Navy Got 'UFO' Patent Granted by Warning of Similar Chinese Tech Advances
thedrive.com
thedrive.com
Chinese advancement in frictionless supercavitating submarines are already well known[1]. But claiming that they have the capability to do so with EM propulsion is something new.
What's more bewildering to me is that the patent fiasco surround this. AFAIK state of the art defence tech rarely gets through patent system for obvious reasons, TIL that U.S. Patent system has a way to file secret patents and even that wasn't used in this case.
Not sure whether they filed this patent with PCT (Patent Cooperation Treaty), then they would be eligible to submit this patent application for review in other countries as well.
[1]: https://www.popsci.com/article/technology/chinas-future-subm...
As a PhD in physics, this just sounds like nonsense to me. Energy isn't a field and to polarize it doesn't mean anything.
> Little information can be found about Salvatore Cezar Pais; he has virtually no web presence. What is known is that he received a PhD in Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering from Case Western Reserve University in 1999 and that he currently works as an aerospace engineer for NAWCAD at Naval Air Station Patuxent River in Maryland – the Navy’s top aircraft test base. Pais has published several articles and presented papers at American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics conferences over the years describing his work in electromagnetic propulsion, revolutionary room temperature superconductors, and topics like his PhD dissertation: "Bubble generation under reduced gravity conditions for both co-flow and cross-flow configurations."
My sample size is small at ~5, but former classmates who joined the military research labs were not the brightest bunch. Of my overall cohort, the smartest ones went into industry, sometimes a different industry than their field of study. The smart but idealistic ones went into academia. And then the ones that truly never shed their sophomoric arrogance, acquired in their formative years and that should have been beaten out of them by the doctoral process, went to the military labs to work on secret stuff.
It may have been true in the past, but military labs don't have the cachet to attract top talent.
With that being said, the most likely reason for this patent filing, as others have noted, is misdirection.
That part is just a terrible attempt by the journalist to summarize the theoretical background of the patent's (rather ludicrous) claims in a popular form. The polarization they're talking about is just the vacuum polarization in the standard QED sense. The funny stuff starts when the patent assumes that you can automagically generate fields close to or over the Schwinger limit.
As a fellow physics PhD, I recommend reading the actual patent for comic relief [1]. It has no other use as far as I can tell.
[1] https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/de/4c/43/62c585c...
So yeah, perhaps someone working for the Navy wants to try to patent it so they can make some money from the technology. Well, it is very likely such technology would be top secret classified and any individuals working on it would find themselves in deep trouble for publishing anything, including patents, related to their work.
If this story is true, at least the part about some patent trying to explain the UFO's that have been in the news more of late then it is likely a psyops piece/work and/or is a means to try to quell concerns that there are in fact extraterrestrials visiting earth or things the U.S. government (and others) can't explain.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_patent_use_(United_...
Not true, they did exactly that on several episodes of “Star Trek: Voyager.” /s
Well considering light is energy and you can polarize that.
The inventor is saying you can create gravitational waves through with just EM. Now you need to combine sound and angular momentum. Add a shit load of volts. Like Tesla on crack. And create high frequency standing wave in a resonance chamber. Boom you have the equivalent to a laser. But using all of physics in a perfect storm of power.
This will create a small field of negative energy. Think opposite of black hole.
They also say "top aircraft test base" but it's also practically the only after the BRACs of the 90s: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_Realignment_and_Closure
I hate to point this out but "smartest" doesn't have monopoly over inventions or discoveries.
The stuff they are doing now with drones is even more wild, I can't wait to read about how those actually work in a few years.
My command leader was a former SR-71 flight mechanic...
We were marching about, and it was just after dusk, but a full moon.
At the horizon, we saw a craft come up over the mountains at incredible speed - and we watched it as it was flying at a vertical as opposed to an arc which a winged aircraft woulld require...
Within seconds the thing was hovering about 100 feet above us. Silently. A huge triangle with the white lights on corners and one in the middle.
Our commander yelled and said “everyone inside now!” And hustled us back into our hangar office...
—-
About three weeks ago, in santa rosa ca, i saw a sphere glowing in the sky and moving at a rate which was impossible for conventional craft..
And as i watched it, it literally just disappeared.
I fully believe bob lazar.
(Obviously I’m just speculating, and I’m not assigning belief either way to any of this; I just enjoy thinking about the possibilities here.)
I have no idea why the thing did what it did, but i will never forget that experience in my life.
The color and materials were flat matt black, the lights were white and diffuse... not beams or anything.
It was completely silent.
These are supposed to look “tictac” not triangular. Perhaps you saw another alien technology ...
Triangle used to be required because they would use two “engines” to hover/float and one to pro-pulse.
Aligns with. Bob lazars statements.
We dont know anything about the internals of the tic-tac
Examples and procedures to take a convincing photo of an erratically moving UFO - I don't claim I have the know-how. All I know is the evidence has to be high quality and irrefutable to make such a claim. My point is, people should not be talking about phenomena they don't understand as if they are true, if they have no skills to gather required evidence.
Please provide an annotated list of irrefutable evidence that others have created so I can see what you are talking about...
Edit: actually if I were to meet you in real life you could just ask my wife about the incident. She hates the fact that she saw it too: I used to talk about this stuff but backed off in recent years. Because she was there it validated the fact that there is some type of conspiracy in the world. We don't know the exact details of the conspiracy but something is definitely not as it seems when a silent triangle rips across the night sky.
Edit2: a simple google search and the second video appears to be what I saw. It's going much slower but the light pattern and altitude are what I remember. Watch the whole video - the first lights are just a plane https://youtu.be/RoR0izkByAI
Let's just call it a conspiracy theory then.
Is this really difficult? Nixon had a conspiracy both to violate laws, and to cover up violating laws, making at least three violations. Trump's people probably conspired to violate laws against foreign influence on elections. Clinton didn't conspire to perjure, because it was just him.
Not that that's proving anything but it gives me a harder time to entirely dismiss it.
The Joe Rogan interview linked in sibling comment is an interesting follow up to the initial interviews with George Knapp from the late 80s.
Just make an international phone call with a non-citizen, for the most obvious example. Slightly less obvious is just walking around outside if you are within 20 miles of a big city or an international border.
To me, that I still look at these guys claims of spooks watching them with incredulity is a bit disturbing. They were obviously nuts, but now it's a fact of life? Totally bizarre.
Which, at this point means we either have some kind of stupid psychological operation on our hands, or (hopefully) some rational facts that shed light on the bullshit artistry of paranormal crackpots, and dispel idiotic space alien malarky once and for all.
I swear, if I hear any further bullshit about "greys" from "Zeta Reticuli 1 & 2" and watch people eat a can of X-files garbage like it's a Dean Kamen TED Talk, I'm going to off myself by eating rat poison, because this world is fucking stupid.
While the rest of your comments seems like it could be perhaps better worded.
The author of the article does have as one of his leading theories that all this recent hoopla is some type of Psychological Operation (PSYOP)
I guess this is the first time I've considered that this whole UFO/alien thing might be real.
God, this might be why they all look the same - the underlying technology requires the same basic external shape... but the craft could be from different civilisations.
How does writing a patent for a device that obviously can't work as described achieve anything. They can't come along years later and say, oh we invented that, if something similar emerges, as it will be abundantly clear from the nonsense description that they did not invent it.
The only serious explanation I can come up with is that buried in this application is some element of the design which is feasible and which they do want to protect. But even that seems unlikely, given that they could have just made it secret.
Another less likely explanation is that someone in the navy is playing a prank on the public and the patent office. If the person who submitted the application doesn't actually exist, the navy might have trouble tracking down the perpetrator of the hoax.
One final possibility is that it is a recruiting tool. Perhaps by making this public they get a bunch of correspondence from talented individuals who capably point out that is nonsense, or that are capable of doing experiments that demonstrate parts of the patent to be nonfeasible.
What's really odd is the reply of the patent examiner. It's almost like they are asking, "so just to make sure I understand you, this is quite impossible, right?". The military replied, "yeah of course it is, it would require more energy than could be produced by all the power stations on earth, even if the physics were sound. If it makes you feel better, we could add that we are doing this on battery power".
Or the theft of an AWAX by the chinese?
They are not stupid.
When i was at lockheed the chinese were phishing lockheed staff who had attended defense conferences. They managed to get a worm in lockheed that trickle fed them stolen data.
When it was discovered they opened the flood gates and tried to dump mass data out of the lockheed network - which, at the time, only had three egress points to the internet such that lockheed had to shit them down.
Then, lockheed tried to keep an air-gap between vendors they were using... but the chinese hacked the vendors such that they coulld compromise the usb drives being used as the sneakerbet between lockheed and the vendors....
The chinese are not stupid.
The real question is whether they have stupid people making important decisions for them. Or, more stupid than the US has. At least we can be sure that they don't elect them to do it.
If I did this where I work, I'd get a small cash bonus for the application, and a larger, but still small cash bonus if it issued and a commemerative trinket. Plus, I'd have something nice to write about myself in performance reviews. Sounds like an acheivement to me.
Anyway, it seems to me that the options have narrowed to human tech or psyops. Invoking aliens just doesn't help with any of the observations.
I'll get my coat.
1. they are sure a stream of publishable papers will flow from it
2. they get grant funding.
Is it "blame Chinese and (not aliens) and get people concerned (to be aware/do something" or "blame Chinese and (not alien and not get people concerned)"?
I mean just make everyone think it's the Chinese so they won't worry about it. "Oh it's just the Chinese and we're developing our own version" is much less scary than "It's something that acts with total impunity in our airspace and we haven't got a clue what it is, how it works or where it's from".
It must have been pretty obvious to the Navy this story would have been picked up by the media and widely circulated.
Most of the stuff on those sites looked like BS, though. I don't know about Brown and this recent guy, though. This could also be disinformation to get Chinese to waste time on it. It has plus side that they can patent sue them if they do find anything.
EDIT: This was one of the sites. Just came back to me.
https://www.americanantigravity.com/tim-ventura-on-antigravi...
Antigravity conspiracy theories has been a favorite source of fascination/amusement for me for a long time (see my username), and I cannot describe how eerie and weird it feels to read official Navy patents and claims by ex-head of Lockheed Martin skunkworks literally corroborating some of conspiracy theories I’ve heard going around for decades. (Yet the skeptic in my brain still won’t allow me to fully believe it until I see a working prototype.)
The whole story here is just so utterly bizarre; the deeper you dig, the weirder it gets. These TheDrive articles seem to do a great job of investigating and reporting on the facts without too much speculation, and I highly recommend diving down the rabbit hole of linked articles (especially on this connected “To The Stars Academy” organization making similar claims of incredible technology by a panel of founders with astoundingly impressive and official credentials).
To add to the strangeness of the Navy patents: the actual patent contents reads almost like gibberish, or the kind of pseudoscientific technobabble you’d write to add scientific explanations of space ships to a sci-fi novel. If the technical descriptions and phenomena are real, then these patents really are describing or hinting at new physics, but in a way that misuses existing terms and reexplains obvious basics of physics with what seems like amateurish imprecision (like referring to cross products as “multiplication”) — which just doesn’t make sense at all given the credentials of those vouching for the patents.
Yet, the descriptions match almost exactly the rumors and conspiracy theories of how electrogravitic propulsion systems of secret military craft worked. And, they describe something that should be testable even without a room temperature superconductor (one could take a charged super capacitor and spin it and/or vibrate it at extreme frequencies and see if this has any measurable effect on its inertial or gravitational mass), which intrigues me.
Look into the “TR-3B” or “Aurora project” conspiracy theory and you’ll find tales and descriptions of the crafts antigravity drive that is absolutely identical to what is described in these patents: a superconducting medium carrying an extremely high charge density, that is rotated and vibrated are incredibly high frequencies — and this is claimed to somehow reduce the inertial mass of the surrounding area.
This TR-3B conspiracy theory is decades old, at least, and it matches these official government patents exactly.
It’s almost as if someone took some of the most intriguing rumors or conspiracy theories of secret government craft from decades ago, and started filing patents from extremely official government sources on exactly the kind of tech that was rumored to exist; yet in a way that sounds much like pseudoscience to anyone educated in modern physics.
This is the kind of thing which, based on the content itself, you’d immediately dismiss as a crackpot conspiracy theory technobabble. But the highly official credentials of the source of these patents, and of the people claiming or hinting that the tech is real (the ex-head of Lockheed Martin skunkworks — it doesn’t get much more credible than that) makes it impossible to ignore in that way.
So I honestly don’t know what to make of any of this. It would be interesting to try experimenting with some of the testable claims that these patents describe.
From watching social media over the past few years, especially the various foreign authoritarian governments, we can see an easy pattern: some bit of truth comes out, then the organization trying to suppress conversation floods the conversation with tons of half-truths, lies, conspiracy theories, and so forth. In the firehose of bullshit, the only thing the average observer can do is throw up their hands and give up.
Based on this general pattern of information and disinformation, I'm quite confident that the western mostly-free (?) countries are trying to have an honest conversation with themselves. About what, I have no idea. What I find particularly interesting are the professional, multi-sourced observations of various things happening that seem to just get eaten up by the system itself. Whether incompetence, secrecy, crackpots, or whatnot, it says something really fascinating about how groups of people deal with things they don't want to deal with.
Yes, there are crackpots and liars in the world. Yes, there are people who are honestly mistaken. There are also people who avoid controversy and just throw out the "crackpot" label instead of thinking through things. These are all easy responses. Even putting all the options together, something very interesting is going on that we're not dealing with so well.
I think we do this not because this is the most accurate way to think, but because our minds are finite, and we need some simplifying approximation (e.g. quantization of a continuum into categories, or binary decisions) in order to make thinking about the immensely complicated world even possible.
For example, we tend to seek conclusions like “we have decided that A is good, B is bad, C is bunk, and D is science — case closed!” When in reality, our understanding of truth is far more a continuous and constantly evolving thing, as new information and ideas flow through.
Put simply, I think most people are just uncomfortable answering important questions with “I don’t know”, and avoid that answer at all costs, even when it is the correct answer.
Within a short amount of time of those folks dying off, however, it all became BS. It was the sky god. It was an optical illusion. It was a bunch of liars. It was stupid people. It was people making stuff up.
These knee-jerk, easy answers come because in most cases they're true. But even more true is the fact that there are a ton of people who just have to know. Whether it's aliens or swamp gas, they have to know one way or the other. Just looking up in the sky and saying "Did you see that? Beats me what it is" isn't good enough.
Non-reproducible phenomenon is still phenomenon. The point the former Assistant SecDef was making in his recent opinion piece is extremely valid. If we can't control our skies that's a DoD/Security matter, even if the data is coming to us in such a way as to be very difficult for us to process. Easy answers aren't going to cut it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Podkletnov
whose equipment is rumoured to have ended up in the US.
So it's written and presented in a way that only the gullible, naive and crackpots will accept.
Maybe that's the answer then - it's schmuck bait. Someone in the US Navy wanted to troll the UFO nuts, the patent office, or both.
If they wanted to mislead rivals into thinking we have technology we don’t (so as to waste their resources trying to develop tech down a dead-end), why not write it in a more credible way?
If they just wanted to publish “schmuck bait” as you say, I suppose I just don’t see the point of that. It could be explained as an inside joke / trolling I suppose, but for example, look at the credentials of the people here:
https://dpo.tothestarsacademy.com/
Their team includes the recently retired director of Lockheed Martin Skunkworks group. I don’t know how to dismiss that.
No. The patent application fits with the narrative that the US patent process is a total joke. This is an attempt to patent science fiction. This patent will be used for everything but the production of a working technology. It will be used by someone to aggrandize themselves and potentially milk "investors". They will wave this "patent" in front of some naive old people, probably in florida, to get them to sign over their life savings.
If anyone on this planet has practical warp drive technology, friction-free motion through air/water, or gravity manipulation tech ... such things are akin to the discovery of fire. In the real world, whether the inventor has a patent or not is absolutely meaningless in the face of what such technology would mean to mankind.
The US navy is a very large organization. I doubt this is a core program. This is some crazy think-tank operating way way outside oversight. Or it is an elaborate joke. Or an attempt to pad a resume before retirement. Or a "patent something or you're out" box ticking.
I would prefer such a requirement.
This is most likely pure indirection, IMO. They want the Chinese or Russia to think we are doing this for some reason. Maybe they want them to go down their own wild goose chase or they want them to think something of ours that they have seen recently is a result of this and not some more easily duplicable technology.
Isn't that a bit condescending way to address such organization?
Of all the possible justifications, you point to the weakest one imo: that it is ran by ignorant people who are detached from reality when it comes to these matters, to the point of coming out to publicly state they did/are/aim/want to work on something. It's like the eat anything crazy it's thrown at them.
I mean, you could say: "It's just propaganda - they either want to diverge attention so we don't focus on something else (like decrease the warmongering status), or get attention to try to get something (like support/resources)." - Which is believe is the most likely one.
It's a odd behavior, but I doubt it's a byproduct of ignorance and belief in pseudo-science.
It would be if their CTO hadn't personally endorsed the "scientific" content of this patent in his letter to the patent office. In light of that, it's hard for me to see a different explanation than either "incompetent scientists" or "incompetent propagandists" (because the patent is a blatant joke to anyone with a science education), hence my reaction. I'm open to a different explanation, hence my question to those better versed in the mysteries of the U.S. military-industrial-scientific complex.
For sure there's a lot of things wrong with this:
- the "scientific" content;
- the approval/publishing of the patent based on such content;
- the news reporting of such content without further research, just for the sake of being a patent and not questioning it's validity in the light of our current scientific knowledge;
- The propagation of such information;
If it's deliberate or fruit of a lot of layers of ignorance, we can't know for sure but there's a high probability of both.
