We are searching data for your request:
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.
Ek probeer die waarde van meteoriese waarnemings tydens 'n meteoorreën realisties benader, want ek wil nie groot verwagtinge hê nie. Ek het 'n paar vrae oor hierdie formule wat ek op hierdie webwerf gevind het.
Aantal meteore = ZHR × sin (θ) / (F × r ^ 6.5 − m)
Vraag 1
Ek wil graag weet vir die berekening van F, waar
F = 1 / (1 − k)
waar k die fraksie van die lug is wat u nie kan sien nie, want dit word verduister deur wolke of ander obstruksies soos bome.
Gestel ek is op 'n plat vlakte sonder bome / geboue en het 'n duidelike uitsig van 0-180 grade (dwarsdeursnee van die aardkors). Sal k 0,5 wees gegrond op die feit dat ek nie kan sien wat onder die grond is nie (180-360 grade).
Sal die beperking van die menslike oog ook hierdie waarde beïnvloed? Dit wil sê, as ek noord kyk, kan my perifere visie net noordoos tot noordwes bereik en dus die k-waarde hierbo verder verhoog?
Vraag 2
Vir watter waarde moet ek hê?min die bostaande formule as ek op hierdie plek is? Ek neem tans 'n waarde van 6 aan volgens hierdie wiki. Is dit reg?
Die faktor k, die fraksie lug wat u nie kan sien nie, word nie aangepas nie as gevolg van die grond of u perifere visie. As daar op 'n plat vlakte ('n "seevlak" -horison) en geen lug bedek is deur wolke, geboue of bome nie, dan is k = 0. (Daarom is F = 1 en die uurlikse tarief van Zenithal word nie verminder nie.)
Ek weet nie hoe die kaart vir ligbesoedeling geskep is en of dit die vogtigheid is nie. Die humiditeit kan die beperkte grootte aansienlik beïnvloed. Met ander woorde, as dit 'n droë dag is en die lug helder is, kan jy flouer sterre sien as wanneer dit 'n vogtige dag is en die lug donker is. As u ligging duidelik is (u het 'n blou lug gedurende die dag en 'n swart lug in die nag), is die aanname van m = 6,5 realisties. (Let daarop dat wanneer u op 'n plek op die kaart vir ligbesoedeling klik, dit die Bortle-klassifikasie sal gee. As u op die skakel vir die Bortle-klas klik, sal die verwagte beperkte grootte gegee word.) Die beperkte grootte hang natuurlik ook af van u sig. Jonger mense kan flouer sterre sien as ouer mense. (Ek het pas die kaart vir my ligging probeer, en dit voorspel 5,5 tot 6,0. Ek kan gewoonlik net sterre in die omgewing van 5,0 tot 5,5 sien as gevolg van die ligbesoedeling en humiditeit.)
Meteorbuie 2021: wanneer en waar om 'n verskietende ster te sien
Vind uit of daar vanaand 'n meteoorreën plaasvind, wanneer die volgende een is, en hoe om 'n meteoor self te sien.
Hierdie kompetisie is nou gesluit
Gepubliseer: 6 Augustus 2020 om 09:03
Die jaarlikse meteorietbuie is 'n vaste ligging op die kalenders van sterrekykers en sterrekykers, meestal omdat dit gereeld, betroubaar is en elke jaar op dieselfde tyd plaasvind.
As u u oomblikke kies en 'n bietjie geduld het, is dit nie moeilik om 'n meteoorreën te sien nie, maar u hoef nie meer as 'n paar oë en iets om u resultate aan te teken nie. U kan selfs familie of vriende kry om u te help om 'n wetenskaplike verslag te lewer van wat u sien.
Hier gaan ons deur wat 'n meteoorreën is, hoe om 'n meteoor die beste te sien en belangrike datums te gee oor wanneer die grootste jaarlikse meteoriese buie plaasvind, sodat jy kan bepaal of 'n meteorietreën vanaand plaasvind of in die niet-te -afwykende toekoms.
Tans bereik die meteorietbui van die Eta Aquariid 'n hoogtepunt, en dit is die een om op te let.
Die Wes-Kaapse Bolide van 2019 16 Januarie
Tim Cooper 1 en Kos Coronaios 2
1 Komeet, asteroïde- en meteoriese spesialis, Astronomiese Vereniging van Suider-Afrika
2 Direkteur van Waarnemings, Astronomiese Vereniging van Suider-Afrika
'N Helder bolide (South African Fireball Catalogue (SAFC) # 316) is op 16 Januarie om 20h14m53s SAST wyd gesien oor die Wes-Kaap op 16 Januarie. Dit ontplof op 'n hoogte van ongeveer 46 km, is gevolg deur hoorbare geraas en trillings en laat 'n aanhoudende trein etlike minute sigbaar. Kos Coronaios, wat gesê het dat hy omstreeks 20h15 SAST berigte ontvang het van 'n 'dubbele knal, gevolg deur 'n gedreun', het die eerste persoon wat oor hierdie gebeurtenis geadviseer het. Later die aand en die volgende oggend het ons die waarneming van die gebeurtenis aangehou, sowel as twee video's en 'n aantal beelde van die aanhoudende trein wat die meteoor agtergelaat het. Die waargenome duur en spoed en die voorkoms in die video's stem ooreen met 'n helder meteoor. Die gebeurtenis is veral nie deur Amerikaanse regeringsensors opgespoor nie en was dus waarskynlik minder energiek as die vuurbal bedags wat op die 12de Maart 2013 (SAFC # 249) met 'n energie van 0,1 kT net wes van Kaapstad ontplof het. 'N Ruwe driehoek uit die betroubaarder ooggetuieverslae, en nog belangriker uit die beelde van die rooktrein, gee die voorlopige pad wat in Figuur 2. getoon word. Die meteoor kom vanaf die suide nader en skuins af, beweeg effens na die ooste, en verbrokkel met twee ontploffings net suid van die kus tussen Hermanus en Pearly Beach, waarskynlik in die omgewing van Gansbaai.
Geografiese sigbaarheid en rigting
Ons het 'n groot aantal verslae van 'n wye uitgestrektheid van die Wes-Kaap ontvang, waarvan 42 onafhanklike liggings in Figuur 1-3 getoon word. Alle terreine is opgestel, maar vanweë die groot aantal rondom die Kaapse metropool kan nie alle etikette gesien word nie. Die vuurbal is tot in die noorde van Clanwilliam en Lambertsbaai in die noorde en tot in die ooste van Pearly Beach gesien. Henriette Vermeulen, waargeneem vanaf Clanwilliam, sien dit laag aan die horison net oos van suid en skuins afwaarts beweeg van regs na links, terwyl Liza en Pierre Groenewald van Lambertsbaai opgemerk het dat dit na die binneland na die ooste beweeg. Daar was 'n groot aantal waarnemings uit Kaapstad en omgewing, en die meeste het die algemene rigting as suid-oos gegee en van regs na links beweeg.
Van Welgemoed het Rozanne Groenewald gesê iets 'het afgegaan oor Welgemoed-gholfklub' wat suid tot suidoos van haar ligging loop. Marius Reitz in Edgemead was besig om sy teleskoop op te stel en het die vuurbal in die rigting van Helderberg, in azimut ongeveer 120 °, gesien.
Verskeie verslae van verder suid en oos help om die waarskynlike pad van die vuurbal te beperk. Marg James loop by Lagoon Edge oos van Hermanus toe sy dit suidoos sien en dink dat dit dalk in die strandmeer sal beland. Ander in Hermanus het gesê dat dit op pad is na Gansbaai, en Kate en Steve Klopper in Fisherhaven het gesê 'dit het reg oor ons kop gekom'. Jaco en Chloe Koekemoer by Onrus het gesê dat hulle dit suid van hulle gesien het, vanwaar die beskrywing van die pad wat ek die meteoor neem, nie die kus oorsteek nie. Nog verder oos het Sonja Rademeyer die meteoriet van De Kelders gesien en gesê dit lyk soos 'n noodgeval wat na Gansbaai skiet. Aan die ander kant van die berg by Franskraal sien Cecelia Diener dit noordwaarts na die bergkant beweeg. Die oostelikste waarnemings was van Pearly Beach, waar hulle die meteoriet in westelike rigting sien kyk het, en van links na regs beweeg. Dit dui blykbaar daarop dat die pad noordoos êrens tussen Hermanus en Pearly Beach op pad was.
Video's van die bolide
Videomateriaal van kameras soos sekuriteitskameras en dash-cams kan baie nuttig wees om die pre-atmosferiese wentelbaan te bepaal, en ook die moontlike valplek vir meteoriete van groot bolides. Dit vereis egter presiese kennis van die ligging van die kamera wat gebruik word om die beeldmateriaal te neem. Twee video's is op sosiale media geplaas, wat albei die werklike verloop van die meteoor, direk of indirek, getoon het. Die beeldmateriaal van 'n veiligheidskamera naby Malmesbury (Figuur 4) is die beste visualisering van die voorkoms van die meteoor. Die meteoor kom regs bo in die veld in en daal onder 'n hoek van 30 ° tot vertikaal van regs na links en kyk ongeveer suid. Die passasie duur minder as twee sekondes nadat die gesigsveld binnegekom is totdat die meteoor net bokant die horison uitbrand, en in daardie tyd word twee helder flitse duidelik waargeneem, geskei deur minder as 1 sekonde. Die totale vlugtyd van die sigbare meteoor is onbepaald aangesien die ontbranding reeds aan die gang was toe die meteoor die gesigsveld betree het. Die tweede video is afkomstig van 'n veiligheidskamera wat oor 'n swembad in 'n residensiële eiendom uitkyk, en die meteoor word weerkaats op die water vir 'n baie kort gedeelte van die gang. Ten spyte van die pogings van die outeurs, kon die presiese posisie van geen van die videokameras op die oomblik bepaal word nie, dus kan ons geen akkurate metings van die baan van die vuurbal aflei nie. Nog 'n video is van Guido Di Giannatale ontvang wat die helder flitse in 'n residensiële eiendom toon en die reaksie van 'n dier op die geluid van die ontploffings. Aangesien die kamera-tydstempel met internet-tyd gesinkroniseer is, het ons die verskyningstyd van die helder meteoor as 20h14m53s bepaal. Dit is 136 sekondes later gevolg deur die harde ontploffings, wat daarop dui dat ontwrigting op 'n hoogte van ongeveer 46 km plaasgevind het.
Beelde van rook trein
In die afwesigheid van astrometrie van die video's, kon ons nogtans 'n paar voorlopige metings aflei van beelde van die aanhoudende trein wat in die pad van die meteoor gelaat is. Vier beelde is ontvang wat toon dat die meteoor in verskillende rigtings neerdaal, afhangende van die ligging van die waarnemer, en word in Tabel 1 opgesom.
Tabel 1 Plekke van waarnemers wat beelde van die aanhoudende trein ingestuur het, in volgorde van die mees westelike tot die oostelike. Opmerkingspersele 17 en 42 word slegs met 2,1 km van mekaar geskei. Afkykhoek is die hoek na vertikaal.
Uit onderhoude met die waarnemers het ons vasgestel wat die rigting in die gesig staar, en die rigtingverskille lei tot die meteoriet tussen hierdie liggings. So het die terreine 17 en 26 byvoorbeeld na die ooste gekyk en die meteoor na links gesien neerdaal, terwyl terrein 22 na die weste gekyk het en die meteoor na regs sien neerdaal het. Die beeld van Jacqueline Keulemans van Gordonsbaai is veral nuttig deurdat dit die trein saam met 'n waarneembare berghorison opneem. 'N Projeksie van die pad in haar beeld gee 'n kruising met die grond in azimut 152 ± 2 °, wat net suid van die landpunt by Gansbaai is. Die beeld van Riaan Potgieter het nie die horison gewys nie, maar hy kon die posisies van die twee helder bars in die trein aanwys ten opsigte van plaaslike landmerke, waaruit ek azimute gemeet het as 144 ° en 120 °. Naby in Vermont het Janeke Maroudas haar beeld ongeveer 10 sekondes na die sigbare vuurbal geneem en uit haar rigting het ek 'n kruising met die grond in azimut ongeveer 144 ° gemeet. Analiseer Kleyn se beeld verder oos, is die enigste waarin die trein van links na regs is soos sy dit gesien het, wat die pad na die weste van haar ligging beperk. Die azimutaanwysings wat van hierdie treinbeelde afgelei word, word in Figuur 3 getoon, en hoewel daar 'n mate van onenigheid is, word die moontlike voetspoor van verbrokkeling verminder tot die getoonde gebied.
Visuele voorkoms
Diegene wat die sigbare gang van die meteoor aanskou het, het 'n gloeiende bal met 'n stert beskryf, vinnig beweeg, met ten minste twee helder flitse en 'n rookspoor agtergelaat wat enkele minute aangehou het. Aldiana Kotze sien 'n groot bal rooi oranje vlamme, terwyl Ree du Toit sê die kop lyk soos 'n baie groot traan, en Rozanne Groenewald het gesê dit lyk soos 'n traan met 'n lang brandende stert. Dit lyk asof hierdie beskrywings ooreenstem met die montering van beelde in Figuur 4, wat die voorkoms in verskillende stadiums van sy pad toon, gesien vanaf Malmesbury.
Die totale duur van die sigbare gang is moeilik om vas te stel, aangesien die meteoor reeds met die ontbrandingsproses voor sy twee helder flitse begin het, wat blykbaar die meeste mense se aandag getrek het. Die meteoor het reeds met sy sigbare gang begin voordat dit die gesigsveld in die Malmesbury-kamerabeeldmateriaal betree het, en het minder as 2 sekondes geduur voordat dit uitgebrand het. Verskeie persone het die duur bereken, van 1-2 sekondes tot ongeveer 7 sekondes. Die werklike duur is waarskynlik tussen hierdie twee uiterstes.
Presies die helfte van die verslae het beskrywings van kleur gegee. Die meeste genoemde is wit (30%), geel (26%) en oranje / rooi (30%). 'N Klein aantal noem blou en groen. Die kleure wat in die omgewing van die paadjie gesien is, was uitsluitlik helderwit of geel, en almal wat ander kleure gesien het, insluitend oranje, rooi, groen en blou, was in die Kaapstad-omgewing geleë.
Baie het beskryf hoe die vuurbal 'n aanhoudende trein verlaat het. Analise Kleyn het gesê dat dit 'n rookspoor met twee helder kolle agtergelaat het, en Ree du Toit het gesê dat die vuurbal opgebreek het voordat hy die horison bereik het en twee wit strepe in die lug gelaat het. Dewald Jonker het gesê 'die rookwolk het maklik twee minute geduur'. Jaco Koekemoer het 'n uitstekende beskrywing van die vuurbal- en rookroete gegee, en sy beskrywings word hier volledig weergegee
‘Skielik sien ek uit die hoek van my oog 'n verblindende goudkleurige flits in die rigting van Gansbaai. Ek het na die ooste gekyk. Onmiddellik na die flits het ek gesien wat lyk soos 'n baie vinnig bewegende voorwerp ... Toe ek na die contrail kyk, merk ek op dat dit redelik dun is en dink toe dat dit eintlik rook van 'n fakkel is. Die kontreël bly ongeveer anderhalf minuut sigbaar. Die dikte van die roete het my ook afgegooi, omdat dit baie dun was. Die wind het die reguit lyn vinnig verwoes en binne sekondes was dit net 'n vlek van 'n kronkelende lyn in die lug. Die contrail was eintlik baie hoog. Dit was nie & # 8217; t presies bokant ons, dit was meer suid, waarskynlik oor die see. Dit het gelyk of dit net 'n bietjie Suid was, maar weens die hoogte van die kontreël was dit waarskynlik meer suid as wat dit gelyk het.
Die voorkoms van die trein is goed te sien in die beelde wat deur Riaan Potgieter (links) en Analise Kleyn (regs) in Figuur 5. geneem is. Ons het die beelde verbeter om besonderhede te beklemtoon, wat die twee ligte kolle wat saamval met die ontploffings en die duidelike duidelik toon. kurkskroef voorkoms van die roete.
Klink gehoor
Die visuele meteoor is gevolg deur hoorbare geluide en trillings in die omgewing van die paadjie. Waarnemers in Kaapstad en omgewing noem nie dat hulle geluide hoor nie, en sommige het selfs spesifiek gesê dat daar geen geluide gehoor is nie, alhoewel enige geluide 'n tydjie na die sigbare meteoor sou neem om daardie plekke te bereik. Die verste plek waarvandaan klanke beslis gerapporteer is, was Franschhoek, waar Ian Newton gesê het dat hy 'n paar minute na die meteoor 'gehoor het wat na 'n soniese klank geklink het. Byna al die terreine rondom Hermanus, Gansbaai en Pearly Beach het effekte ervaar. Vanuit Hermanus het Marg James ongeveer 'n minuut later ''n harde gedreun soos 'n donder' gerapporteer, Louis Loubser het gesê dat hy gedink het dit was 'n aardbewing, en Riaan Potgieter het die meteoor gesien terwyl hy met sy hond geloop het, en net meer as 'n minuut later 'n harde gehoor ' boom 'wat veroorsaak het dat mense uit hul huise gekom het. Ook van Hermanus het Guido Di Giannatale die tyd van die flits op 'n kringtelevisiekamera opgeneem, wat 136 sekondes later deur 'soos 'n sonic boom' gevolg is. Van De Kelders het Annalize Kleyn die rooktrein afgebeeld en 15-20 sekondes later geluide gehoor 'soos harde donderweer en gevoel soos skud'. In dieselfde omgewing het Sonja Rademeyer gesê dat sy 'n 'harde slag soos donderweer en dit voel soos 'n aardbewing' hoor. Van Pearly Beach was Sarah Coronaios buite en het berig 'twee ontploffings baie naby aan mekaar, gevolg deur lae gedreun vir ongeveer 8 sekondes, soos 'n pap band op gruis'. Barnie Huysamer het kort na die flits gesê hy hoor dreun wat ongeveer 15 sekondes geduur het, en Retha Vos hoor 'dreun soos donderweer, maar amper asof daar twee ontploffings was'.
Gevolgtrekkings
Uit die beskikbare verslae kom ons tot die gevolgtrekking dat 'n meteoroïde uit die suide van die land nader gekom het en die atmosfeer om 20h14m53s SAST in 'n steil hoek ten ooste van Hermanus, waarskynlik naby Gansbaai, binnegekom het. Die bolide het twee ontbindingsgebeurtenisse ondergaan, geskei deur minder as 1 sekonde op ongeveer 46 km hoogte, wat gelei het tot twee helder flitse van lig, 'n aanhoudende trein vir enkele minute sigbaar gelaat, insluitend twee helder wolke waar die verbrokkeling plaasgevind het, en gevolg deur hoorbare geluide met twee ontploffings, gedreun soos donderweer wat vensters en grond laat bewe het.
Erkennings
Die skrywers bedank dr Daniel Cunnama, SAAO, vir verskeie verslae wat via die SAAO-webwerf ingedien is. Figure 1-3 met dank aan Google Earth.
Figuur 1 Plekke van al 42 waarnemers wat verslae en beelde verskaf het. Alle terreine is opgestel, maar as gevolg van opeenhoping in die Kaapstad-omgewing en voorstede, is nie alle etikette op die terrein sigbaar nie.
Figuur 2 Plekke van waarnemers in Kaapse Skiereiland en die suidelike Kaapse kus, met moontlike pad van die bolide aangedui as 'n geel pyl.
Figuur 3 Plekke van waarnemers in die omgewing van die paadjie. Azimut-aanwysings afgelei van beelde van die rooktrein word soos volg getoon: Rooi lyn is die asimut van kruising met grondvlak vanaf Jacqueline Keulemans by Gordonsbaai, geel lyn is die azimut van kruising met grond vanaf Janeke Maroudas in Vermont, blou en groen lyne is azimute van die twee helder sarsies van Riaan Potgieter by Onrus. Die wit ellips dui die rowwe gebied aan waarin die meteoor waarskynlik gedisintegreer het.
Figuur 4 Volgorde van raamgrepe uit Malmesbury-videobeelde. Die boonste raam is die eerste verskyning van die bolide regs bo. Die derde en vyfde rame toon die twee ontploffings. Die laaste raam is onmiddellik voordat die bolide nie meer sigbaar is nie. In sommige rame is minstens drie fragmente sigbaar. Let op, die totale vlugtyd in die Malmesbury-video is net minder as 2 sekondes, en die twee ontploffings word met minder as 1 sekonde geskei.
Figuur 5 Beelde van aanhoudende trein vanaf terrein 42 (links deur Riaan Potgieter) en 22 (regs deur Analise Kleyn). Let op die veranderde rigting van die pad soos gesien deur die twee waarnemers van verskillende plekke. Die twee helder gebiede is die wolke wat agtergelaat word deur die twee ontploffings langs die paadjie. Let ook op die kurkskroef-voorkoms in Riaan se afbeelding links. Albei beelde is verwerk om besonderhede te verbeter
'N Kort geskiedenis van meteoriete uit die eerste opname van meteoorstort
Vroeër in die verlede toe mense nie veel aandag aan meteoriese buie gegee het nie, het hulle dit gekoppel aan weerlig en ander natuurverskynsels, maar een belangrike gebeurtenis in die geskiedenis van meteore het alles verander. Dit het basies die meteoriese sterrekunde gebaar.
'N Meteoroïde is 'n klein rotsagtige of metaalagtige liggaam in die buitenste ruim. Meteoroïede is aansienlik kleiner as asteroïdes, en wissel in grootte van klein korrels tot een meter wye voorwerpe. Voorwerpe kleiner as hierdie word geklassifiseer as mikrometeoroïede of ruimte stof. Die meeste is fragmente van komete of asteroïdes, terwyl ander botsingsafval is wat uit liggame soos die Maan of Mars uitgestoot word.
65 miljoen jaar gelede 'n meteoor het dinosourusse van die aarde af gevee
Daar word vermoed dat 'n baie groot asteroïde-impak 65 miljoen jaar gelede, wat die 300 kilometer wye (180 myl wye) Chicxulub-krater op die Yucatan-skiereiland tot stand gebring het, bygedra het tot die uitwissing van ongeveer 75 persent van die see- en landdiere op Aarde destyds, insluitende die dinosourusse. (8.1)
Die eerste meteorietrek in die geskiedenis is op 12 November 1799 opgeneem
Andrew Ellicott Douglass, 'n vroeë Amerikaanse sterrekundige, was getuie van die meteorietreën van Leonids vanaf 'n skip buite die Florida Keys. Douglass, wat later 'n assistent van die beroemde sterrekundige Percival Lowell geword het, het in sy dagboek geskryf dat die 'hele hemel lyk asof dit met lugrakette verlig word, en in 'n oneindige rigting vlieg, en ek het voortdurend verwag dat sommige van hulle sou val. die vaartuig. Hulle het aangehou totdat hulle deur die lig van die son na dagbreek geblus is. ' Douglass se joernaalinskrywing is die eerste bekende rekord van 'n meteorietreën in Noord-Amerika.
Later is ontdek dat Leonids Meteor Shower 'n jaarlikse gebeurtenis is wat rondom middel November plaasvind
Die Leonids-meteorietbui is 'n jaarlikse gebeurtenis wat elke 33 jaar of so sterk verbeter word deur die verskyning van die komeet Tempel-Tuttle. Wanneer die komeet terugkom, kan die Leoniede snelhede produseer tot duisende meteore per uur wat die lug op 'n helder nag kan verlig. Douglass was getuie van een so 'n manifestasie van die Leonids-stort, en die daaropvolgende terugkeer van die komeet Tempel-Tuttle in 1833 word beskou as 'n inspirasie vir die eerste georganiseerde studie van meteoriese sterrekunde.
Die meteore het nie veel aandag gekry tot die skitterende meteoorstorm van 1833 nie
Alhoewel meteore al sedert antieke tye bekend is, was dit eers vroeg in die negentiende eeu bekend dat dit 'n astronomiese verskynsel was. Voor dit is hulle in die Weste gesien as 'n atmosferiese verskynsel, soos weerlig, en was hulle nie verbind met vreemde verhale van rotse wat uit die lug geval het nie.
Die nag van 12-13 November 1833 is nie net die ontdekking van die Leonid-meteorietbui nie, maar ook die feit dat die meteoriese sterrekunde gebore is. Gedurende die ure ná sononder op 12 November het sommige sterrekundiges 'n ongewone aantal meteore in die lug opgemerk, maar dit was die vroeë oggendure van die 13de wat die grootste indruk by die mense van Oos-Noord-Amerika gelaat het. Gedurende die vier uur wat dagbreek voorafgegaan het, is die lug deur meteore verlig. (8.2)
Dit is van die bekendste jaarlikse meteorietbuie in die geskiedenis
Klein liggame van 'n meteoroïde is kort-kort in die naghemel te sien, maar as iemand die magiese buie uit die lug wil sien wat mettertyd voortgeduur het, moet hulle hul sterrekykervaring beplan onder die gegewe tyd van die jaar . Entoesiaste het ook 'n paar dinge byderhand om die ervaring onvergeetlik te maak.
'N Meteorkalender wat u sal help met die buie When & amp Wheres of the Meteor:
1. Kwadrantiede gedurende 3-4 Januarie vanaf 23:00 tot dagbreek teen ongeveer 60-200 meteoriete / uur
2. Aquarids gedurende 5-6 Mei vanaf 01:30 tot dagbreek teen ongeveer 40-85 meteoriete / uur
3. Perseïede gedurende die 11-12 Augustus vanaf skemer tot dagbreek teen ongeveer 60-100 meteoriete / uur
4. Tweelinge gedurende 13-14 Desember vanaf 19:00 tot dagbreek teen ongeveer 60-120 meteoriete / uur
Senderopsies
Hierin word 'n paar aantekeninge gegee oor die sendertipes wat tans beskikbaar is vir gebruik in radio-meteoorwerk uit Brittanje.
- VHF-analoog-televisie-uitsaaistasies: dit gebruik die visiedraer-sein van 'n verre televisiesender. Ongelukkig is die meeste analoë TV-dienste die afgelope paar jaar na digitale uitsaaiseine gemigreer, wat nie vir meteoriese opsporing gebruik kan word nie.
- VHF FM-radioband II: Alhoewel dit ideaal is vir die opsporing van meteorologiese stelsels 3, is hierdie band nie geskik vir stelsels 1 of 2. Die VHF FM-band is oor die algemeen ook vol.
- Amateurradio-bakens: Daar is 'n aantal amateurbakens van 6 meter (50 MHz) en 2 meter (140 MHz) wat geskik is vir meteoorwerk. Die gebruik van golflengtes om frekwensies aan te dui, is terloops 'n algemene radioradiokonvensie. Een so 'n voorbeeld is die baken wat deur BRAMS in België bedryf word (sien http://brams.aeronomie.be/), wat deur waarnemers in die suide en ooste van Engeland gemonitor kan word.
- VVS Beacon: Dit is 'n baken wat toegewy is aan meteoorwerk, wat werk op 49 990 kHz. Dit is 'n suiwer draaggolfsein met sirkelvormige polarisasie, en & # 8216 opwaarts & # 8217 stralend op 50 Watt, geleë by Astrolab Iris (50 ° 49 & # 8242 N, 2 ° 55 & # 8242 O) in Ieper, België.
- Ruimteradar: Baie amateurs gebruik nou GRAVES & # 8211 'n Franse radar vir ruimtebewaking naby Dijon in Sentraal-Frankryk & # 8211 as hul teikensender. Die radar-transmissie is 'n ongemoduleerde draergolf wat deur die lug gevee word met behulp van 'n fase-reeks-senderantenne. Dit & # 8217s frekwensie is 143,050 MHz. Die ontvanger moet op CW gestel word. Aangesien GRAVES 'n militêre opset is, is gedetailleerde spesifikasies vir die radarstelsel nie maklik beskikbaar nie. Vandaar moes meteoriese waarnemers aflei hoe die balke daarvan oor die lug vee. Die oortuiging was dat die boog waaroor die balke gevee het suidwaarts van Dijon af was. Daar is egter heelwat bewyse, gebaseer op die waarnemings deur Richard Fleet en ander, wat daarop dui dat sommige van die uitsendings & # 8220 terugsak & # 8221 noordwaarts en dus dit moet moontlik wees om meteore oor Noord-Frankryk op te spoor en moontlik ook die Engelse kanaal met GRAVES as die & # 8220beacon & # 8221. Dit open die moontlikheid van korrelasie van radioopsporings met meteore wat van die Verenigde Koninkryk afgebeeld is. Hoe verder u vanaf die sender geleë is, hoe minder gunstig is die meetkunde om die eggo's op te tel. As aanduiding van die moontlike gebruik van GRAVES uit die Verenigde Koninkryk, maak Bill Ward (naby Glasgow) egter suksesvol gebruik van hierdie sender.
2012 Perseids
Na 'n maanverligte Perseid-maksimum in 2011, het ons gehoop om nog baie Perseïdes te sien in 2012. Waarnemings van die vroeë Perseïede sou belemmer word deur die Volmaan van 2 Augustus en die maan sou traag wees om daarna uit die lug van die aand te beweeg. Met Perseid maximum sou die maan egter net 'n kwynende halfmaan wees en dus meer 'n irritasie in die later gedeelte van die nag eerder as 'n belemmering wees.
Ongelukkig het die wolke nie saamgewerk nie en was die helder lug skaars. Gedetailleerde visuele verslae is egter ingedien deur Alastair McBeath (Morpeth Northumberland), Graham Winstanley (Bassingham, Lincs), Jane Mills(Thrapston, Northants) en Tony Markham (Prei, personeel) en radiouitslae is ingedien deur Alan Heath. Opsommings van visuele resultate is ook op die SPA Forum geplaas deur Mike Feist (Portslade, Sussex), Robin Scagell(Flackwell Heath, Bucks), Kevvek (East Devon) en koueveldgrens (Brugge). Vir meer besonderhede, sien forum.popastro.com/viewtopic.php
Peter Meadows (Great Baddow, Essex) kon beelde van verskeie helder meteore gedurende die Perseid-periode met sy videostelsel opneem. Die onderstaande beelde toon a Perseid by 23:55 UT aan 4 Aug. en a suidelike Delta Aquarid by 23:33 UT aan 11 Aug..
Gelukkig kan ons agterkom wat ons gemis het deur te kyk na verslae van regoor die wêreld wat aan die Internasionale Meteororganisasie (IMO) voorgelê is. Hul aktiwiteitskurwe (sien imo.net/live/perseids2012/) dui op 'n piek-ZHR van ongeveer 100 gedurende die dag van 12 Augustus, in ooreenstemming met voorspellings.
Werklike formule vir meteoriese waarnemings - Sterrekunde
Mount Rainier is nie net waar die baanbrekende UFO-figuur Kenneth Arnold "vlieënde pierings" in 1947 gesien het nie, die majestueuse berg speel eintlik 'n meer direkte rol in saucerologie.
Majestueuse Mount Rainier in die Cascade-berge in Washington lok blykbaar vlieënde pierings, selfs help hulle om hulle te produseer. Gedurende 'n paar dae in Oktober 2013 kon een van ons (Nickell) twee keer oorvlieg en selfs die seldsame hange (meer as 5 500 voet) van die steeds aktiewe vulkaan verken en verken. Hier sit ons koppe bymekaar om na Mount Rainier se voortgesette rol in die geskiedenis van UFOlogy te kyk.
Mirage Saucers
Soos studente van saucerologie weet, het die private vlieënier Kenneth Arnold beroemd nege 'vlieënde pierings' in 'n patroon gesien oor die Cascade-berge in die
omgewing van Mount Rainier op 24 Junie 1947.
Arnold se UFO's is op verskillende maniere geïnterpreteer: vliegtuie wat in formasie vlieg, 'n trop Amerikaanse wit pelikane, ballonne, selfs druppels water op sy
vliegtuig se voorruit. Een van ons (McGaha, in Nickell 2007, 15–16) het egter veronderstel dat dit waarskynlik is dat die verskillende skuldiges opties was
verskynsels genaamd "lugspieëls op die bergtop". 1
Hierdie verskynsel, soos getoon op foto's (bv. Menzel 1953, 212), gee die voorkoms van sweefende, pieringvormige vaartuie. Weens die voorwaardes wat
produseer 'n lugspieëling, is dit die bergtoppe self wat in kunsmatige ophanging bo die landskap verskyn.
