Sun pulls a complete 360 on it's axis.

reply to post by aayler


You know, ill be honest.. its all really confusing to me
However, if there was a speck on the sensor, it would have had to have gotten there during assembly.
And wouldnt it show up in past, present and future images?

Originally posted by Animatrix
reply to post by aayler

 

You know, ill be honest.. its all really confusing to me

However, if there was a speck on the sensor, it would have had to have gotten there during assembly.
And wouldnt it show up in past, present and future images?

It DOES show up there, in all the EVE MEGS-SAM images. You can see it there when the instrument first started working in May: Movie

reply to post by BRITWARRIOR

...why does it look real time to you ?

What??? DO you do this on purpose? Twisting others' words??


YOU said "it corrected it self (sic) in a matter of hours".

Meaning, you thought that the Sun could actually move that much, in a few hours....and I said, obviously, it was time-lapse

The CAMERA slowly rotated, (sped up in time-lapse)....which should be obvious has heck...

reply to post by nataylor


Oh, well ok then...my mistake. carry on.

reply to post by CanadianDream420



[img]http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.kidsgeo.com/images/earths-size-compared-to-sun.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.kidsgeo.com/geography-for- kids/0003-how-big-is-the-earth.php&h=324&w=575&sz=18&tbnid=I2zX7B0DtV5d3M:&tbnh=76&tbnw=134&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsize%2Bof%2Bthe%2Bsun&zoom=1&q=size+of+ the+sun&usg=__pjkKatfekC41F34fNFg1oKXKQIE=&sa=X&ei=1f_rTLENyKucB8-gifUB&ved=0CCEQ9QE
If the sun spun that fast a spot on the surface would exceed the speed of light....I don't think op realises the acual relative size of the sun....

Originally posted by aayler
reply to post by BRITWARRIOR

 

Ok dude, you must be dyslexic. If there was a speck on the camera sensor, and the Sun flipped, the speck would stay the same.
And if there was a speck on the camera sensor and the camera flipped, again, the speck would stay the same.
If there was a object next to the Sun and the camera flipped, both the object AND the Sun would APPEAR to flip together.
If there was a object next to the sun, and the sun flipped, the object could remain in the same spot yes, but since that speck has been there for some time, and NEVER moves, we can extrapolate that it is attached to the camera in some fashion.


Ok? We good now??

Owwwwh

Touchy touchy

Why you getting so upset & throwing insults DUDE !!!!!

Listen to me

Grab an object...

Hold it out infront of your FACE

Look at your monitor "this is the sun"

Put that object to the left of the Monitor/Sun

Your body is the Satellite/Camera/Lense

NOW... would you be so kind to... make the Monitor/Sun move 360 Degrees, Move your body not the monitor, oh look the Dust has moved wheeyyyyy


This i what im saying either

The Satellite moved 360 degrees And the object is next to the sun...

OR

The sun did flip & the Dot/Dirt is on the camera

YOU CANNON'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS IM AFRAID, JOG ON
Or

reply to post by BRITWARRIOR

This i what im saying either The Satellite moved 360 degrees And the object is next to the sun...

But... in that scenario, wouldnt the object have spun in the image as well?

reply to post by BRITWARRIOR


Maybe this will help you visualize???



I had the wrong one to visualize, here....turns out, this is how it looked to a person watching the filming of this scene.

In the movie, she seems to "defy gravity" (well, they are simulating a zero-g environment) and make the 180-degree treadmill walk. The final effect, filmed with the camera locked down (If I could find it) shows what is similar to the OP video effect.

I think one of the scenes from onboard the Discovery, in the centrifuge habitat......but, copyrights and all, may not be available.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Found an overly long version....starts at 1:30



Clever, and creative, for its day (to attempt to simulate zero-g) but, obvious flaws all over the place. We know better, nowadays, because of the later four decades of manned spaceflight, and all the videos. Her weight is obvious, unfortunately, even when they tried so hard to "fake" it.....

Also, if its an object near the sun then its position would change as it orbits the sun but i guess if its in the distance, behind the sun (and much larger) then it could appear to be in the same place relative to the sun..
for now anyway.
So, if that were the case, then it could either be dirt or an object and thats why its been there since the first images were taken.
But.. that wouldnt explain why it didnt appear to flip with the sun, when the probe did a rotation.

NASA should seriously address this issue on the website. usually, when something like this is on an image, theyll say, oh thats venus, mercury, a speck of dirt on the sensor or w/e.
Not that many here would believe their explanation, but damn, it would still be a courtesy.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by BRITWARRIOR

 

...why does it look real time to you ?

What??? DO you do this on purpose? Twisting others' words??


YOU said "it corrected it self (sic) in a matter of hours".

Meaning, you thought that the Sun could actually move that much, in a few hours....and I said, obviously, it was time-lapse

The CAMERA slowly rotated, (sped up in time-lapse)....which should be obvious has heck...

Look

I KNOW ITS NOT IN REAL TIME HAPPY?

most people could tell that from the motion & clock in the corner

I watched it over & over frame by frame and looked @the times there is quite a few frames with NOTHING AT ALL not even the sun is in view, SO has this video been edited? or did the Camera turn left or right? the dot is also not there on these frames they're just blank/purple screens with a few stars in them, id expect the dot to be present if it was a lense artifact in thos frames also, i'll admit i have no clue as to whats going on in thos frames so no comment.

I don't care about irrelevant points your trying to drag me into to be honest, i just want to know whats going on in this video.. forgive me for having a different opinion right now but that is what this forums all about,

Id quite happy have this debait with you & others and believe me i am listerning to all and taking there points onboard but it does not make sense to me at all at the minute everything thats been said contradicts its self, so its up to you weather you would like to waste anymore time bringing me up to speed, and to those getting a little touchy & throwing insults carry on and i will ignore you all together im not intrersted in throwing insults over the internet

Ok I'm not a fan of Mr Helton but he has a piece of video that may explain the black dot to some extent.

Watch his video, start at 5:20 to see what hit the sun. Where the black dot is, it hits the sun and leaves ripples in it, reverberating.

I will warn you not to watch any of the beginning of the Von Helton video just because it's stupid and cheezy

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by BRITWARRIOR



I did exactly what you told me to do, per instruction, as i was reading, and i understood what you meant from the beginning. You are just getting it a little mixed up.
Yes, the speck (and the camera) is the one that's actually moving. But playback of the recording, from the cameras perspective (our perspective as we watch what the camera recorded), the speck does not move, only what it recorded moves- the Sun. As people have been trying to tell you.

Why don't you get a camera, attach a short stick to the side and extend it out in front of the camera with a object attached to the end, and record as you rotate the camera (with the stick securely attached not moving). Now play it back on your computer and the object will appear to stay stationary, as your room or whatever you recorded, appears to rotate.

If you can somehow play the Sun video while spinning your monitor counter-clockwise you would see the Sun stationary, and the speck rotate. That's because when it was recorded, it was the camera that was the one flipping.

But anyways, did you just blatantly ignore the quote in my last post about the camera successfully rotating for calibration purposes?
Geeeeeeeeezzzzzzz..............................

Originally posted by v1rtu0s0
One of the comments said it was the lens of the SOHO spacecraft being re-positioned. Of course that doesn't explain why the black dot doesn't move... unless it's tied to SOHO somehow.

Originally posted by Animatrix
...So, if that were the case, then it could either be dirt or an object and thats why its been there since the first images were taken.
But.. that wouldnt explain why it didnt appear to flip with the sun, when the probe did a rotation...

The spot is part of the camera (dead pixels or debris -- probably pixels), and the "spinning" was due to the probe/camera spinning. If the probe/camera spun, of course the spot would not appear to spin -- i.e., it would stay in the same part of the frame (which it did). The spinning of the spacecraft is done regularly for maintenance purposes.

There's nothing to see here. They guy in the video who asked "if the lens spun, then why did the spot stay still?" obviously was not thinking about it logically.

EDIT TO ADD:
By the way, the very fact that the spot did NOT appear to spin with the Sun when the spacecraft did its spin maneuver is proof that the spot is not really out in space, but rather is part of the camera.

Originally posted by BRITWARRIORI watched it over & over frame by frame and looked @the times there is quite a few frames with NOTHING AT ALL not even the sun is in view, SO has this video been edited? or did the Camera turn left or right? the dot is also not there on these frames they're just blank/purple screens with a few stars in them, id expect the dot to be present if it was a lense artifact in thos frames also, i'll admit i have no clue as to whats going on in thos frames so no comment.

