Peer Reviewed Analysis Of The Flight Characteristics of Anomalous UAPs Published On Sept. 25

On September 25, a peer reviewed paper was published about the flight characteristics and accelerations of the UAPs that were observed back in 2004 by the Nimitz Carrier Group, off the coast of California.

The three authors of the linked 19 page paper, are all from the Scientific Coalition for UAP Studies, with one author also from the Department of Physics at the University at Albany.

None of the authors state that they can prove that the UAPs are extraterrestrial in origin, however, they do state that these craft "appear to violate the laws of physics" and that their estimated accelerations "are consistent with accelerations required for effective interstellar travel, i.e., if these observed accelerations were sustainable in space, then these craft could easily reach relativistic speeds within a matter of minutes to hours and cover interstellar distances in a matter of days to weeks, proper time."

The authors state that they tried to produce a conservative estimate on the observed accelerations, by taking note of "uncertainties to the observations" and by assigning "liberal uncertainties modeled by a Gaussian distribution."

The estimated accelerations of the UAPs were determined by radar data from USS Nimitz former Senior Chief Operations Specialist Kevin Day, eyewitness information from CDR David Fravor and LCDR Jim Straight, as well as analyses of the ATFLIR video.

This published paper shows various formulas used to determine the constant and limited acceleration of the UAPs, as well as how the authors came up with "a ballpark estimate of the power involved to accelerate the UAP."

The author's analysis suggest that the UAPs were either autonomous or remote controlled craft. They believe the UAPs "are taking advantage of technology, engineering, or physics" they aren't familiar with, because the UAPs "had no apparent flight surfaces or means of propulsion," they didn't produce any sonic booms or give off any "excessive heat that would be released given the hundreds of GigaWatts of power" that was needed to propel these craft.

As far as "GigiWatts" are concerned, the authors point out that the "ballpark estimate of the power involved to accelerate the UAP," peaked at 1100 GW, "which exceeds the total nuclear power production of the United States by more than a factor of ten."

The authors state that it is impossible to verify that these craft are extraterrestrial in origin, however, there is "the possibility that these UAVs have been developed by governments, organizations, or individuals on Earth" and "that these UAVs and the technologies they employ may be of extraterrestrial origin."

One might imagine that the presence of unidenifiable, or incomprehensible technology would constitute potential evidence. However, it would not rule out the fact that it could have been created by someone on Earth. The purpose of this paper is not to prove the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis, but instead to focus on the flight kinematics of these UAVs with the aim of building up a body of scientific evidence that will allow for a more precise understanding of their nature and origin."

All quotes and content are from this link, where you can download and read the PDF of the paper entitled, "Estimating Flight Characteristics of Anomalous Unidentified Aerial Vehicles."

a reply to: shawmanfromny



News report for reference

a reply to: o0oTOPCATo0o

CNN is fake news

a reply to: shawmanfromny

Quite a read. To be honest I scanned over a lot of the Math. Bit outside my scope and found the graphing much easier to relate to.

The 50's article regarding the UAP was one I have not read before and I found that an interesting take when compared to the 2 other latest report which I had knowledge of.

I paste an excerpt from the pdf which, to me, pretty well sums up what as to what the paper was getting across to a reader such as myself.

"While the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis can be neither verified nor ruled out at this time, it is useful
to consider whether the characteristics of these UAVs tend to support or rule out the Extraterrestrial
Hypothesis. Given the estimated accelerations of these UAVs, it is useful to consider the time it
would take them to travel interstellar distances. Figure 7A illustrates how long it would take a craft
accelerating at 1000 g to reach various percentages of the speed of light. In just less than an hour, a
craft accelerating at a constant 1000 g would reach 10% of the speed of light, which is NASA’s goal for
the planned 2069 mission to Proxima Centuri [33] (Alpha Centuri system). In less than three hours,
the same craft would reach 30% of the speed of light. Such a craft accelerating at a constant 1000 g for
half of the trip and decelerating at the same rate for the remaining half would reach Proxima Centuri
within 5 days’ ship time due to the fact that it would have been traveling at relativistic speeds for most
of the trip (Figure 7B). However, for those of us on Earth, or anyone on Proxima Centuri b, the trip
would take over four years. As a comparison, a craft accelerating at 100 g would reach 10% of the
speed of light in 8.5 hrs, 30% of the speed of light in just more than a day, and Proxima Centuri in a
month and a half."

Cheers for the post. More educational material to ponder.

Kind regards,

Bally

Or their ground data is inaccurate and flawed because of the new systems being tested at the time.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

Thanks for sharing , reading it on my phone since normal internet is down.

Pretty mindblowing

originally posted by: shawmanfromny these craft "appear to violate the laws of physics"

only as far as we earthlings understand the 'laws' of physics. i suspect we have barely scratched the surface of these 'laws'. we are cosmic amoebas.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

Interesting in a way if you are not in the knowing, but why at this time in the history of UFOs is science and aviation interested in "flight" motions of a typical UFO that you would have thought would have drawn immense interest decades ago?

...And for those not in the knowing, obviously the government is allowing such to be done about videos that themselves could not have easily found their way to the internet and remailed unless TPTB wanted it so.

Are we now being allowed to enter decades of controlled and intense debate over the craft being real or projections, friend or foe, ET UFOs or Skunk Works, products before the whole truth is revealed? Was it just a "show" and little bit of "tell"program we were allowed, to priming the pump for the serious question of just what the Hell are we going to do about the ETs?

Or maybe we should wonder if those craft were Russian or Chinese and we have been bested by technology that we can only dream about? If TPTB play their cards right, the debates in the public arena can range into decades with no real answers coming. But to their credit, the public will be a tad more ready for bigger news at some point and that is probably the only reason for this bit of social engineering by a supposed revelation/slip or whim.

I don't believe that the video of the UFO/UAP/object/tic tac is the clearest available.

We know the US has amazing quality cameras. Just like the Iranian tanker limpet mine incedent video, first released in a grainy can't see much black and white version followed by the release of a clearer colour version where you could see a lot more.

If they are going to tell us and show us an incedent, why release a 240p version and hold back the 4k version. If it was because of security or wanting to withhold advanced tech capabilities why tell us at all, i just don't get it myself. Just release a proper video in the version it captured the object, then we can then discuss what we really see and compare it to what they tell us.

Otherwise, i would suggest there is no point telling us at all. If that is the best version of the video then fair enough, but i don't believe it is.

originally posted by: Moohide
If they are going to tell us and show us an incedent, why release a 240p version and hold back the 4k version. If it was because of security or wanting to withhold advanced tech capabilities why tell us at all, i just don't get it myself. Just release a proper video in the version it captured the object, then we can then discuss what we really see and compare it to what they tell us.

Well, it was never an "official" release, anyway. Just something some crew member burned off in a hurry and stuck in his shoe, then posted it on ATS where is sat ignored for more than a decade. If the Navy has anything better -- or the Air Force or Army or Marines or Coast Guard or whoever -- they're under a nice, shiny lock and key.

a reply to: Blue Shift

Just something some crew member burned off in a hurry and stuck in his shoe

posted it on ATS where is sat ignored for more than a decade

I am presuming they know who the pilot is/was, and who released the video?

So what the pilot did was prove he/she cannot be trusted and broke the secrets act (a felony)? I hope they were sacked and/or court martialled. I would not want that untrustworthy person in my ranks.

But why has this suddenly become a news item in 2019 if it has sat on ATS for over 10 years, there must be a reason for it?

I think what threw me was the title of the CNN video "US Navy confirms UFO videos are the real deal" as i don't remember seeing or hearing of this video before, or maybe i just forgot.

Jeez you people are slow.

We discussed this five days ago in an existing thread.........

originally posted by: moebius
a reply to: celltypespecific

Never heard of MDPI. Lets do a quick web search.

Hmm... Reviewer sends warning

Also Kevin H. Knuth seems to be the chief editor of MDPI Entropy.

I kinda doubt that there has been any actual peer review.

I was just looking at a few reviews of MDPI too.

.....Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI), churns out nearly 160 scholarly journals a year, many of them of mediocre quality, according to Jeffrey Beall, an associate professor and librarian at the University of Colorado Denver, and one of the world’s leading experts on what he calls “predatory” open access publishing.

Each week, MDPI and other questionable publishers hound Dr. Lee by email, asking her to review submissions that she considers shoddy. Mr. Beall has called this particular environmental publication a “pretend journal.” So when Dr. Lee next saw the biology student, she alerted her to the potential problems and redirected her to more credible scholarly publications, such as FACETS, a Canadian open access journal.


www.universityaffairs.ca...

Seems to all be part of the plot to divide ufology and make the people who once believed the US Govt. held all the UFO secrets and were lying are now the ones who aren't lying and are telling people what they wanted to hear.

But who is telling the truth?

originally posted by: Blue Shift

Well, it was never an "official" release, anyway. Just something some crew member burned off in a hurry and stuck in his shoe, then posted it on ATS where is sat ignored for more than a decade.

(NB: None of the following is new, but worth repeating for newcomers.)

Well, technically it was not posted on ATS, rather he provided a link to the German film-makers' site Vision Unlimited that hosted the footage. And then it floated around on YouTube for many years, virtually unnoticed, until early 2015 when Paco Chierici from Fightersweep.com mentioned the incident publicly for the first time (other than ATS eight years previously) in the article, 'There I Was - The X-Files Edition' (unfortunately adorned with a pic of Chris Mellon's balloon faux-pas - ouch).

Somehow the tape made its way to YouTube. A few years after the incident, when first telling me the story, Dave pointed me to the link. It was unremarkable without the background information. But folded into context it was amazing, especially the slow-mo of the dot accelerating out of screen. For years I told the story to friends and showed them the video as punctuation.

However last month when I called Dave to refresh my memory before sitting down to write this bizarre encounter, he informed me that the video had been removed from YouTube. He told me that a government agency with a three letter identifier had recently conducted an investigation into the AAVs and had exhaustively interviewed all parties involved.

So, it seems it vanished from YouTube as soon as (presumably) Zondo & Co began sniffing around. The article is worth revisiting from time to time to study how the 2015 story compares to the current version.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Is this CGI ?
Seems like civilians are seeing Tic-Tacs....
Its from an airplane:

www.reddit.com...

a reply to: celltypespecific

Not shaking with excitement.