About us
Science Blog was started in August 2002. It lives, breathes and eats press releases from research organizations around the globe. Most of what you read here are press releases from the outfits named in the stories themselves. Got a news story you think belongs here?
Let's talk.
The other half of the equation is
blog posts from readers like you. So if you have an interest in science,
please register and join others like you in an ongoing, vibrant dialog about what makes the world tick. Meantime, please take a minute to read our
Privacy Policy and Site Disclaimer.
A little high-school physics: Why do we *see* things? Because of light scattering from them. So, if the camera *saw* the "apparition," why did nobody else on the scene see it? The CCDs in the cameras (if that was a digital camera) are not too sensitive beyond the visible range. Let's assume that indeed it was a "spiiiiiriiiit" and that the camera is quite sensitive in a wide electromagnetic spectrum. Judging by the blue color, the "ghost" must have been radiating in the short-wavelength range invisible to the naked eye (since nobody but the camera detects it), that is - close to UV-A radiation (such as the one used in tanning salons). For something to emit near-UV radiation of this intensity, it must have had quite a power source! Add to this the UV filtering properties of common glass, and the dilemma groooows... So, it's not UV, just plain blue such as, hmmm... from a bag or a mischievous computer geek with too much time on his/her hands...