Gegewe die helder lug en gladde lug waarin Arnold die vlieënde pierings sien, tesame met die hoek van die son (50,4 grade bo die horison), alles
nodig was, was 'n temperatuur inversie om die formule te voltooi. Normaalweg word lug kouer met die toename in hoogte. Soms egter
die situasie word omgekeer. Byvoorbeeld, die grond wat snags vinnig afkoel, kan die lug direk daaroor afkoel, en aangesien die laag daarbo is
natuurlik warmer, die resultaat is 'n temperatuurinversie. Dit veroorsaak dat ligstrale wat deur die lug beweeg, buig, met beelde wat sodoende verdraai word en,
in die geval van lugspieëlings op die bergtoppe, wat ook verskyn verplaas (Sachs 1980, 321).
Arnold se eie uitsprake oor sy waarneming help om die saak te versterk omdat net sulke lugspieëling verantwoordelik is. Hy het gesê dit lyk asof die voorwerpe weerspieël
sonlig en dat dit selfs soos 'weerkaatsings' gelyk het (soos deur sy vliegtuigvenster, wat hy nagegaan en uitgesluit het). Inderdaad, “die flikker wat hulle in die
son het my laat dink aan die weerkaatsing van 'n groot spieël, 'het hy gesê, en hulle het' gelyk asof hulle wieg '(Bequette 1947). Die hele effek sou gewees het
versterk deur die posisie van die son, en sy lig weerkaats die boonste oppervlak van die lugspieëling. Hy het gesê dat die "pieringagtige" voorwerpe ook was
'Vlieg baie naby die bergtoppe', skynbaar 'van die hoë bergtoppe in en uit geswaai', en hy het tot die gevolgtrekking gekom, was 'n formasie 'in die
omgewing van vyf kilometer lank ”- inderdaad 'n groot eskader! Hy het hulle gesien — hy bereken uit “twee definitiewe punte”, Mount Adams en Mount Rainier — as 100
myl weg, en hy het so naby aan hulle gekom as drie en twintig myl (aangehaal in Bequette 1947 Clark 1998, I: 139–43).
Mount Rainier was nie direk deel van die lugspieël wat deur ander berge in die Washington Cascade-reeks veroorsaak is nie, maar Arnold het die
“Pierings” vlieg ongeveer suid vanaf Mount Baker in die rigting van Mount Rainier (Clark 1998, I: 139). Daarom tipeer ons laasgenoemde as,
metafories, 'n "magneet" vir UFO's.
Heilige berg?
Op die herdenking van kenneth Arnold se waarneming, sê een UFO-skrywer, 'maak ufoloë die tog na Rainier om die geboorte van saucerologie te herdenk.' Hy
sou miskien 'trek' deur 'pelgrimstog' vervang het, aangesien dit lyk asof hy die berg verhef tot die status van 'n Olympus of 'n Sinai. Hy noem Rainier as een van
verskeie UFO-"hotspots", dit wil sê "Gebiede met gekonsentreerde UFO-aktiwiteit wat deur UFOlogists as 'UFO-laboratoriums' behandel kan word" (Glenday 1999, 120, 123).
Maar behalwe vir die waarneming van Arnold, noem hy vir die Rainier-gebied slegs 'die berugte' Maury Island'-voorval, waarin 'n hond doodgemaak en 'n seun beseer is
deur puin wat deur een van ses UFO's ontslaan word ”(Glenday 1999, 123). Arnold was ook in daardie saak van 1947 betrokke, maar as 'n vermeende ondersoeker. Hy was uit
sy diepte, en dit het op die lugmagondersoekers geval om die saak as 'n klug te openbaar, bevestig deur bekentenisse van die oortreders (Clark 1998, 2: 612–14).
Mount Rainier speel nou eintlik 'n meer direkte rol in saucerologie en help inderdaad om wat Hendry (1979, 65) 'pieringagtige verskynings' noem - te genereer.
striking phenomenon whose secrets we take up next.
Rainier as a Saucer Creator
Mountains like Mount Rainier actually help to form clouds into the shapes of flying saucers! Called lenticular (“lens-shaped”) clouds, these smooth,
symmetrical formations may take the simple form of a double-convex lens, or they may be much more elaborate, piled into a stack of two or more, as if with
a spaceship’s undercarriage below. Such clouds may appear singly, or in groups resembling a squadron of flying saucers (Sachs 1980, 66).
These cloud saucers are seen in and around mountainous areas. They are formed when stable moist air flows over hills or mountains, causing large standing
waves to form on the prominence’s downwind side. Should the temperature at the crest of a wave drop to the dew point (the temperature at which vapor
condenses) a lenticular cloud may be formed. (Rarely, lenticular clouds may form where no mountain exists, when a front causes shear winds.) Lenticular
clouds typically remain stationary and have long durations (Hendry 1979, 65 “Lenticular Cloud” 2013).
A beautiful array of layered clouds was photographed for instance over Sao Paulo, Brazil, with a mountain range in the distance (Sachs 1980, 66). Meer
relevant to the present discussion, another source points out that on some days Seattle, Washington, “is treated to an unusual sky show when lenticular
clouds form near Mt. Rainier,” which looms less than one hundred kilometers to the southeast (“Astronomy” 2009).
Lenticular clouds over Mount Rainier Lenticular clouds can actually be reported as UFOs. Investigator Allan Hendry (1979, 65) cites a case involving confusion over these saucer lookalikes, “in
which five to six lenticular clouds hung stationary over Peavine Mountain for half an hour in Reno, Nevada,” then “descended into a conventional cloud
layer.” Moreover, like airplanes, weather balloons, planets, “shooting stars,” and other aerial phenomena, these cloud formations are subject to
atmospheric distortion—caused, for example, by intervening fog, ice crystals, whirlpools of air, and the like. The resulting distorted image may appear
especially saucerlike (Sachs 1980, 201). It is possible that among the UFO cases that remain unsolved a few could involve lenticular clouds, possibly
viewed under unusual conditions.
One of us (Nickell) spotted a single lenticular cloud hovering right over the top of Mount Rainier. He was riding in a shuttle to the Seattle airport with
physicist and CFI board member Leonard Tramiel (the day after the CFI Summit, a conference in Tacoma, October 24–27, 2013). Some fellow passengers at
first thought it was just the mountain’s snowcap, but Leonard confirmed it was indeed a lenticular cloud. Mount Rainer was then obscured by trees and
buildings for the next few minutes and, when it next came into view the cloud was gone. Or, as Leonard happily quipped, “It flew away!”
Airship Visit of 1896
We turn now to a mysterious UFO sighting at Mount Rainier that occurred half a century before Arnold’s saucers heralded the wave of modern UFOs. Dit was
reported by a couple who described a strange light in the night sky near the summit of the famous mountain. Their account is related in books like Weird Washington (Davis and Eufrasio 2008, 73), but, as one might imagine, there is more to the story.
The original account appeared in the Tacoma Daily Ledger, November 27, 1896, p. 4, under the heading, “What was it? Wonderful apparition seen over
Tacoma.” It informs that on the previous Tuesday (November 24) at about twelve o’clock at night, druggist George St. John and his wife were lying abed and
saw from their Tacoma Avenue window a strange light “east of Mount Tacoma” (now Rainier). “Mr. St. John,” the newspaper reports, “describes it as having
the appearance of a brilliant electric light and looked to be nearly the size of an arc electric light. It flashed often and each time sent forth various
colored rays of light, shooting out from the center in every direction, like spokes from the hub of a wheel.” The couple watched the light as it moved
slowly from one window to another. The account continued, “It seemed to have a wavering motion and swayed back and forth in its course through the heavens
like a vessel at sea in a storm.”
It is important to note that this report came amidst the great wave of “airship fever” that occurred in the United States between November 17, 1896, and
the middle of May 1897. Fueled by science fiction interest in the possibility of heavier-than-air flight, the rash of sightings began when something
resembling an “electric arc lamp” passed over Sacramento, California, in the early evening of November 17, 1896. Significantly, this was during the annual
Leonid meteor shower (its peak in 1896 was on November 14), suggesting it was a large, bright meteor known as a fireball. Newspapers
hyped the story, prompting people to look to the skies, and soon almost anything seen in the heavens was thought to be another “airship” sighting (Nickell
1995, 190–192 Bartholomew and Howard 1998, 21–79).
