A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Others » Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

is there a "base" on the moon?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 4th 21, 03:19 PM posted to alt.astronomy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 38
Default is there a "base" on the moon?

Look. I just love to make people queasy thinking about these things.

So I have to ask. Is there "any" evidence (apart from unverified
statements from various astronauts that may have been on the moon on a
"quick scoop and return" missing), "any" evidence that there may be a
base on the moon operated by person or persons on non-persons unknown?

We have to assume if there is a base on the moon it may suggest access
to better tech than a Space-X rocket so we might question how likely
it is there would be any trouble for people up there to fly between
the moon and Earth. But there might be an ever ever so slight
variation depending on the distance between the 2 bodies. Maybe when
the back side of the moon is facing the sun 24/7 it might be slightly
more attractive to come down to Earth.

But it must -- surely -- be a tiny tiny effect even if it is there.

But we have to check. We are all scientists and engineers after all,
and it doesn't exist if it hasn't been measured. Right?

So I will take the list of UFO sightings at the NUFORC and check if
there is any interesting periodic structure to the data.

First off we have to make an adjustment to allow for the NUFORC
switching to a web report form in March 2006. Before that numbers
seemed to be much smaller than after the web report went live. A
statistical procedure finds if we multiply sightings numbers before Apr
2006 by 9.8 we can allow for that change.

Next we find there is a 7-day cycle in UFO sightings. It seems more
UFO's are spotted on Sats than any other day of the week. (At
least with the NUFORC data; I didn't check any other databases). In
fact, the probability of seeing a UFO on a given day seems to rise
from Mon (minimum prob) through to Sat (max). Sun sees a
decrease in prob before returning to Mon minimum.

The table for the 7-day structure is thus:

DOW Adj factor
0 1.50547 Mon
1 1.4569 Tue
2 1.37849 ...
3 1.35947
4 1.27042
5 1 Sat
6 1.28463 Sun

The "adj factor" is the number I will use to adjust the number of
UFO's reported on a certain day in an attempt to remove the 7d
periodicity from the data. Since Mon is the least likely day to
report a UFO we'll multiply any count on a Money by 1.505... to allow
for the apparent fact people going back to work on a Money do not tend
to be looking up in the sky. OTOH on Sat we'll use "1" as the
factor (i.e. no adjustment) because people are apparently at their
most alert on Sat.

I will not attempt to allow for the hangover from Fri night partying.

We will then assume, in turn, there is a periodicity of 20, 21,
.... 35 days in the data and check the root mean square error of the
(adjusted) UFO daily sighting counts from the average for the relevant
day of the period.

We then print out the RMSE for each period and see whether there is
any dip in the RMSE (better fit) at any period we might a priori
suspect might be linked with the moon.

Let's look:

Period RMSE
25 23.1191
26 23.1059
27 23.113
28 23.0913 -- BOING! Smallest RMSE.
29 23.1092
30 23.111
31 23.1068
32 23.1118
33 23.11
34 23.1115
35 23.092 -- 2nd smallest RMSE

Incredibly, there is a periodicity of 28 days in the UFO sighting data
even after trying to nullify the 7d weekday period.

The dip at 28 days is very certain even if small. I've used several
different methods and all show up the same pattern. 28 days is the
minimum RMSE with days either side being larger. We might even suspect
29 days is slightly closer to the true value of the period than 27
days given the RMSE for the former is smaller than the latter.

We know the period of the moon is around 28 days and our procedure has
unambiguously pointed at it popping up inside the UFO sighting data.

It points at UFO sightings being slightly more likely at certain times
during the lunar cycle and supports an hypothesis that a trip between
the moon and Earth by said object being slightly more likely then. At
this point we have not identified whether the "most likely" sightings
happen at full moon, new moon or someplace in between. We are not sure
the "easier" trip happens when the Earth and moon are closest,
furthest or somewhere in between. Or whether the back of the moon is
in full daylight or full dark, or somewhere in between when these
"most likely" trips tend to happen.

But it is "some" evidence there may be a base of some kind somewhere
on the moon and some of these UFO's are coming from there.

Of course we also presume from other data most of them come from
somewhere in the Siberian Arctic and Antarctic, most likely from under
the ocean. That what the "trans medium" stuff in the latest Pentagon
leakage is all about.

At some point I'll try to write a more exacting program to calculate
whether the "28 day" period is more likely the sidereal (27.3) or
synodic period (29.5) of the moon. On the evidence here is seem the
synodic period is the more likely one to be found. I have some s/w
I've discussed elsewhere that tries to model interplanetary flights
that match UFO sightings against the positions of (mostly) the outer
planets. From these some "flight characteristics" have been roughly
deduced. It would require some adapting but could also try to fit
likely routes (e.g. a low energy curve assuming you have some kind of
antigravity drive) between the front or back of the moon and the Earth
and see which show up as more likely.

Since we don't seem to see any big domes on the moon looking up there
with out backyard telescopes, we might expect to find the back of the
moon to show up as the more likely location of the starting point.

--
I Feel Like This UFO News Should Get More Attention
Esquire, 03 May 2021 21:22Z
The Dept of Defense established The Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task
Force to study videos like these and other ...
[I ONLY GET IT FOR THESE KINDS OF ARTICLES!]

The research about shrinking penises might not be as clear-cut as you think
ABC/The Conversation, 3 MayMay at 8:30pm
Warnings of an end to human sperm production have been making headlines
recently, now with the added threat of shrinking penises. Is this science or
sensationalism? Tim Moss explains.

[Ignored for a century or 10:]
'There must be a reckoning' if US bureaucrats ignored evidence of UFOs,
ex-UK official tells 'Tucker'
YAHOO!News, 01 May 2021 03:34Z
A forthcoming report from the Pentagon and US intelligence agencies about
the presence of UFOs could shed light on "a potential catastrophic failure
of intelligence," a former British defense ...

UFO Fragments Are Likely In Possession Of Lockheed Martin, Says Ex-Sen.
Harry Reid
Yahoo News, 01 May 2021 03:35Z
Former Nevada Senator Harry Reid, once a major leader in the Democratic
party before his retirement, has claimed that defense ...

Ex-Pentagon Investigator Shares Shocking Details About UFOs Disabling
American Nuclear Capability
BroBible, 30 Apr 2021 16:36Z
Yet another former United States govt official has come forward with
concerns and new information about the secrets ...
Ads
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How difficult and expensive would it be to have a "base" on the moon? Hop Policy 6 May 24th 12 04:02 PM
How difficult and expensive would it be to have a "base" on the moon? Koobee Wublee Astronomy Misc 270 March 11th 12 12:14 AM
BUZZ on Howard Stern.."No to the Moon"...Denies wanting to be "First"! Jonathan History 21 April 21st 10 10:36 PM
might Odissey-Moon be the Google's expected, preferred, designed,"chosen" and (maybe) "funded" GLXP team to WIN the prize? with ALL otherteams that just play the "sparring partners" role? gaetanomarano Policy 3 September 27th 08 06:47 PM
NatGeo's "Space Race - The Untold Story"...And you thought "Moon Shot" was bad, kids... OM History 21 July 5th 06 06:40 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.