Spaceman spiff
Noble
Space represented there as large landmass, sorry. Hope everyone got my point. Cant edit anymore, stupid time limits...
Arguments Against ETH
- Thread starter humanoidlord
- Start date
- Copy link Copy link
Space represented there as large landmass, sorry. Hope everyone got my point. Cant edit anymore, stupid time limits...
Dejan Corovic
As above, so bellow
Of course it was solved. NASA did this plane with ultra long very spiky nose. If you think of Concorde's nose, than 3-4 times longer.
As I said plasma project by Soviets was abandoned because it would make plane glow and be visible without radar. It turned out not to be solution, so there is no point offering it to military, because they know about it.
Here is Wikipedia link Plasma stealth - Wikipedia
On Wikipedia they talk relatively little about use of plasma to reduce drag and possibly sonic boom. But here is something similar that an US company has patented:
Plasma Stream | Drag reduction technology
Your model is wrong. Meteors consist of variety of organic and inorganic compounds. When meteors heat up in atmosphere these compounds start turning into gas and that gas is what you see as a tail. It's a plasma, but it is not bonded to the meteorite, just loose material falling off.
Contrary to that plasma on UFO is bonded by strong electric field. That bond prevents plasma from detaching and forming tail.
Dejan Corovic
As above, so bellow
Of course it was solved. NASA did this plane with ultra long very spiky nose. If you think of Concorde's nose, than 3-4 times longer.
As I said plasma project by Soviets was abandoned because it would make plane glow and be visible without radar. It turned out not to be solution, so there is no point offering it to military, because they know about it.
Here is Wikipedia article on plasma stealth:
Plasma stealth - Wikipedia
In Wikipedia article there is only little about canceling drag and possibly sonic boom with plasma. But there is this US company that patented technology based on the same principles:
Plasma Stream | Drag reduction technology
Your model is wrong. Meteors consist of variety of organic and inorganic compounds. When meteors heat up in atmosphere these compounds start turning into gas and that gas is what you see as a tail. It's a plasma but it is not bonded to the meteorite, just loose material falling off.
Contrary to that plasma on UFO is bonded by strong electric field. That bond prevents plasma from forming tail.
Last edited:
humanoidlord
ce3 researcher
you know, this sentence is quite contradictory, like "cold lava"
Dejan Corovic
As above, so bellow
You are on a good track. There is a scientific paper that delivers the same message but more accurately. Make yourself your favorite drink over the weekend and spend half an hour digging deeper into this paper. The way to read science papers is to skip formulas and read only paragraphs that are easy to understand
:https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1509/1509.02832.pdf
nivek
As Above So Below
Thanks but I typically read science papers from a spiritual point of view, as above so below, the formulas then become alive before me and are the first parts that grasp my attention...
...
No.
1.) That plane hasn’t been built: NASA hands massive supersonic contract to Lockheed Martin, with one catch: No sonic boom
2.) It reduces the sonic shockwave by half – it doesn’t eliminate it.
We're not talking about radar invisibility, so this stuff is irrelevant.
There's nothing about sonic booms on that Wikipedia page. And plasma can reduce drag; it doesn't cancel it. At Mach 31 that's an important distinction.
They're reducing drag on shipping trucks by preventing vortexes from forming behind the truck trailer, big deal.
AAVs darting across the sky at 24K mph with no plasma trail is an entirely different situation.
Your understanding is wrong. You don't need any material to be emitted from a hypersonic object moving through the atmosphere to see the blazing trail of plasma that it makes as it moves - that's why craft like the Space Shuttle look like a meteor upon re-entry: the rate of motion through the atmosphere compresses the air, heating it to incandescent temperatures, which leaves a long trail of glowing plasma behind the craft:
"Why does this happen? The air gets heated by the Orbiter’s ramming the atmosphere at 20+ times the speed of sound. And contrary to popular belief, it’s not friction that heats the air, but compression. When you compress a gas it heats up (like when a bicycle pump gets hot when you use it a lot), and the Orbiter is screaming through the atmosphere at hypersonic speeds. That compresses the air a lot. A shock wave forms in front of the Orbiter, and the air begins to glow as it gets heated up to temperatures as high as 1260° C (2300° F)."
Source: The fiery descent of Atlantis... seen from space! - Bad Astronomy
AAVs move at those velocities yet produce no such trail of superheated incandescent plasma in their wake. You're suggesting creating plasma on the surface of the craft to reduce the atmospheric drag. But to reduce the drag that much, at those speeds, would require the production of the same kind of superheated plasma, which would also leave a trail behind the craft. So your solution solves nothing, and doesn't explain this signature performance characteristic of AAVs. But my explanation does.
You can't "bond" plasma to a craft with an electric field because plasma has a net zero electric charge: it's composed of both positive and negative charges in equal measure. All you can do is continually convert the atmospheric gas into plasma and let it flow away.
Even the flow of plasma is notoriously difficult to control with any precision. That's why we don't have fusion reactors powering our energy sector right now: it's the most unstable and chaotic form of matter.
I hate this "plasma solves everything!" kick that you're on right now. It may be one factor - perhaps AAVs do use it for radar stealth, for example. But I can't see how it explains any of the key performance characteristics of AAV propulsion, ranging from radical accelerations to silent hovering directly over eyewitnesses with no downward air movement, to hypersonic motion with no sonic boom or visible propulsion signature of any kind, and it sure as hell can't explain interstellar travel.
Plasma is not a magic bullet that can explain the key signature performance characteristics of AAVs. Magnetoaerodynamics can be used for propulsion purposes, but it's really just another primitive application of reaction propulsion, and therefore unsuitable as an explanation for the most common types of AAV maneuvers. Gravitational field propulsion, on the other hand, explains all of the key performance characteristics of AAVs perfectly. No other explanation even comes close to doing that.
Last edited:
pigfarmer
tall, thin, irritable
Actually it was not a comment on anything technical. Maybe an Office Space reference is too esoteric for a global audience.
Lots of hay being made here out of very little.
Now is about time for meta materials. Some gristle to chew on.
Last edited:
Dejan Corovic
As above, so bellow
Yes, both charges are there in equal measure, but not in equal mass. Relatively heavy positive ions in atmosphere like oxygen, nitrogen can easily be 10,000 heavier than little punny electrons, because proton is 1,800 times heavier than electron. And that is crucial factor here. If UFO's hull is positive it would attract tiny electrons and push away large and heavy positive ions and reduce air pressure in the direction of motion. Reduced air pressure would eliminate sonic boom, because you can't have boom in vacuum. Columb's law can't be wrong, like charges must repel.
Example with space shuttle doesn't apply here because Shuttle was not creating electric field around itself.
Electric field from UFO hull creates near vacuum around ufo, so atmosphere never heats up into plasma.
Yes, we are talking about stealth because radar invisibility is one of 5 physically correlated indications that plasma accompanies UFOs, that I listed in previous post. All indications fit into electrodynamics as a hand into a glove.
That is as good as it gets.
I mean Paul Hill would really be proud of us. He did mechanics, I did electrodynamics and you did Relativity. We have everything from beginning to the end.
I never said that. Plasma solves nothing, just some minor issues which they would be able to solve by multitude of other technical means. In a big picture, after one crosses interstellar void sonic booms and radar invisibility look quite like trifle issues.
Plasma is NOT part of gravitational propulsion, merely a byproduct. As we discussed many times before likely process is that they start with electricity, than pump EM energy into UFO hull's metamaterial and in some currently unknown way trigger some quantum process that manipulates gravity.
Plasma is probably just escaping while they are pumping EM energy into hull. Nothing more. And they opportunistically use it to take care of few minor tech. issues, like sonic booms and radar invisibility.
pigfarmer
tall, thin, irritable
Had a look at Tom DeLonge and TTSA on Twitter. I don't use Twitter but was curious to see if there had been any follow up to the hint DeLonge recently dropped, so for those that do this is old news.
A post Jan 23 that shows a public response from DIA and DoD's document list for AATIPs List of Studies. All were unclassified except #37. In this thread I wondered what Paul Bennewitz may have stumbled upon and the bright ideas Leik Myrabo had and isn't #37 interesting?
A post Jan 23 that shows a public response from DIA and DoD's document list for AATIPs List of Studies. All were unclassified except #37. In this thread I wondered what Paul Bennewitz may have stumbled upon and the bright ideas Leik Myrabo had and isn't #37 interesting?
Dejan Corovic
As above, so bellow
Just found another brilliant scientific paper going into great depth about electromagnetic effects:
A Preliminary Study of Sixty Four Pilot Sighting Reports Involving Alleged Electro-Magnetic Effects on Aircraft Systems
NATIONAL AVIATION REPORTING CENTER ON ANOMALOUS PHENOMENA
This preliminary report presents the findings of a comprehensive review of over fifty years of pilot reports in which permanent or transient electro-magnetic (EM) effects occurred on in-flight aircraft systems allegedly as a direct or indirect result of the relatively near presence of one or more unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP). From a total of 1,300 reports sixty four (5%) were found that involved E-M effects. Of these, thirty three (3 %) case reports contained 58 different E-M effects that fit the authors’ level 1 (highest) acceptance criteria. Of these cases, the (fundamental) aircraft system most frequently affected was electrical (46 cases; 79%) followed by power plant (4 cases; 6%), on-board radar contact (4 cases; 6%), and miscellaneous (3 cases; 5%). Of the forty six electrical system interference cases the radio’s function was affected most often (18 cases; 39%) followed by compass reading errors in 12 cases (26%). In general, it was found that general aviation aircraft were more likely to be affected than commercial or military type aircraft. The most commonly reported UAP shape is round or oval. Interestingly, most of the E-M effects occurred when the UAP was nearby the aircraft. These findings are potentially important and deserve further in-depth study and confirmation by obtaining additional high quality aviation reports.
So far we've got 448 EM cases from Mark Rodegheir, plus here 64 new ones from Richard Haines. Total of 512 physical EM cases. That makes EM cases more numerous than any other observed physical UFO effect.
But when one digs into Aircraft cases there are lots of individual differences. In one case compass was spinning, in another case compass was pointing to UFO. Both can be explained. First one was caused by alternating magnetic field, second by static field. So UFOs have different flight modes, maybe switching gears...
A Preliminary Study of Sixty Four Pilot Sighting Reports Involving Alleged Electro-Magnetic Effects on Aircraft Systems
NATIONAL AVIATION REPORTING CENTER ON ANOMALOUS PHENOMENA
This preliminary report presents the findings of a comprehensive review of over fifty years of pilot reports in which permanent or transient electro-magnetic (EM) effects occurred on in-flight aircraft systems allegedly as a direct or indirect result of the relatively near presence of one or more unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP). From a total of 1,300 reports sixty four (5%) were found that involved E-M effects. Of these, thirty three (3 %) case reports contained 58 different E-M effects that fit the authors’ level 1 (highest) acceptance criteria. Of these cases, the (fundamental) aircraft system most frequently affected was electrical (46 cases; 79%) followed by power plant (4 cases; 6%), on-board radar contact (4 cases; 6%), and miscellaneous (3 cases; 5%). Of the forty six electrical system interference cases the radio’s function was affected most often (18 cases; 39%) followed by compass reading errors in 12 cases (26%). In general, it was found that general aviation aircraft were more likely to be affected than commercial or military type aircraft. The most commonly reported UAP shape is round or oval. Interestingly, most of the E-M effects occurred when the UAP was nearby the aircraft. These findings are potentially important and deserve further in-depth study and confirmation by obtaining additional high quality aviation reports.
So far we've got 448 EM cases from Mark Rodegheir, plus here 64 new ones from Richard Haines. Total of 512 physical EM cases. That makes EM cases more numerous than any other observed physical UFO effect.
But when one digs into Aircraft cases there are lots of individual differences. In one case compass was spinning, in another case compass was pointing to UFO. Both can be explained. First one was caused by alternating magnetic field, second by static field. So UFOs have different flight modes, maybe switching gears...
Last edited:
Spaceman spiff
Noble
As for arguments against ET there is one particular fly in this ointment. Namely the Fermi Paradox.
Lets look at it and some of the possible answers and explanations:
Question: Why has Earth remained so seemingly untouched.
Humans are a recent comer to this planet, how ever life has existed here for billions of years, and presumably out there too. If intelligent life has also been around billions of years, why has no one seemingly come down here and colonized the place?
Answer: They havent found us yet.
Problem: Theyve had billions of years time to.
Answer: Someone at some point got here and removed the previous residents. Time erased all traces.
Problem: Speculation, no evidence.
Answer: Someone got here and hid this planet from sensors, so it appears dead to all who search, except the first comers.
Problem: Speculation, no evidence.
Answer: Theres some interference rule established, long before intelligent life even appeared here. A sanctuary law that later became a sort of "prime directive" law.
Problem: Speculation, no evidence, only takes one law breaker to render moot.
Answer: Intelligent life is going through its first wave in the cosmos, no one has simply had time to come here yet. Oldest civilizations are a couple of million years old, and none are from the Milky Way.
Problem: Speculation, universe is very old.
Answer: Were inside some sort of quaranteened world or virtual reality
Problem: Speculation, no evidence.
Question: If there are Kardashev scale 3 civilizations out there, why cant we see traces of astro engineering, Dyson spheres etc. ?
Answer: Perhaps there are none in this galaxy. Perhaps distant galaxies have them, but with light lag theyre impossible to detect at this point.
Answer: Dyson spheres and swarms are for some reason not possible or otherwise unfeasible to build. Perhaps there are more efficient ways. Perhaps more the civilization advances the less traces it leaves.
Downer answers:
Intelligent life is a huge fluke. Were the first or perhaps only civilization in this galaxy or perhaps the universe.
Civilizations come about, but 99.9 percent of them end up destroying themselves or otherwise not passing the great filter. Including us soon.
Some predator civilization which hides destroys them all at some point.
All of them end up spending their lives in a constructed virtual world of their own and forget the real one.
Interstellar travel is very hard, too unfeasible or impossible.
Lets look at it and some of the possible answers and explanations:
Question: Why has Earth remained so seemingly untouched.
Humans are a recent comer to this planet, how ever life has existed here for billions of years, and presumably out there too. If intelligent life has also been around billions of years, why has no one seemingly come down here and colonized the place?
Answer: They havent found us yet.
Problem: Theyve had billions of years time to.
Answer: Someone at some point got here and removed the previous residents. Time erased all traces.
Problem: Speculation, no evidence.
Answer: Someone got here and hid this planet from sensors, so it appears dead to all who search, except the first comers.
Problem: Speculation, no evidence.
Answer: Theres some interference rule established, long before intelligent life even appeared here. A sanctuary law that later became a sort of "prime directive" law.
Problem: Speculation, no evidence, only takes one law breaker to render moot.
Answer: Intelligent life is going through its first wave in the cosmos, no one has simply had time to come here yet. Oldest civilizations are a couple of million years old, and none are from the Milky Way.
Problem: Speculation, universe is very old.
Answer: Were inside some sort of quaranteened world or virtual reality
Problem: Speculation, no evidence.
Question: If there are Kardashev scale 3 civilizations out there, why cant we see traces of astro engineering, Dyson spheres etc. ?
Answer: Perhaps there are none in this galaxy. Perhaps distant galaxies have them, but with light lag theyre impossible to detect at this point.
Answer: Dyson spheres and swarms are for some reason not possible or otherwise unfeasible to build. Perhaps there are more efficient ways. Perhaps more the civilization advances the less traces it leaves.
Downer answers:
Intelligent life is a huge fluke. Were the first or perhaps only civilization in this galaxy or perhaps the universe.
Civilizations come about, but 99.9 percent of them end up destroying themselves or otherwise not passing the great filter. Including us soon.
Some predator civilization which hides destroys them all at some point.
All of them end up spending their lives in a constructed virtual world of their own and forget the real one.
Interstellar travel is very hard, too unfeasible or impossible.
Last edited:
wwkirk
Divine
To my knowledge, this would be the most prominent mainstream scientific answer.
The Fermi Paradox is founded on a false premise; namely, that thousands of credible eyewitnesses and radar operators haven’t seen highly anomalous objects navigating terrestrial airspace. Somehow…it seems that with his nose buried in experiments and paperwork at LANL back in 1950…Fermi was oblivious to the waves of unexplained sightings transpiring all around the world and sensitive installations such as his own lab, and the various military research projects set up to investigate them.
But anyone who’s bothered to study this subject for ten minutes can see that Fermi’s question only revealed his total unawareness of the world around him. Credible reports have been flooding in from all around the world for at least 70 years which indicate that we are being visited with a striking frequency by a wide variety of anomalous devices, and even the Pentagon concluded that they don’t originate from any known terrestrial inventory.
This always reminds me of the era prior to the discovery of electromagnetic induction, when the only known source for magnetism was lodestone.
At that point, the mainstream scientific consensus would have been that lifting a 1-ton mass with a magnet would be “very hard, too unfeasible or impossible.” Mainstream physicists might have even done a calculation, and determined that a Moon-sized aggregate of lodestone would be required to lift such a mass, which revealed the “absurdity” of such a feat.
Then in 1820 Hans Christian Ørsted discovered that an electrical current also produces a magnetic field, and in 1824 William Sturgeon invented the electromagnet. By 1832 he built one that could lift 3600lbs. Within 12 years the idea transitioned from “impossible and laughable” to “proven empirical fact.”
We’re in the same position with regard to gravitational fields right now: the only way that we know how to increase the strength of a gravitational field is by gathering together more mass-energy (or by increasing the much weaker terms in the stress-energy tensor). We are in the “pre-gravitational-field-technology era” because we don’t know how to technologically induce gravitational fields yet, so all manner of gravitational technology appears to be “very hard, too unfeasible or impossible” to us.
But it appears quite clear that other civilizations have made that technological breakthrough long ago, so for them it’s no more “difficult, unfeasible, or impossible” than lifting a car with an electromagnet is for us. And using that technology they buzz our planet with some frequency, probably looking down on us poor bastards who are still basically glued to our little blue planet because we haven’t developed a gravitational field technology yet, and anxiously anticipating what kind of neighbors we're likely to be once we figure it out for ourselves.
Last edited:
Dean
Adept Dabbler
Yes. Evidence, including anomalous evidence, should guide exploration and development of theories -- rather than evidence being filtered out and disregarded because it is does not fit tidily into current orthodox paradigms.
As Dr. J. Allen Hynek wrote in a letter published in Science, October 21, 1966:
“I cannot dismiss the UFO phenomenon with a shrug. The ‘hard data’ cases contain frequent allusions to recurrent kinematic, geometric, and luminescent characteristics. I have begun to feel that there is a tendency in 20th-century science to forget that there will be a 21st-century science, and indeed, a 30th-century science, from which vantage points our knowledge of the universe may appear quite different. We suffer, perhaps, from temporal provincialism, a form of arrogance that has always irritated posterity.”
Attachments
Spaceman spiff
Noble
Still it raises the question why hasnt anyone landed visibly and contacted us publicly. If there are many civilizations here visiting, youd think it would be harder to monitor them, even if theres some kind of "look dont touch" law going on. It takes one single individual of a single species to do this, may their motive be anything from a drunken act to a genuine curiosity contact, and still we have none.
I can think a couple of reasons to explain this:
Theres really no one here.
Theres someone here but they have camouflaged the place. Thus no unwanted interlopers can find this place, while they proceed with whatever agenda they have.
Theres a group here, but theyre extremely vetted and only some are allowed in, like scientists of certain species.
Theres only one visiting civilization here, but it gives us the impression theyre many through avatars and proxies.
Last edited:
Dejan Corovic
As above, so bellow
Not just that. Hyneks research found that 25% of cases can not be explained by ordinary means. And that was confirmed by French government GEPAN study which put a mark at 21%. It's only when scientists were pushed aside by politicians that irrational agenda won.
It is like Donald Trump telling Albert Einstein how to do science.
nivek
As Above So Below
Dejan Corovic
As above, so bellow
Politics. That question can not be answered scientifically.
according to astrophysical studies average civilisation in Milky Way's habitable zone is 3.3 billion years older than us. To put that into perspective we are on very young planet, we are 150,000 years old spieces, with 15,000 years old civilisation, who gave precedence to scientific reason 300 years ago. From their viewpoint we are basically just animals transitioning into intelligent species.
Last edited:
True, but that's a fundamentally different question than Fermi's question: "where is everybody?"
There's so much evidence of AAV activity in terrestrial airspace at this point that the first explanation you've offered appears untenable to me, and the last option seems highly unlikely given our rapidly expanding knowledge of exosolar Earth-like worlds and their prevalence and average age.
Frankly I'm surprised that so many people assume that interstellar civilizations would have any interest in making direct contact with us.
In my mind, we're very much like that primitive and hostile tribe in this photo that pigfarmer posted:
Would you take at look at those people from your Cessna and decide to land, and try your luck at opening trade negotiations with them? I wouldn't.A
What could they possibly have to offer you that would be worth the mortal risk of approaching them? What kind of impact would you expect such a meeting to have upon their tribe - even in a best-case scenario? In short, what good or benefit could possibly come from approaching these people?
I would argue: none. And I think that's self-evident. Historically, every contact between two civilizations with any significant gap in their sophistication and technology, has been calamitous for the more primitive civilization. But it has happened, because the more advanced civilization has sought out land and natural resources to exploit.
I don't think that an interstellar civilization has those needs: territory and natural resources are plentiful when you can hop between stars with the ease that you and I drive to the grocery store. So our planet offers them nothing of value, at least nothing of value that they can't get more easily without making contact with us and thereby sending shockwaves through our global civilization.
In my opinion, they're showing us a non-human level of mercy by leaving us alone. And that makes me hopeful, because it indicates that all of the star-faring civilizations out there are more intelligent and/or more compassionate than we are.