Slashdot Mirror
UFO Evidence From SOHO Satellite
Anonymous Coward writes "EuroSeti is set to reveal during the week of Jan 24-27 National Space Centre in Leicester, UK scientifically sound and verifiable evidence based on observations taken by the SOHO satellite and other satellites that indicate UFOs are present within our solar system. For the past two years, hundreds of extraordinary UFO-like images have been gleaned by a Spanish-based team using two space-based satellites. NASA initially tried to explain the images away as pixel faults, passing meteors or asteroids, etc., but when a European-led consortium presented them with images that clearly were none of the aforementioned, they 'clamped up.'"
A Small Office/Home Office satelite would do something the big commercial, governmental and scientific satelites couldn't! Amazing!
And when they come to Earth and systematically wipe us out one city at a time, one brave computer geek will upload a virus to thier mothership, and take the whole alien fleet out! They'll make movies out of this!
Oh wait, they already did...
RaGe
We're all just noise on the wires..
Ill believe evidence of UFO's when the evidence isn't a link to a UFO-centric site.
I think seti looks for signals outside the solar system. I remember reading that they have some sort of system set up to filter out any signals that don't come from the part os space they are checking.
Business News and Resources: www.usasource.net
It doesn't do any good to look for signals that we either wouldn't recognize or even see at all.
Who is to say that a more advanced civilization would even bother communicating with Radio? That whole "Light Speed" limit kind of makes communication by this method rather worthless.
I'll leave scientifically valid theories as to other ways they might communicate to someone advanced enough to figrue that out.
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
Why has it become such that UFO = flying saucer?
A "UFO" is just an unidentified flying object. Anything whizzing through the air that I can't identify is a "UFO", whether or not it has anything to do with spacecraft from another world.
Sure, I know they are claiming that the so-called 'Slashdot Effect' has rendered it invisible, but do we have any independent witnesses? Any physical proof? No...
- -
Are you an SF Fan? Are you a Tru-Fan?
This article exemplifies the growing problem of apathy amongst the editorial staff of Slashdot. I'm disappointed, too, because I like this place.
Colonel: "They've seen us! Prepare ship for Light Speed."
Dark Helmet: "No, no, no, Light Speed is too slow."
Colonel: "Light Speed too slow?"
Dark Helmet: "Yes. We're going to have to go right to...Ludicrous Speed!"
Slashdotter are stupid and biased.
To: Ms. Dana Sculley,
I told you so.
Regards,
Fox
Trolling is a art,
Umm... Wouldn't the profile of a flying saucer, viewed from a satellite be, um, circular?
Please can slashdot not post crap like this in future?
So they found some satellite images with some objects (asteroids / space debris) that hadn't yet been named / catalogued as it only showed up in a tiny mesh of 4x4 pixels before it crashed into the sun. Because of lossy image compression artifacts they think it looks like a UFO and NASA stops talking to them (something the UFO nuts take as "proof" that they're right).
Big deal - I'd stop talking to them as well.
Now they want to sell tickets to a "conference" where they'll reveal all. Wow. The only thing this scam is missing is an official from the Government of Nigeria / promise of Hot Teens / free Viagra / cheap home refinancing.
Apple might go really bankrupt sometime and then we have no weapons left to use against them.
Somehow I think there might be another explanation:
News story
The secret of success is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake those, you've got it made. (Marx)
Buyer beware. They're selling stuff. CDs for 15 pounds a pop (~25USD), and tickets for 20 pounds a pop.
:) Significantly less sexy, eh?
Supposedly, you are supposed to be able to view a video interview with some guy, but there are no links to that interview. You've got to buy the CD.
So, "uh-huh".
And let's keep in mind that UFOs are unidentified flying objects. A meteor *IS* a UFO, if it hasn't yet been identified.
In fact, if they have identified it as anything, it's not a UFO any more.
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
The name of the image file on the page is Disney.jpg.
Hmmm.
/..sig file not found - permission denied.
If humans had these ships they'd at least have have fins or something by the next season.
I think the best reason for space-travelling aliens to communicate with radio is that a primitive society like ourselves might be able to hear them.
Assuming they're not just cruising around stealthily, looking for planets to wipe out, and are in fact searching for other societies, sending primitive beacons would be a good way to find them, since we would be more likely to be able to answer them. Using their latest communications technology would go right over our heads.
Obviously they would use something more advanced for their own communications (assuming they've figured out space travel, they've probably figured out lots of other neat stuff).
On the other hand, they could be using SETI's approach and just cruise around listening for signals with their AM/FM/8-track stereos in their pimped out rides.
blog
Three words: you have no clue.
This "quantum pairing" doesn't allow passing of information.
UFO Mag says there are UFO's around the world and we're supposed to believe them? There is absolutely no evidence that even remotely validates their claims that a bright blur on some SOHO images are UFO's, versus meteors, comets or cometary fragments. They don't even describe what wavelength or anything. I say bull shit now!!! The burden of proof is on their shoulders!
What the heck does "UFO-like" mean? Is that something that's been identified, but looks like it hasn't? Or is it something that you know you can identify, and the name is on the tip of your tongue, but you just can't remember it?
mabye the aliens can give me a job...
Who is to say that a more advanced civilization would even bother communicating with Radio? That whole "Light Speed" limit kind of makes communication by this method rather worthless.
Even if you assume that that light speed is an absolute limit, there are good reasons not to use radio over any distance greater than a few hundred metres. The reason is simply efficiency: if you know more or less where the entity you want to communicate with is, why waste energy by broadcasting the signal on other directions? Over short ranges, broadcasting is good because it gives you freedom to move relative to a relay station, but between relay stations, hard links like optical fibre, or directional transmission by laser or microwave are the way to go.
This can explain also why SETI@Home haven't found anything. The period of time between an alien civilization starting to broadcast radio and then realizing that there were more efficient ways to communication would have to overlap with the period in which our civilization was listening for said signals. Not only that, but even if a civilization would have overlapped at 50 lightyears, if they happened to be 200 lightyears away, there would be no overlap. We are talking about mere decades out of millions of years. Maybe exactly the signals we were looking for passed us by just before radio invented.
Further, the limitation of lightspeed in communication is only really a problem if you assume that the users of it have to worry about time. I think it is reasonable to assume that before any civilization makes it any distance into space, they will have solved the problem of aging for themselves by whatever means.
"player 4 hit player 1 with 0 stroms"
Seeing this type of news on a UFO centric site certainly raises the crap-o-meter, but if in any doubt go and ask real astronomers over at http://www.badastronomy.com
Its a site run be a real astronomer with real scientists there ready and willing to answer questions.
StarTux
Looks like they've taken damage and are leaking pixie dust.
Oh no! Tinkerbell's going down!
Heh, just a memory of MST3K and the cheesy effects of some movie... How can you not laugh your ass off after seeing that 'actual picture'. They should have stuck with weird blurry blobs they could blame on poor atmosphere/camera focus, this is so ridiculous.
Why is this not 'it's funny, laugh'?
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
It has the link that should have been on the front page for balance, if not accuracy.
Can see this adding to their conspiracy theories:
"The US Govt hit us with a massive denial of service attack after we broke this story, which means they are trying to hide something".
StarTux
See this link. :)
:)
:)
More seriously, the first google link is a bunch of eurofolks running seti@home. I seriously doubt that seti@home has generated any pictures of "ufos" in our solar system. The second link is the one above. The third seems to be some crank who regularly gives speeches on "SETV" (the "Search for Extraterrestrial Vehicles") -- he claims to be a "professor", which may be true, as advanced degrees are hardly a prophylactic against insanity.
So, ooh, ahh, some bunch of UFO freaks have announced that some obscure other group (which may or may not also be a bunch of UFO freaks) have proof (proof! At last, real proof! Mwuah-ha-ha-ha-ha!) of UFOs. Geeze, there's news for ya! Guess what, one group or another of UFO freaks has been claiming that they have proof (real proof, see, it's a genuine photograph of a blob, what more do you want, sheesh!) for years. Wake me when someone with a operating brain gets involved.
Frankly, without a little more than this, I'm sticking with Timothy Leary's theory that so-called UFOs are actually human time-travellers from our future astral-projecting themselves back to our time.
Can you trust the source?
If a professor at Cal-Tech released this, I would be midly interested. If it was then further verfied by a research team from the University of Arizona and then later by another team from a Sweedish University, then I would consider it pretty legit.
Now, if you have the resources, the training and capability to validate claims yourself then by all means go ahead. As for me, I use my "BS detector" to the best of my ability but in the end I know where my shortcomings are and in these areas defer to the experts.
- It might be some dynamic physical or electric behaviour in the CCD or optics. The hardware is a few years old, after all, in extreme conditions. Might be water condensating on lenses, might be reflections from ice crystals, might be obscure electric charge dynamics on the CCD.
- SOHO is located in one of the 5 Lagrange points where it stays at same relative position with both Earth and Sun. Since this is an exceptional point, some space garbage such as rocks or space suit gloves might get stuck in the vicinity of the (unstable) point for some time.
- UFOs, as flown by some extra-terrestial intelligent beings, might generally be rather small objects. Space is big. SOHO's cameras do not have extremely good resolution and any visible object would have to be either enormous, very bright, or somewhat close to SOHO (and Earth), but between SOHO and Sun. Somehow that wouldn't seem to make much sense.
- Similar bright objects have not been observed from Earth based observatories, which would mean that it's a local phenomenom to SOHO. This would hint towards the first two possibilities above.
IANAA, IAAAA.Has it been slashdotted or...
It's a Government cover-up!!! THEY don't want us to see the evidence so they enlisted Slashdot to nuke their server.
The truth is out there!
(FemaleStateLegislatorsPercapita2001*CostOfLivingG roceryItems2000*(AIDSTotalPercapitaThru2001/4+Suic idesPercapita1990+10*MurderPercapita2001)*(America n_Indian_Eskimo_or_AleutPercapita1990+Scotch_Irish Percapita1990)/BlacksPercapita1990)
Seastead this.
What difference does it make where the evidence is presented? Why don't you instead ask if the evidence is stong.
Because evidence that appears on its face to be strong yet comes from a completely incredible (i.e., not credible) source can usually dismissed without further examination. It's a time-saver.
We use this technique all the time here on Slashdot. Remember all those Microsoft press releases about how Windows is more secure than UNIX? Because Microsoft released them, or funded the company that released them, we don't even bother to try to refute them. They're obviously not objective. Same thing here. When a UFO nut says, "Satellite detects UFO!" it's not even worth reading the article.
I write in my journal
Now I have to filter out Timothy too. I'm down to like 2 "editors" left.
I beg to differ.
As I understand the process, it works like this:
Under controlled situations, one heats up an element. General black box radiation will usually suffice, but you typically need to have some weird constraints like using only a single atom as your emitter. Utilizing various methods, such as a laser, you excite the atom such that it emits a photon and an anti-photon (but, remember that a photon is it's own anti-particle, so the quantum pair turns out to be two photons). These photons are emitted in different directions.
By pulsing the laser and the excitation level of the atom, you can emit photons in a morse-code like manner.
Now then, utilizing affects of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and the Schroedinger Wave equation, the trick is to not 'observe' the photons as they are emitted (else, they wouldn't be observable to the folks you're sending them to on the other side of the galaxy).
Anyhow, assume that these photons travel half way across the galaxy and are 'observed' by some other group. When the photons are observed, the quantum wave collapses, and discrete information is passed from the source of the photons to the observation apparatus. Additionally, if the two photon are emitted exactly 180 degrees opposite of each other, and both are traveling at velocity c, the transmission of data has a theoretical velocity of twice the speed of light.
That is, by calculating the direction of the incoming photon with the measurement apparatus, one can discretely calculate where the other photon is. Due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, you loose the velocity information, however, so you know where the other photon is, but don't know how long it took to get there, or how fast it's traveling.
This method of calculation, at the quantum level, is not un-common amongst scientists.
I'm sure I haven't gotten the details exactly right, but this is a basic description of the method.
Yeah, I see what they're talking about now. That photo looks exactly like an early eighties video game UFO! No wonder they're convinced this is real! :)
New slashdot headlines:
Britany Spears impregnated by CowboyNeal.
CmdrTaco blood is made of taco sauce.
Timothy's brain is removed and no one noticed.
Oh well thats why I keep reading slashdot you never know what is next.
...a European-led consortium presented them with images that clearly were none of the aforementioned, they 'clamped up.
/. goes on in full amateur mode.
In case anyone is wondering if the people at Slashdot practice journalism or even make an attempt at verifying facts, that quote provides the answer: no.
Who says? What "European-led constortium"? Where's the evidence that NASA "clamped up"? What does "clearly none of the aforementioned" mean? That's an assertion of an opinion.
This story may be perfectly true, but then again it might not be. Meanwhile,
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
This should do a lot to discredit Seti. Either they are UFO loving wack-jobs, or UFO's do exist, but obviously aren't using any kind of radio communication that can be detected using Distributed computing.
Perhaps these people will put their computers to better use.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Pseudoscience.
any suggestions on what the image icon should be?
A little cliche twist...
On Klacknar, job finds you!
I like big butts and I cannot lie.
This is the basic premise that science is a belief system. To some degree, it is. What is really scary is the number of people who won't even entertain an idea because some "expert" says it's nutso. The plain bald truth is that no one on Earth, scientist or nonscientist alike, has the foggiest idea what's under the surface of Mars, let alone orbitting alpha-Centauri. Try to keep an open mind, fellows.
Hic iacet Arthurus, rex quondam rexque futurus.
As I was reading your post, it struck me more and more that what you were saying does not at all add up in comparison to what I've read on the subject in Scientific American and Science. But then came this:
:) We just know that it happens. And it has already been used to transmit data...check out the Scientific American of a couple of months back, which had an article about how this was done for not just a particle or two, but for two whole volumes of gas.
"Additionally, if the two photon are emitted exactly 180 degrees opposite of each other, and both are traveling at velocity c, the transmission of data has a theoretical velocity of twice the speed of light."
This just doesn't fit with current physics. Why? Because those photons travel in a reference frame...it's not called general/special !relativety! for nothing. The photons (and the data) travel at a speed of c...also relative to each other, due to the space-time dilation effect (ie it space-time compresses the faster you travel). Thing is, we don't know why or with what mechanism paired particles retain that odd connection...that's why it's called the 'strange attraction'
-- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
They claim first and prove 'later'. The first group which comes straight out and gives the evidence without some bullshit pseudo-hype before it should be given the publicity they deserve.
I wonder if this conference will be delayed because of.... a power failure brought on by UFO interferance? Or perhaps they will announce their leader has been abducted and given a probe up the rear end.
when a European-led consortium presented them with images that clearly were none of the aforementioned, they 'clamped up.'"
Don't we all know the feeling, when some moron just keeps on talking and we really want them to shut up or go away. First my responses gets limited to "yes" and "no", then "ah" and "hm", then I just stop reacting on what they are saying all together.
my sig
So has anyone taken credit yet for hacking into these SOHO Satellites image databases and inserting these pics???
For compatibiity with the alien systems. There may very well be other aliens (using Windoze), but they can't get out of their own galaxy without rebooting or encountering BSOD. The resources these aliens could have used to improve and stabilize their systems were foolishly squandered on DRM.
I totally agree;
"Further, the limitation of lightspeed in communication is only really a problem if you assume that the users of it have to worry about time. I think it is reasonable to assume that before any civilization makes it any distance into space, they will have solved the problem of aging for themselves by whatever means."
But I once was stunned into mental chaos when I heard the eminent Carl Sagan completely and unequivocally dismiss the possibility of extraterrestrials visiting Earth on the grounds that it would take far too long to travel over the vast distances involved. Carl Freakin Sagan! I thought the guy had imagination.
After that I realised that he was, after all, a pothead like myself...
Only I allow myself a bit more imagination when I am stoned out of my gourd.
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
"Order the CD NOW!" So, if you would spot an alien, would you start burning CD's with the images and sell them for a few dollars. Hope not!
And I've seen too many of those, too many people say they have seen aliens. I once sent an e-mail to a site like this, asked them "how the space-ship could have travelled faster than the speed of light" as was said in the article. They never answered.
I mean... how can we believe people who say they have seen aliens when so many do - and their stories obviously contradict each other. If I decided to believe in aliens, not only would I have to believe that they were orbiting our planet right now, but that there were actually various types of aliens orbiting our planet! And that's just a bit too incredible.
Just look into a book store, you will find at least one book about people who have seen aliens. As I say - too many!
There's telepathic communication which is quite feasible as well. You think of something and I try to guess it. BTW, I've just read your mind. Guess what? You're clueless.
Years from now people will reminisce about the late great Slashdot, I predict that a consensus will emerge that this story here was either the beginning of the end or the final straw depending on how you feel about /. today.
I'm afraid it doesn't work like that. The "spooky action at a distance" you are referring to has to do with observations, not imposed changes. As soon as you try to modify the particle it will lose decoherence and will no longer be entangled with its partner.
Higher Logics: where programming meets science.
Because evidence that appears on its face to be strong yet comes from a completely incredible (i.e., not credible) source can usually dismissed without further examination. It's a time-saver.
This is a techniques which the shadow government use to keep there work secret.
They mix facts with fiction and release it trough a not credible source.
The most used source is Hollywood.
You can find clues about real projects in films/series like.
X-files
7 days
Stargate.
MIB
http://www.ufocity.com/modules/news/article.php?st oryid=3521
Here's a press release entitled: EUROSETI TO REVEAL STARTLING UFO IMAGES AT THE NATIONAL SPACE CENTRE! (yes, all CAPS)
I'm putting it here so you can read it even after the site has been slashdotted.
---
From Graham W. Birdsall, Publisher of UFO Magazine (UK)
EUROSETI TO REVEAL STARTLING UFO IMAGES AT THE NATIONAL SPACE CENTRE!
A full-page advertisement in the January 2003 issue of UFO Magazine has generated considerable interest amongst the UFO community. It refers to an event taking place on the weekend of 24-27 January, when some extraordinary satellite images of anomalous objects will be screened at the National Space Centre in Leicester. The screenings will be held on the evenings of Friday, Saturday and Sunday, with each commencing at 7.30pm.
For the past two years, hundreds of extraordinary UFO-like images have been gleaned by a Spanish-based team using two space-based satellites and which defy explanation.
NASA initially tried to explain the images away as pixel faults, passing meteors or asteroids, etc., but when a European-led consortium presented them with images that clearly were none of the aforementioned, they 'clamped up'.
On Tuesday, 7 January 2003, Mr. Mike Murray, one of the founders of EUROSETI, visited the offices of UFO Magazine to conduct a WORLD EXCLUSIVE filmed interview. With his kind permission, that interview - which features a healthy selection of these images - can now be viewed on our website.
http://www.ufomag.co.uk/euroseti.htm
Those wishing to attend the lectures at Britain's National Space Centre in Leicester should book their seat a.s.a.p. with EUROSETI. Tickets are £20.00 each and available NOW!
Note that each ticket holder will receive a FREE CD containing all of the EUROSETI images, including a vast range of computer analysed enhancements.
The EUROSETI ticket hotline number is: 01733 293720
Dear Sir,
/. revolutionary activities at once and report to your Control.
Thanks to recent advances in technology mind control lasers have never before been as safe and as effective as they are today. Insights from confidential sources have allowed us to make past limitations in our systems obsolete. Now mind control lasering technology relies on non-material interference bands and goes directly into each subject regardless of most terrestrial technologies jamming efforts.
Please cease your
Thank you,
They
Notice how the "craft" appears to be at right angles (even with) the frame of the picture (assuming they have not altered the rotation for the newspaper photo).
This would lend credibility to those who claim that it is an artifact of digital camera construction. The "blur" lines up with the pixels of the camera. If most of the other UFO images aligned like this, it is a dead ringer for "pixel blur".
Table-ized A.I.
While you can show statistically that the particles are linked, you cannot transmit any information. The linking is hidden is such a way that it is only apparent when you have the information from *both* ends, and of course to do that, you need to send it at light speed or less.
This "transcendental modem" idea has been around for a long time, and a lot of very smart people have considered this issue, without ever finding a way to violate the speed-of-light causality (transfer of information rule) - probably because it is inherent in how the universe functions.
The only good weather is bad weather.
There should be a tin-hat logo for News of the Absurd: Stuff that Inspires Laughter. Like this. I mean, come on, could this be any more laughable?
don't blame me...*I* voted for Kodos!
Well, they can receive Fox affilite stations on Omicron Persei 8, which is 1000 light years from here!
Lrrr: "I don't get it. Why does the largest friend not simply eat the other five?"
I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
Honestly, I don't care if this gets me modded down: when pseudo science, a la roblimo's Alex Chiu "interview" is the norm, I won't bother reading Slashdot. Fortunately, there've been relatively few such articles thus far. Timothy, however, is clearly attempting to change that: first was the Starcraft book review (http://books.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/12/16 /1630223&mode=thread&tid=160), and now he's posting unverified, unsubstantiated tripe from clearly biased sites. I -want- to believe in alien life! I'm dying to! But I consider myself in the same league as Carl Sagan: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof." There's a big difference between the SETI folk, who want to believe in UFOs, but are yet to see proof, and the UFO-weenies, who already believe, proof be damned.
Once this has been verified by some more reputable sources, I'll be interested, and it'll be worth posting on slashdot. I know this place is a fringe site as it is but there's no reason to go THIS far off the path of reason.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Yes, the video is pretty cool. But I don't think it's genuine. Here's why:
1. The girl is pointing to the tower and says something like "whats that". The reaction of the cameraman is to zoom right in until we see the craft hovering at the side of the building. I know *I* wouldn't have zoomed in instinctively at once if someone just said "look there".
2. Although the craft is moving *really* fast (exceeding 2000 kph in my opinion) the girl never looses track and continues to point to its exact location. I know that if *I* would ride a helicopter when a strange aircraft is passing by at ludicrous speeds (tm), *I* would be having trouble to track it in real time.
3. (now the most scientific point) Towards the end of the movie the aircraft passes in front of the helicopter at a speed of, say, at least 2000 kph. We can't be sure about distances here but let's say it's distance to the helicopter was 10 meters at its closest. Now: passing by in front of a brittle thing like a small mid air helicopter WITHOUT even making the helicopter shake a bit? Hell, the air draft alone (not to mention engine exhaust) should have gotten the heli into serious trouble at those speeds!
Mind you, I don't know a thing about aviation, that's probably why my analysis is wrong. Any pilots around here? I'd like to hear your opinion!
Now, what a coincidence: the picture shown on that guy's computer (the movies are slashdotted anyway...) resemble... wow, a flying saucer! The same shapes that have been used in all the hoaxes from the last fourty years! Now I'm convinced.
Hello! I'm a disaster waiting to happen!
Assuming that the aliens designed their computers the same way we do, there is still virtually no chance of a virus we made even running on their computers.
;)
1)Completely different CPU instruction sets
2)They probably have some form of network security.
3)Even us stupid human sysops know that you don't just run any old program that you get off the network. You verify that the person who gave you the program is trustworthy, then you verify that the program itself doesn't do anything bad by running it on a standalone system.
4)The only way to get their computers to run our code would be to root their OS.
5)Of course, we wouldn't know anything about their OS. And since they're aliens, they probably use EBCDIC instead of ASCII
the scientist debunking the photo says it's overexposure of a planet, not a UFO, and that such things happen frequently with this instrument.
great, by every measure you've posted an excellent link to provide a reasonable explanation for the image.
note that it should be a trivial matter for a reasonably competent scientist look at the date/time the pic was taken, the direction it was pointing, and identify the exact planet beyond any doubt.
when the required info comes out, this will surely happen, exposing the UFO site as a fraud, or not, as the case may be.
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
See my user info for links.
There is a lot of confusion with this. When the particles are, as you called, 'a quantum pair' and Alice measures one of them, the other one assumes the same measured value, so Bob also sees the same value. There is no way to transmit information that way, since Alice doesn't know or controls what value her measurement will turn out to be. But, as soon as she measures, both Alice and Bob has the same, totally useless, random piece of information. Well, not useless, you can use this as an encryption key, but that's another story...
"There is no teacher but the enemy."-Mazer Rackham
A theorectical Matrioshka Brain can live as long as its star burns. So what's a few million years lagtime between buddies when you live for hundreds of billions of years? Of course, as you think faster, the world outside seems to come to a standstill; like cityfolk observing countrybumpkins. :)
--
Power to the Peaceful
Well, I don't have a PhD in this subject or anything, so you may be correct.
As I understand it, however, data can 'travel faster' than photons.
For instance, assume that we both have direct fiber optic connections from our personal computers to the slashdot servers. So, all information is traveling between us at the speed of light.
Data theory and logic suggest that in order for us to be communicating at all, via 'the internet', we have to both have a web-browser that can transmit HTML, a network protocol stack, a computer screen and keyboard on which to view this information, and so forth. Further, we could also deduce that the other person is a carbon based life form, which possesses DNA, and has grown up in a social environment, such that it learns 'English'. At the very minimum, this can be encoded as a couple of megabytes of information, if not a gigabyte. All of which was transmitted to me the very second that I looked at your message.
Now, one response to this may be that all of this information/data is transmitted in parallel, and it hasn't traveled faster than the speed of light.
On the other hand, there is an argument that information can flow faster than photons.
Let me put it this way: If you encode information on the photon itself, then the data is confined to the physics of the photon. If you encode the information on the wave-equation of the photon, then one can determine and transmit information about states which exceed the speed of light.
The real meat of this post, then, goes back to the previously mentioned scenario. Imagine that we are connected via fiber optics from our personal computers to slashdot. Also, assume that our fiber optics actually transmit information at the speed of light without latency. Now then, assume that we set up our computers to recieve 'push' information from Slashdot's servers, and we both stand in front of our monitors. Also, assume that we are 180 degrees from each other. For the purpose of this argument, assume that there is no latency in regards to processing of the packets, and so forth.
You ------ Slashdot ------ Me
Here is the thought experiment: Slashdot sends an update to both you and me, at the speed of light, via fiber optics. It does this by sending a network packet out it's network card, which is then split into two identical packets by a splitter (one of those mirrors which seperates polalized light, or some similar contraption). The two packets travel to you and me at exactly the same speed, and arrive at the same time.
Now then, I claim that it is true that the network packet travels from Slashdot to Me at no greater velocity than the speed of light (c). I also claim that the network packet travels from Slashdot to You at no greater velocity than the speed of light (c). However, I also claim that there is information transmitted between you and me, at that moment in time, regarding the status of the other packet. This information is transmitted via the wave-equation, not the photon. It's transmitted via the context and the nature of the observation, not with the obersvation itself. In this case, I think that the information passed between You and Me, regarding this network update, has traveled at twice the speed of light (2c), due to quantum parity of the network packets.
If this is not the case, and data is confined by the speed of light, then the thought example must be modified. Perhaps a 1/2 multiplier is needed somewhere within the thought example.
Anyhow, I don't know all the answers, and I'm not claiming what I've said is absolute. I do know, however, that there are definately other scientists on our planet who believe that information can be encoded on the wave-equation, and not just on the photon. In that instance, as I understand it, data can be transmitted faster than the speed of light.
Anyhow, I gathered that from reading and studying articles by Heisenberg, Schroedinger, Fermi, Einstein, Chamberlain, Turring, and Knuth. But I'm not on par with them. I hope that it is obvious that this thought experiment is relevent to UFOs and the topic at hand.
Anyhow, I could be wrong.
There were also other technical reasons - that part of the spectrum was believed to be one of the most efficient for transmitting through interstellar space.
Aside from the fact that that was what their radiotelescopes were designed to detect (we have a hammer, therefore the problem is a nail)...
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
"...a Spanish-based team using two space-based satellites."
This apparently yielded much better results than the Polish-based team who used two ground-based satellites.
What does this have to do with logical reasoning? It has to do with observation and the accurate reporting of observation. The problem is that the scientific establishment has been laughing at anyone who even looks at the evidence for so long that scientists working in observational astronomy are deathly afraid of reporting anything that smacks of forbidden ideas like alien craft in the Solar System. Jacques Vallee has documented the actual destruction of observational data that resulted from this fear. Thankfully, it appears that at least now there is some chance that those who make valid observations will not be afraid of reporting what they have seen.
As to what you believe, I--and science in general--do not care. I am not interested in convincing you of anything. I am not a missionary. What I do wish you and your compatriots would do is stop ridiculing long enough to allow observational science to deal with the phenomena involved. This could very well be quite serious business. One can only imagine what the local witch doctor told the chief when the first European was sighted off the American shore. We need to learn a bit from our own history.
Hic iacet Arthurus, rex quondam rexque futurus.
When I look at the image at the head of the linked page ("Disney.jpg" - curiously)
what I see is a VERY low resolution image.
Look at the red trail behind it. There are a bunch of little raster-aligned
four-pointed star shapes. (The one on the extreme left is a prime example).
This is what you get if you take a VERY low resolution image an blow it up
with simple bilinear blending between the pixels. Taking this as evidence
of the original image resolution, we can see that the 'spaceship' at the
righthand end of the image is just about 3 pixels across - but has been
false-coloured so that the bilinear blending has become magenta and yellow
bands. Those are not 'real' they are just a part of the false-colouring.
Isn't it suspicious that the "UFO" is exactly aligned with the raster?
This is a fake...well, perhaps not exactly a fake - but an intentional
mis-use of image manipulation to produce an image that was never really
there.
You could reproduce this image in GIMP in about 3 minutes flat.
1) Create a 20x20 RGB image.
2) Using a 1 pixel brush, paint a diagonal line using bright red.
3) Fatten one end of the line slightly.
At this point, your image (if you'd gotten it from a photo of the
night sky) wouldn't convince you that this was a UFO - would it?
It could be any kind of a trail, meteor, military jet on afterburner,
a flare, a firework, anything like that.
4) Increase the image resolution to 400x400
Notice how the 'tail' now looks EXACTLY like the one in the
ufomag web site. Look at the 'star' shapes in the tail.
So, now let's do some "false-colour enhancement":
5) Choose 'select by colour' - set the threshold down to nearly
zero percent and click on a region at the center of the 'head'
of the trail. Fill it with magenta.
6) Pick a pixel close to that, fill it with a nice lemon yellow.
Notice how your image looks startlingly similar to the one
on the ufomag website. All the artifacts present in their
image are present in yours.
Now, I'm not saying that they painted their image in GIMP,
I'm quite prepared to accept that it's a photo of a real
world night-sky object. However, the pretty pink and yellow
spaceship on the right - complete with spooky red glow and
engine exhaust is no more than a deliberately produced
artifact.
The yellow and pink regions are BOTH narrower than the original
pixel resolution - no feature narrower than TWO pixels wide
(Nyquist sampling limit) can ever be reconstructed from an
image.
Bah. BULLSHIT!!
www.sjbaker.org
Recently the effects of gravity were proven to travel at the speed of light. Who is to say that the effects of quantum entanglement don't travel at the same speed?
Always going forward, 'cause we can't find reverse.
This looks to me like an image of an ordinary star saturating the ccd (the cross), with some small portion of the exposure time suffering from a tracking problem (the diagonal smear). Many telescopes have a cross-shaped support for the imaging device within the light path, and what results is a cross-shaped diffraction peak around bright stars. Or, saturation of the pixels under a bright image bleeds out along the principal directions of the ccd. Notice how the cross is aligned with the up and down directions of the image?
That's not data traveling, that's assumptions you are making. And that's not actual data (except in the sense that you can say "based on this, I now make this assumption; the data I have consists of that assumption").
:)
There is a HUGE difference between data and assumptions.
It's like saying royalty travels at an instantanious speed, because as soon as the king is dead, his son is king. No data has traveled, and you also don't know at the time that the king has died that something has happened: you only know that that transfer has taken place when you hear the news...so it's not even like royalty, as royalty travels at the speed of newsbroadcasts
-- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
As the alien spaceship leaves its homeworld, it begins letting out a piece of string. It continues to let out string as it travels, stopping by the occasional asteroid to pick up more raw materials for string. When it reaches its destination, they use the string to communicate with the homeworld. No, dummy, not by talking into a tin can! That would require sound waves, which would be limited to the speed of sound. They tug on the string in Morse Code. Of course, they wouldn't call it Morse, 'cause the person on their homeworld who invented it would be named something like "Boeulrak". So they tug on the string in Boeulrak Code. Instant intergalactic communication! All brought to you by the miracles of a ball of string! (Would this hypothesis of communication be called "String Theory"?)
Darned tropical millipede! What's it doing in our apartment?
Three words: you cannot count.
And you think that gives you some kind of authority? Please, this is Slashdot. We're all a bunch of self-proclaimed coders here.
In fact, there's a great picture at Science@NASA that shows Jupiter, Venus, Mars, and Saturn all in SOHO's field of view. All with the diffraction spikes at the sides of the planets.
More images with diffraction spikes:
The Finding of Comet SOHO 2002 C4
Hot Shots from SOHO - high bandwidth, but great examples showing that the image at the top of the EuroSeti page is almost definitely a comet
They are always pulling that kind of rationalization or disinformation.
Once, when I showed them a picture I had of an alien on the moon, they tried to explain it away as being Buzz Aldrin. When I kept confronting them, they clamped up.
This space available.
I think it is difficult to talk about the speed of a photon in the rest frame of another photon. This is because any rest frame traveling at the speed of light experiences no change in time. Time stands still. It will travel to the end of the universe and back (assuming it was not annihilated in route) and will never experience time.
a large, flaming head takes a bite out of the sun!
I hold it, that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing. -- Thomas Jefferson
Look, every Joe knows what UFO stands for. As long as these objects can possibly be considered "unidentifiable", they're not evidence at all, they're just freak anomolies. Inexplicable, or basically meaningless anomolies are a fact of life in every field of research, and life in general.
I think I speak for quite a few people when I really could care less, and tell me when something is conclusive. Otherwise it's just more whining about what we DON'T know and can't explain, rather than what we can prove beyond a reasonable doubt.
I seriously think Roswell sky-watchers are doing their cause more damage than good by constantly arguing utterly inconclusive anomolies. As long as it's even POSSIBLE to conceive of explaining them as "pixel faults", or whatever, that's not evidence. As such, they degrade their credibility one level further.
If you disagree, don't mod me down, just reply to this post.
-----
"Cogito Eggo Sum: I think, therefore, waffle."
or perhaps the technical hooks in films are just a touch facile nowadays.
DOn't forget that they had access to an alien ship for 50 years. So our architectures and computer concepts are all devolved from theirs.
Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power.
This is where your argument breaks down.
This is the same problem with EPR type communcation. I send out two entangled photons. Person C and A measure the polarizations simultaneously, far apart. They know they got the same answer. But how do you use this to send a message from A to C?
Or in less esoteric terms, suppose I can send two letters to people who can't communicate with each other. They know they both got the exact same letter - but how can they use this to tell each other anything? They can't - and hence no information has passed from one person to the other.
It's not wasting time, I'm educating myself.
Most of them are attributable to dust thrown off by the spacecraft itself -- e.g. one of the instruments would close its door, and then another instrument would see loads of moving specks.
Other streaks (like the one at the top of the linked page in the article) are often attributable to cosmic rays (often deliberately mistyped as "comic rays" by my cow orkers) or ionizing radiation from the Sun itself.
The LASCO wide-angle coronal camera often sees stuff moving in strange directions -- most of that is sungrazing comets from the Kreutz family of comets.
I work at the Southwest Research Institute now, and my coworker Dan Durda has done an extensive search through thousands of LASCO images for moving objects that don't fit the pattern of the sungrazing comets -- because he's interested in "vulcanoid asteroids", asteroids inside Mercury's orbit. He didn't find any, but I'm sure that any alien spacecraft jetting through the field of view would have tripped his algorithm.
It's certainly possible that these guys have found something new, but remember that "UFO" doesn't necessarily mean "alien spaceship".
Interestingly enough, SOHO itself registered as a false positive (caught by humans, fortunately) for the earthbound SETI algorithms. It's a strongish radio source that doesn't fit their earth-satellite pattern, since it's sitting at the Earth-Sun Lagrange point.
*blink*blink*UFO MAGAZINE WORLD EXCLUSIVE*blink*blink*...
Gimmie a fuckin break. I click on the only link on this page, expecting to see hard scientific data. What do I see? A bloated-ass animated GIF of a poorly rendered flying saucer, and three magazine covers. One magazine cover has a picture of a "grey" superimposed over the white house. Lovely. The second picture suggests the Moon landing was a fraud, which is a slap in the face to the tens of thousands of engineers who made it happen. The third image suggests aliens are abducting us with spooky-dookie glowing tractor beams. Yeah, thats great. Tons of credibility there.
This "news" isn't worth the powder to blow it to hell.
Cheers,
Bowie J. Poag
"Just remember guys, a few things we know about these aliens so far: They're VERY susceptible to dying from earth based bacteria (War of the Worlds), their computers can be interfaced via Macintosh computers.. although I'm afraid we'll need to use OS9 or Classic mode to do that since they aren't advanced enough to use a BSD kernel yet (Independence Day), and water is deadly to them! (Signs) Remember this when they start invading guys."
:-)
You forgot one: Country music causes their heads to explode. (Mars attacks) Maybe you left it out because Country music has the same effect on a lot of us too...
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Actually, the Areceibo dish with its current transmitter and receiver should be able to hear a copy of itself from anywhere within the Milky Way (except possible for the small wedge hidden by the galactic core). And those could be upgraded if we really felt the need/desire to do so.
We're *well* within the ability technically to make ourselves heard. The problem is being noticed. With that many stars in the galaxy, everybody's transmitting with a -3 AC penalty.
It's ham-fisted "analysis" like this one that makes a the panic-monger's job even easier.
Yeah, and Paul Davies wrote a paper on how the speed of light has slowed over time. This may or may not break relativity.
There is a remote possibility that we mightn't be able to travel faster than light but that we might be able to increase its speed.
Anyway. Said paper is at:
http://aca.mq.edu.au/lightspeed.html
Ah, but how many of us get paid?
"Verbing weirds language." -- Calvin
What are those flying saucer-shaped objects in the LASCO images?
The "funny-looking spheroid" is a typical response of the SOHO LASCO coronagraph CCD detector to an object (planet or bright star) of small angular extent but so bright that it saturates the CCD camera so that "bleeding" occurs along pixel rows. There is a bright horizontal streak on either side of the image, because the charge leaks easier along the direction in which the CCD image is read out by the associated electronics.
CCD stands for charge-coupled detector, and refers to a silicon chip, usually a centimeter or two across, divided into a grid of cells, each of which acts like a small photomultiplier in that an incoming photon knocks loose one or more electrons. The electrons are "read out" by row (fast direction) and column (slow direction), the current converted to a digital signal, and each cell or picture element ("pixel") thus assigned a digital value proportional to the the number of incoming photons in that pixel (the brightness of the part of the image falling on that pixel). This is the same kind of detector as is used in a hand-held video camera, though until recently, the analog-to-digital conversion was left out in consumer devices.
If you point a video camera at a very bright source (say, the Sun), the image "blooms" or brightens all over --- there are so many electrons produced in the pixels corresponding to the bright source that they spill over into adjacent rows and column, perhaps over the entire detector. Better CCD's will "bleed" only along the fast readout direction (a single row), and perhaps a few adjacent rows.
The LASCO and EIT CCD cameras include "anti-bleed" electronics which limit the pixel bleeding around bright sources to less than the full row (and usually no adjacent rows). In the case of a marginally too-bright object, the pixel bleeding will be only a few pixels in either direction along the fast readout direction. Thus, the "flying saucer" images.
A few of the LASCO images that have appeared on the "extraterrestrial" Web sites show much larger and brighter, but still saucer-like features. These images are in fact obtained with the instrument door closed, but with an incorrectly long exposure. The big "saucers" result from massive pixel bleeding along every row of the detector containing part of the image of the "opal," or small diffusing lens, in the instrument door, that is used for obtaining calibration data.
If your correspondents still prefer to believe that the pixel-bled images of planets or bright stars are something else, ask them why the extended part of the "saucers" (i.e., the pixel bleeding) always occurs in the same direction relative to the image --- even when the spacecraft is rolled relative to its normal orientation relative to the Sun.
You ask the computer for a cup of tea, and it spends all its time thinking why an ape descendant should want dried leaves in boiling water with juice squirted from a cow...
"Information wants to be paid"
From realufos.com:
I asked the world famous psychic Sollog about this video.
He says it is REAL!
Well, I'm convinced!
Seriously; this happens over New York. Is this the only footage of this UFO? At any time, there's so many camera crews in atcion in Manhattan (ref. the WTC plane crash first footage) that someone had to get this on tape in addition to the ones in the helicopter.
I believe in extraterrestial life, but I also beleive that if you can travel 10 + light years, you don't smash into a planet like a Mars probe (ref. the Roswell incident.) or expose yourself like this.
Face it, Roland Emerich was pulling insipid crap out of his ass (again). All his movies follow the same pattern:
- Excellent first act, makes movie seem full of potential
- Boring second act. Dumb melodrama. Lots of talking heads. We usually learn more about the bad guys than we could even want to know.
- Lame and uninspired third act. Protagonists are down and out, but at the last minute they pull something together and kick the bad guys' ass.
Take, for example, ID4:
- First act: aliens come and blow shit up
- Second act: they're down in the Area 51 bunker for what seems like ages. Lots of "talking heads" scenes.
- Third act: down and out, all seems lost. Suddenly, Jeff Goldblum has a "Eureka!" moment, and after some trite "Tell my children I love them!" self-sacrifice crap, the good guys win.
Stargate:
- First act: the stargate is discovered. They go through it, and come across the natives.
- Second act: Mr. Crying Game arrives, we get some uninspiring examples of how bad of a person he is. Then he kicks the heroes' asses.
- Third act: down and out, all seems lost. Then, "unexpectedly", Guy From Supernova won't kill his friends, and Boys Who Rebelled Against The Establishment Because They Saw The True Path help our heroes save the day.
The Patriot:
- First act: the colonists get sick of the Limeys and start some shit. While clearly outclassed and outmanned, there is still Hope. We see the Good Guys use their Good Guy Intuition to kick some British ass.
- Second act: Colonel Bad Guy On Horseback gets permission to do whatever he wants. Cue melodrama about how much he's beating the Good Guys. In a particularly underwhelming scene, Good Guy From Down Under gets whacked by Colonel Bad Guy On Horseback. Mucho mas talking heads.
- Third act: All seems lost. Both of That Braveheart Dude's sons are dead. The rebels are getting their asses handed to them. George Washington is going to be taking it up the poop chute Real Soon Now. "Unexpectedly" That Braveheart Dude comes up with a plan, and the colonists pull a Hail Mary tactic in the following battle. Cue trite "Dead Good Guy From Down Under told us some insipid 'insightful' crap in Act Two, so we're doing it by building a house" scene.
Yes, it's true that most movies follow a three act layout, but none are as formulaic as a Roland Emerich movie. None have as uninteresting of a second act or as uninspired of a third act as a Roland Emerich movie.
I think fundamentally that some people have to believe in a higher power, and attribute all "unknown" phenomena to that power. Religious freaks do it all the time, and UFO people are doing the same thing. There has been, to date, no affirmative evidence for the presence of intelligent life having visited our solar system, but that doesn't dampen their spirits a bit.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
I didn't even need to trace this thread back - I could tell by your description what this was. I work in visual FX, and one time we were toying with the idea of making a ufo hoax as a pr gimmick(we never got around to it). Anyway, I spent a fair bit of time analysing that movie, and I hate to disappoint any abductees out there, but you're right - it's a fake. Even discounting the common sense things you mention, there are motion blur problems with the UFO for those few frames when it zips past and it cuts to the shot straight up. It's obviously a CG element. I also noticed some artifacting issues when they did a hold-back matte for the saucer when it emerged from behind the building. :)
It's a *good* fake, mind you! But it's a fake.
DT
"I'm sorry, but your spaceship is operating outside of your home galaxy. Please contact sales for a service upgrade."
-Hope