the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The deployment of a geomagnetic variometer station as auxiliary instrumentation for the study of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena
Abstract. Witness reports of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) occasionally associate UAP sightings with local electromagnetic interferences, such as spinning magnetic compasses onboard aircraft or sudden malfunctions of mechanical vehicles. These reports have motivated the incorporation of a magnetometer into the instrumentation suite of the Galileo Project (GP), a Harvard-led scientific collaboration whose aim is to collect and analyze multi-sensor data that collectively could help elucidate the nature of UAP. The goal of the GP magnetometry investigation is to identify magnetic anomalies that cannot be readily explained in terms of a natural or human-made origin, and analyze these jointly with the data collected from the other modalities. These include an ensemble of visible and infrared cameras, a broadband acoustic system and a weather-monitoring system. Here, we present GP’s first geomagnetic variometer station, deployed at the GP observatory in Colorado, USA. We describe the calibration and deployment of the instrumentation, which consists of a vector magnetometer and its data acquisition system, and the collection and processing of the data. Moreover, we present and discuss examples of the magnetic field data obtained over a period of 6 months, including data recorded during the May 2024 G5 extreme geomagnetic storm. We find that the data meet and even surpass the requirements laid out in GP’s Science Traceability Matrix. Key to the evaluation of our data is the proximity of the variometer station to the USGS magnetic observatory in Boulder, Colorado. By comparing the two sets of data, we find that they are of similar quality. Having established the proper functioning of the first GP variometer station, we will use it as the model for variometer stations at future GP observatories.
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-3431', Anonymous Referee #1, 22 Jul 2025
This is a very well written manuscript. Although I will be surprised if the magnetometer system is ever used to provide insightful data regarding UFOs, the data themselves will be valuable for a wide variety of applications. I have a few questions, which I hope the authors will address.
1. I note that the air-conditioning system at the BOU observatory was not working during calibration. Since the authors are set up near that observatory, are there plans to revisit the BOU observatory and investigate system response over a wider range of temperatures?
2. Are there plans to make the data available to the scientific community in the style of (say) Intermagnet or SuperMag? This is important. Other investigators will make use of the data, and, in the end, the project represented in this manuscript will find indirect support from the wider scientific community.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3431-RC1 -
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-3431', Anonymous Referee #2, 01 Sep 2025
The paper by Vervelidou et al. on “The deployment of geomagnetic variometer station as auxiliary instrumentation for the study of unidentified aerial phenomena” was an interesting read for someone who does not do research on UAPs. The introduction is clear and gives the required background. The following sections describes the experimental setup and gives examples of data sets with an accompanying discussion. The authors give a clear presentation of the experiments, including all the challenges that occur in experimental work in the laboratory or in the field, such as sensor failures, broken cooling systems, and elks interfering with the experimental setup.
The paper is easy to follow. I am very close to recommending a publish-as-is, but I have just a few minor issues that I would like to see addressed.
Page 5: The discussion of the magnetometer / ADC interface is a bit short, e.g. it is nice to be told the noise floor of the magnetometer, but if it is poorly interfaced to a insufficient ADC, this noise floor is never reached. Please elaborate a bit here. How far is the experimental noise floor from the theoretical noise floor?
Figure 4: The data are sorted by temperature, but it might be beneficial to add a small inset to the figure with the raw data as a time series.
Figure 5: What is MD? I suggest to also add the distance between the magnetometer and the camera as this is not directly clear from the picture.
Figure 10 could be discussed in slightly more detail. Clearly, the instrument is very well insulated as seen by the small overall change in temperature, but the plotted data curve is very “thick”. I suggest adding an inset with a zoom on a few seconds of data to make the data quality and any structure in it more visible. Please also add a comment about the “thickness” of the plot. Is it explained by the electronic properties of the sensor or are external noise sources in play?
Figure 14: I suggest adding insets with zooms on the spikes, so the shape of the spikes can be seen.
Page 21: The discussion of the origins of spikes is a bit short. Are there other potential sources of spikes in magnetometer data, e.g., could cosmic rays be the culprit? Is spikes like this this a common feature for magnetic observatories? On page 6 a 160 m distant road is mentioned. Is there any correlation to traffic on this road or can any other noise be attributed to traffic?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3431-RC2
Data sets
Magnetic field and temperature data obtained at the geomagnetic variometer station of the Galileo Project in Colorado, USA The Galileo Project https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15825118
Model code and software
Python script to record magnetic field and temperature data Laura Domine, Abigail White https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15824706
Viewed
Since the preprint corresponding to this journal article was posted outside of Copernicus Publications, the preprint-related metrics are limited to HTML views.
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
576 | 0 | 2 | 578 | 0 | 0 |
- HTML: 576
- PDF: 0
- XML: 2
- Total: 578
- BibTeX: 0
- EndNote: 0
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Since the preprint corresponding to this journal article was posted outside of Copernicus Publications, the preprint-related metrics are limited to HTML views.
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1