What you're seeing is a satellite that has a spin to it. The spin is reflecting off of the solar panel. That's why it seems rhythmic as well. They do this so that they don't have to put panels all over the vehicle and it can still generate enough electricity. Also magnetometers really need to be in a rotation to get a true reading.
@@mr.peter.l.k ..i freely admit this one's consistent with a spinning satellite. Like Steve says it's periodic - bright pulse then dim pulse - so perhaps a suggestion of some asymmetry about the spin axis, one side glinting more strongly in our direction than the other. The pulses have an appreciable attack and decay too, also consistent with sunlight glinting off the flattened surfaces of a rotating object. To be honest i only bothered uploading it in an abundance of caution after that other object apparently zapped me the other night; if the camera hadn't picked up that hum, perfectly synced to the flare-up, i'd have dismissed it as satellite flare without a second thought. Similarly, i was only on-guard re. potential audio interference after noticing a similar instance a few nights previously, in which i again had dismissed the object as terrestrial, and the passing hum just a coincidence. So while i'd happily be shown wrong again, i'm with Steve on this one. The benefit to magnetometers makes sense just in terms of Faradays laws (magnetism being a force between charges in relative motion), but there might be as many good reasons for satellites to spin, as not to, and as many different ways of optimising solar generating efficiency (if it's even solar panels that are glinting). An object apparently hyperspacing around the sky at eight-second intervals, only interrupted by another object flaring up in my direction while the audio records a perfectly-synced "woof", _that_ is a strong capture. This one's weak by comparison. As ever, no single example's a hill to die on - it's the preponderance of evidence that carries the day - and this one's undeniably ropey. I wipe Gb's of similar captures after every night's viewing, since i've found one of the reliable ways to spot UAP is simply tracking satellites on the off-chance one does something or passes something interesting. Most obviously don't, so are wiped the minute i get home, plug the camera into the computer and begin sifting through the footage. Many of those may be bona fide ET craft for all i know, but if they're indistinguishable from satellites they're of little or negative value..
Signal is strong with this one!
What you're seeing is a satellite that has a spin to it. The spin is reflecting off of the solar panel. That's why it seems rhythmic as well. They do this so that they don't have to put panels all over the vehicle and it can still generate enough electricity. Also magnetometers really need to be in a rotation to get a true reading.
you are wrong
@@mr.peter.l.k ..i freely admit this one's consistent with a spinning satellite. Like Steve says it's periodic - bright pulse then dim pulse - so perhaps a suggestion of some asymmetry about the spin axis, one side glinting more strongly in our direction than the other. The pulses have an appreciable attack and decay too, also consistent with sunlight glinting off the flattened surfaces of a rotating object.
To be honest i only bothered uploading it in an abundance of caution after that other object apparently zapped me the other night; if the camera hadn't picked up that hum, perfectly synced to the flare-up, i'd have dismissed it as satellite flare without a second thought. Similarly, i was only on-guard re. potential audio interference after noticing a similar instance a few nights previously, in which i again had dismissed the object as terrestrial, and the passing hum just a coincidence. So while i'd happily be shown wrong again, i'm with Steve on this one. The benefit to magnetometers makes sense just in terms of Faradays laws (magnetism being a force between charges in relative motion), but there might be as many good reasons for satellites to spin, as not to, and as many different ways of optimising solar generating efficiency (if it's even solar panels that are glinting).
An object apparently hyperspacing around the sky at eight-second intervals, only interrupted by another object flaring up in my direction while the audio records a perfectly-synced "woof", _that_ is a strong capture. This one's weak by comparison.
As ever, no single example's a hill to die on - it's the preponderance of evidence that carries the day - and this one's undeniably ropey. I wipe Gb's of similar captures after every night's viewing, since i've found one of the reliable ways to spot UAP is simply tracking satellites on the off-chance one does something or passes something interesting. Most obviously don't, so are wiped the minute i get home, plug the camera into the computer and begin sifting through the footage. Many of those may be bona fide ET craft for all i know, but if they're indistinguishable from satellites they're of little or negative value..