UAP Theory Site

I didn't see this here, yet, unfortunately, or at least not in it's own thread, and so I will drop it as an "old school" co-existing theory to "UFO's are exotic lifeforms" which I think holds oodles of merit, btw, as does the breakaway civ (IMhO), but the "phenomena" is varied enough to hold many points of view as to it's nature(s). Heck, the only thing I'm sure of is that the "phenomena" exists ...in some manner.

So, without further adieu, or cliches', here is a nice presentation and website for the one or three enthusiasts who missed it...

Overview We present a theory and qualitative explanation for the physics of UAPs and discuss their likely origin. From the theory, we make a list of predictions that can be tested observationally. We want Navy personnel to be aware of these. We provide evidence of these observations within the data that is already available. For general readers, we have prepared additional pages with more detailed explanations of some of the physics involved.

www.uaptheory.com...

These people are on the right track, IMHO. Whenever an object is moving along a geodesic, it is basically “falling”; not experiencing any local accelerations. a reply to: Baddogma

Awesome. Just like the ATS of old.

These people are on the right track, IMHO. Whenever an object is moving along a geodesic, it is basically “falling”; not experiencing any local accelerations. a reply to: Baddogma

originally posted by: Baddogma
I didn't see this here, yet, unfortunately, or at least not in it's own thread, and so I will drop it as an "old school" co-existing theory to "UFO's are exotic lifeforms" which I think holds oodles of merit, btw, as does the breakaway civ (IMhO), but the "phenomena" is varied enough to hold many points of view as to it's nature(s). Heck, the only thing I'm sure of is that the "phenomena" exists ...in some manner.

So, without further adieu, or cliches', here is a nice presentation and website for the one or three enthusiasts who missed it...

Overview We present a theory and qualitative explanation for the physics of UAPs and discuss their likely origin. From the theory, we make a list of predictions that can be tested observationally. We want Navy personnel to be aware of these. We provide evidence of these observations within the data that is already available. For general readers, we have prepared additional pages with more detailed explanations of some of the physics involved.

www.uaptheory.com...

That site is a poster child for the idiocy explained in this "How the Web Became Unreadable" article, where some moron suggested that gray text is easier to read than black text on white, and a lot of other morons who believed him designed their sites that way.

My plea to designers and software engineers: Ignore the fads and go back to the typographic principles of print — keep your type black, and vary weight and font instead of grayness. You’ll be making things better for people who read on smaller, dimmer screens, even if their eyes aren’t aging like mine. It may not be trendy, but it’s time to consider who is being left out by the web’s aesthetic.

So damn the designers of that website and every other website who ignore the plea for legible text and instead use this stupid gray text which is much harder to read than black text.

Regarding the content of that website, they only give a partial quote of Richard Feynman:

As Richard Feynman said, “it is scientific only to say what is more likely or less likely.”

They don't seem to appreciate the rest of what Feynman said which is this:

www.youtube.com...
Feynman Chaser - The Likelihood of Flying Saucers

"From my knowledge of the world that I see around me, I think that it is much more likely that the reports of flying saucers are the result of the known irrational characteristics of terrestrial intelligence, rather than the unknown, rational efforts of extraterrestrial intelligence."

Then they talk about the "tic-tac". The video we have made by Chad Underwood of the "tic-tac" defying the laws of physics is an example of what Feynman said, where Chad Underwood either falls for the illusion that the tic-tac is accelerating, or else he knows it's not and he's lying by claiming he thinks it is, which he might do if some superiors asked him to lie to spread disinformation. And there's no evidence of what Fravor saw because even though he was assigned to identify the UFO, his camera was a potato, or his brain was since he failed to flick the switch on his helmet to record what he saw.



Back to the linked site, it says this:

In April 2020, the US defense department and Navy released three declassified UAP videos, which are also surrounded by information given by some of the Navy personnel involved in the incidents. This imparts a credibility to the reality of UAPs that did not exist prior to this time, and we can now accept the nature of the objects as a scientific topic of investigation.

It says " This imparts a credibility to the reality of UAPs" but what it actually does is impart credibility to Feynman's claim that the UAPs are "the result of the known irrational characteristics of terrestrial intelligence" since there are lots of irrational claims made about those videos, like people claim the "gofast" UFO is going fast (it's not, that is just an illusion created by parallax), people claim the "Gimbal" UFO is rotating (It's not, that is just an illusion caused by the gimbal mechanism), and people like Chad Underwood claim the "FLIR" aka tic-tac UFO defies the laws of physics with the acceleration at the end (again it doesn't, that acceleration is an illusion, there's no acceleration).

Then the site goes into completely unwarranted speculation about distortion fields and such.

It talks about the 2013 Puerto Rico UAP/UFO Rafael Hernandez Airport UFO video, which they calculate is going an average speed of 123 mph, maybe a drone. Then they make some other speed calculations which imply strange accelerations but I don't see any strange accelerations in the video. They also claim the UFO goes in the water but I don't see it clearly go in the water, they lose it just before 3 minutes in the video. They also claim they see gravitational lensing around the object, which is something you might see around a black hole but I think they are getting a little too excited about optical artifacts of the FLIR system.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Ha! Hi Arbi, I agree as to legibility of the site ... though my darkreader helped. As to the more meaty critique' of their theory, cool and thanks! I have no stake in the theory, other than finding it less goofy than some. I'm not surprised they only partially quoted Feynman and garbled some other points. It's on the internet, after all!

But I posted it for input... and you really put it in!

a reply to: 1947boomer

Uh-huh... that part got me reading, too. It makes sense ... of basically nonsensical physics.
Anyway, I'm retiring to kill some of my few remaining brain-cells and wish all a lovely time period of their location.

And Mark08, yeah, I wanted some action on my fav subject at my fav site, so posted something. Try it. It gives one a nice shot of serotonin and gives an illusion of accomplishment.

a reply to: Baddogma


Weight into Speed.

David Hamel.

Been done.

Not a Secret to those who know.

Information is free nothing stops you from learning except yourself.

Me of course being an ignoramus I think their theory is no more then a mind game.
There is absolutely no evidence that any UAP has come from any planet or solar system other than our own, and by that I mean just the Earth. Just because the UAPs show signs of exotic performance and the theorists can come to no other conclusion that they have to be extra terrestrial.
My theory, just like them I can't prove it, is their propulsion and protection from forces that would rip humans apart. Gravity manipulation. Inside the craft is it's own bubble of gravity. Outside, propulsion, go forward plus gravity at rear less gravity at front.
They come from a parallel Earth, they don't vanish, they move back into their own space not observable to us.
Isn't it funny we travel through space at 66,620 MPH on an orb rotating at 1,037 MPH but you don't feel it.

a reply to: crayzeed

I, too, think that particular view may have merit and know it has been held by credible people since the 1940's (and before) ...i.e. the more techno-illogical sightings come from some parallel reality rather than light years away.

But there are many views that have merit and they all indicate that our current cultural understanding are very partial.
When it comes to the fact that unknowns are seen in the sky (and on the ground, in water, in space and maybe even in environments undreamt of yet accessible by humans, somehow) then literally anything is possible.