Introductory Space Science - Volume 2, Chapter 33
Department of Physics 370
United States Air Force Academy
Edited by: Major Donald G. Carpenter
Co-Editor: Lt. Colonel Edward R. Therkelson
| Home |
|---|
In this text, an attempt has been made to discuss all observable phenomena from the surface of the sun to the surface of the planets, particularly the planet Earth. It must be admitted, however, that some phenomena have been overlooked and that others are not presently explainable. In this latter category we find "Unidentified Aerial Phenomena."
This is a very broad, all-inclusive subject since the "unidentified" depends on the experience and education of the observer--to an aborigine, an airplane may be "unidentified" while to the meteorologist even such rare phenomena as noctilucent clouds and ball lightning may be "identifiable." Thus sightings of "unidentified aerial phenomena" must be reported completely and investigated carefully to determine if they are indeed "unidentifiable." There have been thousands of reports of "unidentified aerial phenomena" in the past quarter century and a number of these reports are still listed as "unidentifiable." This may be due to poor reporting, incomplete investigation, or to deficiencies in our understanding of the atmosphere and the universe at large. The possibility that our scientific knowledge could be increased by study of these phenomena has led several organizations to explore the subject further.
The popular literature uses the more restrictive term "Unidentified Flying Objects" instead of the general "Unidentified Aerial Phenomena." Although there is insufficient evidence that the phenomena are real physical "objects" or indeed that they are "flying", we will adopt the popular terminology to avoid confusion. Consequently we will define an "Unidentified Flying Object" (UFO) as any reported aerial phenomenon or object which is unknown or appears out of the ordinary to the observer.
While there are purported UFO reports dating from ancient times, the subject of UFOs really was thrust upon the American public shortly after World War II when Kenneth Arnold on 24 June 1947 reported seeing nine "saucer like" objects near Mount Rainier. This was the first in a series of UFO reports which has continued to the present. The newly organized U.S. Air Force was assigned the mission of determining if the UFOs represented a threat to the national security. The investigation was conducted under Project Sign, later Project Grudge, and finally Project Blue Book which ended on 17 December 1969.
Because of a rash of UFO reports in 1952 and fears that military communications channels could be clogged by enemy instigated UFO reports, a special scientific panel chaired by the late Dr. H, P. Robertson was established under government sponsorship in January 1953 to study the UFO problem. The panel concluded that there was no evidence in the available data that UFOs were a threat to national security. These scientists recommended that a campaign be conducted to produce better public understanding of the situation and also to remove the aura of mystery surrounding the subject. This latter goal has not yet been completely achieved.
FALL SEMESTER 1970
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
After this, Project Blue Book continued to receive and evaluate UFO reports, but the conclusions reached were not always accepted by "UFO-logists" and the general public. The Air Force was often accused of trying to cover up the UFO problem and of withholding information allegedly indicating that UFOs are extraterrestrial. Consequently, a panel headed by Dr. Brian O'Brien was empowered to review Project Blue Book in 1966. While this commission reaffirmed that there was no apparent security threat posed by the existence of unexplained UFO reports, it suggested that a detailed study of some of the reports might produce something of scientific value. The commission recommended that a few selected universities be engaged to provide scientific teams for prompt investigation of selected UFO sightings. Consequently, in 1966, the U.S. Air Force sponsored a $500,000 investigation led by Dr. Edward U. Condon of the University of Colorado to make a scientific investigation of UFOs, not necessarily to identify UFOs but only to determine if there is scientific merit in the study of them.
In any scientific investigation, we establish an hypothesis or hypotheses, collect data, analyze the data in light of our hypotheses and then refute or confirm our hypotheses or conclude that we have insufficient data to do either.
Approximately 6% of the UFO reports collected by Project Blue Book are officially listed as "unexplained." If we propose to "explain" these remaining cases we must first set up a list of possible explanations. There is always the danger in this procedure that the true explanation for a particular event is not contained in the given set of a priori hypo-theses. With this note of caution before us, we adopt a set of hypotheses proposed by Dr. James McDonald of the University of Arizona:
Let us examine each of these in light of the data collected over the past twenty-plus years.
1. Hoaxes, fabrications, and frauds. There is no question that some UFO reports are hoaxes, fabrications, and frauds perpetrated by persons playing pranks with candles in plastic cleaning bags, persons faking photographs, persons seeking notoriety or recognition, and practical jokers. The UFO literature is replete with examples of all types. However, confirmed hoaxes are only a small percentage of the total number of UFO reports. Most reports are by reliable witnesses and show no evidence of fabrication or fraud.
