From: Viktor Golubic <diverge247.nul> Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 21:19:50 -0400 (EDT) Archived: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 05:02:59 -0400 Subject: Re: 'Snowflake' Video From South America >From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >To: post.nul >Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 17:25:13 -0400 (EDT) >Subject: Re: 'Snowflake' Video From South America >>From: Viktor Golubic <Diverge247.nul> >>To: post.nul >>Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 21:44:53 -0400 (EDT) >>Subject: Re: 'Snowflake' Video From South America >>>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul> >>>To: post.nul >>>Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 12:02:13 -0400 (EDT) >>>Subject: Re: 'Snowflake' Video From South America >>>>From: Martin Shough <parcellular.nul> >>>>To: <post.nul> >>>>Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 12:41:39 +0100 >>>>Subject: 'Snowflake' Video From South America >>>>http://tinyurl.com/c6c5pfu >>>>Subtracting the erratic camera motion and measuring the position >>>>of the light relative to the house window, I think the object >>>>seems to drift slowly up and to the left over the rooftop during >>>>the video. This makes me think of a bright star or planet. But >>>>of course with no direction or time information to go on it's >>>>hard to say. The pattern of lights hints at some optical or >>>>video artefact but I haven't seen an effect exactly like this >>>>before. Any thoughts? >>>I wonder if the guy videoed a bright planet using a "star >>>filter" or something like that on his lens (a diffraction filter >>>with three gratings that are 120 degrees apart). >>>He might have used a color filter as well to make the light >>>approximately monochromatic to avoid color blur that would occur >>>when a diffraction filter is used with polychromatic light such >>>as starlight. >>>Tha latter portion of the video looks like an "emboss" version >>>of the first part. Pulsations of the image could be a >>>combination of "focus hunting" by the camera and atmospheric >>>scintillation. >><If all this were to turn out to be true, then it would be a >>>hoax. >>Hi Bruce, I think this is a very good suggestion. However, every >>diffraction filter I know has bilateral symmetry: Where there is >>the corresponding right half identical to its left. However, >>this is a seven point polygon (not even numbered) with no >>bilateral reflection plane. I'm not sure any exist and even if >>you attempted seven, by default it will a produce a fourteen >>point pattern (even not odd like this one). >>Any additional thoughts? >>My only thinking is that this is a lens flare effect caused by a >>thin film coating and the shape of the aperture. In that case, >>the spatial distribution of the flare depends on the shape of >>the aperture itself which has a seven point symmetry. >You are correct that there wouldn't be a "7-fold symmetry" >created by a filter such as described above. >I have looked at the video again and noted that it seems like a >"6-fold" array with a couple of other lights in seemingly random >- but fixed relative to other lights - positions. The seven is always there and never varies so I'm not seeing anything but seven. I had tried to envision six but the axis are also bent slightly to accord with a seven-fold system. >I also note the "lights" (diffraction orders if this were an >image of a diffraction pattern) seem weak or non-existent at the >right side. It is as if some lights were missing or blocked by >something. I thought of that too but the intensitieare are not diminished and I have frozen the images multiple times throughout the recording. The symmetry does not appear to have any voids, but blocking could be there. >Since a diffraction filter operates inside the camera the >diffraction orders would be created and there would be nothing >to block a diffraction order. Yes, agreed >I therefore question my own suggested explanation and note that >others have proposed a LED light hoax. If so, and if the lights >were intended to be in a pattern, then something happened to the >'contraption' on the way up! My first thoughts were LED helium filled balloons and had bought some recently for my friends daughter. The slight rotation could still be adequately explained as the photographer rotating the camera as he held it. I can still believe that we are looking at a lens flare through a seven point aperture, noting that the center one is always brightest. A thin-film coating on the lens could cause the two order separation along each of the seven axes, thus filling out the flare as observed. Viktor Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp