Nice Australian picture. Just a single frame of many, taken at a 1/20th sec to show.........? A faint trail ending in a burst of light?
NASA would like your help to decide what you are seeing.
Is it a laser, a firework, a flashlight, a small meteor, an exploding street lamp, an insect?
Nobody is quite sure. But NASA states that the picture is genuine, and not faked.
I thought it would be an interesting problem to participate in our own 'online discussion'.
Later, Amaranth as moderator could cobble together the best ideas, and posting under Science a Gogo,...get us some kudos, even poach some new members from APOD, for us?
For the Picture http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap041207.html

It would be nice if we could get some idea of its size and velocity. Does anyone know that the structures to the left of "thing" are? Can we guess how far away they are, and trace back to the beginning of the visible arc? Or, measuring the arc itself, can we determine the velocity by the distance covered in 1/20 of a second? If we could determine a size by comparison, even measuring the width of the track and comparing to the power pole or the items in the surroundings, it would shed a bit of light on this. The power pole outside my house is about a foot in diameter; I've never been to Australia, so really can't tell. Maybe Kate or some of our other Aussie members can help us out here.

It's an interesting challenge, anyway. I'll do my best.

I am sorry to be a joy breaker, but before trying to explain the phenomenon in the the picture, they should have posted more of the pictures/frames that have been taken before and after the frame in question. Otherwise, same as the lottery.

And BTW, this is right up Extrasenseless' alley, so I wonder if he won't conclude that the picture shows definitive proof that life he previously identified on Mars has somehow migrated to Earth... :rolleyes:

Why haven't them dress up a scuba equipment and research that peeble. As I can see, it's not a deep area and it's quite easy to see a "new" stone on the sea floor of an oxigenated shallow water environment.
First thing to do.

Why haven't them dress up a scuba equipment and research that peeble.
***************************************
Because we only have the picture to go on.

From a scientific point of view....Its just as important to state what you think is is'nt, and say why. As well as to say what you think it might be. Giving at least one scientific reason
to back up your case.

I thought this could be an interesting exercise
to help us all digest that Xmas pudding.

So you believe it's an object? (that landed in the water) What about the cloud of smoke (angle and size) by the flash?
the end

Yes, excellent idea....and so using the 1/20th second shutter speed.
Just how fast did that object travel from the small sunlit cloud to within a few feet of ground level?
Average cirrus, or is it cummulus cloud height?
Having lived in and under a cloud most of my life
I've never studied them. Any one any ideas?

I'll give you the same answer as I gave Kit Kat, We have only got the photo to go on.I understand that someone was taking time lapse photos of the clouds. So nothing before or after the relevant frame.

I'm assuming its evening, so that the photo looks if it was taken in a S Westerly direction?
Do you know from what direction in the sky
Meteors appear from, in Australia?

After having worked in a retail photo processing department it actually looks like a flaw I have seen with the paper that was used during processing of the negative

Sorry to be so vague in the previous post...the flaw would exist from the paper itself and is caused by a light leak before the paper is exposed t the negative......Mike, I thought you decided to post no more on SaGG? Good to have you here though!!

Re Posting- I'm open minded, having learnt that nothing is fixed and immutable in this world.
But I did like the previous Forum. Since I could see ALL the replys on a single screen. To pick and read as desired.
Thank you kind Sir for your last remark.

Re The light leak flaw? You could be right, but
what are the odds of your flaw ending in that flash, and puff of smoke?
Could it be an ionisation trail. Or a wispy smoke trail? Assuming the object was v hot.

If someone is able to rough out some max/min speed figures, we might be able to decide?

In order to be accurate I would need to examine the negative to ensure there is no bending or damage to either the negative or the paper itself. If the negative were damaged so as to not allow either enough or too much light through it then this could be the result, or the fact that as I stated before there could have been a light leak or the paper could have been damaged while in the drum of the processing machine. Without the physical evidence (the photo or the negative or the processing equipment to examine)then of course I am merely speculating... :rolleyes: