All three witnesses provided testimony of unprecedented credibility. Their participation in a quasi-judicial process demands respect. It demands regard of David Grush as an honest broker of facts, until proven otherwise.
Carl Sagan said, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.” The testimony does not by itself reach that standard. In the case of David Grush, it contradicts my understanding. I wonder if participants in relevant SAPs have themselves been deceived by excessive classification, robbing them of understanding their own activities. The U.S. has been collecting adversary aircraft since 1942, in the same time frame as claims about alien spacecraft.
Similarly, one could pick apart the gimbal camera in the F-18 targeting pod, or the alleged sloppiness in analyzing recovered materials. But for the first time, these issues do not subjectively diminish human testimony to the point of disregard. For the first time, we are faced by the inescapable question: What if it is all true?
The media tend to mix up the relevance of areas of knowledge. UFOs are not a question for aerospace engineering, which relies on Newton’s laws of motion — classical mechanics. Only in a few esoteric areas does aerospace touch on modern physics:
- GPS could not work without the Theory of Relativity.
- Radio communication with planetary space probes requires relativistic correction.
- Ion propulsion requires quantum mechanics.
- Modern electronics, where design of semiconductors requires quantum mechanics.
For practically everything else, aerospace relies on fields with mostly classical master equations:
- Navier–Stokes equations for aerodynamics.
- Lagrangian mechanics for structural analysis of airframes.
- Thermodynamic cycles for propulsion.
- Materials science, where most analysis is classical, with exceptions like carbon fiber.
This means that if you gave flying saucer parts to Boeing, Lockheed-Martin, or Northrup-Grumman, their engineers wouldn’t know what to do with them. It is a problem of modern physics. They could hire outside physicists, but there is a catch.
Contract physicists work with existing theories. No valid existing theory offers a hint at how a flying saucer might work. There have been many attempts; the floor is littered with broken theories that that fail to predict what is already experimentally verified.
You have to be smart to be any kind of physicist. The hierarchy of achievement is a cruel reminder to those blessed with extreme intellects, of the rarity of extreme achievement. Ignoring the hundreds of years of patient mathematical advance that enabled, there is a hierarchy:
- At the top, Newton and Einstein.
- Other 18th and 19th century giants.
- The small group of the Thirty Years that Shook Physics, and less celebrated heroes.
- Developers of Second Quantization — QED, the Standard Model, and the Particle Zoo.
- Mere Nobel Prize winners, from astrophysics to condensed matter physics.
- People who have managed to Do Something.
- People with doubtful theories that cannot be fully dismissed.
- Those who teach, managing to pass on the knowledge, which is no small feat.
- Industrial physics.
- Popularization of physics.
In this cruel-to-the-ego list, building the Bomb counts for little. These days, it’s considered an undergraduate subject.
So Boeing can’t just hire the brains to crack the UFO problem. Their custody of crashed UFOs is pointless. Nevertheless, propelled by that which cannot be dismissed, the next article will speculate on:
***How do UFOs work?***
and why we are unlikely to find the answer on our own terms.
To be continued shortly.