Stanford professor says US is reverse-engineering downed UFOs
news.com.au
news.com.au
Not aliens. That’s just a cover story to conceal decades of research on quantum gravity mechanics.
[0]https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/31798/the-secretive-in...
Which parts of the patent were not valid?
Military science is always far ahead of mainstream science.
But yeah, must be aliens. Super logical
I don't know about this. I think it's more of a romanticized view than anything else. I don't doubt they have some of the top aerospace engineers but scientists? I can't imagine they're years ahead of top professors in academia - the chair of quantum physics at Hamilton College described Salvatore Pais' patents as "bearing no more resemblance to quantum physics as I understand it than does ‘The Force’ from Star Wars" [0]
Either leading academics in quantum physics are so far behind they can't even understand military academics or these patents are sci-fi gobbledygook. For example the energy required for his room-temperature semiconductor is greater than that of a magnetar (according to some physicists whose summaries I read) - that's 1.4* more than the sun.
[0] https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/28729/docs-show-navy-g...
In Examiner's Advisory Action Before the Filing of an Appeal Brief, dated July 1, 2018, Examiner "held" that after considering the Sheehy declaration filed with Second Amendment "the claims are still not enabled." Examiner, however, agrees that high frequencies of vibration on the order of 10 Gigahertz are possible, by stating *obtaining high frequencies are possible."
Hefurther asks that the Applicant demonstrate these high vibrational frequencies to create a local polarized vacuum. This directly contradicts the Federal Circuit's dicta that stated "al patent does not need to guarantee that the invention works for a claim to be enabled" (Alcon, 745 F.3d at 1189) and that it is improper for the Patent Office to suggest that an inventor had to offer proof for a claimed result (In Re Cartwright, 165 F.3d 1353 at 1359 (Fed. Cir. 1999)). Moreover, in Applicant's peer reviewed paper *AlAA 2017-5343, it is shown that by vibrating electrically charged matter in an acceleration mode, *it is possible to generate the high energy E-fields and B- fields that can polarize the vacuum. Thus, proving enablement of the invention.
Additionally, enablement is also shown in an IEEE paper (K.J. Coakley et al, "Estimation of Q-Factors and Resonant Frequencies" IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MICROWAVE THEORY AND TECHNIQUES, Vol. 51, No. 3, March 2003), that Applicant described and entered into the record in his January 23, 2018 response to Examiner's Office Action of November 28, 2017.
The Examiner never addressed this reference or Applicant's arguments related to this reference, in any of his responses, that this paper shows enablement. The paper describes the fact that high Q-factors and vibrational frequencies in excess of 10 Gigahertz can be enabled readily. In particular, Table I on page 866 ofthis paper shows that by emitting microwaves within a copper resonant cavity it is possible to experimentally obtain vibrational frequencies in excess of 10 Gigahertz, thus enabling electromagnetic (EM) flux values of 10^33 Watts/ m?, according to Equation in the inventor's AIAA paper (AIAA 2017-5343). This EM flux value is equivalent to the generation of E-fields on the order 10°18 V/m and B-fields on the order of 10°9 Tesla. Thus, the fields required for the invention are both feasible and enabled
As you've highlighted, you actually meant that the claims were enabled under US patent law, which does not generally require the patented idea to actually work.
I noticed your quoted text uses "it is possible to experimentally obtain". That's an odd way of saying "it is theoretically possible to obtain".
Clearly if the theory is wrong then it can make wrong predictions about feasibility. The patent office isn't tasked to determine if such theories are wrong.
For example, no one has demonstrated that "Space vehicle propelled by the pressure of inflationary vacuum state" (see https://patents.google.com/patent/US6960975B1/en ) actually works. Very few expect that idea to work, and I expect that most who do are ill-informed of the science.
The same applies here.
One deep problem with the entire idea of extracting usable energy from the vacuum energy state is highlighted in this letter to a curious 19 year old, at https://van.physics.illinois.edu/ask/listing/1277 :
> The point, however, is that this is not the calculation of some energy that’s sitting around waiting to be used. It’s just the calculation of a natural unit in which to measure energy. If it has a physical significance, it may represent the amount of energy that has to be concentrated in a small scale (the Planck distance, about 10^-32 cm) in order to make weird quantum gravitational things happen.
> To get usable energy out of some process, there must be some way for things to fall to a lower energy state than they are now in. That’s possible for many nuclei- hence we can get nuclear power- but such nuclear reactions are known and have little to do with the Planck scale.
> The Planck distance-time scale is the scale on which our current theory of space and time is likely to break down. If there really is some process on that scale that could settle into a lower energy state, that would mean that the current vacuum is unstable. It could somehow start to collapse to the more stable state, which would destroy any sort of physical structure in the current universe. Something like that probably happened at least once in the early universe, ending the strongly inflationary period of the Big Bang.
