SOHO Catches A UFO ?

reply to post by Phage


Thank you for this explanation, it makes sense to me. This is still a curious anomaly though because it forms in different directions and at different angles, but I won't leap to any conclusions.

Ok lets look at this for a second. Is there anyone here on ATS that would for a split second expect them to come out and say yes your seeing a ufo. Nothing against you Pauli you did a great jobs getting the info for us. I just find it interesting that as was said before in this thread how does the same so called glitch or artifact show up in the different photos on different times. Still haven't seen any pics from SOHO that would show the same thing from any earlier SOHO pictures. This is a very interesting thread that should be watched closely.

Sremmos just stole my question.

I too would like to know what a real artifact/UFO should look like. For those that "think" they have debunked these various photos from 2 sources--what would a photo of a real UFO in the same position, same size, same shape, really look like? What would be the difference in the photo of a real UFO vs these "debunked" photos? What would you accept as a real UFO in a SOHO photo?

reply to post by Phage


Do we know if there were any comets around the sun at the time of this pic being taken? If we find that info it would surely help in knowing what is is exactly. That would an answer that we probably could agree on.

reply to post by ptmckiou

*sigh* There no images from 2 sources. LMSAL uses images from SOHO.

There are very similar (not identical, they cannot be) examples. I posted one here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by tsurfer2000h

No. No comets.
We know what it is. It is an image artifact caused by a very energetic cosmic ray striking the sensor.

Is there even anyway to determine that things size? Assuming it is an actual physical object? Surely whatever that is would be viewable from a telescope?

The first thing I thought when I saw this was that it was some sort of energy field. Look at my other posts, I want this to be something, but look at this with some logic. If that was a ship or unknown planet, why would NASA leave it up, considering their past track record ? Now another thing I was thinking, if this was a true UFO, maybe they did airbrush it to make it seem like a normal camera artifact. Just because the artifact is the shape of a "ship" by no means it really is, however.

reply to post by Phage


YOU didn't answer my question. Tell us what a photo should look like of a REAL UFO. What qualities would it have vs these photos?

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


reply to post by ptmckiou


I think this website should answer all your questions...

Look under "common mistakes".

sungrazer.nrl.navy.mil...

Also, there are known "tracks" which known comets travel each month:

sungrazer.nrl.navy.mil...

Here is a "recent reports" page where people report comets they find in the LASCO images:

sungrazer.nrl.navy.mil...

Here is a comet hunting guide:

sungrazer.nrl.navy.mil...

It teaches you how to identify cosmic ray strikes like in the OP so you don't report them as comets. Even teaches you how to identify debris which could include "spacecraft" I guess.

Here is the debris list page for LASCO:
LASCO Debris List

reply to post by ptmckiou

I explained how to eliminate the possibility of an imaging artifact (which we have here), planet, asteroid, or comet.
A "real" UFO? How should I know what a "real" UFO would look like? I've never seen one in any SOHO image.
You're kidding right?
Ok, maybe something like this?

reply to post by Phage


Hello there,

Your explanation of the artifact appearing because of cosmic rays is very plausible and most likely the answer.

I did notice however that you stated things like comets last for several frames because they are in fact real, then went on to say that things that are close to the cameras appear only for one frame.

Why can the 'Craft' not be close to the camera? It would explain the one frame idea and could potentially help with it being the same 50 pixels on both cameras.

Thank you

reply to post by Wally898

As I explained, a single frame is not a single image. It is made of of several stacked images. But you're right, if the object were close to the satellite and moving fast, it may appear once in a single frame. It could happen. Possible, but very doubtful. But in that case it would probably show some sign of motion blur.

But the fact that the same "object" has the same width in two different images with two different fields of view would not support that idea. It is more support for a sensor effect produced by a cosmic ray strike.

A cosmic ray strike explains what is seen. If you want to think it could be a UFO playing games with the satellite that's fine but after you've seen an awful lot of these things you might start to reconsider that stance.

Sorry to keep bombarding you with questions, but can you explain the differences in sizes of these high energy rays hitting the lenses?

They all have the same shape but are different sizes and angles and locations around the sun, and that confuses me (looking I've seen like 5 or 6 of these so far).

If it is just a beam of light I honestly don't get why it has such persistent but changing appearance (appears to be same object, but in different positions/distances/angles)?

Is this just a matter of 'how intense' the radiation hitting the lenses is? If it's powerful, it shows up, if it's super powerful it shows up even bigger?

reply to post by sremmos

You're pretty much correct. But it isn't a "beam of light" and the effect isn't from hitting the lens.

It is a particle, an atom, moving at a very, very high speed and packing a lot of energy. It's hitting the CCD, the sensor in the camera. The more energy it carries, the more neighboring pixels it affects. Also, the more energy it has and depending on the angle at which it hits, the farther it will travel across the sensor. So we see some examples which are just streaks, some that are just dots, and some (like this one) that are really large. This was a very high energy cosmic ray, it is not common to see this much "action".

Originally posted by kyle43
Is there even anyway to determine that things size? Assuming it is an actual physical object? Surely whatever that is would be viewable from a telescope?

The first thing I thought when I saw this was that it was some sort of energy field. Look at my other posts, I want this to be something, but look at this with some logic. If that was a ship or unknown planet, why would NASA leave it up, considering their past track record ? Now another thing I was thinking, if this was a true UFO, maybe they did airbrush it to make it seem like a normal camera artifact. Just because the artifact is the shape of a "ship" by no means it really is, however.

If it was an object (which it's not) I think you would have to know the distance before you could estimate size.
Take a look here about half way down the page
sungrazer.nrl.navy.mil...
There's an image that shows Venus, Jupiter, Saturn and Mercury. Check the sizes.

Originally posted by gift0fpr0phecy
reply to post by smurfy

 

What is so interesting about it really?

The LASCO cameras were built in the 80's when digital cameras were hardly in the hands of the public. That is the only interesting thing to me... is that they work so well for being built in that time.

The bucket analogy is quite old, you can read more about it here:
www.specinst.com...

You also have to realize that LASCO stands for "Large Angle Spectrometric Coronagraph". It's not a normal camera, it is a intensity measuring device. Everything black is low intensity, red is medium intensity, white is high intensity. It's a scale. To be a more accurate measuring device it can't just stop filling buckets when they are full, it has to over fill into near by buckets so you can get a good measurement of its true intensity.

What is interesting is that "Karl" or whatever his name really is implies that CCDs have a capability to mitigate cosmic rays, or even destroy them. As for the cameras, I don't think anyone missed the post sometime before yours, and yes, they have done a stirling role, and we would not even have a thread like this. The "tail" thing is harder to get around though.

I find this interesting info on cosmic rays from the sungrazer site.

Cosmic Rays: Cosmic rays are noise (white dots, blobs and streaks) created in the images by energetic particles striking the cameras in the telescopes. Cosmic rays get reported as comets more often than real comets do! So it essential to learn how to distinguish them from something that is real. Cosmic rays are completely random -- they can, and do, appear absolutely anywhere in the images and they only appear once. They are most commonly just dots, but they are also occasionally blobs or streaks. Some are very faint, but most are quite bright. Some even saturate the camera and cause the large horizontal spikes we often see on planets and bright stars.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/765371c3

This doesn't seem to fit in the explanation or what a cosmic ray would show up as in the SOHO pics. I could be wrong but you never know.

edit: will fix the pic sorry bout that

reply to post by witness63


Nevermind. I will simply start using the Alert button, when others are making off-topic statements about another member.

Here is the pic to go with earlier post sorry about that.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/d19eb745c8fd.gif[/atsimg]

reply to post by tsurfer2000h

Those would be examples of low energy cosmic rays, probably of solar origin. They are more common that the higher energy galactic cosmic rays which are much more energetic. Because they are less energetic they do not produce the greater amount of sensor saturation.