The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
MRO observed 3I/Atlas during its Mars flyby (approx. October 3-7).....
| Mainlining the $ecret Truth of the Univer$e | 11/07/25 |
| Mainlining the $ecret Truth of the Univer$e | 11/08/25 |
| https://imgur.com/a/o2g8xYK | 11/08/25 |
| Mainlining the $ecret Truth of the Univer$e | 11/08/25 |
| https://imgur.com/a/o2g8xYK | 11/08/25 |
| Mainlining the $ecret Truth of the Univer$e | 11/08/25 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: November 7th, 2025 9:36 PM Author: Mainlining the $ecret Truth of the Univer$e ("One Year Performance 1978-1979 (Cage Piece)") Why are we still waiting for the images, and why does it matter?
It has now been over a month since NASA's Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO)—and its high-resolution HiRISE camera—had the best, closest view of the interstellar object `3I/Atlas`.
As of today (November 7), those images have not been released.
The official reason is the ongoing government shutdown, which has furloughed NASA's public affairs and data-release pipeline. While this is procedurally true, it's a failure of scientific priority. Mission-critical staff *are* at their posts protecting these multi-billion-dollar assets. The data almost certainly exists.
Withholding these images, for any reason, is a massive scientific disservice because `3I/Atlas` is not just "another comet." The data we *do* have from other sources confirms it is a "black swan" event that is actively challenging our models.
The "traditional comet" theory is failing to explain a stack of verified anomalies.
1. The Central Paradox: "Thrust-Without-a-Tail"
This is the most significant, data-driven mystery.
**It Has "Thrust":** A report from NASA's own JPL (Davide Farnocchia) confirms `3I/Atlas` is exhibiting "non-gravitational acceleration." Something is actively pushing it.
**It's Missing the "Exhaust":** To produce this much thrust, a normal comet would have to be catastrophically ejecting *at least* 13-15% of its total mass. This would create an enormous, unmissable coma and tail.
**The Contradiction:** Post-perihelion observations (as recent as November 5) confirm this tail is missing. The object shows a "faint glow" but **no evidence** of the massive debris cloud required by the physics.
This is the *exact same* `thrust-without-a-tail` paradox that made `1I/'Oumuamua` a mystery. `2I/Borisov` (our second visitor) was a "normal" comet with a huge tail, which makes `3I/Atlas`'s behavior even more anomalous. We are now 2-for-3 on interstellar visitors that break this model.
2. The "Industrial" Composition
This isn't speculation; it's a verified spectral anomaly from Keck telescope data.
The gas plume of `3I/Atlas` shows **"prominent nickel emission but no evidence for iron."** This "extreme nickel-to-iron ratio" is not found in other known comets, where the two metals always appear together. This chemical signature is, however, characteristic of industrially-refined nickel.
3. The "Impossible" Orbit
The object is on a retrograde trajectory that is aligned **within 5 degrees** of our solar system's flat ecliptic plane. The statistical probability of a random interstellar visitor having this specific alignment is **0.2%** (1 in 500).
The MRO images are the highest-resolution data we have from its closest encounter. They could provide the ground truth on these anomalies. The public deserves to see them.
|
Date: November 8th, 2025 12:53 PM Author: Mainlining the $ecret Truth of the Univer$e ("One Year Performance 1978-1979 (Cage Piece)") (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5794803&forum_id=2).#49412513) |
|
Date: November 8th, 2025 12:56 PM Author: https://imgur.com/a/o2g8xYK "The statistical probability of a random interstellar visitor having this specific alignment is **0.2%** (1 in 500)"
We've only observed two other interstellar objects, and one of them also moved fast and escaped the sun's orbit. So the odds seem closer to 2 in 3 than 1 in 500. How did OP become this retarded? |
 |
Date: November 8th, 2025 1:11 PM Author: Mainlining the $ecret Truth of the Univer$e ("One Year Performance 1978-1979 (Cage Piece)") YOU ARE CONFLATING TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FUJJUKING ANOMALIES, IMGUR, MY FRIEND:
ANOMALY A = THE ORBIT (The 0.2% $tat) -
This is the PATH the object is on. Its 5-degree alignment with the ecliptic.
ANOMALY B = THE ACCELERATION (The 2/3 $tat) -
This is the BEHAVIOR of the object. The thrust-without-a-tail.
You literally took the $tat from ANOMALY B (which is *another* fking anomaly, u idiot) to "rebut" the $tat for ANOMALY A.
This is NOT an argument.
This is a fukkiking NON-SEQUITUR.
It's only a "$ign" that your brain is broken ljl |
|
Date: November 8th, 2025 1:18 PM Author: https://imgur.com/a/o2g8xYK Our sample size is 3, and from that you extrapolated to 500. You're fucking retarded (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5794803&forum_id=2).#49412565) |
|
Date: November 8th, 2025 1:30 PM Author: Mainlining the $ecret Truth of the Univer$e ("One Year Performance 1978-1979 (Cage Piece)") I didn't "extrapolate to 500" from the "$ample $ize of 3," u fukin retraded ape..
THE 1-IN-500 (0.2%) IS THE BASELINE PROBABILITY.
It's the pre-calculated stat, based on fukkkking orbital mechanics, of *ANY* random inter$$$tellar object having that 5-degree ecliptic alignment..
we are comparing our $ample *AGAINST* that baseline, u fag
the fuking ANOMALY is that ONE OF OUR FIRST THREE SAMPLES (3I/Atlas) HIT this 1-in-500 $lot machine jackpot.
u don't understand what a "$ample" is
u don't understand what "probability" is
u don't seem to understand fuiking anything
$top poa$ting myu friend
TLDR (bc i know u need it heh):
(1) I did not "extrapolate" from the sample; I am comparing the sample against the baseline. Fag.
(2) the real anomaly: that one of our very first three samples (3I/Atlas) just so happened to hit this 1-in-500 statistical jackpot. |