PDA

View Full Version : Is "1991 VG" a bracewell probe?



pie33
2008-Apr-19, 02:35 PM
Is 1991 VG a bracewell probe?

“Stephen Hawking tried to show that time travel was, in fact, impossible. He said there are no tourists from the future.” - So this theory may disqualfi probes coming from our own future.

From that JPL orbit app, it looks like the next time 1991 VG will be fairly close to us during 2017. with its closest point of 0.0581 AUs being Aug 6/7th 2017

Nasa has a chance to possibly visit the mystery object in 2017.

Of all the UFO sightings, there maybe a chance that 1 or 2 of the sighting may have been probes from advanced civilization, doing something like a sneek, and peek of Earth.

History on 1991 VG: - In late 1991 a strange object approached and passed within celestial spitting distance of the Earth, causing surprise, and some disquiet, among astronomers before vanishing back into the depths of space. The object was catalogued as “1991 VG,” and to this day it remains a mystery.

Spotted on November 6, 1991, by astronomer Jim Scotti, 1991 VG was initially thought to be an NEO—a Near Earth Object, probably an asteroid, of which there are many that periodically pass by too close for comfort and of which the public is blissfully unaware. At the time of discovery, 1991 VG was approximately 2,046,000 miles from Earth and heading inbound rapidly. Scotti, who was tracking with the small Spacewatch telescope at Kitt Peak National Observatory, Arizona, described it as a “fast-moving asteroidal object.”

01101001
2008-Apr-19, 05:14 PM
Is 1991 VG a bracewell probe?

See 2004 BAUT Forum topic 1991 VG - alien probe? (http://www.bautforum.com/against-mainstream/15039-1991-vg-alien-probe.html).

Background: NASA JPL, 1991 news release (http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/releases/91/release_1991_1406.html):


Astronomers at Jet Propulsion Laboratory are tracking a small object, probably no larger than 10 yards, that is hurtling through space and will pass near the Earth at a distance of about 288,000 miles on Dec. 5.

"Although the object, identified as Object 1991 VG, is probably a tiny asteroid whose orbit is very Earth-like, we initially considered the possibility that it had been an aging spacecraft returning to Earth," said JPL astronomer Dr. Donald Yeomans, who is part of a new center at the Laboratory designated as NASA's International Center for Near-Earth Objects.

"A recent reconstruction of its orbital history suggests the object was never launched from Earth and, hence, is a natural solar system object," Yeomans said.

pie33
2008-Apr-19, 11:21 PM
Dr. Donald Yeomans, stated or wrote: "A recent reconstruction of its orbital history suggests the object was never launched from Earth and, hence, is a natural solar system object," Yeomans said." - Would not a bracewell probe sitting near an earth orbit be considered "a natural solar system object?"


Continued: "1991 VG, is probably a tiny asteroid whose orbit is very Earth-like." We do not know that 1991 VG is a small asteroid. This is why we on earth need to know for sure.

grant hutchison
2008-Apr-19, 11:47 PM
For anyone interested in further reading, this idea originated in Duncan Steel's 1995 paper SETA and 1991 VG (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995Obs...115...78S).

Grant Hutchison

Neverfly
2008-Apr-20, 12:51 AM
What is it about this particular space nugget that makes it so interesting?

Superluminal
2008-Apr-20, 03:12 AM
Isn't this the object that was believed to be the third stage of Apollo 12?

01101001
2008-Apr-20, 03:49 AM
Isn't this the object that was believed to be the third stage of Apollo 12?

Might be J002E3 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J002E3).


J002E3 is the designation given to a supposed asteroid discovered by amateur astronomer Bill Yeung on September 3, 2002. Further examination revealed the object was not a rock asteroid but instead the S-IVB third stage of the Apollo 12 Saturn V rocket.

Some think 1991 VG might be part of, a panel from, an S-IVB.

Superluminal
2008-Apr-20, 10:02 PM
Interesting. The U.S. and the U.S.S.R. both shot a lot of stuff at the moon and not every thing hit it's target. There's bound to be a lot of junk in Earth like orbits that occasionally makes a close approach to Earth. Could be Snoopy.

agamemnon
2010-Jan-05, 03:44 PM
Another possibilty for the origin may be that it is a tunnel plate from the Pascal-B nuclear test. On August 27, 1957 during a safety test for operation Plumbob a 900 KG steel plate was launched by the force of the nuclear detonation to an estimated speed of 6 times escape velocity or about 67.2 Km/s. The plate was never found. The calculations that were performed by Dr. Brownlee; a project designer were admittedly very rough. From the photographic evidence he described its velocity as "going like a bat!". This object would be on a very similar path to the earth if it survived the lauch and . I freely admit I am no expert just an interesting thought and given Occams Razor a much simpler explanation than a Bracewell Probe, or a piece of an S4b lauch stage remnant.

CJSF
2010-Jan-05, 04:16 PM
Much older thread on this topic (http://www.bautforum.com/astronomy/1101-operation-plumbbob.html).

I think the understanding is that perhaps the object went "sub-orbital" but then fell back to Earth.

CJSF

eburacum45
2010-Jan-05, 04:48 PM
I would expect that the 'Plumbob' steel plate cap was vapourised on its way out of the atmosphere, but it would be nice to be proved wrong.

Bynaus
2010-Jan-05, 05:39 PM
The first thing that is so unusual about 1991 VG is that it has a strange albedo (reflectance) behavior for an asteroid, similiar to what artificial (painted) objects have. So it could be an artificial object.

The second strange thing is that it is in an unstable orbit. If extrapolated backwards, it can not have been in this orbit for longer than ~the space age.

Therefore, there are two independent lines of evidence pointing toward a manmade object launched from Earth. But then, there are also two other observations:

First, there is no fitting launch on the record that could possibly have resulted in the orbit of 1991 VG, not even when considering residual fuel that is slowly boiling away in an upper stage.

Second, chances of finding this object by chance in 1991 are a priori very small. Duncan Steele calculated that a population of a few thounsend of similar objects (in orbit and size) would be needed to make its serendipitous detection "plausible".

Therefore, you could just as well argue that this is a non-human artificial object that actively searched the vicinity of Earth (thus increasing its probability of being found) with the beginning of the space age.

I'd say: A good target for the first interplanetary student picosat mission... :)

Jason_Roberts
2010-Jan-05, 06:23 PM
A similar object, SG344 turned out to be an asteroid, as well as evidently having been photographed before. Image here (http://www.dailyaviator.com/images/2008-05/asteroid.jpg).

This could strengthen the case that 1991 VG is also an asteroid.

Bynaus
2010-Jan-06, 01:48 PM
Image here.

You know this is an image of asteroid Gaspra, do you?

Jason_Roberts
2010-Jan-08, 11:31 PM
You know this is an image of asteroid Gaspra, do you?

Oops!

Here's SG344 (http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/images/sg344/Phillips1.gif).

I'm still confident that it's an Aten asteroid or man-made debris, and not an ET probe.

(Note: What's strange is that I have linked that image before in an older thread (http://www.bautforum.com/1473782-post32.html), and nobody corrected me.)

Bynaus
2010-Jan-09, 09:04 AM
Well, what may be true for 2000 SG344 doesn't need to be true for 1991 VG. After all, backward-extrapolation of 2000 SG344's orbit leads to several possible linkages with rocket launches - which is not true for 1991 VG.

See: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001DDA....32.0803C