Electric Meteors and Meteorites

Historic planetary instability and catastrophe. Evidence for electrical scarring on planets and moons. Electrical events in today's solar system. Electric Earth.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: Fireballs in the Sky

Unread postby flyingcloud » Fri Jan 15, 2016 7:08 am

not sure but from similar fireball monitoring apparatus I have seen in the past I would assume the perceived curvature back into space is due to the fish eye lenses used to capture the most sky area from a stationary camera pointed relatively straight up
flyingcloud
 
Posts: 477
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:07 am
Location: Honey Brook

Re: Fireballs in the Sky

Unread postby webolife » Fri Jan 15, 2016 11:45 pm

The non-linear paths of the meteors are, as flying cloud said due to the fish eye lens.
The coronae are also an optical effect, generally known as diffraction. The standard explanation for diffraction assumes light to be acting as a waveform, deflected by the media of the lenses used to focus the image, or possibly by particulates in the atmosphere, eg. from water droplets or ice crystals in clouds. My perspective on coronae, rainbows and other halos and spectral phenomena is that they have nothing to do with waves, rather manifest a pressure gradient, describable by vectors about the central line of sight. It should be understood, although for some this may be counterintuitive, that all such halos and rainbows exist [ie. are phenomenal] only "here" at the retina the eye or screen of a camera obscura... they do not exist "out there" in space, in the air or at an interface of raindrops. It is an optical effect, the endpoint [eg. the retina] of the light rays is where the action is happening, ie. the detection of the pressure field gradient we call the spectrum. In as much as light fields and electrical fields both manifest the universal/unified centropic pressure field in my view, the apparent glow about the burning heads of the meteors may be considered at least related to electrical phenomena. In as much as meteors also produce "occasionally audible" radio "rays", this is a further unification of the electric meteor framework.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2338
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Electric Meteors and Meteorites

Unread postby comingfrom » Wed Mar 16, 2016 4:35 am

Finally found a confirmation, from Immanual Velikovsky, of all people :D .
From his paper Cosmos Without Gravitation.

Approaching the earth, the meteorites suddenly slow down and turn aside, and some are even repelled into space. “A few meteors give the appearance of penetrating into our atmosphere and then leaving it, ricocheting as it were.” (26)

26. Ch. Olivier, Meteors, p.129.


~Paul
comingfrom
 
Posts: 527
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm

1913 Great Meteor Procession

Unread postby Tansi » Tue Dec 27, 2016 7:49 pm

I’m not sure if I’m posting in the right section - feel free to let me know and I’ll move to a more appropriate space.

What I wondered is if anyone had any EU perspective on a meteor even that happened in 1913.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1913_Grea ... Procession
(trusty wikipedia info ;) )

It was said to be a meteor procession though there were disagreements even at the time ranging from a decaying orbiting ‘moon’ ; multiple meteor events and even UFOs.

I understand the EU has a different concept of what makes a meteor (not the iced dust ball) - so I wondered if there might be any different theories of the possibility of what this 1913 event was or wasn’t.

Thanks for any input.
Tansi
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 6:02 pm

Re: 1913 Great Meteor Procession

Unread postby oz93666 » Mon Jan 02, 2017 12:56 am

This from wikipedia ....
........................................"The meteors were particularly unusual in that there was no apparent radiant, that is to say, no point in the sky from which the meteors appeared to originate. The observations were analysed in detail, later the same year, by the astronomer Clarence Chant, leading him to conclude that as all accounts were positioned along a great circle arc, the source had been a small, short-lived natural satellite of the Earth.."

Image

I doubt if the EU take on this event differs too much from the official one , NASA's view is " that a single large meteor once grazed the Earth's atmosphere and broke up. When the resulting pieces next encountered the Earth, they came in over south-central Canada, traveled thousands of kilometers as they crossed over the northeastern USA, and eventually fell into the central Atlantic ocean."

This site analyses the sightings in detail and says there are anomalies indicating an alien craft ... http://cognizantnationhq.weebly.com/blo ... ase-proven
oz93666
 
Posts: 164
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 3:12 pm

Re: 1913 Great Meteor Procession

Unread postby jacmac » Mon Jan 02, 2017 9:29 am

Tansi:
I understand the EU has a different concept of what makes a meteor (not the iced dust ball)

Are you perhaps mixing up a meteor with a comet ?
Jack
jacmac
 
Posts: 401
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:36 pm

Re: 1913 Great Meteor Procession

Unread postby oz93666 » Mon Jan 02, 2017 10:43 pm

jacmac wrote:Tansi:
I understand the EU has a different concept of what makes a meteor (not the iced dust ball)

Are you perhaps mixing up a meteor with a comet ?
Jack


I've just been looking at what establishment sciences defines as these two...from what I can gather , reading between the the lines ,there is no real difference , no sharp dividing line.

There is space debris ..... some has not spent too much time close to the sun ,and so has a higher component of volatiles .. this is labeled 'comet' when it does approach the sun ...the other has been sunning itself longer , so most of the volatiles have been boiled off by the heat from the sun ...labeled 'meteoroid' ...but no sharp division, a continuous spectrum of objects with different % of volatiles ...

Exactly the same as planets , the further out the planets are the more liquids and gasses they have, if you brought jupiter close to the sun , all the volatiles would go, and something like mercury would be left.

This UFO site is quite sensible ...http://cognizantnationhq.weebly.com/blo ... ase-proven ...and raises some good points.
oz93666
 
Posts: 164
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 3:12 pm

Previous

Return to Electric Universe - Planetary Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest