Starship Asterisk*

Anonymous wrote:Does this look familiar?

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap010219.html

Of course. I remember that picture from some time ago. It shows something completely different to what we're studying. Note how the width of the shadow changes, how the sun, contrail, and viewer are coplanar, and how the shadow doesn't go below the water level. Also, the bright spot is the moon.

I managed to find some more experimental subjects (I remembered there's a couple of wasp nests in the attic) so I reprised yesterday's experiments, but this time with the advantage of daylight (and a full stomach).

Again, here's the experimental subject (actually photographed post-experiment, looks like it's drooling a bit - not surprising given what it had just been through)



Spinning the wheel around 3 revs/sec (it hurt my fingers too much to go faster) gave a wasp velocity of around 2m/sec. The camera was about 0.6m from the subject, focused on infinity (roughly - it's not an SLR and the built-in screen's not much use), synchro flash and about 1/2 way though its optical zoom range of 8.3 to 24.9mm (Fuji Finepix 6800).

And here you have it.




[

Luis wrote:

FastArtCeeToo wrote:By self-admission I do not know (yet) what caused these phenomena, but I hope someone will come up with the answer.

- It would have to be flying more-or-less parallel to the focal plane of the camera, within a narrow range of distance. (Surely 19 out of 20 bugs would have been flying at some angle to the camera.)

No it would not!
If you see the graph below, you will see that the size of the insect would vary about 2 pixels if it was moving from 40 to 60cm away from the camera. If the bug trajectory moved from 40 to 50cm the bug size would vary only 1 pixel. And as you get away from the camera the change in size is even smaller.



Anyway I think that the apparent constant size of the streak, only tells us that the bug trajectory was "parallel" to the lens with an error of about 50%. That is if the bug was at about 40cm, the length of the streak was of an insect moving 20cm from the beginning of the streak to the flash. In this space of time the bug moved away from the camera no more than 10cm...

So that one you can rest assured is not a vanishingly small probability

[/quote]

Before the flames start, this is the size of the blur, not the insect size. The insect size changes proportionally to this. For a 1mm bug 60cm from the lens, its size can change as much as 5 pixels as it moves to 65cm. As you get closer to the lens the magnification changes faster,

So the trajectory of the bug could be not parallel as far as it was within a few cm, which is still not unlikely.

Sorry for the wrong plot above though.

hazeii3 wrote: And here you have it.

Obviously, this is a picture of a missile striking a passing jetliner. Nice capture.

(corrected spelling)

hazeii3 wrote:I managed to find some more experimental subjects (I remembered there's a couple of wasp nests in the attic) so I reprised yesterday's experiments, but this time with the advantage of daylight (and a full stomach).

Again, here's the experimental subject (actually photographed post-experiment, looks like it's drooling a bit - not surprising given what it had just been through)



Spinning the wheel around 3 revs/sec (it hurt my fingers too much to go faster) gave a wasp velocity of around 2m/sec. The camera was about 0.6m from the subject, focused on infinity (roughly - it's not an SLR and the built-in screen's not much use), synchro flash and about 1/2 way though its optical zoom range of 8.3 to 24.9mm (Fuji Finepix 6800).

And here you have it.




[

Bravo!!! If this doesn't do it for the bug theory I don't know what will... Given the limitations of the experiment, (read your camera) it certainly proves that the bug theory is 100% plausible and since it doesn't require any massive coincidences (like a space shuttle shapped meteorite, or magical contrails)..I don't know what more is needed..Although for the record I feel the exact details of your incinerated dinner needs to be part of the public record..
8) 8) 8) 8) 8)

I have asked the local dive club over at Fannie Bay if any of their members wouldn't be interested in diving on the site to check for possible recent debris or meteorites.

Not too hopeful of anything as this is not a time of prime diving in the tropics.

Interesting and fun experiments. But, we have to get a bug that's not Super Glued to a spoke. Try Southern California. I'm afraid some potential subjects met a disasterous fate on their way to pollen heaven.


Las Vegas Firefighters Respond To "Save" Truckload Of Bees


TIM SZYMANSKI
Las Vegas Fire & Rescue

In a part of the country where firefighters are usually called to respond to bee incidents that are a public safety problem, today firefighters responded to save a truckload of bees on Interstate 15. The truck broke a rear axle on Interstate 15 at County 215 while enroute to California from Minnesota. The 408 hives on the flat bed truck contained approximately 11 million bees that will be used for agricultural purposes in Southern California.

Firefighters from Las Vegas and North Las Vegas using a water tanker and engine company cooled the bees by spraying water on the truck twice during the afternoon. Because the truck was not in motion, air could not cool the hives and the bees were beginning to die from exposure to the sunlight. The water saturated the hive boxes, which in turn cooled the honeycomb inside the hives for a few hours. As the bees were being overheated, many thousands were beginning to escape and many were dying.

The truck was later towed to an area, which provided shade and an ability to cool the hives until repairs could be made to the truck, which was expected to take several hours.

The company that owns the bees says the bees were worth approximately $100,000.

victorengel wrote:

hazeii3 wrote: And here you have it.

Obviously, this is a picture of a missle striking a passing jetliner. Nice capture.

I've been laughing for the last half hour!

I did not read all posts but there appears to be a large animal pasturing next to the trees below the white building on the left. It raises its head in the last frame. Did it hear something ?

Excellent work! Good experiment!

Someone will still think your image could show a contrail...

Oh, I get it-- the bug's NAME is CONTRAIL. That must be the source of confusion! And he's into astronomy... that must be it.

hazeii3 wrote:I managed to find some more experimental subjects (I remembered there's a couple of wasp nests in the attic) so I reprised yesterday's experiments, but this time with the advantage of daylight (and a full stomach).

Again, here's the experimental subject (actually photographed post-experiment, looks like it's drooling a bit - not surprising given what it had just been through)

Hooray! That bug shall not have died in vain as it has given its life for SCIENCE!

Excellent work!

WheelMan's image certainly lends credence to the insect theory.

DC and victorengel: I wonder if the slight 'wondering' of the streak could be the result of slight wondering of an insect along its flight path?

I am still curious about the near-correspondence of the flash & reflection line to the body of water.

"cdsmith" commented that this was a "false assumption" and that the flash/reflection was as likely as not to have occurred at any point within the photo frame.

But I contend that some locations can be more 'curious' than others. For example, a truly random streak is just as likely to occur in one location/orientation as any other. BUT... if a mystery streak was present that, for example, went precisely (to the pixel) from, lets say, the top of one lightpole to the top of another, then I think it would NOT be a false assumption to point out that there was something highly curious about the location of such a phenomenon. In fact, it would be a strong indication that the photo was either faked, or that the lightpoles (in the example given) had something to do with the phenomenon.

So, I continue to wonder if there is any significance in the near-alignment of the flash/reflection and the body of water. But I accept that it *could be* pure coincidence.

(If it was an insect, and if flying insects were very common at the site, why don't we see more examples of streaks/flashes/reflections in other photos? Presumable the photographer has many other before and after photos from this event... do insects show up in any of them?)

Note to Victor about previous post, page 103:

Yes, where I said (Before + After) I mean (Before + After)/2.

And yes, I now think the trail clearly goes down, up, over and down again.

The last image you questioned is an investigation into whether what I'm calling a reflection is consistent with being a reflection. In the top image (below) I approximate the angle of color changes of the sky reflections in the water to see if they match the angle of the event "reflection"/smoke/whatever. (The second line could probably be tilted more to the right.) I move those lines at the same angle down to the bottom image, which is a mask made from my diff image which clips out the negative differences. I still say the angles are "generally" in the same direction, but the angles are not close enough to be convincing. In the center image I put the mask over the top image to compare the extent of the reflection/smoke with the boundaries of the water as well as the boundaries of the color changes of the reflected sky in the water. The yellow arrow shows where the mask extends beyond both boundaries, and so what I am calling the event reflection is inconsistent with being a reflection.

But then if my event "reflection" is smoke, why does the smoke mostly follow the same angle (actually I think it has a slight arc) but in the center take a neatly defined semi circular excursion relative to some yellow tinted object/flash?

Before the flames start, this is the size of the blur, not the insect size. The insect size changes proportionally to this. For a 1mm bug 60cm from the lens, its size can change as much as 5 pixels as it moves to 65cm. As you get closer to the lens the magnification changes faster,

So the trajectory of the bug could be not parallel as far as it was within a few cm, which is still not unlikely.

Sorry for the wrong plot above though.

Far from 'flaming', I appreciate your posts, and take their points!

So, for a 5 mm (?) bee at a couple metres, about how many degrees off parallel could the flight path be before the tapering of the streak would be noticeable?

My last post should inform some of FastArtCeeToo's questions about the "reflection" being so coincidentally close to the water. I can't explain the wandering trail. Or why the flash is so coincidentally close to the pole. I still think the signature of this event is somehow encoded in the shape of the reflection/smoke, but I don't see how to interpret it. If all other theories besides the bug are eliminated, does that mean it is a bug? I've not read through the pages lately to see if any other theories are appealing.

My last post should inform some of FastArtCeeToo's questions about the "reflection" being so coincidentally close to the water.

Well... it does, and it doesn't.

The alignment with sky/cloud reflection: if the line/reflection has a different source/cause, there is no reason why it should be aligned with the sky/cloud reflection.

The alignment with the water body: Yes, your analysis (and Victor's) shows that the line/reflection extends past both water edges. But the overall line/reflection (not the flash) is centered on the water body, which still seems curious to me.

I know it could be a coincidence, but if we were talking about (and analyzing to death!) a mysterious flash that was aligned to the pixel with, say, the tiptop of a spire, and if the hypothesis was that the flash was a bug that just happened to be exactly aligned with the pixel defining the tiptop of the spire... well, that would seem to require an extremely improbable coincidence. I think we would more likely be thinking, "this was either photoshopped, or the spire is somehow connected with the phenomenon". No?

...your ability to extract info and details from images is remarkable. Would you mind looking at the little flash at location [x=888, y=1346] and telling me what you think caused it?

I truly believe that this is a meteor because of the following,

1. Smoke like trail indicating debris being torn off by atmospheric friction.

2. The brightness at the core of the object also indicates heating due to atmospheric friction.

3. Obvious cone shaped pressure wave leading the object would indicate some mass and speed. The pressure wave looks like a military jet at supersonic speed.

I wonder how it sounded? Possibly like lightning? Lightning also produces a sonic boom.

If I am correct this is an extreemly rare photograph.

GL wrote:I did not read all posts but there appears to be a large animal pasturing next to the trees below the white building on the left. It raises its head in the last frame. Did it hear something ?

Why , yes it did. It heard the infrasonic blast of a space boogie as it crashed through the atmosphere just after God sneezed.

no57va@shaw.ca wrote:I truly believe that this is a meteor because of the following,

1. Smoke like trail indicating debris being torn off by atmospheric friction.

2. The brightness at the core of the object also indicates heating due to atmospheric friction.

3. Obvious cone shaped pressure wave leading the object would indicate some mass and speed. The pressure wave looks like a military jet at supersonic speed.

I wonder how it sounded? Possibly like lightning? Lightning also produces a sonic boom.

If I am correct this is an extreemly rare photograph.

Yes yes yes... Lightning does sound rather peculiar. Kinda of like... Thunder maybe?

Anonymous wrote:Does this look familiar?

Yep.

And does this then look familiar too?

Ruidh wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This object may be falling at 200 mph [slow terminal velocity for a round rock but fast for a man - he'd have to be curled into a ball]. If that's a 45 degree trajectory then it has a 200mph horizontal velocity and it's velocity at the water would be 282.84 mph

You don't appear to understand terminal velocity. If the 200mph were the terminal velocity, then it could not have a velocity of some 280mph at the water.

I don't know why you are so hostile to a bug theory. It is much more likely than an unusual meteorite.[/quote]

Oh, sorry, I didn't mean Terminal Velocity, I meant Quirminal Velocity. That speed that can't be defined when falling towards a gravity well.

FastArtCeeToo wrote:Well, I can put the Manning meteor theory to rest.

Yes, you certainly can.

Here is how it measures up. Any further charts, or pictures, or graphical FFT's - and I will suggest you go outside and get some fresh air.

OK, the possibilities:

Space Boogie .0000001%
Time Space rift .000001%
Lightning: .0001%
Space debris .01%
Directed weapon .01%
Meteorite .1%
Contrail .2%
Bug 20%
Camera artifact 25%
Hoax/Photoshop 25%
Combination 30%

Since you will never ever know... that makes this the very last post in this thread.

DONE. All over. Fini.

Go home now... cook some dinner and have a glass of wine. You all did very well. I'll give most of you a B-... for effort. However, some failed. Despite all the discussions, the most obvious solutions have been purposefully ignored.

Thanks and see you next year.

I truly believe that this is a meteor because of the following,

1. Smoke like trail indicating debris being torn off by atmospheric friction.

2. The brightness at the core of the object also indicates heating due to atmospheric friction.

3. Obvious cone shaped pressure wave leading the object would indicate some mass and speed. The pressure wave looks Rolling Eyes like a military jet at supersonic speed.

I wonder how it sounded? Possibly like lightning? Lightning also produces a sonic boom.

If it had been a meteor there would have immediately been numerous reports. Nothing like you are suggesting (a meteor large enough to create a smoke trail, a bright flash, and a sonic boom) could have happened in a populated area and not have been seen by many.

Also, how would you explain that the fact that the streak starts within the frame of the photo?

I think the best hypothesis right now is the insect hypothesis, but I'm not quite convinced.

GL wrote:I did not read all posts but there appears to be a large animal pasturing next to the trees below the white building on the left. It raises its head in the last frame. Did it hear something ?

This is a fascinating and potentially significant find. Here is the location of the movement:



Here is an enlarged animation of the area which seems to suggest a figure moving near a vehicle:



But hold on to your tinfoil... After further enlargement and fine tuning in PhotoShop, you will be staggered to see what was revealed:



What a day for science!

Deef - that was great!!!!hahahahahahahahahahahaha