> These are not processes which I would attempt to ’use’.
The materials you've pointed to assume the vacuum energy state is "energy that’s sitting around waiting to be used", without demonstrating that it's true.
Further, they make no mention of how that energy is transferred to a lower energy state than vacuum. We know of no such thing.
As an analogy, a bird sitting on an high power line - which isn't even insulated - is touching a huge amount of energy. It's not affected because there's no lower energy place for that energy to go. At best it could get power from AC power lines due to the fluctuating fields, but that's far less than the power going through the lines.
This all sounds way too far out there to most people. I'm also highly sceptical and need proof, but don't mind entertaining the idea.
This is not a statement a scientist would make.
We are starting to look spectacularly goofy and corrupt.
Interesting
Reference?
Ah, well.
Perhaps not, and I am highly skeptical of the whole concept of UFOs in general, but I can't prove a negative.
Things like quantum teleportation and entanglement, for instance, are still restricted by the speed of light. Even gravity is restricted by the speed of light - this has been proven experimentally. TANSTAAFL.
United States is doing the same thing with the Quantum age. Do you think the military is waiting around for mainstream science to protect its economy and military from quantum computers? No. They are pioneering it, in secret.
Yes, the science was common knowledge. Berlin scientists first split the uranium atom four years before the Manhattan project even took place. It was common enough that science fiction writers of the time wrote stories about atomic bombs before any bombs were ever built, through extrapolation from established science alone, and Kodak was able to deduce the US was working on an atomic bomb because the radiation from testing fogged up their film stock. That's why there was a race on to be the first to a working implementation of that science, and a working implementation was what the Soviets were interested in. I can guarantee you Soviet scientists already knew what a chain reaction was.
Stop acting like you know what you're talking about, the more you comment the more obvious it is that you don't.
Generational ships, species that require fewer resources to thrive or that have manipulable hibernation abilities (for instance, if they have antifreeze blood like some jellyfish do, then they could theoretically be kept in suspended animation for a long time without aging or risk of boredom), or if they are incredibly long lived compared to humans for one reason or another.
Our best telescopes today can see oxygen in the atmosphere of planets that no living human could ever possibly set foot on regardless of what we did. It's possible that another different civilization could have noticed our planet and sent out a scout vessel 200 years ago just to see if it was a viable alternative planet for them to colonize.
But aside from the fun talk of scifi space travel possibilities, I am also very skeptical of UFOs and alien life forms being close enough to meet us during my lifetime. I would need to see them in person to believe that it wasn't yet another hoax.
If we have to take UFO reports at their word, just for the sake of argument, what is described at the very least appears to have some form of non-reactive propulsion that acts like gravity control. Just them being able to move at high velocities without creating a sonic boom or any visible means of propulsion would put them in the realm of using some kind of weird new physics we don't understand.
"surpassing the speed of light" in 3D, but done in 4-5D is just a matter of traveling a lot less "space", hence you actually didn't need to surpass the speed of light, but you travelled "faster than light", by travelling across the 4th-5th dimension.
Travelling like that could be just like walking 100 yards in the 5th dimension, but in 3D you travelled 100 light years in a matter of minutes (of walking).
maybe you're looking a vessel with more than 3 dimensions, and when it moves throught the next dimension/s, it allows it to do those kinds of movements. Maybe we're just seeing just an "expression" of a 4th-5th dimension vessel in 3D, but it's not really fully interacting with our three dimensions (maybe it's just leaking photons), and that is why those things can make impossible things like instant acceleration, submerging in the ocean at high velocity without making a minimal splash (maybe they could "submerge" into solid ground as well? that would explain UFOs in mountains, if you can get into a mountain to hide your presence, mountains look amazing as amazing parking lots for UFOs).
One explanation (which i can obviously neither confirm nor deny) is that aliens don't come from Far Away, but from neighboring dimensions.
Why?
If I lived for a million years then interstellar travel would be feasible for me with the physics we know.
We have trouble defining "life" in general terms because we only know of this planet. If intelligent life developed (some say it has developed here :-) in the universe then there is no predicting what form it would take.
We may not recognise it, or it us
They could have tech that makes this less of a inconvenience than it would be for us. If for example if they had some way of hibernating the interstellar travel time, but any sort of help from the home planet would still be decades away, staying put, observing and limited contact would be a possible kind of behavior one might choose.
They would be technologically advanced, but still lack the numbers for any kind of "safe" interaction with us from their point of view.
What Would Sabine Say About This?
She says there might be a chance...