This article covers characteristics, speed, rotation, wobble, radiation, manoeuvres, sounds, landing traces etc. The article aims to help the reader make some “technological sense” out of certain aspects of the UFO pattern. Some of the concepts are technical, but I’ve attempted to present them in a language which nearly everyone should understand.
Enhanced image of Belgium UFO.
Shapes and sizes of UFOs, as reported by eye-witnesses, change over time: Since the mid-1970s a growing percentage of UFO reports has been of dark/black triangles and chevrons, some incredibly large and reported all over the world (note: triangle-shaped UFOs have been reported at least as far back as the 1950s and are not a modern phenomena). In recent years the objects reported near the ground or landing are mostly smaller ones up to 5m (15ft) sphere/half-sphere/ovoid/triangular, down to beach ball sized spherical objects, in contrast to the majority of larger objects like the 5-10m (15-35ft) discs and ovals in earlier decades.
Propulsion: UFO researchers including, H Oberth, L Cramp, J Harder, J Campbell, C Poher and P Hill, through a process if elimination of alternatives, speculated on UFO propulsion by accepting a hypothetical gravity-like ‘force field’ which could be repulsive as well as attractive i.e. artificial gravity fields, or what is popularly referred to as “anti-gravity”.
Indeed, witness reports describe that these fields bend and break tree branches, bump or slow automobiles spinning them out of control or tipping them over, stop people by force or knock them down. Under close analysis the subtleties of these interactions combine to point unequivocally to a repulsive force field surrounding the craft. There is no jet propulsion and no ejection propellant of any kind, like those used to give thrust to a rocket. UFOs do not create any significant downdraft of air; unlike a helicopter or Vertical Take Off and Landing aircraft when they hover. UFOs also do not create any significant air-disturbance (turbulence and noise) when they move. Close range eye-witnesses will typically use terms like “floated” or “glided” or “drifted” to describe how a UFO moved smoothly and swiftly through the air. Apparently UFOs use the atmosphere neither for support nor for locomotion (unlike balloons, airplanes, helicopters, birds etc). UFOs don’t use aerodynamic lift designs such as those used on ordinary aircraft wings (See diagram).
The middle word “flying” in the U.F.O. acronym is an unsuitable term. UFOs don’t “fly”, they are vectored along trajectories. In this instance the term ‘vectored’ means changing the UFO’s direction by altering the airflow control force field (ACFF).
NASA aeronautical engineer Paul R. Hill in his book “Unconventional Flying Objects: A Scientific Analysis” explains how UFOs may utilise acceleration-type (i.e. gravity-like) force fields in several ways: externally for propulsion and airflow-control (shockwave suppression and drag reduction) and inside the vehicle for acceleration neutralization during manoeuvres (so UFO occupants can withstand the tremendous accelerations, which would certainly kill a human pilot). Of the first two field types, the UFO propulsive force field (PFF) may be thought as being long-range, narrow and focused. Whereas the UFO airflow-control force field (ACFF) may be thought as short-range, continuous, and having components which are uniformly distributed with respect to direction.
In his book, Hill -who was a famous aerodynamicist in his day, provides calculations and possible arrangement of force field generators within spherical and oval UFOs, which would produce the necessary effects, including the ability of UFOs to travel supersonically without generating a sonic boom. Manipulation of the surrounding air/water by the ACFF would, even at supersonic speeds, result in a constant-pressure, constant-density flow around the UFO, in which the UFO is surrounded by a subsonic (slower than the speed of sound) flow-pattern of streamlines, and subsonic velocity ratios (hence no shockwave i.e. sonic boom). This minimizes friction and heating issues. An additional benefit of the ACFF is that drops of rain, dust, insects, or other objects would follow streamline paths around the UFO rather than impact it.
Effectively, the ACFF creates a “protective shield” around the UFO, much like an incandescent light bulb. Imagine the UFO is the filament and the bulb is the air-control field around it, which protects the UFO, and keeps the surrounding medium (air/water) from coming in touch with it.
The Aerial Phenomena Research Organization (APRO) case of a farmer in Miller County, Missouri 14-Feb-1967, who threw rocks at a UFO and they bounced off an invisible barrier is one such case which seems to confirm this. Another case occurred during the Korean War in 1951 (see link). http://www.nicap.org/springkor.
UFO ACFF DIAGRAM
Could the “aura-like” glow of the air (i.e. “plasma sheath”) around many UFOs be due to the ionization of surrounding air by the electromagnetic (EM) radiation accompanying the UFO “airflow-control” force field (ACFF) used for shockwave suppression and drag reduction (resistance experienced by a body moving through a fluid medium, especially by an aircraft when travelling through the air).? The ACFF apparently creates an envelope of lower atmospheric density (vacuum) around the UFO, by pushing the surrounding medium (air/water) away from the skin of the UFO.
UFOs seem to switch off their ACFF when they hover near the ground or land, which eliminates the “plasma sheath” and allows details of the UFO to be seen.
UFOs observed to travel continuously at Mach 4 or 5 (4939.2 k/ph or 6174 k/ph) do not appear to generate temperatures sufficiently high to be destructive to known materials. In other words, UFOs appear to prevent high aerodynamic heating rates rather than permitting a heating problem to arise. It appears they do not require heat-resistant materials such as the NASA Space Shuttle, whose surface temperatures can reach 1300°C. The resolution of this potential problem may derive from the fact that the force-field control that results in the prevention of shockwave drag, mentioned earlier, is also effective in preventing aerodynamic heating. In effect, the airflow approaches then springs away from the craft, depositing no energy in the process.
Merging/Splitting: UFOs have been reported “splitting” into smaller objects, in a soundless “explosion” with bright light (e.g. Rendlesham forest Dec-1980, or Puerto Rico 28-Dec-1988).
The following statement comes from a MUFON (Mutual UFO Network) Event Report.
We were outside sitting on the porch at 8:45 p.m. smoking a cigarette. It’s been my habit for the last few weeks to check for a particular star as it comes into view over the treetops around that time every night. I look for it every night because it’s always the brightest star in view over my house. I saw it in its usual spot, but then I noticed another, brighter star that was twinkling through the trees a little to the east of my star. As I focused on it, I realized that it wasn’t twinkling … it was flashing. My husband was out with me and I called his attention to it. I asked him if it was the space station (which I thought MY star was) but as we watched it, it flashed brighter with multicoloured lights. Red, blue, green, yellow, orange. We got up and walked out into the yard, thinking to see it better through the trees.
It hovered the whole time … but would raise and lower a little bit, but randomly. It wasn’t a trick of the eye, though. We noticed at the same time. Then I saw it split into two lights, twinkling different colours. The second, new one rose up from the first only slightly and hovered a few seconds, before merging back into the first. That’s when I went in to get the camera.
I called my friend in Carl Junction to ask if she could see it from her house. I told her which direction, she went outside and almost immediately spotted it. She described to me exactly what I was seeing … the flashing, multicoloured lights, the slight rising and falling … it was like nothing any of us have ever seen before. She also started filming from her vantage point. I filmed … I don’t know … 30 minutes or so over the course of an hour, and got several very clear still shots. This object followed a track across the sky — but slower than all the rest of the stars, I think. I have no idea what this object is … it could very well be the space station. But I would like a very thorough explanation and demonstration as to why this thing broke apart, merged, and flashed so many different colours for so long. It was like nothing I’d ever seen before.
The Marfa Merging Lights link (Unrelated to the above testimony): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfCJvh6kwcQ
Note: Could the Marfa lights be related to ball lightning or other ‘earthlight’ Phenomena such as put forward by the Tectonic Strain Theory (TST)? https://occultusregnum.wordpress.com/2011/09/17/the-tectonic-strain-theory-tst/
Rotation/Spin: UFOs with a round cross-section (e.g. spheres, disks, ovals, cones, cylinders) are often reported to exhibit a rotating motion. Many discoid UFOs have luminous “portholes” (“windows”, “vents”) arranged in a circular band around their circumference often give the illusion of rotation, by blinking multi colours in sequence, or a single colour in which each light will individually pulse brighter periodically. Witnesses often describe them as “chase lights” or “lights on a theatre marquee”.
Note: Rotation of “lights” at the rim of saucers is practically always reported to be counter-clockwise i.e. left to right as seen from the side. A few UFOs have been reported to have two rotating sections, which counter-rotate. UFOs are almost never reported to rotate in their entirety, despite the popular myth. Examples: Waterbury CT 1987, America West Airlines Flight 564 May-1995, Newport CA 2009, Puerto Rico 1990, Redlands, CA USA 1968, Blenheim, New Zealand 1959, Bexley, UK 1955.
Some have suggested that the rotating components of UFOs may be for gyroscopic stabilisation. Others suspect it is connected to the propulsion system and to that effect are intrigued by the parallels with recent scientific literature on gravity effects of rotating superconductors and the subject of field effects caused by moving matter known as “Gravitomagnetism”.
Some discoid UFOs (e.g. saucers, Saturn-shaped etc) have been reported to have a rotating outer rim, which is described as spinning (or “vibrating”) independently from the central part or cupola, which remains stationary.
Wobble: When hovering or moving slowly, some spherical UFOs (e.g. saucers, Saturns) exhibit a “wobble” in a sinusoidal path, an undulating “rocking” motion, like a gyroscope or a top (other expressions used by witnesses: “like a boat at anchor on water” or “tipping right and left”), similar to that of a spinning coin as it is winding down and closely approaching a flat surface.
There is some evidence which suggests that the UFO gravity-like force field has a cyclic component, i.e. periodically attracts and repels matter. Also, in several cases of round, hovering, UFOs (discoid, spherical and egg shaped) the gravity-like force field seems to prevail within a cylindrical zone having about the same diameter as the UFO and extending from it down to the ground. This force field acts upon objects underneath the UFO, and also seems to be imparting them a rotation (a torque or turning force) as suggested by the spinning.
Note: Could the gravity-like force field be responsible for some crop circles?
The swirling of loose materials (plants, sand, snowflakes etc) has been reported rising towards hovering UFOs suggesting an anti-gravity effect. The same effect has also been reported over bodies of water, such as seas and lakes (see diagram).
UFOs’ non-propellant propulsion and associated phenomena seem to defy our Physics theories. Both Classical Mechanics (Newton’s gravity) and General Relativity (Einstein’s theory of gravitation), require the existence of “negative mass” (or energy) for antigravity to be possible. However, the Standard Model of particle physics does not permit negative mass. To overcome these objections, other UFO researchers (e.g. physicists Friedman, Meesen, Petit, Warmkessel), attempt to explain UFO propulsion based solely on the currently established physics theories; in particular on “Magneto Hydrodynamics” (MHD), i.e. ionize the ambient air into plasma and then work with magnetic fields.
Test vehicles have been built around MHD principles, including the EM submarine model tested by Dr S. Way of UCSB in 1965, the submarine Yamato 1 of Japan in 1992 or the proposed “Wingless Electromagnetic Air Vehicle” – WEAV by Dr S. Roy of the University of Florida in 2008. Although UFOs would become more acceptable, if more of the UFO pattern could be explained in terms of today’s scientific principles, IMHO and MHD-type methods simply don’t conform to the UFO evidence (e.g. it doesn’t account for the direct gravity effects).
But all is not lost yet. As mentioned in the “Rotation/Spin” section above, there is new but yet unconfirmed scientific research in the field of gravity effects of rotating superconductors and “Gravitomagnetism”. Anomalous gravity effects have been reported e.g. in Mar-2006 Austrian physicist M.Tajmar and others in an experiment funded by ESA (European Space Agency), reported generation of a toroidal (doughnut-shaped) gravitational field in a rotating accelerated superconducting Niobium ring.
Theoretical frameworks include work by Sakharov, Haisch, Rueda and Puthoff (Zero-Point-Field and polarisable vacuum) and by Burkhard Heim (newscientist).
Radiation: When airborne, UFOs emit invisible electromagnetic (EM) wave energy with ionizing capability. There is some evidence and theory indicating that the EM radiation is about coincident with the UFO’s “gravity-like” force fields, i.e. gravity-like waves (used for propulsion and airflow control) and ionizing EM waves go together, the latter being some form of support for the generation of force field waves, or simply a side-effect (i.e. propulsive waves may have an electromagnetic component).
