THE UFO INSTITUTES by charles Tromblee

THE UFO INSTITUTES

2/2013

 I just saw a picture of a small, dried out creature that was about 9” tall, and is reputed to be a dead alien. This can be seen on Dr. Steven Greer’s blog website. This specimen was discovered in the Atacama Desert in Peru, and has actually been handled by a couple of medical doctors, one of whom is Dr. Greer himself. It would be a bit difficult for a fake creature or an actual dried out animal to fool an experienced medical doctor like Dr. Greer, so we can conclude that the investigation of this specimen is off to a good start and is worthwhile. On Oct 18, 2012, Dr. Greer reported that DNA had successfully been extracted from the specimen, and in mid December, he reported that the DNA test setup had been completed and was then ready to start on the analysis. This is kind of surprising, given that many DNA test facilities already exist throughout the world, so why would a new test facility have to be created? Furthermore, for something of potential importance like this test could turn out to be, why not submit a second sample to another independent test lab as well? After all, scientific teams are well known to contain scientists who, when confronted with things that may conflict with their mainstream belief system, become non-scientific nut jobs who throw science out the window (think of the Shroud of Turin investigations, for example, or those scientists who believe in intelligent design.) Anyhow, the specimen is now in the possession of an “Institute” which I presume is in South America.

 This “Institute” was not named, but the use of this word piqued my memory that throughout the history of UFOs, several institutes have been involved.

But first, some background is in order about “institutes” in general. There are thousands upon thousands of institutes in the world. From Wikipedia, an institute is an organizational body created for a certain purpose. In the British Isles the term "institute" is a protected word and companies or other organizations may only use the word if they are "organisations which are carrying out research at the highest level or to professional bodies of the highest standing". Furthermore, if a company is carrying on a business under a different name to the company name, that business name must comply with the Business Names Act. Use of the title "institute" requires approval from the British Secretary of State. Failure to seek approval is a criminal offence. In some countries, such as South Korea and Japan, private schools are sometimes called institutes, rather than schools. In Spain secondary schools are called institutes. In some countries, including the USA, they can be an educational body; for example, the Illinois Institute of Technology. An institute can also exist as part of a university; for example, there exists Stanford Research Institute which did a lot of work on remote viewing which is reputed to be a practice which keeps bumping into UFOs. An institute can also be a professional body. An institute can be a research organization created to do research on specific topics. Therefore, one can conclude that throughout the world, an institute can be simply a special purpose unregulated, unprofessional organization all the way up to a large, regulated very professional organization. In the USA, this whole range of institutes exists.

 There used to be (and maybe still is) the Spontaneous Human Combustion Institute. I stumbled across the Lulu Institute for Portable Explosives located in Syria, but this “factoid” is from a website that occasionally makes up humorous stories, kind of like the Onion does. If it were to exist, it would be appropriate for that neck of the world. There is also the Institute of Meteoritics at the University of New Mexico, for whom Dr. Lincoln La Paz worked as director back in the early fifties while he analyzed the early green UFO fireball sightings.

I believe that all “think tanks” are institutes. Two broad categories for institutes are research institutes and policy institutes. In the history of UFOs, both types have been used to provide research. The policy institutes are the ones that are less credible in that they offer up opinions to those who hire them that are usually in line with what the employers want. Otherwise, they won’t be rehired for anything else. In what follows, some of an institute’s employees may have independently written about UFOs as a personal hobby, and this has caused their institute to bear some responsibility for what they have written in the mind of the public, perhaps unfairly so. By the same token, this may have caused that institute to have reacted unfairly to that employee.

Cato Institute: Charles Koch, one of the Koch brothers of Tea Party fame, helped found The Cato Institute in 1977. It espouses libertarian and Tea Party principles and is recognized as about the fifth most influential think tank in Washington. It is probably unfair of me to point out the oxymoron of it being a Tea Party think tank, and they do criticize both major political parties. Plus they have written favorably about same sex marriage and drug decriminalization. They did have an employee in the role of a 20 year adjunct scholar named Don Armentano who has always been interested in UFOs, so in 2008 he wrote and published a paper which advocated UFO Disclosure by the government. He was fired the next day with his boss telling him, “…for now this strikes us as not an issue that we want to have as part of Cato’s research agenda.” So much for government transparency and free speech, which are supposedly the cornerstones of Cato’s founding.

RAND Corporation: The most well known UFO related publication by RAND Corporation (stands for Research ANd Development) is one that they do not officially take responsibility for. It is entitled, UFOs: What to Do?, and it was written in 1968 by George Korcher. On page 3 of this publication, it says, “This paper was produced as an internal document; it was not prepared for or delivered to any of RAND’s clients. Peer review has not been undertaken, nor has it been edited for publication. It is being released at this time as a matter of public interest.” It is only 42 pages of text and is very well written. Apparently, George Korcher was very interested in UFOs and wrote this paper on company time on his own without being asked to by his employer. At least, that is what RAND wants you to believe. Because it was written on company time, it is the property of RAND, it is in their archives, and RAND is selling copies of it for $18.40. It was written just before the long awaited Condon report was released. As you know, Condon did a great disservice to UFOs and truth in general, and the media fell for it hook, line and sinker as they always do. You can read this paper for free on the internet at http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/drafts/2007/DRU1571.pdf
Anthony Bragalia discusses RAND’s involvement with UFOs on his excellent website, The Bragalia Files, in his archived report, “Deep Secrets of a UFO Think Tank Exposed”, published in 2007. The aforementioned paper, he reports, was stamped “’for RAND Use Only.” It further instructs on its cover page: “Do not quote or cite in external publications or correspondence.’” The website that I referenced which contains this paper does not have those revealing comments on the paper. One has to admit that it is odd for a company to allow an employee to write a hobby paper on company time that obviously took at least a few man-months of effort to complete unless, of course, the company wanted the paper written in the first place. Bragalia’s article shows that RAND has a deep history with UFO that precedes this 1968 paper by about two decades.

Battelle Memorial Institute: Battelle is a research institute, not a policy institute. I once worked for a company that used Battelle to do some research, and as a result I have a very high opinion of them. Battelle is the institute that wrote Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14 for the Air Force in 1955. Stanton Friedman sells this report so I bought one. I have to take his word for it that Battelle wrote it because I can’t find the word “Battelle” in it anywhere. Mr. Friedman also includes a copy of the press release (not written by Battelle) that attended its publication. The press release is clearly a bunch of lies intended to fool the public as to the actual contents of the report. Evidently, the Air Force knew of the laziness and gullibility of the journalism community as far back as 1955 when the report was published. The UFO researcher Anthony Bragalia has presented evidence which shows that Battelle was also the research body which was supplied Roswell crash material for analysis, resulting in the patents for Nitinol memory metal. Given that Battelle did so much work on UFOs, it is likely that they also authored the permanently missing Project Blue Book Special Report No. 13 which only about two people ever claim to have seen, and which therefore may never have existed. It probably did exist because why skip number 13 in the numbering sequence? It is likely that Battelle did write report number 13 because they did write number 14. Number 13 allegedly contained absolute proof of alien visitation because it contained pictures of UFO crashes and aliens. If there ever was a report number 13, the only reason that I can think of that Battelle may not have written it is that the Air Force did not want any single outside organization to learn too much about the alien contact that was occurring so they farmed out no. 13 to a different research organization. My opinion is that there was indeed a Special Report Number 13, and that Battelle wrote it.

 Another involvement with UFOs by Battelle was with an early UFO project called Project Stork, which ran from 1947 until at least 1954. The project was known to both Edward Ruppelt and J. Allen Hynek and appears to duplicate the effort of Project Grudge and early Bluebook. It was run by Battelle. This project collected UFO sighting data on preprinted forms and did a UFO survey of astronomers. Not a whole lot is known about Project Stork.

Brookings Institution: In 1960 NASA commissioned the Brookings Institution to write a report which was named “Proposed Studies on the Implications of Peaceful Space Activities for Human Affairs”. This report, usually referred to as the “Brookings Report”, generally gets bad publicity in the early annals of ufology because many people blame it for the justification of the coverup of UFOs. In reality, the report contains many scenarios of possible reactions and responses to those reactions of hypothetical discoveries of our space exploration activities. The 219 page report clearly presents its ideas on each scenario as possibilities and leaves it at that. It can be read at http://www.nicap.org/papers/brookings.pdf . It mentions the words “saucer”, “UFO”, “unidentified flying object”, “sighting”, and “alien” zero times. Because this report was written toward the end of the “golden age of UFO sightings”, to me it has the appearance of avoiding the real issue of alien visitation (or at least keeping it at arm’s length) and that this certainly had to have been a conscious decision. Negativity arose in the UFO world when subsequent journalists emphasized a couple of statements in the report which mentioned withholding information as a way to contain any reaction to the discovery of alien life.

Brookhaven National Laboratory: All English speaking people who are interested in UFOs certainly have heard of the Robertson Panel, whose ignorant recommendations set progress back in ufology even to this day. All the members of this body, which met for 4 days in January of 1953, were physical scientists of one sort or another, yet the most damaging of their recommendations pertained to controlling the thought processes of the American public. This certainly was not their area of expertise. The USA would have gotten better results from consulting the local dog catcher or milk man. This panel simply regurgitated the goals of their founder (the CIA) back to the CIA, and then disbanded. One of the members of this infamous group was nuclear physicist Samuel Abraham Goudsmit, an employee of Brookhaven National Laboratories. It presently has 3000 permanent employees and is co-operated by Battelle Memorial Institute and Stony Brook University according to Wikipedia. Back then, however, it was operated by Associated Universities, Inc. (Notice that the word “institute” is not in its title although it performs pretty much the same work as Battelle. “Brookhaven Institute” is another organization altogether.)

Brookhaven was also implicated in a UFO crash that allegedly occurred very close to the labs on 11/24/1992. Supposedly Brookhaven personnel were witnessed being given special access to the cordoned off crash site, and the wreckage was removed to the labs. This event, now believed to be a hoax, was given special coverage on 5/20/2009 on the now defunct UFO Hunters tv show.

In conclusion, this blurb shows that the government readily used private sector resources to find answers to the UFO question even in the earliest days of the phenomenon. It also suggests that when a UFO leak by an institute occurs, it is probably just the tip of an iceberg of extensive history and deep UFO files that probably still reside at that institute

ANTIGRAVITY PROPULSION BY HUMANS by Charles Tromblee

Antigravity Propulsion by Humans             Jan, 2013      ©

In 2008, Dr. Paul LaViolette published a book, Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion. After reading my copy of it, I felt inspired to revisit my own beliefs in how UFOs propel themselves. My own book, Alien Radix, chose antigravity (aka “counterbary”)  as the motive force for UFO travel, and arrived at this conclusion from empirical observations of UFO movement and witness close up encounters. Assisted by Dr. Paul Hill’s great book, Unconventional Flying Objects, I decided that rotation is involved with the creation of the UFO’s antigravity field, but declined (read as “unable to”) to go further into the cause. Dr. LaViolette does go further into the cause. I recommend this book for anyone curious about UFO propulsion, although as an ex-technical person, I understood only about half of it. Maybe if I had reviewed my own coursework from decades ago and had set myself down to go through the field explanations with more of a fine tooth comb, I could have extracted another 15% of understanding, but that would have been about it for me. I apologize for this writeup coming across like a big book review, but it is a good book.

Dr. LaViolette’s book has about 400 pages not counting a lengthy appendix. About 300 pages are allocated to the work of T. Townsend Brown, genius inventor and discoverer of the Biefeld-Brown effect. As a teenager, Brown noted that when a capacitor is charged up to a very high voltage, there is a measurable force created toward the positive electrode, and this force is now named the Biefeld-Brown effect, a.k.a. the electrogravitic force, or simply electrogravitics.  If the capacitor’s charged up voltage is sufficiently high, the whole capacitor will physically move. All of Brown’s subsequent work on levitation and propulsion was based on maximizing, controlling, and understanding this force.

 

This force is still believed by some to be simply the electrostatic attraction or repulsion of charged particles.  This belief is sourced by the fact that for the electrogravitic force to be even measurable, the capacitor has to be charged to at least 10 kilovolts, and the higher one goes in voltage, the more powerful the forces (both electrogravitic and electrostatic) become. In fact, the electrogravitic force increases at approximately as the voltage to the second or third power. Given the high voltages involved, ionization of the air around the electrodes does occur, and these ions are thought by some to be the explanation for everything about the Biefeld-Brown effect, because the ion wind caused by charged particle attraction causes the measured force from the negative side of the capacitor to the positive side. For this to be confirmed, all one has to do is put the capacitor in a vacuum and apply the kilovolt charge and measure away because in a vacuum, there is nothing to ionize. A couple  of years ago, I read a T. Townsend Brown story on the internet which said that this has been done and that the force disappears in a vacuum, thereby proving that the Biefeld-Brown effect was nothing but electrostatic ionization attraction/repulsion all along. After I read this, I discounted electrogravitics as a serious candidate for UFO propulsion. Well, guess what? Dr. LaViolette has found in T. Townsend Brown’s notes some experiments described in which the electrogravitic force was measured in a vacuum. Not only was the electrogravitic force present in a vacuum, it was increased in magnitude above what it would have been in the atmosphere. Now why are there sources which say the opposite? I don’t know. T. Townsend Brown also proved to his own satisfaction that the force was gravitational in nature, and not due to any of the other common force causes, such as magnetism, electrostatics, ion wind pressure, and so forth.  How did he conclude it was gravitational? Because it acted equally on all matter, regardless of whether it was charged, neutral, organic, metallic, inorganic, solid, liquid, or gas. In other words, just like gravity does. {Digression: In the early 90’s, the B-2 bomber received quite a bit of rumored publicity that it was using antigravity technology to boost its performance. It was publicized that the B-2 saves an immense amount of fuel by ionizing its jet exhaust gasses such that the leading edge of its wings are charged up to a very high voltage with respect to its trailing exhaust gases. This gives the plane a push as its own exhaust ion wind flows toward the leading edge of the wing because they have opposite charges, so it acts like a tail wind. Flying in ionized air also reduces drag. With sufficiently high voltage, additional push and lift occurs due to the Biefeld-Brown effect which is independent of and additive to the ion wind effect. Those who know the truth about the B-2 are keeping mum. LaViolette believes that this technology should be released to the commercial airline industry so as to save fuel and money.}

About the same time as Brown’s most advanced work in electrogravitics in the mid-fifties, another guy named John R. R. Searl came up with the Searl Effect Generator (SEG), and this invention is afforded about 35 pages in the book.  You can see versions of this machine on YouTube, but none of them appear to operate with the fantastic success claimed by Searl for his invention. The attractive thing to me about the SEG is that it reminds me of the outer rotating rim of a UFO which I strongly associate with its antigravity propulsion drive.  This rotating outer ring also rises to a very high voltage, high enough to cause ionization of surrounding gas, something that also reminds me of UFO operation. The SEG was intended to be a low-to-free power generator, but had the unexpected property that once it exceeded a threshold of rpm speed, it ceased to require external energy input to operate and it broke free of its tethers and flew away, never to be seen again. That is, it had the property that maybe it could be used as an antigravity drive as well. Searl supposedly built several prototype generators, about 4 of them each 14 feet in diameter, and they all took off and got lost. There is something “Lazar-esque” about Searl, because his prototype should be duplicate-able by even a hobbyist with several thousand dollars to spend on special magnets and machined circular frames, but no one seems to have done it “successfully” (i.e. the prototypes do not take flight). They do rotate as several YouTube videos prove, but none of what I saw on those videos looked even remotely like it was going to go into a self sustaining mode of operation and even take off. {The Biefeld-Brown effect, on the other hand, is more easily duplicate-able by the home hobbyist providing he owns a generator capable of generating 100 kilovolts and is willing to live with the danger of operating it. It would also help the hobbyist to own a piece of high K dielectric material (where K (also denoted by Greek letter epsilon) equals the relative dielectric of an insulator, aka permittivity) to use between the plates of the experimental capacitor. In the cellular telephone industry, filtering structures made of barium tetratitanate were once used, and maybe still are, with a K of 18,000-36,000 as I recall.}  Why doesn’t Searl have a video of one of his several escaped prototypes flying away? One would think that after the first 2 or 3 that escaped, one would want to video a self powered rotating generator taking flight. Searl now claims to have discovered how to dampen the runaway energy so that no more of his generators take off on him, and even worse, explode. Fortunately, there are two Russian physicists named Vladimir Roschin and Serge Goden in the mid-nineties who did build what is essentially a Searl device. They used a different design than Searl called the magnetic energy converter (MEC) whose operating principles were identical to the SEG. They got it to work, and verified all of Searl’s claims about its weight reduction during operation and the tendency accelerate to higher and higher rpm while using less and less energy. They also confirmed the temperature-drop-in-the-room phenomenon during operation as well as the surrounding ionization. They took measurements for all of the preceding phenomena. No mention was made in the book about it breaking its tether and flying away because they had a governor fail safe to prevent such runaway. Per LaViolette in his book, “…in May 1982, government agents broke into Searl’s home, confiscated an SEG unit that was under test supplying electricity to his house, and tore out all the electrical wiring from his house. Citing as evidence a sequence of unusually low metered electrical bills, the Southern Electricity Board then prosecuted him on trumped-up charges of ‘stealing electricity by means of a unique device,’ and sued him for a large sum of money. As a result, Searl’s family broke up and he became very depressed.  The Court had him confined to jail for about a year and while so detained an arsonist set his house on fire, destroying most of his records and equipment.” Where there’s smoke, there’s fire, and this story gives credence to some of Searl’s claims. It reminds me of how government agents allegedly confiscated Tesla’s files immediately after his death.

 Now, one might ask, if these two guys found such potentially useful technologies for space travel, why did the government essentially dump on them and ignore them, instead of taking them under its wing and nurturing their technologies into something for the next generation?  Well, in his book, The Hunt for Zero Point, Nick Cook speculates that, at least for Brown, the government was already researching Brown’s technologies in black projects and was well on their way to developing antigravity propulsion. It had no further need of T. Townsend Brown or his ideas. A bit more about this will be mentioned later.

One thing that I wish Dr. LaViolette would have done in his book is explain what possible effects, if any, that these separate technologies would have on the occupants of an “electrogravitics UFO” and a “Searl UFO”. For example, in the electrogravitics version of the UFO, parts of the hull would have to be electrically insulated from one another and a voltage of possibly a million volts applied between those hull sections. Essentially, the craft would be a flying capacitor, and the region between the plates of the capacitor would be the region of strongest artificial gravity. The voltage gradient between the plates is tailored for maximum non-linearity (which results in the most electrogravitic force) through dissimilar capacitor plate shapes and irregular dielectric shape and permittivity between the hull sections (capacitor plates.) Therefore, you have the occupants walking around inside this non-linear voltage gradient inside the capacitor (craft).  Is the artificial gravity field within the craft also non-linear? In other words, if a six foot occupant is in a UFO which is 14 feet thick and 50 feet in diameter, and if the UFO is in its lift mode where a plate in the floor of the UFO might be charged negatively with a million volts with respect to the upper hull, does this mean the occupant’s head would be in a different g-field than his feet?  Would the occupant feel the effects of a sudden right angle turn due to the different gravities? Also, what about metal objects on his body, such as a belt buckle? Any effects there? The same questions would apply when inside a hypothetical “Searl UFO”? {Another Digression: Notice that the Biefeld-Brown effect works with DC or AC applied voltage. When it is AC, the waveform should be as non-linear as possible and the electrode shape should be dissimilar. It also helps to have a non-homgeneous capacitor dielectric between the capacitor plates. A Russian scientist named Evegny Podkletnov did some experiments with a single non-linear discharge of capacitors charged to a high voltage. He was able to generate a single gravity pulse which appeared to traverse through impressive thicknesses of walls and steel, undiminished in strength. These pulses I like to think of as a gravity piston, although this piston does not go back and forth—it just goes on forever. Although his experimental apparatus bears little physical resemblance to what one would expect an electrogravitics setup to be, LaViolette links the two by saying that the Biefeld-Brown phenomenon uses some sort of linkage between charge and gravity as does Podkletnov’s. Anyhow, with a few million volt discharge, Podkletnov was able to put a big dent into a 1” thick steel plate and shatter a concrete block. LaViolette corresponded with Podkletnov at least through 2007, but LaViolette noted that the Russian government is now “resisting export of this technology”, presumably as they explore weaponizing it. From memory, I seem to recall that Podkletnov also is discussed in Nick Cook’s book, The Search for Zero Point.}

Dr. LaViolette goes into a third technology that could also provide thrust. In 1986 Dr. LaViolette learned of a black research project named Project Skyvault that started in the 1952-1957 time frame. The early version of this project was to successfully levitate an object by aiming a microwave beam at it from the ground. It had been noted in earlier years that a microwave beam could move some objects, depending on what they were made of. Objects with a special magnetic property were the best candidates. High energies and frequencies were involved in Skyvault, so the ground based equipment in the early fifties was quite large. Later, the ground based equipment was reduced in size such that it could be located on the levitated object itself, and its microwave beam could be aimed at the ground. Many of the principles of this project involved radar technologies plus the technologies that T. Townsend Brown was experimenting with at the same time. The government’s technology was ahead of Brown’s which could explain why Brown was advised to drop his work and really did not get support for his research--he was not needed. This project apparently used an early form of something called microwave phase conjugation, which is a way to aim a microwave beam at something and cause the reflected energy from that beam to get back in phase with the source beam. This can result in higher and higher power being stored in the beam system. This technology can be used to lock radars onto targets, and also to provide a tightly collimated beam that is difficult to detect and/or jam unless it is aimed right at you. For example, if an incoming missile is heading your way, you can aim a microwave beam at it, or a laser, detect the energies from the reflections, and get the reflections back in phase with the original beam, lock on to the target, and blast the target from the sky using the locked on beam as a unerring guide.  Where does thrust enter the picture? If the microwave signal is sent through a non-linear dielectric, the microwave signal becomes non linear, and as such is capable of providing electrogravitic thrust in the manner of T. Townsend Brown. In this discussion LaViolette makes no mention of capacitor plates and is kind of unclear where and what the transducer is that provides the thrust. I think it is the dielectric itself. He also speculates that the material need not be a dielectric (he gives barium titanite as a likely dielectric example), but it could also be a “metamaterial”. A “metamaterial” is one that at particular frequency or frequencies exhibits a negative permittivity and permeability (commonly denoted as greek alphabet epsilon and mu), so this necessitates that the microwave frequency of the system be right at or near this frequency. This stuff is really complicated, literally involving mirrors, special high power oscillators, lenses, and waveguides. It also involves the usual high voltage and powers associated with electrogravitics. Dr. Laviolette dedicates about 70 pages to this technology. If I had to bet on what technology is used in our own black triangle crafts, it is this one. In my layman’s view, unlike true alien UFO operation, this Skyvault technology does not appear to protect the occupants of the craft or the craft itself from sudden accelerations, starts, stops, and so forth because they are outside of the artificial gravitational field(s) of the craft’s generator(s). (At least that is my interpretation of LaViolette’s Skyvault microwave phase conjugation diagrams.) They are just mechanically attached to it and carried along by it. However, LaViolette’s explanations/diagrams for non-Skyvault antigravity machinery (i.e. Searl and T.T.Brown) indicate that the artificial g-field surrounds the whole apparatus, in which case the occupants could indeed benefit from the protection of the generator’s gravity field.

