I saw an invisible airplane!

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darkpr0
If the aircraft was invisible it could not have cast a shadow due to the physics of light.


Thats exactly what I was about to say.

To the OP is not possible that you just didnt see the plane? Mabye you looked in the wrong direction.

Or mabye it never happened in the first place?




posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


GST,

Yes, it did happen.

I've already addressed your other concerns in my earlier posts, particularly about it not reflecting light.

It could be that I didn't see it, but I'm familiar with what low-flying aircraft look like and it didn't fit the profile.

I wanted to post this to see if there were any other "invisible aircraft" sightings.

[edit on 25-8-2008 by asmeone2]



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by asmeone2
 


I see. Well Id bet money though that you just didnt see the plane. The physics just makes it impossible for an invisible object to cast a shadow.

Its the same reason air doesnt cast a shadow. The object has to be able to block the light for a shadow to form. If the object is clear/100% invisible it cant cast a shadow.

Have you ever noticed sometimes when you hear a plane and you look in the direction of the sound the plane is actually far beyond where it sounds like it is?

That doesnt happen because there is an invisible plane where youre hearing the sound. It just takes longer for the sound of the plane to travel to your ears than the image of the plane to travel to yours eyes because light travels faster than sound.

Also think about the angle of the sun compared to the location of the plane. Have you ever noticed how your shadow can change spots depending on where the sun is? mabye thats similar to what happened with this plane. Is it possible that the shadow was in one spot but the plane was further over? Mabye behind a tree out of your line of sight? Id say yes it is possible.


As for the shape of the shadow. They can either be elongated or really short or round etc based on the location of the sun. It is possible that the shadow was not an accurate representation of the shape of the actual craft.




[edit on 25-8-2008 by gimme_some_truth]



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
reply to post by asmeone2
 

Have you ever noticed sometimes when you hear a plane and you look in the direction of the sound the plane is actually far beyond where it sounds like it is?

That doesnt happen because there is an invisible plane where youre hearing the sound. It just takes longer for the sound of the plane to travel to your ears than the image of the plane to travel to yours eyes because light travels faster than sound.

Also think about the angle of the sun compared to the location of the plane. Have you ever noticed how your shadow can change spots depending on where the sun is? mabye thats similar to what happened with this plane. Is it possible that the shadow was in one spot but the plane was further over? Mabye behind a tree out of your line of sight? Id say yes it is possible.


As for the shape of the shadow. They can either be elongated or really short or round etc based on the location of the sun. It is possible that the shadow was not an accurate representation of the shape of the actual craft.



We are still confused on "invisible" here I see.


In ths context, and most others, it doesn't mean phsycially not there, it simply means not seen.

My theory was that it was covered with fiberoptic particles which produce a picture of whatever is on the other side of the object you are looking ad (CHeck out some of the links put up on page 1). It would be like looking like a very good HD tv... the picture might look convincingly real, but it isn't, and light still would not go through it.

As I said with 3 major airports I am very used to the sound of planes, and also what they look like when flying low overhead.

I looked ahead of me first, and then to the side where the sun was coming from. There really weren't any significant trees and since I was at a red light, I was able to twist around and get a good look in every direction.

No plane.

There are two things I want to clear up though. One is that the plane shadow was not distorted--it was proportionate both front to back and side to side. Two is that if it was high enough up to be unheard and unsee, it would not have cast that big a shadow.

Hope that answere your questions.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 10:55 PM
link   
Ok hold your horses about "invisible airplanes". I am an aerial survey pilot and spend a lot of time flying grid patterns back and forth over all kinds of cities, towns, roads, etc. When I get bored I'll look out the window and depending on the time of day, I can watch my plane (small Cessna 172) cast a very large shadow on the ground. I often wonder if it freaks people out on the ground in their cars to see this big shadow go streaking in front of them. The shadow tends to be offset by about 1/2 mile from the actual ground track of the aircraft, so it's not surprising that by looking around quickly you didn't see the plane. It's not as if the plane should be immediately overhead or otherwise close by.

But now I know the answer about scaring folks on the ground!



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by asmeone2

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
reply to post by asmeone2
 

Have you ever noticed sometimes when you hear a plane and you look in the direction of the sound the plane is actually far beyond where it sounds like it is?

That doesnt happen because there is an invisible plane where youre hearing the sound. It just takes longer for the sound of the plane to travel to your ears than the image of the plane to travel to yours eyes because light travels faster than sound.



Also think about the angle of the sun compared to the location of the plane. Have you ever noticed how your shadow can change spots depending on where the sun is? mabye thats similar to what happened with this plane. Is it possible that the shadow was in one spot but the plane was further over? Mabye behind a tree out of your line of sight? Id say yes it is possible.


As for the shape of the shadow. They can either be elongated or really short or round etc based on the location of the sun. It is possible that the shadow was not an accurate representation of the shape of the actual craft.



We are still confused on "invisible" here I see.


In ths context, and most others, it doesn't mean phsycially not there, it simply means not seen.




Good then we agree! I never said that it wasnt physically their. I said that I had my doubts as to your claim but I did say that it had to be there in order to cast a shadow.'


The fact that you admit that it had to be there but could not see it could be twisted two ways.

It could mean that there was a plane that was covered in some fiberoptic cable system wich rendered it invisible and is yet somehow still able to block light even though you could see right through it. I( If you can see through it that means light is going through it thus no shadow)

Or we could go the logical way. There was a plane that cast a shadow and you just missed it. mabye it was out of your line of sight.

let me put it this way the fact that you saw a shadow does mean that there was something their. The fact that their was a shadow means that their was an object their that light could not go through. If you are able to see throught an object its because light is going through it.

thats not speculation on my part, thats just how things work.

We can sit here and argue physics all you want but as long as you arent willing to accept the way things are then I cant help you.

Besides your the one who said it was invisible. Not me.
Physics are physics.

[edit on 25-8-2008 by gimme_some_truth]

[edit on 25-8-2008 by gimme_some_truth]



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darkpr0
If the aircraft was invisible it could not have cast a shadow due to the physics of light.

If you saw a shadow, you could have seen the plane. If you didn't see it, then either the shadow was from something else, or you merely weren't looking in the right direction.

It is possible that if the aircraft existed, the second it flew over you it activated its cloaking mechanism, but why would such a valuable technology be used in plain sight?


It depends on the technology used to camouflage the aircraft. LED's for example if used around the aircraft would only make it appear that it was the exact color of the sky above it, but since LED is limited on brightness, it would be impossible for it to fill in the shadow that was being cast.

I remember seeing a technology show where they used lights to make a tank vanish from a hill. This was technology used in WWII. LCD or other panels could be used. This is not outside of possibility at all. Anyone could replicate this if you had enough money for LED panels or backlit LCDs for varying contrast.

Darkpr0, I am afraid your assumption may be wrong.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by xman_in_blackx

Originally posted by Darkpr0
If the aircraft was invisible it could not have cast a shadow due to the physics of light.

If you saw a shadow, you could have seen the plane. If you didn't see it, then either the shadow was from something else, or you merely weren't looking in the right direction.

It is possible that if the aircraft existed, the second it flew over you it activated its cloaking mechanism, but why would such a valuable technology be used in plain sight?


It depends on the technology used to camouflage the aircraft. LED's for example if used around the aircraft would only make it appear that it was the exact color of the sky above it, but since LED is limited on brightness, it would be impossible for it to fill in the shadow that was being cast.

I remember seeing a technology show where they used lights to make a tank vanish from a hill. This was technology used in WWII. LCD or other panels could be used. This is not outside of possibility at all. Anyone could replicate this if you had enough money for LED panels or backlit LCDs for varying contrast.

Darkpr0, I am afraid your assumption may be wrong.


