Two suns.

[Steven Daniels]

I am more enamored with the Chinese reporter chick.

[bobby rivers]

Jason, there are hundreds of different vids. Its in all different positions of the sky and in many different countries. Youtube it.

[Jason Hyatt]

I was basing my impression on that vid alone but I'll take a look around if I get a chance today. Again, based largely on the fact that I can look out the window right now and see one sun, it seems highly unlikely to be a planet, brown dwarf, or star. To have the same angular size in the sky as the sun and to radiate light at a comparable magnitude would require a MASSIVE body. Even if we assume it were a planet reflecting light and not producing it, it would be enormous with an absurdly high reflectivity (at least as great or greater than Venus, Europa, or Enceladus). Not only would we be able to easily see it, the gravitational effects would be catastrophic.

The moon is the same angular size in the sky as the sun because the ratio of diameter-to-distance is the same (which is why we can see a total eclipse). The moon has a substantial gravitational effect on Earth because of it's size and proximity. Any object further away than the moon but the same angular size as the sun/moon would be proportionally larger in diameter -- and therefore mass. It would thus have a substantial gravitational influence. If it's as far away as the sun but the same diameter, then it is approximately 1,000,000 times the size of Earth. If it's on the other side of the sun but the same angular size it would have to be even larger in diameter. Any object with that kind of mass (even if it had an absurdly low density) would effect not only Earth, but the entire solar system; keeping in mind that the sun's gravitational influence extends for nearly a light year out to the Oort cloud -- any object that big would have decidedly non-trivial effects.

Again, since an enormous object is not visible out my window at the moment, and since the Earth is not presently being torn apart by gargantuan tidal forces, I have to conclude that the phenomenon is both transient and benign; whatever it's cause (and I'm still not sold on the vid being genuine but again, I haven't yet looked around for others). I return to an atmospheric explanation as the most likely based solely on ruling out astronomical phenomena, not because I have a firm meteorological explanation.

[Enrique "Kiko"]

I was basing my impression on that vid alone but I'll take a look around if I get a chance today. Again, based largely on the fact that I can look out the window right now and see one sun, it seems highly unlikely to be a planet, brown dwarf, or star. To have the same angular size in the sky as the sun and to radiate light at a comparable magnitude would require a MASSIVE body. Even if we assume it were a planet reflecting light and not producing it, it would be enormous with an absurdly high reflectivity (at least as great or greater than Venus, Europa, or Enceladus). Not only would we be able to easily see it, the gravitational effects would be catastrophic.

The moon is the same angular size in the sky as the sun because the ratio of diameter-to-distance is the same (which is why we can see a total eclipse). The moon has a substantial gravitational effect on Earth because of it's size and proximity. Any object further away than the moon but the same angular size as the sun/moon would be proportionally larger in diameter -- and therefore mass. It would thus have a substantial gravitational influence. If it's as far away as the sun but the same diameter, then it is approximately 1,000,000 times the size of Earth. If it's on the other side of the sun but the same angular size it would have to be even larger in diameter. Any object with that kind of mass (even if it had an absurdly low density) would effect not only Earth, but the entire solar system; keeping in mind that the sun's gravitational influence extends for nearly a light year out to the Oort cloud -- any object that big would have decidedly non-trivial effects.

Again, since an enormous object is not visible out my window at the moment, and since the Earth is not presently being torn apart by gargantuan tidal forces, I have to conclude that the phenomenon is both transient and benign; whatever it's cause (and I'm still not sold on the vid being genuine but again, I haven't yet looked around for others). I return to an atmospheric explanation as the most likely based solely on ruling out astronomical phenomena, not because I have a firm meteorological explanation.

Agree.

[Bill Keeling]

First, you can watch the video camera move and the two objects remain in place and still ( that rules out a relection from a window or glass). Next the refraction in the atmoshpere is a possible explanation, except for all recorded refractions have been north/south and never side by side. There are explanations to the north/south refractions because of the angle of the incoming light rays. It is odd that google would black out this area as well. I guess we will know in a few months, one way or the other.

[Jason Hyatt]

First, you can watch the video camera move and the two objects remain in place and still ( that rules out a relection from a window or glass). Next the refraction in the atmoshpere is a possible explanation, except for all recorded refractions have been north/south and never side by side. There are explanations to the north/south refractions because of the angle of the incoming light rays. It is odd that google would black out this area as well. I guess we will know in a few months, one way or the other.

I don't assert to have any solid explanation for what it *is* only for what is most likely NOT. The only thing I can be fairly certain of is that any astrophysical body of that size and luminosity would not be a brief event captured on video. It would be a cataclysm -- one which would be plainly visible for more than a brief period. Planets, stars, and brown dwarfs don't disappear. If it's visible on Tuesday it won't be gone by Wednesday. Add to that the fact that the gravitational effects of an aberrant object at any distance with an angular size comparable to the sun would substantially outweigh the curiosity of a bright light in the sky. Neither me nor anybody else can be 100% certain what it is, but it is fairly easy to rule out what it is not (which is true of just about anything -- that's how science progresses afterall).

I am reminded of an old quotation I've heard Carl Sagan use: "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." A shaky YouTube video in the complete absence of any enduring physical phenomena doesn't quite rise to the level of "extraordinary evidence" so I'm sticking with a much more mundane explanation.

[Mike Nall]

http://www.lifeslittlemysteries.com/...xplained-1427/

Odd light refraction

[Brandon Mccaghren]

Fox News

MSNBC

ABC News

[bobby rivers]

Yeah, I new it would disrupt the entire solar system as we know it. Thats why I wanted your take on it. Funny but half the other vids I saw about a week ago are gone from youtube. Was gonna post em. If you happen to get the scoop fill me in please. Thanks Jason.