The Release of Dust from the Surface of 3I/ATLAS
Does Not Imply That it is a Comet
Avi Loeb Medium 8/12/25
(Why is there only one individual pointing out all the inconsistencies
with what all of his colleagues in his field of study are saying?
"something is rotten in the state of Denmark"
Meaning, something sure aint right.)
Problem one:
"The fundamental uncertainty about the new interstellar object 3I/ATLAS involves its size. With the typical albedo of 5% for an asteroid, its diameter needs to be 20 kilometers in order to account for its brightness. But as argued in my first paper about it, the reservoir of rocky material in interstellar space can only deliver a 20-kilometer rock once per 10,000 years, even in the unlikely case that all this interstellar material is packed in 20-kilometer rocks."
(Simply put:
It should not exist.)
Problem two:
"The alternative interpretation of the brightness of 3I/ATLAS is that most of the reflected sunlight originates from a dense cloud of dust that came out of a much smaller nucleus. This would associate the observed reddening of the reflected sunlight (as reported here, here and here) with small dust particles having a size of half a micron (half a millionth of a meter), the characteristic wavelength of sunlight being reddened."
"But this association raises a new problem. For sub-micron particles, the radiation pressure from the Sun is stronger than gravity, pushing them away from the Sun to the form of a typical cometary tail that trails 3I/ATLAS. Given the acceleration from solar radiation pressure, the sub-micron dust particles would lag behind the nucleus by a few arcseconds within a single day.
The resulting trail of dust should scatter sunlight efficiently but is not observed in the Hubble Space Telescope image, which only shows a glow ahead of 3I/ATLAS but no bright trail of dust behind it."
(I told ya I wasnt buying the size of 3I/ATLAS based on the recent Hubble image, as to many other things brought up about this object have been soon discredited.)
"If most dust particles are larger than a micron in size, then they would encounter less push by radiation pressure because of their smaller surface to mass ratio. In that case, the reddening of 3I/ATLAS must be explained by the red surface of 3I/ATLAS, implying that the object’s diameter is 20-kilometers, bringing back the concern that it cannot be an interstellar rock because of the limited supply of rocky material in interstellar space."
(LONG STORY SHORT:
Psalm 139:5-6
5 You hem me in
behind and before,
and you lay your hand upon me.
6 Such knowledge
is too wonderful for me,
too lofty for me to attain.
God's got ya comin and going.
You wont, in fact
can not escape him.
Every time we find out "xyz" about 3IATLAS
we find that it contradicts something else.
It's kinda how this object is supposed to be.)
"Instead, 3I/ATLAS might be a technological (Insert Supernatural) object which targets the inner solar system. This is consistent with its retrograde trajectory being aligned with the ecliptic plane of the planets around the Sun (0.2% probability), and its arrival time being perfectly matched to a close encounter with Mars, Venus and Jupiter (with a 0.0005% probability, as discussed here).
Haggai 2:6
“This is what the Lord Almighty says: ‘In a little while
I will once more shake the heavens
and the earth,
the sea
and the dry land.
Revelation 8:8
The second angel sounded his trumpet, and
something like a huge mountain,
all ablaze,
was thrown into the sea.
A third of the sea turned into blood.
20 KM = roughly 12 miles.
Interesting.
Sea turned to blood
=
Deceased marine life possibly.)
"...a thin layer could have been dirt that accumulated on the surface of 3I/ATLAS as a result of it being bombarded by interstellar gas and dust particles during its journey over the past 10 billion years."
(Remember this, "10 billion years")
"In contrast with the interstellar comet 2I/Borisov, the glow around 3I/ATLAS is much smaller in size and does not show a bright trailing tail, even though the surface area of 3I/ATLAS is larger than that of 2I/Borisov by up to a factor of a few thousands. Moreover, 2I/Borisov showed clear evidence for H2O, CO, CN, C2 and C3 molecules in its cometary plume (see Tables 4 and 5 here) unlike 3I/ATLAS so far. This suggests that 3I/ATLAS is not an interstellar comet like 2I/Borisov, as it lacks common cometary ices on its surface.'
"If it happens to be a comet, it should erupt with enhanced outgassing as a result of the brighter illumination by the Sun. This would inform us beyond a reasonable doubt that 3I/ATLAS is natural in origin..."
(It aint gonna.
Ive said it all along.)
"On the other hand, if 3I/ATLAS will not show the telltale characteristics of a comet but only those of a solid dusty object and also execute an unexpected maneuver near its closest approach to the Sun — when the Solar gravitational assist can amplify
the thrust of its engine
then its rank on the Loeb scale will rise to `10’ — a number reserved for manifestly technological (supernatural objects."
So,
10 Billion year old engines?
Where are they getting their oil changed?
10 Billion year old extra terrestrials?
(Older actually as one would have to assume
it took them a while to make and assemble such a craft)
Thats some kinda cryogenic chamber they got,
I wonder what energy source is running that?
But my main problem is the logic involved:
Why would something
that shouldn't be here in the first place,
need 10 billion year old "engines"
to do anything?
If its here
and it shouldn't be?
Does it not follow
that it could likely do things
its not supposed to be able to do?
There is more evidence for things
existing outside the laws of nature
(Supernatural)
than there are
of ANY
signs of life
let alone any kind of
"extraterrestrial tech".
I got:
UAP,
The Information in the genetic code
(Just far to complex to come into existence
without an intellect behind it)
And The Mechanism
by which that code
was placed
in every living cell
of every living thing
that has ever processed oxygen to exist
on the only place we know of
that life has ever existed.
So thats evidence of
3 things
existing outside the laws of nature
as we know them
Signs of any life elsewhere?
0.
3 to 0.
Interesting numbers.
Go ahead and go with
10 billion year old engines
and even older extraterrestrials
if ya want.
Aint no skin off my teeth.
Have fun with that.
Im back to 12 miles wide.
Based on 20 KM across.
Based on 3I/ATLAS
surface reflectivity.
(Albedo)
Godspeed everybody.
Journey well.
No comments:
Post a Comment