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.

 

Unknown Satellite Crossing The Sun

page: 10
111
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 06:12 PM
link   
Well if it isn't a regular satellite I can't only say this., Then it has to be the alien spaceport that surrounds our sun so that spacecrafts from other systems going in and out just saying , but I might be totally wrong ...






posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 06:37 PM
link   
Guys its just Comet ISON. AKA "Scrodingers comet". Itd take me a while to explain why its called that. Its about quantum mecahnics though



posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 06:59 PM
link   

yourignoranceisbliss
reply to post by skyblueworld
 


I'm afraid "Deny Ignorance" has become "Stick your head in the sand".

Here's a close-up view of OP's picture.



Now let's wait for the very same serial debunkers to repeat themselves and ad hominem until they're blue in the face.


This deserves a explanation, a bouble leaving the sun? anybody have exampels of this from earlier?



posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Curious69
 




This deserves a explanation, a bouble leaving the sun? anybody have exampels of this from earlier?

people.hao.ucar.edu...
people.hao.ucar.edu...
phys.org...
edit on 12/4/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Phage
reply to post by Curious69
 




This deserves a explanation, a bouble leaving the sun? anybody have exampels of this from earlier?

people.hao.ucar.edu...
people.hao.ucar.edu...
phys.org...
edit on 12/4/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)


I agree on what that is. But contrary to the text that yourignoranceisbliss originally posted with that graphic, it doesn't appear to be "a close-up view of OP's picture" at all. It's dated about 21 months previous to the OP's actual GIF, and appears to be a timelapse taken over several days, not 36 milliseconds.

Phage, I would be very interested to hear what you think was in the OP's original graphic. The one about which Richard Schmidt of Burleith Observatory said: "While imaging sunspots we observed a fast-moving satellite with a long boom arm crossing the field of view. This sequence spans 36 milliseconds of real time. The object was moving East at 1 degree per second. Lunt LS100 solar telescope."

This one:


skyblueworld
Taken by Richard Schmidt on December 1, 2013 @ Burleith Observatory, Washington, DC.




Details:

While imaging sunspots we observed a fast-moving satellite with a long boom arm crossing the field of view. This sequence spans 36 milliseconds of real time. The object was moving East at 1 degree per second. Lunt LS100 solar telescope.


Link to source on spaceweather.com



It looks like a weather balloon with a tethered instrument pack or a satellite with a boom, but at 1 degree per second I think it would be moving too fast for either of those.



posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 09:32 PM
link   
I wish the aliens would just show themselves already!



posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by ikonoklast
 


This sequence spans 36 milliseconds of real time. The object was moving East at 1 degree per second. Lunt LS100 solar telescope."
Since most satellites move east (more or less) the direction isn't a problem.

Let's start by guessing that the object is a satellite and it's in an orbit 250 miles above the Earth. That gives it a speed of 17,157 mph (4.76 mi/sec). At that altitude 4.76 miles has an angular length of 1.09º when directly overhead. For an angular velocity of 1.09º/sec.

Now, we don't know the elevation of the Sun at the time (or do we?) and that "1º/sec" is a suspiciously round number but the lower the orbit, the faster and there are satellites which orbit lower than that so, a satellite is entirely plausible and is the likely culprit and prime suspect.

edit on 12/4/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Phage
reply to post by ikonoklast
 


This sequence spans 36 milliseconds of real time. The object was moving East at 1 degree per second. Lunt LS100 solar telescope."
Since most satellites move east (more or less) the direction isn't a problem.

Let's start by guessing that the object is a satellite and it's in an orbit 250 miles above the Earth. That gives it a speed of 17,157 mph (4.76 mi/sec). At that altitude 4.76 miles has an angular length of 1.09º when directly overhead. For an angular velocity of 1.09º/sec.

Now, we don't know the elevation of the Sun at the time (or do we?) and that "1º/sec" is a suspiciously round number but the lower the orbit, the faster and there are satellites which orbit lower than that so, a satellite is entirely plausible and is the likely culprit and prime suspect.

edit on 12/4/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)


The speed, at that altitude, would be 14x that...if its transverse speed was 1 deg a sec.



posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 11:05 PM
link   
reply to post by ChuckNasty
 

Would you care to show your work?
You can start here. A simple way to calculate angular dimensions.
Calculate angle by using a distance of 250 (miles away) and a "size" of 4.76 (miles per second).
www.1728.org...

Or you could do it manually and use the tangent of 1º. Either way will be fine.
edit on 12/4/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Phage
reply to post by ChuckNasty
 

Would you care to show your work?
You can start here. A simple way to calculate angular dimensions.
Calculate angle by using a distance of 250 (miles away) and a size of 4.76 (miles per second).
www.1728.org...
edit on 12/4/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)


Not my work, but my daughters.. Gave her the numbers and she spat out the speed....now she's updating her FB about how dumb old people are..grandparents will like that one. Oh dear.

Astronomical terms, 1 deg is with the center of the planet being the center and not the observers altitude.

250 miles above the creates a bigger circumference - so that 1 deg in one sec is about 71.279 miles a second.

I could be wrong...



posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by ChuckNasty
 


Astronomical terms, 1 deg is with the center of the planet being the center and not the observers altitude.
No. It's the observed angular velocity...how fast it was moving across the sky. Astronomers do not make observations from the center of the planet.

But I'm old. What do I know?


edit on 12/4/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Phage
reply to post by ChuckNasty
 


Astronomical terms, 1 deg is with the center of the planet being the center and not the observers altitude.
No. It's the observed angular velocity...how fast it was moving across the sky. Astronomers do not make observations from the center of the planet.

But I'm old. What do I know?


edit on 12/4/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)


A few post back I wondered the same. With that being true, it makes hella more sense.

With his gear, highly doubt he even had a 1 degree view zoomed in at the sun.

Edit - was thinking the sky being an extension of that latitude and longitude stuff. My bad, zero clue about satellites and astronomy. I need to get a book or two.
edit on 4-12-2013 by ChuckNasty because: as above

edit on 4-12-2013 by ChuckNasty because: autocorrect error



posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 11:31 PM
link   
reply to post by ChuckNasty
 

The Sun is about 0.5º across.
But by knowing the tracking rate and direction of the telescope and analyzing the pics it wouldn't be too difficult to come up with an accurate angular velocity. That's how they figure out where comets are going, after all, but with a lot more than just "1º/sec east".

I'm just suspicious of such round numbers. 1 is too round for comfort but close enough that it's nothing really unusual.

edit on 12/4/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 11:50 PM
link   

Phage
reply to post by ChuckNasty
 

The Sun is about 0.5º across.
But by knowing the tracking rate and direction of the telescope and analyzing the pics it wouldn't be too difficult to come up with an accurate angular velocity. That's how they figure out where comets are going, after all, but with a lot more than just "1º/sec east".

I'm just suspicious of such round numbers. 1 is too round for comfort but close enough that it's nothing really unusual.

edit on 12/4/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)


So what's your take on it being a balloon? The gif looked to be the spots in 1909 region. If the image is turned to reflect the suns north and south, it does look like a balloon dangling its package.



posted on Dec, 5 2013 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by ChuckNasty
 

At 75,000 feet that comes to 892 mph.
At 20,000 feet: 238 mph.
At 5,000 feet: 59 mph

So at 5k the speed starts to get feasible but....
A normal weather balloon will burst at about 35ft in diameter (at around 100,000 ft). At 5,000 feet that would be 0.4º, nearly the diameter of the Sun. So, a small balloon, at low altitude...perhaps.



posted on Dec, 5 2013 @ 02:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Sorry but that doesn't quite looks to same of what I'm seeing from the Gif image . I understand that there has to be a logical and natural explanation for it . But it's so perfect round it has to be something else I think ?
In how many occasions did the SDO captured this kind of anomaly? It's pretty rare if you ask me..



posted on Dec, 5 2013 @ 02:33 AM
link   
reply to post by skyblueworld
 


ITT: People learn about perspective and distance.

lol seriously, it's an old nuclear space craft.
edit on 5-12-2013 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2013 @ 03:51 AM
link   
I would go with an spacecraft or drone.



posted on Dec, 5 2013 @ 05:54 AM
link   

Phage
At 75,000 feet that comes to 892 mph.
At 20,000 feet: 238 mph.
At 5,000 feet: 59 mph


As mentioned earlier, I did my own calculation of the speed based on an image of the sun on that day and used the sunspot group as a reference for the movement of the object.
I got 0.476 degrees/second.

So the speed figures you have are really only half...
At 75,000 feet that comes to 425 mph.
At 20,000 feet: 113 mph.
At 5,000 feet: 28 mph

I'd like it if somebody could check my work.



posted on Dec, 5 2013 @ 06:55 AM
link   

alfa1

Phage
At 75,000 feet that comes to 892 mph.
At 20,000 feet: 238 mph.
At 5,000 feet: 59 mph


As mentioned earlier, I did my own calculation of the speed based on an image of the sun on that day and used the sunspot group as a reference for the movement of the object.
I got 0.476 degrees/second.

So the speed figures you have are really only half...
At 75,000 feet that comes to 425 mph.
At 20,000 feet: 113 mph.
At 5,000 feet: 28 mph

I'd like it if somebody could check my work.

Unless I've misunderstood, it looks like this may be a problem


Taking an approximation of half a degree for the sun


Wouldn't that be affected by having less than the full Sun in the FOV?



new topics

top topics



 
111
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join