Are UFOs 'Nuts & Bolts' Or Spiritual?

Georgek

George
Obviously you do, George. I'm not expressing opinions here I'm explaining well-trodden physics that you don't yet understand. I provided a key academic paper, Alcubierre's seminal 1994 paper about gravitational field propulsion, that explains the physics here in detail and with mathematical rigor. The Alcubierre metric within that paper is widely accepted as a theoretically valid mechanism for producing dramatic accelerations without any subjective g-forces for the craft or any occupants within it - if you read it that's what you'll find.


Gravity isn't a force, it's an acceleration field:
If gravity isn't a force, how does it accelerate objects? (Advanced) - Curious About Astronomy? Ask an Astronomer

It's useful to neglect considerations of atmospheric friction when discussing gravitation because it's totally unrelated, and it's pointless to get distracted with irrelevant details that only obscure the fundamental physics involved.


That's perfectly understandable flight behavior in the context of a gravitational field propulsion system. Maneuvers that would destroy any ordinary craft involving reaction propulsion, like rapid acute-angle maneuvers, would exert zero strain on a craft that's employing a spacetime propulsion system.


Okay apparently you know absolutely nothing about gravity. The range of gravitational fields is infinite, so there is no "above the Earth's pull." Spacecraft orbiting the planet are simply following the curved goedesic around the Earth - they're in free fall. Gravity provides the curvature in a satellite's trajectory. If they didn't keep falling around the planet - if they stopped relative to the Earth at any height - they would fall toward the Earth because the range of gravity is infinite.


No they're not. That's what I'm trying to explain to you, and it's clearly evident from the observations: UFOs/AAVs aren't using any form of reaction propulsion like a rocket or a missile or an airplane or a helicopter because there are no emissions or winds associated with their lift or their accelerations. The only method of reactionless propulsion - the kind of propulsion that we observe - is gravitational field propulsion. And none of the considerations of Newtonian physics apply to that form of propulsion, which is why it looks like "magic" to us.


It's not my opinion; it's a common feature in the literature, such as Paul Hill's brilliant 1995 book Unconventional Flying Objects: A Scientific Analysis. The most likely explanation for the absence of superheated air or sonic booms in UFO incidents is that the artificially generated gravitational field surrounding the craft and propelling it, also accelerates the air immediately surrounding the craft, producing a kind of atmospheric cushion that diffuses heat and prevents the formation of a shockwave.


No, it's an acceleration - see the Cornell University link above. Most first-year physics students understand this.


You're speaking in terms of Newtonian mechanics, which is obsolete in regard to gravitational fields. This is Einstein's geodesic equation which replaced our incorrect Newtonian equation of gravitation that was based on false assumptions such as "gravity is a force." General relativity showed us that gravity is actually an acceleration field generated by the metric curvature of spacetime, described by this equation:

View attachment 7236
Geodesic - Wikipedia

I think the leading reason why so many people mistakenly resort to superstitious/spiritual explanations of the UFO/AAV phenomenon is because most people (understandably) don't comprehend the advanced theoretical physics of gravitational field propulsion. So the behavior of UFOs/AAVs seems to defy "the laws of physics." But in reality, this is untrue: the performance characteristics of AAVs are a perfect one-to-one match for the theoretical predictions of a gravitational field propulsion system. It only seems exotic to us because we haven't yet learned to technologically engineer gravitational fields - so just as quantum teleportation would seem like magic to a 19th-century engineer, gravitational field propulsion seems like magic to a 20th-century engineer. But once you become familiar with the physics of gravitational fields and their propulsion applications, it's very sensible and well-modeled mathematically. And one day we too will learn how to build gravitational field propulsion devices that exhibit the exact same performance characteristics that we're seeing in our skies, and that technology will throw open the door to the stars and spawn the age of superluminal manned interstellar exploration.

You know something Mr Morrison, I find your replies extremely rude and offensive.

Especially how you insinuate that I know nothing about gravitation.

I spent years at university having gained the highest qualifications at degree level and you do not discus your points, but merely try and denounce others who have already proven their worth as to substantiate your own theories.

The correct method is to discus/explain or ignore a post not denounce a person' reputability

I assure you, that I had studied gravitation, Laplace, differentiation , integration and up Level III at high standard mathematics up to MSc level in engineering. My qualifications are here on this forum.

I had attended 3 years at Demontfort University, One year at Trent University whilst gaining computers skills in C&G \HND and practical engineering 228 advanced.

I had learnt everything about propulsion systems, materials and even Einstein's relativity and beyond.

What makes it insulting, is that you come along from nowhere and insult me!

What the heck gives you the right to rattle on about a subject of hypothetical values and extreme mind boggling thoughts and treat others as idiots who challenge your authority???
I am hearing:- "Clear evidence...blah..blah" Do you not have thoughts of your own and debate what YOU think instead of condemning others on what is clear to you?

What YouTube says....
Who cares a sod?

Have you got no points of your own which is not cut in stone, that you can discus, except challenging others to believe in what you believe?
You rattle on like a dictionary...years of reading from books, YouTube and so on.

How about 'The Thoughts of Mr Morrison' ?

I would normally be happy to discus some of your points...but the more I read about you, the greater disrespect I have and what the 'powers that be had said'

No doubt I am gonna get told off for this...and I say this without being egoistic...so here I end my discussion with you.

You are just beginning to annoy me and the few choice words that I may be thinking, I would rather just walk away from your debate.

George
 
You know something Mr Morrison, I find your replies extremely rude and offensive.

Especially how you insinuate that I know nothing about gravitation.

I spent years at university having gained the highest qualifications at degree level and you do not discus your points, but merely try and denounce others who have already proven their worth as to substantiate your own theories.

The correct method is to discus/explain or ignore a post not denounce a person' reputability

I assure you, that I had studied gravitation, Laplace, differentiation , integration and up Level III at high standard mathematics up to MSc level in engineering. My qualifications are here on this forum.

I had attended 3 years at Demontfort University, One year at Trent University whilst gaining computers skills in C&G \HND and practical engineering 228 advanced.

I had learnt everything about propulsion systems, materials and even Einstein's relativity and beyond.

What makes it insulting, is that you come along from nowhere and insult me!

What the heck gives you the right to rattle on about a subject of hypothetical values and extreme mind boggling thoughts and treat others as idiots who challenge your authority???
I am hearing:- "Clear evidence...blah..blah" Do you not have thoughts of your own and debate what YOU think instead of condemning others on what is clear to you?

What YouTube says....
Who cares a sod?

Have you got no points of your own which is not cut in stone, that you can discus, except challenging others to believe in what you believe?
You rattle on like a dictionary...years of reading from books, YouTube and so on.

How about 'The Thoughts of Mr Morrison' ?

I would normally be happy to discus some of your points...but the more I read about you, the greater disrespect I have and what the 'powers that be had said'

No doubt I am gonna get told off for this...and I say this without being egoistic...so here I end my discussion with you.

You are just beginning to annoy me and the few choice words that I may be thinking, I would rather just walk away from your debate.

George
Wow, lol.
 

pigfarmer

tall, thin, irritable
I'm hoping this 'soft disclosure' is for real and that one day soon we'll be invited aboard an alien craft, only to discover that it's powered my a magical piece of cheese that transported them from dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity; the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition ......
 

Georgek

George
Wow indeed lol...

...
I don't see what is so funny 'nivek'?

I always stick up for myself and I do not like bullies....
There is no one laughing apart from you and him.

I like a bit of respect and it is called 'one's hard earned pride' not ego.
We work hard for what we achieve and no one has the right to destroy another person's self esteem and persona.
Without being personal to the gentleman, I used to come across this rabble many years ago. It often consist of hollow none viable self opinionated junk that is available on YouTube.
There is no logic as they take valid understandable points to captivate audiences and then pile it with a load of self appointed junk..hoping others will not understand.

It is called Directive Manipulation. I have got passed the stage that I need training.

You make the rules and we try and stick to them.
We give our hard work, time and devotion and want nothing more than respect in return.
You want him...you got him.

I have better things to do, so let us hope this does not continue.
 
Last edited:

nivek

As Above So Below
I do not see any bullies here, laughing lightens the mood, changes the atmosphere, but it seems you prefer to stay with negativity...

...
 

nivek

As Above So Below
It is called Directive Manipulation.

