Why debate some article on some theoretical technique that has a couple buzzwords that sound sorta related to what GeoResonance claims when we can take a shortcut and look at whether it's even possible for them to get their hands on that much imagery to begin with.
fubaya, you've touched on an area that I've been thinking about, so time for me to post my thoughts. My current position (as a non-expert) on the (broad, underlying) science/technology behind the claim is that it MAY have some validity, although (like most) I'm still VERY, VERY sceptical. My position is, however, based on GeoResonance apparently having access (direct or via Sevastapol University?) to an ex-military satellite 280km above the earth that has the capability to take "special" ("multi-spectral"?) images, that can then be processed in a special way, including irradiation at the research nuclear reactor IR-100 at Sevastapol University! Indeed, as others have mentioned, Sevastapol Univ. does seem to be at the heart of the technology GeoResonance is claiming they used.
Furthermore, there are several other companies (e.g. GeoNMR) that claim to use the same/similar technology; and the presentation detailed on pages 30-33 (numbered) of this documennt, a 2008 Newsletter from the Black Sea Universities Network (originally provided by bume):
http://www.bsun.org/userfiles/file/newsletter/683fd2.pdf
does indeed seems to suggest that Sevastapol Univ. are most likely the ones doing all the work, in terms of image collection (?), preparation, processing and analysis. If this is the case, then either it's a (state-sponsored) scam by the University (if the technology is false); or the technology is real (although, perhaps, over-hyped) but GeoResonance's claims are false and they are just trying to boost their business profile.
If it's a scam by the University, would it be cheekily conspiratorial of me to go one step further and suggest Russian involvement to try and embarrass The West?
For now, though, I'm going to assume that it is GeoResonance who is at fault here, and what I want to do is stimulate discussion a bit more around the other claims by GeoResonance, i.e. mainly the image gathering and processing work load, in order to "slam-dunk" debunk that area of GeoResonance's claim.
Let's start with what GeoResonance stated in their press release of May 1st:
http://georesonance.com/20140501 Press Release.pdf
External Quote:
"The area totalled 2,327,000 km2. The survey commenced on March 12, 2014, prior to the search moving to the Southern Indian Ocean. The study concluded on April 7, 2014."
"The initial report was passed onto search authorities on March 31st."
and the press release from April 29th:
http://georesonance.com/20140429 Press Release.pdf
External Quote:
"GeoResonance completed analysis of multispectral imagery of the location taken on March 5, 2014. It established that the anomaly had appeared between the 5th and 10th of March 2014."
"The search used the imagery taken on March 10, 2014, and was conducted consecutively in 4 zones north and northwest of Malaysia, until all targeted elements produced an anomaly in one place in the Bay of Bengal."
So, I have some questions/comments for members to get their teeth into:
1) if the technology is using an ex-military satellite at 280km above the earth (as, e.g., the diagrams describing the technology by Victor Gokh shows) that was tasked to search the area and the survey commenced on March 12th, how could they task the satellite to take images of the area on March 10th and then on March 5th? Can we safely assume that it is highly unlikely that GeoResonance just happenened to be tasking the satellite on March 10th and 5th to take images of the area where they say the plane is located. Hence, I'm concluding that they weren't using the ex-military satellite at 280km, but accessing commercial satellite images. Is that a fair assumption?
2) if GeoResonance was using commercial satellite images, does anyone have an idea of how long it would take to image an area of 2,327,000 km2? Can it be done in one day (i.e. March 10th)? Can it even be done in 19 days? Could they gather images from numerous satellites covering different areas? Why would any commercial satellites be taking images of the oceans in the area on March 5th? Obviously, DigitalGlobe would have been on March 10th, but not of an area of 2,327,000 km2? I understand that there are satellites that are used to measure ocean tidal movements, etc., but I believe they have quite a long orbit time, plus don't know if they also take images.
3) if the images were available (even if taken on different days over a period of many weeks), how many separate images would we be talking about to cover an area of 2,327,000 km2? Fubaya mentions 60x60km (for lower orbit satellite - the ex-military one?). This would give 646 images. But, how many would it give for a higher-orbit satellite?
4) how long does it take to process an individual images (i.e. prepare, irradiate, process, analyse, etc.)? That's a question I can't answer, but I would imagine that it would be several hours, although it could possibly be done in batches of images. If I recall, I think in the links various members have given, mention is made that it takes in the order of weeks to survey even a relatively small area. So, surely, there's no way the process could be sped up in order to process images for an area in excess of 2million km2. Ignoring this for the moment, just as an academic exercise, in order to work out an estimate (as a starting point) I did the following:
a) assume batch process of 10 images (guesstimate, no science behind it) with sequential processing (i.e. if have a 3-step process, then whilst batch 1 is undergoing step 2 processing, batch 2 is undergoing step 1 processing, etc.), since it reduces the processing time considerably
646 images = 65 batches
b) assume 3 step process - sample preparation, irradiate, sample processing (Kirlian photography, etc.), with each step taking an hour (since it makes it easier for me to work out how long it will take to process the 65 batches!) if my calcs are correct, that would require 67hrs processing time
c) If I recall correctly, the supposed technology requires processing an image for a particular element, and repeating the process for each element to be looked for - is that correct? Therefore, the process would have to be repeated for 7 "elements" - the images here:
http://dmnewsi.com/tag/georesonance/
mentions Al, Ti, Cu, Ni, Fe, Cr, and Hydrocarbons. [what is interesting about the images in the above link is that there are separate images for "Engine alloys (Ni, Fe, Cr)" and "Steel alloys (Fe, Ni, Cr)". But, if they are detecting elements, how can they produce two different images, when both images are for the same elements? Are they also able to detect (and distinguish between) metals with different elemental compositions?]
Hence processing hours = 67x7 = 469
d) Let's be even more generous and say it only takes an hour to analyse all the data (they've got super-computers, right?)
This gives 470hrs total time taken to do the work (NB: I haven't included any time to collect together all the images in the first place)
e) Being generous again, let's assume it's a 24hr operation
Therefore, 19days = 456hrs
So, putting aside the technology, I'm concluding that it would have been physically impossible to carry out the work GeoResonance claims to have done, in the time-period they claim to have done it in - AND, that's for 60x60km size images, AND only for the images from one of the surveys. Therefore, just based on the logistics of doing the work, I would say that GeoResonance are lying, pointing to a company trying to raise its business profile (for a technology that MIGHT work??) by making an outrageous (and shameful) claim!
Finally, as an aside, how likely would it be that a company based in Australia could have cooperation with, and access to the technology of, Sevastapol University during the Crimean crisis? And, I wonder what would be the estimate of the cost of the whole operation that they claim to have self-funded! Incidentally, Anti-Spin mentioned that GeoNMR is based in Kiev. If that's the case (and they're still in business), then if they were relying on use of the research reactor in Sevastapol, I think they might be a bit screwed now!
[Wow, InterpreDemon, that PDOS website is cool!
]
P.S Sorry for the long first post - I do tend to waffle a bit!
...and apologies if the posting format is wrong in any way (still getting used to it
)
