Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum

(Nov 23, 2024 08:28 AM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]Only an ideologue would demand that video is evidence of anything but the visual, even though that is all video is capable of recording. Talk about not being in touch with reality.

And I guess such bias precludes reading facts, like a range of hundreds of meters and being capable of being deployed from an aircraft.

But you were in the Navy, MR. Were you privy to every aspect of every mission and exercise you participated in? Unless you hold high rank, there's no reason you'd know about cutting edge military technology testing. But your bias is likely just as divorced from reality on that point as well.

Given that these spheres have been around since at least the 1950s and lasers weren't invented until 1960 .. even if they are a projection then the method and equipment used to create the effect predates earthling technology by many years.

(Nov 23, 2024 10:00 PM)confused2 Wrote: [ -> ]Given that these spheres have been around since at least the 1950s and lasers weren't invented until 1960 .. even if they are a projection then the method and equipment used to create the effect predates earthling technology by many years.

And far older sightings. Not that I'd buy into much from people who were receptive to personal sightings of angels and hearing the voice of God in their day. 

1561 celestial phenomenon over Nuremberg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1561_celes..._Nuremberg

"The broadsheet claims that witnesses observed hundreds of spheres, cylinders, and other odd-shaped objects that moved erratically overhead..."

One more snag with the laser projection theory of uaps:

"The one item that still gnaws at me in the report (and anyone correct me if I misunderstood the timeline) was that the second wing of F-18's were not able to radar lock but could follow the objects via their ATFLIR's. When laser's concentrate on a specific area, they can ionize the air enough to allow radar returns, but the caveat is they have to stay concentrated on a specific area long enough to do so. A moving laser target would not stay in position long enough to fully ionize the air for a sufficient radar return."---
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/thread...162/page-2

There's a difference between lasers and laser-induced plasma. The latter can be fine-tuned for IR:

Laser induced plasma emission spectra covers a wide electromagnetic spectrum, from Infrared (IR) to Visible (VIS) and up to Ultraviolet region ((UV). By fine-tuning the interaction parameters (e.g. laser wavelength, laser temporal and spatial pulse profile, and etc.) it is possible to maximize the radiating power for a dedicated electromagnetic spectrum.
- https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200041236A1/en

And plasma has been suggested as a way to reduce radar signature:

Plasma stealth is a proposed process to use ionized gas (plasma) to reduce the radar cross-section (RCS) of an aircraft.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_stealth

You were saying?

(Nov 24, 2024 01:34 AM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]There's a difference between lasers and laser-induced plasma. The latter can be fine-tuned for IR:

Laser induced plasma emission spectra covers a wide electromagnetic spectrum, from Infrared (IR) to Visible (VIS) and up to Ultraviolet region ((UV). By fine-tuning the interaction parameters (e.g. laser wavelength, laser temporal and spatial pulse profile, and etc.) it is possible to maximize the radiating power for a dedicated electromagnetic spectrum.
- https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200041236A1/en

And plasma has been suggested as a way to reduce radar signature:

Plasma stealth is a proposed process to use ionized gas (plasma) to reduce the radar cross-section (RCS) of an aircraft.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_stealth

You were saying?

That's what they're talking about--the laser igniting a 3D image made up tiny exploding plasma points, Like the pixels on old TVs. A moving image would not be able to be detected on radar because there's no time to ignite enough plasma points. But uaps ARE detected in radar. So uaps can't be laser projections, a technology which doesn't even exist yet.

(Nov 24, 2024 01:49 AM)Magical Realist Wrote: [ -> ]That's what they're talking about--the laser igniting a 3D image made up tiny exploding plasma points, Like the pixels on old TVs. A moving image would not be able to be detected on radar because there's no time to ignite enough plasma points. But uaps ARE detected in radar. So uaps can't be laser projections, a technology which doesn't even exist yet.

As usual, you don't even understand the things you cite.

(Nov 24, 2024 12:02 AM)Magical Realist Wrote: [ -> ]One more snag with the laser projection theory of uaps:

"The one item that still gnaws at me in the report (and anyone correct me if I misunderstood the timeline) was that the second wing of F-18's were not able to radar lock but could follow the objects via their ATFLIR's. When laser's concentrate on a specific area, they can ionize the air enough to allow radar returns, but the caveat is they have to stay concentrated on a specific area long enough to do so. A moving laser target would not stay in position long enough to fully ionize the air for a sufficient radar return."---
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/thread...162/page-2

That literally says that it could not be tracked on radar, but only IR, which is exactly what the laser-induced plasma does.
One of these days you'll learn to read, little mooncalf.

Don't presume to tell an ex Navy radar tech about Navy radar systems..

"In fighter jets, a "radar lock" means the pilot has selected an enemy aircraft as the primary target and the radar is actively tracking it, allowing for a potential missile launch."

"The report is loaded with facts about the “tic tac,” referred to in the report as an anomalous aerial vehicle (AAV.) Stratton interviewed the aviator witnesses and spoke with radar and sensor operators who said “tic tac” objects were detected many times, dropping from 60,000 feet to ocean level in a matter of seconds. They reportedly traveled at 30 to 60 times the speed of sound without producing sonic booms. Pilots saw the object with their own eyes and on their instruments, infrared sensors which recorded the now-famous video.

Multiple other sensors confirmed the encounters, including AN/SPY, a system capable of tracking a golf ball 100 miles away, and the E-2 Hawkeye early warning aircraft that flew above the USS Nimitz Carrier Strike Group"--- https://www.wate.com/news/world/inside-o...-incident/

"The AN/SPY-1 is a multi-function, phased array, 3D air search radar that provides search, detection, tracking, and discrimination data of air and surface targets."

You were saying?

You just verified exactly what I said.
Me: "it could not be tracked on radar"
You: '"radar lock" means... the radar is actively tracking it'
Apparently you were lousy at your job before getting drummed out as a basket case.

If you can't comprehend the things you cite, that's your own illiterate problem.

Now you're just deflecting by talking about a different UAP entirely, which is clear by the difference between "were not able to radar lock" and "radar and sensor operators... detected many times", as well as from metallic spheres to tic-tacs. That's the problem with dishonest people. If you refute them, they simply change their argument.

But one problem with saying objects traveling at 30-60 times the speed of sound were detected on radar is that they can't be. At such supersonic speeds, plasma envelopes absorb radar signals. This is the whole reason countries have sought to develop supersonic missiles. So at best, they can only track subsonic objects on radar. It's more likely that they were intermittently getting multiple objects 60,000 feet apart, as they dropped in and out of supersonic speeds. Simply mistaking them as a single object, due to the gap in radar signal.

Quote:You just verified exactly what I said.
Me: "it could not be tracked on radar"
You: '"radar lock" means... the radar is actively tracking it'

Are you really this stupid? To lock on to and track a target the target has to already be detected by the radar, else how will they be able to lock on to it? You're simply too ignorant to grasp this fact.

Every thing else I quoted confirms that the uap tic tacs of the USS Nimitz incident were indeed detected on other radars as well. It's the same incident. Meaning ofcourse the laser plasma theory utterly fails in explaining uaps. Quit embarrassing yourself with your ignorance:

"Objects were detected one moment and gone the next. On Nov. 14, radar operators finally got a lock on one object—the Tic Tac.

Top Gun pilot David Fravor was sent to investigate. The commander of the “Black Aces” Strike Fighter Squadron 41 sped through the skies in his F-18 and could not believe what he saw. Years later, his opinion hasn’t changed.

David Fravor, the commander of the “Black Aces” Strike Fighter Squadron 41 sped through the skies in his F-18 and could not believe what he saw.

“The video was taken by a crew after us when we came back and landed,” Fravor recounted.
“There were four of us. We chased it visually, and I looked at it for over five minutes.”

Fravor described watching it move and interact with his jet. He was confident that what he saw was not one of the usual aerial suspects.

“It’s not a bird. It’s not a weather balloon. It had no wings, it had no rotors, there was no wash,” he said. “The four of us will to this day tell you that we have no idea what we saw, as far as where it was from or what it was, but it had incredible performance characteristics that were well beyond brand new Super Hornets right out of the factory, which [were] the jets we were flying.”

Commander Chad Underwood was in the second F-18 sent after the Tic Tac. A recording device on his plane recorded the grainy image from an infrared sensor. Underwood said a second recording of the incident has never been released, adding that the Tic Tac engaged in active jamming.

“I did get jamming cues on my radar tape,” Underwood said."

Hmmm...imagine that!

I can't help it if you've already forgotten your own citation:

(Nov 24, 2024 12:02 AM)Magical Realist Wrote: [ -> ]...F-18's were not able to radar lock but could follow the objects via their ATFLIR's.

Again, that's exactly what would occur with a laser-induced plasma. But maybe you just can't manage to parse that fairly simple sentence you cited. @_@

Then you change your story and claim they are seen on radar. Which is it?
Again, if it was seen on radar, it couldn't be while supersonic, due to plasma signal absorption. And since the F-18's max speed is around mach 1.8, there's no way they could keep up with 30-60 times the speed of sound to track it visually. This means they have no way to know whether they saw one or multiple objects. So still lots of unfounded assumptions.