Iraq War Veteran Records TicTac White UFOs In The Sky, USA, Nov 3, 2020, UFO Sighting News.

Date of sighting: Nov 3, 2020
Location of sighting: America (coming soon)

 

The eyewitness is a retired Army Veteran, that served more than two decades as a Soldier and had multiple “Combat” Tours to Iraq. He has been noticing some strange objects in the sky lately and stated,

"I’ve seen a lot of aircraft but none quite like this." I didn't get the location yet, but will update it soon. It was recorded inside America. Wow, just look at those white tactic UFOs shooting past. One comes so close and really it looks like some kind of semi cloaked object. Absolute proof that aliens are in the sky over the USA. 

Scott C. Waring - Taiwan

 

{ https://www.ufosightingsdaily.com/ }

22-11-2020 om 17:48 geschreven door peter  

Submerged prehistoric settlements in both the Bland and Mediterranean seas show that these areas were above water 6000 years prior, but sea levels shown at the time by classic academia are off by 1000 years. 

Additionally erosion patterns at the Kailash Temple complex in India indicate a far older monolithic structure than academia will allow. 

Out of time artifact where ever we look.

RELATED VIDEOS, selected and posted by peter2011

{ http://ufosightingshotspot.blogspot.com/ }

22-11-2020 om 17:06 geschreven door peter  

Bright UFOs filmed over Kirkby, UK 12-Nov-2020

This UFO sighting report was submitted to me through our Facebook page. This happened over Kirbky, a town in the Metropolitan Borough of Knowsley, Merseyside, England, on Tuesday morning (12th November 2020.

{ https://www.latest-ufo-sightings.net/ }

22-11-2020 om 15:42 geschreven door peter  

UFO Light Bulb Shaped Craft & Blinking Companion Appear, Move & Hover | Rancho Cucamonga, California - 22nd November 2020.

This bright UFO was caught on tape during daytime over Rancho Cucamonga, California on 22nd November 2020.

Witness report: 

Light-Bulb Shaped Craft & Blinking Companion Appear, Move, & Hover. While sitting outside in my courtyard, I looked up into the sky and saw what looked like, to my naked eye, a white orb moving very slowly from northeast to northwest. I was on video chat with a friend and told her to wait while I got my partner from inside the house so he could also see and witness it, which he did. I tried taking photos of it with my cellphone (Samsung Galaxy S10), but it was too far away to see clearly. I took several videos of it, as well, zoomed in as much as I could. The quality isn’t great, but I have videos to share. At one point, a second white orb appeared directly below the first and they moved in tandem, very slowly, across the sky from east to west. The 2nd, lower orb flickered in and out. Eventually, it moved into some clouds and I either lost it or it disappeared. The original orb remained where it was, hovering, for at least 45 minutes. While I was getting video of this, I had my partner go back into the house and get my binoculars. With these, I was able to see that it had definite structure. Initially, it looked quite a bit like a lightbulb, with a larger, rounded top and then a bit rectangular-ish below. The entire time, the top of this craft shone brilliantly, perhaps reflecting the sun. Occasionally, however, a blue-green color could be observed (only with binoculars) in the middle of the craft. The bottom 1/3 of the craft was more or less a darker shade of silver; not as brilliantly bright as the top.

A few times, it seemed that the craft would change shape, becoming something that looked like a collection of bubbles or glass spheres. Once or twice it looked like it was a large, metallic, rectangular object. But most of the time, it appeared as more light-bulb shaped with the blue-green color appearing and disappearing in its middle section. This craft hovered for quite a while above my roofline. I tried to communicate with it emotionally/spiritually/psychically as instructed by CE5 protocols, but was unable to make substantial contact. I was highly distracted by wanting to capture it on video and see it through my binoculars. Eventually, the craft did move again, very slowly, in a northerly direction. In time, it moved out of my sight.

{ https://www.latest-ufo-sightings.net/ }

22-11-2020 om 15:30 geschreven door peter  

While the rest of us look at the paintings and drawings of Leonardo da Vinci in awe, trying to figure out a smile or find a hidden message explaining everything, scientists are digging deeper and finding … bacteria? A new study reveals that researchers analyzing seven drawings by the master are covered with an unexpected amount of bacteria, fungus and human DNA. Human DNA! Does Dan Brown know about this?

“Seven emblematic Leonardo da Vinci’s drawings were investigated through third generation sequencing technology (Nanopore). In addition, SEM analyses were carried out to acquire photographic documentation and to infer the nature of the micro-objects removed from the surface of the drawings. The Nanopore generated microbiomes can be used as a “bio-archive” of the drawings, offering a kind of fingerprint for current and future biological comparisons.” 

“Results showed a relatively high contamination with human DNA and a surprising dominance of bacteria over fungi.”

The Man in Chalk

The study, published this week in the journal “Frontiers in Microbiology” and summarized in a press release, was conducted by researchers from the University of Natural Resources and Life Science and the University of Applied Science of Wien in Austria, and the Central Institute for the Pathology of Archives and Books (ICPAL) in Italy on seven 500-year-old sketches by Da Vinci, including ‘Portrait of a Man in Chalk’ and ‘Uomo della Bitta’ (Man of the Bitta). Dr. Guadalupe Pinar of the University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences led the analysis of the drawings using an innovative new genomic approach called Nanopore to reveal their complete microbiome composition. Oxford Nanopore Technologies, creators of the tool, call it “the only technology that offers direct sequencing of native DNA/RNA, or sequencing amplified samples.” So, what did it find?

“Here, a high proportion of these bacteria are either typical of the human microbiome, certainly introduced by intensive handling of the drawings during restoration works, or correspond to insects microbiomes, which could have been introduced, a long time ago, through flies and their excrements.”

Bug poop! Most ancient documents of this age and older are covered primarily in fungus, which grows readily in the dark, damp environments they’re either found in or stored in. On the other hand, these Da Vinci sketches, befitting of the genius who drew them, have been handled and studied by untold numbers of humans, resulting in bacteria overcoming fungus to be their number two content (after the actual image). The insect excrement is there because, well, it’s everywhere.

Leonardo Da Vinci

How about the DNA? Does it belong to Da Vinci? Jesus? Mary? Mona Lisa? Dan Brown?

“Unfortunately, we cannot assume that this DNA comes from the master himself but it might rather have been introduced by the restoration workers over the years.”

After the first revelation, that was expected. These documents have obviously been handled a lot – and by people not wearing protective gloves in non-sterile environments. Nevertheless, Nanopore offers one feature that is crucial in determining the place of origin of ancient documents, helping determine if they’re real or forgeries.

“However, some similarities were observed that could be influenced by the geographical location of the drawings. Some taxa were only detected in the drawings stored in the Royal Library of Turin, while other taxa were only detected in the drawings stored in the Corsinian Library in Rome.”

In this case, it’s been long verified that the drawings were made by da Vinci. Their microbiomes instead help draw a map of where the sketches have been since Leonardo lifted the chalk after the last flourish. In other words, the kind of data that used to get art history majors all hot and bothered before colleges dropped art history as a degree program. That itself is sad, because this discovery of the invisible bacteria, fungi and human DNA on these drawing illustrates that art history is human history and we never have enough of that.

Your move, Dan Brown.

{ https://mysteriousuniverse.org/ }

22-11-2020 om 00:49 geschreven door peter  

A few months ago I wrote an article about the closest asteroid that ever passed by without hitting us. The record-breaking event involved an asteroid named ZTF0DxQ (or 2020 QG) and it flew by us at a close distance of 1,830 miles away. What’s even more eerie was that fact that nobody saw it coming until six hours after it flew by us. (The article can be read here.)

And now, three months later, a similar event just took place. On Friday, November 13^th (coincidence…?), another asteroid narrowly missed us and scientists didn’t see this one coming either. The asteroid, that’s been named 2020 VT4, zipped by us at an incredibly close distance of just 240 miles which made it the second space rock of the year to break the record of the closest non-impact approach.

To put this into better perspective, the International Space Station orbits Earth from a distance of a little more than 200 miles above us.

And if that isn’t scary enough, it wasn’t noticed by the Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert System (or ATLAS) on Mauna Loa, Hawaii until the following day – 15 hours after it passed by. Since the space rock was somewhere between 16 and 33 feet in width, it would have just burnt up in our atmosphere over the South Pacific. But it still doesn’t give us much comfort as astronomers had no warning that it was even coming.

Experts have said that in order for there to be damage to the surface of our planet, an asteroid would need to be at least 82 feet in width and for there to be global damage it would have to be between 0.6 and 1.2 miles wide. And for the human population as well as plants and animals to all become extinct, the space rock would have to be around 60 miles in width.

For example, the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs around 66 million years ago was approximately 7.5 miles across. Another comparison was that the Chelyabinsk meteor that broke up over Russia in February of 2013 that caused a decent amount of damage with shattered windows and more than 110 people being hospitalized was about 30 times bigger than the 2020 VT4 asteroid that zipped by us last week.

And 2020 VT4 won’t be the only asteroid to fly past us on a Friday the 13^th as the much larger Apophis asteroid (around 984 feet wide) is suppose to do a close flyby on Friday, April 13, 2029. (A frame-by-frame image of 2020 VT4 traveling through space can be seen here.)

The asteroid- 2020 VT4 is estimated to be 5-10 meters (16-32 feet) across, about the size of a small house. Earth juuust missed occupying the same space as the perihelion point for the asteroid, which occurred just 20 hours prior to Earth passage.

{ https://mysteriousuniverse.org/ }

22-11-2020 om 00:38 geschreven door peter  

David Sereda: UFO Extraterrestrial Shootdown of Columbia

Well known scientist, David Sereda has studied Meditation, Yoga, Vegetarian diet, world religions, ancient history, Physics, Math, Astronomy, Alternative Zero Point Energies for over 40 years. He took physics in school to the college level and continued his studies ever since. In school, he presented his Physics teacher a time dialation theory which his teacher admitted was way beyond anything he had seen since Einstein!

He has written self published books such as Evidence, the case for NASA UFOs, Singularity, Differentials, Face to Face with Jesus Christ, and jointly with his wife Mona Lisa’s Little Secret, and God’s Great Pyramid.

{ https://beforeitsnews.com/ }

21-11-2020 om 22:26 geschreven door peter  

Very Detailed Alien Craft Close Encounter In France

JANUARY 8, 1981…….TRANS-EN-PROVENCE FRANCE

The Trans-en-Provence UFO event occurred on January 8, 1981 and was observed by a single witness. Due to the French privacy laws, the case was originally published with the witness name replaced with the pseudonym Renato Collini; however the witness name is by now well known to the UFO community as Renato Nicolai.

The account provided by the witness to the police authorities is as follows:

I have lived in Trans-en-Province at my current address for nearly 14 years. My wife and I live alone. She is the cleaning lady at the social security office in Draguignan. I have not worked since November 1979. I was previously an employee of the SCNI company.

This firm went out of business and I was laid off. I recieve a disability pension because I suffered from a heart problem since 1973.

Yesterday, January 8. 1981, I was busy around the house as I am practically every day. I was behind the house, which is built over a restanque (raised level). I was building a concrete shelter for a water pump. Behind my house on the same level is an expanse of flat ground.

It is reached through a path along the base of the house.

It was about 5 PM. The weather was turning colder. My attention was attracted by a slight noise, a sort of faint whistling. I turned around and saw a device in the air at the height of a big pine tree at the edge of the property.

This device, which was not spinning, was coming lower toward the ground. I was only hearing a slight whistling sound. I was not seeing any flames, either below or around this device.

While it was continuing to come down, I went closer by walking towards the stone cabin above my house. When I placed myself against the wall of the cabin, I could see very well over the roof, since this cabin too is built over a raised level. I was on the higher level, about 1.2 m from the roof.

From that position, I clearly saw the device resting on the ground. Right away it lifted off, still emitting a slight whistling sound. Reaching a point above the trees, it left at high speed toward the forest of Trans, that is, towards the northeast.

When the device lifted off, I saw four openings below, through which neither flame nor smoke were escaping. The device kicked off a little dust when it left the ground.

At that instant, I was about 30 m away from the landing site. Later I went to the spot and I noticed a circle about 2 m in in diameter. At certain places along the circumference of the circle were traces like abrasions…

The device had the shape of two saucers, one inverted on top of the other. It must have measured about 1.5 m in height. It was the color of lead. This device had a ridge all the way around its circumference. Under the machine I saw two kinds of pieces as it was lifting off. They could be reactors or feet.

There were also two other circles which looked like trapdoors. The two reactors, or feet, extended about 20 cm below the body of the machine.

