From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> Date: Sun, 8 May 2005 12:30:13 -0400 (GMT-04:00) Fwd Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 20:32:36 -0400 Subject: Re: More UFO Fleets Over Mexico - Smith >From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj.nul> >To: ufoupdates.nul >Date: Wed, 04 May 2005 10:24:41 -0700 >Subject: Re: More UFO Fleets Over Mexico >>From: James Smith <zeus001002.nul> >>To: ufoupdates.nul >>Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 14:04:30 -0400 (GMT-04:00) >>Subject: Re: More UFO Fleets Over Mexico >James, it's nice that you got rid of all those strings you had >previously postulated. You are now assuming that: >(a) The hypothesized balloons, now buoyant, have risen above the >planetary boundary layer (PBL), where small-scale turbulence is >lacking. This implies either a shallow PBL extending only a very >few hundred feet above the ground, or rather large balloons or >both, such that the video shows the orbs in good individual >resolution and at the same time over a large expanse of some 80 >"balloon" diameters in width. Possible. Thanks. >(b) The hypothesized balloons continue to rise, but do so all at >the same rate so that their rising motion is not noticeable in a >video that tracks them. This is now your key problem. Their >rates of rise would all vary a few percent from each other at >least, due to their slightly different volumes of inflation. If >rising on the average at 8 ft/sec., some would be rising at a >speed nearer 7.5 ft/sec., e.g., others at 8.5 ft/sec. Over a >minute's time, their vertical displacements would have randomly >changed relative positions by some 30 feet or more -- by many >balloon diameters. Nothing like that shows up on the video. >Hence the witnesses could remark that the objects didn't behave >like balloons. You are correct. There would be a slight difference, but I have not calculated the difference. I will check your calcs when I have time. Do you think temperature effects play a big role here or not? >So as a believer in the balloon hypothesis, your task is now >simpler. Without having to resort to a multitude of strings >between balloons, and without worrying how to get no-lift >balloons up several hundred feet, all you need do now is inflate >and release several hundred buoyant balloons, video-tape them, >and show the results of a one-minute video of them. No photo- >shop artistry allowed! Or, perhaps you should assume further >that the video camera was aimed directly overhead. I can try to use 3DMax to simulate this kind of thing, at least initially. My question is what is the field of view, camera elevation. Of course its hard to confirm these things without a nice Campeche like FLIR on screen printout. Also, does any detailed wind layer data exist for that area? Odd things can happen when you are using a high zoom, such that you don't really need to be looking directly overhead to get a similar effect. Also, can you please tell me exactly which video you are writing about so we can coordinate.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp