Somethings up with venus

Originally posted by Unity_99
Also its not this tiny insignificant hicksville star, Scientists now believe its 85% brighter than any other star in the Milky Way. That is very interesting!

Try reading your article again. That's not what it says. It also brings to mind an interesting point of distinction between medians and averages, but that's for another time.

Venus is some kind of catalyst at the worst, and some kind of sign, or warning, in the least.

Or it's just a planet producing a lens flare in the optical system, not a sign, not a warning, not a catalyst. If I were to show you a live telescopic image of Venus showing that it's not emitting anything, would you admit that what is being seen in the STEREO images is just a lens flare?

reply to post by Bcs8484


No, it's the planet cooling off. You know when you have too much pressure you have to hit the release valve, same thing with planets, Venus is no different than Earth, Volcanoes is a release valve for Earth.

Well this was an entertaining thread. I was at first like Phage...Huh? Doing a lot of film and photography of night images it at first glance did not appear to be a lens flare. But like the recent image of Mercury and the so called "cloaked" object if you can repeat the process you can prove it.

Regardless a great find and interesting.

Originally posted by musselwhite
i do remember seeing this on t.v. - i am unable to recall the program - science channel, discovery, something but it showed a burst of what i came to understand as a magnetic field - wish i could recall - venus is highly magnitized -

A magnetosphere is formed when a stream of charged particles, such as the solar wind, interacts with and is deflected by the intrinsic magnetic field of a planet or similar body. Earth is surrounded by a magnetosphere, as are the other planets with intrinsic magnetic fields: Mercury, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune. Jupiter's moon Ganymede has a small magnetosphere — but it is situated entirely within the magnetosphere of Jupiter, leading to complex interactions. The ionospheres of weakly magnetized planets such as Venus and Mars set up currents that partially deflect the solar wind flow, but do not have magnetospheres, per se.

en.wikipedia.org...

what i do recall is these burst happen at certain points in their orbit - i'm going to dig a little further -

here's a link www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu... i find interesting but it is waaaaay out of my league!

great find - s/f

EDITED: i remember now, it was john gorman youtube site:

www.youtube.com...

edit on 28-12-2011 by musselwhite because: (no reason given)

Wow i think you video here proves the lens flare thing final...

reply to post by mr10k


I agree 100%. I have been looking at a lot of the Stereo A and B footage over the years and I would bet the farm this is lens flare. I see no reason to believe that this could be anything else.

reply to post by Phage


I wish there were a reticle in the center of the lens, because lens flares always align themselves to the center of the lens, and a reticle would make it a simpler matter to determine whether or not a particular artifact was caused by processing, lens flare, or genuine unexpected phenomena.

reply to post by Aeolus1970


Ahem...

ats venus thread

Originally posted by opnmind
Made another GIF:

If you are to trust your eyes over some expert, then that looks very much like some type of mass ejection.

01:18:01 UT
03:18:01 UT
05:18:01 UT
07:18:01 UT
09:18:01 UT - missing?
11:18:01 UT
13:18:01 UT
15:18:01 UT
17:18:01 UT
19:18:01 UT - missing?
21:18:01 UT - missing?
23:18:01 UT

How come it makes a jump from 17:18:01 to 23:18:01 - where are the missing frames?

edit on 28-12-2011 by opnmind because: (no reason given)

That looks amazing Thanks for making the gif!

Whoa there's a bunch of crazy ass theories in this thread.

Originally posted by Char-Lee

Originally posted by musselwhite
i do remember seeing this on t.v. - i am unable to recall the program - science channel, discovery, something but it showed a burst of what i came to understand as a magnetic field - wish i could recall - venus is highly magnitized -

A magnetosphere is formed when a stream of charged particles, such as the solar wind, interacts with and is deflected by the intrinsic magnetic field of a planet or similar body. Earth is surrounded by a magnetosphere, as are the other planets with intrinsic magnetic fields: Mercury, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune. Jupiter's moon Ganymede has a small magnetosphere — but it is situated entirely within the magnetosphere of Jupiter, leading to complex interactions. The ionospheres of weakly magnetized planets such as Venus and Mars set up currents that partially deflect the solar wind flow, but do not have magnetospheres, per se.

en.wikipedia.org...

what i do recall is these burst happen at certain points in their orbit - i'm going to dig a little further -

here's a link www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu... i find interesting but it is waaaaay out of my league!

great find - s/f

EDITED: i remember now, it was john gorman youtube site:

www.youtube.com...

edit on 28-12-2011 by musselwhite because: (no reason given)

Wow i think you video here proves the lens flare thing final...

I am not sure how you folks are thinking here. At exactly 2:50 of this video, he clearly states "there is absolutely no way that can be camera flare"

How are you taking that statement, then making a counter statement that this video proves it is lens flare?

I would like to also inject that this video does not completely reflect the mass that is seen in the OP's post. In the OP post, and the Stereo pics, we CLEARLY see a mass, which I estimate is 1/20th the visual size of venus in that shot, ejecting and forming at the 11 o'clock position. In the video, however, there is no such mass -- just the forming of a loop.

So please, indulge me -- how are you folks making a statement that this is lens flare when:

1. The video is completely different in appearance than the Stereo A&B pics.
2. The Video's narrator clearly states "there is no way that is lens flare" at 2 minutes 50 seconds.

Please explain. Or better, can any of the lens flare theorist show me the same effect with venus from an earlier point in time that looks remotely similar to the photos of 12/27/11? That would convince me, since it has been stated, "This happens all the time with Venus"

Or, is this simply a perspective issue, where the mass is being seen at a different angle, thus looking like a mass when it is merely the loop as described previously?

One last question for a lens flare expert: Stereo AB does not have a physical lens. It has a series of mirrors and a CCD. How can lens flare, which is a direct function of light through a curved lens, be the case here with a telescope that has no lens?

reply to post by ngchunter


I quoted it. But you only have to google it. I'm going to give link and let you wade through the article, as I only skimmed it once, its huge. The wiki link I mean on it.

www.thescienceforum.com...

www.physicsforums.com...

Ah a nice short answer:

wiki.answers.com...

By examining other stars in the galaxy, its possible to see how our sun compares with other stars; for example, our sun is brighter than 85% of stars in the galaxy.

I see the sun differently than many, and am aware of it being populated and also seemingly many layers, like an onion of portals. I'm very concerned that it truly increases its frequency to Pure Love. I can also see the coding in it.

I don't have time to go through all 11 pages right now but has anyone seen/posted this video that was uploaded to YouTube nearly 3 years ago?

It shows the exact same effect with a much more prominent lens flare arcing away from the view of Venus. It's a very common effect and no it isn't Jupiter/Venus igniting or erupting

Here's the vid...


www.youtube.com...

And NASA's official explanation (incase this was missed too..)

stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov...

reply to post by phantomjack

The animation from ngchunter does not look exactly the same because the processing he uses on the raw images does not match exactly the processing used by NASA on the raw images.

The images which ngchunter has animated are as close as you are going to get. This is because the images currently available for the 27th are low resolution beacon mode images. When the high resolution images become available (after download through the Deep Space Network) they replace the beacon mode images.

The NASA processed beacon mode images from the 17th are no longer available. When the high quality images from the 27th become available you will find that the lens flares seen around the 17th match the lens flares seen now.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Shown here are the latest SECCHI beacon images. The STEREO space weather beacon telemetry mode is a very low rate, highly compressed data stream broadcast by the spacecraft 24 hours per day. These data are used for space weather forecasting. Because of the large compression factors used, these beacon images are of much lower quality than the actual science data.

stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov...

"Lens flares", internal reflections:
stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov...

Don't know about everybody else involved in this thread, but I plan to be out on the deck this evening with field glasses when Venus sets this evening, and would recommend that anyone who possesses the proper gear to film it do the same. Would that I could, but I do not possess such devices.

From a technical standpoint, I can accept the explanation of lens flare...but lens flare does not explain what I've seen the last couple of evenings, and I do spend a lot of my free time watching the night sky. (At my locale, it is impossible not to, as it is simply breathtaking.) I've applied Occam's Razor to the anomaly I've witnessed (coupled to my experiences watching the night sky), and am left with the conclusion something is/was askew.

Bears mentioning that I live at 5,240 feet in elevation, with negligible humidity and next to nothing in the way of light pollution.

Cheers

Originally posted by Aeolus1970
Don't know about everybody else involved in this thread, but I plan to be out on the deck this evening with field glasses when Venus sets this evening, and would recommend that anyone who possesses the proper gear to film it do the same. Would that I could, but I do not possess such devices.

From a technical standpoint, I can accept the explanation of lens flare...but lens flare does not explain what I've seen the last couple of evenings, and I do spend a lot of my free time watching the night sky. (At my locale, it is impossible not to, as it is simply breathtaking.) I've applied Occam's Razor to the anomaly I've witnessed (coupled to my experiences watching the night sky), and am left with the conclusion something is/was askew.

Bears mentioning that I live at 5,240 feet in elevation, with negligible humidity and next to nothing in the way of light pollution.

Cheers

Then I would expect a FULL report by the morning, soldier!

It is overcast here tonight...so I am going to miss the show....be my eyes, please!

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by phantomjack

 

The animation from ngchunter does not look exactly the same because the processing he uses on the raw images does not match exactly the processing used by NASA on the raw images.

The images which ngchunter has animated are as close as you are going to get. This is because the images currently available for the 27th are low resolution beacon mode images. When the high resolution images become available (after download through the Deep Space Network) they replace the beacon mode images.

The NASA processed beacon mode images from the 17th are no longer available. When the high quality images from the 27th become available you will find that the lens flares seen around the 17th match the lens flares seen now.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Shown here are the latest SECCHI beacon images. The STEREO space weather beacon telemetry mode is a very low rate, highly compressed data stream broadcast by the spacecraft 24 hours per day. These data are used for space weather forecasting. Because of the large compression factors used, these beacon images are of much lower quality than the actual science data.

stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov...

