I just changed my pants cause of that loud OUT OF FUEL warning..[alien]
UAs, Barnacles and other mysteries Thread 8 - The Canonn
- Thread starter Yaffle
- Start date
- Status
I just changed my pants cause of that loud OUT OF FUEL warning..[alien]
MadDog, keep thinking and arguing for that line of logic. We need progress.
When you or anyone else find a solution everyone shall be convinced.
I agree with your observation there is a slight difference, which can be reasonably explained but also argued against. I just disagree with your conjecture so far.
We need both sides of thinking though (and more), so please keep cracking at it.
Folks, lets' focus on the problems to solve - and not who to convince.
This is partly my point. Despite the minds turned to the task we don't seem to have any progress.
That leads me to question the basis of our theories and raise objections.
The binary theory is the most deeply held belief so far.
By questioning its validity I'm hoping that someone smarter than me will also not just question it, but also come up with a convincing explanation of the difference.
Some of the biggest leaps in science have come from not just accepting the prevailing theory, but from closely examining that nagging little thing that doesn't quite fit.
That's the problem right there- we invented this message to be understandable. Frontier invented their message to be a puzzle, or a hint, or a clue, or an easter egg. We don't know which, we just know they made it hard on purpose.
(obviously this seti message is a little easier to figure out because it was designed by humans, so we have a edge in thinking like the designers. BUT SO IS THE UP MESSAGE >:E)
I've noticed a grouping of planets that looks like the image from the newsletter (to me anyway).
Could someone give me some clue as to how to upload images? They're the right format but wont load on the forum.
Could someone give me some clue as to how to upload images? They're the right format but wont load on the forum.
Has anyone given any thought to this analysis on reddit interpreting the quarter circles in the spectogram as orbits?
http://i.imgur.com/Am79Zcr.jpg
It thought this was good thinking...
http://i.imgur.com/Am79Zcr.jpg
It thought this was good thinking...
Last edited:
I've gone through Kerrash Landing's video and at around 1:02:45 he states that we found barnacle sites by enhancing the contrast of pictures of planets and were able to see an "X" to mark the spot where they could be found.
https://youtu.be/3QDRdbcYGGs?t=1h2m45s
I don't recall this being a way we found the barnacles (we'd be using it now if it were true, surely?) but as these threads are colossal, searching has been difficult. Can anyone confirm?
Of course, if Kerrash is being economical with the truth here, then perhaps we can discount his statement regarding the crashed alien ships, too?
https://youtu.be/3QDRdbcYGGs?t=1h2m45s
I don't recall this being a way we found the barnacles (we'd be using it now if it were true, surely?) but as these threads are colossal, searching has been difficult. Can anyone confirm?
Of course, if Kerrash is being economical with the truth here, then perhaps we can discount his statement regarding the crashed alien ships, too?
Last edited:
I think we should approach this as 'designed to be understandable'.
I know we don't seem to have enough information (certainly a lot less than the Evpatoria message) but this can also mean the actual information and the content of the message is that much simpler.
What I'm trying to say is, we have to set some ground rules as to what to look for which could define a purpose. FD designed this to be a puzzle or easter egg for the game but if we stop metagaming for a second, someone or something designed this as a message to be understood by some other one. No other way around it. Why would a sentient being send out a message for the purpose of being cryptic, unless they are deeply religious?
I'm maintaining this two options:
1- The message is pretty straightforward and we are overcomplicating things (step by step approach with a defined methodology will lead to solution).
2- There's nothing to be solved and this is just a cool tidbit (we'll see what the meaning of this all is when they tell us).
It's obvious which one is more fun and I hope FD didn't go for the other.
I've never heard of the contrast theory but I can imagine people trying that.
Personally, I find the cryptic clues annoying so I discount everything he says.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
This ^^^^
The 'honk' is already included in the recording and shows on the spectogram as a very simple pulse followed by a continuous strip. The very beginning of the long spectogram on the first page starts with the honk.
Last edited:
![[VR] Frank_G](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/59/59394.jpg?1553527111){kind=avatar}
Did they?
If it is a first contact message or a warning, then it will be understandable in itself, regardless of designed by whom.
If it remains something with essential parts missing for decyphering, then we got something, that was not originally meant for us, that will probably evolve over time.
So far, i absolutely cant tell, if it will be the first or second...
http://www.plover.com/misc/Dumas-Dutil/messages.pdf
This is a radius of earth. Maybe circle and line in crypted image in UA message radius too? And all binary digits is radius of target sun/planet?
Do we have the whole scanner sequence though?
I wasted A LOT of time using the image with the blue background and white lines. I did all kinds of measurements in CAD and tried to apply it to all kinds of theories. After a while, I tried to superimpose the image onto a 3d modelled sphere with longitude lines, and it didn't fit. So I tried to model an ellipse with longitude lines and when I saw how difficult that was going to be, I decided to look at the source, the spectograph (spelling?).
OMG! They're not the same at all!
Here are some DETAILS I've observed with some CAD sketching, from the spectograph (sp?), that may be worth knowing:
Things I noticed:
1) The ellipse is not centered with the grid!
2) When I moved and sized the ellipse to get it to fit, I zoomed in and realized that the upper right arc is not aligned with the grid either. By coincidence, or not, the upper right arc lines up with the major axes of the ellipse that I "fit".
3) The angle in the bottom right corner IS 45 degrees. It doesn't look like it is because the ellipse is creating an optical illusion.
The other dimensions are not important.. just stuff I was playing with. However, this image I used is very fuzzy. Having one that is clearer but not artificially distorted could help answer one question I have: The two arcs in the lower left corner, do they coincide with the center of the ellipse, which is not the center of the grid?
Food for thought.
OMG! They're not the same at all!
Here are some DETAILS I've observed with some CAD sketching, from the spectograph (sp?), that may be worth knowing:
Things I noticed:
1) The ellipse is not centered with the grid!
2) When I moved and sized the ellipse to get it to fit, I zoomed in and realized that the upper right arc is not aligned with the grid either. By coincidence, or not, the upper right arc lines up with the major axes of the ellipse that I "fit".
3) The angle in the bottom right corner IS 45 degrees. It doesn't look like it is because the ellipse is creating an optical illusion.
The other dimensions are not important.. just stuff I was playing with. However, this image I used is very fuzzy. Having one that is clearer but not artificially distorted could help answer one question I have: The two arcs in the lower left corner, do they coincide with the center of the ellipse, which is not the center of the grid?
Food for thought.
Last edited:
Yes. One of zenith's recordings is a series of ADS honks. You can clearly hear collision warnings and cargo bay door opening/closing between the honks. There is no structure in the resulting spectrogram that I saw outside of the probes reply.
I think that is part of the riddle. To my mind because they have different purpose/meanings, but I don't know what. Perhaps one pair are numbers & one are letters? But why?
The problem is, that we're extracting the data from the source audio using a logaritmic scale (actually I find Audacity's MEL setting better) so there will always be some kind of distortion on the angles. We can only get approximations from the data we have.
Good evening everyone
I'd like to start this reply by saying i'm just jumping in the deep end here. very limited experience with sound analysis, and there may be some assumption. but I hope this is helpful to anyone trying to decode.
I've noticed a structure within the signal itself. maybe there are 4 very separate, very distinct and exclusive languages/messages being sent. see the below image.
My thought is the structure of this signal is a 4 part message. each highlighted static burst is essentially a start and stop. between each stop is its own message. either Morse code, Binary, or a graphic like that of the 3rd part we all know.
Just thought i'd chuck in my 2 cents with everyone else's. hopefully this serves as some help rather than derail, or serve no purpose at all.
apologies if this has already been mentioned! keep trying everyone!
I'd like to start this reply by saying i'm just jumping in the deep end here. very limited experience with sound analysis, and there may be some assumption. but I hope this is helpful to anyone trying to decode.
I've noticed a structure within the signal itself. maybe there are 4 very separate, very distinct and exclusive languages/messages being sent. see the below image.
My thought is the structure of this signal is a 4 part message. each highlighted static burst is essentially a start and stop. between each stop is its own message. either Morse code, Binary, or a graphic like that of the 3rd part we all know.
Just thought i'd chuck in my 2 cents with everyone else's. hopefully this serves as some help rather than derail, or serve no purpose at all.
apologies if this has already been mentioned! keep trying everyone!
He is paraphrasing someone who saw geological features on a planet, .... one of the barnacles. I can't remember which atm. Somewhere in Cannon#6 or #7.
You can hear how he explains it - he is relaying or paraphrasing what he read somewhere, forums, reddit, twitter etc.
You never know who & what he is referring to as regards to what he has read, and how he remembers it.
It's not true for all the barnacles, no.
And keep in mind, he's running a show - it's valuable for him to mention these things. It brings him audience. He doesn't have to prove it or reference the source due to the entertainment format.
Please don't take rumours seriously. Use it only for what it's worth .... rumours and hearsay.
TL;DR: Please stop using entertainment shows as a source for data in science.
Last edited:
- Status