I get the shivers each time I read your work because the subject is so complex, one might actually think they can slide it past the entire population. I guess they never counted on you and your team. Thank you so much. I don’t know what it means but I am agog
Thank you Audrey. We work really hard on this and these comments not only motivate us more, they help boost the signal for others. Appreciate you taking the time to read our work and leave a thoughtful reply.
As I said on the last report: icy comets were always bullshit. Velikovsky to Thornhill. Start there. 9-2 and 9-1 propulsion ring systems are naturally. Found in biological motility systems. Start there. Compare to actual real physics, before claiming machine.
Propulsion rings in nature and/or biological motility systems is very interesting too. I will do some basic research into updated comet models - thanks for the tip.
And I just want to say it is almost a relief to find a forum in which we can discuss this remarkable event. Thank you Sentinel Network.
Yes. They are doing good work. And yes, it is a huge task indeed. I've been researching this stuff for so long myself, and have only just started making the connections between biophysics plasma science and everything that got classified for military usage. And it goes back all the way. And then we face the continual comedy of Johnny come lately's, who never listened to the greats, like Thornhill and Velikovsky, and they'll start throwing around the terms like they've been in the whole time. Like the tech-bro kids that are now talking about implosion, and they will never understand what Viktor Schauberger lived and died for. He loved the land and hated money grubbing techademia.
Anyway, yes, my friend. On the backs of giants we ride.
Thanks for reading our work. All of our briefings are free and they will stay free. Our FIELDCRAFT series is a new series for our paid subscribers that dives deeper into the methodology and tools we use in our reports. The first part has two articles live and is planned to be a weekly series.
We've published 14 free briefings this month. One every other day. The Fieldcraft series drops one piece every Saturday. At $80/year, that's about $1.54 per Fieldcraft article. And you're not just buying a tutorial, you're funding independent investigative work with no institutional strings attached.
Thanks for making all these interesting connections. I had written off the 3i Atlas phenomenon early on bc of all the sensationalized reporting. Your approach force me to confront the actual data. The McCasland development independently got my interest and I began making some of the connections myself that led me here ten days ago or so. I wouldn't have read your writing on 3i atlas if your coverage of McCasland story wasn't so good. Boy a lot of ppl seem to have noticed your reporting since then. Now I've been trying to wrap my head around boundary plasma physics. Jupiter represents a very interesting target for this object. One can imagine all sorts of possibilities. Keep up the good work. Following with great interest.
This is a great compliment Ben. The same team, same methodology, same tools. It's fulfilling to see more people taking notice of 3I. If the indicators that we are watching are correct, the 3I story should be going international here shortly as well. Glad to have your support.
The Debrief did an excellent write up here. There should be a lot more like this from other teams as well in the coming weeks. It's good to see more outlets picking up this story. The public deserves to know the truth.
Again, a couple of questions to address my ignorance.
On temperature on the dark side versus the sunlit side: Are those sides relatively stable, the way a tidally locked planet always faces its sun with the same side? Or does object rotation keep moving every point on its equator from dark to sunlit to dark, and so on?
On the ratio of heavy hydrogen to light hydrogen, is heavy hydrogen less volatile, so that the ratio veers toward heavy isotopes as the lightest isotope sublimates?
3I's rotation axis points almost directly at the Sun, within about 8 to 20 degrees. It spins, but like a bullet aimed at the Sun. One pole always faces sunward, the other is permanently in shadow. So yes, it has a stable dark side. And that stable dark side is the hot side. The probability of a random interstellar object arriving with its spin axis aligned to the Sun like this is about 0.5%.
Second question: No. The heavy hydrogen ratio is not set by evaporation. It is set at the moment the molecule forms, in the cold environment where it was made, and locks in permanently. It works as a clock precisely because nothing changes it after formation.
So assuming all of this is true, what would be the mechanism for water building as distance increasing? I’m sure I’m missing something but that doesn’t really make sense for it to “come from the field”. Even if it was some sort of advanced propulsion system, some sort of cloaking or whatever else, there’s not any material in the vacuum to create the water from, at least not in any meaningful quantities.
Honestly? We don't have a specific model for the delivery mechanism. Nobody does. That's the point.
We know the water appears far from the surface. Seven teams confirmed that. We know it's not ice grains. China and Keck confirmed that. We know the surface can't produce it. Munich confirmed that. We described the behavior pattern as consistent with a thermal management system in The Verdict because the output scaled with solar heat load exactly like cooling would.
But how the water physically gets distributed thousands of kilometers out? We don't have that answer. Neither does NASA. The difference is we're telling you it's an open question. They're still citing ice grains that were disproven in multiple studies.
I was stumped at the 10 billion year old age, however if I understand correctly and probably simplistically, that is the age of the ices from which it was built, not necessarily when it was built.
I daresay Avi Loebs latest paper will add greatly to this. Fantastic journalism. Thankyou
Is the paper live? Not seeing anything and would love to read it.
Published yesterday on Medium? Concerning the presence of high amounts of Deuterium and the supposition of a technosignature , a fusion reactor.
This is great. Not sure how that was overlooked on our end. We cover the Deuterium abundance in "The Ancient Engine".
Avi is on the same page as us. "since deuterium is fusion fuel, might its over-abundance in 3I/ATLAS flag a technological signature?"
We think so.
Thank you for sharing this!
https://thesentinel.network/p/the-ancient-engine-nasa-just-dated
I get the shivers each time I read your work because the subject is so complex, one might actually think they can slide it past the entire population. I guess they never counted on you and your team. Thank you so much. I don’t know what it means but I am agog
Thank you Audrey. We work really hard on this and these comments not only motivate us more, they help boost the signal for others. Appreciate you taking the time to read our work and leave a thoughtful reply.
As I said on the last report: icy comets were always bullshit. Velikovsky to Thornhill. Start there. 9-2 and 9-1 propulsion ring systems are naturally. Found in biological motility systems. Start there. Compare to actual real physics, before claiming machine.
Thank you
Propulsion rings in nature and/or biological motility systems is very interesting too. I will do some basic research into updated comet models - thanks for the tip.
And I just want to say it is almost a relief to find a forum in which we can discuss this remarkable event. Thank you Sentinel Network.
Yes. They are doing good work. And yes, it is a huge task indeed. I've been researching this stuff for so long myself, and have only just started making the connections between biophysics plasma science and everything that got classified for military usage. And it goes back all the way. And then we face the continual comedy of Johnny come lately's, who never listened to the greats, like Thornhill and Velikovsky, and they'll start throwing around the terms like they've been in the whole time. Like the tech-bro kids that are now talking about implosion, and they will never understand what Viktor Schauberger lived and died for. He loved the land and hated money grubbing techademia.
Anyway, yes, my friend. On the backs of giants we ride.
Thanks for reading our work. All of our briefings are free and they will stay free. Our FIELDCRAFT series is a new series for our paid subscribers that dives deeper into the methodology and tools we use in our reports. The first part has two articles live and is planned to be a weekly series.
We've published 14 free briefings this month. One every other day. The Fieldcraft series drops one piece every Saturday. At $80/year, that's about $1.54 per Fieldcraft article. And you're not just buying a tutorial, you're funding independent investigative work with no institutional strings attached.
The briefings stay free. They always will.
Thanks for making all these interesting connections. I had written off the 3i Atlas phenomenon early on bc of all the sensationalized reporting. Your approach force me to confront the actual data. The McCasland development independently got my interest and I began making some of the connections myself that led me here ten days ago or so. I wouldn't have read your writing on 3i atlas if your coverage of McCasland story wasn't so good. Boy a lot of ppl seem to have noticed your reporting since then. Now I've been trying to wrap my head around boundary plasma physics. Jupiter represents a very interesting target for this object. One can imagine all sorts of possibilities. Keep up the good work. Following with great interest.
This is a great compliment Ben. The same team, same methodology, same tools. It's fulfilling to see more people taking notice of 3I. If the indicators that we are watching are correct, the 3I story should be going international here shortly as well. Glad to have your support.
Add this as a data point, I believe it came out after this article was written:
https://thedebrief.org/webb-telescope-detects-unusually-high-levels-of-heavy-hydrogen-a-key-component-of-nuclear-fusion-fuel-in-3i-atlas/
The Debrief did an excellent write up here. There should be a lot more like this from other teams as well in the coming weeks. It's good to see more outlets picking up this story. The public deserves to know the truth.
Again, a couple of questions to address my ignorance.
On temperature on the dark side versus the sunlit side: Are those sides relatively stable, the way a tidally locked planet always faces its sun with the same side? Or does object rotation keep moving every point on its equator from dark to sunlit to dark, and so on?
On the ratio of heavy hydrogen to light hydrogen, is heavy hydrogen less volatile, so that the ratio veers toward heavy isotopes as the lightest isotope sublimates?
Good questions.
3I's rotation axis points almost directly at the Sun, within about 8 to 20 degrees. It spins, but like a bullet aimed at the Sun. One pole always faces sunward, the other is permanently in shadow. So yes, it has a stable dark side. And that stable dark side is the hot side. The probability of a random interstellar object arriving with its spin axis aligned to the Sun like this is about 0.5%.
Second question: No. The heavy hydrogen ratio is not set by evaporation. It is set at the moment the molecule forms, in the cold environment where it was made, and locks in permanently. It works as a clock precisely because nothing changes it after formation.
I enjoyed the in-depth quality and visuals. Thank you.
Thank you for reading our work.
So assuming all of this is true, what would be the mechanism for water building as distance increasing? I’m sure I’m missing something but that doesn’t really make sense for it to “come from the field”. Even if it was some sort of advanced propulsion system, some sort of cloaking or whatever else, there’s not any material in the vacuum to create the water from, at least not in any meaningful quantities.
Honestly? We don't have a specific model for the delivery mechanism. Nobody does. That's the point.
We know the water appears far from the surface. Seven teams confirmed that. We know it's not ice grains. China and Keck confirmed that. We know the surface can't produce it. Munich confirmed that. We described the behavior pattern as consistent with a thermal management system in The Verdict because the output scaled with solar heat load exactly like cooling would.
But how the water physically gets distributed thousands of kilometers out? We don't have that answer. Neither does NASA. The difference is we're telling you it's an open question. They're still citing ice grains that were disproven in multiple studies.
3I/ATLAS: it’s kind of clunky, but also elegant.
I was stumped at the 10 billion year old age, however if I understand correctly and probably simplistically, that is the age of the ices from which it was built, not necessarily when it was built.
…or fuel, yes.
It has a flux capacitor!
To add a bit of levity: could it be the planning group for a Vogon constructor fleet?
Or...
And this will intrigue Them wanting to capture and exploit (never happen, cave people)...
It has a mechanism to create "heavy water" or "prima materia" or whatever...
Time, time, time...
Isn't linear.
We live at "the End of Time".
Whatcha think that REALLY means?
😊
link to the verdict here is not working. excellent work, thank you for your write ups