I know, I know - it's hearsay, and - again - I am a huge sceptic. Still, it was a bit of a disturbing conversation to have with someone I know and respect, and who was highly trained and in a position of authority.
I know, I know - it's hearsay, and - again - I am a huge sceptic. Still, it was a bit of a disturbing conversation to have with someone I know and respect, and who was highly trained and in a position of authority.
Interestingly UFOs and supernatural events have been clumped together, but afaik these UFO claims typically don't require rewriting the laws of physics. If a UFO's existence was proven, and in the public domain, it would go from -100 to +100 in terms of people's attitudes of "that's all just a bunch of balogna" to "of course, we have always known it is very unlikely we are alone." However, a supernatural event would fundamentally shake up our scientific understanding of the universe. I think they're completely different types of possibilities.
Surely we're due for one of these soon. Given our infantile understanding of quantum mechanics and physics, it's a matter of time before we observe something that defies modern science.
That hope has always been grounded in a fear of it's "supernatural" qualities and is becoming less likely as theorists find proofs limiting it's flexibility while keeping agreement with experiments.
Antigravity and FTL travel require rewriting the laws of physics AFAIK, or at least amending them. There are possibilites that only seem to work on paper, assuming the existence of fudge factors like negative mass.
Assuming that UFOs behave as described, and are actual physical craft which can hover silently over a point with no visible or audible engines, propellers or exhaust, which can make arbitrary breakneck maneuvers or suddenly vanish over the horizon in seconds, as is often described, then you need an unconventional explanation for their means of propulsion. It's either antigravity or magic, but it probably can't be, say, VTOL or just really good rockets.