I have not felt any disturbance of the sense of vision or hearing.[2]

Parts of the account obtained by a civilian investigator are also relevant:

There [the witness] discovers a sort of ovoid vehicle, with the general shape of two half spheres of unequal volume, clearly separated by a flat ledge, extending at least 15 cm and forming a ring around the metallic mass which has a… height of between 2 and 2.5 m/…

The machine lifts off, making a slight amount of dust and with a soft whistling. Then it seems to tilt, exposing its underside, and it takes off at lightning speed, passing exactly between the two tall trees, at the exact spot from which it had seemed to fall.

The witness has noted that the landing trajectory is not identical to the takeoff trajectory.[3]

GEPAN (a department of the French Space Agency responsible for the investigation of UFO reports) also reconstructed the trajectory and duration.

Trajectory The witness states he began to perceive the phenomenon in the sky above the trees at the back end of the large platform, more precisely between the two tall conifers that tower above the wood.

Mr. Nicolai states that the motion was fast and continuous, without sudden changes in speed, and that there was no stop until the time when contact was established with the ground… The departure path is described by the witness as similar to the path of arrival…

Sound … He compares it to a wind blowing fairly strongly. He does not say[4] whether or not the sound stopped during the landing. The shock at the impact point was recalled like that of a stone falling to the ground[5]…

The Takeoff Phase… the object was resting on the ground for several seconds[6] before it suddenly rose vertically over several meters, tilted… continued to rise in this position and disappeared in the sky.[7]

Note that this object is engaging in the behavior I have termed “drop-in”, where the object arrives on a steep trajectory and departs on a steep trajectory, with only a short period in the landing or near landing location.

Detailed Sequence Of Events

Of importance to determining the point or range of events in the sequence which might correspond to the creation of the trace, is a detailed and measured sequence of events, which, based on the reference, seems to be as follows:

Elapsed Time Event Comments

0-3 secs Witness first sees the object which appears to be above two tall conifers approx 35 m from the impact point. Distance estimate is based on map and statement that the cabin is 35 m away from impact point; comparison of that distance on the map[8] with the distance to the tree suggests an additional 35 m to the tree.

3 secs Object strikes the ground with a sound like a stone falling. The motion from the trees to the impact point is fast and continuous. Assuming the distance from the impact point to be 35m for the top of the tree, and assuming the altitude to be above the tree (stated to be “dozens of meters high”[9],[10]); because of the error in translation, resolved to 10 m, we take 10 m as the altitude of the object; the distance traversed between first sight and impact is therefore 14 m.

The following assume a constant deceleration:

The deceleration based on a 3 second time to cross this distance is -0.32G from a speed of 34 kph.

According to Velasco, an upper limit to the weight based on the ground trace is 700 kg. To accomplish the noted deceleration at that weight would require a thrust of 7,171 kg.

4-25 secs Object is on the ground and the witness is continuing to move to a new location. Assuming 8 secs to walk 10m (a reasonably brisk walk), walking 30 m takes 24 secs, of which it is assumed 1-2 secs are used while object is descending, since the report refers to “while it was continuing to come down, I went closer by walking”.

25-28 secs Witness observes the object on the ground. According to the statement: “several seconds”; also, “From that position I clearly saw the device resting on the ground.”

28-35 secs Object lifts from the ground, tilts, and departs. Altitude appears to be that of the tops of the trees, here estimated to be 10 m (“it lifted off… reaching a point above the trees, it left at high speed”[11]).

It took from 1-3 secs to accomplish this.

The following assume a constant acceleration / deceleration:

If it took 3 sec, then it accelerated at approximately 0.45 G for 1.5 sec to 5 m and then decelerated at -0.45G to 10 m; the thrust required in the acceleration phase is 10,204 kg assuming a 700 kg weight.

If it took 1 sec, it accelerated at approximately 4G for 0.5 sec to 5 m and then decelerated at -4G for 0.5 sec to 10 m; the thrust required in the acceleration phase is 91,840 kg, assuming a 700 kg weight.

The GEPAN account differs somewhat, claiming “it rose vertically over several meters, tilted above the platform, continued to rise in this position and disappeared in the sky.” Hopefully “several” is 10 or so.

Description Of The Trace

The trace was found by the witness immediately after the departure of the object. The trace was circular, 2.4 m in diameter, and had the form of a ring, 0.2 m in width (it is claimed that there is a “crown” to the trace which is only 0.1 m in width[12],[13]).

Note that the witness reported the object surrounded by a shelf approximately 0.15 m in width[14].

Photographs[15] show the trace as lighter in color than the surrounding dirt. Vegetation remains (leaves and sticks) from the edges of the path where the object landed are seen to cross the trace (as of the next day). There does not appear to be any preferential orientation for this material, nor does it appear affected by pressure or heating. In combination, this indicates the possibility that either a) the force which produced the trace had no outward and no inward components, or b) the material was swept back over the trace either at or after the object departure.

Note that the witness mentioned the object’s departure as having raised some dust.

The soil of the trace is lighter than neighboring soil, appears to be slightly raised or crusty, and bears radial striations. These striations are not perfectly radial, but are slightly curved in a clockwise direction, and are slightly irregular.

The trace ring shows these formations most prominently on the directly east and west sides of the ring. The north side of the trace shows a slightly lower degree of the same effect.

The width of the ring as photographed and diagrammed shows no notable deviation, nor does the circularity of the ring show any notable deviation.

Hypothesis Concerning The Time When The Trace Was Formed

The following hypotheses are possible with regard to when the trace was formed:

• The trace was formed at the time the object decelerated.
• The trace was formed when the object impacted the ground.
• The trace was formed when the object was resting on the ground.
• The trace was formed when the object rose from the ground.
• The trace was formed when the object hovered before accelerating away.
  

For the purpose of these hypothesis it is presumed that the trace is a side effect of a force exerted by the object.

Discriminators

There are discriminators which can help select the most likely of the hypotheses:

Geometric discriminators relate to expectations of the geometry of the trace based on the dynamic behavior of the object.

Energetic discriminators relate to whether a given hypothesis can, from the present or required kinetic energy, generate the temperature change expected based on the trace analysis.

Important Facts

The trace is circular, in the form of a ring. No notable deviation from circularity appears to be present. No other traces are visible.

Most prominent trace effects are E, W, and slightly less to the N on the ring.

The trace shows the effects of heating to below 600 degrees C. This heating was thought to be due to friction or impact[16],[17].

The trace is a ring either 0.2 or 0.1 m in width. The outer diameter is 2.4 m. If the inner diameter is 2.2 m, the area of the ring is 41.4 sq m. If the inner diameter is 2.3 m, the area of the ring is 21.15 sq m.

The trace shows effects to a depth of 1 cm in the thickest area of the trace.

The volume of the trace is thus 0.04 cu m.

Assumptions

The object mass is 700 kg. The acceleration due to gravity is 9.8 m / sec / sec, and the speed after falling 10 m is 14 m / sec or 50 kph. The kinetic energy of the 700 kg mass at the end of that fall is 6.86 x 10^11 ergs (6.86 x 10^6 joules).

The object engaged in forward motion during descent. It was first observed 35 m from the impact point. The forward speed is 34 kph, assuming a constant deceleration over 3 secs to a speed of 0. The forward kinetic energy is thus, at first appearance, 3.07 x 10^11 ergs (3.07 x 10^6 joules).

The total energy of the object (kinetic and potential) at its first appearance, is 9.93 x 10^11 ergs (9.93 x 10^6 joules).

This is, in essence, the energy budget of the object, which it is assumed must be dissipated prior to or at the time of intersection with the ground.

A force was emitted as a cylinder with a wall 0.1-0.2 m thick and that cylinder extended perpendicular from the rim of the object, and this force was the means by which the trace was formed.

This is supported by the correspondence between the width of the rim and the width of the circle.

The material of the object has a specific heat similar to magnesium (1.01 / g – degree C or 1001 / kg – degree C)[18]
The ground has a specific heat 1/5 that of water (838 joules / kg – degree C)[19].

Evaluation

1. The trace was formed at the time the object decelerated

This is not supported, since

Forward motion would smear the trace away from circularity, which is not observed.

Forward motion with the force cylinder pointed toward the trace would cause the force cylinder to have an oval intersection with the ground, which would approach circularity as the object approached the trace site. This is not observed.

There is no preferential effect on any part of the trace which is along the line of travel (WNW). Preferential effects do not show a correlation with the line of travel.

2. The trace was formed when the object impacted the ground

This is not supported, since:

If the object retained any forward motion, the objections raised to the previous hypothesis still hold.

If the object had dissipated all forward motion, the only remaining motion would be downward. If all of the vertical potential energy, now kinetic, were dissipated into the trace, a temperature increase of only 1.36 degrees C would be the result. This is insufficient to cause the observed effect. Addition of the forward motion only increases the temperature by 0.61 degrees C.

The imprint of an impact would show an the “feet” rather than the shape of the rim, unless the feet were not extended until departure. If the feet were not present, the imprint would take the form of the bottom of the object. In either case, the expected imprint is not observed.

3. The trace was formed when the object was resting on the ground

This is not supported, since:

The imprint of the object resting on the ground would show an imprint of the feet rather than the shape of the rim, unless the feet were not extended until departure. The expected imprint is not observed.

A weight of 700 kg undergoing gravitational acceleration cannot produce the levels of heat observed.

4. The trace was formed when the object rose from the ground.

This is supported by the shape of the trace, which indicates that the force was applied in a nearly circular pattern; if released from the rim of the object, which is suggested by the dimensions of the trace, there are no apparent variations in geometry which might be attributed to wobble or to a sweep of the force cylinder to one side or the other.

There are several possibilities as to how the trace might have been formed at this time:

The full force of the thrust was expressed as pressure on the ground within the area of the ring. If this is the only contributor to trace formation, this pressure must be sufficient to heat the ground to some affective temperature below 600 degrees C.

The thrust was expressed in the kinetic energy of particles which dissipated their energy as heat upon impact with the ground. These particles might be molecular, atomic or subatomic (i.e. electrons, protons, etc.)

Electromagnetic radiation was dissipated as heat within the area of the trace. This radiation might be a side effect of the thrust.

Subhypothesis 1 is not supported, since the maximum suggested thrust (91,840 kg in the 0.5 sec to 5 m scenario) creates a pressure of only 2 atm, or 23,000 kg / sq m. This is not sufficient to produce the indicated heating.

Assuming the kinetic energy of the particles of subhypothesis 2 to be the same as the kinetic energy of the object at the end of the acceleration phase, the highest degree of heating produced would be near 3 degrees C. Thus, subhypothesis 2 is not supported.

Insufficient information is available to assess subhypothesis 3. Since we do not know much about the spectrum of possible radiation, it is difficult to make any estimates as to how much energy might be needed to created the observed heating.

All of these hypotheses and figures should be examined, keeping in mind that the weight estimate is based on the weight effects on the trace, and if the weight of the object did not cause the trace, the trace forces may simply reflect the weight of the object combined with the force of the thrust.

Under these circumstances, thrust, energy and weight estimates used above would be much less meaningful, except insofar as they provide upper limits to the actual values.

5. The trace was formed when the object hovered before accelerating away
Given that the thrusts and energies of hypothesis 4 (except for subhypothesis 3) are insufficient to produce the trace, the forces in a hover at a higher altitude would also be insufficient.

Further evidence that this is the case comes from a geometric analysis, which shows that the subsequent tilt of the object would have produced an elongation of the trace, or a variety of parabolic or hyperbolic secondary traces, none of which were observed.

Findings

Geometric evidence indicates that the trace was not formed on approach, impact or during the tilt to final departure phase.

Kinetic energy to heat conversion evidence indicates that the trace was not formed on impact or by the object resting on the ground, or by the thrust of the object on departure expressed either as pressure or as the kinetic energy of particles ejected from the rim of the object.

These findings support the idea that the Trans-en-Provence trace represents an unconventional event.

These findings also place certain limiting conditions on the forces used by the Trans-en-Provence object. For instance, it seems that the object did not generate trace-producing force on the ground during the approach phase, despite the need to dissipate apparently considerable kinetic energy in the downward and forward direction.

Furthermore, it apparently did not generate trace-producing force on the ground during the tilt to depart phase. In both of these phases, the altitude appears to have been approximately 10 m.

This indicates an extremely localized force. A similarly sized helicopter, for instance, hovering at 10 m would create a large disturbance on the ground due to the downward flow of air from the rotors.

Suggestions For Future Trace Investigations

Weight measurements are critical. Even an upper or lower bound weight can be helpful in dynamic simulations. But no information about the weight of the object can be inferred without measurements of the resistance of the soil to penetration.

Depth of the trace or pressure resistance of the trace is meaningless without control measurements outside and at some distance from the trace.

Dimensional measurements need to be precise. The area around a trace must be checked for subsidiary traces. These geometric characteristics need to be able to be checked for the slightest irregularity or deformation.

If possible, core samples should be obtained across the trace and in control areas outside the trace.

Sample depths of up to 1 foot are preferred. These allow analysts to infer more about the nature of the cause of the trace, and also preserve information which can otherwise quickly decay.

If evidence of heating can be found, it can assist in dynamic modeling.

Conclusion

The Trans-en-Provence UFO observation lasted under a minute. However, in that minute, information was gained by an alert witness and extracted by focused and experienced investigators which allow an analyst to form and validate hypotheses about the nature of the object.

The Trans-en-Provence UFO was able to dissipate considerable kinetic energy without affecting the ground beneath it. This may have resulted in the observed “whistling” sound, which indicates a motion of air away from the object.

The object was then able to create close to 600 degrees C of ground heating on departure, despite the apparent insufficiency of mere thrust pressure to produce those temperatures. It then departed after tilting, and did not produce any further effects on the environment at that time.

Many previous observations have indicated that the UFO rim is a source of energetic phenomena. The Trans-en-Provence case continues to support that pattern. NOTE: The above mage is CGI.

KEN PFEIFER WORLD UFO PHOTOS AND NEWS

HTTP://WWW.WORLDUFOPHOTOS.ORG

HTTP://WWW.WORLDUFOPHOTOSANDNEWS.ORG

HTTP://WWW.NEWDISCOVERIES51.YOLASITE.COM

THANKS TO HTTP://WWW.UFOCASEBOOK.COM

GOGGLE…………….KEN PFEIFER UFO

Source: http://worldufophotosandnews.org/?p=28204

{ https://beforeitsnews.com/ }

21-11-2020 om 22:13 geschreven door peter  

Photos of Grey Alien, Los Alamos, David Sereda, Analysis

David Sereda’s first aspiration in life was to become an astronaut. In 1968, David and a friend witnessed a UFO along with hundreds of other witnesses. After this experience, David grew up as a UFO enthusiast never living in doubt of the phenomena that has swept the world since the Roswell incident in 1947. His interest in space, religion, philosophy, astronomy and science led him on his career in related fields.

He has worked deeply in high technology, on environmental and humanitarian issues and as a professional photographer for over 20 years. He has studied world religion, science, physics and paranormal psychology for over 25 years.

RELATED VIDEOS, selected and posted by peter2011

{ https://beforeitsnews.com/ }

21-11-2020 om 21:49 geschreven door peter  

Ancient Egyptian Pyramid Found On Moon, NASA Source! UFO Sighting News.

Date of discovery: Nov 20, 2020
Location of discovery: Earths moon
Source URL: 

• http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/posts/208

I found a pyramid on Earths moon today. Its really big, about 1km across. The pyramid is very similar to pyramids in Egypt seen from above using Google Earth. The site I got it from is an NASA endorsed site used by scientists. I also found many other interesting things...take a look at the video I made below and please subscribe to my channel because sometimes I make a video but wont make a post about it. This is 100% proof that ancient aliens moved from the moon to Earth thousands of years ago.  

Scott C. Waring - Taiwan

RELATED VIDEO, selected and posted by peter2011

{ https://www.ufosightingsdaily.com/ }

21-11-2020 om 21:24 geschreven door peter  

Tear Drop UFO Cloaked In Cloud Over California, Nov 2020, Video, UFO Sighting News.

Date of sighting: Nov 17, 2020

Location of sighting: California, USA

 

As you can see from the video below, the person was traveling on a freeway in California when they noticed a huge tear drop shaped UFO cloud in the distance. Many UFO researchers have been trying to educate the public about these clouds actually being created by alien craft that hide within them. The alien ship creates a invisible shield around it which holds in the clouds it creates, thus the disk shape matches the shape of the actual UFO. This is 100% proof of alien activity over California.

Scott C. Waring - Taiwan 

{ https://www.ufosightingsdaily.com/ }

21-11-2020 om 20:56 geschreven door peter  

UFOs Seen On Space Station Live Cam, Cut Off By NASA At End, Nov 15, 2020, Video, UFO Sighting News.

Date of sighting: Nov 15, 2020

Location of sighting: International Space Station 

 

A person caught sight of some unusual objects moving past the space station on live cam this week. The objects each appear to have a different and unique shape to them and are unlike anything I have ever seen before. These are not military secret craft and not space debris of forgotten satellites. There is only one thing they can be...alien  ships watching the space station. I actually saw the end screen yesterday and it seems to be the new cut off screen NASA is using now. I wasn't lucky enough to catch a UFO however. This video...is undeniable proof that aliens exist. 

Scott C. Waring - Taiwan

{ https://www.ufosightingsdaily.com/ }

21-11-2020 om 20:41 geschreven door peter  

With the on going UFO activity above earth, now a series of odd-shaped light objects have been captured on the ISS live feed, the last days. 

What are these colorful anomalies seemly moving in our atmosphere? Are they UFO-lightships or some kind of space debris or does the ISS just fly over city lights on the dark side of the earth? 

You can find and watch these anomalies at the following video links of the ISS HD Earth Viewing Experiment. 

• http://www.ustream.tv/channel/iss-hdev-payload 
• http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/128607141 
• http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/128608769 
• http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/128610346 
• http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/128611223

{http://ufosightingshotspot.blogspot.com/ }

21-11-2020 om 20:26 geschreven door peter  

UFC Legend Diego Sanchez Shares His UFO Experience

UFC fighter Diego Sanchez claims a UFO visited him on November 11 2020. Yes, you did read that right. The New Mexico resident says a UFO flew over his house and believes it was watching him. Sanchez got his daughter to witness the bizarre moment too.

New Mexico is known among conspiracy theorists as a hotbed for UFO sightings. On Twitter, the welterweight wrote that he was doing energy work on his patio as a UFO flew right above him. Sanchez added that he called his daughter, who eventually witnessed the UFO hover hundreds of feet away.

While trip sightings are regular in Albuquerque, Sanchez said that the one they saw was watching him.

The MMA career record of Sanchez stands at 30-13 and holds a victory over Nick Diaz. Also, he’s in the UFC Hall of Fame for his fight with Clay Guida, regarded as one of the best contests of 2009. His last fight against Jake Matthews was a loss in September at Fight Island. After holding a 17-0 career record, Sanchez has had 19 fights since 2009 but never won more than two in a row.

Now in the twilight parts of his career at 38, he is connecting with aliens in his downtime. No schedule of return to the octagon yet for Sanchez. Conor McGregor has openly showed an interest in fighting Sanchez this year, though.

 { https://www.latest-ufo-sightings.net/ }

21-11-2020 om 18:40 geschreven door peter  

David Fravor: UFOs, Aliens, Fighter Jets, and Aerospace Engineering

David Fravor is a navy pilot of 18 years and a primary witness in one of the most credible UFO sightings in history.

{https://www.latest-ufo-sightings.net/ }

21-11-2020 om 18:23 geschreven door peter  

Fermi’s New Paradox: If AI Analysts Are So Obvious, Where is Everybody?

UBS AM’s Bryan Cross says the goal of embedding AI in the investment process has failed because the aim has been misguided.

Bryan Cross

Over the lunch-hour din of the cafeteria, there was a shimmer in the air—a sense that something great was being discovered. This was different than a normal lunchtime in 1950 at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, where the Cold War had mobilized the West’s brightest minds. Normally, one could expect breakthroughs in particle physics or in fusion power, but there was a buzz on this day that could not be attributed to the Chicken Kiev.  

Four great minds were at work solving one of life’s great existential questions: Are we alone in the universe? This question led to more questions, as the Manhattan Project alums scribbled calculations on napkins: How many stars are in the universe? How many are like the Earth’s sun? How many have planets? How many have planets that are old enough to transmit information as far as the Earth? 

It was a frenzy. A crowd began to gather, as many were aware of the recent reports of UFO sightings nearby. Finally, as the calculations poured forth and the empty Coca-Cola bottles piled up, the math became obvious: There must be intelligent extraterrestrial life somewhere in outer space; the vastness of the universe assured the outcome to be true.   

The hand of Enrico Fermi, an Italian-American physicist from the University of Chicago, slammed the table—BAM! The “architect of the nuclear age” was troubled, though, because the conclusion did not make sense. “But where is everybody?” he pondered.

The contradiction between the math and the lack of evidence—if the conclusion that intelligent extraterrestrial life exists is so obvious, then where is it?—has become known as the Fermi Paradox.

A Computerized Buffett on Every Team—An Investor’s

Dream Just as those scientists looked to the stars for signs of intelligent life, investing has for decades looked to computers and quantitative methods for signs of artificial intelligence that can help make smarter decisions. But after decades of experimentation and development, finance is now confronted with a similar paradox.

There is a persistent dream of putting an AI-driven version of Warren Buffet on every investment team—one with all the positive qualities but none of the negative biases and behavioral errors that come pre-installed in humans. The excitement of building such a revolutionary computer-based system to pick investments has driven billions of dollars of investment into developing systems and hiring big-brained PhDs. The share of job openings in finance that are computer or math driven has nearly quadrupled since the Great Financial Crisis.  

But despite all the investments made, decades of academic papers produced, computer systems developed, and fortunes made in quant investing, the vast majority of actively managed assets are still non-quantitative in nature.   

Traditional active managers will tell you that quantitative techniques are not long-term enough and they will question whether a diverse portfolio can really know anything about the “risk” of a company. Quantitative practitioners will fire back with a long-dated backtest or logic derived from (perhaps flawed) statistical techniques, and say, “Isn’t it obvious that quantitative techniques are superior to anecdotal and heuristic-driven investment?” 

The two schools of thought are seemingly opposed and have spent the better part of decades without reconciliation. Sure, some quantitative techniques have permeated into risk management or screening for stocks, but there is no AI analyst working side by side with humans to make investment decisions better. Why not? 

Combining human-driven investment research with assistance from a junior AI researcher would leverage the best of both worlds. A team like that would combine the long-term, complex thinking of a human with the unbiased, quantitative, evidence-based decision-making of AI. 

Combining humans with AI to perform investment research seems such an obvious goal, and the resources being thrown at the problem are vast. But that being so, where are the AI investment analysts? In order to resolve this version of the Fermi Paradox, we need to rethink how finance approaches the use of AI.

The Goal of Embedding AI Has Failed Because the Aim is Misguided

In a classic scene from the movie Jurassic Park, the mathematician Ian Malcolm muses that scientists “were so preoccupied with whether or not you could, you didn’t stop to think if you should.” 

This is emblematic of the state of AI research, particularly in its application to quantitative finance. Everyone is so eager to demonstrate they are “state of the art” that there is no thinking aimed at applying AI in the right way.  

The search trends in the graph below demonstrate the fashion for doing something “fancy”, rather than building something transformative in the right manner.  

In quantitative finance, this trend has manifested itself in the overuse (and potentially misuse) of alternative data combined with machine learning. Rather than thinking about the longer-term solutions to the problem, participants in the field are rushing to outperform each other using niche data to perform task-specific solutions. 

As a result, the alpha itself is fleeting and the applications don’t generalize across a broad spectrum of investment problems.  Additionally, the industry is laden with tales of good intentions that fail to get adopted into the traditional investment workflow. 

Aligning AI with How Investors Think is the Key to Progress

If one stops to think about what makes a great investor, it’s not typically a niche, task-specific process that differentiates the legends from the temporarily lucky. 

Because markets are complex systems whose dancing landscapes are constantly changing, the best investors are generalists by nature; they take mental models and are able to apply them over and over again. They don’t merely learn facts; rather, they learn models and systems so as to build a toolkit in order to pick the best tool for the job at hand. 

The computational complexity is low and the objective is to handicap all possible outcomes—to discount the implied market, not to forecast. They think about what investments present asymmetric payouts from a probabilistic perspective in a folksy back-of-the-envelope manner.

To build AI that can successfully be implemented in the investment process, we must align the design of the machine with the cognitive tasks of great investors. 

Our team at UBS Asset Management, called Quantitative Evidence & Data Science, or QED, has taken the approach of focusing on investor workflows as a guiding principle. Essentially, we want to understand what are the things that investors do, so we can better help them make better decisions. 

In the next several years, QED will be spending more and more time focusing on how to generalize these workflows and to combine them with heuristics to form investment conclusions. Our goal is to create a form of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) that can apply reasoning to identify and apply mental models hidden in novel problems and then, ultimately, make an investment recommendation. In the next year, we will focus on aligning our machines with real investment workflows so that the AGI can make real investment recommendations.

  This may seem an audacious goal. But the process of getting there is the best way for us to help drive the application of science to the fundamental investment process. As we solve problems in the path towards AGI, we can directly apply the solutions to investment workflows. 

Finding AI: The Human Plus AGI Analyst Team of the Future

Does this mean that QED is trying to disintermediate human financial analysts? Not at all. In Philip K. Dick’s Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?—which is the basis for the classic film Bladerunner—humans apply the Voigt-Kampff test to potential replicants (AIs) to determine whether they are human or AI. 

The test presents disturbing images to the subject: If the subject shows empathy, he/she is human; if no empathy is witnessed, the test proves the subject is AI. Empathy is the secret weapon of human analysts, and because human goals—like saving for retirement, or investing in a climate-aware manner—are the raison d’etre for investing, we will always need real people in the loop.

While QED’s goal is to develop an AGI, it is doing so in the context of having an empathic human working alongside a machine agent to produce better client outcomes.

The benefits of an AI/human partnership to client outcomes are clear and should motivate us to pursue this opportunity. The effort to build a successful integration of AI into the investment process doesn’t need to yield inconclusive results like the Fermi Paradox. Finance must align the design of AI with how investors think, and as part of an empathic human partnership. Otherwise, the efforts are in danger of becoming just a fancy tool that operates at the periphery, and we’ll all be left to ponder that, if it was so obvious, then where are all the AI analysts?

Bryan Cross is the head of UBS Asset Management’s Quantitative Evidence and Data Science team (QED). To read more on how QED functions inside of UBS AM, click here. Bryan also joined the Waters Wavelength Podcast to talk about a range of topics in the field of quantitative finance.

FURTHER READING

• Technology Science Friction: Some Tire of Waiting for Quantum’s Leap 08 OCT 2020
• Trading Tools Lighting Up the Black Box: A Must for Investors? 19 MAR 2020
• Technology Transforming NLP: A Look at New Tools Being Used by Banks 04 MAR 2020
• Data Management 'Data Mining is Bullsh**t' — An Examination 02 MAR 2020
• Data Management Fuzzy Data Stalls ESG Alpha Hunt 20 FEB 2020
• Trading Tools Quant Funds Look to AI to Master Correlations

Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.

You may share this content using our article tools. Copying this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/

If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@waterstechnology.com

{ https://www.waterstechnology.com/ }

21-11-2020 om 01:56 geschreven door peter  

Mysterious black disc seen flying over Wrexham and Flintshire

By Matt Warner

Did you see a black disc in the sky on Thursday?

A BLACK disc flying was spotted in the sky above the former Brymbo steelworks.

Residents and dog walkers watched the strange object fly from the direction of Chirk towards Hawarden and Broughton.

Once 60-year-old witness was in his back garden when he saw the disc flying at an estimated height of 100m at 5.30pm on Thursday (September 24).

Although he has no idea what it was, he is certain it wasn't an aircraft, drone or balloon.

He said: "It came from Chirk towards Queensferry.

"It was a flat disc, it was very strange. The wind was going in another direction, so I don't think it was floating, so it wasn't a balloon or a bin liner, it went in a straight line.

"It seemed to be 100ft high at the most. It was about as big as a car."

"There was nobody attached to it and their wasn't a cabin, so it didn't appear to be a craft. It wasn't a drone, when I first saw if I thought someone has let a balloon go. But when I looked at it I could see it was flat.Then it turned over so the bottom was the top, and then it flew again. It wasn't going up or done, or side to side, it was going in a perfectly straight line.

"I could hear dogwalkers saying 'Look at that?' and 'What is that?'.

He believes others will have saw the object as it was at a time when people would be driving home from work, and it appeared to pass over Brymbo, Pentre Broughton, Tanyfron, Caergwrle, and possibly Queensferry, as it headed in the direction of Hawarden and Broughton.

He hopes someone can explain what it was.

The witness added: "I took a video of it on my tablet for about 12 seconds. But when I looked it hadn't worked. But I tried videoing something later and it was absolutely fine."

Delamere actor Nathan Head, who hosts the paranormal investigation series Apparitions on Amazon Prime, says Wrexham is a hotspot for UFO sightings.

He said: "Its not the first time. In 2019 there were lots of reports of sudden flashes of light in the sky above Wrexham.

"I've not heard of a black disc before, usually its a black triangle if it is black. Perhaps it was metallic but because of the light and shadow it appeared black.

"In the 1970s there were lots of UFO sightings in Llandrillo, which isn't too far from Wrexham really. That too was flashing lights in the sky. Independent scientists claimed they were a rare type of lightning caused by earthquakes, a loud noise and bright flashes. The MOD suggested it was a crashed meteor, but no official explanation was given.

"An earthquake light doesn't explain the black disc though. That sounds more physical, like an actual spacecraft. Its exciting to consider the possibilities."

{ https://www.leaderlive.co.uk/ }

21-11-2020 om 01:24 geschreven door peter  

NASA's next Mars rover isn't keeping quiet during its long trek to the Red Planet.

A microphone aboard the Mars 2020 rover Perseverance, which launched on July 30 and will touch down on Feb. 18, 2021, captured the whirring sound made by the car-sized robot's "heat-rejection fluid pump," a newly released NASA audio file reveals.

That microphone was installed to record the sounds of Perseverance's entry, descent and landing (EDL), the "seven minutes of terror" sequence that will end with a rocket-powered sky crane lowering the rover to the Martian surface on cables. The Mars 2020 team turned on the mic on Oct. 19 to determine if it and an associated camera system are functioning properly, capturing the whirring sound in the process.

• In photos: NASA's Mars Perseverance rover mission to the Red Planet

That sound did not travel through the vacuum of space; sound waves need a medium through which to propagate. In this case, the waves traveled through Perseverance's body, causing mechanical vibrations that the microphone registered. 

"As great as it is to pick up a little audio on spacecraft operations in flight, the sound file has a more important meaning," Gruel added. "It means that our system is working and ready to try to record some of the sound and fury of a Mars landing."

The heat-rejection fluid pump is part of Perseverance's thermal system, which will keep the rover and its instruments warm on Mars by circulating heat generated by the mission's nuclear battery, NASA officials said in the statement.

Perseverance will explore the floor of the 28-mile-wide (45 kilometers) Jezero Crater, which harbored a lake and a river delta in the ancient past. The rover will characterize the site's geology, hunt for signs of ancient Mars life and cache samples for future return to Earth, among other tasks.

Perseverance will also test technologies for future exploration of the Red Planet. For example, one of the rover's instruments, called MOXIE (short for "Mars Oxygen ISRU Experiment"), will generate oxygen from the thin, carbon dioxide-dominated Martian atmosphere. Such equipment, if scaled up, could help humanity establish a foothold on the Red Planet, NASA officials have said.

Also flying to Mars attached to Perseverance's belly is a tiny helicopter called Ingenuity. If all goes according to plan, the 4-lb. (1.8 kilograms) chopper will make a few short test flights on the Red Planet, becoming the first rotorcraft ever to ply alien skies.

