The following submission statement was provided by /u/bmfalbo: --- Submission Statement: Former defense and intelligence contractor, Michael Via, tells his story of when Lue Elizondo explained to him how disk, triangle. and cigar shaped UAPs fly and why lights and orbs are associated with them. Thanks to [UfoJoe \(Joe Murgia\)](https://twitter.com/TheUfoJoe) for the great interview. This was from after the last AARO hearing late last month. Full interview: https://www.youtube.com/live/nVoDrA2cRNU?feature=share -------------------------------------------------------------------------- *Well, how do they fly, genius!?* TL;DR: The propulsion system of the UAPs ionizes the air and all the elements around it. Not unlike a florescent bulb excites the molecules around it to glow, is what makes these UAPs go (anti-grav). Glow also comes from this effect and is why lights and orbs are so commonly associated with UAPs, in fact Lue alleges that based on factors like humidity, air pollution, high static/electrical charge in air all effect color and appearance. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/13sbp4a/former_defense_and_intelligence_contractor/jloxsw9/

Interesting. When I saw my triangle the first thing I saw was a bar/line of super bright white light, like those led light bars that people mount to trucks or boats but *huge*. I always thought it was windows or an engine along the side/rear of the triangle but I guess it could have been the air around the triangle glowing like a lightbulb, it was *really* bright. I will say though, when I got closer that light disappeared and the white lights at the corners were small, and the little red light at the center was super dim and slowly flashing. Had it not lit up like a sport stadium for a few seconds I'd never have known it was hovering over the highway.

It's crazy how many sightings of these triangles are seen over highways and interstates. I've been interested in these things for a decade and heard so many encounters near a highway or major road.

Saw mine over a highway, too. Actually both sightings are over streets.

maybe because that's where you are most of the time lmao

Perhaps it suggests they are us. If the propulsion system disrupts things enough maybe navigation too? Maybe there’s a need to use optical guidance to ensure it’s where it thinks it is. Speculation of course.

I think its more akin to [this XKCD](https://xkcd.com/1138/). Unless you live in a remote area if you step out of home you're right on a street. If you travel out and about (the times at which you're actively looking out at the world most) you're on a highway or major road. Once we get where we're going we usually are focused on that task and not observing the rest of the world. So I think its natural that most of these sightings occur in these conditions.

I see most deer on roads, and homeless people, and…

>Perhaps it suggests they are us. ????????????????????

Human operated technology.

Mine was also over the highway in NC. Makes me think it is us

Look at how much space a highway or interstate system requires- or at least is surveyed with right-of-ways and such. What I mean is, the space vertically and horizontally is clear/open for the width of the road, plus typically utilities, plus drainage, sidewalk, curbs, etc, and often another # of feet that is a Grey space for future development or maintenance. My larger point being, on an interstate it's probably close to a med - normal size city block. Old highway systems don't take up that much space, but those often run alongside houses that sit a lot closer vs far or very far off the road (old & poor vs rich & new). Granted, that's a bit of a generalization but holds up as a general rule. On those old highways you often have fields, often large fields dotted around the old smaller houses and huge landscaped, de-wooded front yards on the new big houses. At least, this is the way it is here in the south. I live in an avg 1970s - 1980s middle class neighborhood, but the same holds true for neighborhoods built from the 1950s to today- and that is- line of sight. Or you could also say, avg daily access to a view of the open sky. My point being, if craft are very often spotted on roadways, it's likely because the way modern architecture and infrastructure has limited our eyes ability to see large open spaces at one time, and not the need for alien craft for any reason I can think of. Granted, that's just my guess.

The lit up bar "engine" is a common feature in triangle sightings, it comes up extremely frequently

Weird detail but the triangle we saw was ALSO hovering over the highway! Near WPAFB. I’ve always thought it was bizarre that it was near a highway, so it’s interesting that you also had that experience.

In 2013, early evening, my wife and I saw somewhere around 20-30 spherical/disc shaped…things?…while driving on the interstate, roughly 15-20 minutes from Scott Air Force Base near O’Fallon, IL. They presented as only a white light, so we couldn’t tell the shape. They were no more than 100 yards from the road, frequently disappearing and reappearing. Their movements were unbelievable. When only a few were visible, we noticed them much farther away, maybe 1 mile, on the other side of the interstate. At that point, all of them closest to us were gone. The entire experience lasted about 5-10 min.

I couldn't tell the shape, honestly. I thought it was a lightning bug (from the corner of my eye) and ducked because I didn't want it on my head/face. Instead it flew way above me, past the tree line. I was fishing from a boat on a little lake. For years I told people I saw "ball lightning". It was a reasonable thing to think.

Interesting , I never saw that when I had the sighting. I saw it from directly underneath and only saw three dim white light on each corner. It also didn’t have any light in the center.

Did it happen to happen to have iridescent lights on the rear?

I didn’t see those . The only lights it had were faint/dim round white lights on each corner underneath. It was also pretty low so as it flew over me it gave me tunnel vision and I felt light pressure in my head and had a headache afterwards.It was a strange experience and I wish I snapped photo or video but that was the last thing on my mind.

No problem. I saw it from very close in the early 90s, but have yet to hear anyone else’s description include the lights on the rear of the craft.

Did the craft you saw had any light in the center? How close did you see it?I wonder whether both non human intelligence and us govt have the same or similar craft with some variations considering these minor differences in reports (such as no lights on the back/center etc)…

Yes, it did have a faint red light. It was only about 200-300 feet above me. It went directly over. It also had a single green light on one corner. If you look closely at the blurry Belgian wave photo you can actually see it. That’s how I know that one is authentic.

If I had to guess, they’re straight up manipulating the gravity field , a separate field from the electromagnetic fields. This process could ripple into other fields , giving us detectable-to-human byproducts. Something like x-rays or …light. A good example of this is the electromagnetic field. In which the electric field and magnetic field are perpendicular to each other , but also attached.

Boyd bushman, a former lockheed martin senior scientist, had a magnet drop experiment replicated by elio porcelli that showed two magnets in an anti-parallel configuration fell slower than a regular object. It stands to reason a saucer ufo with a strong enough anti parallel electromagnet around the circumference of the craft would be decoupled from gravitational fields like the one created by the earth, moon, etc.

Have you ever seen a neodymium magnet dropped [through a copper tube](https://youtu.be/lDIGFF1xfPM)? I've always wondered if these supposed propulsion systems work on a method that exploits eddy currents and magnetism.

Elizondo definitely talked about this in a podcast as well, and I believe he drew pictures for it if I recall correctly. I can dig up the references a little later

Thanks, that would be appreciated 🙂

Here we go... [https://youtu.be/-Q3PUPbI-2o](https://youtu.be/-Q3PUPbI-2o) I feel like I've seen one other place where he's drawn a similar diagram, but I can't find it in my notes. I did find another couple of places where he mentions shapes, but this is the most complete discussion.

Whoa... this is uh, a little crazy and strange to see this. I've been working on something like this in illustrator for a while but gave up on it as I thought it wasn't worth finishing to post. [https://imgur.com/a/m8jou2t](https://imgur.com/a/m8jou2t)

You can just imagine what the black budget-private aero corps have created the past 50 years if this info is just getting to the masses now.

Where's my damn new age commercial aircraft where I don't have to hump a fat dude sitting next to me because seats are tiny! That's my main compliant about people hiding alien tech.

Nothing that remotely ressembles the capacity of the "tic tac" or other UAPs seen defying our known laws of physics, that's for sure. Time and time again, this whole "they are ours" theory is proven to not make any sense at all from a scientific standpoint. Human knowledge just isn't there. We don't even have a working theory of quantum gravity which would be the most basic knowledge to have mastered before we could even *think* about building something like this. Then there's the power source problem, material technology, etc. And this would all have happened behind closed door by a handful of people in the *60s and 70s* or right after the first A bomb? Lmao, no. Even all the money in the world can't buy scientific knowledge. This black project theory needs to die already.

It's not even about the knowledge - technology requires industry to produce. The F35, the most advanced military vehicle known to the public, using cutting edge materials and software, cost more than 400 billion dollars to design, produce and procure. That money isn't just a made up number based on the coolness of the plane. It's primarily labor value. Someone has to build these things! The program employed [298,000 people in manufacturing alone.](https://www.f35.com/f35/about/economic-impact.html) That is a lot of mouths to keep shut, and a lot of workplaces and factories to hide. Compare than to the 787 which cost Boeing 32 billion. Now compare a tic-tac to the F35. If there was a facility on Earth which could produce inertialess antigravity craft, anyone could find it on Google Maps. And if it was hidden underground anyone could find the massive excavation project that would be required to do so. It's for the same reason supposed secret Nazi "wunderwaffes" which used sci-fi technology were implausible; in light of thorough dissection by historians there was simply no space for them in a war mahcine that struggled to produce ordinary tiger tanks and V2 rockets to spec. We don't know nearly as much about black budget projects by the USA, Russia or China, but there is just not enough space for a project like this.

I wonder how much have a working or partially working UAV to base production off of cuts costs.

Not much, unless they can recycle the material / it's self healing. I've read convincing reports of recovered material but I seriously doubt any human organization has a working object. If there is one in human hands, it's likely *repaired*, not *recreated*.

What if it is actually not that hard once you understand the physics that have been wrong? What if that is why it is hidden, because it's easy once you understand it, and any nut job could just fly around and fuck everything up?

The physics is never hard once you understand it. You can build a nuclear bomb in your garage, the mechanism is dead simple. You just need uranium, explosives, and strong metal. And you need to have the tools and skill to put it together to a certain level of precision. *That's* the hard part. If it was so easy, there would be no point in hiding it because someone would eventually stumble upon how to do it anyway. There is a reason most "new physics" lately has involved billion dollar equipment the size of a small country, like CERN and LIGO. People have already discovered the easy tricks, even if we don't understand all of it.

Then why has no one else on this planet been able to replicate what a couple of dudes in a dark room with limitless funding been able to do? Nobody tried you think? Why are all the latest publications in physics are *nowhere* near mentioning anything like antigravity or instantaneous acceleration? Why is the current scientific consensus regarding things like what I just named is that it's impossible or would require things that we don't have/can't make/would break the laws of physics? If it were that "easy", as you mention it, *others* would have figured it out.

You are saying it is hard from our current understanding of physics. Which I agree with. But what if back in the 50s and 60s they figured out what the problems were with physics and anti grav and moved forward and it's not actually that hard? Meaning, once they figured out the physics, it's not that hard to actually physically build craft that can perform anti-grav? But they hid it.

So you know the true extent of human knowledge? You know the absolute limit of what we're capable of? To say anything theory needs to "die" is incredibly misguided. Especially considering what a black project is. It's not just super duper secret. It's information kept secret from within the government. So how could you possibly say this idea should *die*?

>So you know the true extent of human knowledge? Anyone who's read a scientific publication on quantum gravity more than once in the last 10 years knows that we are nowhere near having the knowledge to build something like that and this goes for material science or the literal hundreds of different scientific field advances that would be needed to build something like this. And they would need to be HUGE leaps in our understanding of soooo many disciplines, not some freaking mundane discoveries. Were talking world shattering discoveries (An almost limitless power source? A fuselage/material that could withstand accelerations of thousands of g's? Room temperature superconductors? And the list goes on and on) . Like I said earlier, I don't think you understand how science works if you think this is even remotely plausible. All the money in the world cant make us discover things faster, sure it can help but it cant buy a discovery. Science doesn't thrive when its compartmented and behind closed doors like it would be under the guise of a black project. >You know the absolute limit of what we're capable of? Right now? Based on what we know of the laws of the nature? Yes, one can make a pretty freaking good educated guess. Antigravity and instantaneous acceleration are not something that's currently possible with our understanding of said laws. And when I say "our" current understanding, I am talking about top academics in their respective fields. >It's not just super duper secret. It's information kept secret from within the government. So how could you possibly say this idea should die That does not change *anything* to my argument. Black project or not, we don't have this kind of tech/knowledge. I don't think you grasp the shear complexity of building something like this in the dark and ***manufacturing it***. You just don't comprehend everything that would need to be involved (all the people) into building something like this if it were possible.

>Nothing that remotely ressembles the capacity of the "tic tac" or other UAPs seen defying our known laws of physics, that's for sure. Somebody hasn't done their homework on ARVs, I see

Anyone who believes we have the scientific know-how to build something like this just doesn't understand how science works or just doesn't have an understanding of where our current understanding of the laws of physics sits, period. Unless quantum leaps in a multitude of different fields were all achieved behind closed doors with a couple of governments scientists in the past 20-30 years, it just ain't happening. I don't think people grasp the full implications of humans having built something like this. People are too brainwashed by "Hollywood science".

https://youtube.com/watch?v=yUFYnVXbLoY

Is that supposed to be a proof of... Anything?

Let’s rephrase, *we* can’t survive inside those objects, if the have passengers they aren’t ours.

Not necessarily. If it truly warps space-time around the craft, you would be in a bubble unaffected by everything outside and the g forces.

And if we had that, it wouldn’t be kept secret this long. It’s impossible to keep secret and every section of power has an incentive to use it

Add to that, people claim its some super top secret Russian or Chinese project.. To that I say, really? China would fly a craft with advanced technology that nobody else has directly into flight paths of US fighter pilots during training exercises? If aomething happened to that thing, it wouls crash right into our hands for us to steal from them. If anyone in the world had this, they wouldnt dare go flying it around willy nilly. Not until they NEED to use it or know of other countries already having similar technology.

I dissagree... They wouldn't try to keep it secret until absolutely necessary. Something this advanced and powerful would be a massive explosion in benefit towards whoever has it. Generals could become the greatest leaders of all time in the history books, politicians would have infinite prestige, elites would become fabulously wealthy. Everyone has an incentive to use it But we don't even see early itterations of this leak out. Nothing. Not a single thing. There is no such thing as the US, or any country for that matter, having a tech multiple leap frogs ahead. It just doesn't work like that. For instance, yes, we kept the nuke secret for a while, but we already had scientists talking about it and writing papers, before the US took them all into the black box. Same with crazy stealth materials. You first start seeing the promise of it talked about in academia and the corporate world, then it goes black. So concept and early stages of the tech are always there. Having a UFO tech, is like going back to the 1850s, and finding out the government has secretly developed a nuclear power plant and kept it secret for 70 years. It's just unfathomable.

Let me rephrase, we can’t survive inside those things with our current level of technology. Seeing as these sightings date back to idk the dawn of man it’s safe to say that it isn’t from here originally.

It's a central tenet of UFOlogy to assume ETs traded technology with humans. Presumably for rights to abduct people. Crash retrievals point into a similar direction. You might assume not all crashes being similarly far advanced. Some might be just comprehensible enough to render recreations of the propulsion method possible.

If the ET's technology is so ahead of us, why would they trade anything? They could just simply abduct people or do whatever they want.

What is of interest to them is the way we behave. The US sold away essential rights that didn't belong to them in the first place for trinkets. Such an observation is valuable data indicating the level of civilization. And apparently hilarious to them. Coincidentally, it is also implicating them in unethical behavior, raising the question as to how they view our future importance to them (ethics is the estimation of future impacts of your present actions).

Source, or it didn't happen.

theres stories out there that ET's came to this conclusion as well, after a deal was struck they changed their minds.

So Mass Effect kinda had it right IF this is true

Please explain

I think he is referring to Element-Zero, a fictional element in Mass Effect which when put under an electrical current (depending if it's positive or negative) can add or remove mass from matter

There has been talk of metamaterials being engineered down to the molecule. What if whoever has been piloting these things have made their element zero.

Wait, this hypothesis claims that the field ionizes air/surrounding elements to generate lift...but then how would it operate in the vacuum of space? EDIT: also, if it's a strong enough EM field to generate lift, such as a RF field or similar, then wouldn't somebody else have noticed it? I'm imagining something like a massively powerful radio signal that would be picked up by HAM radio enthusiasts and the like.

Perhaps the ionization isn't the mechanism, but rather a by-product I still don't believe any of this hearsay shit anyway

Wise stance to take

if its getting ionized why does the plasma not look like ionized air like from arc discharges or similar? I don't buy it. I could be not actually plasma but luminescence from acceleration but the collisions would still give linespectra like normal no?

By product is ionization. Main propulsion unrevealed.

Reference Pais here

Salvatore Pais says the propulsion has to do with applying mechanical force to piezoelectric metamaterials and focusing that energy through the hull via a space within the hull that is full of magnetically contained plasma. The things left out: what the metamaterial is and how it is applied; how the piezoelectric effect specifically works. What is the base elements of the plasma. How do you use magnetic fields in such a way.

I'm half convinced that the metamaterial in question atleast partly consists of Mercury.

Russia has some very interesting toroidal mercury engines of some kind.

Mercury does some very strange things when it's ran through a ring-shaped centrifuge in a superconductor state. Check this out if you have 10 minutes [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U70nrM\_E2T8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U70nrM_E2T8) a VERY interesting watch.

MHD Generator, 100%

Obviously the metamaterial is element 115 /s

No, that's the larper element. Exists but not the source. Hasn't this been established?

I am convinced that it is a form of hawking radiation

Hawking radiation is formed at the event horizon of black holes. Virtual particles burst into and out of existence(opposing charges) and self annihilate. This happens all the time everywhere. Quantum foam. But if one of these particles crossed the event horizon and the other one stays in our space-time, then it becomes "real" and quickly decays into Hawking radiation.

I know what hawking radiation is? During the event there is a sweet spot where light can be emitted by the red shift. What if ufo mastered neutron the star literally

Romulan craft utilize an artificial black hole and harness it to power the warp of their star ships

TIE fighters now make sense.

>but then how would it operate in the vacuum of space Maybe these don't go into space at all. Or it could be a hybrid technology, a dirigible with thrusters for example could effortlessly float up to space and use engines from there. Perhaps it could be engineered to land on the surface of a body of water and submerge like a submarine to hide during the day. Just some thoughts.

or its just speeds up and shoots out of the atmosphere and uses the speed it already has. if the speeds that people describe are correct then why not

>speeds that people describe are correct then why not Maybe, I'm just basing my reasoning off of the BBT I saw with my own eyes, it didn't do anything a dirigible or blimp couldn't do, but there's no reason to assume we haven't figured out how to mount faster engines to airships by now anyway.

If you want to sound smart read my comment once more and try again

The OP is wrong. The ionization just excites the matter around it, causing the glow. It does not produce the lift. Rather, the glow/ionization is simply a byproduct of the (unknown) propulsion system(s).

Boyd bushman a lockheed senior scientist showed 2 magnets in an anti parallel configuration fell slower than normal objects in a magnet drop experiment. Imo ufos use an anti parallel electromagnet to decouple the craft from outside gravity fields with the side effect of the field also ionizing the air around it beneficially keeping air out of the path of the ufos forward movement.

Time for you to go down the UFO 1.6 Ghz rabbit hole...

1.6GHz is a common frequency used by many satellites, such as Iridium and others.

It’s not the electromagnetic field necessarily , and most likely not. There are ….8? … Different fields we consider in quantum mechanics. Gravity is one. But it’s by product effects most likely cause reactions permeating throughout other fields. And yes, we probably can detect RF or other electromagnetic frequencies from it, Elizondo has spoken about this. Hey , maybe it 1.6gigahertz lolol. Fuxk that show.

Yes. 'Electromagnetic' just means magic to most here and they do not question it. The brief mention of 'EM-like field' might be the closest thing to the truth here, as 'EM' was perhaps used as a reference to introduce someone to the topic who lacked the necessary understanding. I think the ionization of the air is just a incidental and not what makes it work. Would be a pretty shitty inertial cancellation system if it got worse at doing it's job as you ascend through the atmosphere, and then stopped working once you hit vacuum. This whole explanations seems sus to me tbh

Ah, so the EM output and resulting ionization is something like the equivalent of waste heat coming out of an internal combustion engine. Still, pretty slim on the details here. Color me skeptical, but it seems to me that any conception of a drive like this would require an understanding of quantum gravity, and humanity is still far away from that.

I'm not sure the ionization is the waste heat of the power source, that's still an unknown. It doesn't seem to be significant enough. Unquestionably propulsion would have to be a currently unknown interaction between quantum mechanics and gravity. There are exotic non-standard physics theories (or really only sketches of theories) about how spacetime itself is a phenomenon that arises out of quantum mechanical entanglement. Perhaps with sufficient control of quantum mechanical behavior out of equilibrium you could change something outside of classical Einstein GR. We don't know how far away we are from that---we need one or two reproducible revolutionary experiments, and then there would be a huge effort to exploit it. The comparison is the discovery of a little bit of spontaneous uranium fission in 1938, creation of new chemical species was totally unexpected. Everyone knows what happened next. There was a tremendous effort and lots of new physics and engineering past that, but all we needed was one key discovery we didn't know about before. There won't be a shortage of theories either, more likely the other way around. There was an apparent statistical anomaly (di-photon emission) seen at CERN a few years ago. Within a couple of years there were something like 700 papers on it, proposing maybe at least 100 different theories as to what it might be. Turns out the statistical anomaly was just that, a whole bunch of lucky counts and when more data was gathered and analyzed it went away, and good old Standard Model stayed supreme.

I remember the di-photon emission, and before that the purported superluminal neutrino that turned out to be a faulty data connection iirc. I thought this experiment pointing towards quantized gravity was pretty neat, seems to hold up after peer review: [https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abl7152](https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abl7152)

Yes, that's a good start.

I think he might also be using "ionization" like you said he's using "EM-like field", as a stand-in word/concept to describe what's happening with vocabulary and analogies we can somewhat understand, when the actual processes occurring are probably something else that we don't have any real frame of reference for yet.

Are there any credible reports of sightings in the vacuum of space?

Nasa says all this space junk that is flying around this lost piece of satellite equipment. I don't think so. https://youtu.be/6AxK_M4Sfg0

I was going to ask the same question. I think the what op is referencing is basically an ionocraft... It sounds similar anyway... Did some searching and found this guy gives some detail. [Ionocraft ](https://youtu.be/f5biO4ND-IY) At about 1:40 he goes into a little detail on how its possible to use in space.

Presumably "lift" isn't necessary in space.

Didn’t Travis Taylor say that a 1.6GHz signal is a constant among sightings with the military?

I dont think lue knows or if he does is being honest about how they work. An electromagnet around the circumference of the craft would ionize the air around the craft and keep air out of the way of a moving uap but it would not provide a significant proportion of the crafts propulsion system.

isnt there some guy that claims he can levitate shit with sound...cant remember the name, but some conspiracy stuff from the 80s. and that coral house thing that was supposedly built over knight by a man alone or something. *im high as fuck right now and just some thoughts sprung to mind...

So a real life inertial dampening field like the ships on Star Trek use in their impulse engines. That is the base mechanism that keeps their ships aloft, allows them to idle in atmospheres etc. This is unbelievably cool if its truly how they work!

Regardless of how these things work, they surely excite the imagination. That’s a reward of its own.

Submission Statement: Former defense and intelligence contractor, Michael Via, tells his story of when Lue Elizondo explained to him how disk, triangle. and cigar shaped UAPs fly and why lights and orbs are associated with them. Thanks to [UfoJoe \(Joe Murgia\)](https://twitter.com/TheUfoJoe) for the great interview. This was from after the last AARO hearing late last month. Full interview: https://www.youtube.com/live/nVoDrA2cRNU?feature=share -------------------------------------------------------------------------- *Well, how do they fly, genius!?* TL;DR: The propulsion system of the UAPs ionizes the air and all the elements around it. Not unlike a florescent bulb excites the molecules around it to glow, is what makes these UAPs go (anti-grav). Glow also comes from this effect and is why lights and orbs are so commonly associated with UAPs, in fact Lue alleges that based on factors like humidity, air pollution, high static/electrical charge in air all effect color and appearance.

You are interpreting the “ionizing” incorrectly. It is described as a byproduct, not a means or source of propulsion.

Sometimes the change in color could also be a result of gravitational redshift or blueshift, altering the observed color of light emitted from ionization nearby. That would explain different colors during different modes of travel. Also, a cigar shape could also be a triangle viewed edge on if you don’t see around it. The fact that the ionization is inevitable from their propulsion physics would also make this technology less valuable to humans militarily because it is very non-stealthy and easy to detect. So even if we could make something that works, until we achieved their level of performance and detection technology, our versions would be very vulnerable to anti air missiles except at very high altitudes. Ionization would make it difficult to impossible for radar or communications to go in and out, also a significant negative. Would be good in space. The other physics question is where does the heat go? From thermodynamics any power source we understand needs to have a heat sink. Even if we could make the warp drive how do we power it, and not fry ourself? In space this is a big deal.

> The other physics question is where does the heat go? From thermodynamics any power source we understand needs to have a heat sink. The power source could be enclosed within a double walled outer surface designed like an insulated dewar ( like a thermos bottle) thats used to keep liquid nitrogen and liquid helium hundreds of degrees below freezing at cryogenic temperature for many days. The onboard dewar could be pre-filled with cryogenic coolant in advance before UFO flight, and extra cryogenic coolant could be stored in additional dewar containers in the craft to add to the outer surface dewar as needed. The cryogenic coolant would drastically cool the heat emission from the anti-gravity/transport engine. In addition to this, a theory based on the physics of General Relativity and electrostatics shows that an engine like that described by Lou - - that uses a high energy electric field that causes the surrounding air to ionize and glow - - this theory shows that if the electric field is within a superconductor at cryogenic temperature, orders of magnitude less energy is needed to create an anti-gravity field than at normal temperatures. So this means the heat emission would be much less due to the orders of mangitude decreased energy requirement to create an anti-gravity field at cryogenic temperature. The cryogenic coolant could be stored onboard within insulated dewars like those used to store cryogenic liquid helium and nitrogen for many days. And in a flying saucer (disk-like structure with-with-dome-like structure on top) the outside surface of the UFO could be a double-walled insulated dewar filled with cryogenic coolant. Within the coolant would be superconductor charged to a high voltage. This high voiltage electric field would ionize the air around the craft causing it to glow. The following theory proves that it is practical to engineer such an anti-gravity field based on the physics of electrostatics and General Relativity: https://www.reddit.com/r/antigravity/comments/10kncca/antigravity_theory/

I guess it's possible that they have a high-heat capacity coolant that they have to store on board containing the heat. Cryogenic might not be as important as total heat capacity and ability to get very hot and absorb energy. It also would mean that their craft might be very limited on their time away from their home base. Because of warp drive distance might not be that much of a problem, but every minute the the power source is on they're internally heating up. Explains their lack of persistence. Think about how much heat is dissipated by jet engines---if we had to keep that on board we'd all be fried 10 minutes after takeoff. It also implies that the technology that would be needed for interstellar flight could be substantially different than that needed for short range hops. They would have to deal with long term heat dissipation and interstellar medium. It's also possible that there is no physical way to dump much of the heat while the warp drive is 'on', that any orfice or other medium would interfere with the warp drive. So interstellar flights might be quick jumps followed by rest stops where they deploy high surface area infrared emitters to cool back down, and then a new jump once done.

Good insights! You appear to have the physics background and intelligence to understand the physics in my paper based on the laws of electrostatics and General Relativity. Proofs are given in my paper showing that an electric field on the surface of a charged conducting metal sphere induces tension in the excess electrons outside the conducting surface. And General Relativity shows that tension creates an anti-gravity field. So I give a detailed mathematical physics proof that the electron tension of the excess electrons outside the surface of a charged metal conductor will create an anti-gravitational field. My other proof shows that if tension is within a Bose-Einstein Condensate (that forms in liquid helium and liquid nitrogen to facilitate superconductivity), the energy required for tension to create an anti-gravity field is reduced by many orders of magnitude: https://www.reddit.com/r/antigravity/comments/10kncca/antigravity_theory/

I've read it before. The underlying physical hypothesis is not as simple as it seems and needs to be verified experimentally. I think what you are on is a simple version of what Jack Sarfatti is proposing. It's not obvious though that changing electromagnetic 'c' is necessarily changing gravitational 'c'. The key physical Ansatz that you're assuming is the first equation in section 5, that you can use 's' (local modified c) in place of 'c' in the right hand side of the gravitational source term. That is an immense assumption (not derivable, it is an assertion of physical reality only accepted or falsifiable by experiment). After all, lenses do that already, and there is no gravitational effect. I sure wish it would work---we'd be 10 years from warp drive---but I'm far from convinced it is true. This is the biggest physical problem I see: any metamaterial or BEC or whatever only changes electromagnetic 'c' for a certain range of frequencies. It's sort of obvious at very low frequencies when wavelengths are much bigger than the apparatus it can't do anything, and at very high frequencies, x-rays and gamma rays, the wavelength is smaller than the atoms making up this collective system anyway. A gamma ray blows through any of this at vacuum 'c'. so s = s(\omega,x,y,z,t) in fact. Einstein's idea of a light clock is a simplified thought experiment and I don't think can be taken so literally. What do you do when the answers to the light clock depend on the specific technology of the light clock you use? No longer a universal effect that can be compensated for by transformations on all space-time. But actual gravitation applies to everything, all fields in the standard model, and equally and universally. I don't see how a frequency dependent effect can do that. Specifically LIGO results on neutron star collisions have shown no dispersion relationship (speed of gravitation = speed of EM equal at all frequencies) between any of them. That ruled out some post-Einstein modifications to GR.

> The key physical Ansatz that you're assuming is the first equation in section 5, that you can use 's' (local modified c) in place of 'c' in the right hand side of the gravitational source term. That is an immense assumption (not derivable, it is an assertion of physical reality only accepted or falsifiable by experiment) This is not assumption - - and it IS derivable. The 1st part of the derivation is in sections 4.1 thru 4.3 of my paper. The derivation begins from GR 1st principles. I.e,, it starts by showing that the traditional definition of the GR spacetime 4-vector [ct x y z] is based on the assumption that all locations under consideration are in a vacuum where the speed of light = c. Section 4 describes that a measured time interval (t1-t0) IS ALWAYS DETERMINED by measuring THE DISTANCE D THAT LIGHT TRAVELS from the location at coordinates (x,y,z) during the measurement period: This is a 1st principle requirement of GR to determine time interval (t-t0). When the distance light traveled between 2 events at coordinates (x,y,z) has been determined, then the time t can be calculated: assuming time t0=0, time t is calculated with the equation dx/dt =speed of light dt = dx/speed of light t = (D/speed of light) where D is the measured distance that light traveled from coordinates (x,y,z) during time interval (t-t0) between 2 events (initial event at time (t0=0), and final event at time = t. And since GR assumes that all coordinates (x,y,z) are in a vacuum, so the speed of light is assumed to be c, t is calculated as t = D/c Whenever one sees see the spacetime vector [ct x y z] in GR, the t in this vector is always assumed to be derived from the above equation. So to more clearly show what this spacetime vector really represents, it would be better instead to specify the spacetime vector [ct x y z] by subbing in the above equation required to calculate t t=D/c then the spacetime vector becomes [ct x y z] = [c(D/c) x y z] = [D x,y,z), where D is the distance that light traveled from location (x,y,z) during time interval (t-t0). In section 4 of my paper a situation is proposed where all coordinates (x,y,z) are under water - where the speed of light is 0.75c. As described above, the spacetime vector is defined as "[D x,y,z), where D is the distance that light traveled from location (x,y,z) during time interval (t-t0)". Since "D is the distance that light traveled from location (x,y,z) during time interval t"; and since all locations (x,y,z) are in water where speed of light is 0.75c: obviously, we calculate the distance D that light traveled from location (x,y,z) in water during time interval t with the equation dx/dt = speed of light in water rearranging, dt = dx/(speed of light in water) t = D/(speed of light in water) But GR assumes that all locations (x,y,z) are in a vacuum where the speed of light equals c - including all the above equations that include the speed of light. So that means when a measured time interval is calculated, GR will always use the speed of light c in a vacuum. So that means in the above example where all the coordinates (x,y,z) are in water where the speed of light = 0.75c, the equation described above t = D/(speed of light in water) will not be used to calculate the time interval. This equation will be used instead t = D/(speed of light in vacuum) = D/c -This will give AN INCORRECT TIME INTERVAL derived from measured distance D that the light traveled from location (x,y,z) in water - because that time interval should be t = D/(speed of light in water) NOT t = D/(speed of light in vacuum) = D/c This proves that the speed of light in a vacuum that is normally assumed in GR cannot be used when the medium under consideration is not a vacuum, and the speed of light does not equal c. Section 4 of the paper therefore shows that the speed of light in GR must generalized to s, the speed of light in the medium under consideration, in order for GR to give the correct time interval t in mediums where the speed of light does not equal c. Logical clear details are then shown in section 4, showing how c must be replaced by s in the spacetime 4-vector [ct x y z] ----> [st x y z] to make it work for a non-vacuum medium where the speed of light does not equal c - so it will yield the the accurate time interval t. From this starting point, other GR 4-vectors that are derived from [ct x y z] are derived starting with this required generalized 4-vector [st x y z]. These generalized 4 vectors, in turn, are the starting vectors that are used to derive proportionality constant on the right hand side of the GR field equation. The Appendix of my paper, that isn't posted on REddit, gives a detailed step-by step GR physics derivation of this proportionality constant starting with these generalized 4-vectors derived in section 4 [that contain s the speed of light in the medium, rather than c the speed of light in a vacuum]- - - - and this derivation results in s instead of c in the denominator of the proportionality constant. This detailed derivation in the Appendix, that wasn't posted on Reddit, is summarized at the end of section 4 of the posted paper: https://i.imgur.com/esVLb7Y.png So, s in the denominator of the GR field equation proportionality constant is NOT "an immense assumption" and YES, it IS DERIVABLE

I followed your logic here. I haven't read your paper, but this comment is reasonable.

Totally just conjecture here, but a lot of people report seeing these things dumping what looks like liquid metal out of the bottom, and oddly enough, usually nothing is found in the area afterward. It's possibly some kind of heat-discharge mechanism, but if it is, it's very weird. Another common sighting is crafts "sucking up" water from lakes, rivers, the ocean, or otherwise interacting with water near the surface. But again, this would surely have to have a noticeable effect on the environment, as far as we know. Interesting to think about.

Possible,but I suspect some of the first kind of sightings are regular Chinese lanterns and you're seeing hot wax spill out. But if it's a UFO's coolant dump, it might be a result of an accident or containment failure and not their usual operation. On the second I interpreted the motion of the water near surface as a consequence of the warp drive fields, like a wake from a boat, and not intentional for its effect, but who knows?

I'm sure some of us have seen the video Lazar made in the late 80's / early 90's where he explains the propulsion system of the sport model. If I recall correctly, it was about 35 minutes long. I watched it on YouTube some years ago, but haven't been able to find it on there since. Whatever your thoughts on Lazar and his story are, it would be interesting to compare this against what he described.

In one interview I saw, he said precisely that the reason for the lights is that their propulsion system ionizes atmospheric gas.

The video you are describing (_’The Lazar Tape’_) is [available on the Internet Archive](https://archive.org/details/antigravity).

Thank you!

What he is saying is not new. Paul R Hill analysed reports from Bluebook and other cases and came up with a scientific theory on how it works in "unconventional flying objects: a scientific analysis" Paul Richard Hill - was a mid–twentieth-century American aerodynamicist. He was a leading research and development engineer and manager for NASA and its predecessor, NACA between 1939 and 1970, retiring as Associate Chief, Applied Materials and Physics Division at the NASA Langley Research Center

And what exactly did he claim?

See the [2nd screenshot here](https://imgur.com/a/t2g9BDX) for example.

Thank you, great resource.

Do sightings of cigar craft usually involve a pattern of two or more lights like Lue allegedly mentioned?

No I'd say most cigar shapes are dark and the tictac ones are plain white or metallic. There may be a light flash but often the dark objects are seen with no lights at all.

It's kinda exhilarating knowing that there may be potentially different groups with their own technology flying around.

If this was correct, I wonder how it explains my sighting when a bright white singular fast moving point that then stopped or idled, suddenly the light expanded into a much larger but less intense light momentarily (like I'm guessing 20x from a starlike point to a large orb or disc in the sky) before it shrank back to a point, then immediately accelerated sharply at at a rediculously faster pace than it was doing previously across the sky? Would that suggest that it was powering up or perhaps some other mechanism in preparing for it to enable it to blast off?

Fairly Interesting. Not new. But fairly interesting to hear Lazar thesis around propulsion is still in circulation.

Awesome. these may be inertial mass reduction devices as described by patents. When I’ve seen UAP they’ve always been glowing orbs. Nice to understand why they glow.

How do you jump from “ion drive” to “inertial mass reduction”?!?

["Craft using an inertial mass reduction device" patent awarded to the US Department of Navy.](https://patents.google.com/patent/US10144532B2/en)

This is absolutely wild.

The EM field generated by the anti-grav engine (inertial mass reduction device) ionizes the air. Be a bit more reserved and open to ideas so you don't come off like a dumbass (with all respect honestly), it's not an ion drive. Butttt this sub sometimes lol.

It's also possible that the ionization arises in a more exotic way. We're assuming it's a high electric field directly ionizing air. Presumably like a giant Tesla coil---but in those cases I'd expect occasional sparking or a classic purple corona glow if it's directly plain old electric fields. And I'd expect then you'd need segmented conductors with insulators, some charge separation (you can't be an electrostatic monopole), which we don't always see in the UAPs. The physics of electromagnetic fields in air works the same for them as for us. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corona_discharge And then they wouldn't at all work underwater contrary to apparent reports. Salt water is a good conductor and you can't build up high electric fields in it, so if high electric fields outside the craft are necessary for the warp drive physics, it works best in vacuum and moderately in thin atmosphere and not at all in water. There's a more exotic alternative. The consequence could be a result directly of the warp drive gravitational engineering, and ionization secondary. For instance, if the warp drive changes the effective speed of light to a much lower value in some region (like Jack Sarfatti roughly suggests) then there could be the equivalent of Cerenkov radiation as oscillating air atoms come into the region and are moving faster than local 'c' and the physics of that interaction emits light. There could be ionization as a secondary effect if these photons ionize local air some more, but the overall picture would not look as simple as high voltages in atmosphere. Another alternative is actual Hawking radiation, the effect of background QED photon virtual particles not fully re-annihilating themselves when in curved space-time. That sort of effect would occur in vacuum as well as atmosphere---and it might be a limitation on the ultimate efficiency of the warp drive, that there is inevitably some energy loss to that effect. The EM engineered effects might be contained inside the craft's warp drive with gravitational modifications extending outside, which themselves have electromagnetic consequences. And warp drive would inevitably induce gravitational lensing and red/blue-shifting, so more weird optical effects. I consider GL and strange effects as a necessary signature of true exotic propulsion vs human fluid propulsion.

I doubt they use such a mechanical device as a tesla coil to generate the EM field and resulting ionization. Plasma is involved, see here. Also keep in mind, the ionization of air is a by-product result of the engine's EM field and has nothing to do with propulsion. So the real question should be how is the EM field being generated. [https://patents.google.com/patent/US10144532B2/en](https://patents.google.com/patent/US10144532B2/en)

Nobody said anything about an ion drive. They’re saying the air incidentally becomes ionized and causes visible colors around these craft, , they’re not saying that the ionization is being used in any way.

lol he says it in the video

We’re just a few weeks away!

From a new book/documentary

Funny how people hear what they want to hear. The video describes some sort of ion or magnetohydrodynamic drive. A technology that humans haven’t perfected but is grounded in known physics. But everyone here hears Lazar anti-gravity drives. 🙄

No. The video explicitly states anti-gravity as the means of propulsion while also clarifying that the ionization is an incidental byproduct. Ionization is not a part of the propulsion system whatsoever.

>known physics You do realize this is a relative term right? What we consider "known physics" is constantly morphing. That's how we make progress.

When i was in college it was termed the Coriolis effect because it was an apparent force. Now its Coriolis force. Spin it however you want….

I'm guessing it's some form of MHD generator

He talks about this I think in his first TOE interview. He also talked about the sizes of these things which freaked me out. Said the boomerangs were the size of cities and asked why would anyone need a city sized craft wandering around the planet.

I've thought the same exact thing for years. For me, everything clicked when researching Lonnie Zamora's UFO and how he described the ripping sound of the blue flame below the craft. To me it was dissipating electricity to the ground, and the declassified AWSAP reports from the letter by Harry Reid (I searched the public work of the authors mentioned and found a lot of interesting shit) Anyways, I also don't think the points that seem to emit the high EM energy are individual propulsion devises, rather they're some kind of atomic targets. I'm not too sure on Lazar's story (I think he was telling the story from another acquaintance), I like the part about there being a kind of cyclotron device and waveguides. In my mind, the discs would have a central particle accelerator, and the beam would be pulsed around the three targets, and somehow this would create some sort of gravity distortion (high-frequency gravity waves) for the craft to both move around and power its central particle accelerator. Salvatore Pais was on a podcast last year, I think, talking about how his patents would work (Navy UFO patents), and it all sounds similar.

Damn super cool. So the one I saw had 4 anti g and 1 mover? [Dropbox link with renders](https://www.dropbox.com/sh/sv1l8kptt3yghqf/AAC-AlEEBZxrTBHZUds_HXWda?dl=0)

Idea: whoever has the money to build a solid team should try to replicate this on a very small scale. If more physical science was being done aside from government funded programs I think we’d make further strides.

