Are these birds, planes or satellites, or meteors?

[lucas_]

What does this have to do with the opening post?

The tic tacs were at altitude of 28,000 feet and moving at only 100 knots. So at least there were other candidates where they move so slow and yet so high. If the moscow moon balloons were at 28,000 feet. How fast should be they so they would look like the one in the moscow moon video? What's the ceiling of party balloons when they couldn't go higher?

About the US Navy tic tacs. Maybe you have more astronomy knowledge than them so can shed a light or two what they could be. Hope the Navy can invite you.

Just wondering. If observations don't support the standard model, then they shouldn't exist?

 

[weirdoguy]

If observations don't support the standard model, then they shouldn't exist?

No, but it's up to scientists to decide whether these observations really don't support standard model, not to some random no-names on the internet who only care about spreading misinformation and conspiracy theories.

 

[sophiecentaur]

Since this is nearly a full moon, the sun is behind the Earth. The Earth's shadow will be a cone extending out well beyond the Moon to one side.

I was thinking about this.
How near a lunar eclipse was the phenomenon? The Earth can be way off the eclipse situation. (But I'm not sure how relevant that would be.)
If the objects were in the Earth's shadow then they wouldn't be illuminated and they would cast no shadows on the Moon. They would have to be lit, in their own right and be in line with Sun and Moon and we would have seen them.

 

[lucas_]

No, but it's up to scientists to decide whether these observations really don't support standard model, not to some random no-names on the internet who only care about spreading misinformation and conspiracy theories.

It's not some random no-names. Try to google "Chris Mellon":

https://www.history.com/news/chris-mellon-ufo-investigations
"Mellon is uniquely qualified to assess such threats. Having served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence during the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations, and later as Minority Staff Director of the Senate Intelligence Committee, he was heavily responsible for reviewing agencies and budgets involved in top-secret “black programs” related to things such as special operations and nuclear weapons. Mellon is now an integral part of the investigative team featured on HISTORY's "...” We talked to him about what’s happening—and what he thinks should be done."

(I put "..." to avoid scare quotes)

What is very sad is you can see Lee Smolin, Steven Weinberg, Peter Woit, Sabine Hossenfelder, Leondardo Susskind rolling their eyes from left to right when they hear about these things and raise their heads up as they walk away from any topics about them and then visiting physics conference and describing about possible particle desert and no new physics for 40 years such as Sabine's https://backreaction.blogspot.com/2016/08/the-lhc-nightmare-scenario-has-come-true.html

"Now that the diphoton bump is gone, we’ve entered what has become known as the “nightmare scenario” for the LHC: The Higgs and nothing else. Many particle physicists thought of this as the worst possible outcome. It has left them without guidance, lost in a thicket of rapidly multiplying models. Without some new physics, they have nothing to work with that they haven’t already had for 50 years, no new input that can tell them in which direction to look for the ultimate goal of unification and/or quantum gravity.

That the LHC hasn’t seen evidence for new physics is to me a clear signal that we’ve been doing something wrong, that our experience from constructing the standard model is no longer a promising direction to continue. We’ve maneuvered ourselves into a dead end by relying on aesthetic guidance to decide which experiments are the most promising. I hope that this latest null result will send a clear message that you can’t trust the judgement of scientists whose future funding depends on their continued optimism."

When you talk to Sabine about Navy's witnesses of Tic Tacs. She would just ban you from ever talking to her again. It's so frustrating that the very scientists who can shed light on it don't want to even hear about it.

 

[lucas_]

I was thinking about this.
How near a lunar eclipse was the phenomenon? The Earth can be way off the eclipse situation. (But I'm not sure how relevant that would be.)
If the objects were in the Earth's shadow then they wouldn't be illuminated and they would cast no shadows on the Moon. They would have to be lit, in their own right and be in line with Sun and Moon and we would have seen them.

After I saw this video a while ago. I finally understood how the shapes of the lighted moon came from. I forgot about it for decades:

 

[weirdoguy]

Try to google "Chris Mellon"

So you focused only on the "no-name" part... Still, he is not a group of qualified scientists who know enough physics to judge this kind of things.

She would just ban you from ever talking to her again. It's so frustrating that the very scientists who can shed light on it don't want to even hear about it.

You know, I'v been participating in physics discussions on the internet for more than a decade. At the beginning I devoted a lot of time to debunk all sorts of weird videos. And after a few years I saw that there is no point in doing so. It's just a waste of time. I totally understand Sabine, and I would do the same because all of this smells like a crackpottery and another conspiracy theory. She's old enough to know that it's a total waste of time.

Besides, physicists would love to find some observations that do not support Standard Model.

 

[jim mcnamara]

This thread is moved out of the Science forums. Now in Discussion.

 

[lucas_]

So you focused only on the "no-name" part... Still, he is not a group of qualified scientists who know enough physics to judge this kind of things.

Scientists are mostly compartmentalized. You can read all the details in Sabine's book "Lost in Math".

I wonder this though. Do the U.S. Navy have their own scientists? Who are the government scientists? What papers have they written? Are they as good as Weinberg or Hawking?

You know, I'v been participating in physics discussions on the internet for more than a decade. At the beginning I devoted a lot of time to debunk all sorts of weird videos. And after a few years I saw that there is no point in doing so. It's just a waste of time. I totally understand Sabine, and I would do the same because all of this smells like a crackpottery and another conspiracy theory. She's old enough to know that it's a total waste of time.

Besides, physicists would love to find some observations that do not support Standard Model.

 

[weirdoguy]

Scientists are mostly compartmentalized.

So?

 

[sophiecentaur]

So?

Exactly.
It's a long time (the enlightenment) since one person or group could 'know about' everything.

 

[berkeman]

Thread is closed for Moderation...

 

[fresh_42]

Although this thread is now in "General Discussion" and the subject is inherently problematic, please try to remain as reasonable as possible and avoid speculations. The general difficulty with such topics is, that we rarely have sufficient information to claim anything sound.

Thread reopened.

 

[OmCheeto]

Off the top of my head, I would say the video was computer generated/augmented.
But the maths are fun:

The video was taken at ≈9:23 pm, Moscow time.
The moon was 7.4° above the horizon.
The moon's direction was 134°, which puts it about half way between due south and due east.
The ufo's velocity relative to the moon was 49.4 km/sec, at an angle of -28.1° from horizontal, to the right.
The moons relative velocity to itself was 25.5 km/sec, at an angle of +22.5°, to the right. (±10%, as mentioned earlier)
Added together, I get a velocity of 67.6 km/sec @ 4°, to the right. Nearly horizontal.

The wind velocities that day over Moscow were fairly consistent. A couple of altitudes can be eliminated for balloons, I think.

Although none of the lines intersect,

I think if one takes into account that this graph is only valid when the observer's position is perpendicular to the moon, vs the 7° mentioned earlier, then there could be instances where balloons could have been involved.

ps. Off the bottom of my head, I would say the video was computer generated/augmented.

 

[DennisN]

Dear experts,

What are these things (dozens of them):

Is it not incredible that a person happened to zoom in on the Moon (and film it) at the particular moment when UFOs (i.e. unidentified flying objects) were spotted? What a remarkable coincidence! It is so remarkable that I think the movie is fake, i.e. edited.

 

[DennisN]

But the maths are fun:

Nice analysis.

 

[OmCheeto]

Nice analysis.

Thanks! Though, I've already found one error.

Added together, I get a velocity of 67.6 km/sec @ 4°, to the right. Nearly horizontal.​

Added together, I now get a velocity of 68.5 km/sec @ -11°, to the right.​

But as they say, you get what you pay for.

The last thing to do was correct wind speeds for distance and angles.
It looks as though the wind speeds gave one valid solution for balloons. Roughly 4300 meters.

Might also be birds. All the birds on this list fly above that: wiki: bird flight altitudes
Though I don't know much about them, and couldn't tell you which of those fly over Moscow, at night, during full moons, in May.

 

[Keith_McClary]

Some discussion at Metabunk