What is the source of their Spacecraft Power?
___________________________________________________
This is one that really surprises me that we haven't begun
some serious research into. A lot of theoretical work has
already been done and the observed evidence confirms the
math. Here goes:
Assumptions:
Again I did research of witnessed events from all over the world.
It is important to get them from different cultures to
validate the reports. When the same data comes from
cross-cultural boundaries, the confidence level goes up.
Unfortunately, the number of contactees includes a lot of
space cadets and dingalings that compound the validation
problem. I had to run some serious research to get at a
reliable database of witnesses. I found that the most
consistent and reliable reports seem to increase as the size
of their credit rating, home price and tax returns went up.
When cross-indexed with a scale of validity based on
professions and activities after their reports, my regression
analysis came up with a 93% reliability factor.
What descriptions are common are these:
The craft makes little or no noise
It emits a light or lights that sometimes change colors
There is no large blast of air or rocket fuel ejected
Up close, witnesses have reported being burned as if
sunburned.
The craft is able to move very slow or very fast
The craft is apparently unaffected by air or lack of it
We can also deduce that:
the craft crossed space from another solar system
they may not have come from the closest star
their craft probably is not equipped for multi-generational
flight
there may be more than one species visiting us
--------------------------------------------
What conclusions can be draw from these observations:
If you exclude a force in nature that we have no knowledge of
then the only logical conclusion you can come to is that the
craft use gravity for propulsion. Feinberg, Feynmann, Heinz,
Pagels, Fritzsche, Weinberg, Salam and lately Stephen Hawking
have all studied, described or supported the existence of the
gauge boson with a spin of two called a graviton. Even
though the Standard Model, supersymmetry and other theories
are arguing over issues of spin, symmetry, color and
confinement, most agree that the graviton exists.
That gravity is accepted as a force made up of the exchange
of fundamental particles is a matter of record. The
Weinberg-Salam theory of particle exchange at the boson level
has passed every unambiguous test to which is has been
submitted. In 1979, they got the Nobel Prize for physics for
their model.
Repulsive Gravity:
We know that mass and energy are really the same and that
there are four fundamental interactions and that the
interactions take place by particle exchange. Gravity is one
of these four interactions. IF we can produce a graviton, we
can control it and perhaps alter it. Altering it in the same
way we can produce a POSITRON out of a proton. This is an
electron but with a positive charge. It seems logical that
we can do the same with gravitons. It is, after all, gravity
that is the only force that has not had an observed repulsive
force and yet it doesn't appear to be so very different than
the other three fundamental interactions.
Einstein and Hawking have pointed out that gravity can have a
repulsive force as well as an attractive force. In his work
with black holes, Hawking showed that quantum fluctuations in
an empty de Sitter space could create a virtual universe with
negative gravitational energy. By means of the quantum
tunnel effect, it can cross over into the real universe.
Obviously, this is all theory but parts of it are supported
by evidence. The tunneling effect is explained by quantum
mechanics and the Schrodinger wave equations and is applied
in current technology related to thin layers of
semiconductors. The de Sitter-Einstein theory is the basis
of the big bang theory and current views of space-time. In fact, the most recent studies of the universe have concluded that there is a massive amount of "repulsive or dark energy" that is causing the universe to expand.
Recipe to Make Gravity
We already know how to make gravitons. It has been described
by several scientists. It would take a particle accelerator
capable of about 10 TeV (10 trillion electron volts) and an
acceleration chamber about 100 Km long filled with
superconducting magnets.
The best we can do now is with the CERN and the FERMI
synchrontrons. In 1989 they reached 1.8 TeV at the FERMI
LAB. The Superconducting Super Collider (SSC) that was under
construction in Ellis County, Texas would have given us 40
TeV but our wonderful "education president" Mr. Bush (the first one) , killed the project in August 1992. With the SSC, we could have created, manipulated and perhaps altered a graviton.
We Need A Bigger Oven
The reason we are having such a hard time doing this is that
we don't know how else to create the particle accelerators
than with these big SSC kind of projects. Actually, that's
not true. What is true is that we don't know how to create
the particle accelerators except with these big SSC kind of
projects, SAFELY. A nice nuclear explosion would do it
easily but we might have a hard time hiring some lab
technicians to observe the reaction up close.
What do you think we will have in 50 or 100 or 500 years.
Isn't it reasonable to assume that we will have better,
cheaper, faster, more powerful and smaller ways of creating
high energy sources? Isn't it reasonable to assume that a
civilization that may be 25,000 years ahead of us has already
done that. If they have, then it would be an easy task to
create gravitons out of other energy or matter and
concentrate, direct and control the force to move a craft.
