UAP Observations & Metric Engineering | Robert Addinal

Transcript

UAP observations and metric engineering patterns and examples from the 20th and 21st centuries. So why does this subject matter? And I have three points here about why it matters. First, a very large number of UAP sightings have been reported and published in various forms over the last 80 or so years, basically since World War II. And I mean arguably in in our email discussions, we've had many discussions about how maybe there are valid uh reports of UAP and such craft going back before World War II. But the uh you have uh you know modern sort of or organizations like MUN and so on have been around more recently and and putting those together.

So um as I say here some of the sources and publications appear credible and are reported in a reasonably intellectually rigorous manner. And the second point is that since 1994 the concept of the Alcubia space-time warp bubble has gradually evolved into greater detail in theoretical physics leading to the creation of various theories about how such metric engineering effects might be created. Similarly, the Moritz Thorn wormhole metric, another metric engineering effect, hased significant discussions since the 1980s. And third, although metric engineering is still a field in its early stages, and there is disagreement about exactly how warp bubbles might be created, there's been sufficient discussion to put in place some outlines and make alubia type metrics a possible explanation for some UAP observations. So amongst the core points here, the argument here is that a significant number of UAP observations correlate well with what we would expect to see from Alubi type warp bubbles, usually operating at slower than light speeds when people see them in the uh atmosphere u or when when the USS Nimmits has its encounter, the F-18s have their encounter with the Tic Tac, the Tic Tac isn't operating ing at faster than light and Alubia his metric originally was for faster than light but we'll get into this later in the talk how as the topic has evolved there's also uh I mean Jack has has spoken a lot in the last few years about how it can function slower the light as well so I know Jack will say well this is uh you know the the metric engineering war bubble effect is really the only only uh real explanation.

I mean just as a point of academic rigor I will say that this may not be the only possible explanation but it is one that should be studied extensively and it is the explanation that is preferred by some of the physicists participating here including Jack and this talk is just the beginning. The history of UF UAP observations is a topic that can be continuously added to and uh as I've already mentioned some organizations have have collected literally thousands of uh sightings of of UAP events. And here we're looking at some representative examples and general patterns. And then the next slide. I know a lot of people have been annoyed by Avi Lobo, but I do like to make the point that conventional explanations are already being studied.

Avi's Galileo project will explore propulsion options such as rockets and light sails in terms of observations of unusual phenomena around the Earth and in the solar system. In overview of the Galileo project, Lo and a co-author write that they will also work on eliminating sightings caused by natural and humanmade objects or phenomena. So that's already being being done. We don't have to we don't need any of these arguments about oh why are you guys looking at at uh warp drive and so on when it's like there's already there's there's a lobe and there's others have been and continue to look at all the possible conventional explanations the separate effort that looks at metric engineering as an explanation is therefore arguably warranted so structure for the rest of this talk The preceding four slides were outlining the why why should we talk about this and the remainder is organized into the following parts. First an overview of the literature on metric engineering in particular alubia warp bubbles.

Second a discussion of some of the characteristics of warp bubbles that would correlate with widely noticed characteristics of UAP sightings. information pointed out over the last few years by people like Luc Alzando and by websites like uap theory.com is relevant here and I mean we'll we'll get to it but this is I'm not quoting Alzando in any detail but things like the the five characteristics slide which is later in this uh presentation we'll see and then third a review of a few examples of more compelling work covering and UAP observations and how various of the sightings discussed in those works support the pattern of correlations between expected characteristics of metric engineering war bubbles and the widely noted characteristics of UAP sightings and I like to add because I'm a military historian as well this will hopefully provide a basis for historians and social scientists to engage with this topic not just physicists and engineers Although obviously the physicists and engineers are the most important to engage with this topic but it it would be good to get some more uh multidisciplinary thought happening. So uh starting with the metric engineering literature here the Einstein rules of bridge and schwarzchild wormholes were described in the physics literature soon after general relativity was developed. Lwood Flam published a bridge type metric and Schwarz child wrote about a type of eternal black hole that could function a bit like a traversible wormhole around 1916 and Einstein and Rosen published their bridge description in 1935. Traversible wormholes were then discussed in a paper by Homer Ellis and also in another paper by Ka Bronnikov both published in 1973.

In 1988, Pip Thorne and his graduate student Mike Morris published a similar traversible wormhole metric is what Ellis had written in part to provide a more realistic and non-technobble method for faster than light travel in Carl Sean's book contact. And there's from the Wikipedia page. I mean, we most all or most of us here know this stuff, but there's your your two-dimensional representation of the fourdimensional wormhole, a sort of metric drawing. And then also like this one on the Wikipedia page is a image of a simulated traversible wormhole that connects the square in front of the physical institutes of the University of Tubingan with the sand dunes near Bulon Serare in the north of France. The image is calculated with 4D ray tracing in a Morris stormhole metric but the gravitational effects of the wavelength have not been simulated.

So that's maybe a bit more realistic than what the the uh sort of metric drawing is. So nonetheless despite this the uh papers have have been written about them traversible wormholes have not usually been seen as metrics that could be generated in a practical manner by foreseeable technology. Morris and Thorne argued rather that their model was useful for teaching general relativity. They wrote rapid interstellar travel by means of space-time wormholes is described in a way that is useful for teaching general relativity. And about contact here you see uh they they note that many objections are given against the use of black holes of or schwarzchild wormholes for rapid interstellar travel.

A new class of solutions of the Einstein field equations is presented which describe wormholes that in principle could be traversed by human beings. It is essential in these solutions that the wormhole possess a throat at which there is no horizon. And this property together with the Einstein field equations places an extreme constraint on the material that generates the wormhole space-time curvature. and Morris actually has their original essay published at that uh it's online at that URL. So then in 1994 Mexican theoretical physicist Miguela Cubier then at the department of physics and astronomy at the University of Wales wrote the paper the warp drive hyperfast travel within general relativity.

That paper was published in classical and quantum gravity issue 115. Alubir stated that it is shown how within the framework of general relativity and the introduction of wormholes, it is possible to modify a spaceime in a way that allows a spaceship to travel with an arbitrarily large speed. by a purely local expansion of spaceime behind the spaceship and an opposite contraction in front of it. Mo motion faster than the speed of light as seen by observers outside the disturbed region is possible. The resulting distortion is reminiscent of the warp drive of science fiction.

However, just as it happens with wormholes, exotic matter will be needed in order to generate a distortion of spacetime like the one discussed here. And Alcubier's original paper is also it's up on archive at that uh URL. And that's his original 1990s uh graphic of his war bubble effect. I mean the important features here when you look at this is this and this comes back to the discussion that we were just having uh the the interior area of the warp bubble metric here is flat you can see the middle is flat so there's no G forces in there and this is what what uh Jack and Creon were the point they were trying to make you need that that flat area where it doesn't matter if the the uh if the mass is reduced Boo, you're still going to feel the G forces if you don't have this sort of uh flattened out area in the center. And then the part behind this peak is illustrating the uh the expansion of of spaceime in one direction.

And the trough is is like any drawing of a gravity well that uh people do in a book. That's uh the spaceime being contracted on the other side of the craft. And that's how it can it can move this expansion contraction around as it generates it. But that's how it moves in directions. And there's a more uh a more recent illustration of the same thing, but that's with uh after the year 2000 graphics.

So since Kubier published his paper a significant amount of additional work on war bubble metrics has been done. For example, if you search for warp drive and archive as of uh right now in May 2023, you get 203 results. So a thorough literature review of the topic would be an extensive project in itself which should probably be undertaken by a physicist. in email discussions amongst Jack Sarfatti and some of some other physicists and the rest of us um over the last 10 to 15 years we have occasionally one of these uh papers like the of the 203 archive comes up it's a point of discussion we we discussed the nario variation a couple of times but uh in general you can summarize that that the Some of these papers make modifications to the warp bubble metric which make it appear less impractical as a realizable technology. So then uh in terms of US government interest we see that Hal Putoff wrote wrote the paper advanced space propulsion based on vacuum or space-time metric engineering as a defense intelligence agency reference document.

In the now declassified advanced aerospace threaten Identification program or ATIP product list. It is listed as unclassified for official use only and Federation of American Scientists has that ATIP list online there. So again, anyone who's interested, I can I can send you my presentation here and or I can send you all of the uh links if you don't know know where to get them. So uh going on the papers traversible wormholes, stargates and negative energy and anti-gravity for aerospace applications by Eric Davis were also included on this list again as unclassified for official use only. Putoff published his paper in the journal of the British interplanetary society in 2010.

He wrote that a theme has come to the four in advanced planning for long range space exploration in the concept that empty space itself the quantum vacuum or space-time metric might be engineered as so to provide energy or thrust for future space vehicles. Although such far although farreaching such a proposal is solidly grounded in modern physical theory and therefore the possibility that matter vacuum interactions might be engineered for spaceflight applications is not a priority ruled out as examples. The current development of theoretical physics addresses such topics as warp drives, traversible wormholes and time machines that provide for such vacuum engineering possibilities. We provide here from a broad perspective the physics and coralates or consequences of the engineering of the space-time metric. And again, his paper is on archive as well.

So, I'm going to go over a few of the points he makes in detail because they're really one of the the first examples of where the expected behavior of uh warp drives uh was starting to be characterized and and we can correlate this with UAP observations. So Hal says the concept of engineering the vacuum found its first expression in the physics literature when it was introduced by nobleist TD Lee in his textbook particle physics an introduction to field theory. There he stated the experimental method to alter the properties of the vacuum may be called vacuum engineering. If indeed we are able to alter the vacuum, then we may encounter new phenomena totally unexpected. This legitimization of the vacuum engineering concept was based on the recognition that the vacuum is characterized by parameters and structure that leave no doubt that it constitutes an energetic and structured medium in its own right.

Foremost among these are that first within the context of quantum theory, the vacuum is the seat of energetic particle and field fluctuations. And second, within the context of general relativity, the vacuum is the seat of a space-time structure or metric that encodes the distribution of matter and energy. Despite the daunting energy requirements to restructure the space-time metric to a significant degree, the forms that such restructuring would take to be useful for spaceflight applications can be invest in investigated and their corolleran attributes and consequences determined from such a study. The signatures that would accompany such advanced technology craft can be outlined and possible effects of the technology with regard to space-time effects that include such phenomena as the distortion of space and time can be cataloged. This would include among other consequences cataloging effects that might be potentially harmful to human physiology.

Amongst the effects that put off observes a red shift, writing, "Should such a time slowed condition be engineered in an advanced aerospace application, an individual having spent time within such a temporally modified field would when returned to the normal environment find that more time had passed than could be experientially accounted for. If uninformed about the metric engineered characteristics of the environment from which he emerged, the individual might be inclined to interpret the experience in terms of a missing time. Conversely, for other types of engineered spacetime associated with an advanced aerospacecraft, time flow within the altered space-time region would appear sped up to an external observer, while to an internal observer, external time flow would appear to be in slow motion. In this scenario, close approach to a craft could leave one with the impression of say a 20 minute time interval, whereas only a few minutes would have passed in real or normal or exterior time. A corollery would be that within the space-time altered region, normal environmental sounds from outside the region might cease to be registered since external sounds could under these conditions redshift below the auditory range.

An additional implication of time speed up within the frame of such an exotic craft technology is that its flight path might seem precipitous from an external viewpoint. Such a sudden acceleration or deceleration would be experienced as much less so by the craft's occupants. From the occupant's viewpoint, observing the external environment to be in relative slow motion, it would not be surprising to consider that one's relatively modest changes in motion would appear abrupt to an external observer. And then I've noted here again amongst our discussion group the uh view that the flat space-time region in the center of an alubia warp bubble should be should have no G forces at all. But again, these things were like when Hal Pov was writing his paper, this is really just being written up in a rigorous manner for the first time.

So, and then other features that he notice uh that he notes also include that a craft's properties might appear hardened relative to the uh exterior environment due to the increased binding energies of atoms in its material structure. So it could say impact water at high velocities without apparent dilletterious effects. And we do see in some videos we see the uh UAP going into into water and coming out. And I know there's there could be different arguments exactly about how it's doing that. I'm not sure that we would currently agree with PF's statement here, but again it shows the the uh effects that that can be expected to arise.

He notes radiation hazards for external observers which we've discussed extensively in recent years by email. Uh he notes a craft appearing to shrink from this perspective of a remote observer when you're standing somewhere and you see a a uh UAP in the distance and people report sometimes they seem to change in size. There can be refractive index effects such as cloaking or blinking out where the craft disappears and uh or it looks like it disappears to the external observer and uh I note that Pov's paper may have been more popularized the term metric engineering. I I don't know, Jack, maybe you can comment later. Maybe you you started using it first in the 1990s or something, but it's uh um but you don't really see it that often before uh the about 2010 in this paper.

So and then vacuum engineering uh yeah vacuum engineering, space-time engineering, space-time modification and other such terms would also be reasonable but metric tensor engineering or simply metric engineering seems to have caught on and so it's what I'm using throughout this presentation. So apart from the those papers and the literature review then we just have we have a few other people doing things that are worth noting. I mean at NASA Eagle Works you had Harold Sunonny White he claimed creation of a nanocale warp bubble in a custom Casemir cavity although there's disagreement as to whether this was actually a meaningful result and the brief debrief.org or it is uh some articles on on Eagle Works topics. There you see a a nice Eagle Works graphic of what Eagle Works says we could do if we have the warp drive in terms of interstellar travel. Then you have Woodward James Woodward in 2013 his book making starships and Stargates was published by Springer.

It is a peer-reviewed book, but nonetheless, Woodward's model of the universe has drawn criticism for mixing a Newtonian gravitational potential with general relativity theory. In the book, Woodward included a proposal to obtain negative energy densities from metric engineering by exposing the negative bare mass of electrons based on the Arnowitz Daser Meisner model of the electron. And Jack has criticized this specific aspect of Woodward's theory as well as Woodward's theory more generally, writing that the bare mass of the electron is at the scale of classical electron radius 10 the power of -13 cm. The cloud of virtual photons is at 10 the power of -1 cm. The real farfield photons in Jim's contraptions are of much longer wavelength and lower energy and they cannot strip away the virtual photon electron posetron pair plasma to expose the naked negative mass in the ADM model.

And then we have Jack's variation of uh warp drive theory itself uh which of course Jack will talk about much more later during this conference. But Jack has proposed a low power version of the alubia warp drive. It focuses on reducing space-time stiffness or put another way increasing the coupling between a frolic coherent electromagnetic field in spaceime. And Jack has worked out in detail various aspects of how such a drive would operate at sublight speeds. And uh the his what Jack comes up with includes many of the same effects that Pov predicts in his uh DIA uh Journal of British Interplanetary Society paper.

And that leads us to an interesting point about the the shape of war bubble spacecraft. Although the theoretical basis is very difficult both is very different. Both Woodward and Sarfatti have models in which the warp bubble has to be generated in the skin of the spacecraft. Woodward proposes layers of pisoelectrics. Sarfatti believes that certain types of meta materials will work, but that a great deal of additional research is likely necessary in order to figure out exactly what kind.

Such models suggest that the shape of the spaceship has to fit the shape at least the inside of the shape of the warp field. That flat area a bit like a hand has to fit inside a glove. So as a result you would expect to encounter craft shaped as relatively simple geometric objects, flying saucers, tic tacs, globes and so on. And here is uh from CN CNN a picture of a a kind of a house 1950s flying saucer house. I just I thought it's amusing but it makes the point that you know you want a a simple relatively simple structure to do the warp bubble calculations and fit inside your own warp bubble.

And there is a screenshot off PBS of uh the one of the USS Nimtt's videos with the the tic tac in the distance being recorded by a uh F-18. And so uh again a relatively simple shape. So then as I mentioned at the start I was going to mention Alzando and some of the others to the stars academy. I mean they they generated a few of these uh slides that that we send around in our discussions. This uh particular ATIP slide, it covers a number of things like stuff that you also see at Skinw Walker Ranch.

But you do see the point in here of anomalies in the space-time construct and the comment that what was considered phenomena is now quantum physics. So uh that's uh important in taking metric engineering seriously. And then there's the five observable slide. So this really in a simpler way than the PF paper this uh summarizes it nicely. Number one sudden and instantaneous acceleration.

Number two hypersonic velocities without signatures. Three low observability. for transmedium travel, like being able to to fly through space and then the atmosphere and then into the water and back out of the water and positive lift without uh any obvious thrusters like rockets or or jet engines. So uh continuing with these characteristics of UAP uh the website UAP theor theory is a uh reasonably well presented summary of the sort of effects uh we've already seen discussed. For example, it states that requiring that UAPs are consistent with the laws of motion leads us to a gravitational propulsion system for lack of a better term which has the following implications.

first that UAPs should be rounded geometrical as there's no preferred forward- facing direction since they use spacetime as their control service. They need no wings or afterburners. Second, UAPs can maneuver in sharp angles at high speeds because they move on exoggly a slightly different set of five points but making the same points that we've seen so far. And the UAP theory site also has some nice videos on it, like the uh uh bunch of versions of the 2013 Puerto Rico UAP uh video. So, it's it's a good introduction.

If you know someone who you think should learn about metric engineering and UAP warp drives, get them to read that that site. Uh so now we're moving on to the sort of sources we can we can use to correlate between those uh that all the the theory and the characteristics and what people actually respond seeing or report seeing. So um uh quality of reports from organizations like muon can vary and uh you as as I show here some commentators attack the quality of new muon reporting com complaining that it all sorts of stories of alien abductions conspiracy theories human ET hybrids and so on are unscientific. So it's I mean some of us here will disagree with that. We'll say that all those things are things that have to be investigated.

Others may say yeah we don't want we want to keep the intellectual discussion more rigorous but we have we do have more rigorous sources than say uh muon for instance one source that ties together accounts of UAP observations with a theory of metric engineering type propulsion is unconventional flying objects by Paul R Hill and I'm just going to quote from uh Robert Mood who is also a physicist and engineer aeronautical engineer who wrote the forward to Hild's book. Wood wrote NASA aeronautical engineer Paul R. Hill began to collect and analyze evidence about unidentified flying objects during the 1950s. But he could not publish anything about UFOs while employed by NASA. After Hill died in 1991, it was possible to publish the book that he wrote while working for NASA.

Hill was a good engineer. He designed the fuselage for the World War II P47 fighter bomber, and his UFO analysis drew on his knowledge of the physics and engineering of flight. While at NASA, Hill designed and flew a machine that used some the same basic principle of thrust. And yeah, I mean we we don't use thrust anymore because that's not actually what's going on with uh Alubia drives. But again, remember this is Hill is doing this before he's looking at UFO UAP observations before all the theories worked out.

So, uh he he made something that kind of uh like it it it could hover on on uh air pressure, but he uh didn't have the anti-gravity drive. That drive would have allowed the principle to explain the observed near-Earth performance of UFOs and by extension their interstellar performance. Hill knew that UFO technology so far exceeded the capability of terrestrial technology that UFOs could not have been made by uh present- day humans. Hill's approach was 20 years ahead of its time. He never became trapped in the endless speculation about the reality of UFOs.

He accepted the reports at face value and let his analysis of the observed phenomenon speak for itself. And his methodology was impeccable. He took the reported observations and then directly evaluated alternative hypotheses, exploring all relevant aspects of the observations. His comprehensive analyses dealt with size, color, halos, clouds, wakes, jitter, heat, maneuvers, performance, sound, solidity, landing, weight, nests, and rings, propulsion, propulsive forces, force fields, radiation, merging systems, occupants, collection, interference, weaponry, and artifacts. So, and then again my own commentary based on on that based on subsequent work on the Alcubia warp drive, we would now say that there is not thrust involved in the UAP movement.

But nonetheless, by deduction, Hill reached the conclusion that UAP were using what he conceived of as artificial gravity force fields before the physics literature based around Alcubier's 1994 paper came into being. And I'm getting near the end. I know I'm going on a bit long here, but uh some some good stuff to look at. So, another well-ritten and reasonably intellectually rigorous book covering a number of UAP sightings is the 2010 book UFOs, Generals, Pilots, and Government Officials Go on the Record by investigative journalist Leslie Keane. Mich Okaku provided a blurb for the cover of the book.

He wrote at last a serious and thoughtful book about this controversial subject. Keen was also one of the authors of the New York Times articles in 2017 that discussed the ATIP program and included uh on the New York Times websites website copies of some of the of the three US Navy F18 UAP videos. Uh so writing about what drew her to the subject, Keen states 10 years ago. So as her book came out in 2010, that would have been about 2000 or 23 years ago now. As an investigative reporter working for California public radio station, I was suddenly confronted with a seemingly impossible reality.

A colleague in Paris sent me an extraordinary new study by former high rank ranking French officials documenting the existence of UFOs and exploring their potential impact on national security. Now known as the cometar report, this unprecedented white paper marked the first time in any country that a group of this size and stature had declared that UFOs, solid but as yet unexplained objects in the sky, constitute a real phenomenon warranting immediate international attention. The distinguished cometar authors, 13 retired generals, scientists, and space experts working independently of the French government, had spent three years analyzing military and pilot encounters with UFOs. In the cases they present, all conventional explanations of something natural or man-made had been eliminated by the authors and their associated teams of experts. And yet these objects were observed at close range by pilots, tracked on radar, and officially photographed.

They achieved tremendous speeds and accelerations, made sharp right angle turns in a flash, and could stop and stand still in midair, seeming to defy the laws of physics. What could this mean? Since some of the military officers on the cometar panel were serving with the French institute of higher studies for national defense, a French government finance strategic planning agency. Their characterization of UFOs as a phenomenon with possible national security implications assumed a grave importance. And then she talks a bit more about the uh their 90page report and the uh that they they thought that the most logical explanation was uh the extraterrestrial hypothesis. I comment and again we just had this in our discussion an hour ago that uh a warp bubble moving at faster than light speeds uh could also in theory allow travel into one's own past light cone because that's I mean that's with a Jack can explain it better than me but uh that's within general relativity if you can bypass the light speed limit and move faster than light you can necessarily achieve trajectories that will take you into your own past.

Um so the point is that rigorously documented UAP observations correl correlate well with the expected behavior of craft operating on the principles of the Alcubia drive and metric engineering. And then last but not least is of course the more the recently released US Navy videos which the new US Navy acknowledged as uh as uh authentic and uh after 2017 and they can be uh found at these uh website addresses but I mean you can you can also find the the UAP videos all over YouTube so you don't have to go to the government website to download them. So conclusion again summarizing the behavior of the UAP in the US Navy videos is again consistent with the theory that these craft are operating using the principles of metric engineering. No, no apparent thrust uh like no apparent no jet or uh rocket engines, no propellant, no and and ability to accelerate very quickly and so on. Essentially, as has been argued in this presentation, a number of sound sources documenting UAP observations in detail exist and the accounts detailed in them correlate with an alubia warp bubble type technology.

Does this prove that these are warp drive craft? Based on conversations with Jack, I expect that he would say yes. I do not think that we can actually say anything for sure without having empirical proof, either retrieval of a crashed craft or building one ourselves. However, the correlation is strong and there is enough evidence to support continued multidisciplinary as well as theoretical physics research of the metric engineering option. So that's my talk.