Alleged NASA -Affiliated Astronomer Deciphers 'Intelligence' Signal From Nearby Stars

Originally posted by cosmicpixie
reply to post by john124

 

Wayne says she is a friend of his so if that's the case then I think he'd know who she really is..........I will ask him how long he has known her

OR, here's a crazy idea that I'm just going to throw out there - why don't you ask him for some proof instead?

I will hold out hope this is true.... considering Hawkins alien speech (and others)... the timing is good.

But until concrete news or source is added it seems like hear say and speculation so far, based on FB of all places, seems too good to be true.

Keeping my fingers crossed though.

Yet if true... I wonder what the ultraviolet message/signal data is???? Keep us updated original poster.

If she has a physics degree, she'll be quite aware that radio telescopes don't receive UV light, and would have made up a better story.

If i understand right then yes they can see or lets say, pick up ultraviolet radiation.

Matter in the universe emits radiation (energy) from all parts of the electromagnetic spectrum, the range of wavelengths produced by the interaction of electricity and magnetism. The electromagnetic spectrum includes light waves, radio waves, infrared radiation, ultraviolet radiation, X rays, and gamma rays.

Radio astronomy is the study of celestial objects by means of the radio waves they emit.

Radio waves are the longest form of electromagnetic radiation. Some of these waves measure up to 6 miles (more than 9 kilometers) from peak to peak. Objects that appear very dim or are invisible to our eye may have very strong radio waves.

Source

Greets

[edit on 3-5-2010 by Impetus]

[edit on 3-5-2010 by Impetus]

Originally posted by john124
reply to post by Bedlam

 

If she has a physics degree, she'll be quite aware that radio telescopes don't receive UV light, and would have made up a better story.

That's a good point, and that's why I said this could be a hoax with someone using her name.

Or, it wasn't UV....

Or UV doesn't stand for ultraviolet in the FB msgs.

[edit on 3-5-2010 by john124]

Nope, the wavelengths she gave were UV-A to UV-C, not the "deep ultraviolet" which was stated in the original post, but definitely still UV. You'd be very very hard put to separate this out from the Sun's UV flux during the day, especially on the ground where the atmosphere is going to be blurring the crap out of it - a tiny "4 jansky" signal (you don't use "janskies" for light range signals, btw), and isn't the scoop that they JUST received the signal? Sure, sure they did, a tiny signal in the UVA range, during the day. Some from Proxima, which is below the horizon even at the optimal time of the year, which this isn't, north of 27 degrees N latitude, which is just south of Tampa.

From the FB page:

in an unusual part of the radio spectrum

Therefore it's radio, not UV.

l in the deep Ultraviolet Frequency.

There are cross-overs of wavelengths & frequency between radio and infrared. Maybe she said infrared, and Wayne misread it. (or pigs fly)

[edit on 3-5-2010 by john124]

People lets just calm down abit here,so far we dont have much to go on either way so lets just wait for more news,patience is a virtue


regards

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by john124
If she has a physics degree, and has carried out research in quantum physics, then she is a "quantum physicist".

We are members of Homo Sapiens species, and yet to refer to yourself as a "sapient human" would be quite silly, right? Even if factually true. I can't think of many areas in modern physics that aren't "quantum".

But like I said, no publications in peer-reviewed journals in her field of research is really the red flag here, along with all that nonsense that many people detected in the info she fed to a gullible ATS member.

If you bothered to read everything I wrote she is NOT feeding ME info she is feeding WAYNE info and he relaying it on his public Facebook page and I am relaying that info in open minded fashion here...I am not saying I believe it all, I am simply the messenger,and sat on the fence so please don't assume I'm being gullible and naive.

reply to post by II HAL II


LMAOROF. Nice subliminal message.

Wayne's Facebook page

People just copy and paste into google and view his page where any updates he gets and ongoing discussion can be found.........


[edit on 3/5/10 by cosmicpixie]

reply to post by Bedlam

Nope, the wavelengths she gave were UV-A to UV-C, not the "deep ultraviolet" which was stated in the original post, but definitely still UV

Which contradicts where she apparently says it was the radio part of the spectrum.

Definitely wouldn't be any type of UV.

Either a hoax, or she made a typo, or she's lost the plot.

The wavelengths 400.11 nm are UV

[edit on 3-5-2010 by john124]

Originally posted by Impetus

If i understand right then yes they can see or lets say, pick up ultraviolet radiation.

Nope, any more than they can pick up gamma rays. Radio telescopes DO pick up electromagnetic waves, that's why they're called radio telescopes. However, like any EM device, you have to design for the wavelengths you're going to pick up. Thus a radio telescope design won't pick up the entire range of EM from near-DC to far gamma rays, because the design requirements are so vastly different in different segments of the EM spectrum. It is in fact a joke specification to require a device to function "from DC to light"

Thus do you have radio telescopes that specialize in LF bands, and others in millimetric bands, maybe up to near 400GHz at the extreme. But for receiving visible light and beyond, you need something very very different. For visible light, it's generally called a "telescope" and has lenses and mirrors in. That would include the range of UV she's babbling about. You would not do it with a radio telescope. Nor would you use radio terminology to describe the signal.

