I find it very doubtful that the US military would be sinking 80+ million dollars a pop into jets or rocket launches when they could build craft that outperform them at every turn. It makes no budgetary or strategic sense. Yes, there have been secret projects, but they're also rockets or jets, and it didn't take long to find out about them either. Not to mention that UFOs have been reported since the days of prop aircraft, and if the mythology can be believed, even before that. So to suggest they've had antigravity propulsion all along, and developed a whole aerospace industry as a cover is IMO completely beyond reason.
I never said that the military has had gravitational field propulsion technology all along. I don’t understand why people keep putting words in my mouth. I have no idea if the military has that kind of technology even now, but I doubt it.
I just said that if they have such a thing, they’d hide it. You don’t use your best weapons for routine ground wars, or they lose their strategic value. Your biggest advancements should be kept secret so that when a real existential threat comes along, you can surprise the enemy with a capability that they didn’t know you have. We do this constantly, which is why we never have any idea what the current top-secret reconnaissance plane in service is - is it the Aurora (which could just be a cover story for something else), or it is something we've never even heard of? Who knows? Not us, and they're not telling. And that's just dumb stuff like better ramjets. Some genuinely radical advancement wouldn't be flown over Iran, and risk handing over something like a gravitational propulsion system to a hostile state that could use it to nuke Tel Aviv in 30 seconds flat.
I also don't find the breakaway civilization hypothesis compelling, because no society with that level of tech could have broken away without someone keeping tabs on it or keeping us from finding it here. There's too much surveillance including ground penetrating scanners in space. The only feasible scenario is some sort of parallel system working within our own civilization, and if that were the case, the military would know about it and simply conscript anything of tactical value and add it to their inventory.
I see – we have different definitions of “breakaway civilization.” I take it to mean “the highly classified government/defense/military industry, which is coveting god only knows what kinds of technologies under the faux banner of national security concerns” – which is in a sense a civilization within a civilization.
I’ve seen something like this in my own life, dealing with a petulant billionaire who lives within our society, but not among the public – it’s a separate world for billionaires, and I presume for very powerful people in government and industry also. They travel on their own private jets, go to their own private mansions all over the place, have personal chefs make all of their meals, and they usually only meet with other rich and powerful people at places like Bohemian Grove and the Bilderberg group meetings. They live in a bubble. I suppose it’s an even more completely removed bubble when you’re talking about people who live in “the black world” of special access programs and underground bases. But I assume that they live in mansions around our cities and raise families in exclusive suburbs, while remaining pretty well-insulated from rabble like us.
So to me there's no reasonable argument that can be made for the PTB having knowledge on actual UFO propulsion.
Yeah I don’t think that’s logical. I’m sure that top military research scientists have analyzed all of their data and tried to replicate the technology. It would be a gross dereliction of duty to ignore the prospect of a game-changing military advantage. And they might have made some progress. Like I said before, the biggest step forward for physics is learning that something can occur in nature. Add to that the general theory of relativity, which we know is an extremely accurate model of gravitational fields, with some brilliant scientists like Robert L. Forward who was writing groundbreaking papers on this subject in the early 1960s, plus hundreds of billions of dollars in black budget program funding, and you could probably produce a field propulsion device of some kind sooner or later. It’s easy to underestimate the power of an excellent scientific theory combined with the virtually unlimited resources of the US military machine, but I think it’s mistake to do it. I knew a guy who worked on deep black research science programs, and he made it perfectly clear that we’ve done things in the lab that we’ve only seen in science fiction movies.
I'm not convinced that a warp field is necessary. It's an interesting theoretical idea, and I'm certainly no expert, but personally, I don't think math and the real world are the same thing. I think the math for spacetime geometry is an abstract way of looking at the behavior of things in space, not the way space actually is, which means I don't think space isn't actually curved. Things just behave as if it's curved. It's like relativity theory where acceleration and gravity are mathematically indistinguishable, yet gravity isn't acceleration.
I feel the same way, and in fact Caltech professor Carver Mead has recently developed an alternative formulation of the gravitational field called G4v, which describes gravity in terms of 4 vector potentials acting in flat Minkowski spacetime, which makes predictions so close to those of general relativity that we won’t know which theory is correct until the LIGO facilities determine the polarization of gravitational waves (they’ll be able to do that soon, probably within the next year or two).
