The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

UAP/UFO Phenomenon: It's not aliens, until it is.

That_GuyThat_Guy I don't wanna be that guyRegistered User regular
edited June 2023 in Debate and/or Discourse
There is an ever-growing interest in finally figuring out what is behind the recent wave of incredibly well documented Unknown Aerial Phenomena (UAP) seen over the last decade. With ever more increasingly sensitive eyes in the sky, we're seeing objects in the sky apparently behave in ways that are beyond our current known level of technology. We've seen videos of tic-tac shaped objects that emit no reaction heat on thermal sensors, yet are capable of moving at incredible speeds and vectors. There are supposedly even remains of such craft in government custody. The scientific community has spent decades begging for the opportunity to examine and analyze everything we have. The enduring campaign of misdirection and misinformation from the US Government has made any such attempts impossible. That might all be changing.

Not since Project Blue Book has so much public interest been expressed, across the political spectrum, in finally figuring out what is behind this. All the cold war era "government spooks" are no longer in the system. The culture has changed and a new generation is interested in finally getting to the bottom of it.

To this end, the US government has created a bipartisan investigation with the aim to inform the public.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/us-government-expands-ufo-investigations-new-group-forms-pilots-spot-rcna87127

While projects like Breakthrough Listen are leveraging the sheer vast quantity of data collection points available these days.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakthrough_Listen.

That_Guy on
«13456789

Posts

  • That_GuyThat_Guy I don't wanna be that guy Registered User regular
    Honestly, I don't think it's aliens. I think someone, somewhere made a breakthrough in apparently reactionless propulsion. However, creating such an engine requires a technological, industrial, and financial investment that makes it basically impossible to build at scale. Like, the sort of materials required to make just 1 work cost the equivalent of a modest country's annual GDP.

  • This content has been removed.

  • ElvenshaeElvenshae Registered User regular
    That_Guy wrote: »
    incredibly well documented Unknown Ariel Phenomena (UAP)

    That’s just Halle Bailey.

  • That_GuyThat_Guy I don't wanna be that guy Registered User regular
    That_Guy wrote: »
    Honestly, I don't think it's aliens. I think someone, somewhere made a breakthrough in apparently reactionless propulsion. However, creating such an engine requires a technological, industrial, and financial investment that makes it basically impossible to build at scale. Like, the sort of materials required to make just 1 work cost the equivalent of a modest country's annual GDP.

    Technological advancement just plain doesn't work this way. Quantum leaps in capability don't happen. Even something like the atomic bomb had a very long tail of development which made it clear it was possible, and a long ramp up of industrial capability to make it practical (all major WW2 powers were aware of the theory, but were not fully aware that it was more achievable - the Japanese when being nuked were surprised America had enough Uranium, since they assumed the bomb needed on the order of 10 tons).

    There's no current research in any field which suggests a reactionless drive is an achievable phenomenon - i.e. there are no small scale or unusual demonstrators showing a physical principle which might be adapted to achieve it. This would be akin to Marie Curie observing nuclear fission reactions - that work was public, and could be easily replicated at the time by anyone with interest.

    Then there's the pragmatic concerns: if you had a genuine reactionless drive, by some means which was achievable but unexpected, the question is why you would ever fly a practical implementation anywhere within Earth's atmosphere at all. Reactionless means you don't need reaction-mass. That means space travel. There's no reason to take your super-secret vehicle and fly it around anywhere where it could be observed - presuming you're trying to keep it secret. If you can produce force without reaction mass, then you can literally just go straight up into space from any launch point - you have no need for propellant or oxidizer, simply whatever energy source is required.

    Finally is the industrial nature of science: building single artifacts of anything doesn't happen. The mechanics of something "costing a lot" are pretty much exclusively in labor and materials costs. What costs could possibly exist that would not be noticed if they were required for producing a single artifact? You can't hide the acquisition of fissile materials nor electricity, but more importantly presuming the first of some such vehicle cost a lot to produce, most of that cost would be in tooling and equipment to produce it. Building a lot of them is more useful and cheaper.

    There are current theoretical frameworks for apparently reactionless gravidic engines. I was very careful in my phrasing here. Being apparently reactionless doesn't mean there is no reaction mass/energy moving around. It just means that the thermal camera on a jet can't see it. Creating such a drive would require negative mass and magnetic monopoles, both of which are exotic beyond definition, and may be impossible to fully realize. However there is a basic theory for their creation. If a bose-einstein condensate has an external magnetic field applied to it in just the right way, it can begin to resemble a monopole. Similarly, we've observed a negative mass effect between 2 semiconductors in a lab. I'm not saying you can go straight from a strange effect observed in a lab to a spaceship with the snap of one's fingers. It's more like going from a theoretical framework for nuclear criticality to the Chicago Pile-1 test.

    We're running out of mundane explanations for these sightings. There's too much documented evidence for malfunctioning observation equipment and unreliable witnesses to explain it all away. I'm not ready to accept that aliens are visiting us. If it's not aliens than it has to be something made here on earth. The natural explanations strain credibility even more than the man-made ones do.

  • Gabriel_PittGabriel_Pitt Stepped in it Registered User regular
    That's one thing I always hates in fiction - the scientist and his hot daughter making some sort of amazing, world changing, paradigm shifting breakthrough, but the world is not ready/the bad guys will get it and ruin everything, whatever, and then the science duder nobly sacrifices himself, and the world is safe from his terrible technology forever.

    It's just like, ugh, no. If you were able to build something once, someone else is going to be able to figure it out. There is no can't be replicated only I know how breakthrough, because everyone is working from the same principles and framework.

  • Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Central OhioRegistered User regular
    That's one thing I always hates in fiction - the scientist and his hot daughter making some sort of amazing, world changing, paradigm shifting breakthrough, but the world is not ready/the bad guys will get it and ruin everything, whatever, and then the science duder nobly sacrifices himself, and the world is safe from his terrible technology forever.

    It's just like, ugh, no. If you were able to build something once, someone else is going to be able to figure it out. There is no can't be replicated only I know how breakthrough, because everyone is working from the same principles and framework.

    What are you talking about, American democracy is right there to disprove this

    (This is sarcasm)

    l7ygmd1dd4p1.jpeg
    3b2y43dozpk3.jpeg
  • R-demR-dem Registered User regular
    I'm pretty firmly in the "the thing does things not physically possible!" "Then it's clearly not physical" camp for the more gnarly UAP such as the Nimitz gun cam / tic tac sighting.

  • That_GuyThat_Guy I don't wanna be that guy Registered User regular
    R-dem wrote: »
    I'm pretty firmly in the "the thing does things not physically possible!" "Then it's clearly not physical" camp for the more gnarly UAP such as the Nimitz gun cam / tic tac sighting.

    That's a really good point. The tic tac has to be something that apparently reflects radar, visible light, and emits blackbody radiation. But we're probably a lot closer to creating a hologram that can emit light in ways that resemble reflected light than a reactionless drive. The debris are a little harder to explain with this, though.

  • CalicaCalica Registered User regular
    I'm firmly team "that's a mundane object, but your frames of reference are deceptive because you and/or they are moving at high speeds in an environment with few to no landmarks for depth perception" until proven otherwise.

    Also radar ghosts :P

  • That_GuyThat_Guy I don't wanna be that guy Registered User regular
    Calica wrote: »
    I'm firmly team "that's a mundane object, but your frames of reference are deceptive because you and/or they are moving at high speeds in an environment with few to no landmarks for depth perception" until proven otherwise.

    Also radar ghosts :P

    Many of these objects were observed by ground and sea forces. The USS Nimitz encounters can not be explained away by moving too fast because the picked up whatever it was on ship's radar before dispatching fighters to investigate. In fact, multiple ships picked up the object on radar and optical. It stayed in the air longer than any of our fighters could manage, too. Radar ghosts also can't explain the object shot down by the Alaskan coast. So far all we've been told on that one is that it was the size of a sadan, had no visible means of propulsion and bore no resemblance to a balloon. The navy claims it was unable to recover the debris but who knows what they aren't telling us. The whole thing's been classified so FOIA request are being denied.

  • HydropoloHydropolo Registered User regular
    That_Guy wrote: »
    Calica wrote: »
    I'm firmly team "that's a mundane object, but your frames of reference are deceptive because you and/or they are moving at high speeds in an environment with few to no landmarks for depth perception" until proven otherwise.

    Also radar ghosts :P

    Many of these objects were observed by ground and sea forces. The USS Nimitz encounters can not be explained away by moving too fast because the picked up whatever it was on ship's radar before dispatching fighters to investigate. In fact, multiple ships picked up the object on radar and optical. It stayed in the air longer than any of our fighters could manage, too. Radar ghosts also can't explain the object shot down by the Alaskan coast. So far all we've been told on that one is that it was the size of a sadan, had no visible means of propulsion and bore no resemblance to a balloon. The navy claims it was unable to recover the debris but who knows what they aren't telling us. The whole thing's been classified so FOIA request are being denied.

    This doesn't necessarily mean anything other than "the system that the info is gathered on is classified and giving up the goods would give away too much info on how that system works" or something equally innocuous. This goes back to a conversation that ALMOST happened but no one really disagreed with in the other thread of the idea that too much stuff is by default classified.

    Beyond that, the lack of a known explanation doesn't mean "we are running out" of explanations or the like, it just means we haven't got one that fits the data. That's not how science works.

  • edited June 2023
    This content has been removed.

  • That_GuyThat_Guy I don't wanna be that guy Registered User regular
    Zavian wrote: »
    Hydropolo wrote: »
    That_Guy wrote: »
    Calica wrote: »
    I'm firmly team "that's a mundane object, but your frames of reference are deceptive because you and/or they are moving at high speeds in an environment with few to no landmarks for depth perception" until proven otherwise.

    Also radar ghosts :P

    Many of these objects were observed by ground and sea forces. The USS Nimitz encounters can not be explained away by moving too fast because the picked up whatever it was on ship's radar before dispatching fighters to investigate. In fact, multiple ships picked up the object on radar and optical. It stayed in the air longer than any of our fighters could manage, too. Radar ghosts also can't explain the object shot down by the Alaskan coast. So far all we've been told on that one is that it was the size of a sadan, had no visible means of propulsion and bore no resemblance to a balloon. The navy claims it was unable to recover the debris but who knows what they aren't telling us. The whole thing's been classified so FOIA request are being denied.

    This doesn't necessarily mean anything other than "the system that the info is gathered on is classified and giving up the goods would give away too much info on how that system works" or something equally innocuous. This goes back to a conversation that ALMOST happened but no one really disagreed with in the other thread of the idea that too much stuff is by default classified.

    Beyond that, the lack of a known explanation doesn't mean "we are running out" of explanations or the like, it just means we haven't got one that fits the data. That's not how science works.

    recently, there has been a new classification over all FOIA requests for documents related to AARO that appear to be related to a law enforcement investigation into AARO, though it's unknown at this time if it relates to the Grusch investigation:
    (b)(7)(a} which could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforecement proceedings; (b)(7)(e) which would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of law.

    also do we really need two threads for UAPs? The other one didn't even get to 50 pages, not sure why we needed another

    I couldn't find another thread when I did a search. I would have posted there if I didn't miss it. Could you link that thread? I'm happy to request this thread be closed.

  • This content has been removed.

  • R-demR-dem Registered User regular
    https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240708/lets-talk-about-the-mystery-around-uaps-and-uap-senate-hearing#latest

    Though to be fair it got shitty at the end and I actually assumed it had been closed

  • QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    I'm definitely interested in someday learning what natural or man made phenomena these UAPs were. Some of that stuff is wild.

  • kimekime Queen of Blades Registered User regular
    edited June 2023
    Aliens cloned the thread!

    kime on
    Battle.net ID: kime#1822
    3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
    Steam profile
  • CalicaCalica Registered User regular
    @That_Guy is an alien, confirmed :o

  • That_GuyThat_Guy I don't wanna be that guy Registered User regular
    Calica wrote: »
    @That_Guy is an alien, confirmed :o

    NOW you tell me? Would have been nice to know when I was younger. So are we talking a Superman situation (just without the super powers) or a Scully from X-Files situation?

    On a serious note, I'll just flag the thread and let the mods decide its fate.

  • dlinfinitidlinfiniti Registered User regular
    we are the real aliens

    AAAAA!!! PLAAAYGUUU!!!!
  • This content has been removed.

  • ElJeffeElJeffe Registered User, ClubPA regular
    The other thread was locked by a UMP (unidentified mod person). While the incident is being investigated, this thread can operate in its stead, though I assure you there is nothing to see there.

    I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
  • This content has been removed.

  • That_GuyThat_Guy I don't wanna be that guy Registered User regular
    Zavian wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    The other thread was locked by a UMP (unidentified mod person). While the incident is being investigated, this thread can operate in its stead, though I assure you there is nothing to see there.

    CONSPIRACY!

    *puts on tin foil hat*

    You fool. You've fallen for their trap. The foil hat actually AMPLIFIES the mind control signal.

  • HydropoloHydropolo Registered User regular
    Wait... what? SPO
    That_Guy wrote: »
    Zavian wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    The other thread was locked by a UMP (unidentified mod person). While the incident is being investigated, this thread can operate in its stead, though I assure you there is nothing to see there.

    CONSPIRACY!

    *puts on tin foil hat*

    You fool. You've fallen for their trap. The foil hat actually AMPLIFIES the mind control signal.

    Aluminum, ALUMINUM foil amplifies our signal...errr...

  • edited June 2023
    This content has been removed.

  • edited June 2023
    This content has been removed.

  • Mr RayMr Ray Sarcasm sphereRegistered User regular
    What's the odds of this being some sort of previously unknown space phenomena? Last I heard we still don't fully understand what the deal is with ball lightning, which has been observed moving in ways best described as "fucky", including changing direction mid-flight.

    Obviously the more exciting possibility would be actual no-shit probes from another civilization.

  • This content has been removed.

  • Mr RayMr Ray Sarcasm sphereRegistered User regular
    So what you're saying is, the sky gets angry and teams up with the ground to make a lightning-baby. Gotcha.

  • BloodySlothBloodySloth Registered User regular
    Mr Ray wrote: »
    What's the odds of this being some sort of previously unknown space phenomena? Last I heard we still don't fully understand what the deal is with ball lightning, which has been observed moving in ways best described as "fucky", including changing direction mid-flight.

    Obviously the more exciting possibility would be actual no-shit probes from another civilization.

    The hypothesis is that it's basically vaporized soil which recondenses into nanoparticles in the air, which being very light weight can float, and being charged can exhibit some amount of electrical attraction.

    That's so fucking cool holy shit

  • Mr RayMr Ray Sarcasm sphereRegistered User regular
    But yeah, that's exactly the sort of thing I was talking about, is it possible for instance that some space dust could get electrically charged somehow and then just sort of float around randomly?

  • AbsoluteZeroAbsoluteZero The new film by Quentin Koopantino Registered User regular
    Not ball lightning but also fucking weird and unsettling. However unlike ball lightning this is captured clearly on video.

    https://youtu.be/CPk0mKVnnCs

    I think you could be forgiven for thinking aliens. I can only imagine what this might look like to a pilot flying near it. Totally bizarre, impossibly fast movements.

    But it's ice crystals caught in a rapidly changing electromagnetic field above a thunderstorm.

    cs6f034fsffl.jpg
  • HydropoloHydropolo Registered User regular
    Don't worry, we've been finding funky stuff all over the solar system:

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/06/20/jupiter-lightning-nasa-juno-green-light/70336757007/

  • WeaverWeaver Breakfast Witch Hashus BrowniusRegistered User regular
    I'm way more open to the idea of something that has higher access to the rules of this existence than I am tiktok trying to convince me that skinwalkers are real.

  • HydropoloHydropolo Registered User regular
    One day we'll find out that all these UAPs were people trying to crack time travel and discovering that adjusting for the movement of the universe requires... just a bit more precision than they have.

  • QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited June 2023
    There was, in fact, someone on the grassy knoll. But they were prevented when the person who traveled back in time in order to find out who was on the grassy knoll showed up and burst into super heated plasma. Thus preserving the timeline.

    Quid on
  • KamarKamar Registered User regular
    edited June 2023
    Listen, spawning in a weird phenomenon or technology that can easily avoid capture and confirmation doesn't mess up the simulation and it's fun to watch the reactions, so...

    Kamar on
  • yossarian_livesyossarian_lives Registered User regular
    Someone figured out how to enable console commands. UAP ensues.

    "I see everything twice!"


  • edited June 2023
    This content has been removed.

Sign In or Register to comment.