But on the other hand I have been involved with some utterly clueless organisations - where the group think is so profoundly wrong and backward that it's a wonder they can get anything done...
So I would ask, can you point out a couple of things that I can fact check which are wrong with the patent? I'm no physicist, but have an msc in maths
https://www.reddit.com/r/EmDrive/comments/bgr3ex/comment/elp...
That said, you’ll always be able to find a way to explain away the weirdness if you speculate: Maybe they wanted the patent, but wanted to dissuade other people from reproducing the tech. One effective of doing this could be to actually patent a design that itself works, but is accompanied by a theoretical description that comes across as a joke / gibberish to any educated scientist. That would (and does, as you can see here) shut down most educated scientists interest in the topic immediately.
I’m not saying I believe that’s the case, just that we can always find a way to believe what we want to believe; belief is very dangerous in that way. (Generally, it’s best to just absorb evidence and withhold any “belief” until you absolutely have to make a binary decision.)
Therefore, I think speculation is pointless: Instead, we should just try to build what is described here, and see if it works or not.
> The application was initially rejected by Patent Examiner Philip Bonzell on the grounds that "there is no such thing as a 'repulsive EM energy field,'" and that "when referring to the specifications as to ascertain about the microwave emitters needed in this system it is seen that for a high energy electromagnetic field to polarize a quantum vacuum as claimed it would take 10^9 [T]eslas and 10^18 V/m." That's roughly the equivalent to the magnetic strength generated by most magnetars and more electricity than what is produced by nuclear reactors.
The field values come straight from the patent itself, you can check that. So, apart from all the silly theory, the patent simply assumes, as a matter of fact, that you can easily obtain magnetic fields that are only found in the most extreme conditions in the universe (and are many orders of magnitude away from anything we can conceivably create), use utterly ludicrous amounts of energy and achieve all of this in a portable craft of some sort. How much fact checking and experience do you really need to see that this is not merely beyond our engineering capabilities, but rather beyond even the bounds of sane science fiction?
If the criterion for patentability is describing a "future state of the possible" where "possible" just means "might, under a highly generous interpretation, not directly contradict the basic laws of physics... maybe", is there a patent for a Dyson sphere yet?
Just because it is written down does not mean it happened. Just because public money was spent on such a line item does not mean that is where it went.
One strategy would be to pollute that channel with misinformation, so that the adversary needs to go down a lot of different rabbit holes to have a chance of finding something real. Bonus: these could be really useful counter intel traps. You'd need just the right mix of plausible and outlandish, because you'll need to fool an adversary who (you should assume) can see through the strategy in general.
But it's just speculation.
And for all of us on the outside, it can be kind of a fun scifi thought experiment.
Which explains a mechanism that seems plausible by me. Described here by someone who appears to be a credible scientist. I even believe i have read a writeup of the theory in New Scientist. Skip to about 12 mins in, to see speculations about a propulsion system based on the ideas.
[0]https://www.atomicheritage.org/history/japanese-atomic-bomb-...
I'm a skeptic as well, but I'm not a physicist (I am an engineer so I know the basics).
I however, cannot throw a convincing rebuttal to this.
All I know, is that a high ranking officer has requested a patent to go through for a seemingly "perpetual motion machine".
All the buzzwords for the UFO-logists are there to get them salivating about Area-51 and Bob Lazar.
But, imagine such UFO-logists are reasonable about their beliefs (hard, I know) and are open to other suggestions (they clearly are to many).
Given such UFO-logists, how would you tell them this is bullshit without getting emotionally frustrated at the ludicrousness of the article ?
edit: any papers that point me towards the possible edge of today's tech would be welcome as well
Which hits _all_ the selling points for a public transport project in the UK.
I counted 3 green user names and total of 6 comments they made. The thread has 73 comments in total as I'm writing this.
What does a patent say? Basically that you can create and use it today which would be alarming for most around the world.
What if it's a bait for other intelligence agencies/spies working for foreign governments in US defense area.
And if someone tried to gather info about this tech within US defense ecosystem, they'll be caught without US government risking anything.
It does look like a bait to me, publicise that you poses a technology which makes all your enemies obsolete then wait and watch who is coming or helping them steal it from you.
My guess, they're nuclear powered aircraft of some kind. Maybe conventional besides that, maybe not. You can get such obscene power density with nuclear that the ideal craft may just be an engine with a cowling around it. Efficiency is not a concern so nuclear aircraft are going to look a lot different.
It's the only reason I can think of that Navy would be trying to cover up how they work. The idea of nuclear reactors zipping around in the air is terrifying.
It could resemble an optical illusion we’ve been projecting around every once and a while?