What is this thing near the Sun? Is it a comet or meteorite? It hangs out for at least a week.

Sorry to burst your bubble you all. But it is mercury. The time length you have describe fits exactly what it takes for mercury to make an orbit around the sun.

Even on Nasa website and space.com and you can look at mercury and it does the same image.

Peace

reply to post by JrDavis

Oh, it's just starting to get interesting. I still don't think it's mercury. It's something.

Buhaha

Least I got a member to ATS.........

Works every time.



[Welcome to ATS DarkBringer]

Originally posted by Manhater
Oh, it's just starting to get interesting. I still don't think it's mercury.

It's something.

Buhaha

Least I got a member to ATS.........

Works every time.

[Welcome to ATS DarkBringer]

edit on 11-12-2012 by Manhater because: (no reason given)

I'm not sure why you still don't think it is Mercury.

It has been shown that the path of the object in question matches the path of Mercury as seen from SETREO B, and it has been pointed out that the shapes of the objects seen are a function of glare caused by over-sensitive cameras, and are NOT the actual shapes of the objects.

What we have here is an object that moves along the same path as Mercury should, and could be just a dot of light like Mercury would be (NOT necessarily a odd shape seen in the video caused by glare)...so why do you still doubt it's Mercury?

Looks like a satellite to me..LOL...

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

Don't go by the shapes you see. the bright visible object is not "all planet", but is instead the glare produced by the planet, and that glare could have odd shapes, as described in this excerpt from the STEREO website

Something else I wasn't aware of until later in the thread was the imaging equipment's need to do a bakeout.

I have a feeling that is the cause of the higher than normal contrast seen in the OP images. You will notice every couple months this happens to the data being received with STEREO. Although I couldn't find references to STEREO itself having a bakeout done besides during the initial launch into space.

A bakeout, is (in layman's terms) they burn the gunk off the CCD.

(The following is a description for the SDO takeout)

Bakeouts are a normal and essential part of maintaining the accuracy and sensitivity of an on-orbit spectrometer. Even small amounts of contamination sitting on the chip can reduce the measured solar signal. Heating up the CCDs drives the contaminants off the CCDs and reduces the effect.

sdoisgo.blogspot.ca...

reply to post by MamaJ


I think Boncho and chadwickus must have more patience than me..
Cannot believe this thread is still being argued.


^ I never knew about that backeout thing boncho.. The changing images' contrasts had me wondering in a lot of threads on ATS. No one really mentioned it so I assumed it was something normal, like changing background lighting or something.. That makes sense though.

Ha I learned things in this thread like how to play around with the videos thanks to Manhater, And about the bakeout from boncho. time not wasted after all.

Originally posted by Hundroid
Is that thing not Venus or Mercurius? It's planet-sized...

ETA: boncho was faster than me

To see a Venus Transit, you have to do it today.[June 5th, 2012]
After that, it's gone. In fact, no one now alive on this third rock from the sun will ever see one again. Maybe your grandkids or their children will see one when the planets align the next time - in 2117 and 2125.

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by JrDavis

^ Look at that heat shield. Or some type of shield. It's obviously experiencing friction.

 

There is no friction in space.

Does friction exist in deep space? Yes, when two surfaces rub together in outer space, there will be friction. Friction is a surface effect and doesn't depend upon there being air. There is also a force like air resistance from the very sparse gas in space, but it will be very, very small, since space is a very good vacuum.

helios.gsfc.nasa.gov...

reply to post by Char-Lee


Uh-oh! Looks like somebody lied!

reply to post by Char-Lee

Does friction exist in deep space? Yes, when two surfaces rub together in outer space, there will be friction. Friction is a surface effect and doesn't depend upon there being air. There is also a force like air resistance from the very sparse gas in space, but it will be very, very small, since space is a very good vacuum.

Are being clever or just arguing semantics to continue the level of foolishness this thread contains?

I was replying to the following post:

^ Look at that heat shield. Or some type of shield. It's obviously experiencing friction.

That wouldn't happen with Mercury.

They are suggesting that the reason the object is bright is because "it's obviously experiencing friction". Anyone with a modicum of intelligence would deduce that such an opinion would be based of something familiar, like a shuttle re-entry which from friction of the atmosphere causing the protective coating to get red hot.



We know the object is in space, therefore in the context they are speaking about, it is not plausible. The object does appear to pass through the corona but:

The pressure and density in the corona is much, much lower than in Earth's atmosphere.

*

The Sun does have an atmosphere, two of the upper two layers being the chromosphere and then the corona. (Not including the heliosphere) The corona is exactly what the sat is imaging. The object, maintains it's luminosity before it enters the frame of Stereo, and does not increase drastically while passing through the corona (Although it is not actually passing "through" it, rather, behind it.) We can posit from this, it is not actually moving through the corona, where it would be causing the the object to "Illuminating its own".

reply to post by JrDavis
Now it has 2 heat shields? Receiving friction from both sides?

 

So yes, you may argue semantics. There is friction in space, I was not implying that two objects rubbing together have no friction while they are out there. I was merely analyzing what the poster was trying to convey and addressing that in my response.

"There is no friction in that region of space as there is in the atmosphere on Earth." Would that have been more appropriate?

As far as the very sparse gas littered throughout the universe, it too, is not even close to the atmosphere, or capable of causing enough friction to make a "object that is not mercury" as the poster suggests, turn beet red. (Please leave this one at this point, you can argue if a ship is travelling near light speed, etc... But I'm pointing out now that now, so I will decline to comment on semantics for the rest of the thread.)

Originally posted by JrDavis
reply to post by boncho

 

No it's not a planet are you serious?

It wouldn't give off light like that. It's not reflecting light it's actually illuminating it's own.

^ Look at that heat shield. Or some type of shield. It's obviously experiencing friction.

That wouldn't happen with Mercury.

This picture is towards the end of the Video. After the passing.

Now it has 2 heat shields? Receiving friction from both sides?

This is why I don't think it's a planet.

Look how small the object was when it was almost in the middle of Cor2 and the sun..

^ WHY SO SMALL? WHY THE CHANGE OF SIZE IF IT'S A PLANET?

Not only that, OP I'd like to make it aware to you that we miss nearly a day in your video.

The jump is from 27-29. We do not see 11/28/12. When the object is directly in the middle.

It takes Mercury 88 days to rotate around the sun.

It's not Mercury.

edit on 11-12-2012 by JrDavis because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-12-2012 by JrDavis because: (no reason given)

The light source is definately the sun. If freeze from from the time the object gets into view till it is vertical with the sun, you can draw a straight line from the sun to the object and that line will follow the magnitude of light in the object.

Also, this object is not any where near the sun. I say this because its path is perfectly horizontal. If it was near the sun, the path would be elliptical due to gravity. If it was an object with a power source, it would need to vary its acceloration drastically to say on that particular path and we don't really see that large of a variance in its velocity.

If I had to guess, I would say something small and transparant near the camera.

Originally posted by 1plusXisto7billion
The light source is definately the sun. If freeze from from the time the object gets into view till it is vertical with the sun, you can draw a straight line from the sun to the object and that line will follow the magnitude of light in the object.

Also, this object is not any where near the sun. I say this because its path is perfectly horizontal. If it was near the sun, the path would be elliptical due to gravity. If it was an object with a power source, it would need to vary its acceloration drastically to say on that particular path and we don't really see that large of a variance in its velocity.

If I had to guess, I would say something small and transparant near the camera.

edit on 11-12-2012 by 1plusXisto7billion because: (no reason given)

A planet (such as Mercury) would appear to be moving generally horizontally, considering both Mercury and STEREO B are both generally on the flat ecliptic plane (generally).

Plus, as was explained before, the shapes of the object are meaningless because the what we are seeing is glare caused by the overly-sensitive camera almost overloading -- not really the shape of the object itself.

I love threads like these!

It's like 10 year olds getting keys to the car, they don't know how to drive yet...

Usually they turn on the stereo to loud or flip on windshield wipers, and occasionally drive through the Garage and into the house!

LOL

reply to post by JrDavis


That close to the sun how can you know if its reflective or illuminated? Most likely reflective. What has its own light source and travels around the sun? Nothing.

Perhaps the "heat shield" looking thing is charged particles from the sun hitting Mercury's fluctuating magnetic field? Doesn't Mercury's magnetic field increase & decrease every 11yrs. as our Sun goes to minimum activity to maximum activity? I'm not sure, thought I read that somewhere...maybe in something having to do with the "Electric Universe Theory."

Or maybe it's a "Sun Harvester UFO?"

reply to post by Manhater


Well you must have some thoughts on what it is then if not a planet. What do you think it is ?

Originally posted by karen61560
reply to post by Manhater

 

Well you must have some thoughts on what it is then if not a planet. What do you think it is ?

It's something.

I'm not speculating.

Originally posted by Manhater

Originally posted by karen61560
reply to post by Manhater

 

Well you must have some thoughts on what it is then if not a planet. What do you think it is ?

It's something.

I'm not speculating.

Mercury ALWAYS looks like that in STEREO COR2. For instance, Mercury should be visible from STEREO Behind COR2 on August 18th 2012, sure enough it was, right where it should be:
i319.photobucket.com...
stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov...
And oh look, it had the same appearance complete with "heat shield." It's just the way the optics distort the bright light of Mercury!
It even had the same "squashed" appearance when close to the sun, same as your example:
i319.photobucket.com...
stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov...
Another example of how Mercury can appear in STEREO, from April 25th:
i319.photobucket.com...
stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov...
And now the spiky version, which occurs when Mercury is at the top left of the field of view, as seen back on December 22, 2011:
i319.photobucket.com...
stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov...
Do you now understand that it's just Mercury and that this is how the optics make it look? It doesn't tell you anything about the real shape or size of it, it's just how it looks over-exposed. These exposures are long enough to show stars, if I used an exposure that long on Mercury with my telescope it'd also be over-exposed.

reply to post by Manhater


If it is something, and you don't know what, could it be something other members told you it is?

Originally posted by karen61560
reply to post by Manhater

 

Well you must have some thoughts on what it is then if not a planet. What do you think it is ?

I'm thinking the same since I started reading this thread, when it all points to being Mercury. The layered pictures from that satellite is probably designed to highlight other parts of the Sun that NASA wants to study.

Mercury would sure be a mad place to be on though, watching the Sun rise and set, and dither in between, and getting no sleep.