Nonsense, all I read here was a bit of debating and offering/pointing out relevant and factual information, sorry that conflicts with personal belief systems, facts tend to do that sometimes but in any diverse atmosphere such as this place there can be some friction on occasion, cooler heads prevail, remember the topic is nuts and bolts or spiritual UFOs...

...
 

michael59

Celestial
I'm hoping this 'soft disclosure' is for real and that one day soon we'll be invited aboard an alien craft, only to discover that it's powered my a magical piece of cheese that transported them from dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity; the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition ......

Hmmm, craft, cheese, soft disclosure? I smell a conspiracy here somewhere.

I think I'll have some KD for lunch today. I'm craving it for some odd reason or another. :D
 

Georgek

George
I do not see any bullies here, laughing lightens the mood, changes the atmosphere, but it seems you prefer to stay with negativity...

...
Well I assume this applies to you as well 'nivek'?

Or do we have different rules on who's who?

I respect myself and if that be negativity...so be it.
The term is 'laughing with you'...not laughing at you.
 

Georgek

George
Nonsense, all I read here was a bit of debating and offering/pointing out relevant and factual information, sorry that conflicts with personal belief systems, facts tend to do that sometimes but in any diverse atmosphere such as this place there can be some friction on occasion, cooler heads prevail, remember the topic is nuts and bolts or spiritual UFOs...

...

That is my whole point 'nivek'.

Anyone can read a book. People should learn to think for themselves. Hearing some rabble on YouTube is not really constructive debate.

I learnt my discipline correctly. Endorsed by moderators and examiners...and has nothing to do with a personal belief system.
To be told that I am ignorant and know nothing about gravitation is a direct insult towards both the education system and myself.

Ia m not sure what job you are in, but I am pretty sure if someone degraded your authority that you would also feel insulted.

You own a forum and I am also convinced that if someone here degraded YOUR status and laughed at YOU, then they would not be here long

You may think that this is different, but no one would respect you as an administrator and your forum would probably 'fall to bits'

We all command respect and when we are degraded, we not only lose our respect, but lose our 'voice' and become a laugh for others.

Having a cool head is what I have. I say what I think and there is nothing what I said then, what I would not say now.

There are very people I will allow write to me in this way...and Mr Morrison comes nowhere near.
It is called 'self respect'
Not ego or self esteem but RESPECT.

The topic is indeed nuts and bolts or spiritual UFOs and does not include personal member attacks.It is my views that are debated...not ME!
 

Georgek

George
I have said all I need to say on both this subject and the matter involved as don't wish to fall out with people.
Thank you very much....
 

spacecase0

earth human
I have said all I need to say on both this subject and the matter involved as don't wish to fall out with people.
Thank you very much....
I seek the truth
you apparently seek for your opinion to be correct.
Thomas R. Morrison heckled me from posting my ideas publicly (and seems way more accepting of new ideas after I quit posting)
so I have some issues there, but mostly because I have personally seen things he has not.
but you are another matter.
you seem to deny physical reality or theory.
I guess you are entitled to your opinion,
but what does your opinion really mean when it can be proven wrong in physical tests and in theory ?
your opinion shows me that you have no interest in the truth at all.
or did I get it wrong ?
do you have some reason why physical tests and theory are not matching what you say ?
or is this insistence that UFOs must be a mystery and that we have no hope of figuring them out despite theory AND physical tests ?
I urge you to go start looking into what is going on.
my opinion has never mattered to me when I am doing science. and your opinion should not matter to your search for truth either.

on a side note,
I see where most people are at with "science"
at this point if I figure it all out and can prove it,
I am unlikely to share it.
I am done linking to where the data points or trying to show it to others.
and I site my earlier post where I linked to theory and what is said to be leaked data.
from the reply, seems as if I was told that the "leaked data" was unreliable,
and the implication was that the theory must also be wrong...
this reminds me of logic, and how most people have given up on it.
and that debunking has always been an emotional attack on logic.
and if it were not so, it would be called disproof.
so why should I not just make money on ideas and not share what will clearly be hated even with hard proof ?

to get to my point,
Georgek,
sorry to tell you,
but your opinion as far as UFO maneuverability can be disproved entirely.
Thomas R. Morrison tried to do so, and likely did for everyone else reading this thread other than you.
if you don't wish to fall out with people,
try to look at the point of view they have, or at least the physical experiments that have been run in the past.
if you are going to talk physics, at least look at how reality works in front of your eyes.
now I still have issue with the point of view of Thomas R. Morrison, so don't think I am supporting his point of view entirely,
but on this topic, please trust me that you need to look into it a bit more, or at least if you are looking for the truth at all.
 

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
The true thing about Forums is this, I've lost a lot of debates over these years, But, Debates are at their very essence a contest of sorts. No one involved has done anything wrong or wrongly. George is justified to stand his ground and Thomas is justified to stand his, And Nivek was simply showing through example that laughter isn't sometimes something you do at another person, Or with another person, Laughter is sometimes something one does to show that The situation, Which was not a very big situation, Should be Laughed off, Shaken off.

The only real mistake someone at forums can ever make, And I learned this so many times from experience if to take situations personal or too seriously. Consider, No matter what someone's intentions are with the things they imply, They can't possibly know another individual or where they're coming from based on a few posts. So it's literally impossible for something on forums to be personal really.

I've made every mistake possible at forums, But Is winning experience is losing experience? or is, the experience itself experience?


The best solution to any problem ever, Is to always laugh it off, Because We all know the truth, The sad cold truth, The real honest fact is, The only opinions that ever really matter, is our own.

Shake it off, Show your game face, And never allow someone to get under your skin.

Now I don't want people upset at me, I don't I could have just kept my mouth shut, But, It's clear that bitterness and conflict are in fact bubbling, and that honestly needs to stop. SO, I'm not giving anyone any outs to say shadow it's not like that, IT is, And it needs to stop. because all any of us do when we conflict is disgrace ourselves, Because of how unnecessary it is. in an environment of higher education.

Game on.
 
Last edited:

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
Pride and Ego may be different things, personally, I feel that they are somewhat closely related, either way, If a person walked around with their Pride or their Ego out in the open, Eventually it will get offended. It's just logic.
 

nivek

As Above So Below
Well I assume this applies to you as well 'nivek'?

Or do we have different rules on who's who?

I respect myself and if that be negativity...so be it.
The term is 'laughing with you'...not laughing at you.

No the meaning of lol is laughing out loud, so to assume I was laughing AT you instead of just laughing out loud is a ridiculous notion for you to assume...

You could have reported a post and and/or PMed me any issues you have instead of derailing this thread...

...
 

Shadowprophet

Truthiness
No the term for lol is laughing out loud, so to assume I was laughing AT you instead of just laughing out loud is a ridiculous notion for you to assume...

You could have reported a post and and/or PMed me any issues you have instead of derailing this thread...

...
I probably contributed to the derailment myself, I don't do that intentionally, My brain flips channels a lot.

I'm not calling sides on this, I've just learned from experience, Most of the time, When I have a problem, It's because I got unnecessarily offended. I don't speak from accusations on this issue, I speak from just having been through it a lot.

Becoming easily offended, Is usually how any dispute begins. I've been working on that same problem for literal years. Thicker skins make better friends. <--- new saying, It may not stick lol
 

nivek

As Above So Below
Pride and Ego may be different things, personally, I feel that they are somewhat closely related, either way, If a person walked around with their Pride or their Ego out in the open, Eventually it will get offended. It's just logic.

Pride is how you strut your Ego lol or project it, at least that is how I view it...

...
 

Georgek

George
I seek the truth
you apparently seek for your opinion to be correct.
Thomas R. Morrison heckled me from posting my ideas publicly (and seems way more accepting of new ideas after I quit posting)
so I have some issues there, but mostly because I have personally seen things he has not.
but you are another matter.
you seem to deny physical reality or theory.
I guess you are entitled to your opinion,
but what does your opinion really mean when it can be proven wrong in physical tests and in theory ?
your opinion shows me that you have no interest in the truth at all.
or did I get it wrong ?
do you have some reason why physical tests and theory are not matching what you say ?
or is this insistence that UFOs must be a mystery and that we have no hope of figuring them out despite theory AND physical tests ?
I urge you to go start looking into what is going on.
my opinion has never mattered to me when I am doing science. and your opinion should not matter to your search for truth either.

on a side note,
I see where most people are at with "science"
at this point if I figure it all out and can prove it,
I am unlikely to share it.
I am done linking to where the data points or trying to show it to others.
and I site my earlier post where I linked to theory and what is said to be leaked data.
from the reply, seems as if I was told that the "leaked data" was unreliable,
and the implication was that the theory must also be wrong...
this reminds me of logic, and how most people have given up on it.
and that debunking has always been an emotional attack on logic.
and if it were not so, it would be called disproof.
so why should I not just make money on ideas and not share what will clearly be hated even with hard proof ?

to get to my point,
Georgek,
sorry to tell you,
but your opinion as far as UFO maneuverability can be disproved entirely.
Thomas R. Morrison tried to do so, and likely did for everyone else reading this thread other than you.
if you don't wish to fall out with people,
try to look at the point of view they have, or at least the physical experiments that have been run in the past.
if you are going to talk physics, at least look at how reality works in front of your eyes.
now I still have issue with the point of view of Thomas R. Morrison, so don't think I am supporting his point of view entirely,
but on this topic, please trust me that you need to look into it a bit more, or at least if you are looking for the truth at all.

Without going on about the matter in question, I am quite prepared to discuss my theorise but I do not like to
be insulted . I know that I have turned out to be the 'bad guy' as often happens when a person refuses top be bullied and sticks up for themselves.

There is a correct and wrong way to have a conversation, and one way is not to intimidate a person because his views are in opposition.
It is very difficult for this generation to differentiate between self respect and egoism. Society trains people to shut their mouths and hence tro be easily controlled. Destroying a person's persona because a person cannot communicate correctly, is not enhancing their viewpoint, it is merely trying to put another person into worthlessness.This does not strengthen their argument, it merely suggests that their view point is weak.

In the worst case scenario it is called intimidation.

The reason I say this is because Mr Morrison does not tackle a person's points on his own thinking alone, but instead destroys something that that person had worked hard for and had gained outstanding recognition.
It goes beyond opinion because it is certified by LAW as correct through an examining board, lecturers and moderators.

It is pretty much like saying that the administrator of this forum is not fit to run it. That person would be equally insulted but there is bone rule for one person and another rule for another.

Moving on to the matter in hand about physical or spiritual UFOs ...of course it is all opinionated. How can I sasy otherwise?

If I was to give my reasons for thinking this way, I would say that I base it on my own experience as being number one priority.

The second reason is that I had been taught in mechanical science that nothing material can withstand forces thaat are indicated when people see UFOs.

Especially sudden right angled turns.

George
 

Georgek

George
No the meaning of lol is laughing out loud, so to assume I was laughing AT you instead of just laughing out loud is a ridiculous notion for you to assume...

You could have reported a post and and/or PMed me any issues you have instead of derailing this thread...

...
Remind me to do this when someone is in distressed?

As truly I was very peeved.

When someone laughs at the distress of others, whether it is personal or broad like...it is offensive.

I was not distraught enough to treat it as a complaint. It was a 'knee jerk' reaction and hence forgotten and ignored until I read your 'lol'
That man is just a bit of indigestion (personally)...nothing more as far as I am/was concerned
 

Georgek

George
I seek the truth
you apparently seek for your opinion to be correct.
Thomas R. Morrison heckled me from posting my ideas publicly (and seems way more accepting of new ideas after I quit posting)
so I have some issues there, but mostly because I have personally seen things he has not.
but you are another matter.
you seem to deny physical reality or theory.
I guess you are entitled to your opinion,
but what does your opinion really mean when it can be proven wrong in physical tests and in theory ?
your opinion shows me that you have no interest in the truth at all.
or did I get it wrong ?
do you have some reason why physical tests and theory are not matching what you say ?
or is this insistence that UFOs must be a mystery and that we have no hope of figuring them out despite theory AND physical tests ?
I urge you to go start looking into what is going on.
my opinion has never mattered to me when I am doing science. and your opinion should not matter to your search for truth either.

on a side note,
I see where most people are at with "science"
at this point if I figure it all out and can prove it,
I am unlikely to share it.
I am done linking to where the data points or trying to show it to others.
and I site my earlier post where I linked to theory and what is said to be leaked data.
from the reply, seems as if I was told that the "leaked data" was unreliable,
and the implication was that the theory must also be wrong...
this reminds me of logic, and how most people have given up on it.
and that debunking has always been an emotional attack on logic.
and if it were not so, it would be called disproof.
so why should I not just make money on ideas and not share what will clearly be hated even with hard proof ?

to get to my point,
Georgek,
sorry to tell you,
but your opinion as far as UFO maneuverability can be disproved entirely.
Thomas R. Morrison tried to do so, and likely did for everyone else reading this thread other than you.
if you don't wish to fall out with people,
try to look at the point of view they have, or at least the physical experiments that have been run in the past.
if you are going to talk physics, at least look at how reality works in front of your eyes.
now I still have issue with the point of view of Thomas R. Morrison, so don't think I am supporting his point of view entirely,
but on this topic, please trust me that you need to look into it a bit more, or at least if you are looking for the truth at all.

Hello spacecase0,

Let us forget about the gentleman in question...and about his attitude...from experience these things get turned around and sooner or later the aggressor becomes the victim.

Personally, I do not wish to make a hero out of him. Let others do that.

The main points in question, is that I speak from experience . Mr Morrison does not have a point of view...but perhaps his YouTube and books may have?


I had always understood the philosophy that members are here to exchange ideas. What seems to be happening nowadays is that members watch all these geek videos on YouTube and ram it down the throat of others.

This is not seeking their opinion but some geek who had a little bit of knowledge, captivated his audience and then comes up with a load of crap by baffling with science.

If I recollect, there was this other video shown here about this guy who recons that telepathy comes about through tiny signals from the brain and started using artificial 'add ons' to stipulate his point. What a load of rubbish. It had nothing to do with mental telepathy-only how the brain worked controlling movement.

You make a point about UFOs being 'nut's and bolts' but throughout my life, I had never come across this. It does not mean that I am incorrect..merely that I find it not possible based on my mechanical learning.

I stipulate the point over and over again and have the support of any mechanical engineer regarding material overload, stress and distortion on known and unknown materials.

It is a simple rule of mechanics, that no physical object can withstand the stress of right angled manoeuvres in our atmosphere. It has nothing to do with 'free-fall' as we are not talking about inside a craft, but OUTSIDE .
Energy cannot be created or destroyed and merely transfers from one state to another. There has to be some physical structure with UFOs to a degree otherwise they could not interact with our atmosphere. The only way they could appear is by reducing their mass to around 99.9%
Heck..it is common sense if nothing else.

People are under the impression that UFOs are something from Buck Rogers. That we are the masters of the universe and everything has to fit into our thinking and we work around science to fit our ideas.
Their points are often 'hollow'with no maths but everything to defy the natural laws of our science as to adapt to some geek's visualisation of what they want to believe.

I got good grades in my science because I talked sense. Not only that, but I was able to prove using analytical maths including Einstein's laws of physics.

These geeks often come along, making out that they know everything from things that they had read. When challenged, they realise that their points are weak, so instead they try and destroy a person's credibility similar to your own case.

Professional people do not act like that. You normally get them in the lower levels and by the time they reach a higher standard in education, they get 'blown out' unable to cope and are left with a load of 'rattle' with no maths-science or method of communicating correctly. You want me to disown what I had learnt and passed to listen to all that I had rejected?

but your opinion as far as UFO maneuverability can be disproved entirely.

Okay ..just talk...then prove it! You cannot. Show me maths. You accept aan idea with no foundation because it fits into your way of thinking...that is all.

I can write you page after page(at least I used to) of mathematical formulas juxtaposing relative sequences by taking a figure and then proving it to arrive at the same answer.

Anyway..that is not the point. Believe all what you wish. You are entitle to your ideas and I to my knowledge. As knowledge it is.

So far I have not read any point of view !!

All I am reading is about what some geek had said and done and disappeared into oblivion having made a few quid on YouTube.
Do I come up with these things?

NO!

What you read about is MY POINT OF VIEW not that of others.

I give you the facts from my experience and you can all make up your own minds.

But that does not give the right for others to destroy a person's integrity to gratify their own opinions by trying to destroy my qualifications.

do you have some reason why physical tests and theory are not matching what you say ?

Yes..I will show you after I hve had my coffee soon.

George
 
Last edited:
Top