The only limitation to antigravity propulsion occurs when the craft is in deep outer space, say between stars. If a UFO is coasting between stars (assuming, of course, that they don’t teleport or jump dimensions) and if a reason comes up for that UFO to change course, speed up, stop and then start again, there is a problem. The problem is that it can’t use its antigravity propulsion to do any of these things because its propulsion system needs another gravity field to interact with to provide push or pull thrust. There is precious little gravitational field between stars to allow the UFO to do much of anything with its antigravity drive. Paul R. Hill recognized this shortcoming and in his book, Unconventional Flying Objects, hypothesized that an interstellar UFO most likely therefore would need a second type of on-board propulsion system. He analyzes several ideas in this area, all of which are based on ejecting energy or matter to provide thrust; in other words, they are all based on Newton’s third law: for every reaction there’s an equal and opposite reaction. In my book, I hypothesize that this is possibly one reason for motherships: Perhaps the reason that motherships are so huge is not for cargo, but for space needed to house this second type of propulsion system and/or the matter to fuel it. Anyhow, the electrogravitics drive propulsion system appears to overcome this limitation. If my reading about this technology is correct, all the stalled-between-the-stars UFO would have to do is charge up one side or other of its hull with respect to the other to a huge voltage, and the craft would begin accelerating toward its positive side. This seems too good to be true, because no Newton’s third law or matter expulsion would be needed. But if electrogravitics works so conveniently in outer space, plus knowing that it works on earth, why would an interstellar UFO be using anything else because there would be no need for a backup propulsion system? (Of course, if it operated like Project Skyvault, there would be nothing to aim its microwave beam at and as a result it would be “dead in the water” if stalled between the stars.)

Both Brown and Searl did their work in the early to mid fifties. Here are two or three separate technologies, discovered by humans, which could be developed into UFO propulsion drives. The SEG may or may not be legitimate, but the Biefeld-Brown effect is very real. No alien technology reverse engineering was involved as far as I know, even though one or all could be a technology used by our alien visitors. The Searl generator has magnetics plus rotation as its basis whereas the Townsend invention has electric charge as its basis. The Searl design starts off using low voltage but once it starts self operating, the voltages get very high. The Townsend design uses high voltage from the start. The electrogravitics UFO, including the phase conjugate version, would have far fewer moving parts and would seem to be inherently more reliable. According to both inventors and the Russian duplicator of the Searl device, both designs when operating smoothly and successfully, create a visible and spreading ionizing field around them accompanied by a noticeable cooling as they somehow suck energy from their surroundings to maintain their motion; no external energy from a conventional source is needed for them to continue operating. This brings me to the next subject, which is ether and physics dogma.

Before there was Einstein, there was ether. No, I’m not talking about what teenage stoners smell out of a can to get high; I’m talking about the concept of ether as an invisible medium pervading all space. Then along came the Michelson-Morley experiment in 1887 and then Einstein and the concept of ether as an invisible medium pervading all of space became obsolete. Then Einstein had to make something equivalent to ether come back into the picture again when he invented his Gravitational constant G to make universe expansion data make sense.  It is almost forbidden in the physics world to disagree with Einstein, not if you want to keep your job. In the book, Hitler’s Flying Saucers, the author, Henry Stevens, claims that German scientists were comfortable with using the concept of ether in order to think out of the box as they searched for a cheap, low-to-no fuel drive for the next generation flying war machine secret weapon. Dr. LaViolette claims that some operational characteristics of the Biefeld-Brown effect and of the SEG violate certain law or laws of thermodynamics, some of Einstein’s theories, and some of Newton’s laws. Nick Cook in his book, The Search for Zero Point, says that in the late fifties antigravity research went into a secrecy mode imposed by the government when it realized that there may be something to this antigravity stuff that could be weaponized. Dr. LaViolette also noticed the secrecy clamp down on antigravity research at this time and claims that the scientists working on these gravitational black projects have had to re-instate ether into their theoretical thinking in order to arrive at how antigravity really works.  Many scientists of the late fifties firmly believed that an antigravity craft was in the very near future. LaViolette speculates that our black project scientists could have taken antigravity research to fruition such that we could have our own secret space fleet built using antigravity technology, and that we might have been visiting our solar system planets in secret for almost six decades. In my book, Alien Radix. the chapter entitled “Does America Have a Secret Space Program?” concludes that IF we have antigravity technology, then we most certainly do have a secret space fleet which is partially garrisoned in outer space. I concluded this before I even read LaViolette’s book, so now, having read it, I am pushed further toward the belief that we have had such a fleet for many years.

Dr. LaViolette also claims that the patent office now has a rule that whenever a perpetual motion machine patent is submitted, they will automatically reject it. (Plus they will also turn it over to the proper agents to study it for technological ideas that they can steal.) Now here is what is wrong and stupid with that policy. Remember how both the Biefeld-Brown devices and the SEG were claimed to perpetuate their motion while cooling down their surroundings as they presumably sucked the energy needed to sustain their motion?(This also suggests that the devices could suck energy from nearby occupants of the UFO as well. Yikes! A vampire space drive!) What if they were also sucking energy from somewhere else? In the last couple of decades the physicists have discovered both dark matter and dark energy. Doesn’t that sound suspiciously like ether to you?  As we all know, inventors sometimes stumble across a great invention by accident without even knowing how it works. What if one of these perpetual motion machine inventions was somehow, quite by fortuitous accident, able to tap into dark energy?  It could run forever, and this discovery would be rejected by the patent office “experts.”

     

Last but not least, Dr. LaViolette has developed his own physics theories which are compatible with antigravity work. He calls the collection of these theories “subquantum kinetics”. Throughout his book, he describes repeatedly how subquantum kinetics explains and allows accurate predictions about how  antigravity phenomena does and will operate, and illustrates how the traditionally accepted dogmatic laws of physics don’t work for the observed phenomena associated with Biefeld-Brown and the SEG. It also explains some astronomical phenomena as well.  However, LaViolette claims that subquantum kinetics predicts that the centers of galaxies do not have black holes in them (they do) and also that matter particles are created through spontaneous creation, which to me sounds like the continuous creation theory that was rejected when the Big Bang theory was accepted. I tried to use the internet to see if there are any college courses which teach subquantum kinetics and could find nothing.* The only thing I found was LaViolette’s own book on the subject. The physics community can be like a college fraternity or club, and one should not deviate too far in one’s theories from the majority beliefs or else you will be ostracized.  LaViolette also is said to have some New Age ideas on things as well, and although these ideas may fall outside of physics, I am sure that they taint the opinions that his fellow physicists have of him. Someday, Dr. LaViolette’s theories may be recognized as being visionary and accurate, and his name might be included in the lists of famous physicists, but probably not in his lifetime. Dr. LaViolette, now age 67, lives in Greece.

