LASCO2 and LASCO3 movie showing bright object heading towards Sun???

And one more "also". If you look about 1" to the right of the comet there is another smaller object (no tail though) tracking at the same speed. Not saying its a alien space ship, just pointing it out.

reply to post by K-PAX-PROT


Hello im new to the forums and wanted to add a recent email i got from NASA in regards to questions I had with objects in their stereo images. cocky attitudes with nothing but BS if you ask me.

Regarding your question about STEREO images:

You are looking at the full spatial resolution (2048 x 2048 pixel), less lossily compressed (second image you attached) and 4 x 4 pixel binned (-> 512 x 512 resolution, for some reason I've never understood, displayed on the site as any size you want), extremely lossily compressed (first image) versions of the same data from one of the STEREO SECCHU EUVI instruments.

The difference is that we get the poor quality, lower resolution images in near-realtime through a minimal network of antenna partners at 633 bits per second, and the full resolution, better quality images through NASA Deep Space Network, currently at 240 kilobits per second, but not until ~ 3 days after they were obtained --- it's just the way the onboard data store optimization works. as a result, the near-realtime "beacon mode" images have to be much more heavily (and lossily) compressed than images in the the "normal" telemetry.

If you had read:

stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov...

about the beacon mode images (n7euA or n7euB in filenames) and how they're replaced on the Website with the full resolution images (n4euA or B) when those become available, you wouldn't have had to ask.

Likewise, if you'd read:

stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov... ,

you'd see that the signatures of cosmic rays and solar energetic particle hits on the CCD detectors of the EUVI telescopes get compressed to the artifacts you probably think have been "retouched" out of the full-resolution images. Well, there never were features like that in the original (full resolution) images on board the spacecraft, for which the less lossily compressed, full-resolution images are a much better representation than the over-compressed, lower resolution beacon mode images.

You can find a report from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory on the lossy compression scheme ("ICER") used to compress these images; it was originally devised for the Mars Rovers at:

ipnpr.jpl.nasa.gov... .

If you look at Figure 2(b), you can see the artifacts that are created when the image (nominally 8 or in the case of STEREO SECCHI EUVI, 16 bits per pixel) is compressed to 0.125 bits per pixel. The compression ratio for the beacon mode images is similar or even higher.

So to summarize: the second, larger image you sent is close to the "real" image on board the spacecraft, with only minor compression artifacts, and the first, smaller one, the space weather "beacon mode image," has numerous artifacts created by the compression algorithm when it tries to deal with apparently contrasty, sharp features such as cosmic ray or solar energetic particle hits.

No retouching, never was, never will be.

Best,

Joe Gurman

(Dr.) Joseph B. Gurman
STEREO Project Scientist

great find! I used LASCO 3 and put in the last 100 images and clicked "movie". It is a different view from the one embedded here. Also if you notice at image 88 (if you put in 100) there are missing frames. The time jumps from 3:06 (where you see our "drill bit friend with the sparkly tail" again appearing) to 10:42. Why are these missing? very interesting. "Drill bit friend with sparkly tail" also appears on frame 42

Originally posted by thekraziekc
reply to post by K-PAX-PROT

 

Hello im new to the forums and wanted to add a recent email i got from NASA in regards to questions I had with objects in their stereo images. cocky attitudes with nothing but BS if you ask me.

Regarding your question about STEREO images:

You are looking at the full spatial resolution (2048 x 2048 pixel), less lossily compressed (second image you attached) and 4 x 4 pixel binned (-> 512 x 512 resolution, for some reason I've never understood, displayed on the site as any size you want), extremely lossily compressed (first image) versions of the same data from one of the STEREO SECCHU EUVI instruments.

The difference is that we get the poor quality, lower resolution images in near-realtime through a minimal network of antenna partners at 633 bits per second, and the full resolution, better quality images through NASA Deep Space Network, currently at 240 kilobits per second, but not until ~ 3 days after they were obtained --- it's just the way the onboard data store optimization works. as a result, the near-realtime "beacon mode" images have to be much more heavily (and lossily) compressed than images in the the "normal" telemetry.

If you had read:

stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov...

about the beacon mode images (n7euA or n7euB in filenames) and how they're replaced on the Website with the full resolution images (n4euA or B) when those become available, you wouldn't have had to ask.

Likewise, if you'd read:

stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov... ,

you'd see that the signatures of cosmic rays and solar energetic particle hits on the CCD detectors of the EUVI telescopes get compressed to the artifacts you probably think have been "retouched" out of the full-resolution images. Well, there never were features like that in the original (full resolution) images on board the spacecraft, for which the less lossily compressed, full-resolution images are a much better representation than the over-compressed, lower resolution beacon mode images.

You can find a report from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory on the lossy compression scheme ("ICER") used to compress these images; it was originally devised for the Mars Rovers at:

ipnpr.jpl.nasa.gov... .

If you look at Figure 2(b), you can see the artifacts that are created when the image (nominally 8 or in the case of STEREO SECCHI EUVI, 16 bits per pixel) is compressed to 0.125 bits per pixel. The compression ratio for the beacon mode images is similar or even higher.

So to summarize: the second, larger image you sent is close to the "real" image on board the spacecraft, with only minor compression artifacts, and the first, smaller one, the space weather "beacon mode image," has numerous artifacts created by the compression algorithm when it tries to deal with apparently contrasty, sharp features such as cosmic ray or solar energetic particle hits.

No retouching, never was, never will be.

Best,

Joe Gurman

(Dr.) Joseph B. Gurman
STEREO Project Scientist

Hi and welcome to ATS,cheers for posting the reply you got from NASA ,as it is way above my head i cannot comment on the detail or possible cocky attitudes or BS that you feel was contained in that e-mail you got;

How about the result when it "hits", which it theoretically did? That was jolly. Obviously, before anyone chooses to take a chunk out of my backside for even presenting such an idea, it could have been a coincidental flare, but I don't personally subscribe to the idea of "coincidence", so I'm calling it a "result".

______________

When I saw this, the first thing that came to mind was
NASA's mission to send a car sized projectile directly into the sun
and record the outcome. Wasn't this the mission ? The object
didn't move in a manner like a meteor, this one was more directional
and turned into the sun.
Anyone know when the NASA sun mission was scheduled for ?

you can clearly see it at 2011-05-10 @ 20:12
Also AMAZING giant flare on 2011-05-09 from 08:36 on just amazing
(flair @ about 20:00)
. . . for the newbies click LASCO C2 , start date 2011-05-09 end 2011-05-12
SOHO clip

_____________

Originally posted by ToneDeaf
______________

When I saw this, the first thing that came to mind was
NASA's mission to send a car sized projectile directly into the sun
and record the outcome. Wasn't this the mission ? The object
didn't move in a manner like a meteor, this one was more directional
and turned into the sun.
Anyone know when the NASA sun mission was scheduled for ?

you can clearly see it at 2011-05-10 @ 20:12
Also AMAZING giant flare on 2011-05-09 from 08:36 on just amazing
(flair @ about 20:00)
. . . for the newbies click LASCO C2 , start date 2011-05-09 end 2011-05-12
SOHO clip

_____________

edit on 12/5/11 by ToneDeaf because: (no reason given)

edit on 12/5/11 by ToneDeaf because: (no reason given)

edit on 12/5/11 by ToneDeaf because: (no reason given)

Below is some information on this future car sized impact on the sun that NASA have planned, it does state that this could happen in 2018;Are they 7 years ahead of schedule maybe;

NASA Selects Investigations for First Mission to Encounter the Sun NASA has begun development of a mission to visit and study the Sun closer than ever before. The unprecedented project, named Solar Probe Plus, is slated to launch no later than 2018. The small car-sized spacecraft will plunge directly into the Sun’s atmosphere approximately four million miles from our star’s surface. It will explore a region no other spacecraft ever has encountered. NASA has selected fi ve science investigations that will unlock the Sun’s biggest mysteries. “The experiments selected for Solar Probe Plus are specifi cally designed to solve two key questions of solar physics — why is the Sun’s outer atmosphere so much hotter than the Sun’s visible surface, and what propels the solar wind that affects Earth and our solar system?” said Dick Fisher, director of NASA’s Heliophysics Division in Washington. “We’ve been struggling with these questions for decades and this mission should fi nally provide those answers.” As the spacecraft approach

link; www.lpi.usra.edu...

This just in:

A comet goes in; a CME comes out. Coincidence? Probably, yes, the sequence was coincidental. The comet disintegrated as much as a million kilometers above the stellar surface. There's no known way that the wispy, vaporous remains of a relatively lightweight comet could cause a billion-ton cloud of hot plasma to fly away from the sun at 400 km/s (the observed speed of the CME). Moreover, NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory photographed the eruption that did propel the CME into space. There's no comet in the field of view of this must-see movie

reply to post by grindhouzer


They can say what they like. Ask them exactly how the sun works and they can't tell you. They can tell you how they *think* it works, but not how it really, positively, absolutely, definitely works.

I'm still going with "result", because I don't believe in "coincidence", and also because I can believe what I choose.

Here is Youtube video that event. Every frame

youtu.be...