Jim Oberg's "99 FAQs About Space UFO Videos"

[zorgon]

It DOES need to be proven, and you STATING it doesn't do that.

I did more than state it I showed you it in action.

WHY do you reject the explanation that reflected sunlight is inadequate to explain the observed brightness?

The surface is not specular reflective, but diffuse reflective, since it's Kevlar, not a mirror.

Seems you answered your own question 

It sure looked like it was moving across the thicker [reddened] lower atmosphere into full sunlight. Why would plasma glow mimic that normal attenuation effect?

Just because it 'looked like it" to you doesn't make it so. Time stamps? You know we don't have accurate info on that because Martyn's intercepted copy does not have them. You keep claiming NASA has the original with that information, but neither you or NASA has ever released it so it is likely they lost it along with all the other stuff they loose like the Apollo 11 tapes and the Lunar Orbiter tapes (which fortunately Mark Nelson(Dr X) had saved in his garage rather than destroy them)

Now if we look back at the NASA report I mentioned where they state that the plasma arc stopped after it was out of sunlight because of electron density...  since the wire is STILL moving at orbital speed, it is not hard to extrapolate that when the tether once again emerged into the sunlight, and electron density once more was re-established, that the arc would once again 'ignite" as it were.  And just like the plasma experiment I showed you, it would start out a dull glow until the plasma got 'hot' enough

So I have no difficulty seeing how plasma could easily explain the situation you described.

And by your own words  "it looked like".  Well 'looked like' is not good enough

Simply dragging a copper wire that long through earths magnetosphere at that speed will produce a lot of electron volts... the purpose of the tether after all.  The AMOUNT it collects was greatly underestimated by NASA 'scientists' and that is what caused the failure in the first place.  All that electricity collected has to go somewhere

Incidently the spaceships moving through space also collect such electricity... NASA says, in that same report, that it is enough to kill an astronaut if he were free floating and not properly grounded.  And imagine the shuttle approaching the ISS

can we say ZAPPP!!







The ruling of the board?  Should have installed an arc detection circuit to shut it down in case



All about Plasma

Abstract

Plasma contactors have been baselined for the Space Station (SS) to control the electrical potentials of surfaces to eliminate/mitigate damaging interactions with the space environment. The system represents a dual-use technology which is a direct outgrowth of the NASA electric propulsion program and, in particular, the technology development effort on ion thrustor systems. The plasma contactor subsystems include the plasma contactor unit, a power electronics unit, and an expellant management unit. Under this pre-flight development program these will all be brought to breadboard or engineering model status. Development efforts for the plasma contactor include optimizing the design and configuration of the contactor, validating its required lifetime, and characterizing the contactor plume and electromagnetic interference. The plasma contactor unit design selected for the SS is an enclosed keeper, xenon hollow cathode plasma source. This paper discusses the test results and development status of the plasma contactor unit subsystem for the SS.

SAO/NASA ADS Physics Abstract Service
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993iep..confQ..13P

Any high scholl kid that has ever played with electricity can tell you plasma arcs wheter sustained of momentary GLOW ie give off light   Usually VERY bright

You can even create a glowing plasma ball by putting a grape in a microwave

Now watch this vedeo

See how it starts off a deep REDDISH glow then gets brighter and goes to BLUE WHITE?  I would say THAT describes perfectly what you said you saw as the Tether reignited

[JimO]

simple question.

How long AFTER the tether break was the famous video taken?

[JimO]

There was a lot of speculation as to ionization as source of some tether brightness
http://www.satobs.org/seesat/Aug-2002/0015.html
http://www.eclipsetours.com/paul-maley/artificial-satellite-observations/tethered-satellites/
http://www.satobs.org/tss.html

One significant data point against the plasma explanation is that other tethers that were NOT conducting NEVERTHELESS were just as bright. Sort of blows the requirement for plasma dominating reflected light, right out of orbit.

log entries of actual sts-75observations
http://www.satobs.org/seesat/Mar-1996/index.html

The fundamental objection to Zorgon's 'glowing plasma' is that the sunlit tether alone was plenty bright enough on its own.

Also, if the induced current created the 'glowing plasma', a la Zorgon, why did going into darkness stop it? The motion through the magnetic field was unabated, so would the induced current have been. But many observers saw the tether become invisible at sunset and vice versa.

[zorgon]

Also, if the induced current created the 'glowing plasma', a la Zorgon, why did going into darkness stop it? The motion through the magnetic field was unabated, so would the induced current have been. But many observers saw the tether become invisible at sunset and vice versa.

NASA report says the electron density in the shadow of earth is less... says so right in their report.

I guess that would be like expecting solar panels to produce at night

One flaw with your reflecred sunlight theory

There are hundreds of thousands of pieces of space debris out there. Many of those pieces are both larget and more reflective that the tether...

So why do we not see all these pieces as they reflect sunlight?

Can't have it both ways

[zorgon]

There was a lot of speculation as to ionization as source of some tether brightness
http://www.satobs.org/seesat/Aug-2002/0015.html
http://www.eclipsetours.com/paul-maley/artificial-satellite-observations/tethered-satellites/
http://www.satobs.org/tss.html

LOL this is funny... I am using NASA official reports and you are using "Eclipse Tours" as a source.  Opinions don't count

And yout\r satobs link says this "Others have commented on the surprising brightness of the tether - one report placed it at about mag. +3, though brightness estimates of such an unusual (in effect one dimensional) object are hard to make. It seems to compare favorably with the SEDS tether of recent years despite it being much narrower; only 2.54 mm. "

Seems to compare hmmmm yup that sure is proof

One significant data point against the plasma explanation is that other tethers that were NOT conducting NEVERTHELESS were just as bright. Sort of blows the requirement for plasma dominating reflected light, right out of orbit.

What other tethers? The NAVY one glowed and was zapped by lasers   What other tethers do we have to compare with?

[The Matrix Traveller]

The fundamental objection to Zorgon's 'glowing plasma' is that the sunlit tether alone was plenty bright enough on its own.

Anything on record regarding the Level of light recorded from the tether ?

To take out any guess work, what was the data recorded regarding light intensity of the tether,
both from orbit and the ground ?

If nothing on record the above statement (Quote) is purely guess work.

The math will tell you whether the source of light at any stage, was Generated within/about the tether,
or diffuse reflective light from the sun.

I tend to think that the light was probably produced by the plasma.

[JimO]

,,,,

One flaw with your reflecred sunlight theory

There are hundreds of thousands of pieces of space debris out there. Many of those pieces are both larget and more reflective that the tether...

So why do we not see all these pieces as they reflect sunlight?

Can't have it both ways

You can't have been paying attention to the satobs.org message boards. They visually observe space debris all the time. How about you list me, say, four or five of these debris objects bigger and more reflective than the tether that we still don't see?

While we're at it, how about you demonstrate you even know how big the tether was -- what was its visual area, its total reflecting surface, as viewed from the ground?

[JimO]

LOL this is funny... I am using NASA official reports and you are using "Eclipse Tours" as a source.  Opinions don't count

Thanks for giving me the chance to  supplement your incomplete knowledge and needle you for over-the-top arrogance. Paul Maley is the world's leading satellite visual observer with decades of pioneering imaging and descriptions of space objects both in orbit and reentering, some involving world wide travel. He pioneered asteroid occultation campaigns in the 1980s that collected the first indications of asteroid satellites, later confirmed by Hubble and by fly-by probes.  He observed and imaged several tether satellites including STS=75.

The fact that you would mock his status and closed-mindedly dismiss his observations as worthless 'opinion' suggests to me an inadequate flexibility in recognizing your own ignorance. I'm rather disappointed. Am I wasting my  time here?

[JimO]

Anything on record regarding the Level of light recorded from the tether ?

To take out any guess work, what was the data recorded regarding light intensity of the tether, both from orbit and the ground ?

If nothing on record the above statement (Quote) is purely guess work.

The math will tell you whether the source of light at any stage, was Generated within/about the tether, or diffuse reflective light from the sun.

I tend to think that the light was probably produced by the plasma.

This is a good question, and it is discussed at length on the satobs,org links I provided. Hold off on your tendency to reach a judgment without familiarizing yourself with the actual observations.

[JimO]

NASA report says the electron density in the shadow of earth is less... says so right in their report.

I guess that would be like expecting solar panels to produce at night

Are you expecting electrons and photons to behave the same regarding Earth's shadow? Think again. HINT: What is the charge on a photon and why does the electron's charge make a difference?

Jeez, loooo-WEEZ, Zorgon, get it together, please.

[JimO]

...
Incidently the spaceships moving through space also collect such electricity... NASA says, in that same report, that it is enough to kill an astronaut if he were free floating and not properly grounded.  And imagine the shuttle approaching the ISS

can we say ZAPPP!!

So what? I wrote about this fifteen years ago for 'Spectrum', professional journal of the institute of electrical and electronics engineers. There never was any indication these plasmas were visible.  The fact that they WEREN'T was the major safety worry.


http://spectrum.ieee.org/aerospace/space-flight/nasas-big-push-for-the-space-station

[easynow]

There never was any indication these plasmas were visible.

That seems unlikely 

[easynow]

An FYI for all NASA UFO Hunters

NASA created UFO like Orb? Bokeh? Alien Spacecraft?

Re: Jim's Copy of NASA STS-75 tether

Either

1) he doesn't have a copy... otherwise he would have posted it years ago to make his point

or

2) he has a copy but won't show it because it proves ours

I'll take door number 2 please 

[zorgon]

Are you expecting electrons and photons to behave the same regarding Earth's shadow? Think again. HINT: What is the charge on a photon and why does the electron's charge make a difference?

On the left... spacecraft in shadow...  on the right spacecraft in sunlight



Expanding plasma discharge



Spacecraft charging...


https://www.spenvis.oma.be/help/background/charging/sintambp.gif

Flight data and laboratory simulations indicate that portions of the surface of the spacecraft not only charge to MANY kV (negative) but also suffer discharges (ars and coronas)

Like the corona discharge on the clove in Easynow's clip

Just like a lightning bolt you will get that corona effect before the big bolt that lights up the sky with a plasma arc

[zorgon]