The Boring Sky (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?
User avatar
GaryN
Posts: 2696
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 3:18 am

Re: The Boring Sky (Sun)

Unread post by GaryN » Tue Jun 16, 2020 5:46 pm

The OSIRIS-REx cameras are not the same as we would think of as cameras. The use of the word "saw" in quotes here is important as it implies that what they detect is not the same as seeing the way our eyes would do. All of these instruments are extremely complex as far as the aquisition and processing of the data is concerned.
The OSIRIS-REx Camera Suite (OCAMS) consists of three cameras: PolyCam, MapCam, and SamCam. These cameras “saw” asteroid Bennu as the spacecraft first approached it.
https://www.asteroidmission.org/objectives/instruments/
...
As for surface illumination levels of the Moon I have had only one person actually suggest a figure and that was Miles Mathis, who gave a range of 1000 to 10,000 lux, but gives no explanation of how he arrived at those values. He does not believe anyone actually went to the moon though.
For Mars the only figure I have found is 50 lux which was measured by the Russian Mars 3 lander but was during a dust storm. I wonder why these illumination levels are so difficult to come by? Venus with its 14,000 lux surface illumination is surprising too. Yes, it is closer to the Sun but I'd have thought the dense atmosphere would have blocked out almost all the sunlight, unless of course the light is being created within the atmosphere, a glowing sky.
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

Cargo
Posts: 399
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:02 am

Re: The Boring Sky (Sun)

Unread post by Cargo » Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:40 pm

NavCam Earth/Moon
https://planetary.s3.amazonaws.com/asse ... d-Moon.png

MapCam Star-Field
https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/file ... or_rot.png

I don't have data about these pictures though. But here is one
https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/godd ... es-jupiter
The image was taken at 3:38 a.m. EST on Feb. 9, 2017, when the spacecraft was 75 million miles (120 million kilometers) from Earth and 419 million miles (675 million kilometers) from Jupiter. With an exposure time of two seconds, the image renders Jupiter overexposed, but allows for enhanced detection of stars in the background.
interstellar filaments conducted electricity having currents as high as 10 thousand billion amperes

User avatar
GaryN
Posts: 2696
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 3:18 am

Re: The Boring Sky (Sun)

Unread post by GaryN » Tue Jun 16, 2020 9:32 pm

MapCam Star-Field
Here is an image from the MapCam during Earth based testing for comparison.
http://www3.telus.net/myworld/mapcam.png

Can it take such an image from space?
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

Cargo
Posts: 399
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:02 am

Re: The Boring Sky (Sun)

Unread post by Cargo » Wed Jun 17, 2020 1:47 am

More tidbits from design and testing.
The near-Earth asteroid Bennu is fully as dark as the nucleus of comets such as 1P/Halley,
81P/Wild, 19P/Borrelly, or 103P/Hartley and of asteroids such as 253 Mathilde (Hergenrother et
al. 2013). ...disparity between noontime observations at the equator at
perihelion and near-terminator observations at aphelion that can be 3 orders of magnitude (Takir
et al. 2015), 2 orders of magnitude from the reflectance itself and 1 order of magnitude due to the
cosine effect itself. This large dynamic range is accommodated by combining a wide dynamic
range detector with exposure times ranging from millisecond to tens of seconds
typical signal levels for laboratory light (e.g., the illumination level inside
of the Lockheed Martin high-bay where the OCAMS imagers were integrated onto the
spacecraft) are 6000 DN (data number) for a 100 ms SamCam exposure. The high-bay was
measured to have an illuminance of 160 lux, corresponding to 0.51 Wm–2 sr–1, assuming a typical
luminous efficacy of 100 lm/W. Bennu’s surface is somewhat brighter under the Sun’s full
illumination at 1 AU, with an estimated illuminance level around 410 lux and a radiance of 1.4
W m–2 sr–1 at 65° incidence and 0° emission requiring a 40 ms SamCam exposure to generate a
peak signal level of 6000 DN
The star-field images are 10's of seconds long. The longest exposure done was an early look for Bennu, and was 2 hours long.
https://i.pinimg.com/236x/b7/0b/09/b70b ... 74719d.jpg
the first images of its target asteroid Bennu from a distance of 1.4 million miles
The circle is Bennu.
interstellar filaments conducted electricity having currents as high as 10 thousand billion amperes

User avatar
GaryN
Posts: 2696
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 3:18 am

Re: The Boring Sky (Sun)

Unread post by GaryN » Wed Jun 17, 2020 6:15 am

"The star-field images are 10's of seconds long. The longest exposure done was an early look for Bennu, and was 2 hours long."

So your eyes would see nothing, we have no ability to store electrons as do the sensors used in these instruments. Looking at any raw data files available for many of the instruments you find a calibration file with each image, and each pixel of the sensor has its own calibration figures, the full well capacity being one of them. This is why when you download a raw image it can be gigabytes in size whereas an ordinary camera file size is far less than that, even a 20 MP camera would only be 30 megs or so. Their cameras are only 5 MP.
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

Cargo
Posts: 399
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:02 am

Re: The Boring Sky (Sun)

Unread post by Cargo » Fri Jun 19, 2020 3:08 am

Truly, for Humans, it's completely Black out there. The sun is just a pin prick, that will still burn your retinas off though.
The space lense of the Earth atmosphere does some wonderful great things for us..
interstellar filaments conducted electricity having currents as high as 10 thousand billion amperes

User avatar
GaryN
Posts: 2696
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 3:18 am

Re: The Boring Sky (Sun)

Unread post by GaryN » Sun Jun 21, 2020 8:06 pm

At 16:55 in this youtube video the solar neutrino problem is discussed and the EU gets a mention as being able to provide a possible alternative for the discrepancy in detected neutrino counts.

Solar Neutrinos
https://youtu.be/8M_K5ytfsPk?t=1016

In my model neutrinos are produced in an electron-positron annihilation process which is the reverse of the electron and positron creation process by way of two photon physics. I have absolutely no idea if this would produce a closer match to measured counts.

Also see "Solar Neutrinos in the Electric Universe | Space News"
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
GaryN
Posts: 2696
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 3:18 am

Re: The Boring Sky (Sun)

Unread post by GaryN » Sun Jul 19, 2020 6:19 pm

Comet Neowise from the ISS.
https://scitechdaily.com/images/Comet-N ... 77x518.jpg

From the ISS the comet is only visible when looking through the atmosphere of course, and from Earth it is the same. From deep space the comet is not visible, and the Apollo astronauts who tried to photograph Bennets Comet failed. Mission control had some discussions and they had another go but no luck. So they thought about it some more and were about to make a 3rd attempt when those now famous words were issued,"Houston, we've had a problem". That was the end of the attempts to photograph the comet of course.

Before the first attempt they were given instructions.
031:57:02 Brand: Okay. The second one, at 32 hours looking at Bennett's Comet - we want the pictures taken when the spacecraft is as stable as it's going to be before starting PTC. The stability requirement is very high. We weren't sure if you understood that from what we passed up. In addition, the photographs might not show as much as the eye can see of the comet, so if you see anything interesting about the structure of the comet, why, sketching it is in order and is encouraged. Over.
They couldn't sketch what they couldn't see of course. They informed Command that they could not see the comet, or stars, through the sextant or the Optical Alignment telescope, or by eye, but Command was determined they get some photos one way or another. They never did.

One interesting sighting though as they were approaching the Moon was of 2 shadowy shapes not far away from the spacecraft that they could not figure out. Probably their chaperones standing by to help them get home safe and sound.
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
paladin17
Posts: 254
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 2:47 pm
Contact:

Re: The Boring Sky (Sun)

Unread post by paladin17 » Wed Jul 22, 2020 9:51 am

How could they see the surface of the Moon (or, in fact, anything else at all) if, as you claim, visible light is produced by the atmosphere?

User avatar
GaryN
Posts: 2696
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 3:18 am

Re: The Boring Sky (Sun)

Unread post by GaryN » Wed Jul 22, 2020 3:54 pm

Hey paladin17,
On the near side of the Moon the light is provided by Earthshine and is sufficient for safe surface operations to be carried out during the lunar night according to NASA. During near side daytime it is brighter because the solar ionising radiation is producing a full spectrum light by interaction with the sub-micron sized silica particles in the lunar atmosphere. We have no measured surface illumination levels of either the near or far side, but the far side day time illumination levels would be found to be much dimmer than the near side as the far side is never subject to the ionising radiation from the Van Allen belts and Earths upper atmosphere, which in effect bias the near side dust particles.

Lighting Constraints on Lunar Surface Operations (1991)
https://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/strategi ... raints.pdf

The only measured illumination levels I have seen so far are for the Earth taken when Apollo 8 was half way to the Moon, and was 310 Lumens. They did not do the same for the Moon but it was noted that the Moon was much dimmer, though that would be expected because of the lower lunar surface albedo. That we have no measured surface illumination levels for the Moon, or Mars or Mercury after all these years should raise some questions but nobody seems to notice or to care.
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

Cargo
Posts: 399
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:02 am

Re: The Boring Sky (Sun)

Unread post by Cargo » Thu Jul 23, 2020 4:46 am

Paladin, you remember the news from the last year or so, the Moon is actually inside what could be considered (in regards to sunlight), the Earth's atmosphere. In fact, it was just on the last page. https://thunderbolts.info/forum3/phpBB3 ... rt=15#p536
interstellar filaments conducted electricity having currents as high as 10 thousand billion amperes

User avatar
paladin17
Posts: 254
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 2:47 pm
Contact:

Re: The Boring Sky (Sun)

Unread post by paladin17 » Thu Jul 23, 2020 1:27 pm

Cargo wrote:
Thu Jul 23, 2020 4:46 am
Paladin, you remember the news from the last year or so, the Moon is actually inside what could be considered (in regards to sunlight), the Earth's atmosphere. In fact, it was just on the last page. https://thunderbolts.info/forum3/phpBB3 ... rt=15#p536
Yes. And the Solar System is inside the Sun's atmosphere, which is inside Galaxy's atmosphere.

Cargo
Posts: 399
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:02 am

Re: The Boring Sky (Sun)

Unread post by Cargo » Fri Jul 24, 2020 2:47 am

Is it just that word? I thought you had a question, and Gary's response was very well. I only meant to point out the conjunction, in case you still weren't sure.
interstellar filaments conducted electricity having currents as high as 10 thousand billion amperes

User avatar
paladin17
Posts: 254
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 2:47 pm
Contact:

Re: The Boring Sky (Sun)

Unread post by paladin17 » Fri Jul 24, 2020 12:51 pm

Cargo wrote:
Fri Jul 24, 2020 2:47 am
in case you still weren't sure.
I got my answers already.

Brent72
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 1:51 pm

Re: The Boring Sky (Sun)

Unread post by Brent72 » Sat Jul 25, 2020 1:46 am

Cargo wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 3:08 am
Truly, for Humans, it's completely Black out there. The sun is just a pin prick, that will still burn your retinas off though.
The space lense of the Earth atmosphere does some wonderful great things for us..
For us on Earth, looking out into the night sky, it's all just a massive light show. Put on just for us!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest