Venus Illumination Spots, Lightning or NOT ?

Since this topic is more physics related than astronomy, I'll try to keep this discussion of illumination focused so that I can learn something.

THIS IS A TOPIC ABOUT UNUSUAL PHOTONS, NATURAL AND PERHAPS OTHERWISE:

It can be argued that the illumination dispersion and/or diffusion through those clouds is somewhat dependent upon a given cloud depth more than upon any source being of a narrow beam. Here is what I'm thinking;

At a cloud/haze depth of 25 km;
An illumination source beam of 1° targeting from below the clouds, at creating an initial target impact zone of roughly 1.25 km, whereas penetrating this 25 km worth of cloud at a 170° cone of diffusion creates a somewhat concentrated 500 km top-side display.

As opposed to a non-focused source of lightning that would have created a 1200+km illumination spot or zone of display having a rather noticeably sharp decline of its illumination towards the edge, whereas that's requiring at least three times the spherical illumination energy/m2 and by yet another 6+ times the display area. In other words, the amount of displaied energy of similar intensity, but spread over a 1250 km zone as opposed to the more focused display of creating something under 500 km is perhaps suggest another 20 fold energy requirement. Because of the illumination pattern, of its size and that more than half of lightning sourced energy is illuminating towards the surface, this seems to at least partially exclude upon lighting.

Since the clouds are mostly of droplets and not of random crystals nor silica diatoms (though diatoms may coexist), and because of the known opacity of the near UV (400~450 nm) being a minimum of 10% (though I believe as much as 25% opacity is possible), and as such the diffusion of light should not become greater than the divergence of +/- 85°, whereas this makes for that argument of something artificial being capable of generating such illuminations within the box of rational conjectures.

Obviously a thicker cloud depth will increase upon the observed spot diameter, as well as for a lesser depth permits a smaller observed illumination zone and of a potentially brighter event if the original source energy and focus remained the same.

Unless inter-cloud lightning were situated near the cloud-tops, chances are that such diffusion of any such lightning event transpiring within or near the cloud-bottom would become highly diffused, not to mention of an extremely short duration, as well as for providing a more greenish towards the IR spectrum event than not.

After all, if lightning were to ionize the mostly CO2 element, along with a good dosage of the H2SO4, as such I believe there shouldn't be all that much below 500 nm created, and hardly any amount of the 425~450 nm (I believe the KECK-II recording of the ionized O2 creating that nifty spectrum of 525~550 nm was interesting). Though of not having the chemical expertise nor direct analysis of ionizing specific chemicals at hand, I can't personally say with any certainty as to what a typical lightning illumination might generate. This is where folks having such knowledge or resources might offer their expertise without fear of my coming unglued.

I believe that I learned of the opacity of H2SO4 is perhaps best obtained near the spectrum of 425 nm, whereas the transmission of such photons through relatively spherical droplets should actually be quite good. Here again, I'm not the "all knowing" expert nor trying to skew astrophysics into some space toilet for ulterior reasons. So, if you've got something better to offer, I'm certainly willing to learn from and share off all the credit for your support, and many thanks for staying "on-topic".

OK, although it is possible that there is life on Venus, what leads you to the conclusion that this is EVIDENCE of such life?

So there are some lights on venus, that is hardly proof that they are artificial!

I am a real scientist and as such I look for proof, irrefutable evidence, not just posibilities. I have seen nothing here that prooves that these lights are artifical. THey MAY be artificial but hey may be any nubmer of things. Perhaps ball lightning in Venus's atmosphere? Perhaps these effects are not being generated by a source on the ground at all so all your calculations are irrelevant!

I'm not saying you re definitely wrong but you have a lot more work to do to convince me I am right because I am a huge believer in Ocham's razor and inteligent life does not seem te siplest possible solution to me. Some form of chemical reaction in the hot and chemicly complex atmostphere seems much more likely to me.

Bart B.

P.S.
I'm keeping a close eye on this thread so keep things civilized please EVERYONE.

So there are some lights on venus, that is hardly proof that they are artificial!

I'm not convinced of the lights, and have not seen any images to show the existance of the lights he is now describing.

I have looked through the posters website[1], and I can find no images of what is being described here. The main image he cites is of a so called bridge structure on venus taken from the magellen spacecraft, from the canals and face on mars surely we know that drawing conclusions from such images is a bad idea.

Cheers,
~Al

[1] Though not in detail due to the volume of text. At a glance though it does seem to score quite highly on math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html

What you are describing Brad (and what's in the BAA observations) are just cloud layers at greater heights than the main cloud belt, with a higher albedo. There's undoubtedly lightening at much lower levels than where these clouds are most likely situtated. There is no evidence whatsoever of ANY artificial lighting or any civilisation, Brad. And no, I'm not a NASA 'incest cloned Borg', as you charmingly describe your critics on your web page......

Brian

P.S. Aren't the 'tough Islamic or perhaps al-Qaida lizard sorts' that you think are on Venus just the bad guys from the sci-fi miniseries 'V'? God, I loved that when I was a kid

OK, although it is possible that there is life on Venus, what leads you to the conclusion that this is EVIDENCE of such life?

So there are some lights on venus, that is hardly proof that they are artificial!

I am a real scientist and as such I look for proof, irrefutable evidence, not just posibilities. I have seen nothing here that prooves that these lights are artifical. THey MAY be artificial but hey may be any nubmer of things. Perhaps ball lightning in Venus's atmosphere? Perhaps these effects are not being generated by a source on the ground at all so all your calculations are irrelevant!

I'm not saying you re definitely wrong but you have a lot more work to do to convince me I am right because I am a huge believer in Ocham's razor and inteligent life does not seem te siplest possible solution to me. Some form of chemical reaction in the hot and chemicly complex atmostphere seems much more likely to me.

Bart B.

P.S.
I'm keeping a close eye on this thread so keep things civilized please EVERYONE.

Firstly, you're going a bit off topic with discussing various aspects of other life on Venus. At this point I need more raw data and expertise on photons.

I've previously stipulated that Venus is in fact "hot and nasty", thus not likely supportive of any life as we know of, although that doesn't rule out the likes of Darwin running amuck with well motivated DNA/RNA on steroids.

It seems I've been informed by supposedly well educated folks that Venus wasn't always so darn hot and nasty, and that it may have taken millions of years to get itself into the greenhouse fix that it's in.

I've also speculated upon the raw timeline of a 0.1°K/year shift that could have advanced the likes of a tropical 300°K Venus into a 720°K roasting environment in perhaps 4200 years. That's hardly any million years worth but, certainly suggesting upon enough time for motivating my three remaining brain cells into some kind of survival plan of action.

I'm assuming You have viewed Alen Heath's heath4.jpg ?

I've posted that image and a link to their BAA within this page: guthvenus.tripod.com/illumination-spots-02.htm

BTW Brian O'Halloran; I don't believe that's an image of some ultra high cloud layer, as other astronomers have noticed such illuminations on the daytime as well as nighttime season of Venus. If that heath4.jpg image were to be of a symmetrical rise of clouds (oddly spot like illuminated as from all sides), could you speculate as to it's height?

BTW No.2; I'm also not excluding upon the notion of highly unusual forms of lightning (there's certainly lots of vertical kinetics to go around), nor am I excluding the notion of an outpost operated by the sorts of folks that should know better than to come anywhere near Earth, especially if we might start to think they're hiding the likes of Osama bin Laden or any of those WMD.

Obviously you wouldn't want to be communicating with your home world of perhaps Sirius/c by way of using inefficient microwave radio, as for one thing, as dumb and dumber and otherwise dumbfounded as we are, we might have accidently detected such communications, whereas spectrums of quantum photon communications may have been going unnoticed for centuries. At this point, that's about as far outside the box as I'm going to get.

I've posted that image and a link to their BAA within this page: guthvenus.tripod.com/illumination-spots-02.htm

BTW No.2; I'm also not excluding upon the notion of highly unusual forms of lightning (there's certainly lots of vertical kinetics to go around), nor am I excluding the notion of an outpost operated by the sorts of folks that should know better than to come anywhere near Earth, especially if we might start to think they're hiding the likes of Osama bin Laden or any of those WMD.

Obviously you wouldn't want to be communicating with your home world of perhaps Sirius/c by way of using inefficient microwave radio, as for one thing, as dumb and dumber and otherwise dumbfounded as we are, we might have accidently detected such communications, whereas spectrums of quantum photon communications may have been going unnoticed for centuries. At this point, that's about as far outside the box as I'm going to get.

I still don't see any evidence for life on Venus. I am prepared to accept that there may be some lights there but certainly the existance of light is not evidence for life, let alone inteligent life? We get funny lights on Saturn caused by the solar wind interactingwith its magnetic field,surely that is not proof of life so why would light in the atmosphere of Venus be any more evidence of it?

Yes, there is something going on there but it is much more likely to be some cool physics or chemistry that we had not thought of than life!

As for "quantum photon communications" that makes no sense and just sounds like a list of cool physics buzwords put together in a way that sounds cool enough to bluff the non-physics educated public!