Unknown Satellite Crossing The Sun

reply to post by Phage


If it was a small balloon at low altitude then certainly they could have ran outside to check this visually
to confirm if there was anything especially at low altitudes you could view it with binoculars

I think they could easily rule out a balloon at low altitudes as soon as they seen it they could have ran outside to check if there was anything there

I would rule that one out

DenyObfuscation
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?

No, I was using the image of the entire sun (half a degree), and comparing it with the amount of movement of the object.
That is (using the sunspots as a reference), the object moved 1/32th of the size of the sun.

reply to post by alfa1


I did misunderstand. Don't know how but I did.

reply to post by alfa1

I got 0.476 degrees/second.

I was using the value provided by the astronomer, 1º/sec.

Phage

I got 0.476 degrees/second.

I was using the value provided by the astronomer, 1º/sec.

Yeah, I know.
But like you, I thought it was a remarkably conventiently "round" number to have arrived at, so I thought I'd check for myself.

reply to post by alfa1

What's a half second among friends?

In any case, even with the larger estimate the angular rate is not beyond the speed of a satellite...or a small balloon. I think it's a satellite.

ikonoklast

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.

I too agree that the video yourignoranceisbliss posted are from a completly different event. maybe he ment the shape of it the ball and string bit. But it does not take anything away from the beauty and strangeness of the phenomena.
Phage explained to me that its a coronal cavity? i read about blach holes on the sun with no activity, now to me a cavity are a hole? and what i see on the film are a ejection.wich does not seem to stem from a "cavity"nor does it seem to leave one behind? so why the term cavity?
The ejection are just beautyful and looks very biological.

Almost looks like the old Voyager series...with the small nuclear reactor being away on the boom to protect the circuitry of the rest of the orbiter from the radiation.

Probably one of ours; doesn't the UE, Japan, Russia and the US have about 12 watching solar flares, activity and such?

reply to post by jjsdietfitness

The object was not necessarily out near the sun or somewhere out beyond earth orbit (in fact, it most likely is not).

The object could easily have been a satellite in Earth's orbit that simply got between the telescope and the Sun. There have been instances of photographers photographing the space station and space shuttles against the sun, similar to the OP's video. I posted a few back on page 8.

Kind of strange how the SOHO Movie Theater website is down right now. Just something to consider. ~$heopleNation

reply to post by Phage

Phage
reply to post by ikonoklast

 

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.

Thanks for the reply Phage, I appreciate your input. No, unless some new information has come out we do not know the elevation or the time.

Phage
reply to post by ChuckNasty

 

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.

Ok, if it is relative to the telescope and not to the center of the planet, this would explain why my calculations showed it moving too fast for a satellite. I was using the observed angular velocity from the telescope when calculating the speed of possible near objects (like a possible weather balloon), but I was using the center of the planet for calculating the speed of a possible satellite.

I based the assumption that the angular velocity of a satellite would be specified relative to the center of the planet on sources like this:

SOURCE: How Do We Calculate a Satellite's Orbit? by Franz T. Geyling, Mechanics Specialist - Head, Analytic and Aerospace Mechanics Department excerpted from Satellite Communications Physics, Bell Labs, 1963

But if the astronomer was basing the angular velocity on his position, not the center of the earth, then that seriously changes my calculations for the speed if it's an object in earth orbit. If that's the case, I agree with your calculations and I agree that speed is feasible for a satellite in earth orbit.

reply to post by ikonoklast


I agree too. That mo fo to needs to post more info. With his info posted, I totally overlooked the 1 deg/sec mention at first. That is why I decided to use the distance as a more reliable number than speed at first.

I still think it is at the 3.5k-6k miles orbit...but we'll never be sure it seems. I originally got his sun view at .53337 degrees, if he zoomed in on the spot cluster - less than .38 I think. Used an average size of a spot at 16000 (932-31068) width.

As for the round shape, the pixels at that zoom will rough out straight edges at angles. Just like an old 8 bit graphics game trying to create a 2D version of a square / cylinder at an angle. That 2D image does lines with ease. IMO.

reply to post by skyblueworld


Now that's pretty cool, Two Thumbs Waaay Up for catching it!

I think have seen this before…

i1299.photobucket.com...
i1299.photobucket.com...
i1299.photobucket.com...

reply to post by mrno1


Maybe, it's not a very unique design though.

reply to post by skyblueworld


can some one predict the orbit of it? I mean you can see the direction of motion, some one must have the location of the sighting plus the time of the sighting. could some one figure out the orbit with that info? has it been seen again sense?

reply to post by skyblueworld


the boom for magnetometers ?