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.

 

New Analysis Video of the STS-75 Tether Incident

page: 124
77
<< 121  122  123    125  126  127 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by depthoffield
"The program encountered an illegal instruction and will be terminated."

My logic is terminated on those above contradictory statements. Shutting down.


dont worry.... it was just a camera artifact.... and it seems to have been flushed down the field of view.....




posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 09:16 PM
link   
cherio easynow...



Originally posted by easynow
beware of the peeps that want to force their beliefs on you and keep you quiet (Oberg) and others


ATTN ATSERS.... PRINT THE ABOVE IN GOLD AND STICK IT ON YOUR FOREHEADS.......




posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by depthoffield
Nope. Camera C shows a distant wire, which is invisible to the naked eye when in shadow of the Earth, but visible to the naked eye when in sunlight.
Does this means a sufficient amount of plasma light (visible spectrum) is there VISIBLE and RECORDED in the movie? Nope. Does this means tether is obviously visible simply because of sunlight? Yes.


again the level of certitude is laughable at the least.....


you need to sort out your facts first.... prior babbling away like you do....



Shadow Entry and Emergence

It is common to see a satellite gradually fade from view
over several seconds during a pass, its light extinguished
as it enters the Earth's shadow. (It is equally common to
see a satellite suddenly appear in view, when it emerges
from the Earth's shadow.) The eclipse of a satellite is
similar to what happens to the Moon during a lunar eclipse.
First the satellite enters into the by-shadow (or penumbra)
of the Earth's shadow cone. During this phase, it is still
visible but gradually dimming. Finally it enters the core-
shadow (or umbra) and becomes invisible. Contrary to the
moon (which is still visible during a total eclipse, due to
earthshine, the light reflected from the Earth), artificial
satellites are for most practical means invisible when in
eclipse.

Only with telescopes, and computerized tracking facilities
is it possible to see satellites when in eclipse. SeeSat-L
member, Ron Dantowitz, has reported seeing Mir under such
circumstances.

There are also reports of one other satellite being visible
after having entered the Earth's shadow. According to Paul
Maley, the TSS-1R (a tether satellite, basically a long thin
cable) performed such a remarkable feat. This was presumably
due to some kind of luminescence.


www.satobs.org...




posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by mcrom901
 

In order to produce light free electrons have to be flowing in an electric current and have to first be absorbed by an atom, they can't do it on their own.


well.... check the following.......



The principal surprise in these results was that the broken end of the tether could support such high currents with only a few short strands of copper wire biased negative to attract ions. Theoretical analysis of possible current enhancement mechanisms based on an assumption of steady state current continuity reveals that only a gas enhanced electrical discharge, providing an electron emission source, was plausible. Ground plasma chamber tests are reported which confirm this analysis and thoroughly demonstrate the initial failure. The TSS-1R results thus represent the highest electron current emission from a neutral plasma source yet demonstrated into a space plasma.


TSS-1R Large Current Response Using a Neutral Gas Discharge Electron Emission Source



i hope you are not an advocate of the 'space vacuum' myth....


[edit on 13/12/09 by mcrom901]



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:12 PM
link   
some more facts......


Multiple sensors placed along the length of a space tether ("pearls-on-a-string") can be a very useful tool to make simultaneous, multi-point, in situ measurements of rapidly varying structures on a 2-dimensional scale. The TSS 1R mission provided an opportunity, for the first time ever, to make such dual-point measurements. During one of the night passes near the magnetic equator (near south America), irregularities were recorded twice. On the satellite end, these irregularities were observed as variations in the Langmuir probe fixed potential current measurements. On the orbiter end, these were recorded as variations in the current of a flat plate Langmuir probe. In addition, variations in the natural electric field were detected along the tether. Ground observations, near the region, during these times, indicate considerable spread-F activity. The signatures will be discussed in terms of what would be expected upon crossing "plasma bubble" structures mapped along field lines. While data for such studies is limited due to the premature snapping of the tether and also due to the nature of the TSS 1R orbit, the mission successfully demonstrated that simultaneous, multi-point, in situ measurements are feasible. Future missions geared towards such measurements offer the opportunity to yield a wealth of data which will enhance our knowledge of irregularities in the ionosphere.


Simultaneous, Multi-point, in situ Measurements of Ionospheric Structures: Preliminary Observations from the TSS 1R Mission




posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by mcrom901

Originally posted by JimOberg
Just got the response from NASA PAO with the Execute Package for the day of the tether video.


what a load of bullcrap..... what has all that got to do with anything important


where is the more relevant msg no# 101 - fd08 tss science update


it goes from msg 100 to 102.... com'on jim.... did you remove that?

who wants to listen to home messages broadcasting cnn or whatever...



and the irony here is; jim accusing martyn for withholding 'data'...




[edit on 13/12/09 by mcrom901]



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 

Really, you guys should open a manure factory, as you produce a great deal of it.


eloquently stated.... that would be a concise synopsis for the entire pseudo-skeptic gang...




posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by depthoffield



there is no easy way of getting around the problem of a star being effectively 0-dimensional and the tether 1-dimensional.... this is made most apparent by imagining what happens when you defocus the sky (2-dimensional).... it stays the same surface brightness..... the tether will thus still be intermediate between the 0-D and 2-D cases..... disappearing more gradually than a star as you defocus.......



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 01:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by depthoffield

Originally posted by JimOberg
Just got the response from NASA PAO with the Execute Package for the day of the tether video.


Well, this is the "execute package for flight day 8".

But we need for flight day 7.

As you may know, from the ST-75 Scene list, we identified the EXACT MOMENT of the tether video with "ufos", or what astronausts describes as "debris which flight with us":


(page 75 of the document)

As you can see, these happened on Fligh day 7 (MET style), orbit 118-119, after ~8:54:40, when the "crew is looking for the TSS-1R sattelite", and the camera is looking in Centaur constellation where they estimated the tether should be, but they see the tether only after the orbital sunrise.

So, have you the Execute package for flight day 7 ?


I was also confused by the difference between "flight day" or FD and "mission elapsed time" or MET but I think I may have figured it out.

When I look at the flight plan update for flight day 8 that Jim Oberg posted, what I'm seeing are changes to the mission plan for MET day 7 (and some for day 6 too), in MSG 090A FD08 flight plan update.

science.nasa.gov...

Liftoff occurs on the first flight day


It looks like maybe on flight day 1 the MET is 0 days, on flight day 2 the MET is 1 day and so on such that on flight day 8 the MET is 7 days? If so then this FD08 execute package would be the right package for MET of 7 days, but since we see both days 6 and 7 mentioned in the flight plan update for FD08, maybe it wouldn't be a bad idea to have the execute packages for a day before and after the day of interest just to make sure we're not missing anything since these changes seem to span more than one day of MET.

But what we're really missing from the STS-75 execute package is the flight plan. The newer execute packages like these have the updated flight plans as part of the package, and that's not included in the STS-75 execute package.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 02:52 AM
link   
reply to post by mcrom901
 

Yes, as DOF pointed out the tether could have produced a dim glow on the nightside and I am surprised that it was observed from the surface, even with a telescope. A "remarkable feat" indeed. But wasn't this video shot in sunlight? Wasn't the tether easily visible with the naked eye (not with a tracking telescope) from the ground while it was in sunlight? Doesn't that mean it was quite bright?

That question about the electron sheath increasing the visibility of the tether seems to have been answered in the negative.

> My question is, would the the electron sheath produce a visible glow
> that could account for a 2.6 mm tether being seen from great distances?
> Several persons have noticed that the tether has become dimmer with time.
>
The original/maximum brightness corresponds well with the computed
brightness. So, the main speculation is that the electrical(?)
processes have made the surface darker.
www.satobs.org...

It also helped to find this:

>Question #2: How is it that we have been able to see something only
>0.1 inch wide at ranges in the hundreds of miles?


The resolution of the unaided eye is about 3 arcmin. Imagine two light
sources of the same total intensity, say Jupiter and a bright star. At the
naked-eye level, neither is resolved, both being smaller than 3' diameter,
but in a telescope, Jupiter IS resolved. So in other words, an object is seen
because it emits or reflects light, independent of whether it is of sufficient
angular diameter to be resolved.
www.satobs.org...

Of course, this is talking about using a telescope and/or the naked eye. When that object is bright and recorded by a light sensitive vidicon tube its apparent width will be increased by saturation of the sensor. The brighter it is the larger it will appear. For example; do you think that Venus is really the same apparent diameter as the sun?



Good research. Haven't seen much of that kind of stuff since someone with an inordinate interest in plasma (and a fondness for smilies) quit hanging around here.

[edit on 12/14/2009 by Phage]



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 04:31 AM
link   

When that object is bright and recorded by a light sensitive vidicon tube its apparent width will be increased by saturation of the sensor.


unless the camera has a anti blooming device


anti blooming

[edit on 14-12-2009 by easynow]



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by mcrom901
and the irony here is; jim accusing martyn for withholding 'data'...



So -- I provide data, and get accused of withholding data.

