UFO Research of NASA's Paul R. Hill.

1ofthe9

JadeStar

1ofthe9


Indeed! At minimum we stand to learn something interesting about how we perceive things, and as of yet unclassified natural phenomena. At the other end of the spectrum, we might just figure out how to reach the stars. The only way to settle the matter is to apply the powers of !SCIENCE! - and the patterns that emerge from the data are...interesting. I'm amazed that we can make attempts at reverse engineering this stuff without having access to the stuff kept under cover. At minimum, even if this is a purely psycho-social phenomena, this stuff is inspiring people to think outside the box.

That's what I hope to do with my Hill-Fish starmap research which is pretty much complete pending new data (every year or so I will revise it if new information becomes available.)

I'm also planning to do an astrobiological analysis of reported "alien" entities reported in UFO lore. ie: What kind of planet would produce a species like "The Greys", "The Praying Mantis", "The Hill Aliens", "The Flatwoods Monster", etc?

What evolutionary processes would exist to lead to such a life form?

Not because I believe these account but because in studying the subject from an astrobiological perspective we stand to perhaps learn more about the adaptability of life in general.

On the other side, it will provide a friendly gateway and introduction to serious astrobiology for UFO believers.

edit on 29-12-2013 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)

If you need a hand, lemme know. The most enjoyable stuff the Orions Arm people cook up, for me, is their xenobiology.

I will. I've sent you a U2U too

reply to post by RUInsane


thanks for the correction!

reply to post by thedudedoesnotabide


You're welcome!

Just stumbled upon this.

Thanks for the book links.

I really like what Hill and also Campbell were doing. First gathering all the observations and then showing the common observations shared.

I also agree that the glow seen must be a cold plasma/(excited, ionized air).

But I personally do not agree with many of his conclusions he derived from that. It seems he just had his idea about the force-field, and didn't want to further elaborate on other possible explanations.

E.g. he immediately discounted a lift due to atmospheric pressure differences as not possible, as it doesn't have the correct air foil for that and because it tilts in the direction of flight.
But IMHO these are completely wrong conclusions. Sure it doesn't fly like a normal plane.
But if it flies, like many other have suggested before, e.g. by somehow decreasing air pressure above it and increasing it below it, it would exactly do such a tilt to move forward.

I like his conclusion from the observation with a Geiger Counter from a few hundred meters, that there cannot have been charged particles reaching from the craft to there, but that these counts must have been from x-rays or gamma-rays.
But I think he is way too fast in then assuming that this means, the craft itself emits these rays directly.

It gets even sillier, when he tries to declare, that with such x-rays the air gets excited/ionized around it.
Especially the observation he just named, clearly shows, that x-rays get absorbed very very poorly by air.
This would be like the worst you could do if would wanna excite the air around the craft.
Additionally that the sheath of plasma is just a bit extending the craft shows, that whatever excites the air has only a very short range excitement.

Additionally: If you had such a plasma around it, and really a wavelength, where it absorbs energy, then it would mainly heat the plasma. The ionization would then rather happen by thermal/kinetic ionization.
But as he himself declared, observations have shown no heat emanations.
Also this way of excitation would not show different colors so distinct.

He also completely neglects any other explanation for the invisible wall effect from an observation. he even declares, that only a force field can generate this.
That is nonsense.
IMHO he obviously didn't have much knowledge in the plasma physics domain.
Although still not completely understood, the invisible wall effect has accidentially been created in a 3M fab.
I think everybody knows this famous story.
And there we also had rotating air and a lot of ionization happening.

BTW: I also think it is strange that Campell really thinks the rotations seen widely overall, is just for stabilization reasons. That's IMHO the worst you could do.
As if you have such a heavy mass gyrating, and you would do such a tilt, as observed, the counter moment, as typical for such gyrating systems would be extreme.
Additionally, if you can modulate the flying pattern that easy, then flight and stabilization control would be very easy.
At least with modern means...No need for any rotation of the craft.
So my conclusion would be, that the rotation is actually needed for the propulsion system itself.

E.g. in this relation I like the explanation from Kraspedon. There he stated, that the craft is creating an underpressure above it, by using something like Lenard-electron guns at the rim.
This would also fit the coloring observation perfectly. It would heavily ionized the air, and it would also charge it (non neutral plasma!!!)
It would then also explain, why a lot of the observed x-rays are generated. But then the x-rays would just be an actually unwanted secondary effect due to Bremsstrahlung , and not directly related.

