Illuminations upon Venus are Natural and Artificial

(there is a difference to behold, and you'll only need at least half a brain as for realizing that difference)

by; Brad Guth / GASA~IEIS     updated: October 01, 2004


Identifying the natural illuminations, such as those of lightning from the perspective of Earth is a neat trick, as lightning events are of relatively short duration and of creating a spectrum that might be hard to detect, especially of those illuminations transpiring within the season of daytime as opposed to those of the extended nighttime season.

360 years worth of observations as indicated by the recorded images and sketches of supposedly well educated folks, and of those having no apparent reason nor motivation as to lie, where in fact I'd more understand their having not disclosed upon seeing such events, as due to their being ridiculed to death if not eaten alive by their own kind.

Apparently there's been a well documented photograph having recorded the long existing discoveries of the unusually tight illumination zones of less than 500 km as displayed within the upper most clouds of Venus, and as such this still isn't the least bit of a worthwhile discovery, no more so than the extremely large coverage area of green (O2) nighttime illumination as recorded by team KECK-II isn't worth squat until some pretencious old collective of intellectual farts says it's so (50 or perhaps 100 years from date of discovery).


Some of the previous pages on this topic:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/illumination-spots.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/earthshine-moonshine.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-hot-spots.htm

Here's other improvements to this update as of October, 2004

ELECTRICAL PHENOMENA: http://www.pacificsites.com/~cmorford/Her_Sci/E_U/Venus_Comet_2.htm

"The Venera spacecraft found continuous lightning activity from 32km down to about 2km altitude, with discharges as frequent as an amazing 25 per second. The highest recorded rate on Earth is 1.4/sec during a severe blizzard. The Pioneer lander recorded 1000 radio impulses. Thirty-two minutes after landing, Venera 11 detected a very loud (82 decibel) noise which was believed to be thunder. Garry Hunt suggested at the time that: '... the Venusians may well be glowing from the nearly continuous discharges of those frequent lightning strokes'."

"There can be no doubt that the true origin of the Ashen Light is electric. It is a night-sky glow, similar to that in our own sky but estimated to be 50-80 times stronger. It has a line emission spectrum sufficiently strong to be photographed...." [V A Firsoff]

"The associated puzzle as to why Venus maintains a nightside ionosphere, given that night on Venus lasts about 58 Earth days, has not been answered. It is known that the nightside atmosphere is bombarded by fast electrons and that there is an unexplained large, fast drift of plasma (up to 10km/sec or 23,000mph) from day to night hemispheres."

"The comet-like magnetosphere, extreme heat, strong electrical interactions with the solar wind and intense lightning, ionospheric and atmospheric activity suggest that Venus has not yet achieved electrical or thermal equilibrium with its environment in the solar plasma. This, in turn, lends physical support to the interpretation of early reports of the planet as COMET VENUS and of its interaction with other planetary bodies."

Oddly this notion seems to be supportive of good old Velikovsky, and of his research upon Venus as a comet like item entering our solar system, perhaps as derived from our closest stellar neighbor being Sirius as of some 35~45,000 years ago, being especially nearby as of some 40,000 odd years ago, and of roughly every 105~115,000 years before then. Either that or our sun was fluctuating itself by more than 50%, or perhaps our moon had been firing itself up as a small remainder of a star, of which neither of those conjectures seem nearly as likely as for our solar system cruising within 0.1 light year of the Sirius star system, that which emits a rather nice amount of 375~450 nm (UV/a) and near-UV illumination that diatoms really like.


http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/venus_lights_010122.html

The green glow (as of November 1999)
"For two decades, scientists have argued about whether the atmosphere of Venus produces lightning. During two flybys, the Cassini spacecraft detected no signatures of Earth-like electrical discharges."

"While Venus may not have Earth-like thunderstorms, it does put on a newly discovered show of nighttime lights similar to one that occurs above Earth.

"Using the KECK telescope on Hawaii's Mauna Kea, a team of researchers led by Tom Slanger of SRI International, a research organization, found a glow of green light on the night side of Venus."

