Strange streak discussion: 2004 Dec 7 APOD
-
tx rig diver
not a pcs
by looking at the image the only direct sunlight is seen on the highest of the clouds. when looking at these clouds they look like they are just behind a front and building into a clasic anvil shaped thunderhead. the cloud formation has three "lobes" in them and by looking at these lobes you can see that the shadow in the clouds is on the left hand side which means the direct sunlight is coming from the right. Looking at the ambient light lower in the picture I believe there are also clouds behind and to the left and right of the camera because there is no direct sunlight illuminating anything else in the photograph.
-
guest
Has anyone thought that maybe its a marine flare trace? I don't know if the flare would leave a tracer type light image, but they do leave a smoke trail,bounce off of things they strike and are commonly fired around ships and marinas. Sometimes accidentally so no report may have been filed. Just a thought
-
Guest
I vote for "the insect theory" at 1/20 second shutter speed and the good depth of field... six inches of travel at 10 feet per second about six inches in front of the camera should do it.
I draw your attention to http://www.rense.com/general49/blurfo.htm
David Terrell
Fort Worth, Texas
I draw your attention to http://www.rense.com/general49/blurfo.htm
David Terrell
Fort Worth, Texas
-
TENthPower
Strange Streak Imaged in Australia
I have read several of the proposed explanations in this forum and have not found one that covers all the facts that are apparent in the picture. I think that the light pole is a "Red Herring", so I suggest that the event took place not at the light pole, but further out in the bay.
In my analysis, I used both the "before" picture, and the "event" picture. I increased the contrast of both, and then subtracted the before picture from the event. What is peculiar is the "bluish" light that is displaced slightly to the right and a little below the main flash, then there is also a nearly vertical shaft of this bluish light. This may be due to some artifact of the CCD imager caused by a very short duration high intensity flash. But if it was a physical manifestation, then I cannot imagine an explanation.
Another item that is hard to explain is the constant width and contrast of the dark streak. If a tiny meteor had made the trail, then the size of the trail should taper down to a point where it struck the water.
So now I will make a wild and unwarrented speculation of my own. This speculation I have not seen in the posts that I have read so far: What if the streak were caused by a lump of Dark Matter with a diameter equal to the width of the streak? We know almost nothing about Dark Matter (thus Wild Speculation), but perhaps DM interacts weakly with matter, and that caused a flash where the Dark Matter body struck the water and persumably continued through the Earth and came out somewhere on the the other side.
The probabilty of such an event is likely to be very low, but I thought that I would add my $.02 to this discussion.
In my analysis, I used both the "before" picture, and the "event" picture. I increased the contrast of both, and then subtracted the before picture from the event. What is peculiar is the "bluish" light that is displaced slightly to the right and a little below the main flash, then there is also a nearly vertical shaft of this bluish light. This may be due to some artifact of the CCD imager caused by a very short duration high intensity flash. But if it was a physical manifestation, then I cannot imagine an explanation.
Another item that is hard to explain is the constant width and contrast of the dark streak. If a tiny meteor had made the trail, then the size of the trail should taper down to a point where it struck the water.
So now I will make a wild and unwarrented speculation of my own. This speculation I have not seen in the posts that I have read so far: What if the streak were caused by a lump of Dark Matter with a diameter equal to the width of the streak? We know almost nothing about Dark Matter (thus Wild Speculation), but perhaps DM interacts weakly with matter, and that caused a flash where the Dark Matter body struck the water and persumably continued through the Earth and came out somewhere on the the other side.
The probabilty of such an event is likely to be very low, but I thought that I would add my $.02 to this discussion.
-
Guest
Re: one more doubt about flies
1.) I have to disagree I would argue that given the very short duration of 1/20th of second you are very likely to get a picture of a straight path.. Keep in mind that depending on how close the bug was actually to the camera we are only talking about a real flight path of maybe a couple of cm.twocents wrote: Even then, such a straight path is just not a likely natural occurance.
<snip>
it would likely be much more out of focus than it is, and would probably not be remotely recognizable as a "bug", but much more of an amorphous bright obstruction through which very little detail could be seen.
2.) I think you proved your own point!
IMO thats exactly what we got in the originial unaltered image...an amorphous bright obstruction, to me anyway it didn't look anything at ALL like a bug until I saw the diff images. An extremely short flash explains the detail of the wingsLastly as for the perspective of the wings, don't forget that this is a 3 dimensional scene, so if the flash fires at the start of the sequence the bug would be flying from the bottom right up towards the top left. If you imagine the bug going up to the left and also slightly AWAY from you, you would get a nice pretty view of the back of the bug, two wings, etc.
Alternatively if the flash fired at the end of the exposure, then reverse everything and have the bug coming slightly towards the camera..
-
Benjammin
It is likely not a contrail, as it doesn't occur in any of the other photos before or after. It does not fit the pattern for typical lightning strike. The apparition around the flash is intriguing, along with the dicontinuous perimeter of the flash itself.
In our collective experience in the radio spectrum, we have seen similar phenomena. Coronal discharge near the high voltage end of half wavelength antennas look very similar, especially using CW mode transmissions with high power output in a highly humid environment. That would also explain the gaseous apparition around the flash, as secondary excitation of moisture in the air could cause condensation illumination in the immediate vicinity. As it appears that the shadow is being cast into the camera lens and not onto the skyline backdrop (there are artifacts of the shadow below the skyline, indicating that the flash is behind the shadow), it is most likely some obstruction in close proximity to the lens, such as a filament or strand of hair or fiber suspended in the air, that creates an otherwise unusual physical attribute.
What could have caused this type of discharge is difficult to establish, as the point of the flash itself appears to be somewhat obstructed from view by the lightpole. Given the likely atmospheric discharge going on in the distance, it is remotely possible that ionizing energy could've been ducted to this point along the surface of the water by some isolated dielectric or frequency dependent nodal point, where it was finally able to discharge.
Although extremely rare, such conditions do exist.
In our collective experience in the radio spectrum, we have seen similar phenomena. Coronal discharge near the high voltage end of half wavelength antennas look very similar, especially using CW mode transmissions with high power output in a highly humid environment. That would also explain the gaseous apparition around the flash, as secondary excitation of moisture in the air could cause condensation illumination in the immediate vicinity. As it appears that the shadow is being cast into the camera lens and not onto the skyline backdrop (there are artifacts of the shadow below the skyline, indicating that the flash is behind the shadow), it is most likely some obstruction in close proximity to the lens, such as a filament or strand of hair or fiber suspended in the air, that creates an otherwise unusual physical attribute.
What could have caused this type of discharge is difficult to establish, as the point of the flash itself appears to be somewhat obstructed from view by the lightpole. Given the likely atmospheric discharge going on in the distance, it is remotely possible that ionizing energy could've been ducted to this point along the surface of the water by some isolated dielectric or frequency dependent nodal point, where it was finally able to discharge.
Although extremely rare, such conditions do exist.
-
sterngeboren
Contrail Dissipation
Don't contrails take longer than 15 s to dissipate? I've seen many contrails, but not ones that dissipate in a matter of 15 s. Wouldn't the shadow have gradually appeared and disappeared?
Just a thought, I'm no expert.
~A~
Just a thought, I'm no expert.
~A~
-
Guest
Re: one more doubt about flies
1.) I have to disagree I would argue that given the very short duration of 1/20th of second you are very likely to get a picture of a straight path.. Keep in mind that depending on how close the bug was actually to the camera we are only talking about a real flight path of maybe a couple of cm.
2.) I think you proved your own point! IMO thats exactly what we got in the originial unaltered image...an amorphous bright obstruction, to me anyway it didn't look anything at ALL like a bug until I saw the diff images. An extremely short flash explains the detail of the wings
...you would get a nice pretty view of the back of the bug, two wings, etc.
Oh please... 1) you can argue all you want. That is not a natural trace of anything that would be flying sideways. There are no irregularities whatsoever, from wingbeats, or anything else. Nothing is going to fly so arrow straight regardless of the duration.
2) Proved my point? Even the transparent wings would have reflected enough light from the supposed flash to overwhelm anything behind it. But yet, the lamppost is barely obstructed at best.
and it's more likely that the streak would be more due to blocking the light from the background vs. imaging the body of the bug in flight. Ever dodge a print?
Sorry, not plausible. No bug, at least not a real "living breathing" one
2.) I think you proved your own point!
IMO thats exactly what we got in the originial unaltered image...an amorphous bright obstruction, to me anyway it didn't look anything at ALL like a bug until I saw the diff images. An extremely short flash explains the detail of the wings...you would get a nice pretty view of the back of the bug, two wings, etc.
Oh please... 1) you can argue all you want. That is not a natural trace of anything that would be flying sideways. There are no irregularities whatsoever, from wingbeats, or anything else. Nothing is going to fly so arrow straight regardless of the duration.
2) Proved my point? Even the transparent wings would have reflected enough light from the supposed flash to overwhelm anything behind it. But yet, the lamppost is barely obstructed at best.
and it's more likely that the streak would be more due to blocking the light from the background vs. imaging the body of the bug in flight. Ever dodge a print?
Sorry, not plausible. No bug, at least not a real "living breathing" one
-
panik
It's a bug or a bird streaking by. The bug or small bird is zooming by upper left to lower right and is visible just above the dock, by chance in front of a lightpole. The streak is dark because only the darker component of the shadow of the bug or bird contrasts. The speed of the camera can catch an object in a relatively fast trajectory as it passes by and streak like that. The streak stops at the object.
The Streak is not perfectly straight, either, it's not a shadow. Are there light coloured humming birds or bugs there? Nothing magic or mysterious!
The Streak is not perfectly straight, either, it's not a shadow. Are there light coloured humming birds or bugs there? Nothing magic or mysterious!
-
Guest
It can’t be lightning strike. If it were, it would leave some kind of smoke in the after picture, not only that but also short out or blow out all the other lights attached to that circuit.
It cant be a light bulb burnout, if it were there wouldn’t be any of that smoke looking stuff around the post. If it really "Blew up" then there would be smoke there for much longer and therefor there would be smoke in the 2nd photo. If the bulb did burn out at the same time of the exposure, there would have to be some sort of substance, like Mist around the light to refract some of that light and cause the camera to pick that up. The air in this photo seems to be fairly "clear" while having some sort of overcast off in the distance which would rule out a reflection off of mist in the air from incoming raid.
It could be a meteor that caused the trail, which almost looks to be in the background. If you look close you cant really see a continuation of the trail beyond the tree line in the background. I dont see any of that trail in the water, its only visible in the sky portion of the photo.
If it were a shadow, what would the shadow be on? The air looks to be too clear for a shadow to be able to be cast upon it. If it were fog, or mist, then maybe you would see some sort of shadow on the fog or mist in the air. There has to be an object for the shadow to "fall" upon, doesn’t there?
As far as the streak... I would almost have to say it was a small bug, flying really fast that was captured from tree line, to the top dark cloud where the streak seems to end causing a "blur" in the exposure.
As far as the flash... I would have to say the angel of the sun, reflecting off the lamp caused it.
As far as the "smoke" looking stuff around the top of the pole.... Well, you got me there... I have no clue.
just my $0.02
It cant be a light bulb burnout, if it were there wouldn’t be any of that smoke looking stuff around the post. If it really "Blew up" then there would be smoke there for much longer and therefor there would be smoke in the 2nd photo. If the bulb did burn out at the same time of the exposure, there would have to be some sort of substance, like Mist around the light to refract some of that light and cause the camera to pick that up. The air in this photo seems to be fairly "clear" while having some sort of overcast off in the distance which would rule out a reflection off of mist in the air from incoming raid.
It could be a meteor that caused the trail, which almost looks to be in the background. If you look close you cant really see a continuation of the trail beyond the tree line in the background. I dont see any of that trail in the water, its only visible in the sky portion of the photo.
If it were a shadow, what would the shadow be on? The air looks to be too clear for a shadow to be able to be cast upon it. If it were fog, or mist, then maybe you would see some sort of shadow on the fog or mist in the air. There has to be an object for the shadow to "fall" upon, doesn’t there?
As far as the streak... I would almost have to say it was a small bug, flying really fast that was captured from tree line, to the top dark cloud where the streak seems to end causing a "blur" in the exposure.
As far as the flash... I would have to say the angel of the sun, reflecting off the lamp caused it.
As far as the "smoke" looking stuff around the top of the pole.... Well, you got me there... I have no clue.
just my $0.02
-
windsilo
not what you think
This streak is not what you think. Is is a fume from a jet going over 1200 mph and is part of the "Open Skies Treaty" which the Aussies are part of.
What does this mean, it means there is are many countries flying in your airspace with advanced craft we do not see. No, it is not a UFO but an advanced high speed, quiet "jet", making a sorte for unknown reasons.
The digital camera picked up the streak during a synchronized shutter which did not read the intended color spectrum.
Play with the other shots in Photoshop using various density, hue, saturation, tools for example. I'll bet the streak shows and many others.
Do a Google on "open skies treaty" you will be amazed.
The USA president Clinton created a "black budget" agency which is secret to most and enables continued access to the US and other governments.
What does this mean, it means there is are many countries flying in your airspace with advanced craft we do not see. No, it is not a UFO but an advanced high speed, quiet "jet", making a sorte for unknown reasons.
The digital camera picked up the streak during a synchronized shutter which did not read the intended color spectrum.
Play with the other shots in Photoshop using various density, hue, saturation, tools for example. I'll bet the streak shows and many others.
Do a Google on "open skies treaty" you will be amazed.
The USA president Clinton created a "black budget" agency which is secret to most and enables continued access to the US and other governments.
-
jsmiller
Strange photo
Having read all the posts since mine, I see none that explains all elements in the picture. The flying bug, meteor, contrail, lightning flash, reflection, etc., perhaps can explain one or two things (not well) but not all. Once again, I suggest it is an amateur rocket. It was attached to the top of the pole with a fuse going down the pole. The smoke below is from the burnt fuse. The flash is off-set to right of the pole because the rocket was pointed to the left. The faint dark streak is either the rocket moving image or smoke from the rocket. Images over the previous hour or two should be examined for someone attaching the rocket to the pole.
Joe
Joe
-
Boris
Light pole flash
I would suspect a failed lightning bolt/step leader.
As to the vapor trail, again, there may have been enough
energy to cause a brief trail.
Alternativly, but far out, the USAF may have been playing with
lazers.....
The evidence for the lightning step leader is the luminecant arc
to the right of the pole and the burnt out light flouresing.
The National Geographic did an article on lightning (many years ago)
that included a photo of a step leader that never resulted in a full
discharge, it looked very similar.
boris
As to the vapor trail, again, there may have been enough
energy to cause a brief trail.
Alternativly, but far out, the USAF may have been playing with
lazers.....
The evidence for the lightning step leader is the luminecant arc
to the right of the pole and the burnt out light flouresing.
The National Geographic did an article on lightning (many years ago)
that included a photo of a step leader that never resulted in a full
discharge, it looked very similar.
boris
-
Guest
I saw this CONTRAIL being created!
I happened to see the same 'streak' being created the other night, and it was being created by an airplane. It was just about sunset and I saw the streak in the sky only realizing after that a plane was at the front of the streak creating it. It looked red brown in color and I DID SEE THE STREAK FADING AND MOVING EVER SO SLIGHTLY WITH THE WINDS. NO DOUBT IN MY MIND. IT WAS A CONTRAIL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Ed in Oregon
IT's a bug
One quote from an early post identifying the bug.
"There is a common carpenter bee in Australia that is black with a metallic iridescence which could be the culprit." The iridescence is strongly reflecting the light of the flash, and the rest is not. I'm assuming the iridescence is on the abdomen. Can any Aussies confirm that?
Bees are pretty fast, and fairly heavy as bugs go. I think that's why the shadow is so straight. Their wing beats are fast, and any deviation in the shadow from them will be hidden by the lack of sharp focus.
The post is visible through the wings for several reasons: first, the wings are moving very rapidly so are slightly blurred, second, the wings (and the rest of the bug) are out of focus and the post is not, third, the wings are transparent. All three factors are making the post visible through the wings.
"There is a common carpenter bee in Australia that is black with a metallic iridescence which could be the culprit." The iridescence is strongly reflecting the light of the flash, and the rest is not. I'm assuming the iridescence is on the abdomen. Can any Aussies confirm that?
Bees are pretty fast, and fairly heavy as bugs go. I think that's why the shadow is so straight. Their wing beats are fast, and any deviation in the shadow from them will be hidden by the lack of sharp focus.
The post is visible through the wings for several reasons: first, the wings are moving very rapidly so are slightly blurred, second, the wings (and the rest of the bug) are out of focus and the post is not, third, the wings are transparent. All three factors are making the post visible through the wings.
-
wombat
Another strange thing that no-one has mentioned yet?
Perhaps someone has already mentioned this in the 55 pages of post, but I couldn't find it, so here goes:
There's a small "pink blob" centred at what Paintbrush calls position (888, 1346) It's in exactly the same position on all three images, so it doesn't show up in any of the diffs. Being "on the water", and being in exactly the same position on all images, I guess that that "proves" that it's some kind of camera/lens artifact and not actually "on" the water ??????
I'm wondering why no-one else has mentioned this? Quite a few other things in the image that seemed even less relevant have been discussed at length.
There ARE fireflies in Australia. I've seen them in the famous "firefly tunnel" past Lithgow; the exact name of the town nearby escapes me right now. They are exceedingly faint, which is why you only see them at night time, when you are quite well dark adapted. Their faintness was quite well demonstrated in that Milky Way photo from Texas. I'm not sure how relevant that is, either.
There's a small "pink blob" centred at what Paintbrush calls position (888, 1346) It's in exactly the same position on all three images, so it doesn't show up in any of the diffs. Being "on the water", and being in exactly the same position on all images, I guess that that "proves" that it's some kind of camera/lens artifact and not actually "on" the water ??????
I'm wondering why no-one else has mentioned this? Quite a few other things in the image that seemed even less relevant have been discussed at length.
There ARE fireflies in Australia. I've seen them in the famous "firefly tunnel" past Lithgow; the exact name of the town nearby escapes me right now. They are exceedingly faint, which is why you only see them at night time, when you are quite well dark adapted. Their faintness was quite well demonstrated in that Milky Way photo from Texas. I'm not sure how relevant that is, either.
-
A_J
Image geometry
Consider the geometry of the dark line. It is the same width at the top and the bottom, implying that there is no change due to distance. Therefore the fault may lie on the image plane itself, or be due to a reflected surface against the outermost optics.