*For those of you who are interested, here is a recent internet blurb about current attempts to explore gravity under different theories. “Loop Quantum Gravity” might be similar to subquantum mechanics—I just don’t know:

 http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/string-theory-versus-loop-quantum-gravity.html

UFO DATA MINING by Charles Tromblee

UFO Data Mining                                    

Jan 2013

In a broad and general way, research can be split into two types: original research and surveying the works of other researchers.  Original research takes you back to the basics where the findings can lead to original, new and unique insights and discoveries about the subject matter. Surveying the works of others is easier to do than original research, but it leaves one vulnerable to the omissions and mistakes that these works may contain. As they say, “gigo”, or garbage in, garbage out.

Regarding UFOs, the interested person can do his own original research or read the books published on the subject.  The authors of many of these books have done their own original research on the matter, but some have not. Some are just personal opinions which have been “suggested” by a coincidence or likeness that triggered something in the mind of the author. These types of books (and some TV documentaries) are not something to put any belief in. For example, the TV series, “Ancient Aliens”, simply presents mythological and/or archaeological literature and presents it with an ancient alien twist. Many UFO books do the same thing, presenting opinion as though it were fact to fool a gullible public (even though the author may truly believe what he/she is saying). There must be a lot of gullible people out there because it is astounding that the “Ancient Aliens” TV series has just entered its fifth season! Yikes!

Most of us are simply not in a position to do original research.  Besides, most of us are not so interested in the UFO phenomenon as to do original research on UFOs, but elect instead to read books or blogs on the matter. What is “original research” for UFOs anyway? It is taking field trips to interview  those who have had a good sighting, FOIA submissions, archival work, UFO document forensics, efforts to get the government to “come clean” on what it knows, paying for analysis of trace evidence, trolling for witnesses’ names and contacting them, etc.  One area of original research is case studies. I admit that this is one big step removed from interviewing the experiencers and doing the supportive background work of checking police records for other witnesses, checking for radar records from airports, looking at airplane flight schedules, checking star maps, and talking to nearby military bases, and so on, but this has already been done for you if the case study was thorough to begin with. Nevertheless, the summary results of these investigations exist, and these summaries are very good supportive evidence of the phenomenon’s validity.  I personally have read over ten thousand case study summaries and have categorized the information of hundreds of them into results that appeared in my book, Alien Radix. (I also admit that information gathered from reading many UFO books is also in my own book.)

This brings me to the subject of UFO databases. I have investigated the two principal UFO databases and have found them to be very difficult to use to extract data for UFO trends, averages, and so forth. I applaud the sacrifices of those who do data entry and maintain those databases. The illiteracy of the general public who provide the information is appalling, and most of the case studies therein are not usable for anything. After all, what info can be gleaned from a slow moving or stationary night light in the sky? That is what most experiences turn out to be. Having had two UAP night light experiences myself, it suddenly dawned on me that if I had photographed or videoed them, they would have turned out to be the same kind of night light videos that are so prevalent on YouTube. These are the same UFO videos that I always simply skip over and ignore because there is nothing to be learned from them. But because I experienced these events in three dimensions and with normal night visual acuity, the experience was a lot more meaningful than watching the same event on a video in two dimensions with much of the surrounding visual data compromised by lack of true color, loss of perspective, and camera jitter. (I also would be leery of any spectral analysis done on a night light video.) So although a night light can be a truly exciting and meaningful personal experience, when put onto video it turns into something boring and useless. The only videos that turn out to be meaningful, at least to me, are the ones where a UFO shape can be seen or strongly inferred from the light pattern, aside from the obvious hoaxes, of course. However, I still believe that reporting one’s sighting is still the right thing to do in hope that someday, someone will be able to extract the information and use it to draw a statistical conclusion about UFOs.

So what is the point here? It is that you may not need to be careful of what you read, but you sure should be careful of what you conclude from what you read. The best conclusions to draw and the best opinions to embrace as your own are from analyses of data that have been derived from basic “original research”.  Do not blindly become the follower of the pundits. After all, how accurate have political pundits have been about real world situations; how much money have you lost by following stock market pundits’ opinions on where a company or the economy is heading? UFO pundits, if not carefully chosen, also will lead you to incorrect beliefs

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.

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 20^th Century, and now that we are in the 21^st 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.

THE UNDECIDED

The Undecided                                                                                     11/2012

Stories about actual alien contact and UFO functional operation are infrequent, but when they do get published, they are, as Martha Stewart might say, “a good thing”. On the other hand, the stories about humankind’s reactions to the phenomenon are a dime a dozen. Most of these stories document a sighting and that’s about all. Still other stories are always expressing frustration at the government’s obvious and successful coverup and the blocked attempts to get them to come clean, the news media’s ignorant coverage of the subject, and the attention given to obvious UFO charlatans, debunkers, and skeptics. When one is done reading one of these stories or hearing about it in the media, invariably nothing more is ever learned about the actual objects and beings. You wind up knowing no more about UFOs than when you started. I try to avoid writing this type of story as much as possible. Unfortunately for you readers, this is one of those stories.

As you all are painfully aware, we have just completed a presidential election. It was excruciating: 2 years of blather in which unimportant issues were being promoted as important, ignorant news coverage, lying pundits, flip flopping candidates, lying attack ads, state level cheater laws to disenfranchise legal voters, and debates where the candidates tried to avoid “gotchas” immediately followed by incorrect analyses by the pundits. Fact checker groups have sprung up out of necessity as the journalistic profession continued its abandonment of background research.  This two year process then wrapped up with a grand finale by our electoral college which itself is the unnecessary anachronism of an obsolete system that should have been discontinued 50 years ago, and which on rare occasions manages to elect a president in opposition to the popular vote. It was horrible. Starting a couple of months before the election itself, newsmen started saying that the “undecided” voters would carry the election. Others responded to the “undecided” voters by saying something like, “My goodness, if the undecided haven’t made up their minds by now after two years of this, then they must be stupid as hell.”

 So, too, do UFOs have blather that is unimportant, lying pundits in the role of debunkers, lying congressmen, ignorant news coverage, fact checkers in the roles of believers and skeptics, and bad debates where the wrong people are invited, but at least there is no UFO electoral college.

But listen to this, readers.  In the world of UFOs, we have myriads of people who are undecided about the phenomenon. They are still unwilling to commit to the extraterrestrial hypothesis.  Instead of 2 years to mull the matter over in order to decide, they have had 65 years! Are these people even stupider than hell? I don’t know.  I can’t criticize those who have made their decision one way or the other on the question, yes or no. But those who still can’t decide--why is that? (For those of you who have read any of my previous stuff, you might remember that I was in this category for about 40 years. Nyuk, nyuk.)

ELEMENT 115 OPINIONS by Charles Tromblee

ELEMENT 115  OPINIONS                                                        11/2012

One of the problematic areas of studying UFOs is judging information that has come from popular sources who have been found to be lying in at least some of their stories. We all know names of those who are or were prominent in ufology, and lots of them fall into this "lying" category. Does this mean that ALL of the information that they have ever provided on the subject of UFOs is false or is it just some of their information?  One of these people is George Adamski who made some simply ludicrous claims about UFOs, yet he does have at least a few stories which were witnessed by several people who have signed affidavits as to their veracity. Even Timothy Good has professed his belief in some of Adamski’s stories.  My own opinion on why some people lie is that they may originally start out with some great and truthful stories, and then down the line start lying about things.  They commit fraud to keep the ball rolling, make more money, and extend their 15 minutes of fame. Or whatever. I suppose that if you do not choose to reject everything they have ever said once they have been out-ed as a liar (this is probably the best approach), then the bottom line is that it takes a lot of effort just to decide which of their stories is fake and which is real.

This article deals with Bob Lazar’s decision to highlight the alleged role of Element 115 in UFO propulsion. I believe his story to be a fabrication. I will make assumptions about how his thinking process may have functioned in order to make this choice. Mr. Lazar would probably laugh at some of my conclusions, but here they are.

First, let me say some things about Bob Lazar. I am not a critic of Mr. Lazar, and actually am somewhat  impressed by him. We all should admit that the guy is intelligent and creative. He did indeed work at area 51 for a short time. He may even have been given the job titles he has claimed (physicist, electrical engineer) due to having been recognized as an undegreed, raw, natural talent. I doubt that, however. Furthermore, it does appear that the government has erased some of his records, so this means that he does have an important, or at least a secret, story to tell. Also, the videos taken from a distance of test flights at Area 51 on the exact schedule that Mr. Lazar predicted go a long way toward proving that the “being employed at Area 51” part of his story is true. Unfortunately his obvious evasions and lies about his education really detract from his story. I could care less about the prostitution stuff that his detractors usually use to discredit him. That stuff is irrelevant to UFOs (although others could argue that that reflects on his character).

One of the many side trips and anomalies of the UFO world is element 115, a topic introduced by the controversial Bob Lazar in 1989.  The story of element 115 has been an intriguing one for 23 years. Element 115 became a popular topic in the UFO world after Bob Lazar claimed in 1989 that it comprised the heart of the UFO propulsion system. He claims that now the US Government now has 500 pounds of it somewhere, presumably recovered from various UFO crashes. I do not believe what Lazar has claimed about element 115, but kudos to Mr. Lazar for coming up with a story that is so intriguing, and for even being aware in 1989 that superheavy elements yet undiscovered may indeed have an “island of stability” as they say in the physics field of heavy atom discovery.  Kudos, too, for inventing a story which for the last 23 years has remained un-provable as a truth or a lie.

To make an educated guess as to why Mr. Lazar picked a superheavy element to be the heart of an alien antigravity drive, we have to know a little about superheavy elements. We all know that from high school chemistry, electrons ”like” to fly around atomic nuclei in layers (shells) with a given amount of electrons for each shell. It is pretty organized. The total number of electrons for a neutral atom equals the number of protons in its nucleus. What was NOT taught in my high school or college chemistry classes is that protons and neutrons also “like” to be pretty organized in the nucleus in several fixed layers or shells. The nucleus is always “straining” within itself as its protons are trying to fly apart from one another due to electrostatic repulsion, but in a stable nucleus are kept in check by the strong force which binds the particles of the nucleus together. Neutrons help separate the protons from one another within the nucleus, thus moderating the maximum electrostatic repulsion that the protons experience. Thus a nucleus is inherently unstable, some more than others, depending on its mix of protons and neutrons. The bigger the nucleus, the more likely it will be unstable as measured by an element’s radioactive half life. Atoms greater in nucleus size than lead all have measureable half lives, and when you get into the superheavy atoms, the half lives are very short. However, there is high probability that there exists in superheavy atoms (like 50% heavier than lead) a few elements that are stable. The Nobel Prize winning nuclear scientist Glenn Seaborg postulated an “island of stability” for superheavy atoms while serving as chairman of the AEC from 1961-71. Then in 1969, a research paper [1] performed calculations that predicted the island of stability to be located at Z = 110 to Z = 114 (Z is the number of protons in the atom’s nucleus), with the best stability at Z = 110, N = 184. (N is the number of neutrons in the atom’s nucleus.) It is a fact that physicists now predict a possible island of stability located at about elements Z = 104 to Z = 116 and N = 176 to N = 186. The inexactness is because the predictions are usually done assuming a spherical nucleus, but now it is known that large nuclei can be deformed, and this changes the stability point of proton and neutron quantities. Those same physicists also hypothesize that a second such island of stability could also exist at around Z = 168, but since we can hardly build an atom that lands on the first island of stability, let’s forget about the second one.

Now let’s get back to Mr. Lazar. Why would he choose a superheavy element explanation to be the core principle behind antigravity propulsion?

            1. He had just read something about it?

2. He never did “choose” element 115 because he actually confirmed it empirically from the UFO reverse engineering?

 My opinion on question 1: In 1989 a scientific paper was published which discussed the possible “island of stability” for superheavy elements. 1989 was also the year in which Mr. Lazar spoke of element 115. One investigator of Mr. Lazar claims that he most likely had read this paper before he made his startling Area 51 claims. I believe this, but it is not essential, because, as previously mentioned in this article, Glenn Seaborg hypothesized the island of stability in the ’61-71 time frame, and a 1969 scientific paper also discussed it. So he could have read either of those earlier sources too.

My opinion on question 2:  As previously stated, I believe his story about element 115 to be false.  I grant that Mr. Lazar may have been working at Area 51 as a non-degreed engineer or as a technician. However, his duration of employment there was only about 10 visits to Area 51, hardly sufficient time in my opinion to draw all of his startling conclusions. But this could be explained by his story that he had replaced 3 engineers whom he claimed had perished in an explosion while doing an experiment on a UFO. That is, he, from studying their logbooks, simply is repeating the conclusions that they had already drawn.  However, one galling thing about his claims is that he says that the equipment provided to him to use in his investigation was an oscilloscope and a digital voltmeter.  If that was the case, then how in the world could he or his deceased predecessors have reached the astounding conclusions about gravity amplifiers, the nuclear strong force “leaking” past the outer boundary of element 115 and then distorting gravity nearby to be available then to be amplified by those doggone gravity amplifiers, the decay of Element 116 (created from 115) which releases an antimatter particle, super efficient thermal generators, and such?  I suppose that if you found a sample quantity of some 115, you could measure its volume and then weigh it to determine its density by which you could conclude that it is element 115, but how could you draw some of the other conclusions with only a voltmeter and oscilloscope? None of this adds up so it sounds unlikely.

Now why would Mr. Lazar have chosen element 115, and not, say, element 110, 112, or 114 as his favored element? After all, Z = 110-114 was the suspected range at the time for the island of stability.

            3. He actually had empirical data pointing to element 115?

            4. He chose outside the 110 to 114 range so as to make it look like he had not read the 1989    paper?

            5. He chose a number higher than 114 so as to push the likelihood of future discovery (of his fraud) further into the future?

            6. He chose a higher number than 114 because his explanation on how the UFO propulsion works depends on some instability (i.e. radioactive decay) so he chose outside the suspected stable range?

            7. He had another reason for choosing 115?

My opinion on question 3: This is doubtful based on the previous discussion.

My opinion on question 4: This is possible.

My opinion on question 5: This is possible but unlikely because he would have chosen a higher number such as 117 or 118 or even 126 to provide many more additional years of fraud discovery protection.

My opinion on question 6: This is possible.

My opinion on question 7: This is what I think is the explanation behind his choice of Element 115 and not any of the other superheavy elements. In 1921 an eminent scientist named Charles F. Brush published a paper which claimed that his experiments using bismuth and a few other metals showed that bismuth behaved differently than the others during tests of gravity. I could not find this paper. In 1922 someone named Harold Potter refuted Brush’s results. In 1923 Brush published another paper [2] which confirmed his bismuth results. This paper described precision Galileo-style drop tests of about 4 feet done against a brick wall using equal sized discs of bismuth, brass alloy and cadmium. The bismuth discs fell faster. I would not trust these results for two reasons: One is that the bismuth results were obtained over several test runs and the bismuth difference was always pronounced at the beginning of the run, and diminished during the run. This indicates a measurement problem to me, but it could have been due to a more subtle underlying cause [3]. Second, surprisingly there was no mention in the test setup description about bismuth’s known diamagnetism, and magnets and other metals were used as part of the test apparatus. Bismuth is the most diamagnetic element known. It could have interacted either with the magnetic field or other magnetized metals in the apparatus. Just guessing. There were no tabular results published in the source that I read nor was there much quantitative discussion. No one appears to have experimented with bismuth in this manner since 1923. Anyhow, it is my theory that Mr. Lazar knew of this experiment or else he had heard rumors about bismuth’s antigravity properties. Given that elements in each column of the periodic table have similar chemistry properties, it was a clever move of Mr. Lazar to choose Element 115 because it falls directly below bismuth in the periodic table. This means that if bismuth has weird and exotic peoperties, then an element right below it on the periodic table might have even more weird, exotic, and intense properties.

After all of this, it must be mentioned that Mr. Lazar could still be right about the stability of element 115. Even though it has now been successfully synthesized, the few atoms synthesized decayed in only 220 msec, and not in the days, months, or years implied by Mr. Lazar. One big problem in synthesizing superheavy elements is getting the neutron count up to a high enough quantity. If this problem is ever overcome, physicists expect the half life of the superheavy elements in and around the island of stability to go up astronomically. If it were synthesized in a stable configuration of protons and neutrons, then that would go a long way toward getting a sample to measure for residual antigravity properties.

[1] On the nuclear structure and stability of heavy and superheavy elements,  Nuclear Physics A  Volume 131, Issue 1, 23 June 1969, quote drawn from the abstract of this 66 page paper. The abstract is on the internet at:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0375947469908094

[2] http://books.google.com/books?id=6lcLAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA75&dq=charles+brush+gravity&lr=&sig=ACfU3U3075IvfHOV8kY2e79dzTJ2yKAmkA#PPP1,M1

Discussion of a Kinetic Theory of Gravitation II; and Some New Experiments in Gravitiation 4/20/1923 by Charles F Brush pgs 75-84

[3] T. Townsend Brown, while performing force measurements on his electrogravitic capacitors in the 1926 to 1930 time frame, noticed that the electrogravitic force would start out larger and then start to lessen over time as more measurements were performed. He discovered that a charge buildup in the capacitor’s dielectric was occurring which needed time for recovery. From “Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion” by Dr. Paul LaViolette, 2008.