Martyn withholds data, and gets praised for his efforts.

My head is spinning.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 07:58 AM
link   
reply to post by mcrom901
 

Another thing that may have helped to create a plasma around the broken tether was the missing nitrogen, but for that it would be needed a way of keeping the nitrogen near the tether, and I don't know if that would be possible.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 08:31 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 



What do you think of the FES activity as a debris source?


I don't know, I can't keep up with all the acronyms. What is FES, and why do you think this might be what we are seeing in this unusual video?

If yo have a new theory, please share.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 08:42 AM
link   
What all the "must be blooming cause by reflection of sunlight crowd" keeps ignoring is that the silver wires of the tether were completely encapsulated, with I believe is a Teflon sheath, that is not very reflective of sunlight at all.

Silver wires might reflect enough sunlight to cause blooming, but the sheath would not. Somewhere on this thread is a picture of the tether before it was launched, and it is not very light reflective at all.

The only explanation that seems reasonable is the we are seeing plasma energized by the sun causing the blooming.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 08:51 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 

I assumed it was NASA that omitted the 101A FD08 TSS science update, though I'm not sure why they would do that. But thanks for requesting the execute package and sharing what they sent you with us, it's nice to have some facts.


The most noteworthy thing I've been able to glean from it so far is deleting the water dumps scheduled for MET day 6. But that raises a question. If the execute package for FD08 is showing changes to the water dump schedule for MET day 06, then why couldn't the execute package for FD09 be showing changes to the water dump schedule for MET day 7 which is our time of interest?

I'm not sure why the scheduled water dump was deleted and it might be reasonable to think that if they deleted a water dump, it still has to take place sometime, at a later time. So maybe after deleting it, they added it back later? And maybe they added it back on MET day 7 but we wouldn't know that without looking at the FD09 execute package?



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by JimOberg
 



What do you think of the FES activity as a debris source?


I don't know, I can't keep up with all the acronyms. What is FES, and why do you think this might be what we are seeing in this unusual video?

If yo have a new theory, please share.


I assumed it was the Flash Evaporater Subsystem:
www.hsssi.com...


The Shuttle Flash Evaporator Subsystem (FES) rejects heat from the two Shuttle Freon Coolant Loops by evaporating water to the vacuum of space during certain mission phases including late ascent, orbit, and early re-entry.


There's an activity in the execute package called "Topping FES startup" for MET D07-11:45 but that's a couple of hours after our video.

But as you pointed out earlier poet, evaporating water could even re-condense into ice so it's an interesting possible source of particles, though I'm not sure if the timing was right for the STS-75 video which was earlier than 11:45 on MET day 7 right?


[edit on 14-12-2009 by Arbitrageur]



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b

What all the "must be blooming cause by reflection of sunlight crowd" keeps ignoring is that the silver wires of the tether were completely encapsulated, with I believe is a Teflon sheath, that is not very reflective of sunlight at all.

Silver wires might reflect enough sunlight to cause blooming, but the sheath would not. Somewhere on this thread is a picture of the tether before it was launched, and it is not very light reflective at all.

The only explanation that seems reasonable is the we are seeing plasma energized by the sun causing the blooming.


The other explanation is that you don't know what you're talking about.

The tether's teflon sheath was pure white.

I've got a sample here in my hands.

You know a more reflective color, please share it with us.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Teflon is white, and white is not reflective, in that a white surface does not reflect light like a mirror, or silver.

In addition, Teflon sheathing does not have a smooth surface so it acts to diffuse light. Put that Teflon sheathed wire in front of a black background and shine a bright light on it. The Teflon sheath will not be very bright, the rough surface scatters the light too much.

You really should stop drinking so early in the day Jim.


Edit to change white light to bright light, clean up sentence.

[edit on 14-12-2009 by poet1b]



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by JimOberg
 


Teflon is white, and white is not reflective, in that a white surface does not reflect light like a mirror, or silver.

In addition, Teflon sheathing does not have a smooth surface so it acts to diffuse light. Put that Teflon sheathed wire in front of a black background and shine a white light on it. It is not very bright, the rough surface scatters the light too much.

You really should stop drinking so early in the day Jim.



Oh boy. I can assure you that white is reflective. Things do not have to be mirrors to reflect light. It's how we see things. I have a white collapsible reflector for filler light when doing portraits out doors. The technical term for that kind of reflection is albedo:

en.wikipedia.org...

If you're suggesting the white Jim is talking about is the wrong kind of white
, fine. But white is generally pretty reflective.




top topics



 
77
<< 121  122  123    125  126  127 >>

log in

join