These are posted on Facebook by Dave Clock in the JMT group:

"This is at Humphrey's basin, Summit Lake just beyond the tent."

There are some intriguing details in these shots, such as the clouds covering some stars but not others, but the most interesting detail to me is the spiral in the lower left on the Humphrey's basin shot. Anyone know what that could be?

Perhaps an aircraft in a two loop holding pattern or two loop sight seeing/.....?

Sounds like a winner. That may be the message of the shot: here you are at Humphrey's basin, chillin in the starlight, with all those people in a holding pattern over Fresno.

OK here's another puzzler: maybe busting the photog? The second shot is unmistakeably at the north shore of Thousand Island Lake, looking west to Banner peak. SO how can the apparent arcs of the stars be concentric with a point somewhere to the left, to the south?

In neither the first nor second picture do the reflections of the star tracks look correct. In the second picture, there are no reflected star tracks (should be on the left side), I do not understand the horizontal band of light middle right, and in the first picture the reflected star tracks seem "off set". Me thinks the sky's have been photoshopped into the images. Just my .02

Actually the third one is wrong, too: the arcs and angles on the left side are very different. The band of bright light in the TLI shot actually makes sense: headlights and camps to the west. The star tracks in the first shot are also way too dense: like a double or triple exposure, and none of the time-lapse skies match with the snapshot foregrounds.

All in all, some ok visual puzzles but otherwise: meh.

Yes, it would seem the artist was interested in adding a few clouds for dramatic effect (I guess), so added two separate sky shots.

I doubt the objective was to present visual puzzles, but to simply craft some more interesting pictures using "artistic license". For me that is taking post processing a bit too far, although I do admit to twisting the saturation, hue, vibrance, etc... knobs to suit my pleasure:-) What the camera sensor and the human eye capture are not the same, so for me these adjustments seem fair. I do not object to the artists actions. Just not for me.

Hmmm... I think you guys are being too critical.

> The second shot is unmistakeably at the north shore of Thousand Island Lake, looking west to Banner peak. SO how can the apparent arcs of the stars be concentric with a point somewhere to the left, to the south?

The point is the South Pole! Think down through the Earth and a little to the left. That arc appears about right to me.

> In neither the first nor second picture do the reflections of the star tracks look correct. In the second picture, there are no reflected star tracks (should be on the left side), I do not understand the horizontal band of light middle right, and in the first picture the reflected star tracks seem "off set". Me thinks the sky's have been photoshopped into the images.

Actually, in the second, if you look closely at the only place there could/should be a reflection, you can see a faint reflection of the lowest arc, where it touches the crest of the ridge.
In the first picture, the stars are really bright. But think about it: The stars are burning into the digital camera's sensor for hours. How that sensor projects the image has much to do with its dynamics and electronics characteristics.

> Actually the third one is wrong, too: the arcs and angles on the left side are very different.
Lens distortion! Photographers pay big bucks for lenses that maintain straight lines out to the corners of their pictures. Notice the oval shape around the North Star area in the first picture.

> it would seem the artist was interested in adding a few clouds for dramatic effect
Those pictures are time-exposures taken over hours of time. Clouds are going to look strange, since they move. Think about the time-exposures of streams and cascades -- they make the water look way different too.

...But I am still puzzled about the circles in the lower left of the first picture. I really don't think an aircraft could do that.

Now I see Saltydog asked the photographer about the effects in the FB thread. DC replied that these are taken with a super wide-angle lens. ...so angles do get distorted.

Also, he wrote, "depending on how cold it is, I can get 2 sometimes 3 nightime shots per battery. Because I am stacking images, i am shooting anywhere between 90-250 images then stacking into a single once I get home and process it all"

I think that explains the intensity of the star tracks in the first picture.

Trying to figure out what you guys are talking about. Are the circles the copyright/watermark?

yep, either that, or some alien spacecraft

Geosynchronous orbiting satellite. Different circles from different exposures.

Another mystery, is the Marmot tent at TIL legally camped near the water? Or is it just a prop?

I think the circle in the image is a copyright symbol. You can see the shading on it to give it a 3-dimensional look.

I'm still leaning toward alien surveillance.

On FB, Dave explains a couple of things: the left handed arcs are of the soutern sky, which makes sense, and the mystery circles are his copyright mark.

So you're telling us he's an alien.

The brightness of the stars is the work of the photographer. I often ramp up the brightness levels on the stars to max in order to make them pop out more when I edit star photos.

Clouds and stars overlapping is simply the movement of the clouds and having clear sky one moment but not the next and having a ghost image.

The circle could be a satellite but honestly I see so many weird things taking photos of the stars or just laying out watching them that I wonder if more than satellites, space stations and shuttles are flying around at times.

Last year while taking photos I caught an object moving slow across many exposures. The satellites would all burn the same 2 inch or more line in the shot while this one was moving an 8th inch across the photo. It also did not have the same light pattern.

How do these satellites work? It's always been my understanding that in order to avoid falling back down to earth they have to maintain the magic number in speed to fall forever in a circle. If one can make loops like that is it using some sort of propulsion to maintain it's orbit?

Geosynchronous satellites do figure 8 loops above and below the equator while also going retrograde (west to east) from earth's perspective. This could theoretically create a circular ground track (earthbound perspective). The looping is a daily event, so you shouldn't see the complete circle in one evening, but then again, you don't see complete circles in this photo. On the other hand, these circles are very bright. I can argue both sides. So this theory seems remotely plausible, but the truth seems to be that the photographer is actually covering up for alien spacecraft.

Notice this photo is the only one of the three that has the "copyright" included with the photographer name. So it's doubly redundant that he would alter his photo with a fake "C" burned into the sky while also including "copyright" with his name.

Alien conspirator, that's my story and I'm sticking with it.

I agree. And to think that we've uncovered it in the Whitney Zone although the rest of the nation hasn't realized this discovery yet!

Ok, Dave Clock says it is his copyright symbol. Once I enlarged the picture, it is pretty clear. Now I am looking for the symbol in the other pictures.

                       

He shared another with the copyright more obvious:

By the way, his website has some spectacular pictures.

David Clock Photography

Interesting point made by SierraNevada regarding geosynchronous satellites and their figure 8 "wobble". Web pages discuss this and mention that the satellites need to occasionally fire rockets to keep their position steady, due to gravitational effects of the sun and moon.

One thing I can't find in the discussions is the effect of the moon's gravity on the satellites. It would seem that those satellites would be pulled back and forth by their position relative to the moon, similarly to the way the ocean's tides oscillate. In fact, the figure 8 wobble's north and south oscillation can be explained by the satellite's orbital plane being at some angle to the equator's plane. But isn't the width of the figure 8 caused by the gravitational oscillations due to the moon?

Here's a youtube video that shows timelapse pics of the earth over 8 days: http://youtu.be/tvsW2aGq2QU

The Earth's pull is probably just that much stronger. Most people think you get into space and there is no gravity which isn't true. At the altitude the International Space Station orbits the gravity is about 10% less than it is on you right now.

Observing Geostationary Satellites

In fact most geostationary satellites are really geosynchronous. Having mean motions between 0.9 to 1.1 revolutions per day they are allowed to drift across a box before corrections are made by on board thrusters. The size of this box is dictated by mission requirements. For example the box for a TV broadcast satellite is determined by the beamwidth of the reception dishes used.

The drift from the ideal position arises due to anomalies in the Earth's gravitational field, at this altitude atmospheric drag is not a consideration. The gravitational influence of the Moon provides an out-of-plane force too, which gradually increases the orbital inclination towards that of the Moon about the Earth (which itself varies between 18 and 29 degrees). The satellite now tends to describe a figure-of-eight ground track; ground controllers aim to restrict this to the box mentioned earlier given that enough orbit-keeping fuel remains. This wandering has been allowed to grow unchecked in the case of a few communications satellites in order to provide better coverage of the polar regions which is otherwise poor (from the poles a geostationary satellite would almost graze the horizon). Net connectivity to US research stations in the Antarctic was achieved in this manner.

Unlike objects in low Earth orbit, geostationary satellites are visible throughout every night of the year, only entering the Earth's shadow for up to 70 minutes per day, around a couple of weeks either side of each equinox. During the same period the satellite tends to brighten over several days, twice a year, when the satellites orientation favors the 'beaming' of the Sun in the direction of the observer.