Strange streak discussion: 2004 Dec 7 APOD

[Guest]

At the risk of another personal attack by "guest" (who claims I know nothing about basic biology, or physics) , let me throw one more thing out to discount the bug theory, and I'll go away for good.

I'd like someone to identify a bug that flies at a 90 degree bank in open air, even when changing directions (not counting landing on a wall or other surface). They don't fly like airplanes fellas. There's just nothing realistinc about this bug flying fast, arrow straight, sideways, or circling the camera in a plane cutting right through the center of the image plane.

A valid explaination has to be naturally plausable. To me, the chances of the straight path, flying sideways, at the exact orientation to the camera... are just as likely as randomly catching a meteor just at the right instant. It just doesn't add up to a realistic bug.

See ya

The possible bugs have already been identified AND the math for the movement has already been done. Why don't you read the previous posts and get some learning?

[Kevin in Vegas]

I must say, I am quite happy to see how many people are familiar with "Planar Contrail Shadows" who hence, have no doubt about what this picture is. To one contributor I'll admit, the sun could be practically anywhere, except in the actual photo itself or behind thick clouds (if it was in the photo, you'd see the contrail also).

I've asked at least a 100 people I've known if they've ever seen this shadow, even amateur astronomers, and they all say no.

I guess I'm always looking to the sky...and it's paid off, especially when I was living in Idaho and witnessed the daylight fireball of August 10, 1972.

[Big D]

I have read this thread. The bug theory is the only plausible one.

[Ruidh]

I must say, I am quite happy to see how many people are familiar with "Planar Contrail Shadows" who hence, have no doubt about what this picture is. To one contributor I'll admit, the sun could be practically anywhere, except in the actual photo itself or behind thick clouds (if it was in the photo, you'd see the contrail also).

Please discuss the geometry which gives rise to the "Planar Contrail Shadows". I note that the term does not return any documents in Google search, so I have to suspect that you made it up. The pages on contrail shadows discuss geometries where the contrail casts a shadow onto haze. Given that the sun was setting when the picture was taken, that would seem to imply a contrail very low in the western sky.

Specifically, in this picture, where is the sun, the contrail and the shadow? Why does the shadow appear to end below the horizon? Wouldn't that be an extraordinarially long contrail without dispersion to have cast such a shadow? Would that shadow have disappeared with in 15 seconds?

[Boy Howdy!!]

One writer just wrote:

So the streak can only be caused by less light reaching the camera from that area. The only 3 ways I can figure out to explain that is:

1) the shadow was in fact there, caused by some phenomena
2) something blocked light coming from the scene in is path to the camera
3) the streak is a camera artefact

Then another just said:
[The only possible theory, a bug.]

You Einsteins forgot the MOST PLAUSIBLE: It's a HOAX!!!! Sheeesh!!!! Talk about misdirection!!!

[Boy Howdy]

PHOTOSHOP!!!!

[guest]

The "flash" could conceivablly the clouds reflecting off of that light post. The "flash" and the clouds appear to be the same color.

[Guest]

[quote="Boy Howdy"][/quote]

It's obvious that everyone here is going on the assumption that this is not a photoshopped image. It is always in the back of everyones mind that it /could/ be and it has not been ruled out.

But the purpose of the dicussion is to figure out what could have happened if the image is assumed to be authentic.

I certainly wouldn't be surprised if it were photoshopped but I would be dissapointed.

[Bow Howdy]

INTENTIONAL DIGITAL MANIPULATION........ You cannot rule that out as the primary possibility!!!

[Diffit]

You can't rule it out, but you can assume that APOD editor(s) did so when chosing to dedicate a day in APOD history for such an intriguing photo.

[Guest]

You cannot rule that out as the primary possibility!!!

What part of "it has not been ruled out" do you not understand?

[Luis]

For those of you who haven't read the first few posts, the working assumption is that the image is not digitally manipulated.

Photographic experts have said that digital manipulation does not seem to be the case, so please, for the sake of those of us who are having fun trying to figure a possible explanation for the picture, do not come shouting PHOTOSHOP or DIGITAL HOAX.

We all know it may be a hoax, but asserting that as a fact would finish the game. Lets believe that the photo experts who exmined the picutre originally are right and this is not a hoax.

Shall we?

[victorengel]

We all know it may be a hoax, but asserting that as a fact would finish the game. Lets believe that the photo experts who exmined the picutre originally are right and this is not a hoax.

Shall we?

I say, let those who say it's a hoax show some evidence. If there really is evidence that there is a hoax, I'd find that just as interesting as everything else.

[Guest]

Taking a closer look at the photo....my theory is a government test. I tried to zoom in on some parts but clarity is an issue. Photo enhancement would be a very useful. I wonder if anyone is lurking about the area (in the trees perhaps?) but we can't see them in this photo. The object that is being "targeted" doesn't seem like a lamp post to me. Looks like some kind of tie for the boats or something. There is only one more of the same just to the left and I think a couple more further down by the white docked boat or building or whatever it is. The actual lamp posts are taller and distributed evenly along the wharf (I count 8 viewable). And speaking of boat or building....seems a bit strange that in this "deserted" area there is a smaller tug-like boat that just happens to be floating all alone.....perhaps for observation???

[PK]

The smoke seems to be coming from the jetty level, not from the light itself - thicker at the bottom. The smoke trail going up also seems to be distorted (blown out) around the exploding light fixture. I suspect that a 3 phase power junction box, or lighting control box, on the jetty has cooked, causing a significant power surge being applied to the single phase lamp, which has subsequently exploded. The streak across the sky would be the shadow of the light fixture from the flash of the exploding lamp. Must have really scared the bike rider that was riding past at the time....

[rcross]

This looks like a lightning leader coming up from the ground that did not result in a lightning strike. The ball of plasma from the top of the post deflected the leader and may have defeated the strike. The post by the plasma ball created the shadow line.

[old_dog_zero_one]

After reading a majority of the posts on this subject, the theory of it being a bug illuminated by the camera flash seems the most plausable.

I have seen many insects fly in very straight paths, usually the larger ones. Where do you think the term "beeline" came from?

The only question I have is: does the model of camera in question fire it's flash at the beginning or end of the exposure?

If the flash fires at the beginning of the exposure then the object (bug) was actually traveling upwards! This would mean the upper end of the "trail" is when the shutter closed.

It would be cool if this picture were, in fact, evidence of extraterrestrial visitation, or a meteorite falling to earth, or the last reentering piece of Mir, or a particle beam weapons test, or Elvis's Ghost, or the Holy Spirit, or one of a myriad of other things. Alas, I do not believe this to be the case here.

Preponderance of the evidence says: "It's just a damn BUG!"

All other theories to the recycle bin please....

[Roger Davis]

Let's state the knowns:
How often have you seen a perfectly straight bolt of lightning?
The line does have a slight curve to it.
The lantern housing looks to explode? Is there evidence of this physical damage?
If so then the meteor, energy weapon and a twist in the time continuum look good.
Most likely is a meteor. The facts seem to fit it.

Roger Davis
Binocular & Telescope Service Centre P/L
Past President Astronomical Society of Victoria Australia

[Guest]

We all know it may be a hoax, but asserting that as a fact would finish the game. Lets believe that the photo experts who exmined the picutre originally are right and this is not a hoax.

Shall we?

I say, let those who say it's a hoax show some evidence. If there really is evidence that there is a hoax, I'd find that just as interesting as everything else.

Fair enough, but don't just come shouting IT'S A HOAX, IT'S A HOAX!

[Luis]

Can any body point me to a link where I can find info about the distance to the posts and the settings of the camera

Thanks

[victorengel]

The only question I have is: does the model of camera in question fire it's flash at the beginning or end of the exposure?

The camera was a Canon G3, which has a setting to toggle the flash between start and end of frame.

[Guest]

To all those who think it's a bug --

do you see any variation in intensity to either side of the dark line that would represent the bug wings?

in other words, I note that the thickness of the dark line is very close to the thickness of the "bug body" in the "explosion." but where are the wings in the dark line?

[ESLEVY]

All comments assume it is an actual photo artifact. As one who has developed his own film, is it possible the photog developed his own film, and put the slightest strain on the film when processing it. Dad used to have a Kodak Autograph with a window where you wrote on the paper film backing and the force made a readable inage on the negative.

[Luis]

All comments assume it is an actual photo artifact. As one who has developed his own film, is it possible the photog developed his own film, and put the slightest strain on the film when processing it. Dad used to have a Kodak Autograph with a window where you wrote on the paper film backing and the force made a readable inage on the negative.

The picture was taken with a digital camera

[Guest]

Please, a thousands pardons, but can it be that so many people are so easily fooled? One person even said this puts the photographers reputation on the line. And.. SO? NOT!!! Like he's going to get fined or something... get real.

Let's see: Ball lightning, lighning, dark matter, lasers, bulb, shiup mast, meteorite, bug, hahahahaha.... so many posts -- so many posts -- so many wild ideas!!! Yet NOT ONE of you entertains the huge possibility that this is simply a hoax. You'd rather entertain exotic and near impossible odds than face simple 'hoax'. Jeeezzz... I have a bridge for you folks to buy. Hey.. how about them crop circles... hahahaha sure sure, they HAVE to be aliens huh!?? HAHAHAHAHAHA

OK, I'm a reputable guy, except when I'm having a bit of fun. So, I'll create a picture too and post it... and I can't wait to hear all the "I'm so knowledgeable, I know know for sure" explanations! You'll know it when you see it - soon!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHA.... what a riot!!!

Omg, ok I won't say anything but have you even read like 1/4 of the posts? THere had been at least 3 posts stating that it might be a hoax, and that it was fake. I can fidn them for you if you want, it seems you are too lazy to read.

skyglow1