Starship Asterisk*

It looks like a rainbow without any colors. I've seen this before in the USA.

Notice that the airplane in the 2nd picture does not cast a visible shadow.

The contrail shadow is, as some people have noted on this forum, a planar shadow. You're seeing the shadow plane of the contrail edge one (because the sun, on the left out of frame, is directly behind the contrail).

Let's not gloss over the fact that this phenomenon can readily be explained by ball lightening and a contrail like artifact produced from the flash.
I cannot state for certain, since there is no way to accurately test this theory, just as the bug theory cannot as easily be tested.
Let's take a few facts into consideration. First, the light was burned out, and I figure if the bulb was damaged further, it would be noted. Assuming that the bulb had burned out, then we have a flash as a result of the bulb, and a contrail like shadowing effect produced by a camera artifact based upon the photographer's position.
How can it be a contrail, when it's completely gone in the next image? I think we can rule this out, along with the meteor theory. As I've stated, a meteor would be a lot brighter, and the photographer would easily be aware of the situation. I observed a streaking meteor in Phoenix, Arizona, and the trail would not be a stead black shadow as it appears on the photograph. It would be an illuminated streak going across the image. You would further see ripples in the water, or damage, even an audible blast had the meteor actually struck the ground.
So we're left with 2 main possibilities. Either a bug or an electrical discharge (possibly due to ball lightening). I find it slightly more unlikely that this can be due to an insect, because there would still need to be an explanation for the black streak. I doubt it's insect movement, because if it was a lightening bug (which I'm not even sure exists in Australia), then the moment of discharge would be a lot brighter on the camera. I remember seeing pictures of fireflies, and at the moment of luminescence, the brightness would easily overwhelm more of the given area then was apparent in the photograph. Further, for the insect to have just stopped in mid air, after going at the rate of speed to throw a shadow, it would be next ot impossible. We would see an increase in shadow intensity as the insect slowed to a stop.
My conclusion, although can't be 100% certain on it is a discharged light, with superheated gas surrounding the lamp, and throwing off an artifact. There's also a possibility that ball lightening, which definately could look spherical, and superheat the air surrounding the discharge, knock the light bulb out, and also leave little evidence on the light-post.

The light didnt work after the incident. Could the exposure have been made during that brief instant when the light bulb went out, similar to the flash when you turn on a light and the bulb burns out.

HawaiiArmo wrote:Let's not gloss over the fact that this phenomenon can readily be explained by ball lightening and a contrail like artifact produced from the flash.
I cannot state for certain, since there is no way to accurately test this theory, just as the bug theory cannot as easily be tested.

Could you contradict yourself any quicker?

A contrail like the ones photographed above could readily disappeare within the course of 15-30 seconds. They are vsible to those standing either in the shadow of the contrail itself, or withina small range of that on the ground. With a high altitude wind, that contrail could move several hundred meters in a matter of seconds, taking the viewer out of the shadow plane, making the shadow effect nil.

HawaiiArmo wrote:Let's not gloss over the fact that this phenomenon can readily be explained by ball lightening and a contrail like artifact produced from the flash.
I cannot state for certain, since there is no way to accurately test this theory, just as the bug theory cannot as easily be tested.
Let's take a few facts into consideration. First, the light was burned out, and I figure if the bulb was damaged further, it would be noted. Assuming that the bulb had burned out, then we have a flash as a result of the bulb, and a contrail like shadowing effect produced by a camera artifact based upon the photographer's position.
How can it be a contrail, when it's completely gone in the next image? I think we can rule this out, along with the meteor theory. As I've stated, a meteor would be a lot brighter, and the photographer would easily be aware of the situation. I observed a streaking meteor in Phoenix, Arizona, and the trail would not be a stead black shadow as it appears on the photograph. It would be an illuminated streak going across the image. You would further see ripples in the water, or damage, even an audible blast had the meteor actually struck the ground.
So we're left with 2 main possibilities. Either a bug or an electrical discharge (possibly due to ball lightening). I find it slightly more unlikely that this can be due to an insect, because there would still need to be an explanation for the black streak. I doubt it's insect movement, because if it was a lightening bug (which I'm not even sure exists in Australia), then the moment of discharge would be a lot brighter on the camera. I remember seeing pictures of fireflies, and at the moment of luminescence, the brightness would easily overwhelm more of the given area then was apparent in the photograph. Further, for the insect to have just stopped in mid air, after going at the rate of speed to throw a shadow, it would be next ot impossible. We would see an increase in shadow intensity as the insect slowed to a stop.
My conclusion, although can't be 100% certain on it is a discharged light, with superheated gas surrounding the lamp, and throwing off an artifact. There's also a possibility that ball lightening, which definately could look spherical, and superheat the air surrounding the discharge, knock the light bulb out, and also leave little evidence on the light-post.

Wait a second, I thought the black streak was cuased by the insect obstructing the background? After looking at the difference images it does look like a bug.

skyglow1

I think some energy or entity entered our space/time vibrational field from another space/time vibrational universe which could easily be simultaneously occupying our own space but vibrating at a different rate of speed so we can't see it until it slows down to our local rate. We see some object begin to materialize as it careens down toward the water. At the moment of actual materialization there is an energy burst which appears to us as a bright light. In the next instant the object is there but the camera failed to capture the actual appearance of the object which disappeared before the next shot got off 15 seconds later, which was after it zoomed out of sight.

Was it possible to detect whether the light was on or off in the previous pictures?
Sky cover seems to indicate that the sun was not bright enough to reflect from a glass bulb, so I would guess you have caught the the last flash of the lamp bulb as it burned out
A far out guess could be that we see the reflection of lightning from a point in the sky which is not in the picture.
The dark streek is more puzzling and I have no guesses there.[/url][/list][/list][/code][/quote][/u][/i][/b]

HawaiiArmo wrote:As I've stated, a meteor would be a lot brighter, and the photographer would easily be aware of the situation. I observed a streaking meteor in Phoenix, Arizona, and the trail would not be a stead black shadow as it appears on the photograph. It would be an illuminated streak going across the image.

And how bright was the day when you observed this 'bright' meteorite?

I'm seeing alot of posts from those unfamiliar with meteorites, especially those claiming it would necessarily be 10m in diameter.

Hmmm, do they realize the consequenses of a 10m meteorite?

I still say that a meteor [with it's thin chimney] strike in the water about 500m offshore with it's weak [sonic shockwave being overtaken by the explosion's pressure wave [visually apparent from condensation in the momentary pressure differential] explain all elements of the picture.

The meteorite, by the shape of the sonic shockwave, is traveling just over mach 1 [1056 ft/sec at sea level] and has the apparent trajectory of a rifle bullet when viewed from under it's path.

it wouldnt be the first time a piece of scrap survived the fall from space. the lamp post 'explosion is more than likely a scratch spark as a small bolt head from one of the second rate space agencies comes in smoking and by pure chance scratched the metal on the post. that particular piece of the harbor has a lot of other pieces of scrap so what is one more?

I find it slightly more unlikely that this can be due to an insect, because there would still need to be an explanation for the black streak.

The black streak is easily explained. The bug BLOCKS the background while it is in front of it. If you take the ratio of the apparent bug length divided by the length of the path the bug evidently took, you get a measure of the percentage of the light that is blocked. This percentage closely matches what we actually see in the photo. If you're up to the task, please feel free to verify this.

I doubt it's insect movement, because if it was a lightening bug (which I'm not even sure exists in Australia), then the moment of discharge would be a lot brighter on the camera.

What do you mean by moment of discharge? If you're referring to the lightning bug lighting up, I agree that's not what's pictured. First the color is wrong. Second, the duration of lightning bug flashes is long enough that you'd see motion blur in the direction of travel. We don't see that here.

Further, for the insect to have just stopped in mid air, after going at the rate of speed to throw a shadow, it would be next ot impossible.

What shadow? There is no insect shadow. And the insect didn't stop. It is frozen in time by the camera's strobe, which lasts under 1/1000 second.

I believe the photo taken was just a fraction of a second after the bulb on the post burned out with a sudden flash. Take a look at http://www.worldnetdaily.com "Angels photographed over nation's capital?" of a photo taken at the lighting of the menorah (posted December 8). Note the similarity in structure: the straight shaft which is lit up in that photo and the somewhat parabolic image at the end with a central bulge directed away from the shaft. I believe that in the photo on APOD that since the photos were taken at 15 second intervals we are at the end of the flash interval from the bulb on the pole and that the strange dark streak is the recovery phase of the CCD after the lense flare created by the flash.

I looked at some images with difference filters, and lots of other filters, and some other processing that I know how to do, and then I noticed that the "contrail" is in the after image as well. So this is the "contrail" image and the after image, with the histogram cycled through the image a bunch of times (to make pixel neighbors have as much contrast as possible).

While I can't tell at all where this thing is in the frame (behind the lamp, infront of the lamp, near the camera) I do notice that the contrail behaves like drifting smoke.

Final thought: Who says there was a flash on this camera? What professional would be taking pictures of clouds with a flash!!?? That bright spot is not an insect.

it looks like a fake. why are their more bytes of information in the previous photo (with no explosion) than in the photo with an explosion? boats didn't move, sun or clouds didn't move. no other lights came on. it's a fake. this was thought out and planned to provoke. congrats, good job. i hope i'm right. don't want to look like a huge fool. by the way it was fun as hell. keep it up.

the boat's don't move, things that look like animals move in the water nearby slightly, no more lights come on. if the waves move only slightly, animals in the water do the same. wouldn't it be hard to believe that something traveled accross the sky, left a dark trail and hit a lightpost all in the next shot?

without a doubt, this is an ALIEN SPACECRAFT landing on EARTH to collect PEOPLE as biological SPECIMENS for ANAL PROBES and other assorted strange alien outer space TESTS.

be affraid, humans.
be very affraid .......

A close, out of focus, flying insect might have been captured in this hotly discussed image. If so, the dark streak would be a result of shadowing by a moving object. The glare could have been caused by bug's body and wings catching a reflection of bright clouds, sun ray or, perhaps, camera's firing flash.
The exciting aspects of this story are two:
- first, to the best of my knowledge, this intensity of reflection could only be caused by a GOLDEN bug,
- second, if the bug indeed had flown into the lamp post, its size must have been comparable to that of a duck. What makes it a BIG GOLDEN bug.

Goodnight, as it is an appropriate greeting for an astronomy site.

This is DARWIN !!!

Physical attacks on Australia start in Darwin.

Goodness, didn't realize that the signifigance of this smoke trail had risen to that of physical attacks-- Or are we speaking of some sort of unfortunate sidewalk occurance? Anyhow, why would Darwin be the focus of any attack---you're way down there where nobody does anything of note---

and then I noticed that the "contrail" is in the after image as well.

Where? You certainly can't tell by your animation. The animation is so fast that your eyes don't have a chance to get used to the new image and so still have an afterimage of the one with the "contrail". Maybe if you show the two images side by side and maybe put an arrow to what you think you're seeing....

While I can't tell at all where this thing is in the frame (behind the lamp, infront of the lamp, near the camera) I do notice that the contrail behaves like drifting smoke.

How do you arrive at that conclusion?

Final thought: Who says there was a flash on this camera?

The pictures themselves do. It's in the EXIF data.

Check out the images on the "Contrail shadows" link on this web site. Do they look familiar? http://www.geocities.com/milo702000/

hawaiianmike wrote:

I'd guess missle was launched 15-20 sec before picture taken---always sets something on fire behind launcher, and frequently ejects packing material out of the back of the tube that is sparkling/on fire[written as though the tube were sparking or afire]--learn real quickly not to stand behind such launches---this is an OUTGOING, not an incoming---1/2 mi over[do you mean 'beyond'?] pole seems reasonable--launched from a boat, could be a hobbiest with a good sized set-up, not wanting to be seen as it must be against some sort of laws, regs [of course; this is Australia], etc. Not saying it was a terrorist, etc., but has all the signs of a small missle trail---smoke is straight and HAD to smell-----inter-dimensional vibrating energy people need to go lay[lie] down for a spell--that also goes for "laser" dude as well---lots of power needed to generate lasers---incoming would have left evidence, floating stuff, etc., as would have any impact on light pole--assume author/photographer would have seen/hearn[sp] incoming impact---outgoing can be surprisingly quiet and sould[sp] like a leaking teakettle---
UFO people in Maryland must be single--

Trust you don't mind my corrections to your missive for English grammar, syntax, and spelling.

You could use a rest yourself!