August 14, 2022, 08:36:57 AM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: What happened on/to this mountain next to Otorten????  (Read 9315 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

February 09, 2019, 08:42:26 AM
Reply #30
Offline

Nigel Evans


Exactly how many people have been killed by the Hessdalen Lights?
We don't know because isolated deaths could be attributed to other causes. We could only know if there were survivors. It could be the case that a lot of curious fatalities are wrongly attributed to heart attacks, fatal strokes, etc etc. It will all depend on the intensity of the microwave energy :-
In ascending order of intensity :-
  • people see lights in the distance
  • people hearrhythmic sounds - like chains - classic component of paranormal events
  • automobile electrical systems stop working
  • people feel the ground shaking
  • people feel heat, suffer burns.
  • people suffer long term ill effects of encounter - Flatwoods monster.
  • people start dying but the reasons aren't obvious and misdiagnosed as heart attacks, strokes, etc.
  • people clearly die from something that is attributed to lightning strikes.
  • extremely powerful cases are quite rare but exist - 9 mansi hunters being found as if boiled alive, human mutilation case in brazil etc.
 

February 09, 2019, 11:31:26 AM
Reply #31
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
And it leaves a trail of smoke (OMG, maybe NO2)
The NO2 theory requires a microwave plasma or rocket fuel as the source.

Microwaves don't have enough energy to create NO2

Plasma - yes
Which rocket fuel were you thinking of?

Nuclear explosion - yes
Meteorite - yes
Lightning strike - yes
Chemical reactions - yes

 

February 09, 2019, 12:37:23 PM
Reply #32
Offline

Nigel Evans


And it leaves a trail of smoke (OMG, maybe NO2)
The NO2 theory requires a microwave plasma or rocket fuel as the source.

Microwaves don't have enough energy to create NO2https://aip.scitation.org/doi/figure/10.1063/1.4996790

Plasma - yes
Which rocket fuel were you thinking of?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinitrogen_tetroxide

Nuclear explosion - yes
Meteorite - yesHow do meteorites create NO2?
Lightning strike - yesIn quantities too small to be considered here?
Chemical reactions - yesBut not relevant to the DPI?
 

February 09, 2019, 04:23:30 PM
Reply #33
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
And it leaves a trail of smoke (OMG, maybe NO2)
The NO2 theory requires a microwave plasma or rocket fuel as the source.

Microwaves don't have enough energy to create NO2https://aip.scitation.org/doi/figure/10.1063/1.4996790

Plasma - yes
Which rocket fuel were you thinking of?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinitrogen_tetroxide

Nuclear explosion - yes
Meteorite - yesHow do meteorites create NO2?
Lightning strike - yesIn quantities too small to be considered here?
Chemical reactions - yesBut not relevant to the DPI?

The link is referring to a specific experiment which uses concentrated microwaves to heat up matter to very high temperatures and the matter then turns into a hot plasma, which can create NO2.  It would be very difficult and close to incredible to do this naturally.  Microwaves themselves dont have rhe energy.  Where would the microwaves come from?

dinitrogen tetroxide makes a good oxidiser as a part of a two component system - fuel and oxidiser, and it was used by russia during DPI period.  But how is the rocket fuel delivered to the area?

Anything that can create sufficiently high temperatures in the atmosphere can cause oxygen and nitrogen to react to cause nitrogen dioxide.  A nuclear blast, or a meteor.  They are both very high concentrated energy events.
 

February 11, 2019, 04:12:35 PM
Reply #34
Offline

Nigel Evans


And it leaves a trail of smoke (OMG, maybe NO2)
The NO2 theory requires a microwave plasma or rocket fuel as the source.

Microwaves don't have enough energy to create NO2https://aip.scitation.org/doi/figure/10.1063/1.4996790

Plasma - yes
Which rocket fuel were you thinking of?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinitrogen_tetroxide

Nuclear explosion - yes
Meteorite - yesHow do meteorites create NO2?
Lightning strike - yesIn quantities too small to be considered here?
Chemical reactions - yesBut not relevant to the DPI?

The link is referring to a specific experiment which uses concentrated microwaves to heat up matter to very high temperatures and the matter then turns into a hot plasma, which can create NO2.  It would be very difficult and close to incredible to do this naturally.  Maybe converging ion streams, discharging slowly instead of very rapidly as lightning, look at the Quebec object again. Note the white sections seem to be incandescent - https://www.theloop.ca/watch/news/strange/super-clear-footage-of-ufo-in-quebec-caught-on-camera/5852802017001/5852601589001 the blue/violet is probably from excited nitrogen as the electron stream converges. The "black bits" could be hot NO2.
Microwaves themselves dont have rhe energy.  Where would the microwaves come from? We've touched on this before,a natural magnetron of unknown structure :). Lightning creates radio waves across the whole spectrum so the perhaps there's a natural amplifier. Yes i know it's crazy stuff. But these things exist. Unless you discount the Plane2 photo as water damage then it's extremely similar to the quebec object imo. It's easy for me to see a self illuminating object lighting up the snow storm and part of the mountain.

dinitrogen tetroxide makes a good oxidiser as a part of a two component system - fuel and oxidiser, and it was used by russia during DPI period.  But how is the rocket fuel delivered to the area? Crashed rocket leaking fuel?

Anything that can create sufficiently high temperatures in the atmosphere can cause oxygen and nitrogen to react to cause nitrogen dioxide.  A nuclear blast, or a meteor.  They are both very high concentrated energy events. I think we need something more persistent for the DPI.
 

February 12, 2019, 04:51:55 AM
Reply #35
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
And it leaves a trail of smoke (OMG, maybe NO2)
The NO2 theory requires a microwave plasma or rocket fuel as the source.

Microwaves don't have enough energy to create NO2https://aip.scitation.org/doi/figure/10.1063/1.4996790

Plasma - yes
Which rocket fuel were you thinking of?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinitrogen_tetroxide

Nuclear explosion - yes
Meteorite - yesHow do meteorites create NO2?
Lightning strike - yesIn quantities too small to be considered here?
Chemical reactions - yesBut not relevant to the DPI?


The link is referring to a specific experiment which uses concentrated microwaves to heat up matter to very high temperatures and the matter then turns into a hot plasma, which can create NO2.  It would be very difficult and close to incredible to do this naturally.  Maybe converging ion streams, discharging slowly instead of very rapidly as lightning, look at the Quebec object again. Note the white sections seem to be incandescent - https://www.theloop.ca/watch/news/strange/super-clear-footage-of-ufo-in-quebec-caught-on-camera/5852802017001/5852601589001 the blue/violet is probably from excited nitrogen as the electron stream converges. The "black bits" could be hot NO2.
Microwaves themselves dont have rhe energy.  Where would the microwaves come from? We've touched on this before,a natural magnetron of unknown structure :). Lightning creates radio waves across the whole spectrum so the perhaps there's a natural amplifier. Yes i know it's crazy stuff. But these things exist. Unless you discount the Plane2 photo as water damage then it's extremely similar to the quebec object imo. It's easy for me to see a self illuminating object lighting up the snow storm and part of the mountain.

dinitrogen tetroxide makes a good oxidiser as a part of a two component system - fuel and oxidiser, and it was used by russia during DPI period.  But how is the rocket fuel delivered to the area? Crashed rocket leaking fuel?

Anything that can create sufficiently high temperatures in the atmosphere can cause oxygen and nitrogen to react to cause nitrogen dioxide.  A nuclear blast, or a meteor.  They are both very high concentrated energy events. I think we need something more persistent for the DPI.

Natural Magnaton?  Yes a neutron star would probably be required?

Ion discharge is a possible answer but how?

Rocket crash is likely to result in fuel and oxidising agent mixing and therefore explosion

So the only remotely credible one you list is the ion flux.
 

February 12, 2019, 06:29:21 AM
Reply #36
Offline

Nigel Evans



Natural Magnaton?  Yes a neutron star would probably be required?

Ion discharge is a possible answer but how?

Rocket crash is likely to result in fuel and oxidising agent mixing and therefore explosion

So the only remotely credible one you list is the ion flux.
I'd add a natural cross field amplifier to the list, i've got a theory but i'd like to consider it more first.
Here's some others - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_lightning#Proposed_scientific_explanations
 

February 12, 2019, 01:16:10 PM
Reply #37
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient

Natural Magnaton?  Yes a neutron star would probably be required?

Ion discharge is a possible answer but how?

Rocket crash is likely to result in fuel and oxidising agent mixing and therefore explosion

So the only remotely credible one you list is the ion flux.
I'd add a natural cross field amplifier to the list, i've got a theory but i'd like to consider it more first.
Here's some others - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_lightning#Proposed_scientific_explanations


Yes. You could write a book of speculations or theories on this. But there is no scientific proof. And whats more, absolutely no way of connecting it to the Dyatlov Case, without scientific proof.
DB
 

February 12, 2019, 03:31:29 PM
Reply #38
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient

Natural Magnaton?  Yes a neutron star would probably be required?

Ion discharge is a possible answer but how?

Rocket crash is likely to result in fuel and oxidising agent mixing and therefore explosion

So the only remotely credible one you list is the ion flux.
I'd add a natural cross field amplifier to the list, i've got a theory but i'd like to consider it more first.
Here's some others - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_lightning#Proposed_scientific_explanations

The ion flux option would require a significant conductor or more likely a very large number of multiple conductors.  If there were significant veins of reduced metals in the geology of the area close to the surface then it may be possible for charged air to set up an electrical discharge of ions and produce ozone and NO2.  This would certainly create a spectacular light show in the sky ( St Elmos fire on a larger scale).  But not ure if it could create a high enough concentration of NO2 to be a significant hazard.  Also, the topography of the mountain might not support it.  Saying that it would explain the sightings of weird lights around the area by the Mansi.
 

February 13, 2019, 12:41:13 PM
Reply #39
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient

Natural Magnaton?  Yes a neutron star would probably be required?

Ion discharge is a possible answer but how?

Rocket crash is likely to result in fuel and oxidising agent mixing and therefore explosion

So the only remotely credible one you list is the ion flux.
I'd add a natural cross field amplifier to the list, i've got a theory but i'd like to consider it more first.
Here's some others - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_lightning#Proposed_scientific_explanations

The ion flux option would require a significant conductor or more likely a very large number of multiple conductors.  If there were significant veins of reduced metals in the geology of the area close to the surface then it may be possible for charged air to set up an electrical discharge of ions and produce ozone and NO2.  This would certainly create a spectacular light show in the sky ( St Elmos fire on a larger scale).  But not ure if it could create a high enough concentration of NO2 to be a significant hazard.  Also, the topography of the mountain might not support it.  Saying that it would explain the sightings of weird lights around the area by the Mansi.

There is nothing unusual in the geology of the area in question.  Certainly nothing that could contribute to any theory of an electro magnetic nature of such force to have been responsible for the Dyatlov Incident.  The Authorities are supposed to be sending geologists to the area in March. But I have no doubt that the basic geology is already known.
DB
 

February 13, 2019, 01:28:18 PM
Reply #40
Offline

Nigel Evans



Natural Magnaton?  Yes a neutron star would probably be required?

Ion discharge is a possible answer but how?

Rocket crash is likely to result in fuel and oxidising agent mixing and therefore explosion

So the only remotely credible one you list is the ion flux.
I'd add a natural cross field amplifier to the list, i've got a theory but i'd like to consider it more first.
Here's some others - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_lightning#Proposed_scientific_explanations

The ion flux option would require a significant conductor or more likely a very large number of multiple conductors.  If there were significant veins of reduced metals in the geology of the area close to the surface then it may be possible for charged air to set up an electrical discharge of ions and produce ozone and NO2.  This would certainly create a spectacular light show in the sky ( St Elmos fire on a larger scale).  But not ure if it could create a high enough concentration of NO2 to be a significant hazard.  Also, the topography of the mountain might not support it.  Saying that it would explain the sightings of weird lights around the area by the Mansi.

There is nothing unusual in the geology of the area in question.  Certainly nothing that could contribute to any theory of an electro magnetic nature of such force to have been responsible for the Dyatlov Incident.  The Authorities are supposed to be sending geologists to the area in March. But I have no doubt that the basic geology is already known.

Natural Magnaton?  Yes a neutron star would probably be required?

Ion discharge is a possible answer but how?

Rocket crash is likely to result in fuel and oxidising agent mixing and therefore explosion

So the only remotely credible one you list is the ion flux.
I'd add a natural cross field amplifier to the list, i've got a theory but i'd like to consider it more first.
Here's some others - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_lightning#Proposed_scientific_explanations

The ion flux option would require a significant conductor or more likely a very large number of multiple conductors.  If there were significant veins of reduced metals in the geology of the area close to the surface then it may be possible for charged air to set up an electrical discharge of ions and produce ozone and NO2.  This would certainly create a spectacular light show in the sky ( St Elmos fire on a larger scale).  But not ure if it could create a high enough concentration of NO2 to be a significant hazard.  Also, the topography of the mountain might not support it.  Saying that it would explain the sightings of weird lights around the area by the Mansi.
I think the shape of the Ural mountains and Kholat is the key here rather than the geology. Strong westerly winds have little to get in their way before hitting the Urals. The wind above 1200 metres has no obstruction at all but at Kholat the westerly ridge directs the wind at ground level straight up vertically into the higher altitude horizontal winds creating enormous turbulence. With high winds at 100mph plus in a snow storm you then have excellent conditions for constant high levels of ion production. Then in 1959 with stronger geo magnetism this ionisation creates quite a light show (probably including fire orbs and plane1 and plane2). But the important bit is the constant or possibly just regular discharging. Note it doesn't have to be cloud to ground, it could be cloud to cloud. But it's producing N2O and NO2 and nitric acid and they just camped downwind - in the wrong place at the wrong time. It may be that these gases and aerosols are ionised and attracted to the tent which is an earth point in an otherwise well insulated hillside in a metre of snow. So any of the relevant molecues that hit the tent stick to it building up levels of exposure.
 

February 13, 2019, 03:19:37 PM
Reply #41
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient

Natural Magnaton?  Yes a neutron star would probably be required?

Ion discharge is a possible answer but how?

Rocket crash is likely to result in fuel and oxidising agent mixing and therefore explosion

So the only remotely credible one you list is the ion flux.
I'd add a natural cross field amplifier to the list, i've got a theory but i'd like to consider it more first.
Here's some others - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_lightning#Proposed_scientific_explanations

The ion flux option would require a significant conductor or more likely a very large number of multiple conductors.  If there were significant veins of reduced metals in the geology of the area close to the surface then it may be possible for charged air to set up an electrical discharge of ions and produce ozone and NO2.  This would certainly create a spectacular light show in the sky ( St Elmos fire on a larger scale).  But not ure if it could create a high enough concentration of NO2 to be a significant hazard.  Also, the topography of the mountain might not support it.  Saying that it would explain the sightings of weird lights around the area by the Mansi.

There is nothing unusual in the geology of the area in question.  Certainly nothing that could contribute to any theory of an electro magnetic nature of such force to have been responsible for the Dyatlov Incident.  The Authorities are supposed to be sending geologists to the area in March. But I have no doubt that the basic geology is already known.

Natural Magnaton?  Yes a neutron star would probably be required?

Ion discharge is a possible answer but how?

Rocket crash is likely to result in fuel and oxidising agent mixing and therefore explosion

So the only remotely credible one you list is the ion flux.
I'd add a natural cross field amplifier to the list, i've got a theory but i'd like to consider it more first.
Here's some others - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_lightning#Proposed_scientific_explanations

The ion flux option would require a significant conductor or more likely a very large number of multiple conductors.  If there were significant veins of reduced metals in the geology of the area close to the surface then it may be possible for charged air to set up an electrical discharge of ions and produce ozone and NO2.  This would certainly create a spectacular light show in the sky ( St Elmos fire on a larger scale).  But not ure if it could create a high enough concentration of NO2 to be a significant hazard.  Also, the topography of the mountain might not support it.  Saying that it would explain the sightings of weird lights around the area by the Mansi.
I think the shape of the Ural mountains and Kholat is the key here rather than the geology. Strong westerly winds have little to get in their way before hitting the Urals. The wind above 1200 metres has no obstruction at all but at Kholat the westerly ridge directs the wind at ground level straight up vertically into the higher altitude horizontal winds creating enormous turbulence. With high winds at 100mph plus in a snow storm you then have excellent conditions for constant high levels of ion production. Then in 1959 with stronger geo magnetism this ionisation creates quite a light show (probably including fire orbs and plane1 and plane2). But the important bit is the constant or possibly just regular discharging. Note it doesn't have to be cloud to ground, it could be cloud to cloud. But it's producing N2O and NO2 and nitric acid and they just camped downwind - in the wrong place at the wrong time. It may be that these gases and aerosols are ionised and attracted to the tent which is an earth point in an otherwise well insulated hillside in a metre of snow. So any of the relevant molecues that hit the tent stick to it building up levels of exposure.

The tent wasn't a conductor though.  And even if it was it would only produce small amounts around the outside of the tent.  Besides NO2 is NO2 whether it is charged or not.  It would have to have been formed in high concentrations up wind.   That's why I chose the Nuclear test as the source.  It creates a large toxic cloud of NO2 that would collapse quickly due to the extreme cold conditions.  It also provides a reason why the authorities would request radiation checks to be carried out.  That doesn't mean my option is right either, because it requires a nuclear test.  If it was NO2 then we are looking for a very high energy event capable of creating a significant concentration of NO2. 
 

February 14, 2019, 01:10:11 PM
Reply #42
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient

Natural Magnaton?  Yes a neutron star would probably be required?

Ion discharge is a possible answer but how?

Rocket crash is likely to result in fuel and oxidising agent mixing and therefore explosion

So the only remotely credible one you list is the ion flux.
I'd add a natural cross field amplifier to the list, i've got a theory but i'd like to consider it more first.
Here's some others - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_lightning#Proposed_scientific_explanations

The ion flux option would require a significant conductor or more likely a very large number of multiple conductors.  If there were significant veins of reduced metals in the geology of the area close to the surface then it may be possible for charged air to set up an electrical discharge of ions and produce ozone and NO2.  This would certainly create a spectacular light show in the sky ( St Elmos fire on a larger scale).  But not ure if it could create a high enough concentration of NO2 to be a significant hazard.  Also, the topography of the mountain might not support it.  Saying that it would explain the sightings of weird lights around the area by the Mansi.

There is nothing unusual in the geology of the area in question.  Certainly nothing that could contribute to any theory of an electro magnetic nature of such force to have been responsible for the Dyatlov Incident.  The Authorities are supposed to be sending geologists to the area in March. But I have no doubt that the basic geology is already known.

Natural Magnaton?  Yes a neutron star would probably be required?

Ion discharge is a possible answer but how?

Rocket crash is likely to result in fuel and oxidising agent mixing and therefore explosion

So the only remotely credible one you list is the ion flux.
I'd add a natural cross field amplifier to the list, i've got a theory but i'd like to consider it more first.
Here's some others - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_lightning#Proposed_scientific_explanations

The ion flux option would require a significant conductor or more likely a very large number of multiple conductors.  If there were significant veins of reduced metals in the geology of the area close to the surface then it may be possible for charged air to set up an electrical discharge of ions and produce ozone and NO2.  This would certainly create a spectacular light show in the sky ( St Elmos fire on a larger scale).  But not ure if it could create a high enough concentration of NO2 to be a significant hazard.  Also, the topography of the mountain might not support it.  Saying that it would explain the sightings of weird lights around the area by the Mansi.
I think the shape of the Ural mountains and Kholat is the key here rather than the geology. Strong westerly winds have little to get in their way before hitting the Urals. The wind above 1200 metres has no obstruction at all but at Kholat the westerly ridge directs the wind at ground level straight up vertically into the higher altitude horizontal winds creating enormous turbulence. With high winds at 100mph plus in a snow storm you then have excellent conditions for constant high levels of ion production. Then in 1959 with stronger geo magnetism this ionisation creates quite a light show (probably including fire orbs and plane1 and plane2). But the important bit is the constant or possibly just regular discharging. Note it doesn't have to be cloud to ground, it could be cloud to cloud. But it's producing N2O and NO2 and nitric acid and they just camped downwind - in the wrong place at the wrong time. It may be that these gases and aerosols are ionised and attracted to the tent which is an earth point in an otherwise well insulated hillside in a metre of snow. So any of the relevant molecues that hit the tent stick to it building up levels of exposure.

The tent wasn't a conductor though.  And even if it was it would only produce small amounts around the outside of the tent.  Besides NO2 is NO2 whether it is charged or not.  It would have to have been formed in high concentrations up wind.   That's why I chose the Nuclear test as the source.  It creates a large toxic cloud of NO2 that would collapse quickly due to the extreme cold conditions.  It also provides a reason why the authorities would request radiation checks to be carried out.  That doesn't mean my option is right either, because it requires a nuclear test.  If it was NO2 then we are looking for a very high energy event capable of creating a significant concentration of NO2.

Re Tent as a potential conductor of electricity. Any METAL POLES  !   ?  Electricity likes METAL CONDUCTORS.
DB