Daniel Fry - Contactee?

[Thomas R Morrison]

This is fantastic – some altruistic soul has uploaded one of my favorite interviews with Daniel Fry to YouTube, so you can hear him for yourself and make up your own mind.

It amazes me that this Long John Nebel interview from August 1st, 1958, has survived. I’m only aware of about 12 surviving audio files of Daniel Fry’s many interviews and talks, and this one’s a gem (despite the unstable audio quality).

Contrary to the impression one might have after listening to Ray Stanford’s description of Daniel Fry on his April 2, 2017 appearance at the Paracast, in this 1958 interview you can clearly discern Daniel Fry’s technical and scientific prowess on a wide range of subjects as he spontaneously answers all kinds of questions, citing facts and figures off the top of his head as he applies scientific reasoning even when he’s speculating. Frankly he sounds like any one of my friends with a PhD in physics – casually authoritative and supremely rational, remarkably well-informed and thoughtful. This is what a professional scientist sounds like.

I recommend listening to the whole 3-hour interview; it’s fun and fascinating. But for those who would prefer to hear his responses to specific topics, I’ve provided a list of time-stamped links so you can listen to his answers on specific topics of interest. At 47:23 he tells his story about the alleged incident at White Sands Proving Ground, which remains in my mind the most credible-sounding contact experience I’ve ever heard.

Long John Nebel interview with Daniel Fry 8/1/58
3:10:06 long

00:04:17 Dan Fry explains why hollow earth theory is implausible
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=257

00:47:23 Dan Fry begins telling his story about the incident at White Sands
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=2843

1:17:22 describes flight along a gravitational geodesic
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=4641

1:20:56 describes EIT (electromagnetically induced transparency)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=4856
(Note: this is a vibrant field of research today, which began in 1990 with the discovery of electromagnetically induced transparency in gases, and has recently moved into EIT with metals and metamaterials: Classical Analogue of Electromagnetically Induced Transparency with a Metal-Superconductor Hybrid Metamaterial, 2011)

1:23:51 talks about the absence of g-forces he experienced as the craft accelerated
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=5031

1:33:16 he looks around at the trace evidence after the experience, attempting to refute it
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=5595

1:36:00 discrepancies in modern physics, which he asked about, and subsequently tested the answers to those questions
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=5759

1:38:22 he admits that his scientific books are oversimplified, explains that he covered the broad strokes for brevity
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=5902

1:39:40 he spends $2K/year of his own money to publish his books and give talks about his experience
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=5980

1:40:14 throws it to the wolves – describes the adversarial process of applied science
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=6014

1:43:19 the interrogation begins
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=6199

1:45:35 the mathematics of relativity, velocity of light, measuring C from a relative reference frame
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=6332

1:49:40 Ben doesn’t understand the constancy of light speed. Dan explains the constancy of C, and that the relativistic Doppler effect applied to a lantern aboard a train receding at 100,000 miles/sec (~.54C) would shift the light below the optical spectrum
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=6578

1:50:41 key concept: emission/absorption of light defines a zero time reference frame and a point in space
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=6641

1:53:53 Dan: the mathematics of relativity are correct, but our interpretation of them is flawed
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=6833

1:55:16 a lost Einstein quote about the special theory of relativity: “All of the knowledge which we have concerning the universe about us comes to us through our senses. Therefore if we are to formulate mathematical laws concerning this universe, we must begin with the postulate that what our senses tell us is true. This means that if we observe through a large telescope the formation of a nova in a distant galaxy and at the same time we observe the eruption of a volcano upon our own Earth, we must for the purpose of our mathematics assume that these two events are simultaneous. It is true that this is a difficult concept to accept because the faculty which we call reason immediately interposes the objection that a separation in space involves an elapse of time between an event and our perception of it. But if we are to allow our reason to interfere before our mathematics are complete, we will be evolving a concept whose value is based only upon the validity of our reason and not upon the accuracy of our observations. Then, when we have completed our mathematics, we can allow reason to deal with what we have.”
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=6916

2:08:00 “gravitics” and discussion of the gravitational field mechanism, and the method of production, which unfortunately he didn’t understand
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=7675

2:10:06 Dan describes the relativistic Doppler redshift for 100,000 miles/sec velocity as ”about ¾ of an octave.” It’s .829, so his approximation is within 10%. This would shift any frequency lower than blue into the infrared, confirming his statement
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=7808

2:15:59 Dan clarifies that the “viewing screen” aboard the ufo was the hatch door itself, which had undergone some kind of electromagnetically induced transparency
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=8159

2:16:53 audio conversation with craft operator seemed like sound; may not have been
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=8213

2:18:28 Dan states that audile sensation can be induced by vibrations against a nerve in the knee
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=8308

2:22:20 the gravitational field propulsion mechanism involved the rapid counter-rotation of two powerful charges around the periphery of the craft – if the charges were positive it was in opposition to the earth’s field, if negative it’s in conjunction with the earth’s field
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=8538

2:26:54 – money motive? Dan restates that talking around the country and publishing his books costs him $2K/year, and that 9 out of 10 times he speaks, he receives no speaking fees
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=8814

2:28:35 – fame motive? “no thanks – if I wanted fame I wouldn’t do it this way; subjected to ridicule etc”
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=8915

2:32:45 he considers all kinds of explanations that his experience may not have happened, been a hallucination etc, but the preponderance of the evidence convinces him that it did happen
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=9162

2:40:20 Daniel Fry responds to question regarding his education and engineering qualifications
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=9620

2:45:05 question asked “have any artifacts been left on Earth by ufos?” A lively discussion ensues after Dan cites the Giza pyramid as an example of an ancient artifact that we can’t explain given the known technology of that era, and goes on to say that the ancient Egyptians must have had a form of technology unknown to us today, implying that an unknown form of technology may have been explained to the ancient Egyptians by an alien race, which the humans could then have employed to make the pyramids
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=9905

3:04:30 a listener challenges Fry’s assessment of the Doppler shift, not realizing that both the spectral lines and the frequency of the emitted light would both shift to the same degree. Dan explains that the Doppler shift is experimentally proven, and that any alternative theory would need to explain these observations.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=11070


There’s also some very interesting discussion about this case (focusing largely on the physics contained within Daniel Fry’s books) in these two threads, which I’ll link to here for anyone interested in reading further about this intriguing case:

April 2, 2017 — Ray Stanford

Your Paracast Newsletter — April 2, 2017

I welcome any thoughts you may have on any of this, and I'm happy to debate anyone who's up for it. I don't know what to make of this case, but it's been an endless source of enjoyment to delve into it. I think that if you're willing to dig beneath the rubble of the 50's-era contactee cases, and brush this one off to have a closer look at it, you'll understand my enduring fascination with it.

 

[ChrisJohnsen]

This is fantastic – some altruistic soul has uploaded one of my favorite interviews with Daniel Fry to YouTube, so you can hear him for yourself and make up your own mind.

It amazes me that this Long John Nebel interview from August 1st, 1958, has survived. I’m only aware of about 12 surviving audio files of Daniel Fry’s many interviews and talks, and this one’s a gem (despite the unstable audio quality).

Contrary to the impression one might have after listening to Ray Stanford’s description of Daniel Fry on his April 2, 2017 appearance at the Paracast, in this 1958 interview you can clearly discern Daniel Fry’s technical and scientific prowess on a wide range of subjects as he spontaneously answers all kinds of questions, citing facts and figures off the top of his head as he applies scientific reasoning even when he’s speculating. Frankly he sounds like any one of my friends with a PhD in physics – casually authoritative and supremely rational, remarkably well-informed and thoughtful. This is what a professional scientist sounds like.

I recommend listening to the whole 3-hour interview; it’s fun and fascinating. But for those who would prefer to hear his responses to specific topics, I’ve provided a list of time-stamped links so you can listen to his answers on specific topics of interest. At 47:23 he tells his story about the alleged incident at White Sands Proving Ground, which remains in my mind the most credible-sounding contact experience I’ve ever heard.

Long John Nebel interview with Daniel Fry 8/1/58
3:10:06 long

00:04:17 Dan Fry explains why hollow earth theory is implausible
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=257

00:47:23 Dan Fry begins telling his story about the incident at White Sands
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=2843

1:17:22 describes flight along a gravitational geodesic
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=4641

1:20:56 describes EIT (electromagnetically induced transparency)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=4856
(Note: this is a vibrant field of research today, which began in 1990 with the discovery of electromagnetically induced transparency in gases, and has recently moved into EIT with metals and metamaterials: Classical Analogue of Electromagnetically Induced Transparency with a Metal-Superconductor Hybrid Metamaterial, 2011)

1:23:51 talks about lack of g-forces he experienced as the craft accelerated
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=5031

1:33:16 he looks around at the trace evidence after the experience, attempting to refute it
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=5595

1:36:00 discrepancies in modern physics, which he asked about, and subsequently tested the answers to those questions
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=5759

1:38:22 he admits that his scientific books are oversimplified, explains that he covered the broad strokes for brevity
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=5902

1:39:40 he spends $2K/year of his own money to publish his books and give talks about his experience
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=5980

1:40:14 throws it to the wolves – describes the adversarial process of applied science
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=6014

1:43:19 the interrogation begins
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=6199

1:45:35 the mathematics of relativity, velocity of light, measuring C from a relative reference frame
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=6332

1:49:40 Ben doesn’t understand the constancy of light speed. Dan explains the constancy of C, and that the relativistic Doppler effect applied to a lantern aboard a train receding at 100,000 miles/sec (~.54C) would shift the light below the optical spectrum
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=6578

1:50:41 key concept: emission/absorption of light defines a zero time reference frame and a point in space
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=6641

1:53:53 Dan: the mathematics of relativity are correct, but our interpretation of them is flawed
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=6833

1:55:16 a lost Einstein quote about the special theory of relativity: “All of the knowledge which we have concerning the universe about us comes to us through our senses. Therefore if we are to formulate mathematical laws concerning this universe, we must begin with the postulate that what our senses tell us is true. This means that if we observe through a large telescope the formation of a nova in a distant galaxy and at the same time we observe the eruption of a volcano upon our own Earth, we must for the purpose of our mathematics assume that these two events are simultaneous. It is true that this is a difficult concept to accept because the faculty which we call reason immediately interposes the objection that a separation in space involves an elapse of time between an event and our perception of it. But if we are to allow our reason to interfere before our mathematics are complete, we will be evolving a concept whose value is based only upon the validity of our reason and not upon the accuracy of our observations. Then, when we have completed our mathematics, we can allow reason to deal with what we have.”
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=6916

2:08:00 “gravitics” and discussion of the gravitational field mechanism, and the method of production, which unfortunately he didn’t understand
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=7675

2:10:06 Dan describes the relativistic Doppler redshift for 100,000 miles/sec velocity as ”about ¾ of an octave.” It’s .829, so his approximation is within 10%. This would shift any frequency lower than blue into the infrared, confirming his statement
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=7808

2:15:59 Dan clarifies that the “viewing screen” aboard the ufo was the hatch door itself, which had undergone some kind of electromagnetically induced transparency
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=8159

2:16:53 audio conversation with craft operator seemed like sound; may not have been
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=8213

2:18:28 Dan states that audile sensation can be induced by vibrations against a nerve in the knee
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=8308

2:22:20 the gravitational field propulsion mechanism involved the rapid counter-rotation of two powerful charges around the periphery of the craft – if the charges were positive it was in opposition to the earth’s field, if negative it’s in conjunction with the earth’s field
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=8538

2:26:54 – money motive? Dan restates that talking around the country and publishing his books costs him $2K/year, and that 9 out of 10 times he speaks, he receives no speaking fees
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=8814

2:28:35 – fame motive? “no thanks – if I wanted fame I wouldn’t do it this way; subjected to ridicule etc”
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=8915

2:32:45 he considers all kinds of explanations that his experience may not have happened, been a hallucination etc, but the preponderance of the evidence convinces him that it did happen
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=9162

2:40:20 Daniel Fry responds to question regarding his education and engineering qualifications
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=9620

2:45:05 question asked “have any artifacts been left on Earth by ufos?” A lively discussion ensues after Dan cites the Giza pyramid as an example of an ancient artifact that we can’t explain given the known technology of that era, and goes on to say that the ancient Egyptians must have had a form of technology unknown to us today, implying that an unknown form of technology may have been explained to the ancient Egyptians by an alien race, which the humans could then have employed to make the pyramids
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=9905

3:04:30 a listener challenges Fry’s assessment of the Doppler shift, not realizing that both the spectral lines and the frequency of the emitted light would both shift to the same degree. Dan explains that the Doppler shift is experimentally proven, and that any alternative theory would need to explain these observations.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zhbo5KAKO8&t=11070


There’s also some very interesting discussion about this case (focusing largely on the physics contained within Daniel Fry’s books) in these two threads, which I’ll link to here for anyone interested in reading further about this intriguing case:

April 2, 2017 — Ray Stanford

Your Paracast Newsletter — April 2, 2017

I welcome any thoughts you may have on any of this, and I'm happy to debate anyone who's up for it. I don't know what to make of this case, but it's been an endless source of enjoyment to delve into it. I think that if you're willing to dig beneath the rubble of the 50's-era contactee cases, and brush this one off to have a closer look at it, you'll understand my enduring fascination with it.

So much for my Monday workday! Going in deep on Daniel Fry. Good thing I work from home...

 

[Thomas R Morrison]

I almost forgot - I wrote a chapter about gravitational field propulsion for Sean Donovan's 2014 book Contactee: Was Daniel Fry Telling the Truth? that goes into detail about the striking correlations between Daniel Fry's writings and the state of the art in theoretical and experimental gravitational propulsion in the academic literature, so I'm attaching it here for anyone who'd like to read it. I welcome any thoughts or critiques you may have - it's a fascinating subject that I love to discuss.

This is really fascinating, and I'm glad to hear you will be on the show to discuss it. Thank you for pursuing it in spite of indifference from those who should be at least a little bit curious but can't get past the "contactee" part. It reminds me of the Seth material, another trove of information most people rejected out of hand decades ago, but which is also being shown to be amazingly accurate by one modern Scientific Discovery after another.

When I came across your postings here on this matter recently, I followed a link you provided to Fry's books. I had come across The White Sands Incident many years ago in a library somewhere and started to read it. I may have been just a kid, and I may have been away from home and unable to check the book out or whatever, and was never able to find it again. This time I was seriously underwhelmed. It reads like a fairly wooden attempt at a novel. It's not convincing at all as a first-person narrative. If it had been as exciting and compelling as Communion, who knows what might have happened. Anyway, that has no more bearing on the predictive aspect than whatever Fry was caught doing as he faked his movies or whatever. As you point out, he has made clear and undeniable predictions. Somehow. Of course the Self-Appointed Guardians of the Rationalist Worldview will seize on whatever they can in order to avoid considering the points you have so eloquently and patiently raised here. The SAGotRW are childish and intellectually dishonest, but then what else is new? They have been terrified of this stuff for centuries.

I pay less and less attention to what is currently known as the "paranormal" these days because it seems to get more and more lame and silly, but I am looking forward to this episode.

Thank you for your thoughtful response, Double Nought Spy – I like your dispassionate approach to these subjects. I think it’s smart to find that fruitful ground in the center, neither caught in the throes of “the believer” nor caught up in the conceits of “the noisy negativists,” as Stanton Friedman loves to call them.

I think you might enjoy hearing some of the 1958 interview I just posted above of Daniel Fry on the Long John Nebel Show. When you hear him speak, it’s easy to understand the tone of his account – he’s just that kind of guy: a pretty stiff, scientific thinker, who probably would’ve been a pretty boring technical sort of guy, if he hadn’t either A.) actually had a truly remarkable experience that evening at White Sands or B.) for some reason written a fictional account of that encounter. In fact, hearing him speak only makes it harder to understand why a guy like this would make up this kind of story – he strikes me as a pragmatist, not a dreamer.

It is a shame that he made it so easy to dismiss his story by faking some photos and films. But that doesn’t address the issue of the scientific predictions, and honestly although I respect his scientific acumen, I just don’t think he was brilliant enough to arrive at those weirdly prescient descriptions of the dark energy effect and gravitational field propulsion on his own. He got it from somewhere. And as strange as it is to say this, the simplest explanation seems to be that he was telling the truth about his contact experience at White Sands. Because if we assume that the top secret world of advanced military science is 50 years ahead of the public sector, and that his story is a smokescreen for a leak of classified research science, then we would’ve seen gravitational propulsion devices in the commercial market by now, and we haven’t.

When I encounter the hostility of what you call “the Self-Appointed Guardians of the Rationalist Worldview,” I tend to see three major factors at play:

1.) They’re usually awful scientists, or simply people who aspire to be scientists but fail to really understand that science is an expanding frontier and an exhilarating adventure into new capabilities and deeper understanding – not a frozen dogma. The best scientists are daring and creative, insightful thinkers, and that’s how science advances.

2.) There’s a palpable fear of the on-going transformation of the human experience, and the fairly rapidly approaching prospect of actually encountering an intelligent extraterrestrial life form. That fear is understandable, because we humans are averse to drastic changes, and we'd obviously be totally defenseless in a real encounter with an alien race that has mastered the technology of interstellar and/or interdimensional travel. But we shouldn’t allow our minds to be blinded by that fear.

3.) The enormity of the human ego is clearly evident when this subject arises in most circles. It seems childish to me, to be so attached to the notion that humans are the preeminent creation in all of existence, but a great many people cling to that idea like a child clings to candy – they get very angry and petulant if you threaten to take it away from them. But that’s a pathetic lens to observe this vast and mysterious universe through. A little humility is called for. Imagine what we could learn from a race that’s only a few hundred or a few thousands of years farther along the advancement of civilization than we are. The value of what we might learn from such a race; technologically, socially, politically, perhaps even spiritually – I think the potential of contact far outweighs the narcissistic satisfaction one might find in our supremacy among the known life forms.

I’ll have to look at the Seth material; I never have. But if there’s track record of successful scientific predictions in there, then I’ll have to delve into it. There’s a lot of fascinating anecdotal evidence to support noncorporeal travel, and if that really is possible then it seems like an excellent way to make contact across vast distances of space. Sometimes I wonder if some of the reported sightings could be along the lines of the film Solaris, but instead of waiting for us to show up at the doorstep of an alien world, an advanced form of consciousness might reach out to us across light-years of space and manifest inexplicable encounters here on the Earth.

Anyway, the Daniel Fry case is only a small aspect of my on-going research into advanced concepts in theoretical and experimental physics (and a little metaphysics), so if you enjoy hard science topics at the horizon of human understanding, I think we’ll have a lot of fun covering all kinds of interesting territory in the weeks and months ahead.

So much for my Monday workday! Going in deep on Daniel Fry. Good thing I work from home...

Haha - sorry to drop this on you late on a Sunday night, but I hope you enjoy it, and I'd love to hear what you think after checking this out ;

 

[kanakaris]

 

[withoutlimits09]

I don't know much about the contactee movement that took place in the 50's or 60's, but I do like the color it added to pop-culture at that time. I think from a folk-lore perspective, some really great "ideas" originated from it. Perhaps that is the motivation behind these things, all of those early contactees and the quick rise of UFO-mania, really focused people's minds and eyes to the sky. That much cannot be understated. I guess this could fall back on Vallee's "control" theory, i.e., all of this is a mechanism to push humanity in a certain direction. Let's face it, we couldn't rely on coal and cars forever, cinema and life in general, was bland, it needed some flying saucers and things from outerspace!

However, with all that aside, I think you have provided a very thoughtful post and one that I enjoyed reading. There are times when I am convinced that the "hoax" factor or "discreditably" of a witness is a mere byproduct of the phenomena. Knowingly or unknowingly, people associated with the more fantastical claims have some major knock against them. Lazar with his lack of educational records, Fry with his fake footage etc...it seems like part of the program, something one signs up for beforehand. Perhaps it is a way to ensure only the most diligent people can capitalize on the information. Sometimes progress takes work, and weeding through all the mess, might be part of the design in some odd way. I think it adds a bit of sincerity to those people who research this seriously. They are not easily moved by a few outliers because there might be something of merit in between.

Or everyone has lost their mind, I often fall back on that thought too! Great post though!

 

[ChrisJohnsen]

I almost forgot - I wrote a chapter about gravitational field propulsion for Sean Donovan's 2014 book Contactee: Was Daniel Fry Telling the Truth? that goes into detail about the striking correlations between Daniel Fry's writings and the state of the art in theoretical and experimental gravitational propulsion in the academic literature, so I'm attaching it here for anyone who'd like to read it. I welcome any thoughts or critiques you may have - it's a fascinating subject that I love to discuss.


Thank you for your thoughtful response, Double Nought Spy – I like your dispassionate approach to these subjects. I think it’s smart to find that fruitful ground in the center, neither caught in the throes of “the believer” nor caught up in the conceits of “the noisy negativists,” as Stanton Friedman loves to call them.

I think you might enjoy hearing some of the 1958 interview I just posted above of Daniel Fry on the Long John Nebel Show. When you hear him speak, it’s easy to understand the tone of his account – he’s just that kind of guy: a pretty stiff, scientific thinker, who probably would’ve been a pretty boring technical sort of guy, if he hadn’t either A.) actually had a truly remarkable experience that evening at White Sands or B.) for some reason written a fictional account of that encounter. In fact, hearing him speak only makes it harder to understand why a guy like this would make up this kind of story – he strikes me as a pragmatist, not a dreamer.

It is a shame that he made it so easy to dismiss his story by faking some photos and films. But that doesn’t address the issue of the scientific predictions, and honestly although I respect his scientific acumen, I just don’t think he was brilliant enough to arrive at those weirdly prescient descriptions of the dark energy effect and gravitational field propulsion on his own. He got it from somewhere. And as strange as it is to say this, the simplest explanation seems to be that he was telling the truth about his contact experience at White Sands. Because if we assume that the top secret world of advanced military science is 50 years ahead of the public sector, and that his story is a smokescreen for a leak of classified research science, then we would’ve seen gravitational propulsion devices in the commercial market by now, and we haven’t.

When I encounter the hostility of what you call “the Self-Appointed Guardians of the Rationalist Worldview,” I tend to see three major factors at play:

1.) They’re usually awful scientists, or simply people who aspire to be scientists but fail to really understand that science is an expanding frontier and an exhilarating adventure into new capabilities and deeper understanding – not a frozen dogma. The best scientists are daring and creative, insightful thinkers, and that’s how science advances.

2.) There’s a palpable fear of the on-going transformation of the human experience, and the fairly rapidly approaching prospect of actually encountering an intelligent extraterrestrial life form. That fear is understandable, because we humans are averse to drastic changes, and we'd obviously be totally defenseless in a real encounter with an alien race that has mastered the technology of interstellar and/or interdimensional travel. But we shouldn’t allow our minds to be blinded by that fear.

3.) The enormity of the human ego is clearly evident when this subject arises in most circles. It seems childish to me, to be so attached to the notion that humans are the preeminent creation in all of existence, but a great many people cling to that idea like a child clings to candy – they get very angry and petulant if you threaten to take it away from them. But that’s a pathetic lens to observe this vast and mysterious universe through. A little humility is called for. Imagine what we could learn from a race that’s only a few hundred or a few thousands of years farther along the advancement of civilization than we are. The value of what we might learn from such a race; technologically, socially, politically, perhaps even spiritually – I think the potential of contact far outweighs the narcissistic satisfaction one might find in our supremacy among the known life forms.

I’ll have to look at the Seth material; I never have. But if there’s track record of successful scientific predictions in there, then I’ll have to delve into it. There’s a lot of fascinating anecdotal evidence to support noncorporeal travel, and if that really is possible then it seems like an excellent way to make contact across vast distances of space. Sometimes I wonder if some of the reported sightings could be along the lines of the film Solaris, but instead of waiting for us to show up at the doorstep of an alien world, an advanced form of consciousness might reach out to us across light-years of space and manifest inexplicable encounters here on the Earth.

Anyway, the Daniel Fry case is only a small aspect of my on-going research into advanced concepts in theoretical and experimental physics (and a little metaphysics), so if you enjoy hard science topics at the horizon of human understanding, I think we’ll have a lot of fun covering all kinds of interesting territory in the weeks and months ahead.


Haha - sorry to drop this on you late on a Sunday night, but I hope you enjoy it, and I'd love to hear what you think after checking this out ;

OK, I have one question after reading your Gravitational Field Propulsion PDF. Once a craft employing this kind of propulsion system travels beyond Earth's gravitational pull, how would the occupants avoid floating around in the craft once there is no longer that 1G of Earth gravity? Would it necessitate there being some sort of separate "internal system" employed to generate and maintain a "constant gravity field" inside the craft so that the occupants could move around as normal during travel? Or, would you simply need to remain strapped in or use handrails to guide oneself as they float through the craft, a la the ISS?

 

[Trajanus]

It is a shame that he made it so easy to dismiss his story by faking some photos and films. But that doesn’t address the issue of the scientific predictions, and honestly although I respect his scientific acumen, I just don’t think he was brilliant enough to arrive at those weirdly prescient descriptions of the dark energy effect and gravitational field propulsion on his own. He got it from somewhere. And as strange as it is to say this, the simplest explanation seems to be that he was telling the truth about his contact experience at White Sands.

Agreed. This is a bit reminiscent of the Hill map, supposedly in advance of human knowledge at the time. But Fry's evidence is way better.

1.) They’re usually awful scientists, or simply people who aspire to be scientists but fail to really understand that science is an expanding frontier and an exhilarating adventure into new capabilities and deeper understanding – not a frozen dogma. The best scientists are daring and creative, insightful thinkers, and that’s how science advances.

Right. Skeptics often point to the difficulty of interstellar travel as an argument against the ETH. Given the rapidity of our own progress, it's absurd to assume nobody can ever reach another star just because we can't, now.

2.) There’s a palpable fear of the on-going transformation of the human experience, and the fairly rapidly approaching prospect of actually encountering an intelligent extraterrestrial life form. That fear is understandable, because we humans are averse to drastic changes, and we'd obviously be totally defenseless in a real encounter with an alien race that has mastered the technology of interstellar and/or interdimensional travel. But we shouldn’t allow our minds to be blinded by that fear.

It's often been claimed that if ET wanted us dead we'd be gone already.

3.) The enormity of the human ego is clearly evident when this subject arises in most circles. It seems childish to me, to be so attached to the notion that humans are the preeminent creation in all of existence, but a great many people cling to that idea like a child clings to candy – they get very angry and petulant if you threaten to take it away from them. But that’s a pathetic lens to observe this vast and mysterious universe through. A little humility is called for. Imagine what we could learn from a race that’s only a few hundred or a few thousands of years farther along the advancement of civilization than we are. The value of what we might learn from such a race; technologically, socially, politically, perhaps even spiritually – I think the potential of contact far outweighs the narcissistic satisfaction one might find in our supremacy among the known life forms.

Very nicely said.

There’s a lot of fascinating anecdotal evidence to support noncorporeal travel, and if that really is possible then it seems like an excellent way to make contact across vast distances of space. Sometimes I wonder if some of the reported sightings could be along the lines of the film Solaris, but instead of waiting for us to show up at the doorstep of an alien world, an advanced form of consciousness might reach out to us across light-years of space and manifest inexplicable encounters here on the Earth.

On the other hand there's ample evidence for a physical phenomenon, to an extent even a nuts and bolts one.

 

[Thomas R Morrison]

There are a handful of videos of Daniel Fry from very late in his life (this one was made only three years before his death at age 84). But they’re kind of sad and dreary – it’s not very convincing to hear the very old Daniel Fry speaking about his experience: he was far more compelling in his prime back in the 50s and 60s when his mind was sharp and clear. Plus, he starts this particular talk with one of his awful poems, lol.

However, with all that aside, I think you have provided a very thoughtful post and one that I enjoyed reading. There are times when I am convinced that the "hoax" factor or "discreditably" of a witness is a mere byproduct of the phenomena. Knowingly or unknowingly, people associated with the more fantastical claims have some major knock against them. Lazar with his lack of educational records, Fry with his fake footage etc...it seems like part of the program, something one signs up for beforehand. Perhaps it is a way to ensure only the most diligent people can capitalize on the information. Sometimes progress takes work, and weeding through all the mess, might be part of the design in some odd way. I think it adds a bit of sincerity to those people who research this seriously. They are not easily moved by a few outliers because there might be something of merit in between.

Or everyone has lost their mind, I often fall back on that thought too! Great post though!

Thank you, withoutlimits09. It’s disappointing that Daniel Fry gave everyone an “easy out” by faking some photos and a small number of brief film clips (I’m not sure how many he made, but I get the impression that wasn’t many, and represented a small and shameful point in his life – it may have been just 1964 when he did this; I’ll do some digging and see if I can find out more about it). But even the “easy” answer, that all of his story was a hoax, doesn’t explain these predictive aspects of his writings. So the “easy” answer isn’t logically complete either. There’s something more going on here. I like the theory that his story was a cover for leaking classified information, but even that theory is very difficult to accept.

OK, I have one question after reading your Gravitational Field Propulsion PDF. Once a craft employing this kind of propulsion system travels beyond Earth's gravitational pull, how would the occupants avoid floating around in the craft once there is no longer that 1G of Earth gravity? Would it necessitate there being some sort of separate "internal system" employed to generate and maintain a "constant gravity field" inside the craft so that the occupants could move around as normal during travel? Or, would you simply need to remain strapped in or use handrails to guide oneself as they float through the craft, a la the ISS?

That’s an excellent point. He describes the mechanism of the “force rings” in an interesting way: he specifies that a magnetic resonance can be established within each ring individually, or between the two rings (one at the top of the craft and one at the bottom). So I’ve considered that it may be possible to generate a propulsive effect using the resonance between the two rings, and generate a secondary field simultaneously with one ring that would influence the region within the craft. In the part of his story where A’lan offers to let him experience “free fall” within the craft, either one of two things could’ve happened: either the field was turned off, allowing the craft to drop freely for a few moments, or a secondary field was generated within the craft to cancel out the Earth’s gravitational field. I suspect the latter. But yes – if it’s only possible to produce a single field for propulsion purposes, then the larger craft they’d use to travel between the stars would have to rotate, to provide enough centripetal acceleration to simulate a gravitational field, like in 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Agreed. This is a bit reminiscent of the Hill map, supposedly in advance of human knowledge at the time. But Fry's evidence is way better.

I’ve always meant to look into that. A friend of mine told me about a tribe in Africa (the Dogon tribe, perhaps?) that claimed that they’d learned the art of hydroponics from "star people" who had given them a star map to indicate their origin. Apparently this map included stars that can’t be seen with the human eye. I’ve always wanted to compare those maps to see if they match.

Right. Skeptics often point to the difficulty of interstellar travel as an argument against the ETH. Given the rapidity of our own progress, it's absurd to assume nobody can ever reach another star just because we can't, now.

I agree completely. It’s hard to ignore the enormous conceit in that "skeptical" position, isn’t it? Here we are, a species with only 100-200 years of significant technological progress under our belts, and we’re so arrogant that we don’t believe that practical interstellar spaceflight is possible, just because we haven’t figured out how to do it yet. Smh.

On the other hand there's ample evidence for a physical phenomenon, to an extent even a nuts and bolts one.

Yeah, I generally favor the “hardware theory” because we have photographic and film evidence of reflective objects, radar confirmation, and physical landing trace cases. So a great many of these sightings involve solid technological craft. But some of the sighting are effing baffling, like the Rendlesham forest incident – even that has a solid technological aspect, but also some deeply beguiling aspects, like splintering into many illuminated objects that appear to move independently. So that’s either some kind of exotic technology that can do things that we can’t even conceive, or something even weirder is in play. My default position is that in some cases, a technology that’s hundreds of thousands or even millions of years ahead of ours would be difficult to recognize as technology. But I don’t dismiss anything: it’s a big, weird universe, and we’ve barely stepped off the front porch – there’s no telling what we’ll find as we begin to plumb the myriad mysteries out there.

 

[Trajanus]

I’ve always meant to look into that.

There's a problem: The map is subject to interpretation and the Fish interpretation is far from universally accepted.

A friend of mine told me about a tribe in Africa (the Dogon tribe, perhaps?) that claimed that they’d learned the art of hydroponics from "star people" who had given them a star map to indicate their origin. Apparently this map included stars that can’t be seen with the human eye. I’ve always wanted to compare those maps to see if they match.

IIRC the star is the companion of Sirius. In his blog Randle suggested contamination i.e. european missionaries might've told the Dogon about Sirius. But then why did the dogon say "star people" told them?

Yeah, I generally favor the “hardware theory” because we have photographic and film evidence of reflective objects, radar confirmation, and physical landing trace cases.

Right, even if you dismiss crash retrieval reports on the grounds hard evidence is not available for public scrutiny, there's a plethora of evidence favoring a physical phenomenon.

So a great many of these sightings involve solid technological craft. But some of the sighting are effing baffling, like the Rendlesham forest incident – even that has a solid technological aspect, but also some deeply beguiling aspects, like splintering into many illuminated objects that appear to move independently. So that’s either some kind of exotic technology that can do things that we can’t even conceive, or something even weirder is in play. My default position is that in some cases, a technology that’s hundreds of thousands or even millions of years ahead of ours would be difficult to recognize as technology. But I don’t dismiss anything: it’s a big, weird universe, and we’ve barely stepped off the front porch – there’s no telling what we’ll find as we begin to plumb the myriad mysteries out there.

ETs may make use of projected images--holograms.

 

[Thomas R Morrison]

There's a problem: The map is subject to interpretation and the Fish interpretation is far from universally accepted.

IIRC the star is the companion of Sirius. In his blog Randle suggested contamination i.e. european missionaries might've told the Dogon about Sirius. But then why did the dogon say "star people" told them?

Wow – I’m stunned that you knew all about this. That anecdote about the Dogon tribe was a passing remark I heard from a friend about 20 years ago, and I wasn’t sure if I’d remembered it correctly because I’ve never heard a word about it since. Sometimes you folks at The Paracast blow my mind.

So do we have a star map from the Hill case that can be considered reliable? I got the impression from my friend all those years ago that the Dogon tribe preserved their star chart in artifacts predating ufology, so it would interesting to do a comparison. But frankly I presume that we’ve been visited by a wide range of species and probably self-aware probes from all over, so I wouldn’t expect two cases to overlap except in special cases where an alien civilization has taken an on-going interest in us for some unfathomable reason.

One of the facets of the Daniel Fry story that I’ve always enjoyed, is his assertion that the alien race that contacted him doesn’t have a specific planet of origin – Fry said that he was told that they preferred to live aboard their craft and venture to different planets. This way they were safe from the risks of planetary life: earthquakes, asteroids, biohazards, violent weather, etc. And I would imagine that such an existence would be far more interesting – exploring new worlds like the crew of the Enterprise. I’ve often wondered if that was a theme in the science fiction of his day. It seems like all of the other contactees assigned specific origins to their alien contacts, in their accounts (and if I recall correctly, these were mostly planets within our own solar system – which probably seemed almost as ludicrous back then as it does today). I’d love to know when the idea of a non-planetary species first appeared in sci-fi stories – if anyone’s an aficionado of old science fiction, I’d love to hear some thoughts on this.

Right, even if you dismiss crash retrieval reports on the grounds hard evidence is not available for public scrutiny, there's a plethora of evidence favoring a physical phenomenon.

Yeah I don’t think it’s possible to make a reasonable argument against at least some of the sighted craft being physical devices from other worlds.

I think that some people balk at the idea of interstellar travel, and therefore embrace other ideas like “subterrestrial civilizations” and “interdimensional visitors.” But the performance characteristics of many of these craft clearly indicate a powerful form of field propulsion that has all of the expected qualities of a gravitational field propulsion system. And we already know that a propulsion system of that nature permits superluminal travel free of time dilation effects. So traversing interstellar distances, with that kind of technology, is a snap.

One thing that people often miss is that distance becomes an altogether different consideration when you can accelerate at a constant rate, which is one of the huge advantages of a gravitational field propulsion system: the distance you travel becomes an exponential function of your travel time. So if you travel twice as long, you travel four times as far. If your rate of acceleration can get you 1 light-year in a day, then you can travel 100 light-years in ten days, or 10,000 light-years in 100 days. It's as if the universe becomes exponentially compressed as a function of travel time. And you really could accelerate that quickly, because there are no g-forces whatsoever within a gravitational field propulsion system – it feels like standing still, even when you’re executing hairpin maneuvers at 10,000mph. And we have sightings and radar cases of these craft maneuvering like that. Plus, once you have the energy to produce the acceleration field, it doesn't cost you any energy to keep accelerating (except for whatever incidental losses exist within your technology) - totally unlike the rocket principle, which demands both energy and reaction mass to produce every moment of acceleration and deceleration. Interstellar travel is child’s play with that kind of technology.

Once you understand the basic physics at work, the extraterrestrial hypothesis makes perfect sense.

ETs may make use of projected images--holograms.

You raise a very important point. I think we humans still have a very naïve view of the actions that we’re likely to experience with beings that are probably many thousands of years ahead of us, or more. They might employ all kinds of techniques and tactics to show us what they want us to see, or hide what they don't want us to see. We've already begun to experiment with actual invisibility technology using metamaterials - in another 100 or 1000 years, imagine how far along we might get with that. I wonder how many craft navigate in our atmosphere that have virtually flawless cloaking technology - if the tech were sufficiently advanced, it would be essentially totally transparent to visible and radar frequencies.

Think of where we were just 1000 years ago. Western civilization was smack dab in the middle of the Dark Ages: most of us were illiterate slaves/serfs living in squalor, thinking that the world was flat, praying to imaginary angels and saints to be spared from The Devil.

That’s how we must appear now to an interstellar race – clueless primitives slaughtering each other at the behest of psychopathic plutocrats to make profits for the defense industry, burning toxic fuels that give us cancer just to keep the lights on, struggling to keep a roof over our heads and praying that we don’t get sick and thereby plunge into bankruptcy, totally oblivious to the existence of life beyond our own woefully contaminated little asylum of a home world.

And just as the feudal serfs didn’t have the first clue about game theory or elaborate PsyOps, an interstellar intelligence is going to be vastly more sophisticated than we are today. They’ll not only have their own thousands of years of history beyond ours to draw upon; they’ll almost certainly have seen a wide variety of civilizations at various stages of development, and in many ways know more about us than we know about ourselves because of that perspective. I doubt that we’ve even figured out the most basic rules of the game. I wouldn’t be surprised if the abduction phenomenon were some kind of long-term psychological program, or biological experiment, engineered towards ends that we can’t even imagine. We’re so far out of our depth with this stuff that it’s ridiculous. Just look at how easily the idiots in our own government manipulate us en masse, and then multiply that times a million – in the face of a true galactic civilization, we’re not only as physically helpless as a newborn in a cradle; we’re as psychologically outmatched as well.

The only thing we seem to have going for us, is the fact that whoever’s buzzing our skies doesn’t seem to have the slightest desire to wipe us off the Earth, or we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

In my most optimistic moments, I like to think that perhaps the same dynamics apply at the species level as at the individual level: the most interesting people tend to have the wildest and most tumultuous youths. Maybe our alien neighbors haven’t annihilated us from the face of the planet because they know that we’ll be a helluva lot of fun to hang out with once we finally get our shit together.

Or maybe they haven’t bothered because it’s obvious to them that we’re going to wipe ourselves out sooner than later.

 

[Trajanus]

Wow – I’m stunned that you knew all about this. That anecdote about the Dogon tribe was a passing remark I heard from a friend about 20 years ago, and I wasn’t sure if I’d remembered it correctly because I’ve never heard a word about it since. Sometimes you folks at The Paracast blow my mind.

Actually I'm not much of a regular here.

But frankly I presume that we’ve been visited by a wide range of species and probably self-aware probes from all over,

I have some doubts because some entities don't seem evolutionarily plausible. A reported fish-alien is an example.

so I wouldn’t expect two cases to overlap except in special cases where an alien civilization has taken an on-going interest in us for some unfathomable reason.

I think there's a good reason to take an ongoing interest.

One of the facets of the Daniel Fry story that I’ve always enjoyed, is his assertion that the alien race that contacted him doesn’t have a specific planet of origin

IMO alien claims should be taken with a grain of salt. There has been all kinds of absurd stuff told to contactees.

Fry said that he was told that they preferred to live aboard their craft and venture to different planets. This way they were safe from the risks of planetary life: earthquakes, asteroids, biohazards, violent weather, etc.

So life in space is risk free, lol. Even assuming an alien species is immune to calcium loss, asteroids or meteorites can be very hazardous to spacecraft. So can supernovae eruptions, stellar flares, planetary radiation belts, black holes, cosmic rays...
A planetary environment is where a species originally evolved and is best adapted to, unless it's artificial.

It seems like all of the other contactees assigned specific origins to their alien contacts, in their accounts (and if I recall correctly, these were mostly planets within our own solar system – which probably seemed almost as ludicrous back then as it does today).

Almost. Didn't you ever notice that in Hardwicke's introduction at the start of the '53 War of the Worlds, he omitted mention of Venus as a possible option for Martians--for the obvious reason that the Venusian environment was still as mystery back then.

Yeah I don’t think it’s possible to make a reasonable argument against at least some of the sighted craft being physical devices from other worlds.

I think that some people balk at the idea of interstellar travel, and therefore embrace other ideas like “subterrestrial civilizations” and “interdimensional visitors.” But the performance characteristics of many of these craft clearly indicate a powerful form of field propulsion that has all of the expected qualities of a gravitational field propulsion system. And we already know that a propulsion system of that nature permits superluminal travel free of time dilation effects. So traversing interstellar distances, with that kind of technology, is a snap.

One thing that people often miss is that distance becomes an altogether different consideration when you can accelerate at a constant rate, which is one of the huge advantages of a gravitational field propulsion system: the distance you travel becomes an exponential function of your travel time. So if you travel twice as long, you travel four times as far. If your rate of acceleration can get you 1 light-year in a day, then you can travel 100 light-years in ten days, or 10,000 light-years in 100 days. It's as if the universe becomes exponentially compressed as a function of travel time. And you really could accelerate that quickly, because there are no g-forces whatsoever within a gravitational field propulsion system – it feels like standing still, even when you’re executing hairpin maneuvers at 10,000mph. And we have sightings and radar cases of these craft maneuvering like that. Plus, once you have the energy to produce the acceleration field, it doesn't cost you any energy to keep accelerating (except for whatever incidental losses exist within your technology) - totally unlike the rocket principle, which demands both energy and reaction mass to produce every moment of acceleration and deceleration. Interstellar travel is child’s play with that kind of technology.

Very interesting. Generally I doubt reverse engineering claims but maybe by now some progress has been made.

Once you understand the basic physics at work, the extraterrestrial hypothesis makes perfect sense.

It always made the best sense to me.

The only thing we seem to have going for us, is the fact that whoever’s buzzing our skies doesn’t seem to have the slightest desire to wipe us off the Earth, or we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

Good point.

In my most optimistic moments, I like to think that perhaps the same dynamics apply at the species level as at the individual level: the most interesting people tend to have the wildest and most tumultuous youths. Maybe our alien neighbors haven’t annihilated us from the face of the planet because they know that we’ll be a helluva lot of fun to hang out with once we finally get our shit together.

Or maybe they haven’t bothered because it’s obvious to them that we’re going to wipe ourselves out sooner than later.

I'm more optimistic. I know trying to fathom an advanced system's motivation appears daunting, but maybe it isn't. Look at the vast technological gulf between ancient Greece and ourselves. Unfathomable as our technology and techniques would seem to them, they'd still recognize a lot--diplomacy, alliances, armies, wars, trade, education etc.

 

[Trevor Wozny]

Wow..what in hades does this mean " Our best model of dark energy is described as a repulsive gravitational effect, consistent with the theory of general relativity, attributed to some massless and all-pervasive vacuum energy field that appears as the cosmological constant in Einstein's field equation." Really! Please realize that when ANYONE uses the words QUANTUM MECHANICS...they have NO idea what they are talking about. Quantum Mechanics (a woefully crappy term) is at best what is known as a "Toy Theory". Notice the absence of hypothesis. It should be obvious its absurdness. No physicist would do that. Toy theories are great but don't represent anything in particular. It meets some requirements but not nearly all. I heard some smart guy wrote a most excellent article on just this thing...forget his name ...sorry.

 

[Thomas R Morrison]

Please realize that when ANYONE uses the words QUANTUM MECHANICS...they have NO idea what they are talking about.

Heh heh. You’re the only person to use that phrase in this entire thread.

Wow..what in hades does this mean "Our best model of dark energy is described as a repulsive gravitational effect, consistent with the theory of general relativity, attributed to some massless and all-pervasive vacuum energy field that appears as the cosmological constant in Einstein's field equation." Really!

Yes, really. I don’t share that view; dark energy and dark matter look to me like imaginary constructs upheld by mainstream academia to avert the glaring evidence of cosmological-scale antigravity, aka negative gravitation. Apparently after ridiculing people for decades for talking about antigravity, academic scientists will cling to any notion that spares them a big fat dinner of crow.

But I think I described the mainstream view fairly accurately. Sean Carroll provides a more thorough treatment of the subject here:
Why Does Dark Energy Make the Universe Accelerate?

Quantum Mechanics (a woefully crappy term) is at best what is known as a "Toy Theory". Notice the absence of hypothesis. It should be obvious its absurdness. No physicist would do that. Toy theories are great but don't represent anything in particular. It meets some requirements but not nearly all. I heard some smart guy wrote a most excellent article on just this thing...forget his name ...sorry.

I hate having to disagree with you, because I agree with Einstein on this: quantum field theory appears to be a placeholder for a more fundamental and deterministic theory.

But you take the point too far. Quantum theory has made a wide range of successful predictions, including antimatter and the particles and forces described by the standard model. Its central hypothesis was the wave nature of matter, which proved to be a very powerful and effective predictive model. Lots of brilliant physicists have ascribed to it. But I think that some even more brilliant physicists have rejected it in favor of the de Broglie-Bohm pilot wave theory, which restores determinism and causality to the ridiculous train wreck known as the Copenhagen interpretation.

I just don’t think it’s reasonable to rail against physicists for doing the best they can, in lieu of the grand unified theory that we’re all eagerly anticipating, but has yet to emerge.

 

[DROBNJAK]

So, according to Sean Carroll, new empty space is added to the intergalactic voids at a constant rate. And the energy density of that new empty space is constant. Right?

An explanation of the Alcubierre-White Warp Drive | AsteronX

Anyway, that's a good explanation of how Alcubiere-White's drive works.

 

[mike]

It has to be stated clearly that what I'm about to propose is simply my intuitive view of the universe and the dark matter issue.
And it's hard to explain without a white board but here goes.

Imagine a point in the middle of the room you are in, Halfway between the floor and ceiling. Let's call it the big bang.

And BANG, A spherical pressure wave expands outwards. Now imagine that spherical pressure wave is 3 inch's thick. It has a leading edge (outside) and a trailing edge (inside).
Our galaxy is somewhat closer to the trailing edge and the observable universe is a cookie cutter sized tube 3 inches long set in this 3 inch thick sphere.

The vast majority of matter ejected by the BB, is out towards the leading edge of this pressure wave, And has already started coalescing into super super massive black holes.

The trailing edge of the wave is being pulled out towards them.

That is, the universe isn't expanding because its being pushed, But rather pulled out towards the lion's share of ejected matter now coalesced as super super massive black holes encircling the outside edge of the spherical pressure wave.

Eventually all the matter will be pulled out into these super super massive black holes, and they will then all coalesce at some point and the whole process starts again

(Big bang/Gnab Gib) or Big Bang/Big Crunch sceanario.

The Big Bang and the Big Crunch - The Physics of the Universe

No need for dark energy or dark matter in this model.

Again this is just my idea on what might be happening, I'm not presenting it as a fact or theory.

 

[DROBNJAK]

I'm looking for evidence against the claims of Daniel Fry, the 50s-era contactee(?). Specifically I'm hoping that some of the members here can cite sources that provide a factual basis to refute Fry's contact story.

Because I've been studying this case for nearly 20 years - the physics described in his books has been the focus of my interest, and in many key aspects Daniel Fry's story and scientific writings stand alone among the contactee stories. In fact, in sharp contrast to the other contactee reports, an alarming number of specific claims have withstood the test of time. Not only withstood it, but in fact many modern theoretical and technological advances appear to be converging on specific items within his published works. And that sets me back on my heels, because it's exactly opposite to the divergences we find in the other contactee reports.

So I seem to be forced to arrive at one of two conclusions: either Daniel Fry was telling the truth about his contact experience at White Sands, or perhaps the contact report was a cover story to leak some major advancements in deep black military research programs.

For example, in two of Daniel Fry's books first published in the 50s, he clearly describes dark energy, which he attributes to an extremely long-range repulsive gravitational force acting at intergalactic scales. Our best model of dark energy is described as a repulsive gravitational effect, consistent with the theory of general relativity, attributed to some mass-less and all-pervasive vacuum energy field that appears as the cosmological constant in Einstein's field equation. As most of us know, academic astronomy didn't detect dark energy until 1998 - more than forty years after Fry published his books.

There are other fascinating examples, like electromagnetically induced transparency of metals, which is another recent advancement anticipated by Fry's writings.

And unlike all of the other contactee explanations of the field propulsion system employed by ufos, Fry attributes the action of this field to an as-yet undiscovered general relativistic effect. The effect he describes in some detail perfectly coincides with the field propulsion mechanism that first appeared forty years later in the academic theoretical physics community, in 1994, when Miguel Alcubierre first published his paper on warp field propulsion - which remains to this day the only mathematically consistent model of a faster-than-light propulsion mechanism in the mainstream literature. And it doesn't end there; I volunteered a chapter to Daniel Fry's biography on the subject which goes into more detail.

I already know about the fake ufo footage. I assume that Daniel Fry created it, and that's pretty damning stuff. On the other hand, it's possible that he faked that footage because he was taking such a beating for not having any evidence to offer to support his story. As a scientific thinker and a professional technician in the rocket industry, he would've understood that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - which he didn't have. And that may have driven him to a tragic lapse of judgment.

I have to consider that possibility in light of the startling logical and scientific consistency of his books and interviews.

But if anyone has any additional evidence against Daniel Fry, I'd like to hear it, because I'd like to settle this matter in my mind.

Thank you for your help.

I've just finished reading Fry's book "To Men of Earth", 1973 edition.

Maybe I was focusing on the bad stuff. But there was a lot off-putting in that story.

He starts with two Earth's ancient civilizations, Atlantis and somebody else in from Pacific, fighting in a nuclear war. That's baloney. Did he hear that from ETs? Or was it just an embellishment. Who knows.

Second, he talks about these particles, that are the part of the cargo craft's skin. These particle are coerced out from atom's nuclei and they create a repulsive force. So when he pressed on the craft's hull with his finger, finger kept slipping as if surface was covered with oil. Now, I guess there is no such particle in the Standard Model. Even more so, none of the nuclei constituents, like gluons, can be coerced out of the protons & neutrons. One of the firmest postulates of the Standard Model is that if you try to pull gluon out of, say proton, whole thing will explode and you'll never see gluon. Or, simply, constituent parts of nucleons can not be extracted.

But that's interesting anyhow. Because Bob Lazar described the workings of artificial gravitation of the craft he had worked on in a similar way. I forgot the exact mechanism, but some particles were extracted from nucleons and they created artificial gravity. Did Lazar read Fry's book?

And quite recently, journalist Phillip Krapf who worked for the Los Angeles Times newspaper, was apparently a contactee. In his story, aliens lived on large ships and cruised from a star to a star. In his case, they had a giant ship hiding behind the Moon. But he was invited to dine with them and apparently food was first class.

Fry's idea of moving the whole civilization off onto the giant ships makes lots of sense, because its safer and more controllable environment. We can achieve that with ease within 100 years.

As well, the idea discussed here in another thread, about Roswell autopsy report, perfectly matches the idea of life on a big ship. In that thread aliens were described as apparently creating body's energy through photosynthesis, so much so that they didn't have digestive organs. As Fry described, these ships would have a plenty of opportunity to produce, harvest and store energy in a form of electricity. And electricity is easily converted into light. And light, through the photosynthesis can easily provide living organism with energy, without a need for food, food storage and food preparation. Artificial photosynthesis in laboratory is 20 times more efficient than what plant do. So, photosynthesis can produce more energy than a human actually needs.

Instead of bothering with breakfast, lunch and dinner, you just walk around naked and sleep in a sun-bed. ;-)

 

[Waller]

I’ll have to look at the Seth material; I never have. But if there’s track record of successful scientific predictions in there, then I’ll have to delve into it.

That should be enjoyable for you. Here's a start,

Jane Roberts - Seth Speaks.pdf (PDFy mirror) : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive

most if not all the Roberts/Seth material can be found freely on the 'Net.

There’s a lot of fascinating anecdotal evidence to support noncorporeal travel, and if that really is possible then it seems like an excellent way to make contact across vast distances of space.

And many dimensions. Let me suggest that you create your own OBE and prove it to yourself. For most, moi included, it is truly a spiritually transformative experience. I have a particular affinity for William Buhlman whose books are superb...

AstralInfo.org About the Author - AstralInfo.org
http://www.astralinfo.org/about-the-author/
...I still use the Hemi-Sync recordings from the Monroe Institute to generate self-induced OBEs. Caveat: Know where you are going before you get there, OBE will take you where you set your intent.

 

[DROBNJAK]

And unlike all of the other contactee explanations of the field propulsion system employed by ufos, Fry attributes the action of this field to an as-yet undiscovered general relativistic effect. The effect he describes in some detail perfectly coincides with the field propulsion mechanism that first appeared forty years later in the academic theoretical physics community, in 1994, when Miguel Alcubierre first published his paper on warp field propulsion - which remains to this day the only mathematically consistent model of a faster-than-light propulsion mechanism in the mainstream literature. And it doesn't end there; I volunteered a chapter to Daniel Fry's biography on the subject which goes into more detail.

Re WARP DRIVE, there is a faint trace case of something possibly similar to an warp drive artifact.

In the one of the best multiple whiteness cases ever, known as Kelly Cahill, Australian August 1993 case, a physicist John Auchettl, as a principal investigator from the Phenomena Research Australia (PRA), did a measurement of the landing site with magnetometer and found a static magnetic anomaly. This is is the diagram that he presented:

The static magnetic anomaly, that can be seen in the middle, is in a shape of the crescent. I admit its not much as what both halves of a fully formed warp drive would show.

These static magnetic anomalies are typical in many other UFO cases. Practically, for several days after UFO left there is a strong static magnetic signature even on non-magnetizable (para-magnetic) objects like soil, trees, plastic etc.

This is how witnesses described the shape of the UFO craft and the beams of bluish light, that projected from the ship, that formed a crescent at a spot where magnetic anomaly was later found.

 

[Trajanus]

He starts with two Earth's ancient civilizations, Atlantis and somebody else in from Pacific, fighting in a nuclear war. That's baloney. Did he hear that from ETs?

Not at all unlikely; ETs have spouted baloney for decades.

Did Lazar read Fry's book?

Or was he also instructed in what to say?

And quite recently, some journalist who works for the biggest Los Angles newspaper, was apparently a contactee. In his story, aliens lived on large ships and cruised from a star to a star. In his case, they had a giant ship hiding behind the Moon.

You mean Krapf? That wasn't recent; maybe 20 years back IIRC.

 

[Waller]

I've just finished reading Fry's book "To Men of Earth", 1973 edition...He starts with two Earth's ancient civilizations, Atlantis and somebody else in from Pacific, fighting in a nuclear war. That's baloney. Did he hear that from ETs? Or was it just an embellishment. Who knows.

I haven't read the book so I don't know where he got that info from albeit it is fundamentally true.

Atlantis was plagued by warring factions and finally destroyed nearly 13,000 years ago by an asteroid. A completely different source ( “Lucillius ” — one of Dr. Marshall’s past lives) came through the direct voice medium Leslie Flint in an August 27, 1962, seance also explains how Atlantis was plagued by warring factions and finally destroyed by an asteroid nearly 13,000 years ago.

And quite recently, journalist Phillip Krapf who worked for the Los Angeles Times newspaper, was apparently a contactee. In his story, aliens lived on large ships and cruised from a star to a star. In his case, they had a giant ship hiding behind the Moon. But he was invited to dine with them and apparently food was first class.

Don't know about ET cuisine but the "cruising from star to star" fails at the first application of common sense. Light-year distances cannot be covered in reasonable time simply by cruising. ET looks at an object, like a ship (which is fully conscious), and replaces the location variable (part of the energetic equation of that object that we fail to see) with a new definition. The movement is instantaneous and requires no propulsion. Including many of the ships parked on the dark side of the moon.

As well, the idea discussed here in another thread, about Roswell autopsy report, perfectly matches the idea of life on a big ship. In that thread aliens were described as apparently creating body's energy through photosynthesis, so much so that they didn't have digestive organs. As Fry described, these ships would have a plenty of opportunity to produce, harvest and store energy in a form of electricity. And electricity is easily converted into light. And light, through the photosynthesis can easily provide living organism with energy, without a need for food, food storage and food preparation. Artificial photosynthesis in laboratory is 20 times more efficient than what plant do. So, photosynthesis can produce more energy than a human actually needs.

Instead of bothering with breakfast, lunch and dinner, you just walk around naked and sleep in a sun-bed. ;-)

That's one way, many ETs do not sleep or eat because they have learned how to directly tap Source energy.