The error could be explained by some pixels that are malfunctioning and not returning the proper values. In general, the sensors work like this: They are hit by photons and give a signal. The more photons hit that sensor, the higher the signal. Let's say very few photons means the sensor returns a signal with a value of 1 and a lot of photons means the sensor returns a value of 100. Depending on the number of photons, the signal returned could be anywhere in that range. But now we have some malfunctioning sensors and, for whatever reason, they don't register a signal higher than 20. So when there are few photons, those pixels look normal and blend in, because all the surrounding pixels are returning values below 20. But when something bright comes by, all the surrounding pixels start returning a signal of 100, but the malfunctioning pixels max out at 20. Thus, they look dark compared to the surround area and are quite noticeable.

So the sun does a back flip and a satellite records it.

How come its not all over the news?

You know, out of curiosity, I checked out the SOHO websites search image/movie feature and entered the Dates to start at 0ct 12 and end on Oct 13th and...
The sun doesnt rotate..
However, it is kind of strange that there is a huge "flare" just about in the same spot that the object/speck shows up on the EVE probe, probably nothing though.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by BRITWARRIOR

 

Maybe this will help you visualize???

I had the wrong one to visualize, here....turns out, this is how it looked to a person watching the filming of this scene.

In the movie, she seems to "defy gravity" (well, they are simulating a zero-g environment) and make the 180-degree treadmill walk. The final effect, filmed with the camera locked down (If I could find it) shows what is similar to the OP video effect.

I think one of the scenes from onboard the DIscovery, in the centrifuge habitat......but, copyrights and all, may not be available.

edit on 23 November 2010 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)

Also @aaylar nice to see your not throwing insults on my spelling/grammer its not perfect i'll admit but control your self please...

Ok so this is a better video to understand whats going on thanks for the blunder, i have even more issues with it now

The camera doesn't move at all the object its filming moves... agreed?

So i held my mouse curser on the screen in the video above, reperzenting the dust on the lense and got the same effect as the dot in the video in question,

I was happy with this... the object didn't move just like the video, my mouse curser stayed in the same place all the way brilliant...

Now

What do we know to be correct in that video recreating a simular effect,

Well

We know the camera didn't move at all...

The machine moves, the sun which would be our sun

Now

Lets make the camera move instead of make it look like it moved for hollywood blockbusters, and keep the object static in the same place again,

Oh No the dot moves this time ???

Yeah so this must mean the camera/satellite didn't move at all, MAYBE the sun did due to that Huge object conflicting with it and coursing CMEs as it passes, a big MAYBE!!! If the camera/satellite did move then the sun should stay with its equator Level & horizontal, but thats not what we see happen at all.

You following me?

Originally posted by BRITWARRIOR
You following me?

No, I can't say I am following you.

Take a picture frame (one with a piece of glass in front of the picture). Now make a dot with a marker in one corner of the glass. Now, no matter what picture you put behind the glass, that dot will always be there. And, relative to the sides of the picture frame, the dot is always in the same location. You can put anything behind the glass, and you can move the frame any way you want and that dot will always be in the same position in relation to the edges of the frame.

Now let's say instead of a normal picture frame, this was some magical picture frame that recorded images. You can hold the frame out at arms length in both hands and move it all around. You can take pictures of moving objects, like cars going by. You can record anything you want. But that dot is always there, in the same corner.

In addition to recording images, this frame can also play them back. You you do all this recording, then go home, and set the frame down on a table. You start the frame playing back all the images you've recorded. You'll find that no matter what you recorded, even if you were moving the frame or you were holding the frame steady and recording moving objects, that little dot will always be in the same position. And because the frame is now sitting still on a table while playing back these images, that dot stays in the same position relative to the edges of the frame and relative to the table.

That's exactly what we see in the EVE video.

hahah that was awesome.

love the commentary.. "pork n beans"..

"wheel of misfortune" lol.

doh!. yeah u play around with that video to get complete entertainment value possible. reminds me of myself

great vid + commentary man. larfed hard.

WHOA! WO, WO , WO .