The Sun Tells All

paladius

paladius

Temporal Navigator
I think I read somewhere on here that increased fireballs would a sign to look for before a planet x arrival or some other major "thing". Maybe timeline 37?

There have been two large green fireballs now in past month. Green being related to iron, iron being related to magnetic fields, and the sun has been really, really quiet lately, with no visible magnetic disturbances on earth side of sun.

Now, if a iron planet with strong magnetic field was in a large orbit around our solar system , it would be likely that there would be parts of that planet (from asterioid hits) that would be blasted off the surafce but still in a similar orbit through our solar system.

SO, evidence is pointing to timeline 37's description as truth.

The fire balls could be parts of planet x that have been split off in past, but ahead of planet. If the the planet has a strong magnetic field, and is behind sun, it could attract and focus all solar magnetic disturbances toward far side of sun (explaining lack of sun spot that we have been observing). You have to look at sun spots as magnetic disturbances and a lack of them, could just mean that they are focused somewhere. Think of a spencer gifts plasma ball. You turn it on and little purple whisps touch the glass ball all over (sun spots). But then you touch the glass, grounding it, and all whisps focus onto your finger (magnetic ground planet x). As your finger rotates around the glass, the plasma trail follows (planet X's orbit arc being aligned as such as to make planet on far side of sun hidden from our perspective until it is nearly between earth and the sun).

Scary, that the evidence is showing this to be true. And it would explain why the FEDs recently released 2 trillion dollars to someone(s) and that they can not not say who or why.
 
Google it! Why do I have to prove everything on this site?

Western "fireball" may have been small asteroid
Baltimore Sun - ‎3 hours ago‎

Fireball Lights Up the Night Sky in Parts of the West
Nick.com - ‎4 hours ago‎

The UFO / fireball in the sky Saturday night was part of a meteor shower (video)
Examiner.com - ‎Nov 8, 2009‎

Weekend Fireball Still a Mystery
NBC Bay Area - Rob Mayeda, Lori Preuitt - ‎Nov 9, 2009‎
 
SO, evidence is pointing to timeline 37's description as truth.
Click to expand...


No....it points to the fact that such events are actually quite common. All-sky ( fisheye ) cameras across the world pick up bright fireballs on a daily basis. The really bright ones ( brighter than a full moon ) occur somewhere on Earth about once a week. And those large and bright enough to remain intact all the way to the ground occur maybe half a dozen times a year.

Back in the 70s when I was a member of the British Astronomical Association, fireball spotting was one of my activities. These days most of the recording is done with all-sky video cameras....which is good but kinda misses the pure meditative aspect of just sitting there for several hours watching the stars go round and contemplating one's place in the universe.
 
Google it! Why do I have to prove everything on this site?
Click to expand...

Perhaps because you have a documented history (on this site!) of overstating things, or taking things WELL beyond the context in which they actually occur. And this case is another good example. Clearly, there has been meteor shower activity in the past week (Leonid). And one of the citations you finally gave even sets that appropriate context:

The UFO / fireball in the sky Saturday night was part of a meteor shower (video)
Examiner.com - ‎Nov 8, 2009‎
Click to expand...

Yet not only do you NOT consider the cyclical Leonid meteor shower in your analysis, you go off in a completely unsubstantiated direction trying to make a claim there is "evidence" that this is part of Planet X, and that another goofy prognosticator from this site is being validated.

Your overt tendency to stretch reality into a contrived fantasy is, as I say, well documented here. So it should come as no surprise that some of us who appreciate evidence for wild claims will ask you to provide backing for those claims.

RMT
 
More Fun FACTS!

There have been two large green fireballs now in past month. Green being related to iron, iron being related to magnetic fields, and the sun has been really, really quiet lately, with no visible magnetic disturbances on earth side of sun.
Click to expand...

Actually....not so much. Where you got the idea that iron burns green is beyond me...and another valid reason to ask you to provide substantiating evidence. First, let's review meteor colors (and note this page is specifically dedicated to Leonid showers):

http://leonid.arc.nasa.gov/meteor.html

<font color="red"> "Colors of meteors The color of many Leonids is caused by light emitted from metal atoms from the meteoroid (blue, green, and yellow) and light emitted by atoms and molecules of the air (red). The metal atoms emit light much like in our sodium discharge lamps: sodium (Na) atoms give an orange-yellow light, iron (Fe) atoms a yellow light, magnesium (Mg) a blue-green light, ionized calcium (Ca+) atoms may add a violet hue, while molecules of atmospheric nitrogen (N2) and oxygen atoms (O) give a red light. The meteor color depends on whether the metal atom emissions or the air plasma emissions dominate" [/COLOR]

And as a follow-up, it might be good to examine what properties iron actually exhibits when it burns. And as it turns out, iron, on its own, does not burn at all, it melts. However, high levels of oxygen can be used as a catalyst to induce burning of the metal:

http://www.angelo.edu/faculty/kboudrea/demos/burning_iron/burning_iron.htm

<font color="red"> "In pure oxygen, things which are normally not flammable, such as iron or steel, can become very flammable.

(snip)

The iron glows with a bright yellow-orange color as it becomes hot enough to melt slightly, and throws off a shower of sparks." [/COLOR]

Finally, it might be good to see what base metals actually DO yield green colors when burned (either on their own or with a catalyst partner). The answer is not surprising: copper!

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_colour_flame_do_you_get_when_you_burn_Copper

<font color="red"> Q: What colour flame do you get when you burn Copper?
A: A bright green color is imparted to the flame by copper(II) chloride, but copper metal will not burn it will melt. [/COLOR]

So would you like to re-state/reform your analysis?

RMT
 
Re: More Fun FACTS!

If fireballs are as common as you say, tv and police stations would not get 20,000 calls when one flies by.

And the last fireball, according NASA, (whatever they know) was NOT part of Leonid meteor shower.

Just curious about this stuff.
 
Re: More Fun FACTS!

OH YEAH, CITATIONS...

Although the fireball appeared during the Leonid meteor shower, it was not a Leonid. Infrasound recordings of the blast suggest a small asteroid hitting Earth's atmosphere and exploding with an energy of 0.5 to 1 kiloton of TNT. (http://spaceweather.com/)
 
Re: More Fun FACTS!

Although the fireball appeared during the Leonid meteor shower, it was not a Leonid.
Click to expand...

OK, fine. I can accept that. But I wonder if you are willing to admit you jumped the gun (and got some things technically incorrect) in your rush to connect green fireballs to Planet X? I mean, at least admit there is no "iron" connection to green fireballs, yes? It is the least you can do.

RMT
 
Re: More Fun FACTS!

If fireballs are as common as you say, tv and police stations would not get 20,000 calls when one flies by.

And the last fireball, according NASA, (whatever they know) was NOT part of Leonid meteor shower.

Just curious about this stuff.
Click to expand...


There's no 'if' about it. As KerrTexas illustrates in a chart.........and frankly that chart bears out my own experience as an actual observer of such phenomenon.

One has to bear in mind several factors. Although the range of visibility for a bright fireball may be 200 miles, that is really quite small on a planetary scale, and the brightness also drops off considerably with distance. So fireballs are very much a 'local' phenomenon.

Also, if you are indoors ( which most people are in the evening ) when a fireball occurs you will likely miss it completely. I know people who have gone their entire lives and never seen one.

The most important factor is that 'fireballs' cover a huge range of brightness. The brightness at which a bog standard 'shooting star' is defined as a fireball is really quite arbitrary.

Magnitudes of stellar objects are defined using a curious logarithmic scale in which each integer number is 2.51 times brighter than the next...and the brighter objects have negative numbers.

Jupiter is about magnitude -2...which is about the lower end at which on would use the term 'fireball'. I've seen several hundred of that brightness.

A fireball 100 times brighter would ( due to the logarithmic scale ) be magnitude -7. This is about the level that fireballs start to get public attention....but is still actually quite faint as fireballs go.

Another 5 magnitudes and we get to magnitude -12.....as bright as the full moon...10,000 times brighter than Jupiter. This is spectacular, and I've seen several dozen that bright.

BUT....the range of brightness can go all the way up another 15 magnitudes.....a million times brighter than even the full moon, and at magnitude -27....that is actually as bright as the sun !! For a single observer, these are quite rare ( unless you have an all-sky camera on 24/7 )...but a fireball that bright occurs somewhere on Earth maybe once a month and possibly more often. These are the ones that grab the headlines.

So, the term fireball actually covers a 10 billionfold range in brightness..with the fainter ones being exceedingly common ( probably dozens a second over the Earth as a whole ) and the mega-bright ones being less common.
 
Re: More Fun FACTS!

kertex chart tells all. They are far more common that I thought, although I am still surprised if they are that common that most people are aware of them and so many people/news crews/etc. jump on a single fireball as an anomaly, when they are apparently are not.

The green color, I heard or read in the past few days was caused by iron. That is incorrect, as rmt pointed out, but it is still what i read/heard in one of the stories i looked at on net in past few days relating to this last fireball. Sorry I quoted an incorrect source. Besides I shouldv'e known better as I used to be pyro and burnt EVERYTHING and know copper makes green.

Anyways, out of "fireball news" that I have seen in past month (not looking for it, just came accross the stories) both fireball stories in media described green.

Regardless of color, I still think the sun's quietness is a little unsettling. I know it is "just a long solar minimum" to some, but I get the feeling there is more to it that that. Yes, rmt, just a gut feeling, no evidence to back it up. Take it or leave it.
 
Re: More Fun FACTS!

Regardless of color, I still think the sun's quietness is a little unsettling. I know it is "just a long solar minimum" to some, but I get the feeling there is more to it that that. Yes, rmt, just a gut feeling, no evidence to back it up. Take it or leave it.
Click to expand...
#


It's really quite minor compared with the 'Maunder minimum' ( 1645 to 1715 ) in which just a few hundred sunspots were observed in over 70 years.....compared with tens of thousands in the same time period in the 1900s.

There is some evidence that even the sun's 'normal' activity is not quite normal...and that 'super flares' ( 1000 times more energetic than ordinary solar flares ) OUGHT to be more common. Just as well for our entire telecommunications industry that they are not......as a repeat of the 1859 super flare ( the largest flare on record ) would wipe out most of that technology.
 
Re: More Fun FACTS!

well that is exactly it, in 1700, who cared if there was a large or no solar flares. Didn;t matter. Today, however NORAD could go black if there was a superflare. What do you think some old Russian and US nuclear missiles are set to do when power and communication goes out? In 1960, "launch" was a failsafe in that situation, and who knows if all those systems have been updated.
 
Back
Top