Making the statements that have been posted is a dead giveaway that she's nuts, someone's having you on, or it's a hoax.

I really detest ATS's text editor at times. trying for the fifth time to fix this
[edit on 3-5-2010 by Bedlam]

[edit on 3-5-2010 by Bedlam]

[edit on 3-5-2010 by Bedlam]

[edit on 3-5-2010 by Bedlam]

Ok, 211nm and 400nm...

211nm isn't visible, it's slightly below visible range, but 400nm is 5nm below the 405nm blu-ray lasers they use. They are very visible.

But as said RADIO TELESCOPES DO NOT PICK UP THESE SIGNALS!, they would have to be picked up by a NORMAL telescope.

Radio telescopes pick up in the Ghz range.

Originally posted by cosmicpixie
If you bothered to read everything I wrote she is NOT feeding ME info she is feeding WAYNE info and he relaying it on his public Facebook page and I am relaying that info in open minded fashion here...I am not saying I believe it all, I am simply the messenger,and sat on the fence so please don't assume I'm being gullible and naive.

I'm sorry but you didn't bother to check said Judy's credentials, and it didn't strike you that "deep ultraviolet" spectrum is quite invisible to radio telescope, which is another way of saying that the info you relayed as a "messenger" was essentially gibberish.

Uh where do you get UV with a radio telescope???? Smells like a big fat HOAX to me

reply to post by cosmicpixie


I stand corrected, he does say she works for NASA.

Odd that she doesn't mention it anywhere, even though she is willing to claim she can't find the perfect hunk.

www.google.com...
she doesn't mention her employment here either. Should be noted that so far that she lives in Europe. do they have NASA offices in Stockholm?

twitter.com...

she's not found on the nasa goddard site either and she, apparently, is part of their team

Picking up UV radiation with a Radio Telescope is like using a large fish net to catch rice. It won't work. The UV radiation passes right through without being detected. The size of the Radio Waves

up to six miles

is the reason. Your home satellite dish picks up a certain range of wavelengths. Your Radio picks up another set, your Cell Phone another. You wouldn't use your radio to place a cell phone call, and vice versa.

Now, why the hoax? Surely this wasn't pure fabrication? Is there some other meaning to it? Was she misquoted intentionally, or is this some test, via Facebook, to see how the reaction would fair with today's social networking? Is there something to it that was misinterpreted?

Originally posted by Tom_Proctor
Ok, 211nm and 400nm...

211nm isn't visible, it's slightly below visible range, but 400nm is 5nm below the 405nm blu-ray lasers they use. They are very visible.

Actually, 400nm is 5nm SHORTER than the blu ray laser, so it's farther into the UV, but you're right, it's at the edge of the violet end of the visible spectrum, where UV-A meets visible violet. You'd see it as a very dim violet. With an optical telescope.

It bothers me that she's claiming to be a scientist and yet when I google her name I don't get a single paper she's authored/co-authored come up.

I have scientist friends and if I google their names, I always get multiple hits for various papers on their university sites, arXiv or conferences they've attended or spoken at - all sorts of things they've been involved with in their field. With this woman all I get is stuff about abductions and her unfortunate legal trouble being arrested for kissing a girl.

As for Milky Way @ Home, I'm a member of that as well and I'm not a scientist. It's a distributed computing project to map the Milky Way galaxy using unused computer resources of volunteer users. It's just like SETI@Home, which I also run sometimes on my laptop. Good for her, there, she's helping science by letting her computer crunch numbers, but it's not a big deal.

[edit on 5/3/2010 by LifeInDeath]

Wayne's latest reply on his facebook status ( here :

@Vicky... Come on Vicky no need to get snotty about it... Judy is who she is and we dont need to prove anything until it is official. They are obviously using more than radio telescopes in the full analysis! This is all unofficial for now and we will need to wait until it is processed.

Other things apart from radio telescopes are being used in the full analysis..

I hope so much for this to be true... but saying that, who posts such sensitive could-be-life-changing news on their.... wait for it.... facebook profile ? ( wouldn't that be censored of something ? )

Mm...



[edit on 3/5/2010 by Unium]

reply to post by cosmicpixie


Seems he thinks you're being "snotty" From the FB link:

@Vicky... Come on Vicky no need to get snotty about it... Judy is who she is and we dont need to prove anything until it is official. They are obviously using more than radio telescopes in the full analysis! This is all unofficial for now and we will need to wait until it is processed.

woops! Just noticed the above poster beat me to it. lol

[edit on 3-5-2010 by Wookiep]