Post by swamprat on Mar 2, 2018 19:51:39 GMT -6
Resources about possible UFO physics / propulsion / technology
Summary: If we are to explain UFOs in terms of physics we understand to some degree, yet still conform to witness observations, it seems essential to assume UFOs are capable of generating artificial gravity fields (in GR terms, to manipulate the curvature of the fabric of space-time), much as we produce magnetism with electric currents. An approximation -probably oversimplified- of overall UFO behaviour is via accepting such a (hypothetical, or at least not known to us) gravity-like repulsive "force-field".
The glow / luminescence in various colours around the UFO (apparently shape depends on UFO's shape as well as its current maneuver, so the UFO's outline as seen by external observer can change), is thought to be due to ionization of surrounding air (atmosphere around the UFO "lights up", much like what happens in neon-lamps), hereafter referred to as "UFO plasma sheath".
Brightness/color changes of the "UFO plasma sheath" seem to be related with thrust/acceleration. The air ionization seems to be caused by the EM radiation emitted by the UFO, and is thought to be a secondary effect of the propulsion system. This includes UV (suggested by many cases of sunburn-like effects and eye and skin irritation) and soft X-rays (suggested by "burn ring" traces on ground where UFOs landed).
Considering the difficulty of creating plasma in normal atmospheric conditions, in combination with other observations, like the luminosity of submarine UFOs, the sudden appearance of condensation / mist when starting up in high humidity conditions and noise patterns, it all suggests an envelope of lower atmospheric density near the UFO's surface. A near vacuum, i.e. the air/water is "pushed away" from the skin of the craft (confirmed by observations when UFOs rise from water), which minimizes friction and heating issues. Plasmas can interact strongly with electromagnetic radiation, "Plasma Stealth" is a proposed process that uses ionized gas (plasma) to reduce the radar cross section (RCS) of an aircraft.
This may explain why sometimes UFOs are seen visually, but not tracked on radar. Often UFOs have a very strong magnetic field. Also, in several cases, light (e.g. from car headlights or beaming spotlights) is reported to "bend" in front of the UFO, an effect which some suggest is related with the most controversial aspect of UFO reports: the apparent ability to disappear / "blink out" or seem to "implode" (diminish in angular size) [miniature-scale "gravitational lensing"-type phenomenon?].
Physiological effects on humans include: sunburn-type effect and eye irritation, extreme dryness of the nasal area and of the throat, color changes in vision, extreme headaches and a heating/burning sensation. Witnesses and animals have become sick and even died, with symptoms similar to radiation poisoning, after close approach to a UFO. Given the tremendous amount of energy UFOs seem to be expending, their power source is a big mystery.
Many ideas have been proposed, including that UFOs are storing energy in a very concentrated form, or converting gravity to usable energy (H.Oberth 1950s), or utilising ambient energy (speculations about being able to tap the so-called Zero-Point-Energy) or utilize remote transmission of power (wireless energy transfer).
It seems that UFOs defy our currently accepted Physics, e.g. the conservation of momentum (UFOs accelerate without throwing any material out the backside). Both Newton's gravity and General Relativity (Einstein's theory of gravitation), require the existence of "negative mass" (or energy) for antigravity to be possible. This has been a major hurdle to the study of UFOs by many "mainstream" physicists in previous decades (e.g. read Markowitz, W., "The Physics and Metaphysics of Unidentified Flying Objects", Science, Vol. 157, 1967).
My opinion: Having spent considerable time researching the UFO subject, it seems to me that the public scientific research most promising to be related to the UFO propulsion question, is the so-called Gravitomagnetism (the subject of field effects caused by moving matter, it has nothing to do with magnetism despite its name) and in particular any connection of gravitation with superconductivity, the purported "enhanced or boosted Gravitomagnetism". I am inclined to also include claims made in the 1990s by Russian materials scientist E.Podkletnov of "gravity shielding" effects when experimenting with rotating superconductors in a magnetic field, characterised "controversial" and apparently had a negative effect to his carreer.
In Mar-2006, an experiment by Austrian physicist M.Tajmar et al funded by ESA (European Space Agency), reported generation of a toroidal (tangential, azimuthal) gravitational field in a rotating accelerated (time dependent angular velocity) superconducting Niobium ring. My opinion stems from the fact that UFO literature since the 1940s consistently documents: 1/ direct gravity-like effects 2/ perception of rotation on UFOs, such as at the rim of saucer-/saturn-/sphere-shaped UFOs 3/ saucers flying in a manner as if the drive is acting perpendicular to the plane of the disk 4/ strong magnetic fields.
The commonly observed UFO shapes (disk, spheroid) are seemingly not chosen for aerodynamic purposes (considering when discoid UFOs want to fly away fast, they tilt and fly with the plane of the disk directed forward). Very early in the UFO study, there was the idea that "saucers do their business at the rim" (APRO, Hill), the same area which generally is reported to rotate and glow. However, in this page I provide links to other ideas on possible UFO propulsion which have been proposed over the years, such as Magneto[Hydro/Aero]Dynamics (the most popular), to Pulsed EM, to mag-lev type levitation.
Extract from Paul Hill's (NASA aeronautical engineer, bio) book "Unconventional Flying Objects: A Scientific Analysis" on UFO illumination (colors, brightness) and performance (acceleration). Review of Paul Hill's book by Hal Puthoff, PhD theoretical physicist:
"To the degree that the engineering characteristics of UFOs can be estimated by empirical observation, in this reviewer's opinion the above-referenced, recently-published book by Paul Hill provides the most reliable, concise summary of engineering-type data available.1 The data were compiled over decades of research by a Chief Scientist-Manager at NASA Langley Research Center2 who acted as an informal clearinghouse for UFO-related data. The strength of the compilation lies in its thoughtful separation of wheat from chaff, and the analysis of the former into coherent patterns, including detailed calculations. Perhaps surprising to the casually interested, under careful examination the observations, rather than defying the laws of physics as naive interpretation might suggest, instead appear to be solidly commensurate with them, as the following discussion shows."
One of the most consistently-observed characteristics of UFO flight is a ubiquitous pattern in which they tilt to perform all maneuvers. Specifically, they sit level to hover, tilt forward to move forward, tilt backward to stop, bank to turn, and descend by "falling-leaf" or "silver-dollar-wobble" motions. Detailed analysis by Hill shows that such motion is inconsistent with aerodynamic requirements, but totally consistent with some form of repulsive force-field propulsion. Not satisfied with paper analyses alone, Hill arranged to have various forms of jet-supported and rotor-supported circular flying platforms built and tested. Hill himself acted as test pilot in early, originally-classified, versions, and found the above motions the most economical for control purposes. Pictures of these platforms are included in the text.
In an effort to examine the force-field propulsion hypothesis yet further, Hill analyzed a number of cases involving near-field interactions with an apparent craft in which some form of force was in evidence. These include examples in which a person or vehicle was affected, tree branches were parted or broken, roof tiles were dislodged, objects were deflected and ground or water were disturbed. Under close analysis the subtleties of these interactions combine to point unequivocally to a repulsive force field surrounding the craft, while discriminating against propulsion mechanisms involving jet action, pure electric or magnetic effects, or the emission of energetic particles or radiation (although the latter may accompany the propulsive mechanism as a secondary effect). Further detailed investigation indicates that the particular form of force field propulsion that satisfied observational constraints is what Hill labels a directed acceleration field; that is, a field that is, in general, gravitational-like in nature, and, in particular, gravity-canceling.3 Such a field acts on all masses in its sphere of influence as does a gravitational field. Corollary to this conclusion is that observed accelerations ~100g relative to the environment could be sustained without on-board high-g forces.
Summary: If we are to explain UFOs in terms of physics we understand to some degree, yet still conform to witness observations, it seems essential to assume UFOs are capable of generating artificial gravity fields (in GR terms, to manipulate the curvature of the fabric of space-time), much as we produce magnetism with electric currents. An approximation -probably oversimplified- of overall UFO behaviour is via accepting such a (hypothetical, or at least not known to us) gravity-like repulsive "force-field".
The glow / luminescence in various colours around the UFO (apparently shape depends on UFO's shape as well as its current maneuver, so the UFO's outline as seen by external observer can change), is thought to be due to ionization of surrounding air (atmosphere around the UFO "lights up", much like what happens in neon-lamps), hereafter referred to as "UFO plasma sheath".
Brightness/color changes of the "UFO plasma sheath" seem to be related with thrust/acceleration. The air ionization seems to be caused by the EM radiation emitted by the UFO, and is thought to be a secondary effect of the propulsion system. This includes UV (suggested by many cases of sunburn-like effects and eye and skin irritation) and soft X-rays (suggested by "burn ring" traces on ground where UFOs landed).
Considering the difficulty of creating plasma in normal atmospheric conditions, in combination with other observations, like the luminosity of submarine UFOs, the sudden appearance of condensation / mist when starting up in high humidity conditions and noise patterns, it all suggests an envelope of lower atmospheric density near the UFO's surface. A near vacuum, i.e. the air/water is "pushed away" from the skin of the craft (confirmed by observations when UFOs rise from water), which minimizes friction and heating issues. Plasmas can interact strongly with electromagnetic radiation, "Plasma Stealth" is a proposed process that uses ionized gas (plasma) to reduce the radar cross section (RCS) of an aircraft.
This may explain why sometimes UFOs are seen visually, but not tracked on radar. Often UFOs have a very strong magnetic field. Also, in several cases, light (e.g. from car headlights or beaming spotlights) is reported to "bend" in front of the UFO, an effect which some suggest is related with the most controversial aspect of UFO reports: the apparent ability to disappear / "blink out" or seem to "implode" (diminish in angular size) [miniature-scale "gravitational lensing"-type phenomenon?].
Physiological effects on humans include: sunburn-type effect and eye irritation, extreme dryness of the nasal area and of the throat, color changes in vision, extreme headaches and a heating/burning sensation. Witnesses and animals have become sick and even died, with symptoms similar to radiation poisoning, after close approach to a UFO. Given the tremendous amount of energy UFOs seem to be expending, their power source is a big mystery.
Many ideas have been proposed, including that UFOs are storing energy in a very concentrated form, or converting gravity to usable energy (H.Oberth 1950s), or utilising ambient energy (speculations about being able to tap the so-called Zero-Point-Energy) or utilize remote transmission of power (wireless energy transfer).
It seems that UFOs defy our currently accepted Physics, e.g. the conservation of momentum (UFOs accelerate without throwing any material out the backside). Both Newton's gravity and General Relativity (Einstein's theory of gravitation), require the existence of "negative mass" (or energy) for antigravity to be possible. This has been a major hurdle to the study of UFOs by many "mainstream" physicists in previous decades (e.g. read Markowitz, W., "The Physics and Metaphysics of Unidentified Flying Objects", Science, Vol. 157, 1967).
My opinion: Having spent considerable time researching the UFO subject, it seems to me that the public scientific research most promising to be related to the UFO propulsion question, is the so-called Gravitomagnetism (the subject of field effects caused by moving matter, it has nothing to do with magnetism despite its name) and in particular any connection of gravitation with superconductivity, the purported "enhanced or boosted Gravitomagnetism". I am inclined to also include claims made in the 1990s by Russian materials scientist E.Podkletnov of "gravity shielding" effects when experimenting with rotating superconductors in a magnetic field, characterised "controversial" and apparently had a negative effect to his carreer.
In Mar-2006, an experiment by Austrian physicist M.Tajmar et al funded by ESA (European Space Agency), reported generation of a toroidal (tangential, azimuthal) gravitational field in a rotating accelerated (time dependent angular velocity) superconducting Niobium ring. My opinion stems from the fact that UFO literature since the 1940s consistently documents: 1/ direct gravity-like effects 2/ perception of rotation on UFOs, such as at the rim of saucer-/saturn-/sphere-shaped UFOs 3/ saucers flying in a manner as if the drive is acting perpendicular to the plane of the disk 4/ strong magnetic fields.
The commonly observed UFO shapes (disk, spheroid) are seemingly not chosen for aerodynamic purposes (considering when discoid UFOs want to fly away fast, they tilt and fly with the plane of the disk directed forward). Very early in the UFO study, there was the idea that "saucers do their business at the rim" (APRO, Hill), the same area which generally is reported to rotate and glow. However, in this page I provide links to other ideas on possible UFO propulsion which have been proposed over the years, such as Magneto[Hydro/Aero]Dynamics (the most popular), to Pulsed EM, to mag-lev type levitation.
Extract from Paul Hill's (NASA aeronautical engineer, bio) book "Unconventional Flying Objects: A Scientific Analysis" on UFO illumination (colors, brightness) and performance (acceleration). Review of Paul Hill's book by Hal Puthoff, PhD theoretical physicist:
"To the degree that the engineering characteristics of UFOs can be estimated by empirical observation, in this reviewer's opinion the above-referenced, recently-published book by Paul Hill provides the most reliable, concise summary of engineering-type data available.1 The data were compiled over decades of research by a Chief Scientist-Manager at NASA Langley Research Center2 who acted as an informal clearinghouse for UFO-related data. The strength of the compilation lies in its thoughtful separation of wheat from chaff, and the analysis of the former into coherent patterns, including detailed calculations. Perhaps surprising to the casually interested, under careful examination the observations, rather than defying the laws of physics as naive interpretation might suggest, instead appear to be solidly commensurate with them, as the following discussion shows."
One of the most consistently-observed characteristics of UFO flight is a ubiquitous pattern in which they tilt to perform all maneuvers. Specifically, they sit level to hover, tilt forward to move forward, tilt backward to stop, bank to turn, and descend by "falling-leaf" or "silver-dollar-wobble" motions. Detailed analysis by Hill shows that such motion is inconsistent with aerodynamic requirements, but totally consistent with some form of repulsive force-field propulsion. Not satisfied with paper analyses alone, Hill arranged to have various forms of jet-supported and rotor-supported circular flying platforms built and tested. Hill himself acted as test pilot in early, originally-classified, versions, and found the above motions the most economical for control purposes. Pictures of these platforms are included in the text.
In an effort to examine the force-field propulsion hypothesis yet further, Hill analyzed a number of cases involving near-field interactions with an apparent craft in which some form of force was in evidence. These include examples in which a person or vehicle was affected, tree branches were parted or broken, roof tiles were dislodged, objects were deflected and ground or water were disturbed. Under close analysis the subtleties of these interactions combine to point unequivocally to a repulsive force field surrounding the craft, while discriminating against propulsion mechanisms involving jet action, pure electric or magnetic effects, or the emission of energetic particles or radiation (although the latter may accompany the propulsive mechanism as a secondary effect). Further detailed investigation indicates that the particular form of force field propulsion that satisfied observational constraints is what Hill labels a directed acceleration field; that is, a field that is, in general, gravitational-like in nature, and, in particular, gravity-canceling.3 Such a field acts on all masses in its sphere of influence as does a gravitational field. Corollary to this conclusion is that observed accelerations ~100g relative to the environment could be sustained without on-board high-g forces.
See next post for page 2