posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 09:16 AM
Originally posted by The Benevolent Adversary
now why do i say that, because somewhere in the middle of this thread was a link to nasa's explanation for it.
And their explanation, sure enough, matched my explanation.
bah now i cant even recall how they put it but it was some kinda of reflection and they had all kinds of pictures just like the ones in this thread to
That's what a lens flare is; it's an internal reflection in an optic.
so while i will agree that this phenomana is artificial and shouldnt be worried about. i am also pretty sure it is not lens flare (actually i
am not sure if that satellite actually has lenses at all).
It does have lenses, as I explained earlier in this thread in this post:
(except that you missed that link to nasa
No, I didn't miss it. They explained what was happening, and if you look at their description, they're describing a lens flare. That's what a lens
flare is, an internal reflection in an optic.
In fact, I found out exactly where the internal reflection was coming from, a couple of retainers in the lens barrel as I explained here:
and keep using the term lens flare)
That is the appropriate term for an internal reflection in an optic. In cases where it occurs with a reflector it can be a bit of a misnomer, but it
is still a generally accepted term and that is not even the case here; we're dealing with a multi-element lens system with the heliospheric imagers.
It IS a lens system.
you have a good grasp on many things and knowledge to back it up; but somehow you still came out as the biggest troll in this thread!
So I'm a "troll" because I know what I'm talking about and back it up with hard evidence? No, I am not. Name calling is not permitted on ATS.
please try not to denigrate people so much,
If you feel I have denigrated someone in a post, then report it to the mods because such behavior is against the rules. Otherwise, do not make
accusations. I stand by everything I said.
edit on 5-1-2012 by ngchunter because: (no reason given)