2. Hallucinations, mass hysteria, rumor phenomena. There is evidence that UFO reports occur in waves and that a rash of sightings in a localized area may be due to increased public sensitivity to an initial report. Some reports received at these times may indeed be inspired by the increased attention to UFOs and not true sightings at all. However, the large number of multi-observer reports from independent observers, and reports from military personnel, airline pilots, policemen, scientists and other qualified witnesses makes it unlikely that many UFO reports are the results of hallucinations, mass hysteria, and rumor phenomena. Psychologists and sociologists are unable to estimate what portion of UFO reports may be due to such causes but analysis of the credentials of witnesses in most reports would indicate that the number must be small.
3. Advanced terrestrial technologies (e.g. test vehicles, satellites, reentry phenomena, secret weapons). The noted space scientist Arthur C. Clarke has observed that any sufficiently advanced technology will appear indistinguishable from magic. Thus advanced terrestrial technologies are certainly the cause of some reports. The reported characteristics of UFOs do not appear to have changed markedly over the years while man has made great technological progress. Thus while some current UFO reports may be attributable to space vehicle reentries or satellite launches, the reports in the forties and early fifties cannot be attributed to these causes. Similarly, advanced weapon systems in the development and test stages (secret weapons) now would give rise to a different type of UFO report from those of earlier eras. The variety and world-wide distribution of UFO reports make it unlikely that the reports are due to sightings of products of an advanced terrestrial technology.
4. Lay misinterpretations of well-understood physical phenomena (e.g. meteorological, astronomical, optical). From our definition of UFOs it is obvious that a large number of reports will fall in this category. Misidentification of aircraft landing lights, blinking and flashing lights during aerial refueling operations, weather balloons, meteors, movements of the planets Venus and Jupiter, searchlight reflections on low cloud ceilings and lens flares in photographs are a few possibilities. The reader can undoubtedly suggest others and find still more in the UFO literature. In his article, "The Physics and Metaphysics of Unidentified Flying Object Dr. William Markowitz discusses the UFO problem in light of the currently accepted physical laws. In particular, he considers the following five basic laws:
a. Every action must have an equal and opposite reaction.
b, Every particle in the universe attracts every other particle with a force proportional to the product of their masses and inversely as the square of the distance between them.
c. Momentum and mass-energy are conserved.
d. No material body can travel at c, the speed of light in free space.
e. The maximum energy which can be obtained from a body at rest is governed by Einstein's famous equation, E = mc2
To date these laws have enabled physicists to predict and control many phenomena for practical purposes. They can also be valuable in analyzing UFO reports. The details in most UFO reports do not cause any conflict with these laws and lead us to conclude that UFOs may well just be misidentified ordinary phenomena. However, some reports seem at variance with one or more of these laws, leading us to question either the reliability of the UFO reports or the reliability of our physical laws. Since our physical laws are more firmly established both in theory and by experiment, the validity of the physical law is usually a more acceptable alternative to the scientist. We must realize, however, that any physical law may be subject to change with the discovery of new evidence.
5. Poorly understood physical phenomena (e.g. rare atmospheric electrical effects, cloud phenomena, plasmas of natural or technological origin). Attempting to explain UFO reports by some poorly understood phenomenon is risky at best, and probably is impossible until the phenomenon is better understood. Lenticular clouds as explanations for certain UFO reports may be on firm grounds, but attempts to explain UFOs in terms of mirages, ball lightning (a sphere-shaped plasma blob usually associated with electrical storms) , atmospheric inversion layers, or anomalous propagation of radar signals are much less tenable. Some UFO reports may be explainable by these phenomena, but it is impossible to make positive identifications based on our present limited understanding of the phenomena. Consequently, all such explanations should be considered only tentative. There may be still other atmospheric phenomena which are observed so rarely that they remain uninvestigated and unnamed.
6. Poorly understood psychological phenomena. Psychologists are the first to admit that there are many aspects of psychic phenomena that have not been adequately explored. Few data are available to determine how these phenomena may relate to the UFO problem, but we must at least allow for the possibility that there may be some effects.
7. Extraterrestrial visitation. Dr. Condon states in the summary of Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects that convincing and unequivocal evidence of extraterrestrial visitation would be the greatest single scientific discovery in the history of mankind. While this may be a slight exaggeration, it at least points out why this hypothesis adds so much excitement and controversy to the UFO problem. Despite numerous UFO reports concerning purported space vehicles and alien visitors, there remains doubt as to the veracity of these reports. Such reports do, however, contain a number of strange elements that are verifiable. One would prefer hard evidence in the form of a tail fin, a jettisoned propulsion unit, a crashed UFO, several good photographs, etc. Such physical evidence does not seem to exist, despite stories to the contrary. Several scientists have concluded that the priori probability of extraterrestrial visitation appears to be exceedingly low in terms of present scientific knowledge. Although no conclusive proof as to the validity of this hypothesis can be drawn from the evidence at hand, a panel of the National Academy of Sciences has concluded that on the basis of present knowledge, the least Likely explanation of UFOs is the hypothesis of extraterrestrial visitations by intelligent beings.
8. Messengers of salvation and occult truth. Certain cults have adopted the belief that the mission of UFOs is spiritual and that all Physical efforts to determine the nature of UFOs must necessarily fail. While such may be the case, evidence to support it is clearly lacking. Further discussion of this hypothesis is beyond the scope of this text.
Having presented the arguments for each of the hypotheses, possible conclusions are now considered. It is apparent that no single hypothesis can account for all UFO reports. Hypotheses 1, 2, 3, and 4 are obviously valid and, as a group, account for a large number of UFO reports. However, the evidence is insufficient to conclude that all UFO reports can be attributed to these causes. Hypothesis 8 is unlikely to yield to any form of scientific analysis, so we eliminate it from further consideration. If hypotheses 5, 6, and 7 are scientifically the most interesting since they offer the possibility of new knowledge about ourselves and our environment. As indicated above, hypotheses 5 and 6 require additional research on poorly understood phenomena before conclusions can be reached as to their bearing on the UFO problem. At this time, there appears to be insufficient evidence available to either confirm or refute hypothesis 7.
One additional note of caution must be included at this point. In most of this chapter, we have discussed primarily the scientific implications of the UFO question. However, the Lorenzens contend that UFOs are primarily an emotional problem, secondly a political problem, and only incidentally, a scientific problem. They feel that when the emotional and political problems have been resolved, the entire UFO problem will yield to scientific investigation.
Is such scientific investigation likely to be conducted? At least one major scientific study has been made. Dr. Condon and his University of Colorado Project ended their Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects in late 1968 with the general conclusion that nothing has come from the study of UFOs in the past two decades that has added to scientific know-ledge and that further extensive study of UFOs probably cannot be justified in the expectation that science will be advanced. This conclusion and the entire report were endorsed by a select panel from the National Academy of Sciences.
Based on the conclusions of the Condon report and its own twenty-year UFO experience, the Air Force terminated Project Blue Book in December 1969 with this final statement, "As a result of investigating UFO reports since 1948, the conclusions of Project Blue Book are (1) no UFO reported, investigated, and evaluated by the Air Force has ever given any indication of threat to our national security; (2) there has been no evidence submitted or discovered by the Air Force that sightings categorized as 'unidentified' represent technological developments or principles beyond the range of present-day scientific knowledge; and (3) there has been no evidence indicating that sightings categorized as 'unidentified' are extraterrestrial vehicles."
Consequently there is presently no official government agency investigating UFO reports. Dr. McDonald and several private UFO investigative agencies have decried alleged inadequacies of the Condon report and Project Blue Book and urge that the entire subject be re-investigated. Specifically, Project Blue Book, during its existence, was criticized for superficial investigation of UFO reports, low level of scientific competence among its personnel, and unreasonable explanations concerning specific UFO reports. Criticisms of the Condor report include the contention that the conclusions reached are not supported by the bulk of the evidence in the report itself and that the firing of two staff members for "incompetence" before the completion of the final report raises questions concerning the objectivity and completeness of the study. While some of the criticism may possibly be justified, it is unlikely that any new official scientific studies will be forthcoming, primarily because the conclusions of the Condon report have been so widely accepted.
The UFO problem must now compete on its scientific merit with all the other pressing scientific problems facing mankind. To receive attention from scientists and the requisite economic support, the potential rewards from UFO research must be shown to be commensurate with the resources expended. Although the Condon committee cautioned that nothing worthwhile was likely to result from such research, it suggested that all of the agencies of the federal government and private foundations should be willing to consider UFO research proposals along with the others submitted to them on an open minded, unprejudiced basis.
REFERENCES
| Home |
|---|