The Boring Sun

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: bboyer, MGmirkin

Locked
fosborn_
Posts: 526
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 10:20 am
Location: Kansas

Re: The Boring Sun

Unread post by fosborn_ » Fri Feb 24, 2012 10:07 pm

This a HDTV shot of the crescent earth. going to the site and viewing the HDTV still, I think I am seeing dimly illuminated stars thinly scattered but no concentration of bright stars in the ionosphere.
http://wms.selene.jaxa.jp/selene_viewer/en/observation_mission/hdtv/045/hdtv_045_l.jpg
http://wms.selene.jaxa.jp/selene_viewer/en/observation_mission/hdtv/045/hdtv_045_l.jpg
http://wms.selene.jaxa.jp/selene_viewer ... _045_l.jpg

A shot of JAXA failed mars orbiter. image of earth and moon. Again I think I see luminous specs, that I interpret as stars, but no brighter or greater number which might be assumed as in line of sight of earth's or the moon's ionosphere.
http://jda-strm.tksc.jaxa.jp/archive/ph ... c5f2f7.jpg
The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries,
is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'
Isaac Asimov

Goldminer
Posts: 1024
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2009 9:08 pm

Re: The Boring Sun

Unread post by Goldminer » Sat Feb 25, 2012 12:55 am

katherisy wrote: Awesome images! LOVE them! Thank you from the bottom of my heart for posting these! I hope it is okay for me to use one of these as my Desktop background? ;)

Katherisy, It's OK with me, but you never know about Obamma's Desktop Police!
I sense a disturbance in the farce.

User avatar
GaryN
Posts: 2668
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The Boring Sun

Unread post by GaryN » Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:50 am

Image
"There is no dark side of the moon really. Matter of fact it's all dark."
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller

fosborn_
Posts: 526
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 10:20 am
Location: Kansas

Re: The Boring Sun

Unread post by fosborn_ » Thu Mar 08, 2012 7:03 pm

Just perusing a radio transcripts document of Apollo 10 about half way to the moon.
http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/53134295
page 145

SC Hello, Houston, Apollo 10.
CAPCON Go ahead, 10.
CAPCON 10, Houston. Go ahead.
SC Hello, Houston, Apollo 10.
CAPCON Go ahead.
CAPCON Hello, Apollo 10, Houston. We are
reading you § by. Go ahead, Tom.
CAPCOM 10, Houston. Do you read?
SC Yes, now how do you read, Charlie?
CAPCON 5 by, Tom, you were coming 5 by all
the time.
SC Oh, okay. I Just wanted to give
you a star visibility data point. Just a second ago, when
the sun was in the right side window, number 5 window, I
can see on the Southern Cross, Aerux and alpha beta Centauri
out my left window and charts the first time we've been able
to see it.
CAPCOH Rog, good show.
SC And we couldn't - John couldn't
see many other stars, Just the real big ones, you know, like
alpha beta Centauri and Acrux. Now as the sun moves on
around, they've disappeared, but thatts the first glimpse
of any stars I've gotten.
CAPGOM Roger, we
page 157
Tom Stafford reported the ,crew got
its first good view of the moon at an elapsed time of 25 hours
58 minutes. The display which shows distance was not being
generated at that time, but the distance at that tlme was approximately
108,600 nautical miles. Gene Cernan reported the
moon looks bigger from that distance.
SC Hello, Houston,
that distance.
SC Hello, Houston, !O.
CAPCOM Co ahead, iO.
SC Okay, I can see the stars real good
out the side wlndow_ I've got Sirius out my side window, but
even out through the rendezvous window i can look up there and
I've got Orion and Rigel there.
CAPCOM Rog. Boy, old Snoop really, when
the sun ts on the side, he must really block it all out.
SC Yes. and I've got the moon right up
above the x-axis. It's a beautiful sight.
_APCOM Rog. We envy you.
, APCOM Hello, Charlie Brown, Houston. We
would like you to discontinue battery B charRe now.
SC R._g, Charlie, thank you,
SC Hello, Houston, Charlle Brown. On
The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries,
is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'
Isaac Asimov

User avatar
GaryN
Posts: 2668
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The Boring Sun

Unread post by GaryN » Fri Mar 09, 2012 12:40 pm

Hi Frank. I don't doubt stars were visible under certain conditions and at specific locations, but the conflicting accounts from different astronauts and missions just confuses things, rather than answering any basic questions. It is what NASA has NOT shown us over they years that keeps me looking into this affair. No images of the Sun through a filter, though they would need to take a filter with them, which they have never, AFAIK, done. No videos of an astronaut with the Moon, or Sun over his shoulder, hamming it up for the folks back home. No video of the far side of the Moon, which should have been easy if it were as bright as it supposedly is. Nothing adds up, to my way of thinking (yeah, I might be delusional), and NASA will not answer my questions.
Then seeing the Haramein clip recently ( at 4:00 in this clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqwCI7RWN8s )just raised my suspicions and doubts even more. I haven't watched a lot of his stuff, and I don't believe everything he says, so I am now looking into this supposed association of SOHO and the Vatican. In the first 5 minutes of research, a whole lot of suspicious, to me, people, corporations, and associations become evident. I haven't nailed a direct relationship yet, and the inter-connectedness of a whole lot of powerful organisations makes it difficult, but I already smell a rat. If you have the time and inclination Frank, I'd welcome a second opinion. I'll not go over my findings so as not to influence your, or anyone elses findings.
Though I never thought I'd say it, Lizzies posts on the German technology acquired by the US during and after the war, and the possibility that the uber-military has had space travel capabilities for some time, begins to make sense, and could provide answers to a good many questions that presently puzzle me.
"Curiouser and curiouser", it seems. :?
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller

User avatar
JaJa
Posts: 344
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 5:23 am

Re: The Boring Sun

Unread post by JaJa » Fri Mar 09, 2012 2:59 pm

Hi Gary

The video link below is worth a watch but listen to what Haramein says from around 10.50... makes me chuckle. :lol:

Sun-Stargate & Planet size UFOs,2012
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.

Carl Sagan
Now that's delusional...
Omnia in numeris sita sunt

2erlee
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 1:10 pm

Re: The Boring Sun

Unread post by 2erlee » Fri Mar 09, 2012 3:26 pm

GaryN:
Part of the reason you won't see pix of the sun with an astronaut in them is that mostly digital cameras are used now. Without the mediating effect of an atmosphere, the sun simply overloads the sensors in a camera. So what you will get is overwhelming white where the sun is. To get a pic of the sun, the camera needs heavy filtering or needs to specially designed. Either way, you aren't going to get an astronaut , or the shuttle, or the ISS to show up.

Pretty much the same applies trying to get pix of the stars. If the sun or it's reflections are even close to where the camera is pointed, it's light will overwhelm the sensors to a point that stars can't register.

Ron in Colorado

fosborn_
Posts: 526
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 10:20 am
Location: Kansas

Re: The Boring Sun

Unread post by fosborn_ » Fri Mar 09, 2012 10:02 pm

Wow, this sucks;
Stars are not dramatically brighter in space (above the Earth's atmosphere). Professional astronomer and two-time space shuttle astronaut Ronald A. Parise stated that he could barely see stars at all from space. He had to turn out all of the lights in the shuttle to even glimpse the stars.[3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Examinatio ... cite_ref-2
Stupid wiki. :P
Where's the stupid ionosphere when you need it?
Must be the zero g effect on his eyes. :roll:

Wonder what makes them so bright down here? Well at lest the brighter ones are visible beyond the ionospheres. So maybe everybody gets to be part of right.
Hi Frank. I don't doubt stars were visible under certain conditions and at specific locations, but the conflicting accounts from different astronauts and missions just confuses things, rather than answering any basic questions. It is what NASA has NOT shown us over they years that keeps me looking into this affair. No images of the Sun through a filter, though they would need to take a filter with them, which they have never, AFAIK, done. No videos of an astronaut with the Moon, or Sun over his shoulder, hamming it up for the folks back home. No video of the far side of the Moon, which should have been easy if it were as bright as it supposedly is.
Maybe its as simple as funding connected to public perception. I think the last transcripts concur with Parise's description. As far as getting an accurate idea of what people are seeing in space, its all accessible on the internet. So I don't see a cover up. And as far as the Sun's visible luminosity, I have seen pictures of it blaring in the cockpit widows of Apollo missions and glaring of shinny metal surfaces. So you present a fun theory to follow, and going down the rabbit hole is a mighty strange experience. I just don't think I am going to eat any cakes that says eat me.

I think your view of the void would be a great scify story. Kind of like the opposite of "The Fall of Night" By Arthur C. Clarke, only every body goes nuts when the ionosphere is temporarily swept away and the sky is black and people burn all the population centers. 8-)
hold tight wait till the party's over
hold tight we're in for nasty weather
there has got to be a way
burning down the house
:twisted:
http://www.soundtracklyrics.net/song-ly ... -house.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNnAvTTaJjM
The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries,
is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'
Isaac Asimov

User avatar
GaryN
Posts: 2668
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The Boring Sun

Unread post by GaryN » Sat Mar 10, 2012 12:05 pm

2erlee
Here is an image with a totally overexposed Moon. You can saturate the pixels of the Moon, but if their are stars, they will not be washed out by the Moon. Ever seen a shot like that fom space?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tonyhoffman/121727283/
To get a pic of the sun, the camera needs heavy filtering or needs to specially designed.
I E-Mailed a filter manufacturer, and he assured me, in a rather mocking tone, that his filters would work just the same in space as they would on Earth. My camera is not special and takes images of the Sun very well, with a cheap filter, in no time flat. The digital cameras they have on the ISS, or had on the shuttle, work just fine in space, but if they don't take a filter with them, they can't use it. My suspicious mind says they don't take filters up there because they would be expected to show the results of their efforts. Won't work, can't work, wrong type of 'light' for the optics.

fosorn
And as far as the Sun's visible luminosity, I have seen pictures of it blaring in the cockpit widows of Apollo missions
I'd really like to see that, Frank. Got a reference? I have never seen, or heard talk of the Sunlight, or Moonlight, streaming in through the observation ports of the Shuttle or ISS. Maybe the heat from the Sun is so intense they have to pull the shades when the Sun is up?
hold tight wait till the party's over
hold tight we're in for nasty weather
there has got to be a way
burning down the house
Revalations 18:8? ..and she shall be utterly burned with fire. Yes, the House will burn soon I believe, and with her will go Astronomy, our present Cosmology, and much of Astrophysics. I'll say Amen to that. Or am I misreading you again Frank?
Image
!Warning! Link to controversial, possibly offensive web site and content!
http://presscore.ca/2011/?p=4871
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller

fosborn_
Posts: 526
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 10:20 am
Location: Kansas

Re: The Boring Sun

Unread post by fosborn_ » Sat Mar 10, 2012 12:51 pm

I'd really like to see that, Frank. Got a reference? I have never seen, or heard talk of the Sunlight, or Moonlight, streaming in through the observation ports of the Shuttle or ISS. Maybe the heat from the Sun is so intense they have to pull the shades when the Sun is up?
Sure, I'll look it up tonight. Not at my PC now. :)
The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries,
is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'
Isaac Asimov

fosborn_
Posts: 526
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 10:20 am
Location: Kansas

Re: The Boring Sun

Unread post by fosborn_ » Sat Mar 10, 2012 8:38 pm

I Wrote;
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpB ... 983#p63954
And as far as the Sun's visible luminosity, I have seen pictures of it blaring in the cockpit widows of Apollo missions and glaring of shinny metal surfaces.
GaryN wrote:
I'd really like to see that, Frank. Got a reference? I have never seen, or heard talk of the Sunlight, or Moonlight, streaming in through the observation ports of the Shuttle or ISS.
AS17-152-23391sm.JPG
http://www.apolloarchive.com/apollo_gallery.html
AS15-88-11997sm.JPG
Apollo10LM.JPG
The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries,
is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'
Isaac Asimov

User avatar
GaryN
Posts: 2668
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The Boring Sun

Unread post by GaryN » Sun Mar 11, 2012 12:21 pm

Hi JaJa,
Haramein has some ideas that are 'way out', even to me! However, the flashing of the Sun in the vid you linked to does make me wonder, given the idea that light may not travel in space the way we are told, if the flickering of the stars, seen from Earth, is due to those flashes causing the process of light re-construction in the ionosphere to vary in intensity? There should be an easy way to synchronise Solar X and EUV flashes to the twinkle, shouldn't there?

And relatedly, I finally got around to reading a little of the Oahspe Bible that Lloyd first pointed out to me almost a year ago. I have to read more, maybe much more to gain a firmer understanding, but right off the bat, I like what I am seeing. The little bits I have read so far are in full agreement with how I believe light is created by the planets and moons themselves, within their atmospheres. And there is perfect sense in just this item about the light from the Moon.
As in this image, it can be seen that the bright part has no central bright point, like light shining on a billiard ball.
Image
The Sun facing side has a greater diameter than the unexposed side, and looks more like a fluorescent glow than a reflected light.
It is an error to say that dark bodies appear smaller, and light bodies larger, because of absorption or refraction. The cause is not absorption, refraction or reflection, but manufacture. |1628|
Manufactured light, produced in the region around the object.
38/2.34. The fact is, however, there is no intense center light manifested on the moon's surface, in the place where it directly faces the sun. |1634| Hence there is no possibility of the light of the moon being produced by light from the sun, or from the sun's center. The light of the moon faces the sun center, but it (the sun center) is not the cause of the moon's light;
Much more reading to do, but I feel there is a good deal of scientific fact there, perhaps with some fantasy, but it is Aether based, and the Vortex is something discussed many times on TB.
38/2.25. A complete planetary vortex is a globe, or nearly so..
The ideal field pattern of a dipole antenna, the spherical torus.
Image
And the E and B fields of the dipole:
Image

Are you pulling my leg with those images, Frank? We know that a distorted blob is seen when the Sun goes through that small region of ionosphere. The other two images are not shown in their full context, NASA learned a lot about image composition from Kubrick of course, and there is no way to say where the light is from, but I think a professional image forensics lab would easily locate the light source origin.

Here is a 360 degree VR of a Shuttle cockpit. Wouldn't you think they could have at least taken a shot of a big bright Moon out of one of those windows? Or a conjunction? No filter, no Sun image, of course. The shades on the side windows must be to stop the ferocious heat of the Sun from baking them all alive in there, you think? ;-)

http://360vr.com/2011/06/22-discovery-f ... index.html
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller

fosborn_
Posts: 526
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 10:20 am
Location: Kansas

Re: The Boring Sun

Unread post by fosborn_ » Sun Mar 11, 2012 3:39 pm

there is no way to say where the light is from, but I think a professional image forensics lab would easily locate the light source origin.
Simple deduction narrows it down for me. :|
Are you pulling my leg with those images, Frank?
No.
You made a request, I followed up on it with significant effort to comply. A little appreciation please. :(
We know that a distorted blob is seen when the Sun goes through that small region of ionosphere.
Not sure how your refuting the sun light beaming in the Apollo view port.
The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries,
is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'
Isaac Asimov

User avatar
GaryN
Posts: 2668
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: The Boring Sun

Unread post by GaryN » Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:41 pm

A little appreciation please.

Well Thanks Frank! I appreciate your efforts in trying to show where my reasoning is incorrect, and bring an end to my deluded, all-consuming pastime. If I'm all wrong though, I have learned a lot, and am still learning, about light, colour, photography, CCDs, photoshop(NASA version ;-)) etc. The big Conspiracy thing has come about as a result of my learning about the science, technology and techniques employed.

Here are some new, raw images from Cassini. After page 6 there are only some streaks visible, and what must be pixel blowout and not stars in the background. Maybe the streaks are other moons, and a time exposure? The filters they used are listed, but not the exposure times, and from looking at the camera specs and filters used, it seems my Nikon would have drawn a complete blank, as would my eyes, out there. They are using IR and UV and everything in between (clear filter) to get an image. I know you have looked into this kind of thing before Frank, got time to take a gander and comment?
http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/photos/raw/? ... dQ=2434395

This got me wondering too.

Raging Solar Storm 'Blinds' Venus Spacecraft
Strong radiation from one of the most intense solar storms in the past five years has temporarily "blinded" a European spacecraft in orbit around Venus, and mission controllers are now racing to fix the problem.
Seems this happens when there are solar storms, but the article does not give a technical reason for the blindness. I am wondering if the ionosphere of Venus is temporarily blown away or distorted so that the optics can not function as designed? Or CCD saturation, like being blinded for a while after you glimpse a very bright light?
http://www.space.com/14834-solar-storm- ... craft.html

And todays quote from the divinely inspired cosmology bible of Oahpse:
38/3.11. As light, heat, magnetism, and electricity, are all one and the same thing, being only the manifestation of vortexian currents under different conditions, the student must not lose sight of the fact that none of these so‑called things are things in fact, that is, entities of themselves, separately or combined.
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller

lattooger
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 5:52 pm

Re: The Boring Sun

Unread post by lattooger » Tue Mar 13, 2012 5:55 pm

GaryN wrote:
A little appreciation please.

Well Thanks Frank! I appreciate your efforts in trying to show where my reasoning is incorrect, and bring an end to my deluded, all-consuming pastime. If I'm all wrong though, I have learned a lot, and am still learning, about light, colour, photography, CCDs, photoshop(NASA version ;-)) etc. The big Conspiracy thing has come about as a result of my learning about the science, technology and techniques employed.

Here are some new, raw images from Cassini. After page 6 there are only some streaks visible, and what must be pixel blowout and not stars in the background. Maybe the streaks are other moons, and a time exposure? The filters they used are listed, but not the exposure times, and from looking at the camera specs and filters used, it seems my Nikon would have drawn a complete blank, as would my eyes, out there. They are using IR and UV and everything in between (clear filter) to get an image. I know you have looked into this kind of thing before Frank, got time to take a gander and comment?
http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/photos/raw/? ... dQ=2434395

This got me wondering too.

Raging Solar Storm 'Blinds' Venus Spacecraft
Strong radiation from one of the most intense solar storms in the past five years has temporarily "blinded" a European spacecraft in orbit around Venus, and mission controllers are now racing to fix the problem.
Seems this happens when there are solar storms, but the article does not give a technical reason for the blindness. I am wondering if the ionosphere of Venus is temporarily blown away or distorted so that the optics can not function as designed? Or CCD saturation, like being blinded for a while after you glimpse a very bright light?
http://www.space.com/14834-solar-storm- ... craft.html

And todays quote from the divinely inspired cosmology bible of Oahpse:
38/3.11. As light, heat, magnetism, and electricity, are all one and the same thing, being only the manifestation of vortexian currents under different conditions, the student must not lose sight of the fact that none of these so‑called things are things in fact, that is, entities of themselves, separately or combined.

Thank you very much for the links! I learned something new today!

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests