So, still no strong theory of what the object generating this diffraction pattern could have been? I note Mick's suggested that it may be a missile as the wavy white long looks as though it may be smoke, but could it equally be just about anything else?
Are there any other clues that can be taken from the image, or does the diffraction pattern destroy them completely?
The reason why this topic lost momentum is because we are trying to compare apples to a laser.
There was a pdf here by john.phil on the previous page:
https://www.metabunk.org/attachments/chandelier_diffraction-pdf.65311/
In this argument Phil successfully proves that this picture does not show visible light, because he cannot reproduce the same pattern with the same inputs using visible light.
The reason why the results of Phil shows a colorful rainbow effect is simple: He is using white light as an input. Yet we know the FLIR camera does not see visible light. White light breaks down to its colorful components when it goes across a lens. That does not happen in an FLIR, this is why the simulations are colorful and the FLIR is not.
This was a very good approach because at least we are trying to reflect light to reach the same pattern. At least this is somewhat similar to what may have happened in the FLIR camera. And there is a really interesting conclusion here, but it was dismissed because it does not fit the narrative.
Source: https://i.imgur.com/9wDSdNU.png
I took a screenshot of his simulation's result.
There are long 90 degree spikes. There are shorter 45 degree spikes. All of these spikes have a high amplitude, these are the bright parts of the pattern. If this was a picture, this would be where diffracted light reached the sensors.
But there are diffraction spikes at 22 degrees. Check the picture above. These are not high amplitude spikes, these are created by the destructive interference of two waves. The spike is only visible because it is darker than it should be, because it is a result of two waves meeting and reducing each other into nothing (even making the entire diffraction pattern darker in their wake)
And this one of the reasons why this topic is silent. The more people look at visible light diffraction patterns the more proof they got this is something dissimilar. You cannot have 45 degree diffractions but no 22 degree diffractions for example. Not addressing this problem means there is nothing to talk about.
The chandelier UAP picture is made by an FLIR system, it does not use visible light or regular lenses. There will be no colorful image because the light is infrared, even if a lens breaks it down it will still remain just infrared. No green, no blue, no red, just invisible infrared. We need sensors to tell us there is light shining there because we do not see it, this is what an FLIR camera is. But no lens breaks the light down. This is the problem. Those rectangles are not diffractions because
no lens can possibly break our infrared input to show such a result without the expected artifacts. Physically impossible. If that was the case, if a lens caused that shape, there would be a 22 degree diffraction pattern aswell. But there isn't.
Common sense says the rectangular shapes are the result of a thrust vector control of a vehicle using thrust as a means of propulsion, which is so far the only credible explanation to why there is only 90/45 degree "diffraction patterns" on the picture but no 22 degree ones.
There are countless examples in this thread showing FLIR diffractions. All of them are the same. The FLIR produces those 45/90 degree diffractions, those are actually diffraction patterns. This is true to every FLIR image on the internet. But the rectangular shapes are not visible in any FLIR image, because the FLIR cannot physically produce them.