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.

 

WTH is next to the Sun ~ Its HUGE

page: 18
96
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 7 2012 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Angelic Resurrection
 


I will tell you something I have not told anyone yet... One of the reasons that I have not divulged anything of what I did discover during my meeting with them is because when I was placed back on earth I had the biggest feeling of intense embarrassment about what they knew of me from their surveying of our planet.

Even humans are under their watchful eye, but think about some of your most embarrassing moments being exposed if you decided to tell what you know...




posted on May, 7 2012 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Its time that they implement window washers on those lenses before sending them up there...Because loads of people are going haywire when they see something that shouldn't be there they can't understand.

But at the other hand, they also can sell us everything and we will always buy it.. simply because we don't control it...Because..... No Argument Stands Alive

edit on 21/12/2010 by 0bserver1 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 12:52 PM
link   
It's possible they are refueling? Hydrogen and other compounds? One quesiton : Is our sun a mass relay? All the energy you need, right there. Could also serve as a Rosen Bridge between stars.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
I received a reply to my inquiry. As I thought, it is an issue internal to the imaging device.

A new dust particle has adhered to the internal field lens of COR1-B. It first appeared on May 2, and presumably migrated from some part of the telescope housing. There are actually a number of small dust particles on the field lens, but they are mostly subtracted off by the background subtraction algorithm. Eventually, this new particle will also be subtracted off as soon as the instrumental background calculations catch up with the change.

Bill Thompson


Yep, and there we have it folks, [Never A Straight Answer].


How did I know we going to get that response?



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Thanks for the reply.

The smaller objects I am referring to are about halfway through the video. They form an upside down W around the object in question to upper right. She spends considerable time showing these. You may want to rewatch the video.

I don't think the orbit would have to be exact to see this for a full 2 days. To accurately calculate this, we would need to know how far this object/dust particle is from the sun's surface. Obviously this information isn't available, so we don't know.

What I mean by seeing an intelligent reaction is the 'cosmic ray' that just so happens to head directly to the 'dust particle', but for some reason doesn't go through it. Don't you find it odd that the cosmic ray hits the spot where this 'dust particle' is, but doesn't go through it?

If this video only consisted of this 'dust particle' in view of the satellite, your expanation would more than suffice. But since the propsed 'cosmic ray' heads straight for the center of the 'dust particle', this means we have to explain why this object/artifact is there, and why the 'cosmic ray' seems to interact with it. There is too much going on in this video to explain this as a spec of dust on the lens, IMO.

One more thing. Towards the end of the video it clearly shows a 'cosmic ray' originating from the 'dust particle'. What are the chances that a 'cosmic ray' would form outside of the actual sun, and have its trajectory somehow originate from the 'dust particle'?


edit on 7-5-2012 by TheReligiousHoax because: Added another question...



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by nitestrider
[Snip]

Even if you think life can only evolve on Earth, how do you know that dinosaurs didn’t evolve? They were around billions of years ago!! Humans have only been around under 1 million years? So they could have evolved and left. Then sometimes come back. Might explain the reptilian species.


Might wanna check out this Thread
Talks about similar possibilities.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by TheReligiousHoax
 


The smaller objects I am referring to are about halfway through the video

Those are not objects. Those are also cosmic ray strikes on the sensor. Notice how they appear in only one frame?



But since the propsed 'cosmic ray' heads straight for the center of the 'dust particle', this means we have to explain why this object/artifact is there, and why the 'cosmic ray' seems to interact with it.

It doesn't look like it "heads straight for the center of the 'dust particle'" to me. I see no "interaction".



Neither do these:




What are the chances that a 'cosmic ray' would form outside of the actual sun, and have its trajectory somehow originate from the 'dust particle'?

It does not orginate from the particle. There is no way to determine the source of the ray. Some come from the Sun, some come from outside the Solar System.


Cosmic rays and solar energetic particles are highly energetic particles that travel through space. Some of these originate from the Sun. Others, known as galactic cosmic rays, come from outside the solar system. When they pass through the detectors, they produce thin bright spots or streaks.

stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov...


edit on 5/7/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


What about the cosmic ray that shoots out from the object/artifact downward and to the right? It seems strange that a cosmic ray would develop outside of the sun, and in this case shoot down from the propsed 'dust particle'.

As my previous post posed, isn't it possible that the orbit of this object could coincide with the telescope's orbit at least temporarily?



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
I received a reply to my inquiry. As I thought, it is an issue internal to the imaging device.

A new dust particle has adhered to the internal field lens of COR1-B. It first appeared on May 2, and presumably migrated from some part of the telescope housing. There are actually a number of small dust particles on the field lens, but they are mostly subtracted off by the background subtraction algorithm. Eventually, this new particle will also be subtracted off as soon as the instrumental background calculations catch up with the change.

Bill Thompson

Cheers for the update, I know I'm in the minority here but I agree with the response on this occasion.
edit on 7-5-2012 by digitalf because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrinchNoMore
reply to post by Phage
 


The magical dust strikes again !!

Dust wiggling its way around, and wrecking everything !!

Sure wish i could use dust as an excuse...i have tons in my house !!


I am not sure why you do NOT find it surprising that people have grown tired of the dust excuse, it may be true but it happens FAR too often...

Not surprising at all.......


Dust is the new swamp gas....Didn't you get your new copy of the disinfo/shill hand book??



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by TheReligiousHoax
 


It seems strange that a cosmic ray would develop outside of the sun, and in this case shoot down from the propsed 'dust particle'.


The cosmic ray does not "develop" outside the Sun. The track is the result of a cosmic ray striking the sensor. It is a random event as seen in the images I posted.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


What about the chances of an object going into the orbit of the sun that coincides with the orbit of our imaging satellite allowing us to see it? I am assuming that is possible, right? This scenario would be coincidental, but not anymore coincidental than that cosmic ray headed in the direction of the 'dust particle', IMO.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by TheReligiousHoax
 


I am assuming that is possible, right?

No, your assumption is incorrect.
The orbital radius determines the orbital velocity. Objects in different orbits have different orbital velocities. The closer to the primary, the higher the velocity.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Ahhh, i missed that. Dust particle it is then for now. But they do look like the things in that tether incident video, same as the pic in that post you referenced. That is interesting..



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I'm not buying what your throwing down, If you fly up there, open up the camera and show me the dust particle than I will kiss your feet and give you a big golden star. Until then you are a educated re-gurgitator.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
I received a reply to my inquiry. As I thought, it is an issue internal to the imaging device.

A new dust particle has adhered to the internal field lens of COR1-B. It first appeared on May 2, and presumably migrated from some part of the telescope housing. There are actually a number of small dust particles on the field lens, but they are mostly subtracted off by the background subtraction algorithm. Eventually, this new particle will also be subtracted off as soon as the instrumental background calculations catch up with the change.

Bill Thompson



I know nothing about the construction of said device, but maybe you could explain why it is not hermetically sealed.

How do dust particles get inside?

If it is known that dust could, or would get inside via defects, why wasn't there a better design that would seal the lens area from outside debris, or was the idea of occasional debris interfering with the image an absolute fact that must be dealt with via processing (did dust get into the space suits and lunar orbiter too?

If the image is "processed" around the dust doesn't that mean by definition that it is not an actual real time image, but a processed image (as in photoshop) and should be taken as such; and if such processing must accommodate such defects as dust, then how reliable can the image be - only as reliable as the processor?

If the particle is blocking an area of the image, shouldn't that area now appear as a black out spot - if my lens has black spray paint over one spot, I can no longer see what his behind it and any attempt to "fill in the blank" is disingenuous at best.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 06:30 PM
link   
I have a challenge to you all...many of you will have digital cameras...yea? so go outside and focus on the farthest object in the distance...if you have a dslr focus your lens to infinity...now get a small piece of dust, grit, anything, and pop it onto the front of your lens....now please post your pic if there is even a hint of the dust, mark in your photograph.

Bokeh as an excuse is rubbish and so is the excuse that its dust...camon all you dust, bokeh experts, this is your chance to prove your point very easily. But you know something, you cant.

This is big and whatever it is it deserves better debunking than that.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by crankyoldman
 

Why would it be hermetically sealed? It's in space.

There are other examples of debris being inadvertently introduced into imaging equipment during assembly.

Yes, the image is processed. The purpose of the instrument is to analyze the corona of the Sun. The purpose of the processing is to accentuate the corona. In order to do that background masks are created which provide a basic background brightness levels (among other things, you can learn more here: cor1.gsfc.nasa.gov...). Without such processing nothing of much interest can be discerned. Here is an example of the raw data from May 3:

You can see the other dust motes spoken of as well as a bunch of other extraneous noise. "Our" dust mote is not visible at all without some drastic adjustments. The problem is that the imager has a very high dynamic range. This makes it possible to record details but it all makes it difficult to extract them.






edit on 5/7/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 06:47 PM
link   
reply to post by captiva
 

Will this do?


Courtesy of DepthofField who has given many of us the benefit of his expertise in optics.

edit on 5/7/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Thanks for the info! I will have to agree with you and say it's a dust particle.







 
96
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join