Several Objects Inbound with Elenin. 2 Observatories Confirm ---- Aug 2011

Originally posted by RUSSO

Originally posted by wingsfan
probably just different objects seen in the field of view, probably asteroids.

3 asteroids following the same way in parallel? Wow this is a hell of coincidence.

My spidey senses are tingling

edit on 8-8-2011 by RUSSO because: (no reason given)

Not a coincidence; asteroids orbit the sun in the same direction as elenin. Over a matter of minutes of time you won't notice a difference in apparent speed for the most part until it gets close. Elenin is near the ecliptic, most asteroids orbit near the ecliptic, so they will frequently appear in the same FoV.

reply to post by JennaDarling

Any such object would have also put the comet on a radically different orbit.

Ok, I am now officially interested in Elenin

So lay it on me, wtf is that?

Another comet? two comets at once? What are the odds of that?

help

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Darkblade71

 

Shoemaker-Levy 9 broke up because it passed deep into the gravity well of Jupiter and tidal forces caused it to disintegrate. The distinctive "string of pearls" was clearly visible.

Elenin has not and will not pass close enough to anything to have caused this to happen.

Well, that depends on what we DON'T know that is out there, doesn't it? Could of hit an asteroid, or been hit by an asteroid, or who knows what?

To quote Donald Rumsfeld:

"Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know."

You don't know where comet Elenin has been, and neither do I.

Originally posted by AzazeI
reply to post by iamhobo

 

Put in my place? How by a false assumption that IM new here.please I've had topic posted on the front of this website. You're such a noob Anyways IM done with you

edit on 8-8-2011 by AzazeI because: (no reason given)

DUDE! Get over yourself! Nobody knows, OR cares who you might have been for chrissake!

Seriously....cant you be banned again? Please?

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by RUSSO

 

When the telescope tracks the comet the hot pixels appear to move with the comet. When the telescope does not track the comet and image stacking is used the hot pixels appear in random areas, as seen here:


Hot pixels have nothing to do with how clean the lens is.

Hot pixels are also remapped out from the sensor firmware and also they would map them out using a base image by subtraction. They also tend to look like X's or Crosses on the sensor as they also brighten neighbouring pixels, remapping uses neighbour pixels to average down hots during remapping.

I do this for my astrophotography on my sensors.

Has anybody got the "catalogue" numbers for these "glitches"? They did have catalogue numbers didnt they?

Originally posted by Phage

There are no other objects. What there are artifacts from the processing of the images and hot pixels.

Just haven fun with ya Phage.
But,
It seems strange that the OP found that the author of the Youtube video states that this is from two different observatories. Coincidence that both observatories have the same hot pixals?

I just read it in the last few days and I don't remember where I read it as I do alot of research, but I read that numerous UFO's are behind Elenin. Of course, who knows if this is true. And the old saying, smart is believing half of what you hear, genius is knowing which half to believe.

Originally posted by AzazeI
How is this even getting so many flag my God ATS has been indeed infiltrated...

Welcome new member, thank you for chiming in.

I see that you just registered today.

What are you implying by "infiltrated"?

Thanks

edit to add: I can see why you keep getting banned fella. You're trolling. Get a clue already, you just come off as sounding like a little kid, no offense intended, that is just what you sound like during this adult conversation.

Ask Phage I am sure he would agree.

I think its pathetic that someone posts an interesting topic like this and all some the debunkers can come up with is, "its a hot pixel" or even worse, ad hominem attacks. A couple of you provided some good counter arguments, but many of you take the low road and just dismiss the post altogether without anything to back up your argument. Stop it. If you don't have some sort of example for your argument, just don't reply at all, because you have nothing worthwhile to contribute. The OP stated nothing about aliens, UFOs, or anything of the sort. All he stated was that it appeared to him/her that there were multiple objects. That's it. There was nothing about the end of the world, and yet some of you say he/she is fear mongering.

Now, with that said, I have no idea what it is, but I think its certainly worth some investigation. Have any observatories given the additional object a designation?

Originally posted by JennaDarling

Originally posted by AzazeI
I think everyone is overreacting. The pictures are blurry it could be nothing at all or a simple glitch.

Why would they "catalogue" a glitch with a catalogue number?

This is the best question so far. The answer is that they wouldn't. So where does that leave the artifact theory?

Did anybody get the catalogue number for this object?

Can somebody post it?

reply to post by amongus


Yeah.. ban me for agreeing with NASA about elenin. IM such trouble for the fear lovers

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Enlightenme1111

 

It depends. We are dealing with two things at the same time; image stacking and the tracking of the comet.

The stationary objects are stars.
When the comet is being tracked by the telescope from image to image the hot pixels do not appear to move (much) relative to it.

When the comet is not being tracked from image to image, and the images are stacked, the hot pixels appear to move relative to it.

Hmmmm ... I think you'll have to do better.

When the telescope is tracking something, that object remains rather stationary and everything else moves around it. Any "hot pixels" in the array remain "fixed" relative to the background. So ... as these additional "hot pixels" seem to move sychronous with Elenin, it would seem that they may be real objects, course, then there is the fact that these "hot pixels" were given a catalog number.

Also, when something like an observatory buys and installs a CCD array, they "map" every pixel in the array, and at every schedualed maintainance they remap the aray. This way they know which pixels are not working properly, they even know if it will be a bright spot or a dark one. Doing this is simple, even if a bit time consuming.

So, dear Phage, they know if it is a "hot pixel" or not, and aren't likely to catalog something they know is an error. As for "your" image artifacts; I'm going to have to get seat-belts for my chair if ya keep that kind of stuff up.

reply to post by AzazeI


Haha...it is you. Talk about owned.

Phage's response seems reasonable enough, but those two objects have extremely smooth motion so there still seems to me room for other explanations.

And: Has anybody addressed one of the previous poster's question of why hot pixels would be catalogued? Did the cataloguers get bamboozled by some pixels?

Originally posted by OneNationUnder
I just read it in the last few days and I don't remember where I read it as I do alot of research, but I read that numerous UFO's are behind Elenin. Of course, who knows if this is true. And the old saying, smart is believing half of what you hear, genius is knowing which half to believe.

This scares me, as when Hale Bop went by and the Heaven's Gate cult killed themselves believing the same thing.
I knew a couple of members who did not commit suicide.Last I heard, they felt like they missed something great, and I hope that Elenin is not the excuse they use.

On March 19-20, 1997, Marshall Applewhite taped himself speaking of mass suicide and asserted "it was the only way to evacuate this Earth". The Heaven's Gate group was against suicide but they believed they had no choice but to leave Earth as quickly as possible. After claiming that a space craft was trailing the comet Hale-Bopp, Applewhite convinced 38 followers to commit suicide so that their souls could board the supposed craft. Applewhite believed that after their deaths, a UFO would take their souls to another "level of existence above human", which Applewhite described as being both physical and spiritual. This and other UFO-related beliefs held by the group have led some observers to characterize the group as a type of UFO religion. In October 1996, the group purchased alien abduction insurance to cover up to 50 members at a cost of $10,000.

The link to Wiki-Heaven's Gate Cult

I hope this does not see a repeat.

Originally posted by Violater1

Originally posted by Phage

There are no other objects. What there are artifacts from the processing of the images and hot pixels.

Just haven fun with ya Phage.
But,
It seems strange that the OP found that the author of the Youtube video states that this is from two different observatories. Coincidence that both observatories have the same hot pixels?

Why would the Observatory give catalog numbers to hot pixals?

Because they are not hot pixels? And if they were, and just so mistakenly misidentified by the astronomer, how did the brighter hot pixel speed past the fainter hot pixel and begin pacing with Elenin?

Originally posted by AzazeI
Phage just owned all of you like always. For the tenth thousand time.

Phage has never owned me, i will look into what exactly is being discussed here when i get home

be back in 1 hour

Originally posted by AnthraAndromda

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Enlightenme1111

 

It depends. We are dealing with two things at the same time; image stacking and the tracking of the comet.

The stationary objects are stars.
When the comet is being tracked by the telescope from image to image the hot pixels do not appear to move (much) relative to it.

When the comet is not being tracked from image to image, and the images are stacked, the hot pixels appear to move relative to it.

Hmmmm ... I think you'll have to do better.

When the telescope is tracking something, that object remains rather stationary and everything else moves around it. Any "hot pixels" in the array remain "fixed" relative to the background. So ... as these additional "hot pixels" seem to move sychronous with Elenin, it would seem that they may be real objects, course, then there is the fact that these "hot pixels" were given a catalog number.

Also, when something like an observatory buys and installs a CCD array, they "map" every pixel in the array, and at every schedualed maintainance they remap the aray. This way they know which pixels are not working properly, they even know if it will be a bright spot or a dark one. Doing this is simple, even if a bit time consuming.

So, dear Phage, they know if it is a "hot pixel" or not, and aren't likely to catalog something they know is an error. As for "your" image artifacts; I'm going to have to get seat-belts for my chair if ya keep that kind of stuff up.

Consumer DSLR sensors get hots and get remapped out easily, modified DSLR sensors can be cooled and filters removed for astrophotography further reducing noise.

Specialised sensors for astrophotography usually are cooled for noise reduction.

Very specialised big telescope sensors meet much higher standards than amateur astronmers use even more and hot pixels would be known and subtractable, most likely they would be used in a base subtracting image (easy to find hots by taking an exposure with zero light - I do this myself with consumer stuff and force a firmware sensor remap.

Now, did anybody get the catalogue number of this glitch? lol

I think this i what we need now so we can search for this object.

Remember people, I think the two gifs were taken from two different observatories. What are the odds of two different telescopes creating identical "hot pixels"?

This is very interesting.