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.