Unidentified Flying Objects - UFO in close up and detailed as never seen before

reply to post by Kandinsky


OK, thanks. That answers my question.

I found the part in the Martyn Stubbs video that describes this phenomena in STS 80 so I might as well link it. It starts at around 7:40.

And continues on part 5.

reply to post by 1967sander
Link a couple of videos and we'll have a look. Just video without enhancements please.

reply to post by 1967sander


I think the videos I just posted show that they don't always disappear when the astronauts come out for a space walk. That is, of coarse, if these are the same thing.

reply to post by Edgecrusher26



I don't consider 10 years a waste. When I look at the result I am quite satisfied. I have been a hobby astronomer and UFO researcher for 3 decades. It's not the project I am working on. I do not work on a single project but do several at the same time.

Sofar I have only seen remarks that my enhancements are artifacts but NO ONE has tried to prove that my work is a hoax. All you need is the right software. You all seem to be real experts in the field of differential hysteresis image processing and know all about high definition recording equipment, CCD cameras, are experts in the field of radiation, subatomic particles, cosmic rays (these are mainly "protons" and not neutrons or other trons), hell you are almost the Nobel prize winners in every science topic, but sofar NO ONE took the time to expose me as a fraud. For a true expert in image processing its a piece of cake to reproduce my "artifacts". So experts, I challenge you all. Show me that I have been misled by my knowledge in the field of image processing, that I was blind to see that I enhanced cosmic rays and that I trust too much in the high quality of my software.

Concerning the 1080 HD images: NASA TV does never broadcast in that quality on the public channels. l
When they broadcast "live" there's a delay in the transmission, extra gamma, brightness added and saturation is decreased. This way the images are not clear, we are unable to see what is happening in the background and colours don't look natural. When you take software that automatically recalculates the balance between contrast and saturation you will see a totally different image in comparison to what NASA broadcasts. I wish I could get the real HD recordings as than I am 100% sure that I can prove that my findings are not artifacts and no cosmic rays. What brings me to the following question:

Here 's another one for ALL the experts, since no one cares to read the reply, here's the question again:

I have a question for you and the forum!

Why do these "let us assume they are cosmic rays" always immediately disappear when the hatch is opened of the spaceshuttle or ISS and spacewalkers come out. If these were cosmic rays would they not always be there?
Or can these astronauts / kosmonauts make them magically disappear? And yes I have enough video material to prove that this is always the case. "They" disappear instant when the hatch is opened..

I really love to see a good explanation.

Greetz,

Sander

reply to post by Devino
You're right about that. Off Stubbs' YT channel I found one that shows these effects happening on camera...



Once more, they show particles passing through the CCD. In the segment you linked to, it's the same particle activity.

reply to post by 1967sander
Sander, most people in this thread have been polite and respectful to you. There is no need to feel victimised or dramatic, I don't believe you are hoaxing or being a fraud. You believe what you are seeing and that's good enough for you.

You're right, there are no particle physicists in the thread and no NASA scientists. There are a few members who have the intelligence to weigh up the evidence and check their own sources. We can compare one image with another and see which explanations appears most probable.

You haven't explained why the images in your video look identical to those in my first post. Instead, you want to deflect away and say, 'but look at this, what do you think?' What's more important is trying to rule out the particles explanation before we can look at your explanation with confidence.

Let's try and do that before we move on and let's stay polite and respectful while we're going.

@ Devino - The lights seen on the STS- 82 clip are unlikely to have been particles because both men saw them. I've found it difficult to get a good explanation for what they saw although there's a reference to Smith explaining them as instrumentation lights.

I would lean towards these being "small meteorites", small pieces of rock or other material that fly through space, and when they come in close contact with another body, they start boiling up due to the enormous potential difference.

The same mechanism, as has been proposed as the explanation what causes the cloud around comets. Comets however seem to be interacting with planetary bodies or the sun - these streaks are interacting with the space ship they are almost hitting. Electric universe/plasma universe suggests the potential difference could be millions or billions of volts.

The different colors could be caused by different chemicals evaporating or burning or glowing as a plasma.

The other explanation i see possible is that cosmic rays simply excite the cmos cells in the sensor and causes this artefact to show up.

while i do agree that these images (be they interesting or not) offer little credible evidence of anything. however i did notice that some of the zoom-ins look like spectrograph.

Thanks for sharing!

reply to post by 1967sander

When I first saw the Stubb's video some years ago I was fascinated and considered these things unexplained. I have seen these streaks of light in other NASA still frames since then, they are not hard to find actually. When I saw your original post I recognized these from the Stubb's video and for some reason thought they might be subatomic particles. I wasn't sure if these could even be captured on a camera such as is seen in your OP and in other images but then I read Kandinsky's reply and his linked explanation; Cosmic Rays and Other Nonsense in Astronomical CCD Imagers (odd title btw..."Other Nonsense"?).

From this I think we should look to see if this is indeed what is happening. Does this happen only on CCD cameras or can it been seen in other types of cameras? If we find this phenomena in other types of cameras does this prove or disprove the cosmic ray theory? And finally can cosmic rays be observed via the unaided eye and is this what is happening to these astronauts as they are reporting seeing flashes?

Because of this I still consider these lights to be unexplained, yet even if this is captured images of subatomic particles, or cosmic rays, then it still makes this thread worthy of a star and flag in my opinion and of further study. I doubt people can observe cosmic rays inside their eye, as would be the case here, so maybe these flashes that they saw are not the same as the flashes from your OP. There is more footage in the Stubb's documentary of astronauts seeing flashes, if I remember correctly, so there is still need for further research to see if there is a connection.

I still find it fascinating that someone can find these streaks of light and put this together in such a way when nearly everyone else looks at these images and miss these phenomena.

reply to post by Devino


Correct me when I am wrong, but aint this article about internally created CCD artifacts? Some materials used in CCD cameras, appear to have a relatively high percentage of radioactive particles, so they are also the reason for spots and worms in CCD images, similar to the artifacts created by cosmic rays.

But I am no scientist.

Greetz,

Sander

reply to post by 1967sander
Have you asked yourself why the 'UFOs' in your footage are red, blue, green and white? Are you aware of Bayer filters? These are the colour filters on the CCD of digital cameras...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c3d0b5d3697c.jpg[/atsimg]
RGB

The pdf I linked and the ppt give examples of neutrons passing through CCDs and generating the exact images in your video...here's another example from a laboratory neutron detector used to detect background cosmic radiation ...



You get cosmic rays hitting the CCD at a low angle and it causes pixels to 'light up' and show as a streak (like in your video). If the energy in the particle is high enough it can cause adjacent pixels to brighten or 'bloom.' This we can also see in your images. If enough light is created, a line is formed and the bloom spreads around it, like in your images and the ones I posted in the first post.

The magnification and enhancement of your images show this clearly and the bloom is there in most of them. Like I said, you have to explain why your images can't be caused by the particles I've shown in these other images. If the following footage was in colour and magnified, would it look anything like yours?



The lights seen by the STS-82 astronauts are really interesting though. I've been looking for a detailed NASA response and haven't found one. Quite intriguing as two people can't 'see' (as in flash on the retina) the same one at the same time. These were experience men and had done EVAs from the same hatch before without being confused by 'instrumentation lights.'

It's called RGB method not RBG and it's widely used not just in science and astrophysics. Just because they are trained astronauts does not mean they may not make mistakes and misinterpret things they see.

reply to post by Kandinsky


No I have not asked myself why they are white, red, blue or green, white with orange, blue with purple / violet, green with white or any other colour. Did you know that deepsea creatures also use blue, red, and green lights and they have no idea of CCD or RGB. These basic colours show up everywhere in nature and also in space.
So if an object appears in these colours than that's pretty normal to me.

I do not believe in the "standard" cosmic ray explanation, Some objects I have studied appeared and disappeared in a period of 3 frames. That is way too long for cosmic rays. The blue objects which I have enhanced and tried to present as detailed as possible are no cosmic rays. There are no cosmic rays that look like a blueprint of a rocket. I have seen a couple drawings of future propulsion projects which show a similar innerstructure. I do not have to prove anything. I know what I have seen, I know what I have been enhancing
and I stick to my conclusion that these are not cosmic rays.

Greetz,

Sander

I watched the videos presented from NASA on the first page of this post. I can only say that if it took 10 years of study and research to get that....something of little use for the purpose of presenting proof....then I think it is time for you to look at a differnt hobby.

NASA has some very amazing videos that document UFO'S....but that is all they document....UNIDENTIFIABLES....nothing more nothing less....with the possible exception of the STS mission where a female astronaut is caught on video telling Mission Control that they are still observing the Alien Craft.

Most of the objects or events caught on these videos presented on the first post....look like a combination of orbitaly observed lightning or even Sprites. The second video looks like floating ice or other debrise that is consistent with a Shuttle Launch.....not really much to it....Sorry. Split Infinity

reply to post by 1967sander

I do not believe in the "standard" cosmic ray explanation, Some objects I have studied appeared and disappeared in a period of 3 frames. That is way too long for cosmic rays.

Do you know which camera was used? This would help to rule out cosmic rays.

The blue objects which I have enhanced and tried to present as detailed as possible are no cosmic rays. There are no cosmic rays that look like a blueprint of a rocket.

During the production of the video, how much background work did you do? On what grounds have you felt certain that cosmic rays aren't the cause in these images? I am curious. Had you already looked at the research I posted and ruled it out? Sorry about all the questions.

I know what I have seen, I know what I have been enhancing and I stick to my conclusion that these are not cosmic rays.

Hopefully you can share your certainty with me. I'm reasonably certain they are cosmic rays, but as you say there are no particle physicists in this thread so I remain open to alternatives. Your video has 8000 hits so whatever you've got can be regarded as a reward for the effort. If you can answer the questions, I'll be more than happy to retract my posts. UFOs are a hobby of mine too.

Do you know which camera was used? This would help to rule out cosmic rays.

Sorry no I have tried to find info about the cameras but NASA does not seem to make it available to the public.

The blue objects which I have enhanced and tried to present as detailed as possible are no cosmic rays. There are no cosmic rays that look like a blueprint of a rocket.

During the production of the video, how much background work did you do?

Step by step:

1 - When I captured the frame and saw the blue streak I saved the image.
2 - I loaded the image into the Lucis software and after HD processing the object was clearly visible.
No artifacts were created by the software at that time. No contrast adjusted, no other enhancements made.
3 - Than I dimmed the background (grey) and enhanced the colours using an auto-contrast filter.
During that process color artifacts around the objects were created as you can see in the video.
4 - In order to show the innerparts I zoomed in using a high definition microdetail filter. (S-spline M)
During the entire process of enhancement I carefully watched that the zoom never changed shape / finest details of the object.
5 - finally after I was satisfied with the new size of the object, I used micro focus & micro sharpening software.
Again being very careful not to create an image that would be different from the original.

That's all.

On what grounds have you felt certain that cosmic rays aren't the cause in these images? I am curious. Had you already looked at the research I posted and ruled it out? Sorry about all the questions.

No problem! Yes I looked at your samples and also watched the videos presented but I know what cosmic rays (can) look like but the objects I have found and also after I performed the Lucis DH processing of the image, I saw an object which does not look like a cosmic ray. Tonight I did the process again and same result. l see a fishlike object with a skeleton structure. Not a streak as a cosmic ray but clearly a skeleton.

Lucis® is the trade name for Differential Hysteresis Processing, a patented image enhancement process originally developed to enhance detail in scanning electron microscope images. Lucis® quickly, easily, and accurately reveals indiscernible image information that would otherwise be difficult or impossible to view. Lucis is straightforward to use and very flexible in terms of how it transforms pixels. You choose how to best present the digital content in your image. Enhance the smallest contrast variations (detail), the largest contrast variations (features) or mid-range contrast variations (patterns).

Based on previous experiece with the software I can tell you that I to 98-99% trust the outcome of a Lucis DH processing.

If you can answer the questions, I'll be more than happy to retract my posts. UFOs are a hobby of mine too.

Than we have something in common. ;-)

reply to post by Kandinsky


I was unable to find any information on the camera used by the spaceshuttle to film these "objects" but I found this rather interesting article on cosmic rays.

Historically, charge-coupled device (CCD) cameras used for astronomical purposes have been susceptible to the effects from cosmic ray strikes, creating dots and streaks on images when long exposures were taken.

Long exposure time here means 5-10 minutes.

aer.aas.org...

Also NASA has an article about the Cassini satellite and cosmic rays with long exposure time.

Exposure times lasted about three minutes. Some of the spots in the image come from cosmic ray hits. The long exposure times on the camera and brightness processing increase the visibility of the cosmic rays.

www.nasa.gov...

Now, this does not prove I am right, but it is an interesting fact that cosmic rays become better visible with longer exposure times.

Greetz,

Sander

If anyone is interested in the weird things that show up on the ISS live cam EVERYDAY, see these videos I captured....(I recorded them in order,so that you can see how it starts off small, then builds to a "ufo" crescendo!I can see why people could think they are ufos.....but they aren't. Crazy video though, especially the last couple.I know the op believes in what he's saying, but these (the colored lights) are a common thing if you watch the cam. Every time the ISS heads into sunrise or sunset, there are massive relections off of EVERYTHING from the ISS itself, down to ice crystals and particles (not to mention the TONS of satellites circling the Earth.) The videos on my thread are in order as it happens, to show how it starts off small, then builds in to quite a light show! It's a good way to compare what he caught and what I caught and form your own opinions on it.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I was recently watching a show on Netflix with my boyfriend about mysterious rods that had been encountered by numerous people all over the world, though this segment focused on north and south america. You may be interested in researching more about that. Some of the images you seem to have in your video resemble those identified as "Rods". Sorry, from the show we watched, not even they have input as to what they are, but they did a lot of work debunking videos that were not. So it still gives some credibility to your video that I see a lot of people are criticizing. Though it wouldn't be considered one of the best that I'm sure we've all seen on here, I respect you sharing your research with us.