The mind-blowing game-changer you can't unsee.

Originally posted by alienDNA
reply to post by MoonMine

 

Ok i will not have people put words in my mouth so I will answer this.
Those pics has nothing to do about the rotation thing.
That was simply about what the op thought was the corona is NOT the corona.

The gif made on page 28-30 or somewhere is the proof that the sun is stationary during the roll.
That is what troll Pete is accusing me of deliberately misunderstanding.
When he is the very one misunderstanding it.



And if youwwant answer what creates the green halo effect around the corona I suggest you leave this thread for some googling as it can be easily explained.

Right, I'm a troll, according to the abrasive, insulting dissenters who refuse to prove their points using the same FREE NASA PICS that the OP used.

About the corona, I do NOT recall OP or ANYONE IN THE THREAD being confused about the corona. I really think this is a phony argument to distract from the real topic.

You're still claiming the sun is stationary during barrel roll pics. Yes I find your argument phony and disingenuous.

WHY would the sun be stationary during a barrel roll? Because you can't vizualize / understand a barrel roll with a turning camera? Or because OP faked his images and GIF's? It's either one or the other.

Please use the NASA pics (to recreate the SAME BARREL ROLL) and prove your wild accusations of the barrel roll and reference points.

The dissenters will NOT do this.

reply to post by WhiteHat


Which I also did at first. However it was debunked on page one, and when I came back later to see the OP was fervently arguing against it being an artifact I decided to get involved. I debunked it back on pages 18 and 19, so he started to get hung up on a completely different argument to try and prove his point. It was at this point that I decided he may be a troll, however as I just said previously, I was wrong to assume and accuse him of this. I have only be warned once in this thread and I had two off topic posts removed.

1) I shouldn't have accused him of stealing the story from BIN, although the stories are almost identical and the BIN story preceded this by two months, I was warned for T&C violation and punished.
2) I asked if the new "peacefulpete" guy was actually the OP only with a new account, removed for off topic
3) Had another off topic post removed, nothing to see there though.

I have refrained from name calling and insults this entire thread. Some people take me saying someone isn't educated in solar mechanics or imaging is an insult, when that isn't an insult. Again, if I tried to talk about a Ferrari engine someone could absolutely tell me I didn't know what I was talking about. I would then ask them to explain it to me. Hell, I don't even know how the eco engine works on my Trail Hawk. I also don't think someone has to go to college to be educated in a field. I consider education to be EXTENSIVE studies in a particular field.

One person tried to say the Tesla was an amateur, when that isn't true at all. He was university educated in technology.

In 1870, Tesla moved to Karlovac to attend school at Higher Real Gymnasium, where he was profoundly influenced by a math teacher Martin Sekulić.[21][24] Tesla was able to perform integral calculus in his head, which prompted his teachers to believe that he was cheating.[25] He finished a four-year term in three years, graduating in 1873

n 1875, Tesla enrolled at Austrian Polytechnic in Graz, Austria, on a Military Border scholarship. During his first year, Tesla never missed a lecture, earned the highest grades possible, passed nine exams[21][27] (nearly twice as many required[30])

That college is a school of technology:

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by alienDNA
reply to post by MoonMine

 

But... Just take a camera... Point it at something.... Rotate camera... What happens in your display.... It stays stationary while camera rotates this is how a camera works

Jesus lord give me strength... I tried but I cannot take it anymore
I don't have the nerves. That's it from me.

I am sorry - you are badly mistaken.

If you take any video camera and rotate left the horizon will rotate right. Stand in front of a tree with an arrow pinned to it that is pointing up. Now keep that arrow in the fram and rotate the camera left. If you watch the movie you will see the arrow rotating right.

Try it.

reply to post by raymundoko


For god's sake just use the SAME NASA PICS TO RECREATE THE SAME BARREL ROLL PICS.

Then you will prove / disprove your 3 dozen pages of arguments about barrel rolls and reference points.

This is the ONLY way I can imagine the dissenters proving anything in this thread.

reply to post by MoonMine


If.You.Watch.The.Movie is the key part of your statement. You are watching a video rendered by software. If you actually look through the viewer while you are filming and rotate your camera the object does not change it's orientation. It is only once you allow the software that renders the video to interpret the scene for you that the image rotates. The software on the satellites ALWAYS keeps the Sun North to South, from Top to Bottom. I've already linked directly to the STEREO sites which document this.

reply to post by MoonMine


Exactly. This is so simple that I honestly do NOT believe anyone who is arguing about the barrel roll.

