more complex than it truly is through their attempts to understand in a scientific sense.

The reality is, in the case of a wormhole; it is a "hole" in space that leads to some distant region. What is observed is a gravity lens, with unknown stars on the other side.

Explanations like "Einstein ring ", etc. are not necessary and only serve to complicate things where detection is concerned. And, much of what the explanations provide is virtually meaningless to a CCD array. We need to concern ourselves with a slightly extended visible light range of wavelengths, this is where our data is. By "imaging" this range the data will reflect everything that is contained in our field of view. Analyzing/mining this data will reveal far more than is expected. The presence of gravity lenses will become apparent even at the smallest resolvable size, and we are quite likely to discover new phenomena.

originally posted by: StargateSG7

As a technical reply, what would be called a sophisticated Raytracing and
Rendering Engine would be on the order of a product such as Mental Ray:

See link:
en.wikipedia.org...

and a reasonably high quality Game Physics Engine would be the PhysX engine
which has been re-written to be more "Real-time" for NVIDA graphics cards.

See Link:
en.wikipedia.org...

Background on Physics Engines used today:
en.wikipedia.org...

and for those who are inclined, the "Realness" of your
physics simulation is highly dependent upon your final application.

For Optics, you use Light-Field Calculation and Simulation (which includes RayTracing!)

It appears that most of the high end rendering engines are about the same...I use Poser Pro 2012 (firefly) for that kind of rendering.

NViDIA PhysX is what I use, along with NVIDIA SDK's...

I also have linked "AFORGE" an open source computer vision system, along with the ASCOM standard astronomy library and astrometric methods published by the US Navy. All of these libraries were chosen because they are both very good, and are written in the "C" language or one of it's dialects.

For SCIENTIFIC simulation, however much computing
horsepower, time and money you can afford to throw
at your problem is your only limitation!


So if you want to find a USAF Battle Station or a
Big Black Triangle (BBT) in high Earth Orbit, then use
whatever you can get your hands on to examine all
those telescope images which MIGHT hold the key
to PROOF of a U.S. Space Fleet (and Alien Contact too!).

While computing horsepower really isn't an issue...a quad core i7 will handle it, just take longer...a super computer is not required or even needed.

And that's the whole idea...build a robotic telescope, develop a search algorithm, acquire data and mine it...using a custom developed set of tools intended to find exotic objects; planets, blackholes, wormholes, etc., ???

Point is...the technology to find these things exists...might as well use it!
And, if you don't want to build the hardware...the software can be applied to existing "FITS" files...

Well, despite the lead video being fairly irrelevant, of COURSE there's a "secret space force" of some sort. But that's the only certainty us regular folks will have concerning this topic.

The questions are: how large, how long, what tech, in what capacity and... a biggie ... is it responsible for the bulk of the credible UFO sightings over the years? My bet as to UFOs is, a secret space force is likelier than aliens, anyway. But it's a big universe and our science, though oh so nifty, is in it's infancy, and there are some weird things out there that might not be "aliens" from another celestial body, exactly ... so who knows.

As far as astronomers seeing "weird stuff" ... they do, on rare occasions. Some logged, most not.

Speaking about UFOs in any serious manner is a career killer for astronomers and most boots on the ground scientists, though... for obvious reasons.

And off course the military has stealth techniques (and other stuff) we civies have no clue about that would hide most of it from prying eyes.

And of course we haven't ceded space to foreign powers since the shuttle stopped shuttling. If we have, the military would be crying "treason."

I have close acquaintances in the military and old friends in military intelligence, and all have spoken of things they'd "love to share" but cannot, under any circumstances. Secrets are kept. And the one who's active in intelligence did tell me the stuff we're doing in space is secret and "mind blowing."

I was interested in astr0 and still consider that tale as at least possible... but there is sure as heck a secret space force ...and has been at least since the Reagan years as I knew folks (crazy folks) in the Star Wars program, too.

Knowing highly placed religious zealots who are happy and comfortable designing end of the world space weapons to hurry the end of the world and Jesus' second coming doesn't let one sleep easy at night, lemme tell 'ya.

But a secret space force? Absolutely.

a reply to: Baddogma

Is it possible that the US have off world colonies outside the Solar System to relocate the Space Force and people that were handpicked personally should shtf (Like in a scenario where the world get bombed back to stone age?)?

a reply to: stormbringer1701

For the very first time in history, Australian astronomers have successfully given evidence that the giant plasma tubes are drifting over Earth, thus mapping and confirming the existence of tubular plasma structures in the inner layers of Earth’s magnetosphere which was predicted by scientists for over last 60 years.

Giant Plasma Tubes

I've heard the rumor, but no solid information has come out of it. I don't believe it.
a reply to: Triton1128

originally posted by: Baddogma

As far as astronomers seeing "weird stuff" ... they do, on rare occasions. Some logged, most not.

The thing is today, most astronomers use CCDs rather than their eyes to see things so if they are taking data and something weird happens, it's going to get logged.

A good example of this will be the wide field 8.4 meter Large Synoptic Survey Telescope being constructed in Chile.

If any UFOs show up you can bet they will be logged as a UFO to an astronomer is not the same as a UFO to the average person. You can be sure some astronomers would be interested in any anomalies showing up because they may present a new natural, undiscovered phenomena. The first place we go in science when faced with the unexplained is not to alien or "secret space force" conspiracies. It's to nature.

It may not even be the astronomers who captured the anomaly either. Technicians often take test data while preparing the observatory for a nights observations.

Word gets around and those who are interested in such things will examine them.

I can tell you there are things optical pulses which sometimes Optical SETI detect. These are most certainly natural but often they are a mystery.

This paper seeks to answer the question by examining the astrophysical, atmospheric, terrestrial, and instrumental sources of optical pulses of nanosecond timescale. Potential astrophysical/atmospheric sources include airglow and scattered zodiacal light, stellar photon pileup, muon events, and cosmic-ray induced Cˇerenkov flashes. Terrestrial sources, including lightning and laser communications, appear negligible. Instrumental backgrounds such as scintillation in detector optics and corona breakdown have been the dominant background in our experiments to date, and present significant design challenges for future optical SETI researchers.

Is there “RFI” in pulsed optical SETI? - Andrew Howard and Paul Horowitz, Harvard University Physics Department.

Speaking about UFOs in any serious manner is a career killer for astronomers and most boots on the ground scientists, though... for obvious reasons.

Actually it isn't. The only career killer would be ranting on about "alien space brothers" or "evil reptilians" being behind UFO sightings.

There have been a number of astronomers who spoke about UFOs one even convenient a conference to discuss them. I could probably name 5 or 10… just off the top of my head….

Dr. James E. McDonald
Dr. James Harder
Dr. J. Allen Hynek
Dr. Donald Menzel
Dr. Jacques Vallee
Dr. Peter A. Sturrock
Dr. Paul Davies
Dr. Susan Clancy
Dr. Daniel H. Harris
Dr. Hal Putoff
Dr. Alan C. Holt
Dr. Carl Sagan
Dr. Peter A. Sturrock

The latter conducted a survey among astronomers:

From: Report on a Survey of the Membership of the American Astronomical Society Concerning the UFO Phenomenon - Summary - Peter A. Sturrock - Stanford University Microsoft Word Document

Of 2,611 questionnaires mailed to members of the American Astronomical Society, 1,356 were returned, 34 anonymously. Only two members offered to waive anonymity. These facts and many comments confirm that the UFO problem is a sensitive issue for most scientists. Nevertheless, only a few (13) respondents made critical remarks about the subject or the survey; 50 made encouraging statements, 34 offered to help, and 7 indicated that they are actively studying the problem.

If you want to read a good paper with writing on the subject by some of those interested please read:

Physical Evidence Related to UFO Reports - Peter A. Sturrock et. al - Journal for Scientific Exploration

So it's a bit disingenuous to say that most astronomers and other physical scientists would not log anomalies.

a reply to: JadeStar

Well, I love space. Growing up here in Alaska we had a lot of darkness and low light pollution. My Dad had an 8" Celestron schmidt cassegrain (the orange tube). We'd look at Mars, Jupiter...we'd frequently take our lawn chairs and sleeping bags outside to watch meteor showers.

