Yes, it's conspiracy time again. The NASA STS-75 mission in December 1996 ran a trial experimental tether that was to be used for towing and placing satellites into orbit. During this experiment they had a problem and the 12 mile long tether snapped due to the synthetic material accumulating a critical charge.
This was all video taped live, and what was captured on this video is absolutely incredible. NASA claims the objects in the footage are ice particles very close to the camera and are passing in front of the far away tether. But they're not!
They're passing behind the tether.
5 comment(s):
The Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=As-wYmFYb3I
That's sad.
Guys, let's do some mathematics here.
To say in advance, this is NOT any footage of aliens floating around and feeding on energy, and the objects are not even unidentified. They are small (and I mean small) frozen waterdrops previously ejected from some tank on the space shuttle. They do NOT change direction, and they are not even pulsing. So if you are a die-hard believer and don't want to get disappointed, then skip this post. Othwerwiese read on.
First of all, NASA would not hide the fact that they saw something mysterious. The fact that there's something out there would increase their budget immensely for coming projects, and hundreds of scientists within NASA would surely not keep their mouth shut about this. Mankind has been craving for evidence of extraterrestrial life for decades. Why do you think there' something like SETI ? (http://www.seti.org) Btw, SETI projects are sponsored by NASA.
And just because some NASA ground technician doesn't immediately understand the "things swimming in the foreground" in the footage, does that mean its extraterrestrial? Why do conspiracy people doubt obvious "flag on the moon" photos, and then fall for such a simple optical illusion? Also, why are they so quick to calculate the size of the blobs in relation to the tether, but don't question the size of the tether itsself?
Here's the (mathematical) explanation. First the facts:
- The tether is 20 km (~12 miles) long, and only a meter in diameter
- The footage shows an aspect ratio (length of the tether, divided by it's diameter) of 12:1
- The actual aspect ratio, based on the facts, is 20.000:1
Even if we were to assume that the tether broke before it was fully extended, we would NEVER ever get close to the "observed" 12:1 aspect ratio. So, where does this obvious discrepancy come from? In the footage, the tether should be 1.600m in diameter, when in fact it's only 1m. Even to a viewer of the footage, who does not do this equation, the tether seems much too wide in relation to its length.
In other words: you are not seeing the actual tether, but an overcontrasted hallow of a very thin black pole VERY far away (> 100 km), that has gone through some image enhancement inside the infrared camera. Now, don't you think these "enhancements" apply to all objects in the footage? On top of that, the intense light of the sun, it's position, and the curvature and diffraction of the lens do their part on the actual image. You are seeing ALTERED REALITY.
You can read on in the wiki article on "diffraction". If you scroll down to the chapter "Diffraction limit of telescopes", there's a nice image that resembles the blobs in the footage. However, this time it's not about stars, but about tiny frozen particles NEAR the shuttle that are way out of focus. Also from Wiki: "Even if a lens is designed to minimize or eliminate the aberrations described above, the image quality is still limited by the diffraction of light passing through the lens' finite aperture."
So, things to watch out for when looking at the footage again:
1. Some of the flying blobs have two notches that change size and position as they move, and their circular shape distorts towards the edges of the frame. These are typical optical effects when changing the position of objects in relation to their light source.
2. The pulsing of the blobs comes from the frequency of the camera's power supply or some electromagnetic waves in the shuttle. In fact, even the outside rim of the footage seems to have this pulsing effect. Remember your flickering television, or a computer screen that starts to wiggle when your mobile phone is connecting to the nearest antenna. It's as easy as that. No aliens feeding on energy.
3. The "changing of direction" of the blobs results from the zooming of the camera and the curvature of the lens.
4. The observation, that the blobs seem to travel BEHIND the tether, is an illusion coming from the contrast enhancement of the camera and the fact, that the actual thether is only a tini black rod inside the enhanced hallow you are seeing. The tiny frozen drops also have this enhanced hallow. The actual drop is the tiny black (out of focus) spot inside the hallow. Remember what astronaut Franklin says in an answer to the "swimming things" from the technician at ground control: "it's illuminated by the Sun at such a low angle, so there's a lot of stray light". You would never be able to tell (in the poor resolution of this footage), whether an out-of-focus and overexposed water drop between 10 to 100m distance of the shuttle is before or behind a massive rod at 100 km (!) distance. It's an optical illusion. Did you ever believe that a rainbow actually touches the ground at the position you are seeing it? Your brain is inclined to those kind of illusions.
So people, don't SEE WHAT YOU BELIEVE, but BELIEVE WHAT YOU SEE. If you can't see "aliens feeding on energy" without the notion of a doubt, then don't believe it! To quote another similar thread: "Don't be a believer or a non-believer. Be a thinker and a questioner, and you will be more than either." I know it would be just too cool to be true, to finally find another form of life out there, and I'm sure some day we will. But I'm sorry, NASA did not find one yet, and surely not on this tether mission.
About me: I'm a computer scientist and software developer in the field of image processing and enhancement. My company is located in Munich, Germany. If you want to see what I'm doing, click on the link below.
Henning Kuersten
http://www.CodedColor.com
There's more to a picture...
Thanks Henning, that makes even more sense than my explanation! :-)
lorsque j'ai vu le film , la 1ere question que je me suis posé c'était "il y a un problème avec le diamètre de ce thether?" pour le reste merci pour ces excellentes explications ...
Phil M
Post a Comment