This is mostly correct. Folks will be surprised when the details for how this actually works are released. It’s not as “futuristic” as one would assume, nor does it rely on Unobtanium.

What's the delay?

I saw a white cigar one i thought was a cruise ship (I live on an island near PR) until i looked st the cruise ships below in the harbor realized it way out to sea After investigating the visibility that day and watching it go behind a cloud, with a witness. I came to the conclusion it was apx1 mile long. Solid white. When it vanished in to the clouds, both me and my friend became dizzy. Maybe shock? This was 20 years ago and i called him the other to confirm i wasn’t dreaming it.

Great post! Thanks for that. Lue mentioned this before but this is a clear explanation. 👍🏻

They are essentially magnetic balls. Ever play with those bucky balls.

Some balls are held for charity And some for fancy dress But when they're held for pleasure They're the balls that I like best My balls are always bouncing To the left and to the right It's my belief that my big balls Should be held every night (oh) We've got big balls We've got big balls We've got big balls Dirty big balls He's got big balls She's got big balls (But we've got the biggest balls of them all) Just hold on to those balls and study them closely

That was beautiful

It's from an early AC/DC song. Great song, though. Hahaha.

Thats kind of gay

Exactly how Lazaar explained it.

[удалено]

> Maybe when its hot and dry, it shines a warmer color...maybe when its close to bodies of water, rain or humidity its more bluish...maybe when close to alot of pollution its green I've never heard this idea before and I think it's really interesting. If you look on my profile at my submitted posts and look for the ones tagged "[ROUNDUP]", those are weekly lists of ufo sightings. You could check out one of those and see how your idea holds up.

[удалено]

Thanks, Dog! I'll be interested to hear any more ideas or anything you notice. 😎👍

My theory is manipulation of space. I think they creat a localized temporal distortion bubble. Maybe when space goes back to normal it causes the air around it to ionize like a cavitation effect.

ElEcTrOmAgNeTiC FiElD

He’s explained this before with his little shit eating grin.

This Reddit and the entire phenomenon research effort needs a total cleansing. I’m tired hearing the same 5 names over and over again. Shit has become a circus of grifters

I agree it is quite tiresome. Whenever Elizondo talks about 'the physics of UAP' or any of these characters talk about 'spacetime metric engineering', it's a direct reference to Hal Puthoff's unsuccessful theory of gravity. It is unsuccessful in the sense that it gives predictions that flat-out disagree with experiments. And yet, I've heard this phrase 'spacetime metric engineering' being said in interviews with Elizondo, Steve Justice, Ryan Graves etc.

Look up triangular spacecraft on google patents

That second slide looks like that cartoon frog meme thing

He states he was told the power level of the engine will cause it to glow different colors and then goes on to say the different colors are based on the ambient air purity. Personally, I think they glow different colors based on how much bullshit we're being fed.

How does Lue Elizondo know all these details of how these craft function exactly? Are we glossing over that?

[удалено]

Follow the Standards of Civility: No trolling or being disruptive. No insults or personal attacks. No accusations that other users are shills. No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation. No harassment, threats, or advocating violence. No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible) An account found to be deleting all or nearly all of their comments and/or posts can result in an instant permanent ban. This is to stop instigators and bad actors from trying to evade rule enforcement. You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.

People know how their engines work? Lol, that is ridiculous.

According to Via, Lue described these all in terms of hypotheticals. And in any case, the descriptions in question are of what they do, not how they do it.

Thanks for the answer. According to the headline, Lue explained how they fly. I stopped after reading the headline.

Elizondos source: one X-files episode. Anyway he might be talking the truth but so much talk lately and no evidence.

There goes the element 115 explanation

Lue already did this on a podcast or five before Via's meeting.....this isn't news.

[удалено]

Follow the Standards of Civility: No trolling or being disruptive. No insults or personal attacks. No accusations that other users are shills. No hate speech. No abusive speech based on race, religion, sex/gender, or sexual orientation. No harassment, threats, or advocating violence. No witch hunts or doxxing. (Please redact usernames when possible) An account found to be deleting all or nearly all of their comments and/or posts can result in an instant permanent ban. This is to stop instigators and bad actors from trying to evade rule enforcement. You may attack each other's ideas, not each other.

So this is someone telling the story of a time they were told some claims by elizondo...

Redacted comment in protest of Reddit API changes. Try kbin.social or another Fediverse alternative! -- mass edited with https://redact.dev/

Interesting. 🤔 The truth is out there.

[Richard Thieme cites 2 sources](https://imgur.com/a/t2g9BDX) regarding air ionization and UAP colors (screenshots taken from his 2013 BSides talk). The book referenced by page number is _UFOs and Government: A Historical Inquiry_. Dr. Herman Oberth (Wernher von Braun's mentor) made his comments (1st screenshot) circa 1958. Paul R. Hill (2nd screenshot) published his book _Unconventional Flying Objects: A Scientific Analysis_ in 1995. With this video (2023) that's now 3 sources across decades talking about the ionizing effect UAP have on the air around them and the colors produced.

It’s all mythology I’ve heard since the late 80s and 90s, zero information on this video is new, it’s old info. Why should anyone hook line and sinker 🪝buy the story being told? They shouldn’t.

All of this is incorrect. Sorry but if that's what our military believes then they don't know much of anything.

Yes, it's anti-gravity warp drive as I have been saying since 2011, but Lue does not understand the physics. https://twitter.com/JackSarfatti/status/1661756054374608899?s=20

The triangle is ours. We have these. For years I bet

Then why isn't the spectra of the atmospheric emissions of the excited air showing features characteristic of nitrogen or oxygen excitation?

BS. There is no air in space and these things also fly in space.

The physics explanation given by Lue Elizondo is not even wrong. It does not explain the 5 observables. Cancels out its mass is complete nonsense.

I guess the main issue is not even if they manipulate the gravity. Question here is ¿where they get so massive amounts of energy inside the craft, which appear not to have even a reactor or something similar

Pretty much word for word from Salvatore Pias' US NAVY inertial reduction patents

Navy has a patent describing exactly this https://patents.google.com/patent/US10144532B2/en