It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why no Sonic Boom from UFO's?

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 06:40 AM
link   
the fluid nature of the air around the craft is manipulated to prevent a sonic boom from forming.

you can "blow" air in the direction you want to travel,

you can move the air with you, decreasing its speed as you get further away from the craft,

or you can have gravity pull a column of air along with the craft so it isn't moving through it


just a few thoughts i came up with off the top of my head.




posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 08:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Great answers btw.

My first thoughts to the OP is, define UFO. UFO can be man made. If that is the case, they are just not traveling fast enough.

I guess we can say some sort of alien craft. I know everyone wants to think that UFO's land and take off everyday (even though we have no actual proof yet). If a person actually witnessed a UFO in midair flight, how can they say how fast it is going? Size of the object, direction, all that is unknown. They can guess, but those affect how a person perceives how fast something is going.

Some of the responses are creative, but if you are going to assume aliens built their craft for no sonic boom in our atmosphere (because it would not be the same for their atmosphere), then you must ask yourself, why.

If these aliens went through all this trouble to travel vast distances to visit Earth. Made if so they can operate in our atmosphere. Design the propulsion system to work as well, and make sure no sonic boom is created for some reason (let's say for stealth), then why stop there? Why make it so we can still detect the craft?

I am not saying there isn't aliens out there, but before we can speculate on why there is no sonic boom for an UFO, shouldn't we determine what that UFO is to begin with? You can't give a good answer to a question when it is based around an unknown. UFO could be lightning balls, jets, satellite, the list goes on. Everyone says it is because "they have much more advanced tech", but yet we never see this tech, so how do we actually know this?

I guess I wouldn't want to give a real scientific answer to a question without knowing what is meant by a UFO. We just don't happen to have any alien spacecraft lying around that we can see taking off.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 08:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow_Lord
Some of the responses are creative, but if you are going to assume aliens built their craft for no sonic boom in our atmosphere (because it would not be the same for their atmosphere), then you must ask yourself, why.

You are assuming yourself, that they do that in purpose, but I'd rather think that their method of propulsion is the cause of that effect (or absence of effect). Furthermore, you're assuming that their atmosphere is different, which is plausible, but it is extremely likely that their home has a gaseous atmosphere just like earth has one, and even with a different composition/pressure/gravity, the sound still has to move in that air at a certain speed. When reaching and going over that limit, a shockwave will happen.

If these aliens went through all this trouble to travel vast distances to visit Earth. Made if so they can operate in our atmosphere. Design the propulsion system to work as well, and make sure no sonic boom is created for some reason (let's say for stealth), then why stop there? Why make it so we can still detect the craft?

Same remark as above. You're assuming that they specifically wanted that to happen.

I am not saying there isn't aliens out there, but before we can speculate on why there is no sonic boom for an UFO, shouldn't we determine what that UFO is to begin with? You can't give a good answer to a question when it is based around an unknown. UFO could be lightning balls, jets, satellite, the list goes on. Everyone says it is because "they have much more advanced tech", but yet we never see this tech, so how do we actually know this?

Because we have tried also to build aircrafts that could go at speeds well over that within our atmosphere. That technology would interest us. It would surely interest any other species that is trying to build a flying machine. If indeed they reached a point where they can build such spaceships as described, then they probably have reached that point in technology where their method of propulsion in atmosphere is getting rid of the drag.

I guess I wouldn't want to give a real scientific answer to a question without knowing what is meant by a UFO. We just don't happen to have any alien spacecraft lying around that we can see taking off.

The whole same applies to terrestrial crafts.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 09:26 AM
link   
reply to post by SpookyVince
 


Exactly my point. You cannot answer any question like this if you are going to assume anything. Therefore if you want a real scientific answer, you must base if off what we know, not off what we assume or imagine.

But to your last comment, I think I am reading it wrong, or you misunderstood what I meant. It sounds like you meant we don't have any terrestrial crafts laying around that we can test taking off? I am sure this is just a misunderstanding. What I meant was, we do not have any alien space craft that we can test this concept on. We have tons of our own though.

I understand the reasons we want to build aircraft to deal with a sonic boom. There is no reason to build a space craft around that however.

The only problem I have with the question is; it cannot be scientifically answered correctly given we do not have enough facts. Anything that is put out there is assumed. At our current technology, it cannot be done. To say aliens have the technology to do it, is an assumption, not a fact. Now we can have fun and imagine "what if" but the moment anyone gets defensive (not saying you are at all) and starts to argue "facts" about alien technology, well the water gets very muddy. That is why I enjoy reading Phage's responses, he puts out facts. For example the difference between a propulsion system and drag / reduction of shock waves.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow_Lord
Exactly my point.
(...)
I think I am reading it wrong, or you misunderstood what I meant. It sounds like you meant we don't have any terrestrial crafts laying around that we can test taking off? I am sure this is just a misunderstanding.


Indeed.

What I meant was that the whole explanations or speculations, if you prefer, as to why a craft would produce no sonic bang when passing over the sound barrier also applies to terrestrial crafts.

Therefore, it is perfectly normal to try and understand how it is possible to do that. It is also perfectly normal that this is based on observations of phenomena, whether ET or terrestrial, known or not, because it has been shown on many occasions that it was exactly what was happening, i.e. objects that were proven to be material accelerating to a great deal of speed in an extremely short time, and without producing the sonic bang. (please refer to the belgian wave if you don't think that there are indeed proofs, U2U me, I'll be more than happy to share with you)

To the best of my knowledge however (because I am not the über qualified expert in those physics, therefore I cannot have the whole knowledge required), it is very likely that such a behaviour is beyond our current knowledge and technology, which lets open the fact that these objects can be of extraterrestrial origin.

Also to the best of my knowledge, I am convinced that MHD or a similar technique is used as a part of the propulsion technology, because (as it was pointed out earlier in this thread) it requires an enormous energy. However, we also have no means to assume that such an amount of energy cannot be produced "economically" simply because we are currently unable to do it. It could be entirely MHD, or not.

The precise reasons why we absolutely must base research on assumptions, is simple: if we research what is known, we won't advance a lot. By restraining research to common or ordinary things, we will never learn about the uncommon and extraordinary things that we don't know. Going blind into the walls is not a good technique, but making reasonable assumptions based on (controversed... I grant you that) observations is how we can get to pass the limits of our current knowledge.

For all these reasons, it is as reasonable to believe that going over the speed of sound without creating a sonic bang is a known but secret terrestrian technology (and the secret will be lifted in some time then) as to believe that this technology observed is the creation of some other civilisation that knows more on the subject than we do. I don't think there is a problem then to try and understand that phenomenon. Understanding it will not anyway reveal to us whether it's indeed from earth or elsewhere...

[Edit]
I just wanted to add this. You say that there are reasons to build a ship with that technology to fly in an atmosphere, but to go in space, it's useless. Indeed, because there is no air in space (ahem...) and thus no sonic bang anyway.

This is totally true, but there is more to it than just that. Inherently, MHD or a similar technique can never be a means of propulsion in space, because it is precisely based on manipulating the environment around the craft to move, and again in space, there's no such thing around the craft to be manipulated.

That is also one of the reasons why I believe that there is a second propulsion method, additional or complementary to the MHD (or other). Assuming (yes...) that these crafts are of extraterrestrial origin, it is reasonable to believe that they would have to be able to fly in atmosphere as well as in space, which conforts me in this.

[edit on 28-1-2009 by SpookyVince]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 10:51 AM
link   
Assuming an electrical electrostatic craft, one of the theories not the
same as T T Brown is a charge imbalance with electrons.
The electron being the easiest to move around starting with
a high voltage beam.
www.kyes.com...
According to Tesla published lab results, this flow can be controlled
by magnets.
So this controlled flow of electrons brings the craft into hover.
These electron ropes are entirely visible in an evacuated bulb.
There is a possibility that the craft is actually losing atoms as
the Tesla one wire button bulbs.
The UFO is a lab experiment gone wild.
There is a wake seen in Mexico UFO film footage and another I
don't recall right now at very slow motion.
Air is not crashing together as in regular flight.
Air must be recombining after being torn apart.
And the craft is losing material in pitting of its metal cab in each
and every flight.
That is why the Illuminati has been giving us plastic for fifty years.
The Illuminati are in control of these losers but the engines might
be useful.
ED: wrong coil, see larger:
www.kyes.com...

[edit on 1/28/2009 by TeslaandLyne]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 11:06 AM
link   
The one thing that really gets me is how they deal with inertia. You see how these crafts can go from 0 - 60 Miles Per Second in less than 3 seconds. Wow



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 11:11 AM
link   
Any chance it is just because the time it takes a UFO to cross the sound barrier is so limited, consequently emmiting only limited and unpercieveable sound ?



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 11:25 AM
link   
as far as i've heard, that UFO that's speeding across the sky is "traveling" through time, because as soon as you can manipulate gravity, you can time travel! for example, the UFO is taking 5 minutes to go across the sky, but you're just in super slow-motion to them. just like a hummingbird's reality is faster all around (their heartbeat and way of life is faster, so you're in slow-motion to them, too), the same goes for time traveling objects as well.

also, consider all this the next time you see a UFO make an "impossible" right-angle turn, that it's in its own reality, while you view it from your slower reality...

for further insight and more information, read/listen to Ralph Ring's and Otis T. Carr's interviews!!

www.projectcamelot.org...

this basically explains why there's no sonic boom, and also why UFO's seem to have an impenetrable "forcefield"...

...hope this helps some!!


[edit on 28-1-2009 by adrenochrome]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by GEORGETHEGREEK
 


A sonic boom does not happen when something "breaks the sound barrier". I occurs continuously as long as something is moving at or faster than the speed of sound. The shock waves follow the object like the wake of a boat. When the wave passes over an observer the boom is heard/felt.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by impaired
 


Inertia is the resistance to change of speed.
A spinning flywheel does not like to be moved or changed in any way,
it has inertia to change.

Acceleration is of course a change in speed by definition.
Bill Lyne saw a local saucer go to the horizon estimating the
speed at 25,000 mph in 1953 Texas or some nearby location
out west. Perhaps the Texas oil fields near New Mexico.

The mere fact that charges are involved, Bill saw electrical discharge
covering the craft, means the craft posses instantaneous momentum.
See: Parallels between electrostatics and gravity
en.wikipedia.org...
When you create charges you create Force.
You create charges with voltage.
See: Relating to force - General equations of motion
en.wikipedia.org...
See Force is the time derivative of Momentum (P) which
is mass (m) time some velocity. Velocity is already there.

This is some sort of modern miracle, actually known to scientists 100 years
ago, that charges can do this. You are up to speed and you don't know it.
That's why Electrical Physics classes start with static charges but
little does any one suspect the true facts behind what nature can do
or what the Illuminati will not tell us.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by songthrush
This question was probably answered long before most of you here were born.

Leonard Cramp's Piece for a Jig-saw: UFOs and Anti-gravity Pt.1 1966 is probably the most remarkable book you could ever read on this subject.

Why do I say "could ever read"? Well, I would go as far to say, that one day soon, Cramp's books will be exposed as being "the truth hidden in plain sight" on the UFO phenomena.

You need to get the book (and his follow-up books) and you may find all your questions answered, including many you never thought about.

Some of the early UFO images inside are alone worth the price of tracking down this book. The G-Field images of craft in acceleration are astounding -and way before Photoshop days of course...

As for no sonic booms, well, the vectored G-Field extends WAY ahead of the leading edge of the craft, like a sharp knife at the edge, displacing air much more gently well in advance of the actual craft. Possibly miles ahead.


fwiw -UFO's are very real. But I don't think any UFO's are 'alien' at all, That has been a colossal ruse to distract attention away from the shy clique of separatist humans who have been refining them since the early part of the last century. The technology is THE definitive military advantage, hence the need for total cover-up until... well, the 'until' is the bit that worries me. Maybe I should ask Mr Cramp -he knows a lot you see.


I will definately check it out. Thanks for the info!



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Fastwalker81
 


This is a nice quote made by the Colonel of the Belgium Airforce after their UFO flap of the late 80s and early 90s:


"There does not exist currently any machine manufactured by the man, plane or missile, which is capable of such performances, in particular to fly at supersonic speed without making bang? ?It cannot be something creates by the man and our defense system is impotent vis-a-vis these machines"
Colonel de Brouwer~Belgian air force


Comprehensive account/documentary:
www.disclose.tv...

Footage:
www.ufologie.net...


[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by karl 12
 


But what does he know.
Nothing.
We know more than he does.

He saw the machine, it exists.
An amazing machine.

He doesn't know what every one does on Earth.
Illuminati arm twisting got him to say that.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 08:19 PM
link   
Many UFO's use an electromagnetic anti gravity engine. This creates a BUBBLE of anti-gravity around the vehicle. That is why they can travel at incredible speeds without killing the crew. In this field there is no resistance therefore no sound. It is beyond what HS and college physics will teach you because they are far beyond us.



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 11:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Found this interesting article about Quiet Supersonic Transport:
www.popsci.com...


Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works has been developing the project for six years under a $25-million contract from Supersonic Aerospace International (SAI)…
Designed to fly between Mach 1.6 and 1.8 (1,056 to 1,188 mph), the two-engine gull-wing aircraft would leave a sonic wake that’s only one hundredth the strength of the Mach 2 capable Concorde…



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by karl 12
 



A star for you!


That's bringing it "down to Earth"!


See people? Present day aerospace engineering. That's all it takes.

...would like to fly that bad puppy though...*sigh*



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 12:44 PM
link   
i never thought of this before...we hear about project bluebeam being all about holograms so maybe all these ufos are holograms dontya think?

it does make sense doesnt it? ,why use real ships that can crash when you can just use light?



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by MariaUpsideTown
i never thought of this before...we hear about project bluebeam being all about holograms so maybe all these ufos are holograms dontya think?

it does make sense doesnt it? ,why use real ships that can crash when you can just use light?


Are you serious at all?

I mean... really? Nah, hey, please... Have you read before you read this? We're not talking of holograms you know...



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by impaired
The one thing that really gets me is how they deal with inertia. You see how these crafts can go from 0 - 60 Miles Per Second in less than 3 seconds. Wow


Again, I refer you to Leonard Cramps books. He explained how creation of your own G-Field in an craft means that overcoming inertia is simply a matter of G-Field vectoring. Inside these craft, you would always be 'falling into' YOUR local G-Field, never actually 'changing direction' at all with respect to Earth's gravity -which is rendered irrelevant.

Cramp will be looked back on like Tesla, he is just way before his time...



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join