Blogarchiv
UFO-Forschung - The Pentagon’s Mysterious U.F.O. Program -Update-7

23.12.2017

cenap-infoline-titel-63

Es gibt berechtigte Zweifel an der Story von NYT und so kommen nun auch die "Außerirdischen Artefakte" in den Focus. Wenn es aus dem Weltraum käme, würde diese Reise auch verräterische Zeichen im Metall hinterlassen, in Form von Debris und Ionisierung (Veränderungen der elektrischen Ladungen der Atome in der Substanz).

+++

The Truth About Those 'Alien Alloys' in The NY Times UFO Story

ahr0cdovl3d3dy5zcgfjzs5jb20vaw-51

What to make of a Las Vegas building full of unidentified alloys?

The New York Times published a stunning story Saturday (Dec. 16) revealing that the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) had, between 2007 and 2012, funded a $22 million program for investigating UFOs. The story included three revelations that were tailored to blow readers' minds:

  1. Many high-ranking people in the federal government believe aliens have visited planet Earth.
  2. Military pilots have recorded videos of UFOs with capabilities that seem to outstrip all known human aircraft, changing direction and accelerating in ways no fighter jet or helicopter could ever accomplish.
  3. In a group of buildings in Las Vegas, the government stockpiles alloys and other materials believed to be associated with UFOs.

Points one and two are weird, but not all that compelling on their own: The world already knew that plenty of smart folks believe in alien visitors, and that pilots sometimes encounter strange phenomena in the upper atmosphere — phenomena explained by entities other than space aliens, such as a weather balloon, a rocket launch or even a solar eruption.

Point No. 3, though — those buildings full of alloys and other materials — that's a little harder to hand wave away. Is there really a DOD cache full of materials from out of this world?

One of the authors of the Times report, Ralph Blumenthal, had this to say on MSNBC about the alloys: "They have, as we reported in the paper, some material from these objects that is being studied so that scientists can find what accounts for their amazing properties, this technology of these objects, whatever they are." When asked what the materials were, Blumenthal responded, "They don't know. They're studying it, but it's some kind of compound that they don't recognize."

Here's the thing, though: The chemists and metallurgists Live Science spoke to — experts in identifying unusual alloys — don't buy it.

"I don't think it's plausible that there's any alloys that we can't identify," Richard Sachleben, a retired chemist and member of the American Chemical Society's panel of experts, told Live Science. "My opinion? That's quite impossible."

s-area-51-artifact-large300

Alloys are mixtures of different kinds of elemental metals. They're very common — in fact, Sachleben said, they're more common on Earth than pure elemental metals are — and very well understood. Brass is an alloy. So is steel. Even most naturally occurring gold on Earth is an alloy made up of elemental gold mixed with other metals, like silver or copper. 

"There are databases of all known phases [of metal], including alloys," May Nyman, a professor in the Oregon State University Department of Chemistry, told Live Science. Those databases include straightforward techniques for identifying metal alloys.

If an unknown alloy appeared, Nyman said it would be relatively simple to figure out what it was made of.

For crystalline alloys — those in which the mixture of atoms forms an ordered structure — researchers use a technique called X-ray diffraction, Nyman said.

"The X-ray's wavelength is about the same size as the distance between the atoms [of crystalline alloys]," Nyman said, "so that means when the X-rays go into a well-ordered material, they diffract [change shape and intensity] … and from that diffraction [pattern] you can get information that tells you the distance between the atoms, what the atoms are, and how well-ordered the atoms are. It tells you all about the arrangement of your atoms."

With noncrystalline, amorphous alloys, the process is a bit different, but not by much.

"These are all very standard techniques in research labs, so if we had such mysterious metals, you could take it to any university where research is done, and they could tell you what are the elements and something about the crystalline phase within a few hours," Nyman said.

Sachleben agreed.

"There are no alloys that are sitting in some warehouse that we cannot figure out what they are. In fact, it's pretty simple, and any reasonably good metallurgical grad student can do it for you," he said.

Nyman said that if metals did fall from some mysterious aircraft, some forensics experiments would quickly answer a lot of questions about that aircraft. 

 

"How has the hunk of metal changed?" Nyman said. "From my scientist's perspective, that's the kind of question I'd be asking. Maybe, if it has to do with world politics, and we want to know where the metal comes from, maybe there's some analysis that can lead you to where it was mined, or what country uses that particular alloy, that kind of thing."

If the aircraft had come from space, Nyman said, that travel would leave telltale signs in the metal as well, in the form of spacefaring debris and ionization (changes to the electrical charges of the substance's atoms).

Even if a chunk of alloy that hadn't been seen before did fall to Earth from outer space, both Nyman and Sachleben agreed that it wouldn't necessarily have come from an alien craft. In fact, Sachleben said, alloys strike the planet regularly — space-traversing alloys like those found in fairly common nickel-iron meteorites — leaving behind telltale signs. The meteor that wiped out the dinosaurs was even identified by the rare-Earth metals it left behind in certain geological formations in Earth's crust.

It's important to point out that while Blumenthal did go on cable news and say the alloys were unidentifiable mysteries, helping to spur speculation, that's not what his article actually stated. Here's the full quote from Saturday's piece:

"The company [involved in the DOD research] modified buildings in Las Vegas for the storage of metal alloys and other materials that … program contractors said had been recovered from unidentified aerial phenomena. Researchers also studied people who said they had experienced physical effects from encounters with the objects and examined them for any physiological changes. In addition, researchers spoke to military service members who had reported sightings of strange aircraft."

From this statement, there's no actual sign that there's anything unusual about the alloys themselves. All the Times wrote was that the DOD researchers tasked with finding weird UFO stuff collected some metal, interviewed some people who had claimed startling experiences with it, and decided that it was UFO-related.

In an email to Live Science regarding these metal alloys, Blumenthal said, "We printed as much as we were able to verify. Can't go beyond that."

As for whether there's an explanation at least for the metals themselves, Sachleben said: "There's not as many mysteries in science as people like to think. It's not like we know everything — we don't know everything. But most things we know enough about to know what we don't know."

Quelle: SC

+++

NYT: GIMBAL Video of U.S. Navy Jet Encounter with Unknown Object

+++

Ah yes, I see.

+++

All of the discussion about whether they're talking about the flir pod rotating.. "LOOK AT THAT THING!" etc. That is of course assuming, am i correct, that we are hearing from 2 pilots in the same jet who are not looking at this object through their windscreen, but purely seeing this and commenting on it while viewing it on a TV screen? Aren't the tv displays in jets pretty small? I'm just trying to get more context here, from a total military layman/noob perspective. Thanks

+++

Is this accurate? We're saying they're both watching one of these screens and misidentifying the rotation based on that?

f8502ca3623166d53a9e134b5e4e77

You can see the rotation on a cell phone.
 
 
  1.  
  2. Again this is conflation with the Nimitz video. AFAIK, there is really nothing but the video from the "Gimbal event". It's not even clear if this was ever officially designated as an UFO incident.

    The FLIR system does neither provide speed nor distance of the locked object.
     
     
  3. It is indeed the GIMBAL video that features chat between F-18 pilots/pilot and WSO. As the FLIR does not provide distance information, we don't know if the object was visible or not at the time the commentary goes "My gosh!" or "It's rotating". It would clearly weaken the assertion here that perceived object rotation was actually IR glare if they were observing it visually.
     
  4. Right, I've missed that. Anyway, lacking any contextual information there are many possibilities, including the one that this material has been explained DOD-internally already. We just don't know.
    Quelle: Metabunk 
    +++
    1. Given the poor quality of the image in the display it's likely that it's invisible to the naked eye. The ATFLIR system is designed with a powerful zoom to enable them to see things that are far away. 

      ATFLIR footage of a visible object would be more like:
      20171223-084905-6elhw.
      Source: TGP footage of Syrian Su 22 shot down by USN F A 18E
       
       
    2. I only just noticed that "L+S" is on the display:
      +++
      1.  
      2. We can get the apparent size from the zoom level.

        https://forums.vrsimulations.com/support/index.php/A/G_Advanced_Targeting_FLIR_(ATFLIR)

        We can see it is in narrow mode ("NAR") with 2x zoom level ("Z 2.0").

        View angle: 0.75°x0.75°
        View width: 464px
        Object longest width: 42px
        Percentage of view: 9.1%
        Relative size of object: 0.069° or 4.1 arc minutes

        20/20 vision is defined as being able to resolve 1 arc minute.

        So to the naked eye this thing is a tiny dot, rotation would be barely observable and certainly not enough to cause such exclamation.
         
        It might be useful to get a more comprehensive explanation of the display overlay above, as the might be clues.

        Useful Sources:
        https://forums.vrsimulations.com/support/index.php/A/A_Forward_Looking_Infrared_(FLIR)
        (A simulation, but based on a real system, not exactly the same)

        Some are options that are "on" if they have a box around them like RTCL and DCLTR

        Top Line:

        TACT = Menu type ?????
        OPR = Operational, i.e. it's switched ona nd working.
        NAR = Narrow field of view. 1.5°
        Z 2.0 = Zoom factor 2.0

        IR = Infrared mode
        54° L = Heading of camera relative to aircraft ground track. "Lookpoint Azimuth Indicator"
        [RTCL] = Reticle on (boxed)
        V = ???????

        Right Side
        SLAVE = OFF, "Trackfile Slaved Mode"
        L+S = OFF, "Launch and Steering" slaved mode
        BST = OFF Boresight slaved mode.

        LST = Laser Spot Tracker (LST) OFF "The LST scans for and detects coded laser energy from outside sources, which can be converted into a designation for attack conversion and ordinance delivery." (i.e. someone else lights up the traget)
        1688 = "Laser code. a tri-service PRF modulated, 4-digit code" - i.e what the LST is looking for
        1688 = probably the same thing for the LTD/R
        LTD/R = Laser Target Designator/Ranger (LTD/R) OFF "Provide automatic or manual laser designation and ranging data. With the LTD is it possible to create a designation and lase it from ownship completely autonomously, allowing delivery of laser-guided weapons completely autonomously."
        UFC = Up Front Control (OFF, unboxed) when this is ON (boxed) the pilot can enter a new code for LST or LTD/R
        G1 = ???
        SETUP = ???

        Bottom:

        238 = Air speed in knots
        M Q.58 = Mach number
        WHT = WHT or BLK color of "hot" in IR
        5246 = Mission Time in minutes and seconds, sometimes followed by "A"??
        25010 = Altitude in feet
        B = ?????????
        DCLTR = Declutter off (not boxed). If on then airspeed etc is not shown, to declutter the display.
         
         
        The indicator in the top left of the display "NAR / Z 2.0indicates maximum magnification. NAR (Narrow) is a FOV of 1.5°, so with Z 2.0 (Zoom 2.0x) (probably digital zoom) that's an effective FOV of 0.75. (By comparison the 2000mm P900 mega zoom has a FOV of about 1.0°)

        We can get some ballpark figures for distance from this. Let's say the target is about the size of an F/A-18 Hornet, 44 ft wingspan with a bit extra for IR flare, like 50 feet. 20171223-103423-rbyyw.
        If the apparent long axis of the object is representative of the wingspan, then it's 64/1074 of the width of the image. i.e. 0.75°*64/1074 = 0.0447° (note: linear to angular conversion are fine for small angles)

        So converting that to distance, tan(angle) = object size/object distance

        50/tan(0.0447 degrees) = 64089 feet. (12 miles away).

        Alternatively if it's actually a distant airliner with a 200 foot wingspan, and the "saucer" shape is actually flare, then the effective length on the long visual axis there would be more like 500 feet. Hence 120 miles away.
         
         
      3.  
    3. Ha, I was typing the exact same stuff simultaneously. I got a smaller angle though. I think your measurements are a bit off, as if I resize the image to 464px then the longest dimension of the apparent object is (generously) 34 pixels not 42. 
      20171223-095146-rl7pf
      Here's an illustration of the type of thing we are looking at.
      20171223-113107-fhz0x.

      It was basically invisible to the naked eye.
      20171223-113409-f12vp.

      The naked eye view was just with the viewfinder magnification the same as naked eye. It does not represent human eye FOV, just human eye magnification. At actual wide angle, it's more like:
      20171223-120046-bv2lp.
      Quelle: Metabunk, Mick West
       
       
       
     

 

4639 Views
Raumfahrt+Astronomie-Blog von CENAP 0