But it doesn’t actually matter which theory is correct at this point, because either way, the energy distributions and the physical consequences of them are virtually identical in both theories, so in practice it's more like a difference in interpretation. There might be some observable differences in the extremely high mass-energy regime, like the radius of a supermassive black hole, but it’ll be quite a long while before humankind could ever harness energy at that scale anyway.
So there may be no huge energy requirement.
As I just explained, that doesn’t follow: any theory that accurately describes gravitation must have virtually identical properties in practice, in order to conform to all of the known and very precise observations. But we're an ingenious species; at any time we could devise some novel concept to allow us to modify parameters of our gravitation theories so we can reduce energy requirements somehow – like if we could figure out how to influence the effective electric permittivity of the vacuum so it’s no longer a constant, or to alter the magnitude of the gravitational constant somehow. Sadly, no credible proposals have been forwarded to achieve such things, even in theory - but perhaps that will change one day. Dr. Forward has already proposed a very interesting strategy for amplifying time-varying gravitational fields by developing new materials with nonlinear gravitomagnetic permeability (which would be analogous to the iron cores in electromagnetic inductors that amplify the magnetic field strength), so maybe we'll figure out a way to amplify the coupling strength of mass-energy to spacetime someday. But even that won't change the dynamics of the underlying theory, because those kinds of adjustments are simply quantitative, not qualitative.
I can't help but think there's something fundamental that we're missing.
Jeez – there’s a lot of fundamental stuff that we’re missing, and that may always be the case as science progresses. It seems like we find new physics whenever we make ever larger strides in energy level, and when we explore more extreme scales of observation both larger and smaller. Right now we’re certain that 96% of the universe is a mystery to us because dark matter and dark energy are mysteries to us. Interestingly, the action of both is strictly gravitational in nature, to the best of our knowledge.
It should also be noted that FTL isn't really necessary if the craft has a long service life or the distance is only a few light years. At even half light speed there are a number of stars that could be reached within a human lifetime. Plus who's to say that aliens only live as long as us. For all we know they're immortal and can just lazily drift around the galaxy at sub-light speed checking out whatever interests them. However if there is an FTL drive out there, then I think it works with some combination of electricity, superconductivity, and magnetism. Either that or it works on some sort of interface with the workings of the universe beyond this one. But that's a whole other kettle 'o fish.
Well, we know that general relativity permits a gravitational field propulsion mechanism, so I don’t think we need to invoke other universes. Besides, if there is a way to access something like that, it would appear that it would take far greater energy than anything we’ve ever observed before, because we’ve still seen no signs of such a possibility (and we’ve created conditions equivalent to those of the early universe within an instant of the Big Bang).
But here’s the important point: the craft that we observe are exhibiting all of the predicted characteristics of a gravitational field propulsion system, and we already know that such a system, by its very nature, is not limited by the speed of light, as things like rockets are. So it makes perfect sense that they’re using that kind of propulsion principle, and they could be getting here from a nearby star in a matter of hours, or less – it’s theoretically possible, and the time frames are limited only by the energy densities that a civilization can produce and control, and by technical issues like shielding.
The special relativity model is modestly interesting – at a constant acceleration of only 1g, a craft could circumnavigate the observable universe within the span of a human lifetime, from the frame of reference onboard the device. But of course the Sun would’ve exploded and the Earth would be a cold cinder long before it returned to its launch point. And sure, aliens could use that time dilation effect to visit us in rocket ships, especially if they lived a long time.
But they’re not using rocket ships. By all observable indications, they’re using gravitational field propulsion. No other kind of propulsion mechanism can generate acute angle maneuvers at thousands of miles per hour without generating extremely crushing g-forces. But gravitational field propulsion, by definition, uniformly accelerates all of the matter within the field – so there are never any g-forces using such a system: the craft and its contents are simply in free-fall at every instant, no matter what kinds of drastic accelerations the craft is producing. Only gravitational fields have that intrinsic property. Plus, this method would generate no emissions or turbulence, which is also what we observe.
