Just a satellite, but...

[Hoku]

I've been putting this off for a while, but I saw something kinda neat last month (mid-late September actually) and I'm curious to see how common it is and to understand it a little better.

My husband, daughter and I were staying at a cabin in the mountains and got back to it one night when the moon was getting higher in the sky (maybe 10pm?). The moon was nearly full. When we got out of the rental Jeep, we looked up at the moon and saw a noteworthy satellite.

From our perspective, it was pretty close to the moon and moving towards it. The thing that was really neat about it was that, whatever signals it was sending - GPS, cellphone, whatever - were visible. I think they were reflecting the moons light. So we saw concentric rings, maybe 6, covering about 90 deg of its circle, in the direction of travel (towards the moon). When it passed the moon, it was much more difficult to see but the "behind waves" were definitely not reflecting the light. Maybe because they weren't being compressed as much?

One of the things that I didn't understand about it was that the waves seemed to move at the same speed as the satellite. How do they get anywhere if they're moving at the same rate? I fear how ignorant that question makes me look. Maybe it has to do again with the compression of waves due to the satellite moving through it. I guess that would makes sense.

At any rate, the final piece to this, which is probably entirely coincidental, was that there was a second satellite in front of the unusual one - directly centerend and ahead of of the reflected waves. This satellite was much more faint and didn't seem to be reflecting the moons light, but it sure seemed to be leading the brighter satellite. Their speed and direction was perfectly matched.

Insights??

[Ivan Seeking]

You weren't seeing the signals emitted by the satellite. More likely it was an optical effect caused by moisture in the atmosphere - just as we sometimes see a ring around the moon.

[Hoku]

That's interesting. I'm surprised that you're certain it wasn't signals. I'm reluctant to immediately accept the moisture theory. Here's why...

I know that double rainbows exist but:

1) I've never heard of more that two. The arcs we saw were no less than four and no more than six. I doubt my husband counted but I can ask him when he get's home just in case.

2) In a double rainbow the second rainbow is always dimmer than the first. The arcs we saw were equally luminous, and they were quite obvious. Not the least bit of eye straining required.

Do these conditions still fulfill a moisture theory?

[russ_watters]

Actually, that would be likely to be ice, not moisture: http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4ADBF_enUS311US311&q=moon+halo

There is no mechanism by which radio waves can create an optical effect.

And how bright was this satellite? Are you sure it wasn't a plane?

[JaredJames]

This is simply the effect of light passing through a 'lens', which is ice/moisture of the atmosphere in this case.

You see it whenever you point a camera near a bright light source. Rings, coming from the light source.

Sorry, but this whole 'seeing the signal' stuff is utter non-sense.

[Hoku]

I asked my husband how many arcs he remembered and he said he thought 6-8. Between both of our memories, then, and the fact that I was most comfortable with the number 6 to begin with, I think 6 is the best guess.

Jared or James, your input is a little confusing. I'm not sure what lense you're referring to. I think you're just restating Ivan's initial theory? If that is so, then I'd like to remind you that there were several visible arcs of equal brightnesss. Furthermore, they weren't very fuzzy. They were relatively crisp lines. Honestly, it was a lot like the old R.K.O. logo, except the arcs didn't extend past around 90 deg. I'm sorry that you feel the need to approach me with hostile language like "nonsense". Thinking that we were seeing signals reflecting moonlight is perfectly logical for someone that has limited knowledge about such things. That's why I wrote about what we saw here - so I could learn more about the physics of it. To be honest, I was certain I'd find an answer from you guys - mostly hoping to understand why the arcs moved with the satellite. I didn't realize that what we saw was truly an anomoly.

Russ, if they were planes, they didn't have the standard lighting. No blinking lights and no colored lights. We watched them until we couldn't them anymore, so we saw them from several angles as they passed overhead. There were no changes to their lighting except to get dimmer after they passed the moon. Obviously they were both pretty bright to be visible as they approached a full moon. The one eminating arcs was maybe as bright as Mercury?? The other was much dimmer. It took a second for me to find after my husband pointed it out. But even if they were planes, what's up with the lighted arcs? Obviously that's as much a mystery to you guys as it is to me.

I didn't come here to cause controversy and I'm content to back away from this thread if it becomes too much so. This was just something we saw. It didn't "communicate" with us or "beam" us anywhere. It was just neat. Now that I know how much of an anomoly it was, it's that much neater. I'm still curious to know what could've caused the phenomena. It was a physical phenomena that certainly has a physical answer. At this point, I don't expect anyone to know what we actually saw, but I'm curious to know what sorts of things could cause a "concentric lighted arc" phenomena.

[Hoku]

Here's my newest idea:

What if they were military aircraft that were still in our atmosphere? The brighter one may have been sending off powerful signals that actually moved the air, making the moonlight reflect off of the atmosphere instead of the signals themselves. This seems feasable. We're both fairly certain it was a reflection of moonlight because, although the dimming satellites/aircraft/whatever were still visible after they passed the moon, the arcs themselves disappeared.

[Ivan Seeking]

You were given the proper answer. :smile: