WOW! Recent extra-solar passerby -- a 'highly-elongated', maybe 'high-metal-content' object.

originally posted by: Lurker1

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Lurker1

Do you know what the "excuse" is?

They never name it.

OK, calculate the angular size of the object at the range it was detected, and tell us what you got -- if you're still puzzled after getting that number.

originally posted by: Lurker1

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Lurker1

Do you know what the "excuse" is?

They never name it.

Then what are you talking about?

originally posted by: Lurker1
It boggles the mind that we can look at the other end of the universe with our telescopes, but cannot image a rock right in our backyard.

I think the excuse stinks.

YOU really don't have a clue do you look up angular resolution, it's like the posts on here and other sites on the web saying why doesn't the Hubble picture the landing sites , well just to educate YOU and xconvoyx below your post at the distance of the Moon Hubble can just resolve objects around 300ft.

Now as for Galaxies I did a thread while back

You see Andromeda appears as a faint blob if a picture is taken like this taken at a dark site by me.



Exposure details f3.5 10 secs at iso 3200 18mm focal length.

Now if it was BRIGHTER and it's distance of 2.4 million light years didn't change this is how it would look in our sky
our Moon in the picture for scale



More here on the thread.

How Our Sky Would Look If Andromeda was Brighter

It's safer if you don't know how something works to find out before making comments that make YOU look rather siily.


This might help you understand Angular Diameter

Also have a look here at members pictures of the night sky.

a reply to: Signals

Maybe you're onto something

The Mysterious Booms are Back
www.abovetopsecret.com...