what u guys think? featured in astronomy pic of the day. got tons of great pics too.
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap041207.html
Meteor experts don't think it's a meteor. Atmospheric scientists don't think it's lightning. The photographer insists that the streak and flash on the above image has not been created digitally. So what is it? Nobody is sure. APOD's editors do not claim to know - one purpose of posting this image is to mine the eclectic brain trust of APOD's readers to help see if some unusual phenomenon was caught serendipitously. The strange features were captured on a series of images intended to monitor cloud changes in the background. Images taken just before and after the above frame show no streak or flash. The light pole near the flash has been inspected and does not show any damage, although the light inside was not working. If you think you know what is going on, instead of sending us email please participate in an online discussion. If a convincing argument or consensus is reached, the answer will be posted on APOD at a later date.
Full Version: what's the streak thingy..
Very interesting pic. I have no idea what that streak could be.
My only guess is that it is a flaw in the pic.
My only guess is that it is a flaw in the pic.
Indeed interesting, but I can't help thinking that there's a connection with the streak and the fact that the light of the flash did not work
I think it was actually a metoer that was photographed hiting earth. I saw this topic in a thread somewhere ealier. I'll find the link
It's on front page news, about a week ago.
It is actually a meteor hitting the ocean. At the bottom of the 'streak' you can see where it hit. The meteor was travelling so fast that it left a 'streak' in the picture.
It is actually a meteor hitting the ocean. At the bottom of the 'streak' you can see where it hit. The meteor was travelling so fast that it left a 'streak' in the picture.
It looks like the path left behind by the metor ( sorry about the spelling )
as it says it looks like one hittign earth
QUOTE(BurnSide @ Dec 7 2004, 09:50 PM)
It is actually a meteor hitting the ocean. At the bottom of the 'streak' you can see where it hit. The meteor was travelling so fast that it left a 'streak' in the picture.
[right][snapback]391220[/snapback][/right]
Yep,amazin aint it.
Maybe its my years of doing digital artwork but, to me, this is clearly a fake. Here are my reasons:
1) ANGLE: The angle of descent does not match the point of impact. The impact point is slightly below of where it should be. Like it took a sudden turn straight down. (steered?) (see image)
2) CONTRAIL WIDTH: The width of the contrail does not vary. From where it first appears to just above the point of impact. It is the same or nearly the same. If the contrail was that size above the impact site it should have made a larger impact signature. (see image)
3) PIXELATION: The pixelation of the rest of the image does not match the impact (explosion/spray?). Nor does it match the steam/smoke seen rising near it. Those areas seem smoother then the rest. Whatever pixelation that is seen is due to the compression of the .jpg from the original. (see image)
4) COLOR: The atmospheric conditions create haze which tends to blend with everything the further away you get. Also, the smoke/steam seen rising in front is too white. If it was actually that white it would need to be extremely dense. And it is not, it is transparent in most places. Whispy steam/smoke of that transparency would have absorbed more of the surrounding atmospheric color/haze. Thus becoming more grey/blueish. Not too impressed with the blending of the impact color and the top of the pole either. Not enough color contrast between the two. Nor the clearly consistent transparency color of the contrail.
5) IMPACT SHAPE: I think the shape of the impact is wrong. It would have shaped at least slightly away from its path at the shown angle. Not appear to be a nearly direct strike (90 degree).
6) TIMING: Getting a still shot of a meteor at the moment of impact is possible but highly unlikely. (not scientific I know, but come'on...)
Contrail: Fake
Impact Point: Fake
Steam/Smoke: Fake
CONTRAIL ANGLE/WIDTH, POINT OF IMPACT
PIXELATION, COLOR/BLENDING, SMOOTHING
Just my 2¢
1) ANGLE: The angle of descent does not match the point of impact. The impact point is slightly below of where it should be. Like it took a sudden turn straight down. (steered?) (see image)
2) CONTRAIL WIDTH: The width of the contrail does not vary. From where it first appears to just above the point of impact. It is the same or nearly the same. If the contrail was that size above the impact site it should have made a larger impact signature. (see image)
3) PIXELATION: The pixelation of the rest of the image does not match the impact (explosion/spray?). Nor does it match the steam/smoke seen rising near it. Those areas seem smoother then the rest. Whatever pixelation that is seen is due to the compression of the .jpg from the original. (see image)
4) COLOR: The atmospheric conditions create haze which tends to blend with everything the further away you get. Also, the smoke/steam seen rising in front is too white. If it was actually that white it would need to be extremely dense. And it is not, it is transparent in most places. Whispy steam/smoke of that transparency would have absorbed more of the surrounding atmospheric color/haze. Thus becoming more grey/blueish. Not too impressed with the blending of the impact color and the top of the pole either. Not enough color contrast between the two. Nor the clearly consistent transparency color of the contrail.
5) IMPACT SHAPE: I think the shape of the impact is wrong. It would have shaped at least slightly away from its path at the shown angle. Not appear to be a nearly direct strike (90 degree).
6) TIMING: Getting a still shot of a meteor at the moment of impact is possible but highly unlikely. (not scientific I know, but come'on...)
Contrail: Fake
Impact Point: Fake
Steam/Smoke: Fake
CONTRAIL ANGLE/WIDTH, POINT OF IMPACT
PIXELATION, COLOR/BLENDING, SMOOTHING
Just my 2¢
well then you need to get a job for like the CIA or something, because everyone else thinks its real
Very Good Dan'o!
most think it's just a bug
Astronomy Picture of the Day
Cloudbait Observatory
Bad Astronomy
Astronomy Picture of the Day
QUOTE
Australian strange streak is plausibly just a flying insect.
Cloudbait Observatory
QUOTE
Which leaves me with the most likely explanation: this is simply the image of an insect passing right in front of the lens. The theory is well supported by the image analysis and by experiment, it is plausible (a resident of Darwin reports that flying ants and other insects are numerous at this time of year), and it requires no extraordinary coincidences
Bad Astronomy
QUOTE
This is being discussed on SlashDot as well, and one person came to the conclusion that it's a bug flying across the image. It's close to the camera, so it's out of focus. The camera flash lit the bug at the end of the exposure, creating the burst of light. It happens to lie coincidentally near the lamp, but has nothing to do with it. I concur; this is the most likely explanation
i can't really tell...but a guess would be not a foreign object but something that resides on earth. i come to that conlusion based on my knowledge that most meteors are no bigger than a grain of salt. if this is a meteor, then we have and execption.
You people really need to read all the posts.
It is a meteor, the first to be caught on camera striking the earth. It was on front page news, and on Daily Planet on the Discovery Channel, you know, the show with all the science and stuff. The streak is from where the meteor fell to earth, since it was travelling at about 300Kph, a camera would catch it like that, not being fast enough to see it mid-flight.
As it is, hundreds of these strike every year. Not to long ago one bounced off an old womans fence and struck her in the back.
It is a meteor, the first to be caught on camera striking the earth. It was on front page news, and on Daily Planet on the Discovery Channel, you know, the show with all the science and stuff. The streak is from where the meteor fell to earth, since it was travelling at about 300Kph, a camera would catch it like that, not being fast enough to see it mid-flight.
As it is, hundreds of these strike every year. Not to long ago one bounced off an old womans fence and struck her in the back.
no one can ever accept anything out of the ordinary, always a conspiracy, cover-up, or hoax
QUOTE(seeking @ Jan 31 2005, 06:46 PM)
no one can ever accept anything out of the ordinary, always a conspiracy, cover-up, or hoax
[right][snapback]471059[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]471059[/snapback][/right]
thank you seeking...
QUOTE(BurnSide @ Feb 1 2005, 12:38 AM)
You people really need to read all the posts.
It is a meteor, the first to be caught on camera striking the earth. It was on front page news, and on Daily Planet on the Discovery Channel, you know, the show with all the science and stuff. The streak is from where the meteor fell to earth, since it was travelling at about 300Kph, a camera would catch it like that, not being fast enough to see it mid-flight.
As it is, hundreds of these strike every year. Not to long ago one bounced off an old womans fence and struck her in the back.
[right][snapback]471050[/snapback][/right]
It is a meteor, the first to be caught on camera striking the earth. It was on front page news, and on Daily Planet on the Discovery Channel, you know, the show with all the science and stuff. The streak is from where the meteor fell to earth, since it was travelling at about 300Kph, a camera would catch it like that, not being fast enough to see it mid-flight.
As it is, hundreds of these strike every year. Not to long ago one bounced off an old womans fence and struck her in the back.
[right][snapback]471050[/snapback][/right]
Just because it was on the news does not mean it is correct, I would think you of all people would know that.
I'm gonna go with NASA on this one (and many astronomers)... as most likely being a bug
Maybe you should check the links i posted?
QUOTE(Nethius @ Feb 1 2005, 12:40 PM)
Just because it was on the news does not mean it is correct, I would think you of all people would know that.
I'm gonna go with NASA on this one (and many astronomers)... as most likely being a bug
Maybe you should check the links i posted?
[right][snapback]471604[/snapback][/right]
If that is a bug then it is seriously HUGE
If you look at the close up's that Dan'o posted, it appears to go behind the telegraph pole which means it is very far away and therefore really, really big for a bug.
I think it is a meteor
or a 2foot long bug 
^^^^
I shouldnt have to quote myself to answer you, but here we go. important parts in bold
it does not look like it's behind the pole, and it is not far away, it is very close to the camera
I shouldnt have to quote myself to answer you, but here we go. important parts in bold
it does not look like it's behind the pole, and it is not far away, it is very close to the camera
QUOTE(Nethius @ Feb 1 2005, 12:26 AM)
most think it's just a bug
Astronomy Picture of the Day
Cloudbait Observatory
Bad Astronomy
[right][snapback]471037[/snapback][/right]
Astronomy Picture of the Day
QUOTE
Australian strange streak is plausibly just a flying insect.
Cloudbait Observatory
QUOTE
Which leaves me with the most likely explanation: this is simply the image of an insect passing right in front of the lens. The theory is well supported by the image analysis and by experiment, it is plausible (a resident of Darwin reports that flying ants and other insects are numerous at this time of year), and it requires no extraordinary coincidences
Bad Astronomy
QUOTE
This is being discussed on SlashDot as well, and one person came to the conclusion that it's a bug flying across the image. It's close to the camera, so it's out of focus. The camera flash lit the bug at the end of the exposure, creating the burst of light. It happens to lie coincidentally near the lamp, but has nothing to do with it. I concur; this is the most likely explanation
[right][snapback]471037[/snapback][/right]
no wait....get this....ready guys....it was a ROD!
i don't know if it's been mentioned, since i haven't read all the posts, but dan'o is wrong about the contrail and impact not lining up.... a simple check in paint shows that the contail matches up PERFECTLY with the point of impact... i don't see why he thinks it's off.... i don't even see the contrail in what he circled.... maybe because it's covered by the underside of that oval he made (which lines up perfectly with the impact point ).... and the pixelation thing with the "explosion" or w/e being too much of one color.... the same could be said for many places in the trees....
whatever you say dan'o
I think it's real.
).... and the pixelation thing with the "explosion" or w/e being too much of one color.... the same could be said for many places in the trees.... whatever you say dan'o
I think it's real.
Forgot to mention this as well. The light was inspected after the picture was taken, and altho the light bulb didn't work, there was NO damage to the light/glass/pole at all. So nothing hit it.
The "flash" is believed to be a bug, and the "contrail" is believed to be just a shadow from sunlight through clouds.
also have a look at this pic it shows the contrail does NOT line up with the flash.
The picutre was taken with the camera's flash on, That is why the bug looks lit up.
So unless a meteorite fell to earth, drastically changed it's path to hit a lamp post, smashed it, and then went back to fix the damaged light post. I'm going with, it's a BUG!
(Props to Bad Astronomy for the pic)
//edit - i edited the picture to a html link, so it wasnt huge. also fixed my bad spelling
The "flash" is believed to be a bug, and the "contrail" is believed to be just a shadow from sunlight through clouds.
also have a look at this pic it shows the contrail does NOT line up with the flash.
The picutre was taken with the camera's flash on, That is why the bug looks lit up.
So unless a meteorite fell to earth, drastically changed it's path to hit a lamp post, smashed it, and then went back to fix the damaged light post. I'm going with, it's a BUG!
(Props to Bad Astronomy for the pic)
//edit - i edited the picture to a html link, so it wasnt huge. also fixed my bad spelling
QUOTE(Nethius @ Feb 1 2005, 02:15 PM)
^^^^
I shouldnt have to quote myself to answer you, but here we go. important parts in bold
I shouldnt have to quote myself to answer you, but here we go. important parts in bold
Like I said 'it appears to be behind the telegraph pole'
and ' I think it is a meteor'
There is no need to be so dismissive (or sarcastic), you can quote whom ever you please as I did not ask for you to answer me, as I did not ask you a question.
But in the end you cannot change my opinion, you can only give your own.
^^^^
Sorry, I didn't mean for my reply to be sarcastic or anything... I was replying to you becasue you quoted me. No harm meant.
We are allowed to have different opinions, and I do respect yours, altho I may have sounded harsh.
No hard feelings alright?
Sorry, I didn't mean for my reply to be sarcastic or anything... I was replying to you becasue you quoted me. No harm meant.
We are allowed to have different opinions, and I do respect yours, altho I may have sounded harsh.
No hard feelings alright?
Sorry Nethius - You are right - and I was too oversensitive. 
No harm done
No harm done
No clue 
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.