NASA Images Large Spherical Objects Inside Corona of SUN

Sun gave birth to a few new planets. Planets grow and move farther from sun eventually getting lost in space.

an lol idea, but they look like planets or moons.

Originally posted by loam

This is supposedly a close-up of one of the objects.

Here are some additional links:

Link 1
Link 2
Link 3
Link 4
Link 5
Link 6

[edit on 23-1-2010 by loam]

The full image can be found here

www.poketheeye.org...

It was contrast and color enhanced by me utilizing photo-shop. No other alterations were made. Still wondering what these are. Just not sure. Discussion at another board says Dust, Satellites, CG I anomalies, hot pixels.

any comments welcome.

P.S. I posted other color enhanced images earlier in this thread for those interested.

[edit on 23-1-2010 by PatriotG]

[edit on 23-1-2010 by PatriotG]

Originally posted by Pr0t0
reply to post by CHRLZ

 

Having re-read my own post, you deserve an apology...

Back on topic, I found the Behind 195 slide show fascinating...

Would you agree that we are seeing more activity...

Yep, I do! It may sound odd, but I look forward to some spectacular solar activity upcoming.. Having said that, I am painfully aware that if/when we get a really big solar storm, the effects on our communication systems, power grid (and perhaps air travel, astronauts in space, etc.) may be quite unpleasant.

Thanks for the comments, and such a genuine apology is greatly appreciated (and not really necessary - we all go a bit over the top at times..!)

If I get time I'll try to get a peek at the traversing object.


Oh, and if anyone is wondering about how I know about the Stereo imaging process, but not so much about the spacecraft it's because some time back on another forum, there was a lengthy thread about some dark areas that were appearing in the corona on Stereo images. So I emailed the Stereo team and was kindly and promptly given a huge pile of information on where the originals were, how to access them, why the initial processing was pretty crappy and 'over-the-top', how they used dark-frame-subtractions later, etc.

Originally posted by PatriotG

Originally posted by loam

This is supposedly a close-up of one of the objects.

Here are some additional links:

Link 1

...

The full image can be found here

www.poketheeye.org...

It was contrast and color enhanced by me utilizing photo-shop. No other alterations were made. Still wondering what these are. Just not sure. Discussion at another board says Dust, Satellites, CG I anomalies, hot pixels.

any comments welcome.

P.S. I posted other color enhanced images earlier in this thread for those interested.
...

Just a few notes...

Once you enlarge something beyond 100% ('actual pixel size'), you are at the mercy of the enlarging algorithm used. Different algorithms will provide different guesses. Inevitably you simply end up seeing false detail, and if that detail is then enhanced.. well, you can see where I'm going.

When images are enhanced (esp sharpening or contrast enhancement) the software looks for abrupt changes in brightness, and then exaggerates those changes. So you end up with one (or a small group) of bright or dark pixels, and then the software reverses the pixels around it. So if the pixel is bright the software adds a few dark pixels around it, if it is dark, it adds a few bright pixels. Because the pixels are laid out in rows, you invariably get a little square or diamond shaped pattern. The thing is, that such enhancement is only useful if you do NOT enlarge the image too much. If you do, all you see is the pattern created by the software - in this case, it neatly turned into a little smiley face!

This gets back to my earlier comment, once you start doubling/tripling pixels, you don't gain any useful information about the shape of whatever it was in the first place. The anomaly is very obviously only a pixel or two wide, and that means you cannot make any meaningful judgement about its true original shape (look up "Nyquist Limit").

So, I'm not at all surprised to see weird looking patterns surrounding the 'glitch'/object/whatever. It's what happens when you do this sort of thing.

Similar problems can be seen where the image shows those square shapes (eg top left) - that is the contrast enhancement 'tripping' over jpeg boundaries, and falsely enhancing them too.

Enlarging and enhancing images is an art - while it is possible in some circumstance to recover a little additional information by very carefully enlarging an image (look up "deconvolution"), it only works in very precisely defined images using very precisely defined software, and it only works to about 150%. Definitely not 400% and up, which is what is happening here. That only happens on CSI...

Put simply, once you start seeing pixel edges, all bets are off, I'm afraid. You are way beyond the resolution limit of the image in the above examples, and as soon as you see those effects, you need to go looking for a higher resolution original.


If I get time (and that's a big if) I may go and get the original FTS image, and show you what I mean with some examples and using different enlarging algorithms.

sheres a vid
www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by skepticantiseptic
Yes, but not a lot of interest apparently and wondering where that ultimate UFO poo pooer Phage is at on this one? Perhaps I should have come up with a more contentious title like "Huge UFO's Taking Up Position Around Sun".

What do you care what Phage has to say on anything? This forum is an open forum and is not controlled by Phage where his opinion has to be considered that important. We've already had conversations about people such as you that feels that getting some individual's reaction to a thread is of paramount importance. All Phage, or anyone except Jim Oberg who has more knowledge about things NASA, can do is offer is an opinion which may be immaterial unless he is an expert on the thread topic. I don't know Phage so I can't say he is unqualified. But this "Let's see what Phage has to say about this or that" b.s. should stop! Everybody's opinion is to be considered equally.

Originally posted by Korg Trinity
Gosh why do people that have no idea what they are looking at post inane threads about something that is so obviously nothing?

Please can all the people that don't know what they are looking at post a title like "The sun- what am I looking at?"

You will get people that will help you.

Otherwise posting obvious attention grabbing titles only to find nothing of interest will only gain you negativity in the replier to the thread.

Peace out.

Korg.

What a ridiculous reply! What, are you blind? Don't you see the unnatural objects at the pointed out clock positions? Blow the photo up so you can see them. Perhaps you don't know that you can blow up the photo by clicking on them.

Originally posted by PatriotG

Discussion at another board says Dust, Satellites, CG I anomalies, hot pixels.

any comments welcome.

Not quite. All the 'discussion' at the other board came from one person. One person who flooded the thread with post-after-post of his insistence that they are nothing but dust and hot pixels. Most normal people would give their opinion and leave it at that. That guy who kept posting is clearly a shill, and a desperate one with very few options but to respond with civility.

He had a couple of 'hanger-on's' around him but thankfully have left the thread for the time being. Must be on a paid lunch break!

Interesting, check this out people.



I guess someone at NASA will get the chop, indeed, I think either these images were not ment for public consumption, or NASA will state they didn't see them and they have no idea, or claim the camera is faulty. Whatever the case they have some explaining to do me thinks

Heads up!

[edit on 23-1-2010 by Genuine_UFOs]

[edit on 23-1-2010 by Genuine_UFOs]

[edit on 23-1-2010 by Genuine_UFOs]

sorry about the video,
here is the link, I am new to this forum, first post, forgive me? lol

www.youtube.com...

Heads up!

[edit on 23-1-2010 by Genuine_UFOs]

reply to post by Genuine_UFOs


Interesting stuff.
I remember listening to Nassim talk about this. He has an interesting view on things.... I especially got a kick out of everyone singing together in the video (starting at about 3:30 minutes into it).

"Flying mother nature's silver seed to a new home in the sun...."

Here's a new one to figure out today.


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/45b8fecadab4.jpg[/atsimg]

Hmmm. I vote that it's Borg. It sure looks like it...


But thanks for the thread, very interesting! S&F!

[edit on 23-1-2010 by Jibblin]

Gentlemen, you are looking at mass ejected from the Sun with an iron rich composition. The filter is 195 Angstrom and it is sensitive to iron spectra.

There is a reason NASA will never give us a higher res version. It proves our Sun's core has lots of iron which is always constantly ejected. The effect will look like little glowing spheres. They come in all different sizes and shapes since they result from violent reactions on the surface. An iron rich Sun model is compatible with the Electric Universe model.

It takes a lot of energy for iron to escape the Sun's strong gravity. Think about it, the only logical explanation is more Iron abundance at the core. Despite size and surface differences with our planet, the Sun should also share similar core composition due to accretion.

Thermite reactions are a perfect example involving violent molten metal:


Reference:

Electric Birkeland Sun Model
thesurfaceofthesun.com...

The Electric Sun - Criticism Destroyed
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The Sun is a ball of Iron (well, mostly iron)
thesunisiron.com...

The Solar Photosphere: Evidence for Condensed Matter
thermalphysics.org...


[edit on 23-1-2010 by platoslab]

Interesting videos showing dense mass, iron abundance and stable surface features.






[edit on 23-1-2010 by platoslab]

"I have looked at quite a lot of those images. As an aside, I think that "You're the 'ameteur [sic] astronomer', so why not.." comment sounds a little insulting if not arrogant, but I wouldn't say that publicly... (O;"

Arrogant and egotistical posts are usually met with the same kind of writing form in reply. Expect to be treated by others only as you treat them or come across. If you come across as arrogant and abrasive like you did in your reply to my post then you can't honestly expect people to be rolling out the red carpet for you.