Hill estimated UFO primary radiation to be in a range between the bottom of X-ray band and the lower end of Gamma-ray band. (Wikipedia: Electromagnetic spectrum and Ionizing radiation) These X-rays or mild gamma-rays are quite adequate to create the universally seen “ion sheath” around UFOs. Conversely, the existence of the ionized air around UFOs lends weight to the idea of high-intensity EM radiation from the UFO. X-rays would also penetrate a few inches of soil, giving up their energy to plant-root depths. Soil being a thermal insulator, the heat would escape slowly and the temperature would build up with time below a low-hovering UFO. Much ground heating data is from saucer-type UFOs, which are known to focus their force fields and accompanying ionizing radiation downward with considerable accuracy, because of the observed saucer “ion cones” (See enhanced insert).
Mild Gamma-rays are suspected for symptoms similar to radiation sickness in witnesses who have closely approached UFOs. However, lasting radioactivity, which would indicate the presence of particle radiation, has not been found at landing sites.
It should be noted that radiation has been suspected to be associated with UFO sightings since the early 1950s. The classic 1955 book “Report on UFOs” by Edward J. Ruppelt, who served as head of the United States Air Force’s UFO Project “Blue Book” between 1951-1953 and later research engineer at Northrop Aircraft Company, mentions grass roots charring and skin burn of a Florida scoutmaster in 1952.
Physiological effects on human witnesses who came close to a UFO, include a sense of “static” (hair stood on end) or prickling sensation and in some cases a heating / burning sensation, vibration , and temporary paralysis (attributed to shock/fear, but I think more study is needed since animals are reportedly also affected). After-effects of close encounters may include sunburned-like skin and eye irritation (e.g. conjunctivitis), extreme dryness of the nasal area and of the throat, nausea, vomiting, headaches, and general weakness. There have been a few cases of people and animals that stood directly under a UFO who experienced symptoms similar to radiation-sickness. People who have stared at glowing UFOs at close range have suffered “welder burn”-type eye damage, temporary loss of vision and even lasting eye damage (note: UV?). Occasionally odours have been reported, described as “ozone-like”, “foul stench”, “pungent”, “sulphuric stink” etc. Accidents have occurred. Further reading: “A catalogue of UFO-related human physiological effects” (1996) by John Schuessler and UFO cases involving injury/death by Geoff Dittman.
Plasmas can interact strongly with electromagnetic radiation, “Plasma Stealth” is a proposed process that uses ionized gas (plasma) to reduce the radar cross section (RCS) of an aircraft. This may explain why sometimes UFOs are seen visually, but not tracked on radar. Often UFOs have a very strong magnetic field. Also, in several cases, light (e.g. from car headlights or beaming spotlights) is reported to “bend” in front of the UFO, an effect which some suggest is related with the most controversial aspect of UFO reports: the apparent ability to disappear / “blink out” or seem to “implode” (diminish in angular size) [miniature-scale “gravitational lensing”-type phenomenon?]. Given the tremendous amount of energy UFOs seem to be expending, their power source is a big mystery. Many ideas have been proposed, including that UFOs are storing energy in a very concentrated form, or converting gravity to usable energy (H.Oberth 1950s), or utilising ambient energy (speculations about being able to tap the so-called Zero-Point-Energy) or utilize remote transmission of power (wireless energy transfer).
Interference: Electromagnetic (EM) effects observed include interruption of electrical circuitry and radio communications, magnetic and gyro compasses gyrate and wobble, batteries are burned out. Car gasoline engines stop (but oddly diesel are apparently unaffected). More: 56 aircraft pilot UFO sightings involving EM-effects, strong magnetic field. Absence of heat near a UFO only mild sensation of warmth, so not much infra-red radiation. The surface of the UFO is not very hot; nothing is at a red heat. A “corona”, i.e. luminous plasma (ionized air) is produced around specific areas of the UFO, probably created by the intense EM radiation (radiant ionization).
Further research on magnetic fields and automobile ignition systems.
A strong magnetic field might saturate the ignition coil and reduce voltage to the spark plugs. Joe Kirk Thomas, while employed as a EM interference engineer, did some experiments which led him to believe that “interference with automotive ignition systems could occur at magnetic field levels (at the point of interference) of 0.1 Tesla / 1000 Gauss and frequency of 100 Hz.” (src: MUFON Journal Sep-1987, Oct-1989) Under this scenario, automobiles with diesel engines are immune to being stalled by the proximity of a UFO, because diesel engines do not utilize a high voltage ignition system
Another idea, suggested by J.McCampbell, was that the ionisation of air around the UFO. Once ionised to form a plasma, air loses its normal insulating properties and will conduct electricity at lower voltages (commonly referred to as the insulator ‘breakdown voltage’) and thus short-circuits the high-voltage part of the ignition. Note: Could this be related to the tingling sensations, of hair standing up on end, and other physiological effects reported by witnesses when in close proximity to UFOs?.
Illumination / Colours, luminosity and lights: (note: this is a complex subject and much of what follows is speculation and conjecture) Though a few UFOs appear totally dark and unlit (no light in the visible spectrum), the most common aspect of UFO sightings made at night or twilight, is that the UFO appeared to be a source of light, rather than just reflect light from elsewhere (in fact, about 2/3rds of all UFO reports is of distant lights moving in the night sky).
As suggested in the previous sections on UFO Radiation and Propulsion , many of the UFO “lights” are thought to be luminous ionization of air, resulting from energetic EM radiation emitted by the UFOs in relation with the UFO gravity-like force fields (used for airflow-control, propulsion etc). The overall shape of UFO luminosity depends on the shape of the UFO and its current operating condition and manoeuvre, so a UFO’s outline as seen by external observer can change (e.g. a disk at night may appear as a luminous ice cream-cone, teardrop, oval or sphere). UFO glow can vary from faint (“like phosphorescence”), to soft (“like a neon light”), to intense (“like huge car headlights”), to extremely bright (“like welder’s arc”).
At low-light conditions (night or twilight), close-range eyewitnesses may report :
full body luminosity / halos (e.g. “an eerie glow surrounded the UFO like an aura”, “each UFO was engulfed by a sphere of light”) which may change colours (predominantly orange/yellow, but sometimes white, red, green, blue) and brightness in a “flickering” / “pulsating” manner. Full body luminosity is usually observed on UFOs in flight. In rare cases it is observed in a landed or hovering UFO, however, in those cases, the object usually almost immediately engages in flight. Hill thought “there seems to be considerable leakage or random radiation, because the UFO is sometimes surrounded with an ion zone”, however it’s possible that the “UFO ion sheath” may be a boundary layer effect due to the -hypothetical- “airflow-control force field” a short-range, continuous, radial field (spreading from the centre outwards), having components which are uniformly distributed with respect to direction.
Interpreting the “UFO sphere of light” based on this idea: The ACFF (similarly to a glass around the filament of an incandescent light bulb) pushes the air/water away from the surface of the UFO in a radial pattern, creating a spherical shell of rarified air (near vacuum) close to the surface of the UFO. The sphere of luminous ionized air (plasma) at some distance around the UFO is a boundary layer effect, at distance r0 and of thickness Δr, the latter being the zone where the density of rarified air is “just right” to be ionized by the EM radiation accompanying the ACFF.
Note: Depending on the thickness of the surrounding plasma sheath, a UFO’s shape and structural details may either be visible or obscured. If the UFO plasma sheath is thin, a UFO at night may appear to be “inside a transparent globe of light”. But if the plasma sheath around the UFO is thick, a UFO’s actual shape may be obscured and a discoid UFO may appear like a huge spherical / oval / oblong-shaped light. However, when the ACFF is turned down / switched off, the actual shape UFO may be seen, hence giving rise to all the sighting reports of UFO spheres “shape-shifting” i.e. transforming into other shapes, e.g. “dark triangle emerged from inside the orb of light” or “orb transformed into disk”, “huge globe released egg-shaped craft” etc. Examples: photo Albiosc France 1974, USAF Captain, Selma, AL 1957, Sheriff of Sibley County, Minnesota, 1965, Estes Park, CO 6-Sep-2000, colour-changing orb ejects triangle May-2009 Oregon USA, vike: 1 2 3.
Patchy body light. light is emitted from certain areas of the UFO’s geometry, e.g. several “lights” on their underside and sides. Saucer-shaped UFOs often emit light from their underside or rim. Triangles often have 3 lights on their underside, one at each corner, which point downwards. Examples: Green Bay Wisconsin USA Jan-2007, Weyauwega, WI USA, Feb-2003, pilots of Chicago airlines DC3 Mar-1950.
“Beams” of light: There are many reports of strange “beams of light” emanating from UFOs. Some have been described as “searchlights, which would turn in a sweeping motion, shining light opposite to the direction the UFO is moving”. Other beams are described as “laser-like” (focused, seem to exhibit no dispersion with distance – collimated light), but may also appear “almost solid”, propagate (extend/retract) slowly, and stop abruptly in mid-air. Such luminous beams directed from the UFO towards the ground could be columns of ionized air, related to or a by-product of UFO propulsion. Example: “had several lights shining down onto the field across the road and they moved like the spotlights move that they use for grand opening events, like on a swivel on the object”
Certain beams seem to be used for inspection or transportation (MUFON-CES Conf 1978, Coyne helicopter case OH USA Oct-1973). Some may be weapons, having as a purpose the projection of heat, the disruption of electric and electronic equipment, and even the temporary paralysis of individuals. Finally some could just be powerful beaming spotlights, to light up the terrain.
Ejected luminosity is sometimes reported, as shown in photos (e.g. Robert Campbell 2-Aug-1965), night-time videos (e.g. Long Beach, CA Police Department helicopter FLIR 25-Dec-2004 youtube), and testimonies (e.g. “throw off glowing particles, like molten metal” — Col. Halt, case Rendlesham forest Dec-1980). Material remains luminous for some time after falling away from the object. If this material is a plasma then a) it is heavier than air, and b) it is solid enough to survive a fall through the air and retain its luminosity. In some cases, it might also be a luminous liquid (look up Delphos Kansas USA, 1971) or molten metal (Bob White artefact 1985).
“Flashes” of light: UFO reports may mention intermittent flashes (“odd strobe-light effect”), occasionally very bright and noticeable even in broad daylight e.g. “like mirror reflecting sunlight”. One hypothesis is that it is probably caused when brilliant plasma surrounding the UFO emits light directly or via reflection off the skin of the UFO.
Let’s first explore the “sheath of illumination”: Observing a UFO from some distance at night or twilight, people very often report that the UFO appeared to be a source of light, rather than just reflected light from elsewhere. Closer observations have revealed that the glow comes from the air surrounding the UFO (“like an aura”) and not from the UFO itself, except by reflection from the UFO’s surface. The night-time neon-like, solid colour luminosity emanates from an envelope of air around the UFO, like a halo, rather than directly from the UFO. This halo tends to obscure the UFO, making the edges indistinguishable (the “cotton ball effect”). In saucers and saturns the halo concentrates near the “ring” rim, more intensely below than above it. The shape of UFO luminosity depends on its current manoeuvre, e.g. saucers often have an ice cream cone halo underneath. The big cylindrical mother ships sometimes have great white cloud. While sometimes described as “flames” or “exhaust”, very close observations have shown that this glow does not have a high temperature, and it probably represents “cold plasma”, i.e. an ionization of the local atmosphere, similar to what occurs inside a neon light. This solid colour luminosity comes in golden orange, amber, yellow, red, green (like copper flame), blue-green, blue, bluish-purple, blue-violet, brilliant white, singly or in combinations. Of all the visible colours, red and orange/yellow correspond to the least energy. They are also the two most common colours associated with UFO “low-power” operation (when the UFO is hovering or moving relatively slowly). Blue, green, brilliant white and blue-white are common colours when UFOs move fast.
What could be the reason for the many distinct colours? In the previous section on UFO Radiation, It was suggested that UFOs radiate invisible EM wave energy with ionizing capability. According to Hill, the UFO radiation might very well have distinctive frequency components and energy levels, depending on the type of UFO and its operating condition, thus exciting different spectral peaks and colours (ref: ionization @ wikipedia). The UFO colours would be quite different on any other planet, depending on the composition of its atmosphere.
To describe UFO brightness at night, eyewitnesses might use terms like “phosphorescence” or “aura” or “glare” or “surrounded by a shimmer”, but when UFO brightness is stronger people may use words like “dazzling”, “blinding”, “bright as welder’s torch”, “magnesium flare” or “it lit up the entire landscape, you could read a newspaper” etc. When UFOs are observed in daylight, people use terms like “shimmering”, “glowing haze”. Daylight sighting descriptions like “imagine the brightest, shiniest metal” or “like mirror in the sun” may be due to brilliant plasma around the UFO reflecting off the skin of the UFO. Brightness, i.e. light intensity, is proportional to the number of photons passing a given area per unit of time. The UFO ionization energy has two components: 1/ energy level (ref: electron Volts @ wikipedia) and 2/ amount. The former influences the colours of the UFO plasma sheath, whereas the latter, i.e. the amount of ionizing energy per unit area per second that a UFO emits, influences its brightness.
Extract from Paul Hill’s book about the fuzzy UFO outline:
“The phenomenon of ionized and excited atmospheric molecules around a UFO also ties together a number of related mysteries about the UFO. It accounts for the general night time appearance of the UFO: the many observed colours, the fiery, neon-like look, the self-illuminating character, the fuzzy, indefinite or even indiscernible outline, yet an appearance of solidity behind the light. In the daytime the same plasma is present, but usually invisible. Morning and evening, it is partly visible. The ion sheath also accounts for some daytime UFO characteristics such as a shimmering haze, nebulosity of the atmosphere or even smoke-like effects sometimes observed. The absorption characteristics of the plasma can also partly account for the daytime hazy or smoky appearance of the atmosphere around the UFO. When the surrounding illumination is brighter than the plasma, the plasma absorption may be greater than its emission, making it look darker or hazy.” — Hill, p.54
“Running lights”: In addition to the patchy body lights and the sheath of illumination surrounding the UFO, some UFOs are also reported to have lights on them. They are variably described as “portholes”, “windows” or “vents” etc, which may output steady light or blink multi-coloured in a sequence, like a theatre marquee or disco flashing lights (Refer to section Rotation/Spin).
Discoid UFOs may have such lights arranged in a band/ring around their circumference, spheres in an equatorial ring, cigars may have “brightly lit windows” along their length. Hill terms them “running lights”, and thinks they are “at least as complicated as those of cars, boats, and aircraft, and perhaps as superficial”, however. They also could be related to the UFO’s propulsion. Some UFOs have strobe-like flashing “beacons” on their top or bottom.
One of the most consistently-observed characteristics of UFO flight is a commonly-encountered pattern in which they tilt to perform all manoeuvres. Specifically, they sit level to hover, tilt forward to move forward, tilt backward to stop, bank to turn, and descend by “falling-leaf” or “silver-dollar-wobble” motions. Detailed analysis by Hill shows that such motion is inconsistent with aerodynamic requirements, but totally consistent with some form of repulsive force-field propulsion.
A further example of the type of correlation that emerges from Hill’s analytical approach is provided by an analysis of the economy of various flight-path profiles. It is shown that high-angle, high-acceleration departures on ballistic-arc trajectories with high-speed coast segments are more efficient than, for example, intermediate-level, horizontal-path trips, both in terms of required impulse-per-unit-mass and time-of-flight parameters. This he correlates with the observation that UFO departures are of the dramatically high-angle, high-acceleration type.
Hill’s book contains the results of an analysis carried out on the famous Ubatuba magnesium fragments, claimed to have originated from an exploded unidentified craft near Ubatuba, Brazil. An analysis of the samples found the magnesium to be not only of exceptional purity, and anomalous in its trace composition of other elements, but 6.7% denser than ordinary pure magnesium, a figure well beyond the experimental error of the measurement. Hill’s calculation shows that this observation can be accounted for by assuming that the sample contained only the pure isotope Mg-26, rather than the naturally-occurring distribution among isotopes Mg-24, Mg-25, and Mg-26. Since the only isotope separation on a significant scale in terrestrial manufacture is that of uranium, such a result must be considered at least anomalous, and possibly as evidence for extraterrestrial manufacture. ( note ): A recent analysis of the “Ubatuba magnesium” can be found in Composition Analysis of the Brazil Magnesium by Peter Sturrock, JSE, 15, 69-95, 2001).
In the final analysis, one must conclude that Hill has assembled as good a case as can be made on the basis of presently available data that the observation of some “unconventional flying objects” is compatible with the presence of engineered platforms weighing in at something around 30 tons, which are capable of 100-g accelerations and 9000-mph speeds in the atmosphere. Perhaps more important for the technical reader, however, is Hill’s supporting argumentation, based on solid analysis, that these platforms, although exhibiting the application of physics and engineering principles clearly beyond our present-day capabilities, do not appear to defy these principles in any fundamental way.
© David Calvert 2016