It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

# Unknown Satellite Crossing The Sun

page: 7
111
share:

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 12:58 AM

The dimensions might prove this. We must need balloon diameter and the sun spots diameters. But at a satellite orbit - the speed seen would be along the lines of a satellite, not a balloon orbit.... From the math.

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 01:10 AM

Well this speed thing might be hinting even more at a ballon. Something closer to you moves faster through your field of view faster than something farther away. Take the Venus transit. Venus orbits the sun at 35 Kilometers per sec. now the ISS travels around 8 Km per sec. But the Venus Transit took over 6 hours while ISS transits take 10s of minutes.
edit on 4-12-2013 by BGTM90 because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-12-2013 by BGTM90 because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-12-2013 by BGTM90 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 01:11 AM

BGTM90
it does look like a balloon.

What do you guys think?

Interesting idea.
Going by the orientation of the sunspots on that day, and orientation of the dangling payload, we can also predict (a later finding) that if it is a balloon, then the images were captured quite early in the morning, not too long after sunrise.

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 01:12 AM

Ross 54
Ikonoklast is right. One degree per second implies a speed too great for a satellite orbiting Earth. It would have escaped Earth at a far greater speed than we can currently propel a space vessel. A tiny object very near the observatory should at least be considered. At 40 feet distance, a two inch diameter object would appear the correct size. It would be moving at about 20 miles per hour. Perhaps a leaf caught in the wind? Maybe the 'boom' is a strand of spiderweb clinging to it? I doubt this, of course, as the shape of the object seems too consistent for a fluttering leaf, but perhaps it wouldn't flutter much in only 36 one thousandths of a second?

Good point, I hadn't considered escape velocity. Even at the lowest altitude possible for any sort of satellite, aircraft, or spacecraft, this would be traveling at more than 10 times escape velocity. It could not stay in orbit without a propulsion system doing pretty much constant course corrections to keep it from leaving orbit. I don't see how it could be a man-made satellite in orbit.

If it is some object in space, it is traveling at a minimum almost 3 times as fast as the fastest man-made spacecraft (Juno). That means it's not man-made unless the rumors of a secret space program that far exceeds NASA's capabilities are true.

I can really only see a few possibilities.

1. It's some kind of illusion, possibly due to something very close to the telescope (like your leaf and spider web example) or some optical or digital anomaly.

2. It's some sort of natural phenomenon in space that only appears to be man-made.

3. It's some sort of top secret spacecraft that far exceeds NASA's capabilities.

4. It's some sort of craft that was not made on this planet or at least not in this time period.

It's probably 1 or 2. But I would love for it to be 3 or 4. Especially 4.

I find it interesting that the astronomer and the observatory called it an unknown satellite. That sounds like they don't think it's #1. They might think it's #2, that it's a natural satellite. But if not, since they have to be aware that the speed doesn't make sense for any known man-made object, they would have to know that only leaves 3 or 4. I wonder what they are thinking right now?

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 01:19 AM

alfa1

BGTM90
it does look like a balloon.

What do you guys think?

Interesting idea.
Going by the orientation of the sunspots on that day, and orientation of the dangling payload, we can also predict (a later finding) that if it is a balloon, then the images were captured quite early in the morning, not too long after sunrise.

I wondered about a balloon too. Do you think that it would appear to travel 1 degree in 1 second though?

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 01:26 AM

ikonoklast

alfa1

BGTM90
it does look like a balloon.

What do you guys think?

Interesting idea.
Going by the orientation of the sunspots on that day, and orientation of the dangling payload, we can also predict (a later finding) that if it is a balloon, then the images were captured quite early in the morning, not too long after sunrise.

I wondered about a balloon too. Do you think that it would appear to travel 1 degree in 1 second though?

The degree is a perspective of the observed distance from the source. The perceived degree at X distance is a multiplier at a lesser X distance.

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 01:29 AM

BGTM90

Well this speed thing might be hinting even more at a ballon. Something closer to you moves faster through your field of view than something farther away. Take the Venus transit. Venus orbits the sun at 35 Kilometers per sec. now the ISS travels around 8 Km per sec. But the Venus Transit took over 6 hours while ISS transits take 10s of minutes.
edit on 4-12-2013 by BGTM90 because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-12-2013 by BGTM90 because: (no reason given)

Could be - haven't estimated speed on my early calculations. Thought it a mood point. The altitudes for a balloon vs a satellite might have the same size/ratios. I have no idea if so.

But it could be correct.

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 01:53 AM

I'm just wondering how is any one estimating the speed of this when no one knows how far away the thing is? Im not trying to be facetious but that is something you would need to know in order to get a correct conclusion about how fast it is moving.
edit on 4-12-2013 by BGTM90 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 02:08 AM

BGTM90

I'm just wondering how is any one estimating the speed of this when no one knows how far away the thing is? Im not trying to be facetious but that is something you would need to know in order to get a correct conclusion about how fast it is moving.
edit on 4-12-2013 by BGTM90 because: (no reason given)

Simple math using known triangle dimensions - you get the distance and width. With that, you can recalculate the movement speed in degrees vs time. But in satellites, the distance from earth is needed to determine which one it might be. Once you get that, you can compare that satellite's known speed to your calculations. Getting the speed first won't help determine which one it is effectively IMO.

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 02:28 AM

ChuckNasty

BGTM90

I'm just wondering how is any one estimating the speed of this when no one knows how far away the thing is? Im not trying to be facetious but that is something you would need to know in order to get a correct conclusion about how fast it is moving.
edit on 4-12-2013 by BGTM90 because: (no reason given)

Simple math using known triangle dimensions - you get the distance and width. With that, you can recalculate the movement speed in degrees vs time. But in satellites, the distance from earth is needed to determine which one it might be. Once you get that, you can compare that satellite's known speed to your calculations. Getting the speed first won't help determine which one it is effectively IMO.

yet none can tell the distance or the size, we don't even know if it is a satelite, a ballon or whatever...
So what kind of math and calculations are you doing?
7 pages of assumptions is all we got.

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 02:33 AM

ChuckNasty

BGTM90

I'm just wondering how is any one estimating the speed of this when no one knows how far away the thing is? Im not trying to be facetious but that is something you would need to know in order to get a correct conclusion about how fast it is moving.
edit on 4-12-2013 by BGTM90 because: (no reason given)

you get the distance and width.

neither of which you have. I understand how to do the calculation I was wondering how people are doing them with out the the data they need in order to do them.

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 02:46 AM

ChuckNasty

ikonoklast

alfa1

BGTM90
it does look like a balloon.

What do you guys think?

Interesting idea.
Going by the orientation of the sunspots on that day, and orientation of the dangling payload, we can also predict (a later finding) that if it is a balloon, then the images were captured quite early in the morning, not too long after sunrise.

I wondered about a balloon too. Do you think that it would appear to travel 1 degree in 1 second though?

The degree is a perspective of the observed distance from the source. The perceived degree at X distance is a multiplier at a lesser X distance.

I can see how perspective can play a trick on you, but I think it would have to be much closer than something like a balloon. I once saw a fly land on top of the state capital of Texas from about a mile away with the telescope in the observatory at the University of Texas.

But a weather balloon would be much further away. Weather balloons can go up to about 25 miles in altitude. If a weather balloon with a tethered instrument package was 30 miles away, to travel 1 degree in 1 second it would have to travel about a half a mile in 1 second. That's 1800 miles per hour. If it was 45 miles away it would have to travel at 2700 miles per hour.

At 1 degree per second, an object would appear to go from the western horizon to the eastern horizon in 3 minutes. Perception and illusion would be much more of an issue for something really small and a lot closer than a weather balloon. Even the fly 1 mile away would have to travel 60 miles per hour to travel 1 degree in 1 second. That's about 4 times the maximum speed of a fly. But something really small and close, say 300 feet away, would only have to travel 5 feet per second, or about 3.4 miles per hour.

I think those calculations are right, but hopefully someone will correct me if they are wrong. If they are correct, I think they rule out a weather balloon. If it was something close creating an illusion, it would have to be a lot closer than a weather balloon.

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 02:50 AM

BGTM90

ChuckNasty

BGTM90

I'm just wondering how is any one estimating the speed of this when no one knows how far away the thing is? Im not trying to be facetious but that is something you would need to know in order to get a correct conclusion about how fast it is moving.
edit on 4-12-2013 by BGTM90 because: (no reason given)

you get the distance and width.

neither of which you have. I understand how to do the calculation I was wondering how people are doing them with out the the data they need in order to do them.

I was guessing using the spots as a reference to the satellites distance. We know the distance to the sun, we know the width of the sun - I used the spots min/max average sizes to determine the distance of an average sized satellite. Simple geometry with that info. Speed is determined using the estimated satellite size/distance with distance traveled vs known time it took.

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 03:05 AM

ikonoklast

ChuckNasty

ikonoklast

alfa1

BGTM90
it does look like a balloon.

What do you guys think?

Interesting idea.
Going by the orientation of the sunspots on that day, and orientation of the dangling payload, we can also predict (a later finding) that if it is a balloon, then the images were captured quite early in the morning, not too long after sunrise.

I wondered about a balloon too. Do you think that it would appear to travel 1 degree in 1 second though?

The degree is a perspective of the observed distance from the source. The perceived degree at X distance is a multiplier at a lesser X distance.

I can see how perspective can play a trick on you, but I think it would have to be much closer than something like a balloon. I once saw a fly land on top of the state capital of Texas from about a mile away with the telescope in the observatory at the University of Texas.

But a weather balloon would be much further away. Weather balloons can go up to about 25 miles in altitude. If a weather balloon with a tethered instrument package was 30 miles away, to travel 1 degree in 1 second it would have to travel about a half a mile in 1 second. That's 1800 miles per hour. If it was 45 miles away it would have to travel at 2700 miles per hour.

At 1 degree per second, an object would appear to go from the western horizon to the eastern horizon in 3 minutes. Perception and illusion would be much more of an issue for something really small and a lot closer than a weather balloon. Even the fly 1 mile away would have to travel 60 miles per hour to travel 1 degree in 1 second. That's about 4 times the maximum speed of a fly. But something really small and close, say 300 feet away, would only have to travel 5 feet per second, or about 3.4 miles per hour.

I think those calculations are right, but hopefully someone will correct me if they are wrong. If they are correct, I think they rule out a weather balloon. If it was something close creating an illusion, it would have to be a lot closer than a weather balloon.

Your viewing area is a cone. Let's say the furthest distance diameter is 10,000 and you see something moving 1000 per sec at that distance, it will take 10 secs to cross. When viewing the same distance, but something closer comes into view and moves at the same 1000 per second at a distance diameter of 1000 - it will take 1 second to move across.

The degrees are in the same ratio from your fixed perspective. 1 degree at the 1000 diameter distance is a shorter distance than the 10,000 distance, but they are both 1 degree. When viewed from a cone, 1 degree is 1 degree.

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 03:08 AM
Maybe the Ulysses satellite then?

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 03:38 AM

BGTM90

ChuckNasty

BGTM90

I'm just wondering how is any one estimating the speed of this when no one knows how far away the thing is? Im not trying to be facetious but that is something you would need to know in order to get a correct conclusion about how fast it is moving.
edit on 4-12-2013 by BGTM90 because: (no reason given)

you get the distance and width.

neither of which you have. I understand how to do the calculation I was wondering how people are doing them with out the the data they need in order to do them.

We know the minimum distance (the radius of the earth) and the maximum distance (the distance between the earth and the sun). And we know it was observed traveling 1 degree per second according to the observatory. We know that in astronomy, degrees are measured relative to the earth (an orbit equals 360 degrees). We know the radius of the earth. We know a low earth orbit satellite is typically about 100 miles above the surface of the earth (or radius of the earth plus 100). We know the circumference of the earth.

So enough is known to get some ball park estimates:

You can calculate minimum speed algebraically by knowing the circumference of the earth (about 24,900 miles) and knowing that at 1 degree per second an object in orbit would orbit 10 times per hour. That means an absolute minimum speed of approximately 249,000 miles per hour (which actually exceeds escape velocity). You can also calculate speed for any altitude by adding it to the radius of the earth and calculating the circumference of the orbit and knowing it is still making 10 revolutions per hour, however large the orbit.

And you can calculate maximum speed trigonometrically using the 1 degree angle and knowing the distance between the earth and the sun (about 93,000,000 miles):

(distance traveled per 1 second)= (93,000,000 miles) * (tangent of 1 degree) = approximately 1,623,000 miles per second, or about 8.7 times the speed of light.

For anything in between you can use similar calculations.

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 04:03 AM
Probably just a satellite that happened to cross between the camera/telescope and the sun at the time.
I don't know why some people are talking about ISON. Seems some will grasp at any straw, even create some out of thin air, just to make up some crazy theory with their imagination.

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 04:11 AM

Looks like some sort of probe. It has a smaller round ball at the end of the rod . The rod doesn't shift in relation to the big ball so I don't think it's a balloon. No idea what it is.

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 04:22 AM
Quite clearly this is Thors hammer being thrown around the 9 Realms

This is such a cool GIF!!! I think it is a satellite
But you never know.

posted on Dec, 4 2013 @ 04:46 AM

LeviWardrobe
It looks like an old satellite. Check out Vanguard 1. It was launched in '58 and is still in orbit as of 2009.

- en.wikipedia.org...

Here is an excerpt from the wiki page on satellites.

"When satellites reach the end of their mission, satellite operators have the option of de-orbiting the satellite, leaving the satellite in its current orbit or moving the satellite to a graveyard orbit. Historically, due to budgetary constraints at the beginning of satellite missions, satellites were rarely designed to be de-orbited. One example of this practice is the satellite Vanguard 1. Launched in 1958, Vanguard 1, the 4th man-made satellite put in Geocentric orbit, was still in orbit as of August 2009."
-en.wikipedia.org...

It wasn't until 2002 that deorbiting or shifting into a "graveyard orbit" was required. That means that a fair number of decommissioned satellites between the 60's and 2002 are probably still in orbit.
edit on 3-12-2013 by LeviWardrobe because: (no reason given)

Doubt very much that this is Vanguard 1...Vanguard 1 is only 6.5 inches in size!

This looks a lot bigger (judging by focus of the object) than half a dozen inches.

new topics

top topics

111