Silent Operation
Now let's go back to the observations. The movement is
silent. That Fits - gravity is not a propulsive force based
on thrust of a propellent. I imagine the gravity engine to
be more like a gimbaled searchlight. The beam being the
attractive or repulsive graviton beam with a shield or lens
to direct it in the direction they want to move.
Sunburns from the UFOs
How about the skin burns on close witnesses - as if by sunburn?
OK lets assume the burn was exactly like sunburn - i.e.
caused by ultraviolet light (UVL). UVL is generated by
transitions in atoms in which an electron in a high-energy
state returns to a less energetic state. Now we have to get
technical again. We also have to step into the realm of
speculation since we obviously have not made a gravity engine
yet. But here are some interesting subjects that have a
remarkable degree of coincidence with the need for high
energy control necessary for the particle accelerator and the
observed sunburn effects.
The BCS theory (Bardeen, Cooper & Schrieffer) states that in
superconductivity, the "quantum-mechanical zero-point motion"
of the positive ions allows the electrons to lower their
energy state. The release of energy is not absorbed as heat,
implying it is not in the infrared range. Recently, the
so-called high temperature ceramic and organic
superconducting compounds also are based on electron energy
state flow. Suppose a by-product of using the
superconductors in their graviton particle accelerator is the
creation of UVL?
Perhaps the gimbaled graviton beam engine is very much like a
light beam. A MASER is a LASER that emits microwave energy
in a coherent and single wavelength and phase. Such
coherency may be necessary to direct the graviton beam much
like directing the steering jets on the space shuttle for
precision docking maneuvers. A maser's energy is made by
raising electrons to a high energy state and then letting
them jump back to the ground state. Sound familiar. The
amount of energy is the only difference between the microwave
energy and the UVL process. In fact, microwaves are just
barely above the UVL in the electromagnetic spectrum.
Suppose the process is less than perfect or that it has a
fringe area effect that produces UVL at the outer edges of
the energy field used to create the graviton beam. Since the
GREYs would consider it exhaust, they would not necessarily
shield it or even worry about it.
But It has got to GO FAST!
Finally, we must discuss the speed. The nearest star is
Proxima Centauri at about 1.3 parsecs (about 4.3 light
years). The nearest globular cluster is Omega Centauri at
about 20,000 light years and the nearest galaxy is Andromeda
at about 2.2 million light years. Even at the speed of
light, these distances are out of reach to a commuter crowd
of explorers. But just as the theory of relativity shows us
that matter and energy are the same thing, it shows that
space and time are one and the same. If space and time are
related, so is speed. This is another area that can get
real technical and the best recent reference is Hawking's A
Brief History of Time. In it he explains that it may be
possible to move in unique ways. He described the
idea of traveling from point A to point B by simply curving
the space-time continuum so that A and B are closer. In any
case we must move fast to do this kind of playing with time
and space and the most powerful force in the universe is
Gravity. Let's take a minor corollary:
Ion Engine
In the mid 60's a new engine was invented in which an
electrically charged ion stream formed the reaction mass for
the thrusters. The most thrust it could produce was 1/10th HP
with a projected maximum of 1 HP if they continued to work on
improvements to the design. It was weak but its Isp
(specific impulse - a rating of efficiency) was superior. It
could operate for years on a few pounds of fuel. It was
speculated that if a Mars mission were to leave Earth orbit
and accelerate using an ion engine for half the mission and
then decelerate for half the distance to Mars, they would get
there 11 months sooner than if they had not used it. The
gain came from a high velocity exhaust of the ion engine
giving a small but continuous gain in speed.
Suppose such a small engine had 50,000 HP and could operate
indefinitely. Acceleration would be constant and rapid. It
might be possible to get to .8 or .9 of C (80% or 90% of the
speed of light) with such an engine. This is what a graviton
engine could do. At these speeds, the relativistic effects
would take effect and space-time would be warped.
We Got all the Ingredients
Super String theory and other interesting versions of the
space-time continuum and space-time curvature are still in
their infancy. We must explore them in our minds since we do
not have the means to experiment in reality. We make great
gains when we can have a mind like Stephen Hawking working on the ideas. We lose so much when we have politicians like
Bush stop projects like the SSC. We can envision the concept
of travel and the desire and purpose but we haven't yet
resolved the mechanism. The fact that what we observe in
UFOs is at least consistent with some hard core leading edge
science is encouraging.
It also may lead to the conclusion that all these space cadets and dingalings that profess to have seen a real UFO may not all be that crazy. Why, for instance, would one of these weirdos make observations that appear to be consistent with complex aspects of physics that he could not possibly have understood?
If you believe that something is possible until you prove it is not, then there is now no other conclusion that you can draw except that there are UFOs and they did travel here from a long way away.
____________________________________________________
So, What do you Think?
____________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
This is one that really surprises me that we haven't begun
some serious research into. A lot of theoretical work has
already been done and the observed evidence confirms the
math. Here goes:
Assumptions:
Again I did research of witnessed events from all over the world.
It is important to get them from different cultures to
validate the reports. When the same data comes from
cross-cultural boundaries, the confidence level goes up.
Unfortunately, the number of contactees includes a lot of
space cadets and dingalings that compound the validation
problem. I had to run some serious research to get at a
reliable database of witnesses. I found that the most
consistent and reliable reports seem to increase as the size
of their credit rating, home price and tax returns went up.
When cross-indexed with a scale of validity based on
professions and activities after their reports, my regression
analysis came up with a 93% reliability factor.
What descriptions are common are these:
The craft makes little or no noise
It emits a light or lights that sometimes change colors
There is no large blast of air or rocket fuel ejected
Up close, witnesses have reported being burned as if
sunburned.
The craft is able to move very slow or very fast
The craft is apparently unaffected by air or lack of it
We can also deduce that:
the craft crossed space from another solar system
they may not have come from the closest star
their craft probably is not equipped for multi-generational
flight
there may be more than one species visiting us
--------------------------------------------
What conclusions can be draw from these observations:
If you exclude a force in nature that we have no knowledge of
then the only logical conclusion you can come to is that the
craft use gravity for propulsion. Feinberg, Feynmann, Heinz,
Pagels, Fritzsche, Weinberg, Salam and lately Stephen Hawking
have all studied, described or supported the existence of the
gauge boson with a spin of two called a graviton. Even
though the Standard Model, supersymmetry and other theories
are arguing over issues of spin, symmetry, color and
confinement, most agree that the graviton exists.
That gravity is accepted as a force made up of the exchange
of fundamental particles is a matter of record. The
Weinberg-Salam theory of particle exchange at the boson level
has passed every unambiguous test to which is has been
submitted. In 1979, they got the Nobel Prize for physics for
their model.
Repulsive Gravity:
We know that mass and energy are really the same and that
there are four fundamental interactions and that the
interactions take place by particle exchange. Gravity is one
of these four interactions. IF we can produce a graviton, we
can control it and perhaps alter it. Altering it in the same
way we can produce a POSITRON out of a proton. This is an
electron but with a positive charge. It seems logical that
we can do the same with gravitons. It is, after all, gravity
that is the only force that has not had an observed repulsive
force and yet it doesn't appear to be so very different than
the other three fundamental interactions.
Einstein and Hawking have pointed out that gravity can have a
repulsive force as well as an attractive force. In his work
with black holes, Hawking showed that quantum fluctuations in
an empty de Sitter space could create a virtual universe with
negative gravitational energy. By means of the quantum
tunnel effect, it can cross over into the real universe.
Obviously, this is all theory but parts of it are supported
by evidence. The tunneling effect is explained by quantum
mechanics and the Schrodinger wave equations and is applied
in current technology related to thin layers of
semiconductors. The de Sitter-Einstein theory is the basis
of the big bang theory and current views of space-time. In fact, the most recent studies of the universe have concluded that there is a massive amount of "repulsive or dark energy" that is causing the universe to expand.
Recipe to Make Gravity
We already know how to make gravitons. It has been described
by several scientists. It would take a particle accelerator
capable of about 10 TeV (10 trillion electron volts) and an
acceleration chamber about 100 Km long filled with
superconducting magnets.
The best we can do now is with the CERN and the FERMI
synchrontrons. In 1989 they reached 1.8 TeV at the FERMI
LAB. The Superconducting Super Collider (SSC) that was under
construction in Ellis County, Texas would have given us 40
TeV but our wonderful "education president" Mr. Bush (the first one) , killed the project in August 1992. With the SSC, we could have created, manipulated and perhaps altered a graviton.
We Need A Bigger Oven
The reason we are having such a hard time doing this is that
we don't know how else to create the particle accelerators
than with these big SSC kind of projects. Actually, that's
not true. What is true is that we don't know how to create
the particle accelerators except with these big SSC kind of
projects, SAFELY. A nice nuclear explosion would do it
easily but we might have a hard time hiring some lab
technicians to observe the reaction up close.
What do you think we will have in 50 or 100 or 500 years.
Isn't it reasonable to assume that we will have better,
cheaper, faster, more powerful and smaller ways of creating
high energy sources? Isn't it reasonable to assume that a
civilization that may be 25,000 years ahead of us has already
done that. If they have, then it would be an easy task to
create gravitons out of other energy or matter and
concentrate, direct and control the force to move a craft.