I dont think it is wrong. Going by the OP statement wich is that the object was invisble. Its not possible for an invisible object to cast a shadow.

What you just described is a comoflauged object. Not an invisible object.

If its camoflauged to blend in with the sky thats one thing. Invisible is something completly different. I think thats what was meant by "an invisible object cant cast a shadow." because an invisible object cant cast a shadow, but a disguised object can. This is where me and Dark's objection comes from.

Do you see what I mean?

by the way,I do think its suspicious that the OP has chaned his story now from invisible to disguised. awfully convienient if you ask me.

[edit on 25-8-2008 by gimme_some_truth]



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 11:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by asmeone2
Honestly, I think I saw an invisible airplane.

Has anyone else experienced something like this?

Edit to add: My theory is that it was covered with the fiber-optic stuff that makes an object seem invisible, I can't beleive I forgot to say that...


[edit on 25-8-2008 by asmeone2]


You did a brave thing coming forward to ask questions on your sighting. Some people will try to ridicule you. Don't let their ignorance stop your quest for truth.

It has been many years since I saw (or didn't see) something similar. Shadow, but no aircraft. I grew up next to the flightline on an Air Force base. I know all the aircraft and their flight characteristics. I have been to many air shows and still love to watch aircraft any time I can. What I saw was the shadow of a propeller driven plane, with no plane in the sky. The shadow I saw was only the width of a two lane road so it wasn't too far up.

I have pondered what I saw for a long time and have concluded that it must have been lighted all around to remove contrast and the lights would have needed to have been able to change color immediately. LED was my first guess. LCD or plasma panels were my second guess, but plasma panels have issues at high altitude, so they would have to be ruled out. LCD would require VERY bright backlights so for the sake of electricity economy, LED would be the best solution to reproduce it.

Just my experience and opinion.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 11:23 PM
link   
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


GST,

Please look at this video and scroll to about .37.

He is wearing the "invisibility cloak" but if you look behind him, he is still casting a shadow.

That is the principle I am talking about.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 11:25 PM
link   



I dont think it is wrong. Going by the OP statement wich is that the object was invisble. Its not possible for an invisible object to cast a shadow.

What you just described is a comoflauged object. Not an invisible object.

If its camoflauged to blend in with the sky thats one thing. Invisible is something completly different. I think thats what was meant by "an invisible object cant cast a shadow." because an invisible object cant cast a shadow, but a disguised object can. This is where me and Dark's objection comes from.

Do you see what I mean?

by the way,I do think its suspicious that the OP has chaned his story now from invisible to disguised. awfully convienient if you ask me.

[edit on 25-8-2008 by gimme_some_truth]


All I did was clarify. I edited my OP to say that by invisible I meant not visible, instead of transparent. That is a semantic change but doesn't affect the details of what happened.

Edit to remove some of that hugacious quoting.

[edit on 25-8-2008 by asmeone2]



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 11:28 PM
link   



You did a brave thing coming forward to ask questions on your sighting. Some people will try to ridicule you. Don't let their ignorance stop your quest for truth.

It has been many years since I saw (or didn't see) something similar. Shadow, but no aircraft. I grew up next to the flightline on an Air Force base. I know all the aircraft and their flight characteristics. I have been to many air shows and still love to watch aircraft any time I can. What I saw was the shadow of a propeller driven plane, with no plane in the sky. The shadow I saw was only the width of a two lane road so it wasn't too far up.

I have pondered what I saw for a long time and have concluded that it must have been lighted all around to remove contrast and the lights would have needed to have been able to change color immediately. LED was my first guess. LCD or plasma panels were my second guess, but plasma panels have issues at high altitude, so they would have to be ruled out. LCD would require VERY bright backlights so for the sake of electricity economy, LED would be the best solution to reproduce it.

Just my experience and opinion.


Thank you for your support... that is what I am trying to emphasize, while it certainly could have been a normal aircraft or a trick of the light, the physical details really don't add up.

I think you have the same question about hearing it, too, because low-flying propeller driven craft can be easily heard most of the time, too.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth

If its camoflauged to blend in with the sky thats one thing. Invisible is something completly different. I think thats what was meant by "an invisible object cant cast a shadow." because an invisible object cant cast a shadow, but a disguised object can. This is where me and Dark's objection comes from.

Do you see what I mean?

by the way,I do think its suspicious that the OP has chaned his story now from invisible to disguised. awfully convienient if you ask me.

[edit on 25-8-2008 by gimme_some_truth]


Perhaps, but it may mere be a matter of semantics. Not everyone has your vocabulary and may not be up to your standards of communication.

Just my opinion.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 11:33 PM
link   


I dont think it is wrong. Going by the OP statement wich is that the object was invisble. Its not possible for an invisible object to cast a shadow.

What you just described is a comoflauged object. Not an invisible object.

If its camoflauged to blend in with the sky thats one thing. Invisible is something completly different. I think thats what was meant by "an invisible object cant cast a shadow." because an invisible object cant cast a shadow, but a disguised object can. This is where me and Dark's objection comes from.

Do you see what I mean?

by the way,I do think its suspicious that the OP has chaned his story now from invisible to disguised. awfully convienient if you ask me.

[edit on 25-8-2008 by gimme_some_truth]

I think we have moved on from th OP and have since relised that there are other cloaking technology's that would allow for shadow's.
I have also been reading about camo that mimc's what is behind the object....if your computer screen show's a pic of the wall behind it..will the screen still cast a shadow? i think yes.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by asmeone2
I think you have the same question about hearing it, too, because low-flying propeller driven craft can be easily heard most of the time, too.


I don't remember whether I heard sound or not. I just remember looking up and thinking "that plane was damn close but where the hell is it?"

I can only tell you what I can remember. Since I love to watch planes, it grabbed my attention. Probably most people wouldn't have given a second thought or glance.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 11:37 PM
link   
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 





I don't think it is wrong. Going by the OP statement wich is that the object was invisble. Its not possible for an invisible object to cast a shadow.

It was not invisible, it could have been made to "appear" invisible. That is what the OP is trying to say. I think you need to research the technology that was recently created to understand what the OP is trying to make you understand.
I think we all agree here that if it were not there it would have not cast a shadow, but what you are not understanding is that it "was" there, just camouflaged to "appear" invisible. And once again "research" the latest technologies so you can understand what the OP is trying to make you understand.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 11:39 PM
link   
could easily have a shadow and not see a plane. The plane could be some kind of camoflauge, advanced. the chameleon still casts a shadow.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 11:40 PM
link   
Here's another thing I'd like to point out.





The glass is clear-- i.e. "Invisible" in the sense of "transparent," but it still casts a shadow here.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by SvenTheBerserK
 


Well strictly based on the fact that its still being discussed id say we havent moved on.

And yes I agree If you see a pic of the wall behind you on your computer screen you will see the shadow of of the computer.

We have covered that though. A pic of the wall I feel would qualify as a disguise. Not invisible like the OP claimed before they changed their story.

Invisible and disguised are two different things. If invisbile its not possilbe to create a shadow. if its just disguised light cant go through it thus a shadow can be created. it merely cretes the illusion that light is going through.

Invisible no shadow. disguise shadow.

yes we all agree on that.



[edit on 25-8-2008 by gimme_some_truth]



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 11:43 PM
link   


I don't remember whether I heard sound or not. I just remember looking up and thinking "that plane was damn close but where the hell is it?"

I can only tell you what I can remember. Since I love to watch planes, it grabbed my attention. Probably most people wouldn't have given a second thought or glance.


I sure was looking too, because I thought it was going to crash.

The size of the shadow was huge enough that it should have been visible. I honestly thought it was about to drop on the road in front of me.

Then I realized that there was no engine sound, and that was when I started to think something was strange.





new topics
top topics
 
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join