Jump to content

Newly-Discovered Sideways Lines Are Likely a Satellite Streak or Otherwise a Hint for the Release…


Recommended Posts

Posted

Newly-Discovered Sideways Lines Are Likely a Satellite Streak or Otherwise a Hint for the Release of Smaller Objects by 3I/ATLAS

1*Rp9Mvpuv1timMHiKYxsDeA.jpeg
1*gbRaXwDz1s_omlTQa-Gcnw.jpeg
1*WVSX-evAvImfVB83FHy0zA.jpeg
A stacked image of 3I/ATLAS based on 20 exposures of 100 seconds each, taken at 4:15 UTC on November 20, 2025. The displayed field has dimensions of 16.7 arcminutes on a side, equivalent to 1.6 million kilometers at the 3I/ATLAS distance of 326 million kilometers. The direction of the Sun is towards the lower left (opposite to the arrow in the middle panel). The image shows two narrow lines directed sideways from the 3I/ATLAS-Sun axis and creating a X-pattern with the tail and anti-tail along that axis. (Credit: M. Jäger, G. Rhemann, and E. Prosperi)

Today a new image of the interstellar object 3I/ATLAS was taken by M. Jäger, G. Rhemann, and E. Prosperi and reported here. The image stacks 20 exposures of 100 seconds each, observed at 4:15 UTC on November 20, 2025. The displayed field has dimensions of 16.7 arcminutes on a side, equivalent to 1.6 million kilometers at the 3I/ATLAS distance of 326 million kilometers from Earth. The image shows two narrow jets directed opposite to each other and oriented vertically from the 3I/ATLAS-Sun axis. Together with the tail and anti-tail along this axis, the sideways lines constitute an X-shaped pattern. They extend out to a distance of about a million kilometers from 3I/ATLAS.

The simplest interpretation is that these lines are the streak of an Earth-based communication satellite which coincidentally intersected 3I/ATLAS in projection in the sky for a few seconds. There is another line near the bottom of the image, also likely to be a satellite streak.

If future images will confirm the reality of these lines as associated with 3I/ATLAS, then these sideways jets will raise two questions:

1. Why are the sideways jets so straight and narrow, resembling thin lines, given that 3I/ATLAS was reported here to rotate with a 16.16-hour period? Given the typical thermal speed of 400 meters per second for sublimated volatiles at the current distance of 3I/ATLAS from the Sun, the rotation of 3I/ATLAS should have introduced gaps or wiggles in the jets on a length-scale of order tens of thousands of kilometers. Such periodic features are not apparent in the new image.

2. Why are the two sideways jets oriented vertically to the tail and anti-tail associated with the 3I/ATLAS-Sun axis? We expect outgassing to emerge from the surface of a rock when it faces the Sun. The resulting gas or dust are expected to be pushed away from the Sun by radiation pressure and the solar wind. Both processes favor the 3I/ATLAS-Sun axis as the line of symmetry and not the vertical direction traced by the sideways jets.

If not a satellite streak, these straight and narrow sideways-jets is that they are lines highlighting the trail of gas or dust associated with the linear path of small mini-objects that departed from 3I/ATLAS. If the mini-objects started their journey near perihelion — at closest approach of 3I/ATLAS to the Sun on October 29, 2025, they traversed a distance of a million kilometers in 22 days. This corresponds to a speed of 500 meters per second relative to 3I/ATLAS.

The mini-objects could either be pieces of ice that broke apart from the surface of a natural comet nucleus or small probes that were released from a technological mothership. By monitoring these components in the coming weeks, we should be able to distinguish the two interpretations.

The release of sub-components by 3I/ATLAS can also explain the X-shape of the glow around 3I/ATLAS in its HiRISE image at closest approach to Mars (as discussed here). Since this image was taken on October 2, 2025, it represents the early stage of the break-up of 3I/ATLAS into multiple components — extending only out to a few thousand kilometers at that time. If the break-up started close to Mars two months ago, the ejection speed of the sub-components needs to be about 200 meters per second. The required velocity kick, formulated in rocketry as Delta-V, is very reasonable for the thrust enable by chemical propulsion. The Sun’s tidal force across the diameter of 3I/ATLAS is too weak to yield this velocity kick over the related period of time.

1*udzSUKrK70WEZBYZyLdTJQ.jpeg
A 3.2 second exposure of 3I/ATLAS on October 2, 2025 by the HiRISE camera onboard the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. The directions of the Sun and 3I/ATLAS’ motion are indicated by arrows. The image shows an X-pattern similar to that found in the new image taken on November 20, 2025. (Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/University of Arizona)

The fundamental question to address in the coming weeks is whether these smaller objects are real and not simply an artifact of a satellite streak, and if real— are they natural or technological in origin?

***

Below are three uplifting letters that I had received this afternoon:

Letter 1

“Dear Dr. Loeb,

I hope this message finds you well. My name is Andrea Forsythe, and I’m writing from Caruthersville, Missouri — a small town in the Bootheel where I work as a Marketing Manager at our local casino. It may seem worlds apart from astrophysics, but your work has reached into my life in extraordinary ways.

I wanted to personally thank you for the incredible amount of wonder, curiosity, and open-mindedness you’ve inspired in me since the beginning of the discovery of 3I/ATLAS.

What moved me most wasn’t just the object itself — it was you. It was the way someone with your breadth of achievements and accolades could still lead with humility, openness, and a willingness to ask the questions others shy away from. You consistently choose honesty over ego, exploration over certainty, and humanity over reputation. Watching you do that so publicly and so gracefully has changed me.

And the impact didn’t stop with me.

Over the past couple of months, as my daughter Payton and I have followed this cosmic mystery together, something remarkable happened. She is a high school senior this year, standing at the crossroads of who she will become. Through our long conversations — sparked by your work and your courage to explore the unknown — she found a new sense of purpose.

Payton has now decided to pursue a career in Anthropology, driven by the same curiosity, wonder, and openness you model so effortlessly. Your influence reached across the cosmos and into our home, shifting not only my perspective, but the trajectory of her future.

For that, I cannot thank you enough.

The spark you lit wasn’t only about the universe. It reached into every part of my life — especially the places I’ve kept guarded because of uncertainty. You reminded me that wonder is not naïve, that humility is strength, and that being open to the unknown is one of the greatest gifts a person can give themselves.

I also want to share a line from your recent paper that I believe should be echoed around the world. It has stayed with me every moment since I read it:

“Life is worth living if we allow for the unexpected to surprise us.”
 — Avi Loeb

Thank you, again, for your work, your courage, and your humility. You’ve changed how I look at the universe, how I look at myself, and even how my daughter looks at her future.

With deep gratitude,
Andrea Forsythe
Caruthersville, Missouri
”

Letter 2

“Dear Dr. Loeb,

I hope this email finds you well. I am an attorney based in Florida, with space law and science as my personal hobbies. Living on Florida’s Space Coast, I’ve grown up surrounded by aerospace; my family across generations has been deeply involved, from working on the Manhattan Project to working intimately with NASA on shuttle launches and the STS programs. This heritage has made me a lifelong fan of NASA, complete with a hefty space collection in my office.

I wanted to thank you for your remarkable courage in taking the middle path on topics like 3I/Atlas, despite attacks from both sides. Your evidence-based openness has inspired an entire category of humanity to restore faith, awe, and inspiration in science, countering the distrust fueled by a variety of factors including paternalistic gatekeeping. This type of evidence-based courage is absolutely necessary for furthering science exponentially and for finding meaning in a future of abundance, where science becomes a key outlet for human passion and curiosity, synergistically with AI.

This inspiration comes at a critical time, as public support for science seems to be on the decline and control over the direction of science appears to have been heavily consolidated to only a few. The tragedy of modern institutional tenure aside, almost 75% of all U.S. clinical trials in medicine are paid for by private companies, and these companies tend not to fund research that fails to accord with preferred financial outcomes. It is no surprise that public trust in medical scientists has significantly eroded. According to Pew Research Center surveys, confidence in medical scientists to act in the public’s best interest dropped from 87% in January 2020 to around 77% by 2023, with only 29% expressing a “great deal” of confidence in recent years. This decline is mirrored in the medical field, where the percentage of U.S. physicians primarily engaged in research has plummeted from 4.6% in 1985 to just 1.5% by 2019, signaling a broader disengagement that threatens innovation.

Furthermore, as I believe you have stated before, the rising average age of Nobel Prize winners in Physics underscores a march toward stagnation: early 20th-century laureates averaged around 55 years old, but today it’s climbed to about 65–67, reflecting risk-averse cultures that delay bold breakthroughs. Scientific innovation has been under attack.

I was deeply disappointed with NASA’s broadcast yesterday, which took a conservative approach, repeating the “trust the experts over the data” mantra that’s eroding public trust while failing to address nearly all of the 12 anomalies. We need more Galileo- and Loeb-like leaders at the forefront and in positions of power. It’s a human imperative at this point.

Thank you again for leading the way. If you or the Galileo Project ever need legal advice or legal research, I’d be happy to volunteer.

Best regards,

Andrew David Easler”

Letter 3

“Dear Professor Loeb,

My name is Sergio and I’m from Italy.

I am 40 years old and I always been terrible in science, physics and all these complicated subjects. Nevertheless, since I was a kid, I always looked at the stars and always had this feeling that made me wonder about the universe, our planet, why we are here and are we alone?

Now that I’m old I want to thank you because this feeling is still very much alive thanks to you, you are the rockstar of scientists!

Keep doing your job and keep asking questions please, one day we will have the answers or maybe not but since there are people like you, we will never stop learning.”

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

1*LE3Xlzc3hNG5VDAGlDP8KQ.jpeg
(Image Credit: Chris Michel, National Academy of Sciences, 2023)

Avi Loeb is the head of the Galileo Project, founding director of Harvard University’s — Black Hole Initiative, director of the Institute for Theory and Computation at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, and the former chair of the astronomy department at Harvard University (2011–2020). He is a former member of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology and a former chair of the Board on Physics and Astronomy of the National Academies. He is the bestselling author of “Extraterrestrial: The First Sign of Intelligent Life Beyond Earth” and a co-author of the textbook “Life in the Cosmos”, both published in 2021. The paperback edition of his new book, titled “Interstellar”, was published in August 2024.

stat?event=post.clientViewed&referrerSou

View the full article

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Topics

    • By DeepSkyExplorer
      Has anyone looked into the 1984 encounter discussed in that recent NewsNation video? It brings up some interesting points about a U.S. defense satellite detecting an object just three kilometers away. That sounds pretty close for a satellite encounter. The video features insights from director Darcy Weir and Ross Coulthart, along with former Aerojet contractor Ron Regehr who seems to provide some firsthand accounts.
      The satellite in question was part of the Defense Support Program (DSP). It's fascinating that such technology existed back then, primarily designed for missile detection, but it was picking up something else entirely. Regehr's testimony could add credibility, but without more detail about the object itself, there's a lot left open to interpretation. What type of characteristics did this object have? Was it moving in a way that was considered unusual?
      The video doesn't claim extraterrestrial involvement, which is a good approach given the complexity of the subject. Still, it raises important questions about what was documented at the time. The DSP was a cutting-edge system for its day, and its role in early warning against nuclear threats highlights the military's commitment to utilizing advanced technology. It's curious how this specific incident hasn’t been widely discussed until now.
      Looking at the context of the Cold War, this could have significant implications for understanding how military and intelligence agencies monitored unidentified objects. The secrecy surrounding military operations often means that many encounters, especially from that era, remain obscured. It makes you wonder how many more such incidents have been recorded but never disclosed.
      As technology has advanced, there’s been a push for more transparency regarding UAP sightings. This video appears to fit within that broader narrative, but it also feels like we’re only scratching the surface. What else might be hidden in the archives of military satellites? Given the lack of verification for Regehr's account, how should we assess the credibility of similar testimonies in the future?
      I’d love to hear everyone's thoughts on the implications of this 1984 encounter. Do you think it’s important for military agencies to disclose past records like this, or do you believe there are valid reasons to keep them under wraps?
    • By UAPResearcher
      Richard Dolan's recent analysis on the latest White House release of UAP files raises some intriguing points about historical cases that have shaped our understanding of the UFO phenomenon. He focuses on critical documents from the late 1940s, including studies from the Air Force and Project Sign, which examine early military encounters with unidentified flying objects. Dolan separates what he considers significant findings from more routine documentation.
      One notable case discussed is the 1955 Newfoundland radar-visual UFO incident. This event not only involved radar tracking but also visual sightings reported by credible witnesses, including military personnel. Dolan emphasizes that incidents like these highlight the complexities of UAP sightings and the varying levels of scrutiny they receive from government entities. The Newfoundland case serves as a reminder of how long the U.S. military has been engaged in investigating potential threats or inexplicable phenomena in our skies.
      Dolan also delves into the classified Los Alamos Green Fireball Conference, where scientists and military officials gathered to discuss sightings that were particularly puzzling during that era. This gathering underscores the longstanding interest in UAP phenomena within the scientific community and the implications it may have had on national security. It's interesting to consider how these early discussions may have laid the groundwork for more recent investigations and public interest.
      In addition to historical cases, Dolan touches upon modern military videos included in the files. While he acknowledges they are crucial to understanding current UAP encounters, he remains cautious about viewing these releases as definitive proof of extraterrestrial life. Instead, he suggests that they represent ongoing efforts to parse through evidence and understand the government's position regarding these phenomena over nearly eight decades.
      Another aspect that stands out in Dolan's analysis is the historical context he provides. By connecting the UFO subject to broader social, political, and technological developments, he offers a unique perspective that many researchers may overlook. This context can often be just as important as the individual cases themselves when attempting to grasp the full picture of government engagement with UAPs.
      It's worth noting that while Dolan's analysis brings to light many significant historical documents, it's still essential to maintain a skeptical approach. Many of these cases, while intriguing, lack the robust verification required to draw firm conclusions about the nature of UAPs. This uncertainty leaves room for various interpretations and highlights the ongoing debates within the UFO research community about the validity and implications of these sightings.
      As we consider the implications of Dolan's review, it prompts a critical discussion: How can we better verify the evidence surrounding historical UAP cases to establish a clearer understanding of what they represent for national security and the potential for extraterrestrial phenomena?
    • By AlienMan
      The sixth major batch of U.S. government UFO/UAP records has just been released.
      War.gov published PURSUE Release 06 on September 18, 2026, adding another large collection of UFO records, historical investigations, audio and newly released UAP videos to the government's public disclosure archive.
      I've started going through the material, and there are a few things in Release 06 that immediately stand out.
      14 Previously Unreleased UAP Videos
      One of the biggest additions is 14 previously unreleased videos of unidentified objects.
      Most were reportedly recorded by U.S. reconnaissance platforms at different locations around the world between 2022 and 2025.
      That makes these particularly interesting because they aren't simply another collection of 1950s UFO reports. They represent relatively recent military or government observations.
      There is an important limitation, though: much of the contextual and sensor metadata that would help independent researchers analyze the footage has been redacted or removed.
      So we're getting more imagery — but not necessarily all of the information needed to determine exactly what we're looking at.
      The 1952 Edward Ruppelt "Flying Saucer" Recording
      This may be one of the most historically interesting items in Release 06.
      The government has released an audio recording of a March 1952 presentation by Captain Edward J. Ruppelt, the Air Force officer closely associated with the early investigation of UFOs and Project Blue Book.
      Ruppelt discussed the Air Force's newly reorganized UFO investigation and some of the technical methods officials planned to use to investigate sightings.
      More interestingly, he discussed roughly 800 historical cases reviewed by the Air Force and said that after technical analysis, approximately 20% remained unexplained.
      Those unresolved reports weren't necessarily random stories from the public. They included observations from military personnel, commercial pilots and other technically qualified witnesses.
      Ruppelt also discussed concentrations of UFO reports around sensitive locations, including Los Alamos, Albuquerque and Oak Ridge, and reports involving unusual characteristics such as silent high-speed flight and radar observations.
      That doesn't establish an extraterrestrial explanation, and Ruppelt did not claim that it did. But hearing how seriously Air Force investigators were discussing the issue in 1952 is fascinating historical context.
      The Famous 1952 Tremonton UFO Film
      Release 06 also revisits one of the classic cases in UFO history: the Tremonton, Utah UFO film from July 2, 1952.
      Navy Warrant Officer and experienced photographer Delbert C. Newhouse reported seeing roughly 12–14 bright or reflective objects and captured them on color motion-picture film.
      The case became part of Project Blue Book.
      What's particularly interesting is how the assessment evolved.
      Early investigators considered several possibilities without conclusively identifying the objects. Later Air Force assessments became more confident that the objects were probably sunlight reflecting from seagulls.
      But the limitations of the original film meant investigators couldn't reliably determine the objects' distance, altitude, size or actual speed from the footage alone.
      More than seven decades later, Tremonton remains a fascinating example of how difficult photographic UFO evidence can be to interpret without supporting data.
      AAWSAP Documents Are Also Included
      Release 06 contains a substantial amount of material connected with the Advanced Aerospace Weapon System Applications Program (AAWSAP), the Defense Intelligence Agency program active from 2008–2012.
      The documents describe research into possible future aerospace technologies and areas including:
      propulsion
      lift
      energy generation
      advanced materials
      signature reduction
      human-machine interfaces
      human effects
      spatial or temporal translation
      weapons technology
      Some of this material has previously been publicly available, so not everything in Release 06 should be treated as newly discovered information.
      That's an important distinction with these disclosure releases: newly placed in the PURSUE archive doesn't necessarily mean never previously seen by the public.
      Local Police UFO Reports
      Another interesting part of this release comes from local law-enforcement investigations.
      Four records reportedly involve police officers investigating local UFO reports who were able to record the objects themselves.
      Unfortunately, the resulting footage appears to consist mainly of small lights against the night sky, making definitive analysis difficult.
      Still, the inclusion of local law-enforcement material shows just how broad the government UAP archive is becoming.
      What's Most Important About Release 06?
      For me, Release 06 isn't about finding a single "alien smoking gun."
      It's the combination of historical and modern evidence that's interesting.
      We now have material spanning the early Air Force investigations of the 1950s all the way through U.S. reconnaissance footage recorded between 2022 and 2025.
      The Ruppelt recording may be particularly significant historically because it gives us a contemporary account of how Air Force investigators viewed the UFO problem in 1952 rather than a recollection written decades later.
      At the same time, the 14 newer videos raise a familiar problem: why release the imagery without enough underlying metadata for independent researchers to properly evaluate it?
      What Do You Think?
      There is a lot to dig through in Release 06, and I'm sure more interesting details will emerge as people work through all of the records.
      A few questions worth discussing:
      Which Release 06 file do you think is the most important?
      Is the 1952 Ruppelt recording more significant than the newly released videos?
      What do you make of the Air Force reportedly having roughly 20% of the cases it reviewed at the time remain unexplained?
      And with the modern videos, should the government release more of the underlying sensor data and metadata so independent researchers can actually analyze them?
      If you find something particularly interesting buried in Release 06, post the file or video below so we can keep everything together in this thread.
    • By UAPResearcher
      One notable aspect of the sixth White House UAP release is the inclusion of advanced propulsion concepts discussed in technical studies by Eric Davis, a prominent figure in UAP research. These studies delve into theories that extend beyond conventional physics, touching on subjects such as quantum communication and potential applications for propulsion technologies. But how much of this can actually be tested or applied in real-world scenarios remains an open question.
      The video by Richard Dolan provides a thorough breakdown of this release, aiming to clarify what is genuinely new and what has been circulating within the UAP community for years. With some of the material being previously available, it sparks curiosity about how we categorize new findings versus older information. This brings up an important point regarding transparency and the ongoing public interest in understanding UAP events.
      Furthermore, Dolan addresses the sighting material associated with this release, discussing how it contributes to our broader knowledge of UAP encounters. By examining the evidence presented in relation to past incidents, he tries to paint a clearer picture of what we might expect in terms of future disclosures. However, it also raises questions about the limitations and verifiability of the evidence provided.
      The complexities of the research discussed in the release can be challenging to digest. Terms like 'advanced propulsion systems' and 'quantum communication' suggest a level of sophistication that may not be readily accessible to the average person. Dolan attempts to simplify these concepts, making them more approachable, yet the fundamental uncertainty surrounding such advanced ideas might still leave many wondering about their feasibility.
      As we sift through these findings, it’s essential to consider how they fit into the larger narrative of UAPs and disclosure. Are we moving closer to a point where we will have definitive answers about these phenomena, or are we still in a cycle of speculation? The video invites viewers to critically engage with the material, urging a balance between excitement over potential revelations and a cautious examination of what they mean for our understanding.
      In what ways do you think new technical studies, like those from Eric Davis, could reshape our approach to UAP research and public policy surrounding disclosure?
    • By MysteryFiles
      I just came across a recent release from the government about UAPs that has me thinking about the implications of what we know and what remains unexplained. You can check it out here: https://www.war.gov/UFO/search/uap/. The document details several encounters and investigations but leaves many questions open, which is both intriguing and frustrating.
      One of the highlights from the document is the acknowledgment of incidents that have been classified for years. It's fascinating to see how the government is slowly lifting the veil on these cases, but the lack of definitive explanations makes me ponder the true nature of these encounters. Are they simply advanced technology we don’t yet understand, or is there more to the story? It’s almost as if we’re being given just enough information to keep our curiosity piqued without providing clear answers.
      Moreover, the report references testimonies from military personnel who have encountered UAPs. These whistleblower accounts are invaluable, but they also raise further questions about the extent of what the military knows and what they choose to disclose. It makes me wonder if there are more documents out there that could shed light on these mysterious cases. What could be hiding in the archives that hasn't been declassified yet?
      As someone who finds these unexplained incidents captivating, I can't help but think about the historical context of these encounters. Many previous reports have been dismissed or ignored, and it's refreshing to see the government addressing them more openly. However, it also casts a shadow on how many other cases may have been overlooked or concealed in the past. Could there be more significant incidents from decades ago that have shaped our understanding of UAPs?
      With all this in mind, I'm curious about your thoughts on the implications of this document release. Do you think the government is finally moving toward greater transparency, or is this just another layer of complexity in our understanding of UAPs? What do you believe is the most significant takeaway from this report? Let’s dive into this discussion and see where it leads us!
×
×
  • Create New...