"Lens flares", internal reflections:
stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov...

edit on 12/28/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Ok, that makes sense. But I have another question. If we are talking about lens flare, then how do you explain the naked eye views of myself and others who have seen this anomaly? I for one, have been watching venus for about 30 years or more...and have never seen anything like this -- without the need for Stereo AB images.

Originally posted by Unity_99
reply to post by ngchunter

 

I quoted it.

You misquoted it. The actual quote states that the sun is brighter than 85% of the stars in the galaxy since the galaxy is mostly composed of red dwarf stars, not that the sun is 85% brighter than any other star in the galaxy, which is what you said.

Originally posted by phantomjack

Originally posted by Aeolus1970
Don't know about everybody else involved in this thread, but I plan to be out on the deck this evening with field glasses when Venus sets this evening, and would recommend that anyone who possesses the proper gear to film it do the same. Would that I could, but I do not possess such devices.

From a technical standpoint, I can accept the explanation of lens flare...but lens flare does not explain what I've seen the last couple of evenings, and I do spend a lot of my free time watching the night sky. (At my locale, it is impossible not to, as it is simply breathtaking.) I've applied Occam's Razor to the anomaly I've witnessed (coupled to my experiences watching the night sky), and am left with the conclusion something is/was askew.

Bears mentioning that I live at 5,240 feet in elevation, with negligible humidity and next to nothing in the way of light pollution.

Cheers

Then I would expect a FULL report by the morning, soldier!

It is overcast here tonight...so I am going to miss the show....be my eyes, please!

Keeping my fingers crossed...some clouds coming in off of the La Sal Plateau, but here's hoping!

reply to post by phantomjack

I have no idea.

But for me Venus is nothing but a point source of light (with the naked eye) I've looked at it the past few nights (because it is so beautiful at the moment) and all I've seen is a bright point of light and I have seen it at least as bright as it is now.

Originally posted by phantomjack

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by phantomjack

 

The animation from ngchunter does not look exactly the same because the processing he uses on the raw images does not match exactly the processing used by NASA on the raw images.

The images which ngchunter has animated are as close as you are going to get. This is because the images currently available for the 27th are low resolution beacon mode images. When the high resolution images become available (after download through the Deep Space Network) they replace the beacon mode images.

The NASA processed beacon mode images from the 17th are no longer available. When the high quality images from the 27th become available you will find that the lens flares seen around the 17th match the lens flares seen now.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Shown here are the latest SECCHI beacon images. The STEREO space weather beacon telemetry mode is a very low rate, highly compressed data stream broadcast by the spacecraft 24 hours per day. These data are used for space weather forecasting. Because of the large compression factors used, these beacon images are of much lower quality than the actual science data.

stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov...

"Lens flares", internal reflections:
stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov...

edit on 12/28/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Ok, that makes sense. But I have another question. If we are talking about lens flare, then how do you explain the naked eye views of myself and others who have seen this anomaly? I for one, have been watching venus for about 30 years or more...and have never seen anything like this -- without the need for Stereo AB images.

I've been watching Venus as well, telescopically as well as by naked eye, and have not seen this "anomaly." This is what Venus looked like through my telescope at its most widefield configuration (which is still a much closer look than what the heliospheric imager on STEREO gives you) tonight before the clouds set in:
i319.photobucket.com...
Now, by reconfiguring the optical train a bit I can get comet-like lens flares at the edges of the field of view that act like what we see here with Venus in the beacon images. When configured to show these effects, Venus will form a lens flare that points up and to the right in the image when Venus is at the bottom left corner, just as it formed a flare up and to the right as entered the HI-1 field of view:
i319.photobucket.com...
As I move it to the center of the frame, the flare vanishes all together because now it's too close to the center of the field of view to produce a flare:
i319.photobucket.com...
And as I move it to the bottom right corner, it starts to form a new flare up and to the left, just as it does now in the beacon imagery:
i319.photobucket.com...
Note that the flare will always point towards the center of the field of view.

It was asked how you can have a lens flare in an optic with only mirrors, well, a lens flare is just an internal reflection in an optic. It can happen with mirrors as well as lenses, but the heliospheric imager is not the main imager on STEREO and it does use lenses (details are available in this paper: www.sstd.rl.ac.uk... ). Suffice it to say, what we're seeing here is a classic lens flare. I was able to recreate a similar flare with my own telescope, but Venus does not actually show any kind of emission.

Just to point out to the none observant... The arc of the OP's flare or emission/ejection. It's not a flare.... a flares brightest parts originate from the source i.e Venus, in the OP footage and the following gifs check out where the light that feeds the artifact(emission)? its not Venus and it even causes its own tell tail white line although a lot dimmer. It is no flare. The artifact also a bit grainy, I'd expect scymetry from a flare.

p.s But we need the rest of the footage to be conclusive...

Nothing doing on this end, as the moon is barely visible through the cloud cover, much less Venus.