If u rotate a camera then the entire image rotates. Nothing will be "stationary" if the entire image is turning from a barrel roll of the camera.

Originally posted by peacefulpeteAbout the corona, I do NOT recall OP or ANYONE IN THE THREAD being confused about the corona. I really think this is a phony argument to distract from the real topic.

Originally posted by HiramA
What you should be looking at are the dark areas of the corona which VERY CLEARLY DO NOT MOVE thanks to my stabilizing them.

Originally posted by HiramA
reply to post by Arbitrageur

 

I did stabilize the sun in my .gifs. I didn't want to stabilize the object for just that reason, but it just turned out not to move. The sun in my .gifs is NOT rotating. Neither is the object. Only the satellite is rotating. Here's a clue, look at the spots on the lower part of the image. Are they rotating? No. They are part of the sun's corona.

Originally posted by HiramAThe dark areas of the corona. These are, as I interpret them, areas of lower energy output. I am not qualified to say that they are one thing or another, though. This is just my opinion.

So tell me again how he never claimed it was the Corona? That was just from page 1-5. He claimed it until page 28.

reply to post by peacefulpete


I already did. You rejected the gif claming that the Prominence was not a good point of reference, that is your fault, not mine.

Tell me again about the camp fire.

imgflip.com...

You need to research Solar Prominence, Flares and CME's. Once you have a grasp of how they work, you will understand the prominence on the right is a highly active flare that lasted for many many hours. They do not "Move" across the surface of the Sun. I believe this revelation is why the OP stopped posting. He realized his mistake and hasn't come back.

reply to post by alienDNA


I just realized that moon guy is one of the ones I had ignored. I am not sure how, but neither of them were being ignored. I had to re-add them.

Click here for more information.

Let's recap:

First GIF is made from the series of pictures showing the camera roll.

It shows the "halo" and artifact stable because the Sun is kept in the same orientation.

Originally posted by hiramA

Second GIF is made from the same series showing the camera roll only this time it is not stabilized and everything rolls - including the Sun (the "halo" excuse me) and the artifact.

Originally posted by roncoallstar

via Imgflip GIF Maker

Then there is this excellent post from page 13:

Originally posted by astronomine
If the anomaly is outside of the camera:

If the anomaly is an artifact of the camera:

The OP has clearly explained how the GIF was made. If the sun itself was rotating in the pics, why aren't the dark spots rotating as well? Where the appearance of rotation in the corona can be explained by fluctuation, how can the inverse be explained in that the dark spots do not rotate?

So - back to square one:

The horde claims the entire halo is an artifact and part of the lense. That is the only way for them to prove that the Sun is not rotating in the second GIF. If you conclude the Sun is rotating to the observer in the second picture you must also conclude that the artifact is not part of the camera assembly because it is rotating the same way and keeps its relative position to the halo.

Alternatively the horde claims that in the first GIF the Sun IS rotating and the fact that the artifact remains motionless is evidence it is an artifact part of the camera assembly.

So it is simple: in the first GIF is the halo rotating or not - and how about the second GIF?

To me it is undeniable that in the first GIF the Sun is NOT rotating to the observer because the OP stabilized the picture - pinning the Sun in a fixed position to show that the artifact remains pinned as well - hence remains motionless relative to the Sun. In the second GIF the Sun and artifact are BOTH rotating because this time the images are not stabilized and are presented as they are on the site itself - clearly showing a camera roll.

There is no doubt: the artifact is NOT part of the camera assembly. Case closed.

Originally posted by raymundoko
reply to post by MoonMine

 

If.You.Watch.The.Movie is the key part of your statement. You are watching a video rendered by software. If you actually look through the viewer while you are filming and rotate your camera the object does not change it's orientation. It is only once you allow the software that renders the video to interpret the scene for you that the image rotates. The software on the satellites ALWAYS keeps the Sun North to South, from Top to Bottom. I've already linked directly to the STEREO sites which document this.

Absolute and utter nonsense. No offence intended.

If you take a video camera - look through the viewer and start rotating left the horizon starts to tilt to the right. Are you kidding me here with "once you allow the software that renders the video to interpret the scene for you that the image rotates". Really?

Everything changes its orientation once you rotate the lense - EVERYTHING that the lense is recording but for any artifacts/dust/dirst on the lense itself.

Denying this is denying simple reproducable science.

Originally posted by peacefulpete
reply to post by MoonMine

 

Exactly. This is so simple that I honestly do NOT believe anyone who is arguing about the barrel roll.

If u rotate a camera then the entire image rotates. Nothing will be "stationary" if the entire image is turning from a barrel roll of the camera.

They just fail to listen to reason.

Anyone can pick up a videocamera right now and try it themselves. If you rotate left the horizon starts to tilt to the right. Simple. If we are to believe our resident scientist everything stays perfectly stable when you move or rotate the lense.

Wow let's contact YouTube and tell them they do not need their stabilization algorithms anymore - our scients appearantly has a camera that keeps the horizon level when you rotate the lense.

Originally posted by raymundoko
The software on the satellites ALWAYS keeps the Sun North to South, from Top to Bottom. I've already linked directly to the STEREO sites which document this.

During regular filming yes but NOT during a camera roll !!!

That's the whole point of this exercise...

Originally posted by alienDNA

Originally posted by peacefulpete

If u rotate a camera then the entire image rotates. Nothing will be "stationary" if the entire image is turning from a barrel roll of the camera.

And there we go. You just proved to everyone you are either extremely dumb or trolling.
I think the latter. I am reporting you know for trolling.

Look at your signature. Why is the viewpoint moving to the left and the room to the right?

What would happen if the filmer started rotating the camera to the left? Would the head of the man stay north too? Or might his head start moving to the right in the film?

Come now.

reply to post by MoonMine


[SNIP]

Since you obviously don't own a camera and could check this yourself to spare you the embarrassment I will do this for you since I have two smartphones with cameras.

I am recording with camera 2 what I'm seeing on the display of camera 1 while rotating it.


The object is completely stationary as I turn the camera.


[SNIP]

Originally posted by alienDNA
reply to post by MoonMine

 

Ok so this is troll Petes other account?

Since you obviously don't own a camera and could check this yourself to spare you the embarrassment I will do this for you since I have two smartphones with cameras.

I am recording with camera 2 what I'm seeing on the display of camera 1 while rotating it.


The object is completely stationary as I turn the camera.


But since Noone is that ridiculous to believe otherwise is obviously trolling and such I will report you too.

What???

Please read my argument again.

Pick up any videocamera and start filming the horizon. Now start moving or rotating the camera to the left. Does the horizon IN THE MOVIE stay motionless or does it start to tilt to the right?

I am talking about the scene you are filming here NOT the camera itself - that is the whole point. But if you like I can show you what I mean by making a video.

Standby.

Originally posted by MoonMine

Originally posted by alienDNA

Originally posted by peacefulpete

If u rotate a camera then the entire image rotates. Nothing will be "stationary" if the entire image is turning from a barrel roll of the camera.

And there we go. You just proved to everyone you are either extremely dumb or trolling.
I think the latter. I am reporting you know for trolling.

Look at your signature. Why is the viewpoint moving to the left and the room to the right?

What would happen if the filmer started rotating the camera to the left? Would the head of the man stay north too? Or might his head start moving to the right in the film?

Come now.

Hahaha..
Looking into the camera while tilting it is completely different from looking at the recording afterwards.
This is what you don't comprehend.

In the camera the object is stationary. Otherwise how could cameras even work??
The end result aka the picture or video would show the tilting just as Raymond clearly explained.

But when looking in the camera as youtilt the iimage does. Not freaking tilt together with the camera movement

What you are seeing through the camera is reality not relative to the way you are holding the camera.

Again this is just silly you just cannot be for real

reply to post by MoonMine


Omfg
This is exactly what I'm saying

Here it is:

I film a small bottle.

I move the camera left - the bottle moves right.
I move the camera right - the bottle moves left.
I roll the camera to the right - the bottle starts to roll to the left.
I roll the camera to the left - the bottle rolls to the right.

What do you fail to understand?