The EDL mic, which was built by Danish company DPA Microphones, isn't Perseverance's only audio equipment. The rover carries a second microphone designed to record sounds made by its rock-zapping SuperCam instrument.

If these microphones work, they'll be the first ever to record true audio on Mars. (NASA's InSight lander captured the "sounds" of the Martian wind shortly after its 2018 touchdown, but that recording processed data gathered by an air pressure sensor and a seismometer.) 

But the new microphones aren't the first to fly on a Red Planet mission. NASA's Mars Polar Lander spacecraft, which crashed during its touchdown attempt in December 1999, sported a mic. And NASA's Phoenix lander, which aced its 2008 water-hunting mission, had a microphone built into its descent camera. But the Phoenix team never turned that instrument on, out of concern that its use could complicate the landing process.

Mike Wall is the author of "Out There" (Grand Central Publishing, 2018; illustrated by Karl Tate), a book about the search for alien life. Follow him on Twitter @michaeldwall. Follow us on Twitter @Spacedotcom or Facebook. 

{ https://www.space.com/ }

21-11-2020 om 01:15 geschreven door peter  

Researchers find a new hidden secret in the paintings of Leonardo Da Vinci

Hint: you can't see it with the naked eye.

 by Fermin Koop

 

Leonardo da Vinci was one of the greatest geniuses in history, with skills and inventions way ahead of his time. On many occasions his work was surrounded by mystery, hiding secrets not visible at first glance. Now, a new study found another one, linked to bacteria and fungi.

Looking for hidden secrets in Da Vinci’s work, a team of researchers from Austria and Italy decided to investigate what was beyond the naked eye in seven of Leonardo’s best-known drawings. They weren’t looking for hidden sketches or anything like that: they were looking for the microbiome.

A microbiome is essentially a set of microorganisms that share the same habitat. They aren’t perceptible to the naked eye and advanced technologies are needed to try to understand how and why they coexist. Looking for hidden elements in Leonardo’s work, the researchers stumbled upon very nusual types of microbiome.

Five of these drawings are currently housed in the Royal Library of Turin: Autoritratto, Nudi per la battaglia di Anghiari, Studi delle gambe anteriori di un cavallo, Studi di insetti and tudi di gambe virili. The last two are stored at the Corsinian Library in Rome: Uomo della Bitta and Studio di panneggio per una figura inginocchiata.

Analyzing the seven drawings, the researchers discovered that the microbiome of each one was unique enough to be able to identify each of the works only by their distinctive microorganisms — you may not tell a book by its cover, but you can tell a work of art by its microbes.

This is not to say that the microbiomes were entirely different, they were still similar in many ways, but each had a distinctive touch.

The findings can help the researchers to locate the places where the drawing was carried out, as well as the places through which it has passed throughout its life, such as warehouses, restorers, or art dealers. This is very valuable information: the microbiome has a story to tell and if you read it well, you can even use it to detect fraud.

The researchers used a tool called Nanopore, a genetic sequencing method that quickly breaks down and analyzes genetic material, to make a detailed study of the different biological materials. They had already studied microbiomes in the past to determine how statues recovered from smugglers had been stored.

In the case of the Da Vinci drawings, they believe most of the human DNA discovered comes from people who were responsible for restoring and caring for their works from the 15th century. They also confirmed all the drawings are original works by Leonardo and found a high concentration of bacteria compared to the fungi.

In previous studies, they had been able to confirm that fungi tend to dominate the microbiomes, but in this case, it was absolutely the opposite. They believe that they came from both humans and insects, something that probably has to do with how the works were stored, especially after Leonardo’s death.

“Altogether, the insects, the restoration workers and the geographic localization seem to all have left a trace invisible to the eye on the drawings,” the researchers said in a statement. “[But] it is difficult to say if any of these contaminants originate from the time when Leonardo da Vinci was sketching its drawings.”

The study was published in the journal Frontiers in Microbiology.

{ https://www.zmescience.com/ }

20-11-2020 om 23:57 geschreven door peter  

China rolls out Long March 5 rocket for Chang'e 5 moon sample-return mission launch

A Chinese Long March 5 rocket carrying the Chang'e 5 moon sample-return spacecraft rolls out to the launch pad at the Wenchang Satellite Launch Site on Hainan Island on Nov. 17, 2020.

(Image: © China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation)

Two of the Chang'e 5 modules will remain in lunar orbit. The other two — a sample collector and an ascent vehicle — will touch down in the Mons Rumker area of the huge Oceanus Procellarum ("Ocean of Storms"), a vast volcanic plain that has been explored by a number of other moon missions, including NASA's Apollo 12 in 1969.

If all goes according to plan, Chang'e 5's sample collector will use a robotic arm and a drill to snag about 4.4 lbs. (2 kg) of moon dirt and rock, including material that will be sourced from up to 6.5 feet (2 meters) underground. The ascent vehicle will then loft this cache to lunar orbit, where it will dock with one of the orbiting modules and then be integrated into the other, which will haul the stuff back to Earth, according to the NASA description. The moon samples are scheduled to land in China in mid-December.

That touchdown will be historic: Humanity hasn't returned any material from the moon since the Soviet Union's robotic Luna 24 mission did so in 1976. (Comet and asteroid samples have come down to Earth since then, however. And yet more collected space-rock material will be delivered in the near future, by Japan's Hayabusa2 and NASA's OSIRIS-REx missions.)

• Related: The latest news about China's space program

Chang'e 5 is the sixth mission in China's Chang'e program of robotic lunar exploration, which takes its name from a moon goddess in Chinese mythology. The Chang'e 1 and Chang'e 2 orbiters launched in 2007 and 2010, and Chang'e 3 made the nation's first soft moon landing in December 2013, putting a lander-rover duo down on the lunar near side.

The Chang'e 5T1 mission, which launched in October 2014, sent a prototype return capsule on an eight-day trip around the moon to help prepare for the upcoming Chang'e 5 mission. 

Chang'e 4 pulled off the first-ever soft landing on the moon's mysterious far side, delivering a lander and rover to this largely unexplored region in January 2019. Chang'e 4 is still going strong, as is the Chang'e 3 lander. (The Chang'e 3 rover died after 31 months of operation.)

Mike Wall is the author of "Out There" (Grand Central Publishing, 2018; illustrated by Karl Tate), a book about the search for alien life.

Follow him on Twitter @michaeldwall.

Follow us on Twitter @Spacedotcom or Facebook. 

{ https://www.space.com/ }

20-11-2020 om 22:49 geschreven door peter