The 'Doughnut UFO' Observed

Interestingly, it wasn't a multitude of scientists who commented, but rather just one professional and an amateur astronomer. This raises the question: are researchers weary of discussing UFOs in mainstream media? It’s worth noting that amateur astronomers have often contributed significantly to the discovery of celestial objects, sometimes outpacing their professional counterparts.

In a discussion on Space.com, Marco Langbroek, an amateur satellite tracker, shared his perspective on the sighting. He suggested, “I strongly believe that the ‘doughnut UFO’ captured in the Swiss images is merely an out-of-focus shot of a bright star.” While this interpretation might seem reasonable, it brings up a point—having taken numerous out-of-focus photos of stars myself, I can’t recall ever seeing a doughnut shape. More intriguingly, @Eavix1Eavix observed the light before taking any photographs. So, did he also see doughnuts with his naked eye?

Astrophysicist Jonathan McDowell from the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics offered another explanation. He proposed that the doughnut-shaped object could have been the upper stage of a rocket re-entering the atmosphere and burning up. This raises further questions—does NASA or academic institutions have footage of upper stage rockets burning during reentry? Can we find similar images for comparison? Was SpaceX’s upper stage tracked during that time? How fast would that event have appeared?

Nevertheless, without specific timestamps for the images, it’s challenging to connect the mysterious lights to any identifiable object in the sky that evening, McDowell elaborated to Live Science via email. (Live Science had asked for timestamps, but the photographer could not provide them.)

This brings to mind an interesting point. I believed that all modern digital cameras automatically embed timestamps in the images they capture. When a photograph is taken, the exact date and time should be recorded along with various other metadata, such as exposure time and focal length.

Section 1.1 Investigating the Evidence

Even if we lack precise timestamps, we do have a timeframe: Monday night, November 8. Can we not speculate on various celestial events that might have occurred during that period? @Eavix1Eavix could likely recall when he stepped outside—was it a routine evening smoke before bed? I bet Marco Langbroek has an application that could trace objects overhead. Personally, I can easily track the Hubble Space Telescope or the ISS, but I’ve never seen anything resembling a doughnut in the sky.

My eyesight isn't what it used to be, and I often see starbursts instead of clear celestial images.

Another point against the SpaceX theory is that anything in orbit over Switzerland that night would have been in the Earth's shadow, hence not reflecting light. Thus, we are left with the possibilities of a burning upper stage, an out-of-focus star, or… something entirely different.

Section 1.2 The Unidentified Flying Object

The task of sleuthing through these possibilities feels a bit overwhelming. Can’t we simply label it a UFO? After all, it remains unidentified. There’s no need to jump to conclusions about aliens or other explanations; it is, for now, simply an enigma…

Brandon Specktor authored the article on Space.com. I must say, I appreciate his writing style and have enjoyed his other works. Here’s a link to his intriguing piece about entangled tardigrades, which I believe holds promise for future explorations.