What caused the Rainier light display? We considered a number of possibilities, from the remote to the plausible. We were doubtful of its having been a
copycat hoax (the witnesses were aware of the Sacramento event but were considered reputable) (“Seen at Tacoma” 1896). For a variety of reasons, we doubted
the possibility of a shared hypnagogic (“waking dream”) experience, although such hallucinations between wakefulness and sleep often involve bright lights
and visions (Mavromatis 1987, 14–52). We thought of ball lightning, other unusual forms of lightning, and electrical discharges such as St. Elmo’s Fire
(Corliss 1995, 17–55), but they are rare and seem inconsistent with the apparent weather conditions in Tacoma at the time. A scintillating (“twinkling”)
star could have produced some of the effects (a planet can scintillate too), but it would have taken a very long time to have moved from one window to
another (see Nickell 2012 Hendry 1979, 26).
Because the St. Johns’ experience occurred during the Alpha Monocerotids meteor shower (which peaked on November 21), we considered that the “flashes” the
couple reported were possibly meteore, the arc light effect a very large meteor called a fireball, and the radiating colors possibly
caused by a bolide, “a bright shooting meteor (fireball), especially one which explodes when it is near the end of its path in the atmosphere”
(Mandel 1969, 61). However, this scenario, too, seemed an ill fit with portions of the witnesses’ description. Again, what was the “airship”?
Analysis
Die San Francisco Call of November 28 had more information. The couple “watched the heavenly stranger over half an hour.” Reported the newspaper:
“Mr. St. John says that the varicolored lights were shot forth in all directions. They were emitted from each end and both sides” of the supposed airship.
“Some of the lights were white, others red, blue and green. . . . When all the lights were shining the aerial monster seemed encased in a brilliant
glow. . . .”
Significantly, the newspaper noted, “The moonlight was not strong enough to permit a distinct view of Mount Tacoma [Rainier], but the airship was seen to
approach the neighborhood of the mountain at what seemed to be its exact height, and dart hither and thither as if an exploration was in progress.” At
length, the couple tired of watching the scene—suggesting it may have been less dramatic than we might otherwise have imagined—“and went to sleep” (“Seen
at Tacoma” 1896).
The radiating colored lights scarcely seem consistent with an imagined airship, or even, for that matter, an extraterrestrial craft. Rather, it seems like iets that had an oblong shape (with ends and sides) was hovering, glowing with a bright white light while occasionally rocking in place and
causing diffraction of the light, thus producing iridescent colors.
We think this iets near the summit of Mount Rainier was most likely a lenticular cloud—forming and reforming itself in place (as such clouds
do) and consisting largely of ice crystals. These crystals served to diffuse the light from the moon (which at that date and time would have been above and
behind the cloud, 2 at an angular distance of 35 degrees), causing it to glow. As it shimmered in place, it sometimes flashed and sometimes
emitted colored rays. It is also quite possible that there were multiple lenticular clouds. (We should mention that the St. Johns’ nineteenth-century
windows would have consisted of a wavy glass that, covered lightly in frost, could itself have produced some of the effects.) (For a discussion of all
these light phenomena, see Minnaert 1974, 232–45.)
According to an authoritative source (Dunlop 2003, 94–95, 108–109), iridescence is among the most common yet most overlooked of optical phenomena. Daardie
produced by moonlight, while often more visible, is largely ignored. Iridescence appears “as bands of color around the edges of thin clouds,” including altocumulus, altostratus, en cirrocumulus lenticularis. It is often strongest when the light source is an angular distance of
30–35 degrees. Significantly, the moon on the date and time of the St. Johns’ experience was at 35 degrees and was 78 percent illuminated.
Conclusions
As we trust this discussion illustrates, mysteries dart about Mount Rainier and the other mountains of the Cascade range. But mysteries are meant to be
solved, and the scientific approach—which seeks to explain rather than hype or dismiss—is the best means to that end.
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to CFI librarian Lisa Nolan for much helpful research, and SI typesetter Paul Loynes for patience during many revisions.
Notes
1. Menzel (1953, 205–24) provides detailed explanations of the physics and optics of mirages. See also his appendix, “Theory of Mirages,” 300–10.
2. From the St. Johns’ viewpoint, the summit of Mount Rainier was at less than 4 degrees from the horizontal, while the moon on the date given was at 35
degrees. It was 78 percent illuminated.
Verwysings
Astronomy Picture of the Day. 2009. Online at http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap090203.html accessed November 1, 2013.
Bartholomew, Robert E., and George S. Howard. 1998. UFOs & Alien Contact. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
Bequette, Bill. 1947. Boise Flyer Maintains He Saw ’Em (June 26) and Arnold Insists Tale of Flying Objects OK (June 27), East Oregonian
(Pendleton, OR).
Clark, Jerome. 1998. The UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd ed., in 2 volumes. Detroit, Michigan: Omnigraphics.
Corliss, William R. 1995. Handbook of Unusual Natural Phenomena. New York: Grammercy Books.
Davis, Jeff, and Al Eufrasio. 2008. Weird Washington. New York: Sterling.
Dunlop, Storm. 2003. The Weather Identification Handbook. Guilford, CT: The Lyons Press.
Glenday, Craig. 1999. The UFO Investigator’s Handbook. Philadelphia: Running Press.
Hendry, Allan. 1979. The UFO Handbook. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Mandel, Siegfried. 1969. Dictionary of Science. New York: Dell.
Mavromatis, Andreas. 1987. Hypnagogia: The Unique State of Consciousness Between Wakefulness and Sleep. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Menzel, Donald H. 1953. Flying Saucers. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Minnaert, Marcell. 1974. Light and Color in the Outdoors. Reprinted New York: Springer-Verlag, 1993.
Nickell, Joe. 1995. Entities: Angels, Spirits, Demons, and Other Alien Beings. Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books.
———. 2007. Mysterious entities of the Pacific Northwest, part II. Skeptical Inquirer 31(2) (March/April): 14–17.
———. 2012. States of mind: Some perceived ET encounters. Skeptical Inquirer 36(6) (November/December): 12–15.
Sachs, Margaret. 1980. The UFO Encyclopedia. New York: Perigee Books.
Seen at Tacoma. 1896. San Francisco Call 80: 181 (November 28) text from California Digital Newspaper Collection.
Anybody Ever See A UFO?
Likewise most "indentifiables" are "probables", in that we don't have definitive proof that those blinking lights passing overhead are an airliner. This is where some of the disconnect comes between "true believers" and those "skeptically interested" the former says that it must be an "alien craft" if you can't positively identify it, while the latter says it was "probably" a weather balloon, mirage, satellite, etc.
#277 t_image
Likewise most "indentifiables" are " probables ", in that we don't have definitive proof that those blinking lights passing overhead are an airliner. This is where some of the disconnect comes between "true believers" and those "skeptically interested" the former says that it must be an "alien craft" if you can't positively identify it, while the latter says it was "probably" a weather balloon, mirage, satellite, etc.
So the disconnect you mention is just another example of "confirmation bias" which I have mentioned in a previous post.
But the suggestion we altogether change meanings of words because you apply a strict literal meaning to a word that doesn't apply to its ordinary usage is pointless, as I again mentioned in an earlier post:
To demand "definitive proof" for everything is not how we live.
In fact Rene Descartes might even question if you epee are a real human being, we CN readers don't have immediate "definitive proof."
You could possibly be some sophisticated AI robot code that injects posts onto the forum.
And that we ordinarily give posts we see the benefit of the doubt that they were created by humans,
could be just another matter of confirmation bias.
Either way, both sides need to lighten up and not take it too seriously (whether there MUST be aliens or we need definitive proof otherwise),
until the invasion happens, that is.
#278 epee
My apologies. I did not realize you had covered this feature of the phenomena previously.
I am sure my programmer will address this fault in a future update.
#279 BillP
Likewise most "indentifiables" are "probables", in that we don't have definitive proof that those blinking lights passing overhead are an airliner. This is where some of the disconnect comes between "true believers" and those "skeptically interested" the former says that it must be an "alien craft" if you can't positively identify it, while the latter says it was "probably" a weather balloon, mirage, satellite, etc.