"The glow surprised Slanger and other scientists, who did not expect Venus to have the right chemistry to produce the phenomenon. How it is generated is not fully understood, but Slanger says it results when pairs of oxygen atoms collide to form an oxygen molecule, the energy of which is transferred to a third atom, which releases light energy that is -- you guessed it -- green."

"Gurnett didn't zap all hopes for lightning on Venus. He said there might be some cloud-to-cloud lightning, which is weaker than the typical bolts that strike the ground in a terrestrial thunderstorm."

The glow of life?
"Observations of Venus in the 1970s showed no evidence of the nighttime green glow, either, leading scientists to assume that it would only be found on planets with Earth-like atmospheres -- those rich in oxygen and having the potential to support life. It has therefore been considered as a possible signature for potentially habitable places outside the solar system."

This entire report seems as perfectly good and honest, though of somewhat oddly delaied science of such being 4 years and counting past-due from such knowledge becoming publically noticed, in that "Gurnett" and of others associated with this latest review of Venus are neither making conclusive arguments for nor against lightning (applied physics-101 5th amendment of don't ever commit yourself to anything, much less suggesting there's anything artificial outside of Earth). Even though their research has mostly diminished the likelihood of and certainly diminished upon the focus, intensity and duration charistics of this "green glow" as being entirely other than of what Alen Heath imaged (heath4.jpg), at least these folks aren't specifically excluding the factor of some artificial contribution as being responsible for those relatively bright illumination spots.

Is this Green Glow of Life merely the usual astronoly hype, as an infomercial for their up coming publication in the Jan. 18 issue of the journal NATURE, or what?

Here's another of my outside-the-box of thoughts pertaining to that green (O2) illumination detected by KECK-II.

If one had to survive upon such a hot and nasty planet, covered in such thick clouds that creates a season of nighttime that's humanly quite dark and all, and if they had a method of RF ionizing the base or haze zone of those clouds in order to obtain a little better illumination than whatever starshine and/or earthshine that can't be offering all that much in photons to us human like folks, though perhaps sufficient if they're extremely nocturnal as in having that magnitude 5 (100X) sensitivity advantage over our limited spectrum and lesser visual sensitivity, as such it would certainly have made perfect sense as for doing such as an artificial ionizing effort in order to obtain an amount of working illumination, of which below them nasty but illumination reflective clouds could actually become relatively bright.

Again, this greenish glow consideration is absolutely NOT persay of any "ashen light" as deposited by earthshine, and of the necessary energy by which to induce such an ionized display isn't trivial, in fact it's somewhat more like we'd expect from something good old Nikola Tesla running amuck with his wireless energy distribution that could have artificially accomplished such, rather than not.

I realize that mother nature is quite good at surprising us, but exactly how much physics as well as complex geology superiority are we willing to give this mother nature of Venus, over that of our apparently pathetic mother nature that has been running our DNA amuck by allowing the mutations of certain warlords and a highly cold-war motivated humanity to exist, when in fact there are NO such WMD in sight, other than what we as Americans seem to have in great numbers.


THE TRANSFORMATION OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM:   http://ascension2000.com/DivineCosmos/08.htm

"Every time [scientists] take a look [at Venus,] they seem to see something different, with phenomena appearing or disappearing like the smile of the Cheshire Cat. In November 1999, researchers from S.R.I. International and Lowell Observatory pointed the 10-meter Keck telescope on Mauna Kea, Hawaii, toward [the night side of] Venus for eight minutes and saw the distinctive green glow of oxygen atoms. "It was a total surprise," said Dr. Thomas G. Slanger, a scientist at S.R.I. and lead author of a paper in the current issue of Science."

This is also good news "the distinctive green glow of oxygen atoms" or what? As in that every time I've identified an updated report upon Venus, it seems the damn planet is becoming cooler and more livable, and that's even though there hasn't been a fact-finding mission to Venus in well over a decade.

Oddly this KECK-II image of the nighttime side of Venus pretty much proves that other folks have been lying their pretentious butts off about our instruments not being able to safely image the likes of this Venus nighttime season, as lo and behold, in November of 1999 there's this perfectly fine example, and I don't believe KECK-II was the least bit broken.

Folks, even though I'm the master village idiot of astronomy, and perhaps even less of anything astrophysics, as such I realize that I'm no Einstein. Just because I happen to think the much of humanity has become firmly stuck inside of one very smelly space toilet that's containing more cold-war extrament than you or I can shake a flaming stick at, never the less, the fact remains that something a whole lot more artificial than not modified a portion of the surface of Venus with structural items and as such created a highly rational community that could have been creating those illumination spots, such as the 500 km zone captured by Alen Heath and of many others of smaller diameter but equal or greater duration.

This isn't my best work, but it's a start: http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm

Obviously there's been a great deal of orchestrated opposition to my research, and simply because I've uncovered several other items of interest that are not exactly supportive of the "mainstream status quo", as such all of holy-hell has broken lose in order to demise upon my every word. Sounds much like Hitler is alive and well, much like Osama bin Laden and that stash of WMD that been stored all along within the Pentagon on behalf of the entire Laden family tree.


http://www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/personnel/russell/papers/evidence/
"Terrestrial lightning occurs in two quite distinct forms, cloud-to-ground discharge and intra-cloud discharges. Such discharges occur when the electric field in a cloud exceeds the breakdown value which ranges from about 106 V/m in wet air to about 3 x 106 V/m in dry air. Usually cloud-to-ground discharges begin in the cloud with a stepped leader carrying about 200-300A and moving about 50-100 m per step. It travels with an average velocity of about 1.5 x 105 m/s. This is followed by a return stroke in the same channel at a velocity of about 0.6x108 m/s carrying 10-20 kA which decays in about 20 to 50 µs. There are usually 3 or more of these strokes in any one flash separated by about 40 ms and lasting about 0.2 s. Figure 1 shows the electric field during 6 different ground-to-cloud return strokes /11/. The bottom two strokes show the first discharge of a series of strokes. The letter 'L' indicates the various steps of the stepped-leader. The upper four panels show subsequent strokes both with and without stepped leaders."

"In short, our terrestrial experience suggests that because of the height of the cloud layer any lightning on Venus would be intra-cloud lightning which occurs more frequently and consists of more and shorter individual pulses than cloud-to-ground discharges. This height should also weaken any geographic correlations but should not affect local time correlations. On Earth these local time Correlations are strong and we might expect the same on Venus where the "4-day" winds transport the particulate matter in the clouds into cooler regions. Since the thickness of the clouds and breakdown voltage is similar in the terrestrial and the Venus atmospheres, the power and duration of an individual flash of terrestrial and Venus might be the same. However, the rate at which such flashes may occur should depend on the charging rate which might be controlled by the ion production rate and the velocity of updrafts which are unknown. Thus we cannot predict how often Venus lightning might occur."


"On October 26, 1975 the Venera 9 spectrometer detected one period of apparent optical flashes on the nightside of Venus /19/ at 1930 LT and 9o S latitude. Figure 9 shows a sample of the data obtained during this period. The flashes were observed over a period of 70 sec. Multiple strokes were not observed but since terrestrial intra-cloud lightning produces a nearly continuous luminosity this behavior is as expected. The optical energy was 3 x 10e7 J per flash which corresponds to a 10e10 J total flash energy assuming an efficiency for optical production of 3 x 10-3. This is larger than the energy produced by a typical terrestrial intra-cloud flash but less than a strong return stroke from a strong cloud-to-ground discharge. It is also consistent within a factor of 3 of our estimate of the energy based on a recalculation of Ksanfomalitils measurement of the electromagnetic energy. Based on the statistics of this one event combined with the number of null observations, Krasnopolskii estimated that there were about 100 flashes per sec occurring on Venus with a global flash rate of about 45 flashes/km2/yr or about 7 times the terrestrial rate."

"The high electromagnetic impulse rates of up to 30/sec combined with the possible extreme distance of the source from Venera 11 and 12 suggest that the true impulse rate is very large perhaps exceeding the stroke rate on Earth. It is however, very difficult with the present data to determine the flash rate or stroke rates. We would need high temporal resolution data obtained under the ionosphere in the afternoon and evening hours to do this. Thus far we know very little about the properties of the clouds, the winds or the electromagnetic activity in this region of space."

Conclusions:
"The strongest evidence for lightning on Venus comes from the impulsive electromagnetic waves seen by the Venera 11 and 12 landers and the Pioneer Venus Orbiter. These observations suggest that Venus lightning may be similar to terrestrial lightning in many ways. The electromagnetic waves seen by PVO seem to be strongly correlated with local time occurring most frequently on the dusk side. The waves have at least weak geographic associations. The source appears to generate flashes at a rate that is comparable and possibly exceeds the terrestrial rate."

"It is also possible that the Ashen Light is powered by lightning since it too has a similar local time pattern /30/. If so then, with some care Venus lightning may be monitored from Earth with ground-based telescopes."

Unfortunately, this foregone conclusion of lightning as being the one and only possible candidate for the illumination-spots and/or "Ashen Light" isn't sufficiently conclusive nor sufficiently qualifying upon the factors of observed illumination duration, nor of the visual intensity and of a ionised or plasma spectrum of such natural CO2 illuminations that should be those primarily of the 425+nm spectrum if not indirectly offering a good deal worth of IR as created from exciting the mostly CO2 aspects of the Venus atmosphere. Although, an atmosphere of 5e20 < 5.5e20 kg hosting perhaps as much as 1e20 kg worth of H2O should yield a somewhat more yellowish (600~625 nm) affect upon light due to the amount of H2SO4 (SO2/H2O) trapped within them clouds, of which contain roughly 25~33% H2O, and otherwise the raw ionized plasma color of CO2 itself can become more white/red (pink), thus of creating a naturally occuring deep purple/vilot sustained discharge of the near-UV spectrum 400~450 nm seems unlikely, as well as for such creating an illumination spot that's nearly circular within the daytime cloud-tops adds a little further insult to the conjecture upon natural lightning being the sole process at work.

A nearly pure CO2 ionizing gas as within a laser includes a visible spectrum color of white/red (pink):
http://www.thaltech.com/~laser/unknown.html

This source (somewhat unrelated to astronomy though otherwise perfectly authenticated) utilized a microwave method of producing a light blue/purple plasma ball as ... 100% CO2 plasma: http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/pt/diamond/mwpecvd1.htm

Remember that I'm not actually the messenger from hell that's rejecting upon every notion of lightning as being capable of creating such illuminations, just imposing upon the honest notion that those sorts of natural events might be somewhat less symmetrical and of a much shorter duration and of certainly capable of developing more of their photons near to the IR spectrum than not. In fact the monochromatic spectrum of a pure CO2 laser beam is more into the 1060 nm, of which this spectrum is quite well absorbed by the elements of water within the mostly H2SO4 aspect of them clouds.

On Venus you need to think in terms of terrific "buoyancy", as in their clear ocean suspending the relatively dense layer of clouds surrounding their world, as such filtering out nasty solar and cosmic radiation and certainly making it difficult for any typical meteorite as to reaching the surface, at least not at any significant velocity due to the final atmosphere being nearly worth 10% density of water as for what makes a rather sluggish Vt. Thus of whatever craters we see, those were accomplished prior to the atmosphere becoming so extra thick and dense.

In fact, if we had the capability of terraforming a few planets such as Venus before it was so greenhouse hot and nasty, chances are that we first off have to slow it's rotation down, then create an ocean worth of atmosphere that was sufficiently dense and thereby solar radiation filtering, as such we'd obtain the highly desirable season of nighttime and all of that residing under a protective cloud layer that of only sufficiently smart folks or perhaps the likes of Godzilla could survive, thus right off the bat we're eliminating all the GW Bush sorts of fools and of numerous other idiot morons we seem to have cultivated. And if you wanted to keep some privacy between a couple of thse terraformed planets, whereas one of the planets (Earth) was essentially running itself amuck with snookered foold just about everywhere you'd care to look, having yourself a good cloak of a cloud cover would certainly make for unauthorized eavesdropping a bit more difficult, thereby averting any premature planetary pillaging that would certainly have transpired if the incest mutated folks of the other terraformed planet (Earth) thought there was anything of worth for the taking from Venus.

If you're bound by your religious and/or other biased principles as to exclude upon all possibilities of an artificial source for those spot like illuminations existing upon Venus, although if you'll at least concur that earthshine or Earth sourced ashen light isn't of a sufficient intensity nor spectrum, then perhaps I'm still uncertain if there's any form of truth or consequences that's capable of convening yourself and of folks similar into openly considering upon the alternatives of something other than natural lightning is at play, of which the notion of lightning being an extremely short duration and of not the usual spectrum nor intensity as observed (especially from what the following heath4.jpg image has suggested), can be allowed but only conditionally so.

What I'm suggesting, is that if I had the opportunity as to create an artificial source of such a horrific amount of illumination, of sufficiently good focus, and of a spectrum within the range of 400~450 nm (such as 425 nm), that which even a certified village idiot could have managed to accomplish, and especially since there's no apparent shortage of available energy, and the raw materials as for creating a sufficient mirror by way of using elements of silica as retro-reflectors is physics-101. As for an open arc within a mostly CO2 environment, using electrodes of either carbon and/or of including an element or core feed of mercury or some other desirable substance as a fuel for sustaining the desired spectrum, this isn't exactly rocket science.

If there is lightning responsible for creating some of the short duration illuminations, those events should offer more reason as to consider upon the available energy that Venus has at its disposal, as I was only refering to the extraction potential of kinetic energy from the horrific vertical pressure differential of 4+Bar/km worth of a fairly dense medium of CO2 (nearly a 12th that of water) as being one of the most easily obtained methods of extracting gigawatts if need be, and that's not of even dependent upon stored energy but of a continuously available draw on demand, and again this is merely applied physics-101 and otherwise certainly NOT rocket science nor of any other sort of "nondisclosure" or of some "need to know" form of black magic.

Gee whiz folks, I wonder what any decent sort of exoskeletal lizard folk, or perhaps a resourceful (JAXA Planet-C) Godzilla could have managed to have accomplished if there were such unlimited energy, and motivated because their world was getting increasingly hotter by the year, say if that were advancing along at 1ºK/year until the current greenhouse status of energy in = energy out, though of 0.1ºK/year might have been a more likely transition taking 4200+ years in order to reach the current status. In fact, it seems as though Venus has been offering more energy out than solar influx, as report by report isn't of increasing thermal issues but of lower estimates based upon old as well as recent readings. More importantly is that as pathetic and immorally diverted as Earth has become, even we now have sufficient technology of at least technically surviving upon Venus, especially doable if we had ourselves a rigid airship that could cruise along below those relatively cool nighttime clouds, say operating at the altitude of 25 km where the atmosphere is relatively calm, and the nighttime environment is certainly toasty but not excessively so. In other words, we've had the necessary alloys, composites, electro-mechanical and even sophisticated electronics that would survive quite nicely, with margin to spare.

If to consider upon the influx of the 375 peak spectrum of Sirius/ab having anything to offer, as a reason or trigger for Venus becoming so hot and nasty, perhaps that event or last cycle of offering such added influx was of some 45,000 years ago, and lasted for a good 10,000 years worth while Sirius was within a 0.1 ly range, tapering off as our mutual separation created more distance between us and Sirius/ab. At least upon Earth there has been clear indications of some horrific UV/a spectrum of photosynthesise that has transpired on a 110,000 year cycle, and thus affected our balance of CO2, and of the one and only candidate in the vicinity is Sirius/ab, whereas the first observed history of Venus having a beard or that of a comet like tail, of once upon a time is suggesting the likes of Venus may have been Sirius/c. At least of whatever was originally referred to as Venus isn't the Venus of today, reinforcing the relatively new geological aspects of Venus by all accounts being more likely correct than not. I'm only suggest upon an event of perhaps 40,000 ~ 45,000 years ago as when the opportunity of something that horrific may have transpired, and of that obviously taking thousands if not tens of thousands of years to settle down.

Of course, if you want to believe or pretend that we were all created out of whatever conjured up the sun, then by all means the "flat-Earth" society has room in their clubhouse for lots more folks that don't seem to have half a brain nor apparently all that much of a soul.

Otherwise you could pitch in with whatever expertise it is that you can spare, as opposed to waiting around for the likes of our NASA to get off their butt is being more optimistic than waiting around for hell to freeze over. What we need are more images and run-time recordings of those Venus illuminations, and some effort at interplanetary communication. Even though we're not very smart as a species (proof being that we're still looking for all of those snipe WMD), chance are that others will take pity upon our souls by coming down to our level of intelligence, which might be asking quite a lot of ET, but it's entirely possible that folks on other planets will at least make an effort, which has so far been far more than of what we're trying to do.


If you're, just into the physics tit-for-tat aspects of what a phonon has to offer, for that I've got the following page:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-photons-m3.htm plus this little update regarding the Hubble photon mass at rest notion being 5.81e-66/9e16 = 6.4555e-83

This is where I believe the laws of physics and of the science that follows suite remains in flux, whereas few things are of an absolute constant within this ever changing universe. All remains in motion and is impacted by the surrounding environment, thereby all is in flux, thus a variable equation based upon other variables should be the norm rather than the exception.

This is part of my ongoing conjecture or basis for insanity;
There are trillions upon trillions of photons/atom, and even photons that are nearly at rest are those merely residing in a state of minimum flux, of which a sufficient volume and thereby mass of resting photons I could perceive as dark-matter if not dark-energy, yet as such NOT standing absolutely still. Whereas the resting photon offers a singular but variable dimension of length and thereby of the volume of said photons/m3 varies as per surrounding environment of coexistence with atoms permits, thereby it seems we have no constraints nor constants upon the dimension of a photon, nor of its' potential density/volume, whereas the frequency of modulation and/or amplitude aspects of a given photon that is NOT at rest is clearly offering a further variable that's none less complex than the variance upon physical speed or speed of erg/transfer of photon conduction.

The 10 dimensions of a photon:
1-D = Wavelength (as unmodulated, as at rest = 0e0 to 9e16 meters)
2-D = Modulation or erg/photon of 0 to 100% (100% AM/FM = wavelength)
3-D = Volume/m3 (entirely spectrum plus erg/modulation dependent)
4-D = Volume/m3/s (KE/s=MV2 per spectrum plus erg dependent)
5-D = Amplitude/Frequency Modulation (a quantum status of any given photon)
6-D = Photon mass at rest (0 to not more than 1 m/s)
7-D = Photon mass at speed (1 m/s to 3e8 m/s or greater)
8-D = Coexistence with atoms, or rather the atomic Oort zones of atoms
9-D = Photonic mode of conduction (by all standards being a super conduction)
10-D = The quantum matrix of any or all of the above, and perhaps then some

If the technology and minds of today had existed during the time of Einstein, surely there'd be no absolute constant of "light speed", nor would his photon have represented "zero mass".

Only deceptions and continuing lies create and sustain constants. The act of omission or code-of-silence in itself (physics 5th amendment) becomes just another example of a perpetrated lie in the face of a worthy challenge to the mainstream status quo.

I hereby further challenge the mainstream status quo by asking these questions;
1) at absolute zero gravity (inter-galactic gravity-well null), how many atoms exist per m3?
2) how many photons of those at rest are capable of fitting into a zero-gravity m3?
3) how many energised photons per spectrum or community of spectrums are there per m3?
4) is there a monospectrum or monochromatic status of null-wavelength for a typical photon at rest?
5) are photons in motion, or is there a conduction/transference of photon ergs/mass taking place?
6) since speed of a photon or of a transfer/conduction mode isn't constant, what are the limits?
7) within a universe, or a given representative portion thereof, what's the ratio of photons per atoms?


To the INDEX page: GUTH Venus (with loads of recently posted UPDATES)
alternate URL's: http://guthvenus.tripod.com  and  http://geocities.com/bradguth
Copyright © 2000~2004 - Brad E. Guth
GUTH Venus: All Rights Reserved
Webmaster: Brad Guth - Brad Guth / IEIS~GASA   ~  phone; 1-253-8576061
created: May 19, 2004

Brad Guth / IEIS IEIS-Brad@Juno.com
(due to officially DHS sanctioned email account bashings, as well as unauthorized moderation of my email accounts, whereas if push should come down to shove, you can always call or simply post your reply within the likes GOOGLE or Space.com using "bradguth-email" or otherwise include "guthvenus" my name "Brad Guth" within your subject line, in that way I'll find you, though even GOOGLE as well as Space.com can internally moderate/exclude anything by you know who)