Skip to content

Did Dark Matter/Energy Take Down TWA Flight 800?

January 25, 2013

Ntsb_twa_beach_viewI really do not believe everyone understands what dark matter/energy most commonly is.  First off, I do not believe most of it is “Dark”.  A micro black hole particle of entropy with a mass of 1e+10 kg will have a temperature 1.2e+10 Kelvin.  THAT IS HOT.  It is this surface heat which makes it so energetic.  That heat, or radiation at its surface allows it to trigger fusion and fission in any matter it touches and it gains momentum and shoots off like a banshee.  But since its surface is soooooooooo tiny (1.5e-14 meters @ that mass) it cannot transfer that heat to its surroundings, it is sort of well, constipated.  Luckily God designed a very poor heat exchanger in dark matter with very little surface area else we would all be either toasted or sucked in.

So as I thought about the Dreamliner and those poor Lithium Ion batteries getting struck by those energetic particles, I thought I would go back and take a look at TWA flight 800 that blew up over the ocean shortly after takeoff in 1996.  Officials believe it was an explosion in one of the fuel tanks.  What made it so contentious was that 1)  Aircraft fuel tanks are designed with many safety precautions as not to explode  2)  More than 200 witnesses, including other PILOTS saw what looked like a streaking missile ascending in the direction of the plane prior to it blowing up.

From Witness interviews:

“Many witnesses to the accident had seen a “streak of light” that was usually described as ascending,[58] moving to a point where a large fireball appeared, with several witnesses reporting that the fireball split in two as it descended toward the water.[24] There was intense public interest in these witness reports and much speculation that the reported streak of light was a missile that had struck TWA 800, causing the airplane to explode.[59]These witness accounts were a major reason for the initiation and duration of the FBI’s criminal investigation.[60]

The NTSB’s review of the released witness documents determined that they contained 736 witness accounts, of which 258 were characterized as “streak of light” witnesses (“an object moving in the sky…variously described [as] a point of light, fireworks, a flare, a shooting star, or something similar.”)[58] The NTSB Witness Group concluded that the streak of light reported by witnesses might have been the actual airplane during some stage of its flight before the fireball developed, noting that most of the 258 streak of light accounts were generally consistent with the calculated flightpath of the accident airplane after the CWT explosion.[59]

TWA 800 AirframeHowever, 38 witnesses described a streak of light that ascended vertically, or nearly so, and these accounts “seem[ed] to be inconsistent with the accident airplane’s flightpath.”[107] In addition, 18 witnesses reported seeing a streak of light that originated at the surface, or the horizon, which did not “appear to be consistent with the airplane’s calculated flightpath and other known aspects of the accident sequence.”[107] Regarding these differing accounts, the NTSB noted that based on their experience in previous investigations “witness reports are often inconsistent with the known facts or with other witnesses’ reports of the same events.”[108] The interviews conducted by the FBI focused on the possibility of a missile attack; suggested interview questions given to FBI agents such as “Where was the sun in relation to the aircraft and the missile launch point?” and “How long did the missile fly?” could have biased interviewees’ responses in some cases.[109] The NTSB concluded that given the large number of witnesses in this case, they “did not expect all of the documented witness observations to be consistent with one another.”[110] and “did not view these apparently anomalous witness reports as persuasive evidence that some witnesses might have observed a missile.”[111]

After missile visibility tests were conducted in April 2000, at Eglin Air Force BaseFort Walton Beach, Florida,[112] the NTSB determined that if witnesses had observed a missile attack they would have seen: (1) a light from the burning missile motor ascending very rapidly and steeply for about 8 seconds; (2) the light disappearing for up to 7 seconds; (3) upon the missile striking the aircraft and igniting the CWT another light, moving considerably more slowly and more laterally than the first, for about 30 seconds; (4) this light descending while simultaneously developing into a fireball falling toward the ocean.[111] None of the witness documents described such a scenario.[111]

Because of their unique vantage points and/or the level of precision and detail provided in their accounts, five witness accounts generated special interest:[113] the pilot of Eastwind Airlines flight 507, the crew members in the HH-60 helicopter, a streak-of-light witness aboard US Airways flight 217, a land witness on the Beach Lane Bridge in Westhampton Beach, New York as well as a witness on a boat near Great Gun Beach.[114] Advocates of a missile-attack scenario asserted that some of these witnesses observed a missile;[115] however, analysis demonstrated that the observations were not consistent with a missile attack on TWA 800, but instead were consistent with these witnesses having observed some part of the in-flight fire and breakup sequence after the CWT explosion.[115]

The NTSB concluded that “the witness observations of a streak of light were not related to a missile and that the streak of light reported by most of these witnesses was burning fuel from the accident airplane in crippled flight during some portion of the post-explosion, preimpact breakup sequence”.[111] The NTSB further concluded that “the witnesses’ observations of one or more fireballs were of the airplane’s burning wreckage falling toward the ocean”.[111]

SOHO_sungrazer_with_prominent_tailThese energetic quantum particles expelled from the sun can easily pass right through a jetliner and trigger a spark in a fuel tank just as I believe they are doing in the Dreamliner. Lithium Ion batteries love to soak up energy and my particle has PLENTY to spare.  Given adequate escape velocity they can continue to pass right back out into space as they feel no drag from the surrounding atmosphere other than gravity.  These particles have been around forever and they create much of the uncertainty in our lives. Given times of high solar flare and CME activity, I believe the inner solar system density of these energetic particles will increase and will intensify our severe weather, earthquakes, volcanoes and UNCERTAINTY for life.  I believe that large comets can trigger this increase if they upset the sun and release orbital dark matter around it into the surrounding solar system.  I believe what was considered as the “Year of Meteors” in 1860 after one of the largest solar flare events ever recorded, the Carrington Event in 1859 was actually the “Year of Dark Matter”, which also included a somewhat rare “Earth Grazing Meteorite”, NOT to be confused with a Sun Grazing Comet, because NASA says they are not the same and that the solar flare you see in that SOHO graphic was only coincidentally timed with that incoming non-melting ball of snow and ice with a tail of “snow gas?” 15 million miles long, because a dirty snowball could not do that.

Godspeed,

References
Copyright 2012 Stewart D. Simonson All Rights Reserved

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

6 Comments
  1. Gracie permalink

    This story is from 2 days ago. I just ran across it in major news stories.
    http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/is-u-s-navy-coming-clean-on-twa-800/

    • I am not much for conspiracy theories. Humans tend to blame each other or the government when something goes wrong and I am trying to fit a scientific theory to explain observations and then use it to predict something useful. Conspiracy theories are usually dead ended and can only be used to predict more conspiracy theories…

      • Gracie permalink

        Nowhere in that article is “conspiracy” mentioned. Did you even read it? Here is a snip:

        The New York Times confirmed the same. On Aug. 14, four weeks after the crash, the Times stated emphatically, “Now that investigators say they think the center fuel tank did not explode, they say the only good explanations remaining are that a bomb or a missile brought down the plane off Long Island.”

        When trying to come up with a theory one should find out all there is to know about the subject, including the mountain of eyewitness’ that saw the missile hit the plane. I only thought to share
        info that I ran across after reading your “theory”. I won’t make that mistake again.

      • I am Sorry.

        I read “Is U.S. Navy coming clean on TWA 800?” and I immediately thought conspiracy to withold information.

        Quite frankly, I believe if the military accidently shotdown an airliner they would admit it or it would have come out in the FBI investigation. This article mentions there “was a president to elect, etc..” which sounds like they are implying a coverup/conspiracy in that article which I do not believe. Friendly fire happens often in the military.

        I had not read though where they talked about the fuel tank exploding after the initial explosion before. I check into that some more

        Thanks for following and, again I am sorry to upset you, it was not meant towards you it is that everyone is quick to jump on the government, chemtrails, HAARP, etc. and I think it is a bunch of crap most of the time. Of course others believe my theory is a bunch of crap but at least I am trying to predict events with my bunch of crap.
        Goddspeed

  2. Cody permalink

    A friend of yours recommended your blog to me… He seemed to think you were serious. It seems like you are intentionally making up things for your own entertainment. That, or you have seriously warped your mind into a worldview that contradicts the evidence of proven physics…

    You are mistaken when talking about temperature. Temperature is not a measure of something’s ability to ignite something or induce nuclear fusion. Temperature is the measurement of the average kinetic energy of particles in a volume.

    Secondly micro black holes, assuming there is no downward limit to their size, would evaporate almost immediately. Its likely that relativistic particles approaching c collide with our atmosphere producing micro black holes. 4.6 billion years and earth is still 100% black hole free. Black holes are theoretical, and so is their evaporation, however, we if evaporation did not take place, they would only gain mass over time.

    • Your reference to temperature is in relation to a gas, which I agree with for a gas. Temperature also refers to the state of matter or radiation in a local region. It is a measure of thermal radiation. Radiation is blueshifted at the surface of a micro black hole and is thus “hotter”. So no, I am not mistaken.

      Why should there be a downward limit to a black holes size? What is special about them?

      Thermonuclear fusion is induced at temperatures of 120 Million Kelvin. There are two effects that lower the actual temperature needed. One is the fact that temperature is the average kinetic energy, implying that some nuclei at this temperature would actually have much higher energy than 0.1 MeV, while others would be much lower. It is the nuclei in the high-energy tail of the velocity distribution that account for most of the fusion reactions. The other effect is quantum tunneling. The nuclei do not actually have to have enough energy to overcome the Coulomb barrier completely. If they have nearly enough energy, they can tunnel through the remaining barrier. For these reasons fuel at lower temperatures will still undergo fusion events, at a lower rate.

      I will show you my calcs, you show me yours, before you tell me I am wrong.

      Black Hole mass: 1e+10 kg
      Radius: 1.5e-17 meters
      Surface Temp: 1.2e+11 K (More than adequate to trigger Thermonuclear Fusion at its surface)
      Lifespan: 2,664,132 Years (You are incorrect that they would evaporate immediately)

      They either pass thru, coalesce and annihilate with other particles reaching Earth.

      So what part have I made up? I would like to see your calculations for a similar mass black hole and we can discuss further. Why do you say they would evaporate immediately? Do they ever get smaller than a Planck Mass? The average coronal mass ejection is 1e+12 kg

      Thanks for reading

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: