ALIEN RADIX: The Shape of Things That Come

ALIEN RADIX: The Shape of Things That Come
My new book; buy it on Amazon

Friday, December 28, 2012

UFO SHAPE by Charles Tromblee

UFO Shape                                                             Dec, 2012

One of the greatest UFO books ever written is Unconventional Flying Objects by Paul R. Hill. In fact, I think that it is the greatest one by far, but I have read only about 30-40 UFO books. There is a lot in this book and I strongly recommend that anyone interested in UFOs buy a copy.  Prof. Hill was an un-apologetic UFO believer.  I read my copy about 4 years ago, and thought that I did a pretty thorough job of reading it, but I scanned it a few days ago and realized that there is a lot more depth in it than my simple mind can handle so that I need to read it again. I consider it to be a book which someone should read 2 or 3 times in their lifetime. Prof. Hill’s book, which is over 400 pages long, is almost entirely a treatise on explaining how aliens probably have used gravity technology to design their crafts. In it, by using his mechanical and aeronautical engineering skills, he effectively reverse engineers the UFO based on evidence from close encounter reports of the first, second, and third kinds.

My own book, Alien Radix, has a secondary title which is The Shape of Things That Come. This title has been criticized as being stupid and misleading, but I make no apologies. I chose it to paraphrase the title of the old 1933 SciFi story by HG Wells, The Shape of Things To Come” (made into a 1936 movie, “Things To Come”), and I chose it because much of it deals with looking at the shapes of the aliens and UFOs that have been sighted over the recent years to extract as many logical suppositions as possible. Plus, “That Come” implies that “they” already are here, which they are. Because of Prof. Hill’s book, I am a staunch believer that UFO’s use field propulsion based on control of gravity. In his book, Dr. Hill posits many questions about UFO craft technology and answers many of them in a logical way under the assumption that field generators lie within the UFO. One of the many questions addressed by him is of UFO shape, and the shapes he analyzes in his book are the spherical, ellipsoid, and cigar shapes. For example, the ellipsoid shape can be analyzed as having a major axis along its length, and two minor axes which he chose in his book to be equal to simplify his development of his designs. Given that disc shaped UFOs usually are observed to fly edgewise in their direction of travel, I consider the saucer UFO to be an ellipsoid shape where the two minor axes are unequal, in which one of the minor axes is the thickness of the hull and the other is the width of the hull. For a circular disc, the major axis of the hull is also the width of the hull too. Thus, for the ellipsoid treatment in his book, Paul Hill shows the cross section of the UFO along it major axis as looking like a rounded end football, much like a disc UFO would look if it were cut in half. Although some triangles had been observed at the time he wrote his book (started collecting notes in the fifties; published 1995 posthumously by his daughter), he covers no triangles in it.

Prof. Hill says that Dr. Herman Oberth was the first person to state that the propulsion system of UFOs is based on gravity technology. Herman Oberth was one of those ex-Nazi rocket scientists who came to work for the USA’s rocketry program. UFO literature tells me that Oberth, von Braun, and Albert Einstein were all at least partially “in” on the fact that UFOs were real, were here, and were being kept secret from the public. They were “in” because they were among the leading edge scientists of their day whose opinions were consulted by the USA on many matters, and for sure, UFOs were among those matters. Oberth was as smart as they come, and I have read a story about a discussion between him and Einstein in which the latter expressed dissatisfaction with his (Einstein’s) understanding of inertia. Inertia, as you might know, obeys Newton’s laws, yet Einstein was unsure of where it comes from. Oberth gave his opinion on the question. He said that inertia, like gravity, was also a gravitational product created from the near infinite mass of the universe which surrounds any object in all directions. We know that the universe has a radius of about 13.77 billion light years (time from the big bang), and all the mass within it has its own contribution to gravitation and that its gravitational attraction decreases as 1 over r-squared with distance from that mass. He believed that inertia was the composite sum of all that gravitational attraction from all the mass in the universe in all directions surrounding an object, and inertia phenomenon is the resultant gravitational effect upon that object.  Thus gravity, as we experience it, is a mass-derived phenomenon from nearby large objects, whereas inertia is a mass-derived phenomenon from an almost infinite number of far away large objects in all directions (and space dust, of course.) This idea makes one wonder what will happen to inertia once the universe expands so much that all of this far away mass gets even farther: will inertia diminish to near zero?  But all this is just a side discussion, chosen to show that Oberth was very smart, even having advised the great Einstein on a question.

One of the characteristics of observed UFO motion on earth is lack of sonic booms at supersonic speeds. This article will concentrate pretty much solely on that one observation. Paul Hill explains how this is made possible via the strategic placement of force field generators within the 3 shapes mentioned above (sphere, ellipsoid, & cigar). These force field generators are none other than antigravity generators which can be set to provide attraction or repulsion of mass. It is also helpful to realize that when we talk gravity, we are really talking about the acceleration due to gravity, so that a gravity (or antigravity) generator can also be thought of as an acceleration force field generator. The purpose of these generators is to apply a force to the atmosphere just outside of the hull of the UFO, so the best place for their positioning would be just inside of the hull. Depending on the shape of the hull, they could also be placed along the major axis of the hull as well, but that could cause practical problems with what is inside of the hull, like a central support column, cargo, alien beings, or whatever.  The placement of these generators within the hull is chosen mathematically so that the superpositioning of all the fields contributed by the force field generators create a net field that smoothly lies just outside the hull. Some parts of the net field attract mass and other parts repel mass, depending on the individual field generator settings. Somewhere in the book is short statement that I can’t find anymore that says that it is important that the hull stay uniformly close to the net field “surface”, because if it isn’t close, the spot that is not close will cause turbulence resulting in vibration and heating under high speed operation.  Under high speed (supersonic: i.e. > than the speed of sound) operation the force field outside the UFO provides subsonic flow of air around the UFO, no shock wave during supersonic speeds (resulting in no sonic boom), etc.

Please realize that the reason for the shape of the UFO to be relatively simple (Hill calls the UFO shapes “bodies of revolution”, where there is symmetry of the shape around its major axis) is so that the field generators can provide a force field “surface” that lies close to the hull, something that would not be possible with shapes that have large projections, wings, and so forth. This field “surface” is what controls supersonic air flow around itself to result in no shock wave. Thus we see that the main UFO shapes (ellipsoid, cigar, sphere, egg, saturn, teardrop, saucer)  are those which can be described mathematically to allow for an analysis to predict where to put the force field generators. {Digression: Triangles: Prof. Hill did not address triangles even though they had been sighted as early as the fifties. Perhaps someone or something has figured out how a triangle might be dealt with mathematically as a teardrop with truncated sides. Just a guess.} So here is the point of this whole article: The UFO shapes that we have observed and filmed, particularly of really high speed UFOs, exist because those UFOs are designed for atmospheric travel!  I have to admit that there have been observed shapes with are not smooth at all, such as the old wedding cake shapes of Adamski and others. It would be next to impossible to tailor a force field around these shapes to allow for supersonic shockwave free operation. That some UFOs do indeed experience vibration and/or instability during atmospheric flight is proven by those sightings in which small stabilizers are observed or a stabilizing fin. For example, the famous McMinnville, Oregon UFO photos (believed by none other than Bruce Maccabee after extensive analysis to be real) show a UFO with what at first glance appears to me to be a fat antenna, but which is actually a big stabilizer fin as viewed from slightly off front and center. This fin undoubtedly would not be there unless it was needed to stabilize the UFO in flight. Its existence shows that perfect streamlines around that hull were not possible with its particular shape. “Unsmooth” UFO designs undoubtedly can exceed the sound barrier for short periods when they have to, but sustained supersonic flight for these shapes would not be advisable. Even so, all of the 5 or 6 videos that I have seen which show ultrahigh speed UFOs going so fast that no one observed them in real time because they were gone in an instant have always been smooth ellipsoid shapes.

This observation raises some interesting additional observations:

First: If UFO shapes are designed for travel in the atmosphere, then what about space flight? We know there is no chance of friction or a shock wave in outer space, so what shapes, if any, would a UFO have for that environment? Because shape does not matter in outer space, the atmospheric version of shape is just as suitable in a vacuum as it would be in the atmosphere.  But it is obvious that just about any shape would be permissible in outer space so long as it stays in space or travels “slowly” when in an atmosphere.

Second: What about motherships? The rare UFOs that have been observed that are so huge that they have given rise to speculation about motherships are just as streamlined looking as the smaller craft, so apparently mothership-sized UFOs are designed for atmospheric flight also. This is despite the major belief that they are primarily for non-atmospheric travel.

Third: The principle behind creating the controlled attraction/repulsion surface around the UFO renders it independent of whatever atmosphere it is operating in. A given hull design with the same generator placement can just as easily achieve the same or close to the same flight characteristics on Mars, Saturn, Jupiter, or Venus as it does on Earth. Prof. Hill develops equations for both compressible flow around the hull, and incompressible flow. Liquid, including water, is generally deemed to be incompressible.  On earth, the UFO can treat water as a super dense atmosphere. Paul R. Hill says, “If the UFO mission is stellar and interplanetary exploration, the high-g capability they demonstrate would enable them to explore giant planets with gravitational fields on the order of 100 times earth gravity. Exploring Earth is UFO play.”  In a dense atmosphere, I think the field generators would have to be reset to higher field strengths to offset the increased pressure and friction of the surrounding atmosphere, but I could be wrong about this. Water is about 750 times denser than air at STP. I have a hard time believing that UFOs can exceed the sound barrier in water because the speed of sound under water is about 4 times faster than in air. UFOs have been detected by radar going over 200 mph under water, so even though that is nowhere near the speed of underwater sound, the antigravity technology must be helping them out quite a bit nevertheless. But notice this: a given UFO shape suffices throughout a wide range of atmospheric conditions. If you took an airplane and tried to fly it on Mars, it would fall to the ground. If you took an airplane and tried to make a submarine out of it, the wings would break off. Not so with the UFO.

Fourth: Placement of several generators just within the hull of the craft so that the force field can be shaped accordingly (i.e. “shape fitted” to conform to the physical hull but just outside of it) implies miniaturization of these generators. To Hill, this is no problem because he shows in the book a few examples of alien being sightings where the beings must have had personal “anti-gravity” packs to explain the peculiarities of the sightings, most likely located in the soles of their boots or in belts or backpacks.

Fifth: The control of the atmosphere that surrounds the hull also results in still another interesting phenomenon: per Hill: “Drops of moisture or rain, dust, insects, or other low-velocity objects of any kind would follow the streamline paths around a high speed UFO rather than smash into it.” And “Even with sand in the air, the UFO surfaces would not be sandblasted.” To this I would add that underwater UFOs would not be killing marine organisms either, but I don’t know if an underwater UFO could deflect something as big as a shark or a whale. This same property will prevent hull erosion by space dust as well.

One last point should be addressed here. The same equations that Hill develops to show how these superimposed force fields can manipulate the flow of gas around the hull can also be shown to be the reason for relatively cool skin temperature of the UFO hull even after it has been observed in high speed flight. Our space shuttle developed a red hot glow due to atmospheric friction, and this necessitated developing special tiles to cover its hull. UFOs can go just as fast (and faster) as the shuttle without any significant change in hull temperature.

Monday, December 10, 2012

HIGGS-BOSONS AND UFOS by Charles Tromblee

Higgs-Bosons and UFOs                                                         by        12/2012

In Paul R. Hill’s great book, Unconventional Flying Objects   A Scientific Analysis, which was largely written in the 70’s and 80’s, there is a short 2 paragraph section which showed what a forward and broad thinker he was.  His whole book is based on the premise that gravity field control is the technology by which UFOs achieve some of their observed and exotic traits. In the book, he goes through as many possible technologies that he can imagine to see if they fit the observed behavior of these crafts and rejects all but one: gravity field control. He then goes on to show how this technology, if it were to exist, cleanly explains such traits as hovering, sharp turns, shock free supersonic travel (no sonic booms), and apparent frictionless flight.

In this section, he asks himself if there any other possible technology besides gravity field control which could possibly cause the traits listed previously. An excerpt from the paragraphs mentioned above says, ”If UFOs had the incredible ability to de-mass matter in their vicinity, including air, the answer would have to be yes, for if the UFO could neutralize the mass of the surrounding  air, the speed of sound would be raised to a high value while at the same time the deviations from atmospheric  pressure due to air dynamics would be negligible, and the air would follow the well known subsonic, shock-free flow patter illustrated elsewhere in this Section. However, there is next to nothing in this century’s science to indicate such a possibility.” (Emphasis is my own.)

Well, he was right because he wrote this in the 20th Century, and now that we are in the 21st Century, we have the Higgs-Boson “god” particle to think about. This particle imparts mass to other particles. Therefore, “de-massing” refers to controlling the flow of the Higgs-Boson particles. If aliens had the ability to manipulate the Higgs-Boson, then that could explain a lot. Back when Hill wrote his book, he included a lot of discussion about gravitons which are particles that impart gravity, not mass. The graviton still has not been discovered.  I tried to find out if the Higgs-Boson particle precludes the existence of the graviton particle, can they co-exist, etc.? Nothing was found. If gravitons exist, that would be the fundamental particle that the gravity field generators of the UFOs depend on to work, not the Higgs particle.

Does the Higgs particle have a future in explaining UFO operation?  I don’t know, but I doubt it and I am sticking with the anti-gravity hypothesis. Note the shaky ground that I am on: predicating the operation of something that many believe may not exist (UFOs) on the existence of something that many believe may not exist (gravitons), whereas the Higgs-Boson almost certainly does exist. But I personally believe that UFOs controlled by aliens visiting earth do exist. I wrote this article to show what a thinker Paul R. Hill was, and to show that as far as I know, I thought of applying the Higgs-Boson to UFOs first, with most of the real credit to Paul R. Hill of course.