5 ms·

The real fun thing about this UFO patent story is that separate to the patent story, recently the Navy acknowledged UFOs (which they referred to UAPs) which the

The real fun thing about this UFO patent story is that separate to the patent story, recently the Navy acknowledged UFOs (which they referred to UAPs) which the pilots described the object as if it was ignoring inertia. Strangely, one of Pais’s patent claims to achieve the same thing. The fun is that we have only two options to explain these. 1. Pais’s work is moot. Therefore the UAP must be from aliens. 2. The UAP that the pilots saw were secret demos of Pais’s work. This rules out aliens from being involved in the UAP. But this means the Navy now has an anti-gravity engine and a fusion reactor.

krapp 6y ago
Both of these presuppose "ignoring inertia" is possible. It isn't, so both can be ruled out. Pais' work is obvious crackpot nonsense. Whatever objects the pilots saw, or think they saw, weren't actually breaking the laws of physics even if they appeared to be.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- gyroscope1 6y ago
  Then what do you make of this? https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/12/tic-tac-ufo-video-q-and-a-with-navy-pilot-chad-underwood.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/12/tic-tac-ufo-video-q-... The problem with discounting Pais’s work is that by doing so, UAP becomes left unexplained. From the news so far, the object was accelerating at a rate no human could withstand, with no detectable propulsion. Discounting UAP would be much more difficult.
  - krapp 6y ago
    Accepting a solution that requires the entirety of known physics to be scrapped isn't really a solution. Einstein has a very good track record of not being wrong. Just because something appears to defy the laws of physics, doesn't mean it does, and informed opinion is still just opinion. When someone can independently validate Pais' work by constructing an alternative model of physics that allows for gravity control and withstands experimental and predictive scrutiny, and maybe also build one of these UFOs and demonstrate in a repeatable manner that the claims being made are possible, then it's plausible. Until then, everything we have is speculation. The most likely interpretation is still that this phenomenon can be entirely explained by conventional physics, and possibly cutting-edge classified technology, and that the "UFO patents" are unrelated to what's actually going on here.
    - gyroscope1 6y ago
      True that it may be the case whatever the objects were using for propulsion could be explained entirely with known physics, and we just don’t have the explanation yet. However, whether the technology operates within or outside of known physics is not the point. The point is that discounting Pais’ work rules out the possibility that UAP is a classified human technology, which then the only options we are left with for UAP are it is either aliens or time machines. If we accept that the two events (Pais’ work and the UAP) are unrelated, then since UAP cannot be humans it must be something else. This is where the fun begins.
      - krapp 6y ago
        >The point is that discounting Pais’ work rules out the possibility that UAP is a classified human technology, which then the only options we are left with for UAP are it is either aliens or time machines. No it doesn't. The relationship between these patents and UFO footage is being made by web articles and HN posters who believe in the UFO narrative, it's simply inferred because the stories became viral at about the same time. Also, ruling out Pais doesn't rule out the entire rest of the American military industrial complex, which is quite capable of developing cutting edge technology on its own. If we assume for the sake of argument that UAPs are explained by advanced classified technology, Pais and his patent still aren't necessary for humans to be responsible.
        gyroscope1 6y ago
        > Also, ruling out Pais doesn't rule out the entire rest of the American military industrial complex, which is quite capable of developing cutting edge technology on its own. If we assume for the sake of argument that UAPs are explained by advanced classified technology, Pais and his patent still aren't necessary for humans to be responsible. Technically that would be possible for the sake of argument.
gyroscope1 6y ago
There is a third option that should have been there for completeness: it’s a psyops. UAPs don’t exist and Pais’ work is a sham. There is no magic tech. This is the safest explanation that does not involve magic, but this requires discounting the pilot who did the interview.

krapp 6y ago

Both of these presuppose "ignoring inertia" is possible. It isn't, so both can be ruled out. Pais' work is obvious crackpot nonsense. Whatever objects the pilots saw, or think they saw, weren't actually breaking the laws of physics even if they appeared to be.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
gyroscope1 6y ago
Then what do you make of this? https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/12/tic-tac-ufo-video-q-and-a-with-navy-pilot-chad-underwood.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/12/tic-tac-ufo-video-q-... The problem with discounting Pais’s work is that by doing so, UAP becomes left unexplained. From the news so far, the object was accelerating at a rate no human could withstand, with no detectable propulsion. Discounting UAP would be much more difficult.
- krapp 6y ago
  Accepting a solution that requires the entirety of known physics to be scrapped isn't really a solution. Einstein has a very good track record of not being wrong. Just because something appears to defy the laws of physics, doesn't mean it does, and informed opinion is still just opinion. When someone can independently validate Pais' work by constructing an alternative model of physics that allows for gravity control and withstands experimental and predictive scrutiny, and maybe also build one of these UFOs and demonstrate in a repeatable manner that the claims being made are possible, then it's plausible. Until then, everything we have is speculation. The most likely interpretation is still that this phenomenon can be entirely explained by conventional physics, and possibly cutting-edge classified technology, and that the "UFO patents" are unrelated to what's actually going on here.
  - gyroscope1 6y ago
    True that it may be the case whatever the objects were using for propulsion could be explained entirely with known physics, and we just don’t have the explanation yet. However, whether the technology operates within or outside of known physics is not the point. The point is that discounting Pais’ work rules out the possibility that UAP is a classified human technology, which then the only options we are left with for UAP are it is either aliens or time machines. If we accept that the two events (Pais’ work and the UAP) are unrelated, then since UAP cannot be humans it must be something else. This is where the fun begins.
    - krapp 6y ago
      >The point is that discounting Pais’ work rules out the possibility that UAP is a classified human technology, which then the only options we are left with for UAP are it is either aliens or time machines. No it doesn't. The relationship between these patents and UFO footage is being made by web articles and HN posters who believe in the UFO narrative, it's simply inferred because the stories became viral at about the same time. Also, ruling out Pais doesn't rule out the entire rest of the American military industrial complex, which is quite capable of developing cutting edge technology on its own. If we assume for the sake of argument that UAPs are explained by advanced classified technology, Pais and his patent still aren't necessary for humans to be responsible.
      - gyroscope1 6y ago
        > Also, ruling out Pais doesn't rule out the entire rest of the American military industrial complex, which is quite capable of developing cutting edge technology on its own. If we assume for the sake of argument that UAPs are explained by advanced classified technology, Pais and his patent still aren't necessary for humans to be responsible. Technically that would be possible for the sake of argument.

gyroscope1 6y ago

There is a third option that should have been there for completeness: it’s a psyops. UAPs don’t exist and Pais’ work is a sham. There is no magic tech. This is the safest explanation that does not involve magic, but this requires discounting the pilot who did the interview.