Silent Operation
Now let's go back to the observations. The movement is
silent. That Fits - gravity is not a propulsive force based
on thrust of a propellent. I imagine the gravity engine to
be more like a gimbaled searchlight. The beam being the
attractive or repulsive graviton beam with a shield or lens
to direct it in the direction they want to move.
Sunburns from the UFOs
How about the skin burns on close witnesses - as if by sunburn?
OK lets assume the burn was exactly like sunburn - i.e.
caused by ultraviolet light (UVL). UVL is generated by
transitions in atoms in which an electron in a high-energy
state returns to a less energetic state. Now we have to get
technical again. We also have to step into the realm of
speculation since we obviously have not made a gravity engine
yet. But here are some interesting subjects that have a
remarkable degree of coincidence with the need for high
energy control necessary for the particle accelerator and the
observed sunburn effects.
The BCS theory (Bardeen, Cooper & Schrieffer) states that in
superconductivity, the "quantum-mechanical zero-point motion"
of the positive ions allows the electrons to lower their
energy state. The release of energy is not absorbed as heat,
implying it is not in the infrared range. Recently, the
so-called high temperature ceramic and organic
superconducting compounds also are based on electron energy
state flow. Suppose a by-product of using the
superconductors in their graviton particle accelerator is the
creation of UVL?
Perhaps the gimbaled graviton beam engine is very much like a
light beam. A MASER is a LASER that emits microwave energy
in a coherent and single wavelength and phase. Such
coherency may be necessary to direct the graviton beam much
like directing the steering jets on the space shuttle for
precision docking maneuvers. A maser's energy is made by
raising electrons to a high energy state and then letting
them jump back to the ground state. Sound familiar. The
amount of energy is the only difference between the microwave
energy and the UVL process. In fact, microwaves are just
barely above the UVL in the electromagnetic spectrum.
Suppose the process is less than perfect or that it has a
fringe area effect that produces UVL at the outer edges of
the energy field used to create the graviton beam. Since the
GREYs would consider it exhaust, they would not necessarily
shield it or even worry about it.
But It has got to GO FAST!
Finally, we must discuss the speed. The nearest star is
Proxima Centauri at about 1.3 parsecs (about 4.3 light
years). The nearest globular cluster is Omega Centauri at
about 20,000 light years and the nearest galaxy is Andromeda
at about 2.2 million light years. Even at the speed of
light, these distances are out of reach to a commuter crowd
of explorers. But just as the theory of relativity shows us
that matter and energy are the same thing, it shows that
space and time are one and the same. If space and time are
related, so is speed. This is another area that can get
real technical and the best recent reference is Hawking's A
Brief History of Time. In it he explains that it may be
possible to move in unique ways. He described the
idea of traveling from point A to point B by simply curving
the space-time continuum so that A and B are closer. In any
case we must move fast to do this kind of playing with time
and space and the most powerful force in the universe is
Gravity. Let's take a minor corollary:
Ion Engine
In the mid 60's a new engine was invented in which an
electrically charged ion stream formed the reaction mass for
the thrusters. The most thrust it could produce was 1/10th HP
with a projected maximum of 1 HP if they continued to work on
improvements to the design. It was weak but its Isp
(specific impulse - a rating of efficiency) was superior. It
could operate for years on a few pounds of fuel. It was
speculated that if a Mars mission were to leave Earth orbit
and accelerate using an ion engine for half the mission and
then decelerate for half the distance to Mars, they would get
there 11 months sooner than if they had not used it. The
gain came from a high velocity exhaust of the ion engine
giving a small but continuous gain in speed.
Suppose such a small engine had 50,000 HP and could operate
indefinitely. Acceleration would be constant and rapid. It
might be possible to get to .8 or .9 of C (80% or 90% of the
speed of light) with such an engine. This is what a graviton
engine could do. At these speeds, the relativistic effects
would take effect and space-time would be warped.
We Got all the Ingredients
Super String theory and other interesting versions of the
space-time continuum and space-time curvature are still in
their infancy. We must explore them in our minds since we do
not have the means to experiment in reality. We make great
gains when we can have a mind like Stephen Hawking working on the ideas. We lose so much when we have politicians like
Bush stop projects like the SSC. We can envision the concept
of travel and the desire and purpose but we haven't yet
resolved the mechanism. The fact that what we observe in
UFOs is at least consistent with some hard core leading edge
science is encouraging.
It also may lead to the conclusion that all these space cadets and dingalings that profess to have seen a real UFO may not all be that crazy. Why, for instance, would one of these weirdos make observations that appear to be consistent with complex aspects of physics that he could not possibly have understood?
If you believe that something is possible until you prove it is not, then there is now no other conclusion that you can draw except that there are UFOs and they did travel here from a long way away.
____________________________________________________
So, What do you Think?
____________________________________________________