One night while we were sky watching we spotted a satellite. We'd seen them dozens of times, and it wasn't a big deal to see one. As we watched it move across the sky, it suddenly did a perfect 90 degree turn on a dime. We both couldn't believe what we had just seen. It never changed speed, and continued on a new trajectory.

Now, I'm fairly certain for an orbiting body to change its direction on a dime like that is pretty exotic technology. If we happened to catch that, I have to think that professionals with their scopes pointed at the skies have to be catching these things too.

I think (and this is my opinion) -- that these types of things are occasionally seen -- but to maintain professional integrity, they're not talked about. In order to keep in good standing with professional associations, universities, research organizations...these things just aren't talked about (at least openly). There's no funding to be had trying to track these things, and whatever precious time the astronomers do have with high power scopes is to precious to waste tracking down anomalies.

Now that's just one satellite-type object that I saw acting beyond any known human technology in orbit -- that doesn't include my own big black triangle sighting right outside my house in broad daylight. These things exist, they're ours and they're decades beyond what we even think is possible.

There's A LOT more going on up there than we know about, and no professional astronomer that wants to keep their reputation is going to chase rabbit holes over these things.

Who knows, the people operating these craft might know the capabilities of all the research instalations and what they're being tasked with at any given time.

You have to remember that the NRO was using Hubble-sized space telescopes years before Hubble was even put into orbit...heck, the NRO recently gave NASA some of its old space telescopes!

a reply to: tanka418

The nvidia cards they use for small science projects are the tesla cards !

www.nvidia.com...

the coolest super computer I have seen is the one in Edinburgh university
where my mum works and she got me a wee visit

www.epcc.ed.ac.uk...

you can use their services! maybe a good idea to help with your data mining

originally posted by: stormbringer1701

originally posted by: Triton1128
a reply to: stormbringer1701

His reply isn't aimed at NASA, SPACE X, BOEING, ect..

Listen to the question. This pertains to a secret space force/fleet AND a hidden military base on the moon. He specifically says .. We have one, Its there. A space force. It exists. Then the speaker follows up stating. Some acknowledge it, some don't.

His answer is aimed at the previous question. Its cut and dry. I'm just curious if this "comment" was intentional or not

Well I'd love for it to be true but there is no way such a thing could be hidden from all of humanity including astronomers and physicists. there would be effects that would be detectable particularly when they are operating in our own solar system. effects that we would not be able to ignore or rationalize.

Ummmmm what about the Cloaking Device?

That's why we can't see them when they are restaffing the Moon base.

originally posted by: nomadone407

originally posted by: stormbringer1701

originally posted by: Triton1128
a reply to: stormbringer1701

His reply isn't aimed at NASA, SPACE X, BOEING, ect..

Listen to the question. This pertains to a secret space force/fleet AND a hidden military base on the moon. He specifically says .. We have one, Its there. A space force. It exists. Then the speaker follows up stating. Some acknowledge it, some don't.

His answer is aimed at the previous question. Its cut and dry. I'm just curious if this "comment" was intentional or not

Well I'd love for it to be true but there is no way such a thing could be hidden from all of humanity including astronomers and physicists. there would be effects that would be detectable particularly when they are operating in our own solar system. effects that we would not be able to ignore or rationalize.

Ummmmm what about the Cloaking Device?

That's why we can't see them when they are restaffing the Moon base.

If the cloaking device was based on metamaterials I am not sure what kind of tells would exist but there would be some. (admittedly harder to detect because they might be subtle) but current open tech metamaterial cloaks work for one type of detection only. invisible to X wave length but not all others. recently some have been made that are invisible in several wave lengths. But thus far in open source literature no metamaterial cloak is a universal cloak. they all have tells.