"PLUS, up above I explained in some detail how these images work, and how you can get hold of the completely unedited originals as soon as they arrive from the spacecraft. There is absolutely nothing stopping any of you doing that - have you?? "

I would be highly shocked if the DATA transmissions from those probes are open for UN-encrypted reception by the public. With my amateur 17 element stacked array I have been tracking satellites, space stations and shuttle orbits for a few years now via VHF, UHF and most recently microwave frequencies. The data being offered to the public is FAR from transparent and open. I would say roughly 70% of the NASA transmissions, DATA and/or voice, are encrypted. Something in my opinion is highly unacceptable and troubling. Agencies operating with ZERO transparency only offering the public what THEY WANT the public to see is a sign that things are in a bad way.

Thank you OP for bringing this to our attention.
This event is related to the Elecrtic Universe and can be explained very easily.

What you are seeing there is a new earth, venus, mars, mercury in other words a new planetoide bash the idea all you want.

The sun is 99,99% of everything in the solar system everything else than the sun itself has come out of it!.

BR
PPL

Originally posted by Jocko Flocko
...Arrogant and egotistical posts are usually met with the same kind of writing form in reply. Expect to be treated by others only as you treat them or come across. If you come across as arrogant and abrasive like you did in your reply to my post then you can't honestly expect people to be rolling out the red carpet for you.
....
I would be highly shocked if the DATA transmissions from those probes are open for UN-encrypted reception by the public. With my amateur 17 element stacked array I have been tracking satellites, space stations and shuttle orbits for a few years now via VHF, UHF and most recently microwave frequencies. The data being offered to the public is FAR from transparent and open. I would say roughly 70% of the NASA transmissions, DATA and/or voice, are encrypted. Something in my opinion is highly unacceptable and troubling. Agencies operating with ZERO transparency only offering the public what THEY WANT the public to see is a sign that things are in a bad way.

Fair enough. I would just point out that your initial post firstly said "IF" NASA was editing the images, and then jumped to them needing to explain why they were doing it...

My response pointed out that there is no evidence that they are editing the images in any kind of clandestine way, and that the data is available in raw form quite rapidly after it is received. I did, and still do, find such allegations baseless. Can you or anyone point me to a verifiable example of an image that was edited nefariously by NASA? After all, this thread shows that the initial Stereo images are obviously *not* being pulled out or edited (or if they are, it is a totally incompetent job!). So it should be very easy to prove this behaviour has happened in the past.

You are certainly entitled to hold an opinion, but without any backing and with the very first posting here showing that the images were released unedited by NASA, the whole point seems rather moot as it relates to this thread...

Now you are making claims about data encryption - can you be specific - exactly which data transmissions have you received, on what bands, and then how did you go about determining the nature of the encryption? I'd like to see some actual data, thanks, and then we'll check it with the mission specifications. Yes, I believe some of the missions do use encryption, and I can think of at least two reasons why they would do that for reasons other than keeping the public uninformed. Anyway, I'm not a huge space communications expert, but I know you would need a very serious and well aimed dish to have a hope of catching any SOHO or Stereo transmissions - these spacecraft are a long way out - but I believe some folks manage it. And I'm pretty sure that if you had a good reason, eg were a heliospheric scientist, NASA would happily give you the necessary specs.

Just as a final note, bear in mind that these images WILL in fact change over the next few weeks, possibly a month - I hope someone re-bumps this thread when that happens. As I explained earlier, these low-res images are replaced, on a rolling basis, with the higher-res processed images after NASA has collected the background frames it needs, and has done the 'real' processing.

And as I mentioned, the original raw images - showing all the horrid nasties, inc. 'spheres' - will still be in the archives. Indeed I will happily link you to them, when that happens.

If someone wakes me up, that is.. (O;

NASA Hide something...


Now NASA Must justify scientifically all this. Their politics have been always that of the “REASONABLE NEGATION”, that is to always deny and however.

But these are irrefutable tests. These "Planet size objects" they cannot be meteors, planets, comets, flare solar or EMC

Moreover, if they were planets or some type of comets or enormous asteroids, they already would be attracted by the powerful gravity of the Sun, like of recent comets.

You notice also that these enormous objects reflect the Sun light, right as if they were of some kind of metal....