NASA Images Large Spherical Objects Inside Corona of SUN

page: 1
46
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+8 more 
posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 02:59 AM
link   
I saw this on a competing website and was quite intrigued. The spherical objects are in different locations in different views and seem to be moving. You have to look close and zoom in. Look around the 3 o'clock position in the first picture, then 6:30 9:00 and 2:00 in second, etc.

Mystery Spheres In Suns Corona

Mystery Spheres In Suns Corona

Mystery Spheres In Suns Corona

Mystery Spheres In Suns Corona

Mystery Spheres In Suns Corona

[edit on 21-1-2010 by skepticantiseptic]

[edit on 21-1-2010 by skepticantiseptic]




posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 03:07 AM
link   
Hmm that is pretty interesting. Apparently they where taken recently and according to the url, they were taken by NASA. Not much I can add, but I will be keeping an eye on this.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 03:17 AM
link   
Yes, but not a lot of interest apparently and wondering where that ultimate UFO poo pooer Phage is at on this one? Perhaps I should have come up with a more contentious title like "Huge UFO's Taking Up Position Around Sun".



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 03:23 AM
link   
I 've been taking pictures since last july.
Check out the bogie at 3

[img-512x339][atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/dc3dedc5cd1a.jpg[/img]



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 03:28 AM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


Hmmm very interesting. But when it comes to direct photos of the sun I'm afraid Phage will have a field day calling it an artifact of lens flare etc.

It does look interesting though. Let's see what explanation(s) for the official NASA images brings.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 03:31 AM
link   
reply to post by skepticantiseptic
 


yeah or he might want some more.

That won't be a good arguement here.
Same perspective position to the t?



[edit on 21-1-2010 by randyvs]



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 04:20 AM
link   
reply to post by skepticantiseptic
 

Umm whats the mystery ? It is a sunspot .. Sunspot 1041 to be exact ..
spaceweather.com...

edit .. What am I looking at ? lol I just reread your post and I think I am lost


[edit on 21-1-2010 by nophun]
okay first time around I completely did not read your post.
my bad


[edit on 21-1-2010 by nophun]


+8 more 
posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 05:05 AM
link   
Gosh why do people that have no idea what they are looking at post inane threads about something that is so obviously nothing?

Please can all the people that don't know what they are looking at post a title like "The sun- what am I looking at?"

You will get people that will help you.

Otherwise posting obvious attention grabbing titles only to find nothing of interest will only gain you negativity in the replier to the thread.

Peace out.

Korg.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 05:19 AM
link   
They look rather like sensor/processing artefacts to me, but I'll happily admit I don't know for sure.

The initial images from the Stereo spacecraft are posted at very low resolution, and they are 'edited up' to enhance contrast. That means that any defects, and even the jpeg boundary artefacts (do you think those little faint squarish boxes are real objects..??) are artificially enhanced, even though they are not real detail.

Later (usually a month or so), Nasa finishes processing the full resolution raw files and replaces those poor quality initial images with much better versions - if you browse backwards thru the data, you will find that at some point the images change to better versions.

The full processing includes use of a very sophisticated image engine that not only manages to screw every last minute detail from the gathered data, but also uses a 'subtraction' method to eliminate any junk caused by sensor problems, hot/failed pixels, etc. They take test 'darkframes' to determine how best to do this, and they average the data they get over a period, including using future frames. These frames are not yet taken, at the time the original image is collected... That's one reason it takes a long time. It's all documented if you look hard.

Now, for those who think this means that NASA have plenty of time to manipulate the data.. Well, no. The original .FTS (or FITS) raw images are in fact available to the public as soon as they are taken. If you want to get better resolution images earlier you can download your very own FITS processing software, get the originals as they come in, and play to your heart's content in the hope you can beat NASA to it. You can even get hold of the same powerful image processing engine that they use, but it won't run on a PC - it requires much more grunt.

I've tried using basic FITS software, just as an experiment.. While I did manage to get a few decent images, it was hard work using rather unfriendly software, and of course you then have to wait for the dark frames to come in, then work out how to average and subtract them...

That's why most folk just let them get on with it. It's frikkin' hard work!! (And NASA's full archiving service (which is where you get the FTS images) was also pretty unfriendly last time I used it.)

As for the shot into the sun image.. Try being a little scientific with your lens flare display. Move the camera around slightly so the sun is located just a little left of centre, then a little up and left, then up, then up and right, then right, etc.. taking images as you go. (But see warning below..) Then show us the results. You might learn something, as you see the flares move around..

Lens flares are INEVITABLE when shooting into the Sun. Extremely high quality lenses (eg the best Leica/Zeiss/Zuiko's, perhaps even the odd Nikon/Canon/Minolta pro-series) may be able to suppress them so well that they are almost invisible, but if that camera is a consumer compact... Not a snowball's chance in hell. You WILL get little blobs, streaks and sparkles that are simply NOT real. They come from light bouncing around in all directions - internal reflections/refractions from the lens elements, the aperture mechanism and the inside surfaces of the lens barrel..

But do bear in mind that it ISN'T wise to leave a compact (ie non DSLR) camera pointing at the sun for more than 10 seconds or so, as the sensor is being exposed to damaging IR and UV radiation focused to a small intense point on the sensor by the lens. While the sensor is probably somewhat protected by a IR/UV filter, it isn't perfect and after a while... permanent damage may result. The cheaper the camera, the more likely the danger of damage.


+12 more 
posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 06:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Korg Trinity
Gosh why do people that have no idea what they are looking at post inane threads about something that is so obviously nothing?

Please can all the people that don't know what they are looking at post a title like "The sun- what am I looking at?"

You will get people that will help you.

Otherwise posting obvious attention grabbing titles only to find nothing of interest will only gain you negativity in the replier to the thread.

Peace out.

Korg.


What I can't believe is that you got a star for this reply.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 06:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by skepticantiseptic

What I can't believe is that you got a star for this reply.


Of course..

My point is a valid one.

Peace out,

Korg.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 07:14 AM
link   
That was probably me messing around



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by DjSharperimage
That was probably me messing around


LoL


I have two stars now lol hehehe


Peace out,

Korg.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by CHRLZ
They look rather like sensor/processing artefacts to me, but I'll happily admit I don't know for sure...

I think that is possible, especially considering this image (the second image in the OP) where the "object" located at approximately the 7:00 position from the sun seems as if its "shadow" would be wrong -- wrong if it were a real object:

Mystery Spheres In Suns Corona



[edit on 1/21/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 08:27 AM
link   
reply to post by skepticantiseptic
 


If it's a camera anomaly, wouldn't it be in the same position on each photo? These things have to be huge, the size of Earth? The Sun is occupied by beings in the 6th dimension. Very cool post!



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 01:48 PM
link   
So far we have someone calling me stupid because I had the audacity to call the unknown objects "unknown spherical objects."

And that the perfectly round spheres that seem to be moving around in the suns corona are lens artifacts or decompression/software artifacts that NASA will soon take out for us blind idiots.

Waiting for the grand poo poo to weigh in. Phage where are you?... oh grand luminary of all debunkers?

[edit on 21-1-2010 by skepticantiseptic]



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 02:28 PM
link   
The objects in question show up on both the forward and rear looking SOHO views. Funny if it's an artifact then both cameras are having the same problem that has never been seen before.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


Interesting. It lines right up with the lens flare at 3:00.



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by skepticantiseptic
And that the perfectly round spheres that seem to be moving around in the suns corona are lens artifacts or decompression/software artifacts that NASA will soon take out for us blind idiots.
[edit on 21-1-2010 by skepticantiseptic]


Sigh.

Didn't you read beyond the first few lines of my post??? Haven't you saved this image, so that when nasa does their 'evil work', you can easily prove your point? Do you think it will miraculously vanish from ATS 'soon'? May I point out it is still right there, and everyone who sees it, is quite welcome to save it...

Do you not understand that the hi-res, unprocessed FTS images are available from DAY ONE, and that you can easily verify this by actually doing a little work and examining the archives?? Did you scroll back through the data to see where the high resolution images start?

Is there any point at all in posting real VERIFIABLE information, when people have this attitude?

Do you seriously think that the hundreds of thousands of amateur astronomers (inc. me) who see these images, are all paid to keep quiet, perhaps?


Or could it possibly be that they know a little more about imaging issues, and apply a little logic?



posted on Jan, 21 2010 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by CHRLZ
 


I don't need any convincing. I know UFO's are a real thing and also these "could be" unknown large objects circling the Sun.

Since I have already made up my mind in a scientific fashion in regards to just what the UFO phenomenon is, I needn't do all that extra work. But thanks for trying to get me motivated.

fyi...I was just pointing out the interesting "spheres" in the current images.





new topics
top topics
 
46
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join