For cloaks that work by spacial warping such as Lazar's alledged Flying saucer you'd still get optical effects at the fringe of the effect and from certain angles.

when it comes to detecting things there are all sorts of things you can do. some work even if the object is completely invisible. for example a completely invisible plane will create a trail of turbulence through the air while in atmospheric flight. such a trail can be detected by weather radars. if something is invisible due to cloaking that does not mean that a bat cannot "see" it with sonar. or that there isn't a temperature difference between background and the surface of the plane or the margin of a field around it. or that background radiation or particle emissions differ from background due to screening by the cloak or plain old shielding by the mass of the object.

a sensor can detect cloaks by back scattered signals or occultation of natural signals in the background.

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: sirChill

originally posted by: tanka418

Sophisticated "ray tracing"...you mean like what is built in to virtually every 3D rendering engine today?

He was going to say vector graphic, but figured that wasn't hip enough.

Yes, well I see stuff like this quite a lot; people who are overly impressed by some naturally occurring and quite simple phenomena making the whole system far more complex than it truly is through their attempts to understand in a scientific sense.

The reality is, in the case of a wormhole; it is a "hole" in space that leads to some distant region. What is observed is a gravity lens, with unknown stars on the other side.

Explanations like "Einstein ring ", etc. are not necessary and only serve to complicate things where detection is concerned. And, much of what the explanations provide is virtually meaningless to a CCD array. We need to concern ourselves with a slightly extended visible light range of wavelengths, this is where our data is. By "imaging" this range the data will reflect everything that is contained in our field of view. Analyzing/mining this data will reveal far more than is expected. The presence of gravity lenses will become apparent even at the smallest resolvable size, and we are quite likely to discover new phenomena.

I'll say it again. The reason i mentioned ray tracing is because a SME said they did that at the starship symposium. i did not pull it from my "anywhere" to make it sound technical or baffle 'em with BS. so knock it off.

I personally believe there is a breakaway program from what I can gather.
Just as military technology is beyond us - I feel many other things are
along those lines as well. We are kept confused and stupid by interpersonal
issues on this planet that don't mean anything. Party systems that keep us
thinking we're choosing sides when they answer to the same
masters regardless of party.

Along with that program I believe aliens work with them as well -
many ask why wouldn't they tell us?
It stands to reason that if you have people that can hate other people
from their own planet solely for the color of their skin than the
parallel can't be too far off that they would hate someone/thing from
far away or from inside. They don't appear on amateur astronomer
telescopes because quite simply - they cloak.

Sounds like mad ramblings I know but you're always welcome to tell
me about how sane and normal your beliefs are - i'm sure they're
core and fundamental to all.


-Toy the Bear

a reply to: JadeStar

So it's a bit disingenuous to say that most astronomers and other physical scientists would not log anomalies.

Hmmm, I didn't exactly say that... I used qualifiers. I get they're actually looking for anomalies out there, but it is self evident that logging objects doing impossible maneuvers might get one in trouble with the DOD and might interfere with rep, tenure, etc. ...but my remark was more a broad generalization from direct conversations with astronomers. And true when it comes to things seen closer to Earth and less likely natural.

Another problem is this "stuff" is so anecdotal... but there are tales of visits to Kitt Peak by govt suits trashing photos from the 60's-70's, for instance.

I actually met James McDonald, btw, when a kid... the Tucson astronomy crowd is fairly small. There are still folks sure he was killed for snooping into UFO's... I think that's paranoid, but know something very, very weird is going on and I'm simply looking for the least wacky answer... but I appreciate your teaching moments.

Again, for those that haven't seen things in the sky that have no generally known business being there, this all seems silly... we get it. But there are some reasonably educated people who have seen astounding things and know something's up... and ignorance can breed strange suppositions... but something very, deeply weird IS going on.

If someone could explain the huge white cylinder hanging immobile in the afternoon sky, the lights whipping around each other and vanishing over the horizon in 4 seconds, the van sized, wingless black diamond that circled my house at 4 a.m. or the reams of other valid, odd things seen overhead by myself and others, then I would be emphatically, completely agreeing with everything you say.