But honestly. I wouldn't know, why such an electron beam into the air should decrease the air pressure...

originally posted by: hulli
But honestly. I wouldn't know, why such an electron beam into the air should decrease the air pressure...

Well if its for plasma generation, I assume its actively moving the air-plasma magnetically/electrostatically. You should check out Leik Myrabo's MHD fanjet stuff - I think something like that might be going on.

Also please make a thread. I'd love to see your thoughts on the subject.

originally posted by: 1ofthe9
Well if its for plasma generation, I assume its actively moving the air-plasma magnetically/electrostatically. You should check out Leik Myrabo's MHD fanjet stuff - I think something like that might be going on.

That wouldn't get you anywhere. Sure you can always make a MHD thrust. But that's not the idea behind this.

But according to Hill's and Campell's observations, we can almost exclude that strong magnetic fields are involved.
You could still just use a pure acoustic plasma loudspeaker levitation (just with electric fields). But I have a hard time believing you could get that much thrust like that. Especially it wouldn't cancel air friction...

The question would be, if you somehow manage to decrease the pressure by such ionizing means.
To get an underpressure, just repelling a plasma from the craft (either magnetically or electrically) wouldn't get you anywhere, as the counter force would be there immediately canceling any total effect.
So if this idea with underpressure would work, then there must be a change of the air itself, so that it gets into an underpressure/lower density.

As I wrote in another thread, the best I could come up with, why ionizing the air would decrease the pressure is, that is splits molecules. And by that you would finally decrease the density. But first you would increase the pressure like that...
So it doesn't really add up and I don't think it is possible to split that many molecules.

Or it could work similar like Schauberger's machines, where the ionization actually triggers reactions in the air, so that higher order molecules are built, so that in total the number of molecules decreases, which yields an underpressure.

I think one can be sure, that air friction is not present. So IMHO the only solution which, I would say makes sense, would be, that it creates an underpressure into the direction of flight. But this would certainly limit the maximal speed attainable.

Edit:
To come back to Hill's and Campbell's observations with the different colors. A reason could also be the creation of an undertpressure which automatically separates particles with different molecular weight, as the heavier molecules are slower and cannot get as quickly into the vacuum zone, as lighter molecules. If there's an excitation source, then this color changes could indicate a sudden pressure change, where only light elements get close to the craft, and therefore get excited, and so their spectral colors dominate then.
Just a thought, relating to Hill.
But as I said, IMHO Hill way too fast just shot on his preconceived idea. The same with Campbell.

Edit2:
Both of their propagated excitation methods, would mainly heat the plasma. But as has been stated by themselves: There was no heat in the observations.
This is why I think only a corpuscular excitation can take place. And there I really think electron rays are the most convenient ones. And this is why I found this part of Kraspedon's story so intriguing.
But as said, I wouldn't really know, why such an electron ray would decrease the air pressure.

originally posted by: MrInquisitive

Originally posted by Snaffers
Just wanted to download it because you mentioned free.
Over here it is not free.

The Book

Edit: OP gave me this link here Book pdf. This one is a free one. Very sweet

As a heads up to others: I had some problems downloading the free version via several of my browsers; however, it worked fine with the native one for my system (starts with an "S" and is a synonym for a hunting trip). So recommend using whatever your workhouse browser is for this site's download. I had to reboot my system to get one of the browsers back to health after I tried downloading via it.

Also, thanks to the parties concerned for the linkie to the pdf download of this book.

I tried downloading this pdf & my entire system crashed.

I just got some kind of device attack warning on my tablet I've never seen before when I tried pdf download.Wth?

You mean the pdfcast link?

I had no problems downloading it, with Firefox.

I'm still reading the book and I really have to say, that his conclusions are sometimes really just ridiculous.

It really gets very obvious that he is not interested in any other explanations, than the one he prefers.

I really like his observations. And they are IMHO very good. But you can already crush his derivations from them by simple math.

E.g. he states, that it seems UFOs have observed accelerations of up to about 100g.
Then he again states, this obviously cannot be achieved by aerodynamic means.

This is simply wrong.

E.g. if we take his observed weight calculations, that UFOs have about the weight of a submarine, so about the weight of water.
If we assume a disc formed craft with a dimensional ratio of about 3:1 (dia to height). And if we assume it would be one big cylinder filling the volume (not just a saucer shaped object, which would be lighter), then you get a possible acceleration, due to an underpressure on one side of just about 100g.
So a saucer shaped object would be able to attain even a higher acceleration.

So it can easily be shown, that a pure "aerodynamic" effect can yield such high accelerations.

I had again a thought about the color changes in the air around the craft.
IMHO there are actually really just two different possibilities:

* There's a kind of plasma window effect, which blocks or deflects incoming air particles. Only small and or faster particles can enter the underpressure zone near the craft.
What kind of particles that do make it, depends on how good this window effect is.
Like that color changes with the strength of this "plasma window" effect.
So if a strong window is there, you would see mainly the color of helium and neon, which is red and orange.
If the strength dips a bit you would additionally see the color of argon (pink to blue). And if it dips even a little more, the colors of N2 and O2 would become visible.
It's obvious that having several of these gases together inside, would create mixed colors: Like the blue of argon and the yellow/orange of neon, would produce a green color.
It's also interesting how Hill describes, that UFOs hovering typically have an orange teint, whereas this changes to blue or even white, when fast accelerating. He concludes from this, that in a higher exciting mode, these colors get excited.
But honestly. If the color change would come from such a "window" effect, then the color change would actually indicate an increase in pressure, so actually less power for acceleration. This would make sense, for the faster the thing would fly, the more difficult it gets for the window to keep the underpressure. So the obvious result would be a slight decrease in the "plasma window" strength and therefore a change in color.

* The other possibilitiy I see is, that the craft emits some kind of little particles, which then get excited and deliver different colors, when different particles get emitted. I could well believe, that they emit some particles (see angel hair), but I definitely do not believe, that they so quickly always change the kind of particles...

For all other possibilities like propagated by Hill or Campbell, I see no possibility, to excite air, so that you can change the colors like that in such a small sheath. That's simply not possible. E.g. you can try to excite an evacuated tube of air. But no matter what you do, you will not be able to get such color changes in the tube.
IMHO they are only possible when there is a change in the gas composition. And this would easily be explainable by such a "plasma window" effect.

I forgot to mention the dimensions I used for that example craft, I mentioned above in my calculations. It was modeled as a small example craft 30cm dia 10cm height.

originally posted by: karl 12

It also brings up aspects like UFOs changing colour during acceleration, the lack of sonic booms and other UFO flight characteristics.

Dufforak's thread dealing with colour distribution of five hundred sphere and orb UFO reports collected from NUFORC.


A study of sphere and orb UFO colourations.

originally posted by: RUInsane
I just wanted to announce that a new, revised edition of Unconventional Flying Objects will be available in June 2014. It'll have a (presumably new) foreword by Dr. Robert Wood, as well as a completely new foreword from Dr. Don Donderi. I have the original hard copy.

Thanks for that mate - looks very nice.






a reply to: JadeStar

Appreciate the post JadeStar and I think lots of scientists accept that UFOs are an extremely serious mystery.

Rare clip featuring Paul Hill's research, testimony from his daughter Julie Hill and NICAP's Richard Hall.

Professor Paul R. Hill (1909–1990) was a renowned American aerodynamicist. He was a leading research and development engineer and manager for NASA and its predecessor, NACA between 1939 and 1970, retiring as Associate Chief, Applied Materials and Physics Division at the NASA Langley Research Centre. He was awarded NASA's Exceptional Service Medal in 1969

Free dl link appears to be dead, anyone know where else to find it? Maybe it got pulled because of the new edition? Either way, really interesting looking book. I wouldn't mind paying for it next time I need a ufo read.

originally posted by: AgentAnderson

Free dl link appears to be dead, anyone know where else to find it? Maybe it got pulled because of the new edition? Either way, really interesting looking book. I wouldn't mind paying for it next time I need a ufo read.

It's available here on Scribdoc mate - think you'll have to sign up for free trial to read the full book though.


www.scribd.com...

UFO quote directory:

• "They moved jerkily when moving slowly. The speed varied from about 50 to 500 mph. Their ability to make tight circling turns was amazing."

NASA Aerodynamicist Paul R. Hill discussing his UFO sighting over the waters of Lower Chesapeake Bay, Virginia, July 16th, 1952

Scientists

Paul Hill's research doesn't get much (if any) mainstream coverage but below is a recent(ish) article on his work.

Former NASA Scientist Unlocked UFO Flying Technology, Proved It Is Attainable


In the final analysis, Hill summarized on the basis of presently available data that the observation of some “Unconventional Flying Objects” is compatible with the presence of engineered platforms weighing in at something around 30 tons, which are capable of 100-g accelerations and 9000-mph speeds in the atmosphere. Perhaps, more important for the technical reader, however, is Hill’s supporting argumentation based on solid analysis that these platforms – although exhibiting the application of physics and engineering principles clearly beyond our present-day capabilities – do not appear to defy these principles in any fundamental way.