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.

 

Hubble Orion image reveals cylindrical object

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 02:36 AM
link   
It's because there's a lack of perspective when it comes to the area surrounding the "object". It's shining the light from the light source off to the right (in the picture I posted anyway). It does appear to be a 3 dimensional shape because it is. We live in a very 3-D universe.

It's also possible that there could be two light sources causing the reflections from both sides. Something else to think about. Either way, no worries for us. It would take several billion years for that object to reach here, and I can assure you that by that time, I won't care in the least.


TheBorg




posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 03:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kr0n0s
Wow thats witty, you must be what about 15?

I wonder what area that 1 pixel covers? Like some of you say, this thing is very, very big whatever it is. Ive heard/read about large city size space ships but not sun sized ships.
Im wondering though. How much closer is this thing than the Nebula is?
If it was to close, then it most likely would be really out of focus right?
Im just speculating here, i honestly have no clue or opinion on what this could be..
Maybe the hubble site put it in as a joke lmao



Originally posted by red eye agnostic
looks like someone took a giant space dump infront of the camera


lol what are you 78? get over it



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 04:05 AM
link   
Looks to me like looking into the ecliptic of a solar dust disk between here and there...

Usually they are more rectangular, but the background light from the nebula takes care of that I suppose.

Interesting pic.



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 10:36 AM
link   
From the perspective we are looking at it, it looks like fire or glowing under the body or propulsion of some kind. Maybe the hyper drive is getting ready to kick in or maybe they just arrived from hyper drive or maybe that is just the amount of heat given off of such a large craft?

Or maybe it is a cloud...



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheBorg
Let us not forget that this is a nebula, the birthing location for stars. Stars are born in the deep recesses of these kinds of clouds of interstellar gas and dust. Once they condense far enough, they spark to life, and start to burn. During that process, they move towards the outside of the nebula, sometimes dragging trails of dust and debris behind it. Look no further for evidence than the very same Orion Nebula:



isc.astro.cornell.edu...

To me, it's nothing more than another star birth. Such a beautiful thing to see, isn't it?

TheBorg

No offense, but I have yet to see a star birth, and you say 'another star birth' like you have seen a few.
Sounds like speculation and theory to me.
Where can I see bonafide evidence of any star being born?
Where can you point to in the sky and say 'a hundred years ago there wasnt a star there, and then one was born.'?
Im really curious to see a star birth, or even evidence of a star birth, but swirling clouds of matter are not stars and have never been proved to be 'baby stars' or 'star birthings'.



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Its an early solar system.

Ive read various things on this pic and others.

Its just the dust that surrounds the star forming in the middle, which is not yet hot enough to shine through.

The dust is just what the planets form out of.

i thought this was pretty much conclusive information.

please correct me if im wrong


[edit on 11-2-2007 by Anomic of Nihilism]



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 12:55 PM
link   
This is a google image search link for typing in..

HUBBLE PROTOPLANETARY SYSTEM

Google image search




And heres Wiki's definition, with a pic you might recognise used for example.

Wiki PROTOPLANETARY DISK

2012 is comming, thats enough for me to deal with right now....
..lets not get tooOOoo paranoid people!




[edit on 11-2-2007 by Anomic of Nihilism]



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anomic of Nihilism
This is a google image search link for typing in..

HUBBLE PROTOPLANETARY SYSTEM

Google image search



Did you notice that the "cylinder" was one of the images in that search?

The image appears on this page under the title Orion Protoplanetary Disks with a description.

www.physics.uc.edu...

So it is a baby solar system. Nice find.



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheBorg
Either way, no worries for us. It would take several billion years for that object to reach here, and I can assure you that by that time, I won't care in the least.

TheBorg



No offense but you have absolutely no way of knowing if a ship advanced enough to be that size would take billions of years to get to here. For all you know it could take less then 1 second...



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 01:17 PM
link   
Thanx.

I used to browse Hubble images ALOT when i was very into astronomy, and i remembered comming across a few images like that and became quite interested in that subject.

They are without doubt, amazing artifacts. gives you the "depth" you've always wanted in pics like that. who knows what might inhabit that system in billions of years time, if anything at all.

facinating subject any way, certainly interesting times in which we live!


Peace!


[edit on 11-2-2007 by Anomic of Nihilism]



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 02:55 PM
link   
I've been looking around and did a google search on Orion Protoplanetary Disk, and there is a lot of sites showing that this object is indeed a Protoplanetary Disk.

This site has a video tour of the whole M42 Nebula that I thought was pretty cool.

imgsrc.hubblesite.org...

Start the movie and after a bit select Protoplanetary Disc, and there is your object.

Enjoy.



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 04:44 PM
link   
My age doesnt matter since i am not spamming the thread with worthless one-liners in an attempt at humor.
I believe the rule against one liners was probably created in response to people like you that are making worthless posts, like yours.


Originally posted by red eye agnostic

Originally posted by Kr0n0s
Wow thats witty, you must be what about 15?

I wonder what area that 1 pixel covers? Like some of you say, this thing is very, very big whatever it is. Ive heard/read about large city size space ships but not sun sized ships.
Im wondering though. How much closer is this thing than the Nebula is?
If it was to close, then it most likely would be really out of focus right?
Im just speculating here, i honestly have no clue or opinion on what this could be..
Maybe the hubble site put it in as a joke lmao



Originally posted by red eye agnostic
looks like someone took a giant space dump infront of the camera


lol what are you 78? get over it



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 04:56 PM
link   
I am not up on the whole "imagery" end of this stuff. Is this image the kind that replaces the data with colors?

In other words, I know that in a lot of astronomical images, the colors we see are not really colors in space. Colors are added values that are given to represent various gasses and radiation types.

Am I right about this?

And, if I am, does that apply to this image? Thanks.



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Horrificus
I am not up on the whole "imagery" end of this stuff. Is this image the kind that replaces the data with colors?

The Orion Nebula image in the OP is an image from the Hubble Telescope out in orbit that was transferred digitally as opposed to a photograph on film. Digital photography has gotten to be just as good as film and is more convenient to transmit electronically. The imaging process takes several images taken over a long exposure using different filters. The images are combined as layers, but this is what the nebula really looks like. The different colors show the presence of different elements that glow in different colors when excited.

If you look through a telescope, the nebula will appear more like a white cloud, but that is because the human eye is limited to what it can see. A camera can do a better job of distinguishing colors than we can. The two most common colors are red for hydrogen and blue for helium. These are the two most abundant elements out in space and the atoms out in space get energized from nearby stars so we see it as nebulae. The background image that I have in my avatar is a good example of the two colors. Other colors come from other elements and different combinations of elements.

I hope that explains it well enough.

[edit on 2/11/2007 by Hal9000]



posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hal9000

Originally posted by Horrificus
I am not up on the whole "imagery" end of this stuff. Is this image the kind that replaces the data with colors?

The Orion Nebula image in the OP is an image from the Hubble Telescope out in orbit that was transferred digitally as opposed to a photograph on film. Digital photography has gotten to be just as good as film and is more convenient to transmit electronically. The imaging process takes several images taken over a long exposure using different filters. The images are combined as layers, but this is what the nebula really looks like. The different colors show the presence of different elements that glow in different colors when excited.

If you look through a telescope, the nebula will appear more like a white cloud, but that is because the human eye is limited to what it can see. A camera can do a better job of distinguishing colors than we can. The two most common colors are red for hydrogen and blue for helium. These are the two most abundant elements out in space and the atoms out in space get energized from nearby stars so we see it as nebulae. The background image that I have in my avatar is a good example of the two colors. Other colors come from other elements and different combinations of elements.

I hope that explains it well enough.

[edit on 2/11/2007 by Hal9000]

Thanks Hal. Sorry I didn't word my question better, but I'm glad you understood anyway.


Still, and I hope I am just missing your answer to this, but, are you saying that the telescopes or software are assigning specific colors to specific elements, to allow us to see what our human eyes cannot see?

Or, is this the way our software or hardware observes the elements that are present?

Sorry if I am "thick".

Also, what elements do you think that Planetary Disk is made up of, to appear so dark?

Your replies are very much appreciated.



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Horrificus
Still, and I hope I am just missing your answer to this, but, are you saying that the telescopes or software are assigning specific colors to specific elements, to allow us to see what our human eyes cannot see?

Or, is this the way our software or hardware observes the elements that are present?

The colors are real, we just can’t see them with our naked eye very well because our eyes are like a camera that has too fast of a shutter speed. Cameras can take long time exposures so the colors show up better.

The colors are dependant of the element present and we know this from experiments in the past. The glow comes mostly from gasses like hydrogen, helium oxygen and others. Each one gives off a unique color or light frequency when it is excited. I’m sure you have seen fluorescent light bulbs. These work off this principle that when excited with high voltage the mercury vapor gas in the tube glows and other elements coated on the glass tube creates a white light, which is a light containing several frequencies.

So the gas out in space get excited from different sources mostly from stars giving off radio, xray, or gamma rays, and depending on the color or the frequency of the light we can tell what element is present.

The camera is actually a detector which measures the frequency and assigns a value, and that value is what is transferred and eventually reconstructed as an image. When digital imaging was being developed they could calibrate the software by comparing the digital image to normal photographic film and adjust it till the two look the same.

The images are also fixed when errors or different spots show up that they know are not real. I subscribe to an online telescope that displays digital images and they constantly get green blotches that they say are from cosmic rays hitting the detector. These anomalies are fixed by copying and pasting similar areas to cover up the mistakes, but it is just to make the image look better and it is not to cover anything up like so many believe.



Also, what elements do you think that Planetary Disk is made up of, to appear so dark?

The dark area around the star is made up of all elements but mostly of heavier elements like iron and nickel which comes from the center of stars and is captured in orbit of a new star like in the protoplanet disc. These elements will accrete or gather into planets and asteroids. The heavier elements tend to accrete closer to the sun and form rocky planets like our own, and further out are the gas giants that have lighter elements.

That is why this image is so amazing. It is a picture of a new solar system much like our own but in it’s very early stages of development. At one time our own solar system was just like this one.

Sorry for the long winded reply.

Regards.

Edit: Just found an article that helps describe the colors in this image.

www.aoas.org...

Another edit: Here is another link that has a different description that sounds more like some colors are added. So now I am not sure how true to color it is. It sounds like some interpretation was done.


hubblesite.org...

[edit on 2/12/2007 by Hal9000]

[edit on 2/12/2007 by Hal9000]



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Anomic of Nihilism, thanks. Proto-Planetary Disk it is.


Here's another couple links that talk about them

hubblesite.org...
hubblesite.org...



posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 12:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by 11Bravo
No offense, but I have yet to see a star birth, and you say 'another star birth' like you have seen a few.
Sounds like speculation and theory to me.


No, these are educated guesses based on years of astronomical study, and countless hours of looking at pictures of these very kinds of pictures. I can show links to several thousand similar images if that'd help any. Better yet, just do a Google search for pictures on Nebulas, Sun births, or even better, planetary disks. I think you'll be quite surprised by what you find.



Where can I see bonafide evidence of any star being born?


Well, let's try the Pillars of Creation for starters:

sci.esa.int...



Where can you point to in the sky and say 'a hundred years ago there wasnt a star there, and then one was born.'?


I can honestly say that you got me here. I don't have any such evidence that something like that has ever been witnessed. Good catch.



Im really curious to see a star birth, or even evidence of a star birth, but swirling clouds of matter are not stars and have never been proved to be 'baby stars' or 'star birthings'.


Well, everyone's entitled to their opinion, including you. You can take what those who've studied this for years say as truth, or seek out what you believe to be a new truth. Who knows, maybe you'll prove everyone wrong with something new. [sarcasm]God forbid we as a species evolve due to new knowledge.[/sarcasm]

In any event, it's obvious we share differing views on this. If you're able to prove that these places in the cosmos aren't star nurseries, better than the scientists that have spent their lives doing this, then I'll salute you sir.

God Speed,

TheBorg



posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 12:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by selfless
No offense but you have absolutely no way of knowing if a ship advanced enough to be that size would take billions of years to get to here. For all you know it could take less then 1 second...


Provided they found a wormhole, you are most certainly correct sir.

No offense here, but I'm still trying to figure out how this can be so strongly contested, when it's been identified for ages now. Anyone mind telling me what ever made them even presume this thing to be a ship? First off, as has been mentioned before, that thing would be the largest single ship ever constructed. Now I'll never say that it's impossible, but I will say that it's very very VERY unlikely.

Although, now that you mention it, I do kinda like the wormhole idea. Makes for an interesting story at least...

TheBorg



posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 05:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheBorg...Makes for an interesting story at least...


Speaking of which, do you remember that story called The Black Cloud? I think that is it.

Humongous dust cloud parks in our solar system, forms into a disk around our Sun. It tilts one way and fries the Earth, then tilts the other way and deep freezes it. Russians were the first to make contact with it, turns out to be a living organism, highly intelligent collection of smart dust networked together into a massive gestalt. Didn't know we were here, but when it realized it, it reset the thermostat to a better comfort zone for us puny pink things. Great read!

Another story, if you like sci-fi by the great masters, is The Invincible by Stanislaw Lem.

These ships kept going out to this world and never returned. So we decided to send the Invincible. Turns out the dust there was very corrosive. So corrosive it would eat the metal straight out from under you. Each grain of dust was an individual nanobot that mined metal. Mr. Lem was way ahead of his time, as true masters are.

So about this "protoplanetary" disk, I am interested in the electrical properties thereof. I have this vision swimming in my head of gargantuan megabolts of lightning snaking their way across the disk, grounding to planets and moons, leaving their marks of electrically machined craters everywhere. Chains of organic molecules are forming abundantly, life is given equal opportunity on all celestial bodies, then when the smoke clears *lol* natural selection kicks in...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join