*shrugs*

Folks on ATS talk about how the Government lies about everything but many of them some how need concrete proof that we have a top secret black space program. Some of these same people even believe in 2000 year old desert fairy tales, but god forbid they consider that the existence of advanced technology probably is and most likely has been being kept from the herds for decades now. It could be that these Iphones and the like are handed down advanced technology. ~$heopleNation

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
I'll say it again. The reason i mentioned ray tracing is because a SME said they did that at the starship symposium. i did not pull it from my "anywhere" to make it sound technical or baffle 'em with BS. so knock it off.

Knock what off?

What you've said is all quite valid, IF we wish to understand the phenomena, we don't need that to detect, yet we do need the "detect" to augment understanding...nothing quite like "seeing" our object de query.

originally posted by: SheopleNation
Folks on ATS talk about how the Government lies about everything but many of them some how need concrete proof that we have a top secret black space program. Some of these same people even believe in 2000 year old desert fairy tales, but god forbid they consider that the existence of advanced technology probably is and most likely has been being kept from the herds for decades now. It could be that these Iphones and the like are handed down advanced technology. ~$heopleNation

Lol, we didt get iPhones from aliens. not when said technology has a well documented developmental history.

Look, anyone can post anything, that doesn't mean you believe it without good concrete evidence. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and I'm sorry but a "secret space force" which flies around unnoticed by all the nations of the world and their citizens if a little bit extraordinary.

Part of it is that no one is LOOKING for evidence of this. The equipment you need to do so is very expensive and not owned by private individuals. You get assigned "time" at these observatories, and there are things like budgets and grant funding .. no one is going to score funding and be granted time on the right tools to search for a secret space program.

Sure, you can buy a huge telescope and look at Mars or Jupiter ... even far away galaxies and nebula .... but you're not going to see a ship in high orbit if you're counting the moons of Jupiter.

You might run across some weird things in your normal research, note it -- wonder what it was, but no scientist is going to be writing papers on these things, as that isn't a part of their research. I'm sure if you got a bunch of experienced researchers together in a room they might swap stories of weird things they've seen -- but that's probably as far as it goes.

The NRO knows the capabilities of the scientific community -- hell they needed to know what the Soviets had, where they had it, and what they were looking at. Don't we think the government knows what our scientists are looking at, and what instruments theyre using to look up into space? Any secret space program would know when and where to fly to minimize being seen by civilian researchers.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
Part of it is that no one is LOOKING for evidence of this. The equipment you need to do so is very expensive and not owned by private individuals.

I disagree.

You get assigned "time" at these observatories, and there are things like budgets and grant funding .. no one is going to score funding and be granted time on the right tools to search for a secret space program.

Sure, you can buy a huge telescope and look at Mars or Jupiter ... even far away galaxies and nebula .... but you're not going to see a ship in high orbit if you're counting the moons of Jupiter.

Of course not. Astronomy is not just about imaging distant objects under high magnification. Most observatories have a wide-field of view, all-sky cam (sometimes several), many of them you can access for free online.

These are usually set up to show the conditions of "seeing" at any moment.

Here are the ones at Lick Observatory for instance.


Also….

What of the All Sky meteor tracking networks like the American Meteor Society?

Anyone can set up and operate an incredibly sensitive wide field All Sky camera with nothing more than a 300 dollar security camera, a laptop and a 150 dollar video interface. So for less than the cost of a new Apple Watch most people can operate a setup which can image, track and record anything that moves in a wide field of the sky with the right lens.

Even the NASA CAMS network is mostly just comprised of stations operated by private individuals at their residence.

You can't tell me all these cameras which pick up meteors, sprites and other rare atmospheric phenomena miss out on the massive ships in this "Secret Space Fleet"..

I and my patents operated a Watec 902H2 Ultra as a meteor cam. Lots of meteors, lightning, planes, birds, bugs. helicopters, even someones Chinese lanterns but no UFOs.

a reply to: JadeStar

Not if the optical stealth technology is as good as I'm lead to believe. Most of the patents on the tech got seized for national security purposes, so you won't find any. They've been working on making craft invisible for decades. And we think graphene is a "new thing" lol