Let's Have A Nuts And Bolts UFO Discussion

hey reviving this thread to get it active again.

nuts n bolts. ufo anatomy. going back to my original posts in this thread regarding machs principle and a frame of reference cloak.

let's consider the layout of the ARV or Fluxliner.
in the following posts ill explain as to why it's likely called the flux liner. and I believe it has nothing to do with aliens.

although McCandlish may have gotten the details of what the components looked like right he may have not gotten all the components comprising the Fluxliner correct as I believe he's missing a crucial element in his drawings. maybe not his fault as he's relying on second hand accounts and descriptions.

he also misinterpreted the usage of such components and got the anti inertial aspect wrong by going into things like zero point energy and anti gravity.

look at the depiction of the flux liner again and realize you're seeing a big antenna. the metal plates. the central column. all of it.

the antenna is an elaborate setup to perform wavefront manipulation via a boundary layer to create the real "mach sheild."

the bottom plate that he calls a capacitor is really a ground plane. the top plate just below the crew compartment is the D plate. the two (gp and dp) operate in unison to form a parallel plate capacitor. which in turn creates a powerful magnetic field.

a part Mcandlish didn't get was what's called an E plate. it sits above the D plate where the crew compartment would be. the E plate looks like a hollow tube or cylinder standing upright. I suspect the crew compartment was tucked inside the E plate. its outer walls being the actual E plate. the E plate generates a electric field that arcs down and connects with the ground plane.

the central column is a phased voltage source that sends a signal to both the D and E plates.

in a second post I'll explain how these separate fields create a synthesized boundary layer comprised of surface currents that act like a bubble surrounding the craft.
in which, discontinuities can be formed to create huygen sources which reflect, scatter or cancel out signals back inward. the goal being eliminate signals that transmit data outside pertaining to your frame of reference.

a partial decoupling from free space in which you exhibit very little to no inertia. if the universe doesnt recognize that youre even moving does it matter how fast you are in fact accellerating or travelling. youd have no inertia and via that no mass. as long as youre not trying to go superluminal you're capable of doing almost whatever you want.

interestingly a side effect of this rig is strong radio signals being created on the surface of the boundary layer and potentially interfering with people's car stereos. another version of this rig can instead create synthesized impedance/admittance boundary creating two dielectric mediuns in which to create the discontinuities and form a cloak. it would possibly create a dielectric that accidentally shuts off your car by preventing temporarily voltage flow.

Working the powersource is one thing but to me the big question is...How is the power generated onboard?
Traditionally electricity is made by spinning magnets and copper coils..

a reply to: Blackfinger

well two things. the rig it's self doesn't necessarily require a ton of power. the idea isn't based on brute force. second the antenna it's based off of is very efficient both in its design and broadcasting power although it's real benefits is the size and abilities of its near field that makes it so functional. so it probably wouldnt require a rediculous amount of power. probably could power it for brief flights using batteries or other types of available technologies back in the day. how long can a battery array power an efficient antenna that only needs to broadcast a couple dozen yards.

Look up Bob Lazar. He goes pretty in-dept into what makes these things fly.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Check my earlier reaction, page 7.

How does explain the pre Ww2 radar sightings of Ufo,s?

a reply to: Blackfinger

you talking to me or others here?

also I'm going to do a follow up post sometime this weekend when I have more time to go into depth about synthesized EM boundary wavefront manipulation and frame of reference cloaks

a reply to: BASSPLYR
Just trying to tie in the past to the present..There has to be a connection between our side of things to theirs..

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: TheBadCabbie

although you got it all wrong regarding the Philadelphia experiment its something you should look further into.

I typed out a huge PM for you regarding it that would help you out a lot. just debating on whether to send it.

but I like that you brought that experiment up. it wasn't to test what they claim and what they discovered has been kept quiet for a long time now. and the public stories about it are all BS. all of them. but it's something important to look deeper into.

keep going

other than that sorry I've been awol from this thread for a week or so I've been travelling. I plan on touching on several posters comments who made great posts with good conversational topics to expand on.

Got it all wrong? Erm, how so, exactly? I'm just recounting Al Bealik's interviews, albeit from memory. I know I misnamed the ship as the Philadelphia (the Eldridge was the ship upon which the experimental equipment was installed), and Bealik certainly never offered any hypotheses as to the science behind the phenomena he recounted aside from a few vagaries, but the phenomena he described are what I've recounted in my post. Perhaps you're poking at my hypotheses. Well that's fair enough. After all, they're only hypotheses.

originally posted by: TheBadCabbieI'm fascinated by discussions of what might make some of these storied craft work.

Speaking from experience of getting very close up to ufo orbs the nearest thing I can compare them to is the UV lamp. They have the same effect at least with the white type, I think the amber / orange type to also but the swirling effect can probably be seen better from that colour. The white type certainly exhibits the same visual effect of a UV lamp. So whatever a UV lamp is powered by might be the same power source for the white type ufo orbs

a reply to: Blackfinger

I'll take nuclear isomer batteries and high-efficiency themoelectric converters for 500, Alex.

My favourite "proof"/story is still Auora Texas from 1897!
Or the HMAS Hobart story from 1968, Vietnam.

Speaking of nuts and bolts or rather those make airframes and such from them, skunk works has had an increase of 33% in terms of head count in the last 12 month's.

Compact nuclear fusion reactors, next gen fighter's and hypersonic platforms apparently..

They certainly are gearing up, something black this way comes....

a reply to: Xtrozero

Do you recall the source of that estimate? I am curious because the Milky Way galaxy is about 100,000 ly from end-to-end. At 10-percent the speed of light we could travel from one end to the other in about a million years.

In fact, I estimate that it would take a driven human colonization effort >10,000,000 years to completely colonize the entire galaxy, without warp drives or other imaginary tech that violates the laws of physics.

2 billion years seems like a ridiculously high number.

originally posted by: 0zzymand0s
a reply to: Xtrozero


2 billion years seems like a ridiculously high number.

I'll go with your estimate. At 10% the speed of light I think your number is correct, but then there are 100 billion stars to go checkout with most having planets, and I was thinking more in terms of data gathering/collection on every solar system etc and not just do a fly by. Popular mechanics did a story on it where the machines could completely self replicate every 500 years.

"Fermi paradox that asks why we have no evidence of alien intelligence ever existing, despite that fact that many statistical models like the Drake equation suggest that intelligent life should be all over the place."

originally posted by: BASSPLYR

look at the depiction of the flux liner again and realize you're seeing a big antenna. the metal plates. the central column. all of it.

the antenna is an elaborate setup to perform wavefront manipulation via a boundary layer to create the real "mach sheild."

the bottom plate that he calls a capacitor is really a ground plane. the top plate just below the crew compartment is the D plate. the two (gp and dp) operate in unison to form a parallel plate capacitor. which in turn creates a powerful magnetic field.

Okay, I'm an old retired MSEE; do y'all think you could explain just how all this is supposed to work? Don't be afraid of getting technical, I can prolly handle it.

Its just that you are saying things that don't quite seem to jibe. things like "plates" on an antenna, and how these plates are forming a capacitor (that magically creates a magnetic field). Sorry man, but my antique education is just getting confused here, as what you are attempting to describe just didn't seem possible in 1975.

Just how does a capacitor create a magnetic field, what are the equations? How would One determine polarity?

a reply to: majickJimi

Where there are time varying electric fields and displacement currents there are magnetic fields.

And, just as an example, patch antennas are antennas based on square plates that are constructed similarly to a capacitor.

originally posted by: framedragged
a reply to: majickJimi

Where there are time varying electric fields and displacement currents there are magnetic fields.

And, just as an example, patch antennas are antennas based on square plates that are constructed similarly to a capacitor.

Well now, that's all very interesting! Just how many farads is required for those magnetic fields to become significant enough to make any difference? Does this work for simple "plate" type capacitors? I noticed that article you linked was talking about spiral wound capacitors, probably larger electrolytic caps. This might actually begin to work because at least in that instance you could have something that attempts to be an "ampere-turn". So again, in the instance in question?

And on that "patch antenna", that's not quite what is depicted in the images for the fluxliner, etc. since a flying device can't operate on "microstrip" antenna That would seem to be in same category as zero point energy, though perhaps a bit more macro.

So I guess I should refine my question a bit:
How are these "things" created in the present instance, and, how do they work?

Seriously, I do think you have two devices here that cannot do what you think; mostly because they are far to large structurally speaking. But hey, that's just an old engineer's opinion. (I'd really love for y'all to show a real, logical, 3D design for this thing. Along with all the appropriate math. But, I suppose that's asking too much).

a reply to: majickJimi

Well, I'm not the guy with the theory and I don't believe one way or the other about their specific operation. I just wanted to point out that the physics by itself weren't necessarily invalid, even if they weren't sound.

"How are they created?"

By hand? Just kidding. But I don't think you'll get much more than that, short of getting an invite to the assembly room.

"How do they work?"

[redacted].

I don't think there is an explicit answer available for this question. There's the speculation in this, and other, threads and... not much else.

All we really have are the consistent reports of ultra high-g maneuvers, reports of people getting radiation burns and experiencing weird electronic interference, and the disparate bread crumbs from scientific literature. So it's always nice for an engineer to chime in about their take on the reports and and either ground things or offer their own insight about the... uh, magic... since you guys actually deal with bridging theory and practice.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Hey,

I like your posts in this thread - on the whole anyway and you sound like you have a good grasp of the subject.
Like most people, I'm an enthusiastic (although skeptical) amateur, with no real knowledge of the topic, other than what I've read and researched over a long period of time.
My "in a nutshell" opinion tends towards the hypothesis that most UFO's (not all) are likely man made - and I think there's evidence out there that more elaborate theories have been popularised to put people off what's really happening (and obviously the underlying technology).

IMO - I do think "die glocke" has been misunderstood over time.
It's also grown into a modern myth and I think the reality of that experiment is different to what many people think. The main clues to me are the founder and lead scientist on the project (Prof Walther Gerlach - and his background in torsion physics and electromagnetism) and the likely uses of this device, in the context of what the Nazi's were doing at the time (admittedly lots of highly advanced experiments - including a nuclear weapons program - but I think anti-gravity is likely pushing things too far).
If you read literature on this project, to me it seems similar to an early version of a Tokamak. en.wikipedia.org...

In plain english - it's a form of particle accelerator.

I think this synopsis is a good theory of its true purpose:
sites.google.com...
The key extract is the first paragraph:
"Put most simply the Nazi Bell was in fact a heavy particle accelerator used as an artificial neutron source to breed Protactinium 233 from Thorium 232. Protactinium would naturally degrade after 27 days into pure bomb grade Uranium 233

Uranium 233 derived from spent reactor waste is often contaminated by Uranium 232 when Thorium 230 gets bombarded by a second neutron, but in a particle accelerator this process does not have time to occur and thus U232 contamination is as low as one part per million and thus as safe to handle as weapons grade Plutonium.

According to speech notes recently uncovered in KGB archives, Heisenberg advocated harvesting Protactinium for a nuclear weapon at the Harneck Haus conference in July 1942. Later whilst interned at Farm Hall Cambridgeshire after the War, Heisenberg also identified harvesting Protactinium as one of three methods of obtaining fissile material for a nuclear bomb.

The other two of course, being to either enrich U235, or to reprocess Plutonium from spent fuel in a thermal nuclear reactor... Our history books tell us all about these other two methods in Nazi Germany but are strangely silent on the Protactinium harvesting project. Why is that?

The wartime Chairman of AEG, Herman Bucher revealed to OSS informant Erwin Respondek that his company was funding development of a Heavy Particle Accelerator for the Atomic Bomb Project at Bisingen.

The process harnessed the fluorescent quality of Mercury to cause collisions between electrons and photons, which in result released thermal neutrons. The device was surrounded by a concave beryllium mirror to reflect neutrons back into a mass of Thorium oxide placed at the core. The machine generated this X-ray plasma in orbit around an axle which spun two carefully frequency phased contra-rotating drums.

Respondek also revealed to the OSS that Heisenberg worked closely with Swiss engineer Dr Walter Dallenbach at a secret facility known as "Forschungsstelle D" at Bisingen to develop the Nazi bell. A report by the OSS in November 1944, cited information from an engineer named Nagglestein who related Otto Hahn's laboratory at Tailfingen in a town close to Bisingen was using Thorium to obtain Uranium for an Atomic Bomb."


That use would make logical sense given the Nazi's plans for nuclear weapons and their understanding of quantum physics.
Perhaps anti-gravity effects were discovered unintentionally as a result of the experiments with this device - but my gut feeling is that wasn't its primary purpose - although obviously I could be completely wrong. Gerlach did have interesting theories around the distortion of space-time via the use of torsion fields/physics.

Other than that though - I like the discussion in this thread
My gut feeling is the anti-gravity experiments involving counter rotating magnetic fields are a plausible solution - regardless of my previous comments re: die glocke.
There's simply too many instances of these sorts of experiments to overlook.
I also think Thomas Townsend Brown's ideas regarding electro propulsion are another area that neatly ties into the overall picture. I've read and researched a fair bit on him and I think the reason his ideas were rejected by the US government, is because they were already working on the same sorts of things. He was trying to sell them something that they already had (and were developing).

In terms of power source for a device like this - my thoughts would be speculation. But a crude solution would be a minaturised nuclear reactor. I suspect there are other solutions though.
A vehicle of this type may involve a number technologies, being used in combination to produce the end result.

I am curious if you have any view on an overall vehicle design ?
i.e. do you think someone has documented or detailed the whole picture of how one of these craft may work?

You've mentioned the Mark McCandlish "ARV" drawings - so I would assume that's your favorite theory on what a version of this sort of tech may look like ?

I have numerous documents on various theories and a lot of books on the subject, but I'm not sure if I could pick any one theory as being the most likely (complete) solution. Some of the early 1950's era books - do have some interesting proposals though.

...I am very open to any alternative ideas and theories
In saying that - I don't think it necessary to start theorising on inter-dimensional aliens, given the fact, that existing earth based technologies seem to come very close to delivering a working hypothesis.

...it's an interesting area of discussion though