Valid observation. But it points out bias from both populations really. So the skeptical believers are in reality true believers also, just having a different bias structure. Neither is showing objectivity. You can find this bias structure present in a lot of science as well unfortunately. The "unbiased interested" group would have reacted quite differently from either of the ways you presented and responded more like "This looks intriguing, but there is not sufficient data to reach any conclusion with a high confidence level. Let's figure out if there would be a way to gather a reliable set of data relative to this phenomena. Until then, it remains unknown so it could be something currently known or currently unknown."
As a side, IMO when "absolute proof" is demanded, this goes outside the range of most science. Making solid and unrefutable determinations is the stuff of laws in science. Much of science does not converge to a law being 100% assured, but remains probabilistic and in the theoretical, so just highly confident given the present data. Much in cosmological science is no where near 100%, even though scientists in that realm often talk as if it is
Edited by BillP, 27 April 2018 - 10:58 AM.
#280 epee
Valid observation. But it points out bias from both populations really. So the skeptical believers are in reality true believers also, just having a different bias structure. Neither is showing objectivity. You can find this bias structure present in a lot of science as well unfortunately. The "unbiased interested" group would have reacted quite differently from either of the ways you presented and responded more like "This looks intriguing, but there is not sufficient data to reach any conclusion with a high confidence level. Let's figure out if there would be a way to gather a reliable set of data relative to this phenomena. Until then, it remains unknown so it could be something currently known or currently unknown."
As a side, IMO when "absolute proof" is demanded, this goes outside the range of most science. Making solid and unrefutable determinations is the stuff of laws in science. Much of science does not converge to a law being 100% assured, but remains probabilistic and in the theoretical, so just highly confident given the present data. Much in cosmological science is no where near 100%, even though scientists in that realm often talk as if it is
But the observer who who sees a dull red light moving linearly across the night sky at a constant rate has every reason to believe that light is a satellite, even though he cannot, without provided references, prove it. Unlike some, I believe that the "UFO" phenomena is worthy of some degree of study, in behavioral science as well as physical science, and I do not dismiss the mention of such with the wave of hand and dismissive language. Likewise, I do not believe for a second that any nation on this Earth would not pay attention to good reports of physical intrusion of its airspace by foreign entities long before physical evidence of those entities falls in their collective laps. This is where things get weird what does the existence/non-existence of government investigation mean?
#281 barbie
In my 50 plus years of observing I have NEVER seen anything in the sky that couldn't be scientifically explained or identified.
#282 beanerds
Yes , totally dark and silent , 'V' shaped travelling east to west blocking out the milkyway's stars as it moved , took probably 3 minutes to cross the whole sky , gave me the heeby-jeebies .
Looked about 1/2 a degree across in relationship to the stars behind it ..
Edited by beanerds, 27 April 2018 - 11:38 PM.
#283 walle
Broad day lite, less than 500yds away about the size of a school bus, all silver with no wings, rotors, no markings or even rivets or panel lines and most of all, no sound! My crew and I watched it maneuver up and over a ridge for about 1/2 mile. Sorry, but anyone who thinks they are not here is just fooling themselves.
#284 brentwood
Beanerds, if this happened in the US SW, I would say it was some experimental craft, but in Australia?
Walle, this sounds exactly what a paramedic friend of mine saw in the Yukon, many years ago. When they first saw it in the distance, they thought it was an Airstream RV, travelling towards them on the road, in the valley they were in. As they got closer though, they realised that it was on the other side of the valley, floating silently just above the trees. And again, no detail.
Maybe 'barbie', above, could apply their identifying skills to these two latest sightings and in fact my observation on #57?
#285 MeteorBoy
In my more than 50 years of watching the skies I have not seen any UFOs. but I have certainly been responsible for creating them.
I'm retired now but I used to fly many hundreds of weather balloons. The balloons ranged in size from 3 meters to more than 100 meters in diameter. I tracked the instruments of one of them on descent to its landing spot of the grounds of a foreign consulate in Winnipeg. The staff upon discovering it, called in the Bomb Squad. It made front page news that day.
#286 Ballyhoo
I have no explanation or suggestions for what you saw back in November of 1974. While I can offer a few educated guesses, I would simply be speculating.
Some things simply have no known or logical explanation at the time they are observed. Perfect example is as follows.
My cousin's wife lost her brother to one of these "unexplained" events back in 1980. I have spoken to her, her sister and her father regarding this incident and they are truly at a loss as to what happened.
Long story short, At 6:10 PM, June 28, 1980, her brother (Jose Pagán Santos) and a friend (Jose Maldonado Torres) took off in a small Ercoupe plane (marked N3808H) from Santo Domingo (Dominican Republic) to Puerto Rico. The plane was owned by Pagan's father, Jose Pagán Jimenez (Mr. Pagán Jimenez was a full time helicopter pilot for the police department in Puerto Rico. His son, Jose Pagán Santos was also a pilot following in the career footsteps of his father). At around 8:03 PM they isdued a mayday call regarding being lost and seeing a strange object. They advised that the "strange object" made them change their course 3 times and were now lost. They gave their approximate bearing of 35 miles off the coast of Puerto Rico. All transmission was lost after 8:12 PM.
His father, Mr. Pagán Jimenez, was involved in the immediate search for his son. The search lasted 2 days with no trace of them or their airplane found.
After this event, the father and both sisters were never the same again. Refusing to believe that someone could be lost without a trace they continued to search for him. I have attempted to come up with a concrete sollution as to what could have happened that night, but I have been unable to come up with any. I have seen the official police reports regarding the search, listened to the recorded transmission several times, taken into account all weather related possibilities but have come up empty handed. I would love to be able to offer Mr. Pagán Jimenez and his daughters an explanation as to what truly happened that night. Mr. Pagán Jimenez is long retired now, however he is still heartbroken at the loss of his son.
Their loss is recorded all over the internet UFO sites:
https://historiasufo. aldonado-torres
Just do a search for "The Disappearance of N3808H, Puerto Rico, 1980". I can tell you for a fact it is a true story. The immediate family members are real (one if them married to my cousin, all of them now living in Florida). The recorded radio transmission is real. The disappearance is real. The radar verification of their last known position is real.
I would love a rational, fact-based explanation as to what truly happened. I welcome anyone here to check the above story out, do some digging and contact me if any findings are made.
p.s. No, I don't believe they were "abducted by aliens" or "flew into some time warp distortion", etc. There has to be a concrete explanation for their disappearance.
Seems that they probably got caught up in some electrical conductivity probably explained best by an interaction between warm and cool air flows interacting. He says "caught in this stuff" suggests some environmental phenomenon.
#287 Ballyhoo
Okay I have read a lot these posts and I am a sceptic by nature, I don't even fully believe in man-made global warming (some just call that stupid.) I am a chiropractor and I kinda feel about subluxations like I do about global warming, although adjusting people's spines has had positive outcomes in my patients, prob not bc of subluxations.THere are people in my profession, and some patients too, that claim no end of miracle cures from removing subluxations. For me, the best I was ever able to do was to help make some back, neck or shoulder pain go away. (different thread).
But, what I want to make sure of is, because I tend to observe alone: have any of you on this thread known of any observers that have gone out at night and disappeared with no trace like Mr. Jose Pagan Santos in his airplane? I presume if someone was abducted, ****- probed etc, he/she wouldn't be able to e-mail home or text or anything. I have a feeling the answer is "no." but some of these posts have kinda freaked me out a bit, kind of like when you watch a scary movie late at night and you know it's not real -- but still. I am not saying many of these related experiences aren't real -- I am sure these were real experiences. In the final analyses, my theory is, whatever someone saw, or relates what they saw, just bc there is no explanation does not make it alien. It doesn't make it not alien either, but it certainly doesn't make it alien -- it is just "we do not know." I will say one thing: one night I met someone at a dark sky sight and he had me try on his, what was it, 3rd or 4th gen 2x night vision binocs. I swear when I put those things on I saw light dots travelling in all manner of unexplained ways. Someone was asking about the thread, what was it, #57? He wants other people to answer what he saw. I think his point is, 'if you are a naysayer, then explain what I saw.' That is the tough thing about being a solo witness: Only you know what you saw. but apparently, no one has identified.
And to the scientist arguing with the lawyer: no matter how scientific you want to be, don't be so "scientific," as to be unscientific." Science requires an open mind to the possibility of the unanswerable. The legal method of forensic evidence is no less valuable than the scientific method. both aim to answer human questions with as much certainty as possible. Brilliant scientists can be pretty dumb too.
Edited by mantrain, 29 April 2018 - 02:41 AM.
#288 RSersen
In August 2016 I was part of a group that was camping in Stanislaus National Forest in northern California, about 100 miles north of Yosemite. Anyone familiar with that area may know that it is a magnet for UFO sightings, along with Bigfoot encounters and other unexplained phenomena. I had brought my XT8 with me to take advantage of the dark skies.
On our last night there, at about 2-3 am, I had already packed up the scope, and three of us were just hanging around the fire, finishing a couple beers and getting ready to turn in. To the north, low in the sky, I noticed two orange-red spots of light that were moving unlike any aircraft I had ever seen. They would shoot across the horizon at a pretty fast clip, then stop, abruptly change altitude (sometimes up, sometimes down), and then reverse direction across the sky. Sometimes both lights would move in the same direction, other times they took opposite paths.
My first thought were helicopters, perhaps looking for someone, but they were moving way too fast. It eventually dawned on me that I should try to track them in my scope. While I was setting back up, they disappeared for about 10 minutes, and then re-appeared. I couldn't keep my sights on them for very long, but from the glimpses I got, they were triangular-shaped craft, with a trio of rear engines also in a triangular pattern (two on the bottom, one on top). No wings that I could discern. We watched them for another 20-30 minutes while speculating and debating what they were then they disappeared for good.
New Moon Sighting for Syawal 1439H Explained
Bandar Seri Begawan – There is another chance to break the national record for the youngest moon crescent on June 14, 2018 during the upcoming moon crescent observation for Syawal 1439H.
Infographic of Syawal 1439H New Moon Sighting
Reminder: This is only a computational analysis data. The result/declaration of the sighting will be announced through official media by the government.
Space Debris
Space Debris
After polluting the soil, water, and atmosphere of our planet, man has now begun to bespoil the heavens. Waste already has begun to pile up in low Earth orbit (300 to 1,200 miles above the Earth). In fact, of all the man-made objects in low orbit, an estimated 95 percent is junk.
Meteoroids and space debris present a potential hazard to astronauts and spacecraft. This activity demonstrates the penetrating power of a projectile with little mass but with high velocity.
Procedure
Materials Needed:
Raw potato .
Space agencies take the threat of collisions with space debris seriously. NASA has a long-standing set of guidelines to ensure the safety of ISS crew.
Removal and Satellite Servicing
MORE .
A Danger To Future Missions
Of all the landfills to blight the planet, perhaps the biggest garbage collection on all is the one actually orbiting the Earth. In fact, the situation has begun to get so far out of control [.]
News & Events .
(55) Spaceflight Without Escape velocity
(60) Van Allen Belt and Spaceflight
(62) (a) Why are Satellites Launched Eastward?
. and what is a "Sun Synchronous" orbit?
(b) Why are satellites launched from near the equator?
(usually parts of comets or asteroids) that are on a collision course with the Earth are called meteoroids. When meteoroids enter the Earth's atmosphere they are called meteors.
impacts in grazing-incidence telescopes p. 941
J. D. Carpenter, A. Wells, A. F. Abbey and R. M. Ambrosi
DOI:.
METEOR: The bright, transient streak of light produced by a piece of
burning up as it enters the atmosphere at high speed.
METEOR SHOWER: An event where a large number of meteors enter the Earth's atmosphere from the same direction in space at nearly the same time.
". Paul D. Maley. Houston, TX: Future Travel Inc. Retrieved May 14, 2013.
^ Apollo 14 image
^ Wilson, P. M. Knadle, R. T. (June 1972). "Houston, This is Apollo. ". QST (Newington, CT: American Radio Relay League): 60-65.
^ "432 Record, W4HHK Apollo 16 Reception".
The visible streak of light from
is the result of heat as it enters a planet's atmosphere, and the trail of glowing particles that it sheds in its wake is called a meteor, or colloquially a "shooting star" or "falling star".
The spacecraft arrived at Venus in April 2006 and during the summer of 2014 it was sent plunging into the atmosphere to be destroyed, something that is commonly done to remove potentially hazardous
(they crashed it while there was just barely enough fuel still available).
Reactionless Drive Vessels and
Spacecraft using reactionless drive can traverse the interstellar medium at very high fractions of the speed of light. However interstellar space is not empty it contains dust and larger particles of solid matter, as well as thinly spread gases.
The Oort Cloud is made of icy pieces of
the sizes of mountains and sometimes larger, orbiting our Sun as far as 1.6 light years away. This shell of material is thick, extending from 5,000 astronomical units to 100,000 astronomical units.
Meteors
Falling through the Atmosphere Meteor Showers Meteorites
On Earth Quiz
METEOROIDS
Meteoroids are small bodies that travel through space. Meteoroids are smaller than asteroids most are smaller than the size of a pebble. Meteoroids have many sources.
On the issue of debris - we agree,
should be of genuine concern to all space-faring nations. It is why the Artemis Accords signatories agreed to limit the generation of long-lived harmful debris.
EOS has also begun to use its expertise to design, build and test systems to track and record
-human-made rubbish in orbit around the Earth-down to a diameter of 10 cm or less. "The next step is to develop high-power laser systems to actually manipulate the debris in space.
. At present, there are over 500,000 pieces of debris that are being tracked by NASA and other agencies as they orbit the Earth. An estimated 20,000 of these are larger than a softball, while the remainder are about the size of a pebble.
Some call it space trash, others refer to it as space junk or
. All three terms identify the same items -- man-made objects remaining in space though they no longer serve any useful purpose. Mankind s journey into space began in 1957 when the Soviet Union launched Sputnik, the first artificial satellite.
that plow into the Earth's atmosphere. Because they arrive at very high speeds — anywhere from 11 to 74 kilometers (7 to 46 miles) per second — they vaporize by air friction in a white-hot streak. Most meteor parents (meteoroids) range in size from sand grains to pebbles.
that reaches the Earth's surface intact
Milky Way- a soft, glowing band of light encircling the sky, it is the disk of the spiral galaxy in which the sun lies, seen from the inside .
Lydia: Well, here I must insert - for the record - Astronomy Today does not condone hording government property, although I definitely understand wanting to collect
Why Can't We Launch Garbage into Space? - Universe Today
Illustrated: The Problem in Pictures - Universe Today
Universe Today's Guide to Space : Space Junk
Contaminating Other Planets - Science Friday (Radio show archive) .
and advised for it to be left alone on its course which would eventually see it destroyed. However, Data insisted on investigating it and found it to be a space module containing frozen but revivable Humans. (TNG: "The Neutral Zone") .
How Do We Know? Humans have learned about asteroids by examining pieces of
- meteorites - that have dropped through our planet's atmosphere to the surface. We've given those pieces of debris various names: .
★ Meteor A small particle of
entering Earth's atmosphere at high speed that is heated to incandescence by friction with the air molecules. We see these as "shooting stars".
The second launch of Challenger Window pit caused by impact of
Deployment of Palapa B1 Deployment of Anik C2 SPAS-1 grappled by the RMS
.
While we have never been able to directly see the Oort Cloud, it's believed to be made up of icy chunks of
that range from mountain size to larger. The Oort Cloud is the sun's gravitational influence boundary.
Smaller meteors have also impacted Earth, even in the present time. Meteors that survive passage through the atmosphere and impact are called meteorites while the
that burns up in the atmosphere are called meteors. In space, these objects are called asteroids.
The comet was discovered on September 21, 2012, via images taken with a 16-inch reflector telescope that is part of the International Scientific Optical Network (ISON). This is a group of observatories specialized in finding asteroids and
, with facilities in ten countries.
It is almost a double planet system because it is orbited by a large moon, Charon. The discovery of the moon Charon weakened the theory that Pluto is an escaped moon of Neptune. It is now thought that Pluto came from a region of
left after the forming of the solar system called the Kuiper Belt.
with a point due north on the horizon and going through the zenith meteor the trail of light left when a meteoroid enters Earth's atmosphere and burns up a falling star or shooting star meteorite a meteoroid that enters Earth's atmosphere but survives to hit the ground meteoroid a chunk of
The IDA seeks to raise public awareness about good and bad outdoor-lighting practices, including aesthetic, security and economic issues. The IDA is also building awareness of other threats to the astronomical environment, such as from radio-frequency interference and
