Jack Sliwa, Technologist                            01/25/22                                 White Paper #1 rev1

 

 

                                                                                  Contents

 

Part A) Two fundable and evidence-based subareas for earth’s scientists to finally start understanding UAPs    

                                                                                                 

(Research)

 

Part B) What may be true of E.T.’s and their supposed activities -my own percentage probability for each behavior listed in order of decreasing probability. (Based on 50 years of studying global UAP/ET materials and a 1.3 terabyte MAC M1+ Pro database constantly updated by search bots and feeds); Devonthink™ Database and DevonAgent™ Search programs are employed  

(Educated Speculation)

 

Part C) A real concern about “near term” manned flights to Mars      

                

(Opinion)

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                            Part (A)

 

  The Part (A) subareas are: 1) The UAP Angel-Hair phenomenon and 2) The UAP dropped-metallics phenomenon. Each is quite revealing of UAP/ET technologies and unsurprising.

 

  A1) The website herein goes into considerable detail logically explaining the long mysterious Angel-Hair as well-understood electrospinning from the hulls of UAPs-the hair comprised of known waxy organics accumulated during interstellar flight and possible additional known hydrocarbons based on earthly terpene chemistries accumulated during tropospheric flight. The “mysterious” boron, calcium and magnesium constituents can be isotopically accounted for including as to their locational origin. Humans have a deep understanding of electrospinning as evidenced by its continued rapid and broad industrial growth. The famous Belgian Petit-Rechain triangle-UAP photo shown on the website is clearly real and shows substantial Angel Hair shedding in great detail at low altitude and close to the camera. Angel-Hair presents an excellent opportunity for global science and experimentation.

 

  A2) The dropped metallics, a different repeated mysterious phenomenon than the above, is also logically explained on the website herein as ejected filtered unavoidable impurities from the liquid metal “coolant” of UAP power plants. Again, much is known by humans in this specific area based on Gen 4 nuclear fission or fusion power plants currently in design which will use such molten coolants (heat transport fluids) and will require the controlled removal of such unavoidable dissolved impurities coming from the slowly dissolving walls of the power unit’s coolant chambers. Historic and recent efforts to assign such droppings to broken-off UAP parts are probably a dead-end. Only one chunk broken off from a UAP is widely thought to be real and it is said to be a magnesium-orthosilicate chunk shot off a UAP by an American fighter Jet in the 1950s. That sample’s whereabouts is publically unknown presuming it was real in the first place. The separate Ubataba magnesium samples were anonymously submitted at the time Dow Chemical was experimenting with ultrapure and doped magnesium materials. Where was the on-site follow up to collect every piece from the sea and beach? How about Brazilian or US FOIAs relating to the Ubataba cleanup-if any? Some magnesium may still be there-magnesium typically pits in sea water over time.

  The numerous remaining global metallic samples, some measured in many pounds or gallons, are likely purposely disgorged metallic impurities as explained. UAPs require ultrahigh performance heat sinking (internal heat transport). That is absolutely unavoidable based on thermodynamics, heat transfer and UAP emitted power. This is also an excellent opportunity for global science and experimentation.

   The latest efforts to analyze the “alien” thin-film multilayer Bi/Mg/Zn sample sold for $35k ignore the fact that that sample could have been deposited in a conventional multitarget sputtering or evaporation deposition machine over several hours (or even days) and then deformed. It is probably not a metamaterial. I myself have made similar fine laminates decades ago. Bismuth (doped, undoped or alloyed), Magnesium (doped, undoped or alloyed) and Zinc (doped, undoped or alloyed) deposition targets are easily purchased and such deposition machines have programmable software to deposit any layer combination from angstroms to tens of microns sequences unattended. Thin film people like myself know this is easily possible. Such thin film depositions (one or more of Mg, Bi, Zn) are done, for example, as for battery or electrode research. Some machines can handle 4 different deposition target compositions and if you allow for few-hour target changeout or the use of two different machines one could have 10 different composition layers. It is possible to deduce the deposition method from a sample. Such deposition equipment has been available for over 40 years worldwide. I add here that multilayer fine electroplating and electroforming could have also been used for one or more of the layers. The sample shown appears to be a portion scraped from a deposition shield (used to keep the system clean).

    My point is that for Angel Hair and Dropped Molten (or frequently hot) metals there aren’t such doubts as for Ubataba or the $35k De Longe specimen. There are dozens of witnessed cases some with thousands of witnesses (Italy soccer match). Go with the samples you are most confident in. Don’t base sweeping conclusions on what is not the best evidence. Fraudsters are extremely clever and motivated in all realms of fakery. Government agencies, at least in the past, will try and demonstrate samples or photos are fakes. (Monguzzi photos, Petit Rechain photo-both real).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

                                                                            Part (B)

 

   The sheer and overwhelming number of isolated chances for life to form somewhere in the universe are essentially infinite. No matter how unlikely individual steps to this creation are, e.g., one in a million, there are still likely a near infinity of successes employing various workable strings of such steps. It must be kept in mind that there are likely numerous paths to life creation, each having a different number of steps-some steps having similarities.

  Many decades ago there was a brilliant experiment done (1957 Miller/Urey experiment) wherein an electric arc was exposed to a flask enclosed fluid mixture-the mixture representing the best guess for a primitive planet’s atmosphere and the arc simulating lightning. The experiment was repeated several times back then and all runs produced a similar variety of agreed biological precursors. Even more amazingly, a grad student recently repeated this same simplistic experiment using far more sophisticated means to analyze the resulting molecular products and it was discovered that the original experimenter had missed at least 5 additional such bio precursor products due to the primitive chemical analytical tools of the time. It also turned out the boron leached from the Pyrex™ flask also had a big effect, a fact unknown to the original scientist.  We need more bold scientists and students like this who care as much (or more) about the truth than about their associates doubts and indecision

  It is virtually certain that life, in some recognizable forms, exists off-earth distributed throughout the universe- “virtually certain” meaning to me 99.9% certain. A legitimate question is “are some of these life locations close enough and communication-capable such that they could talk to or commute to each other?” Recall that there would indeed be an average separation distance but in many cases life would be much closer than that average separation purely by chance. The other is that by a “life location” that could be, for example, a light-years large molecular cloud, planet(s), moon(s), asteroid(s), interstellar dust, fallen meteorites, fallen interstellar dust, fallen angel hair, agglomerated Angel-Hair on UAP hulls, atmospheres, oceans, ice, comets and free-floating ejected” planets. So, a location may itself be spatially extensive, may move, and may leak life elsewhere.

  The argument that humans are the epitomy of biological evolution and intelligence is quite amusing, egotistical and self-serving. Even on earth we have octopi and dolphins with enormous intelligence and shape-changing ability that still confound we humans. For decades it was confidently said only man utilized tools. We now know this is blatantly untrue with cases of tool use and training of others within animal groups (e.g. monkeys, birds) to similarly utilize the new tools. Humans are unchallenged at underestimation.

   Many people (around 50% plus) accept that intelligent life exists “elsewhere off-earth”. The heated debate comes these days mainly when we discuss whether “they” have visited or are visiting we earthlings. Psychologically speaking, and to me quite understandably, this is a much much greater hurdle than whether they exist off-earth. Such a big leap in understanding shouldn’t be easy.

Humans have achieved virtually all of their “aerospace/space” acumen in a matter of roughly one century or roughly one modern man’s lifespan. We cannot possibly say what could be developed over the span of millions of lifetimes elsewhere-or here on earth. Further, some ETs will be more inventive than humans on a per-(earth) year basis, others just plain much smarter, and others have millions of years headstart. That doesn’t bother me in the least. It does motivate my learning and teach humility.

  As a broadly practiced technologist I also find it amusing when people say that we will never travel at any appreciable fraction of the speed of light at an acceptable societal cost. While this is essentially true for chemical and even nuclear/photon rockets it will likely be completely untrue for a 1G+ accelerating force-field based propulsion system(s). The main issue will be that the near-lightspeed traveling crew/passengers age slower than their left-behind families. Other real issues such as crew radiation exposure and anemia development will undoubtedly be overcome with good engineering and bioengineering and/or by the short trips using force-field propulsion.

  A pertinent question to me is whether instantaneous communication across light years distances is possible (e.g. via quantum entanglement). If so, then a craft could travel at 0.8c-0.9995c velocity, communicate with other such 0.8c craft and crews elsewhere, and not have to deal with “rapidly” aged folks who stayed home-i.e., everyone goes on the trip(s). Traveling becomes day-to-day living. Perhaps the mother craft is their permanent home. This scenario makes the entire universe “real time” in the sense of avoiding communication-propagation delays. That, if true, makes the universe a real time entity. That isn’t easy to comprehend.

  The following are my guesstimated percentage possibilities for ETs and what behaviors they may (or may not) practice. My underlying assumptions are as follows:

a) There are dozens of types of intelligent technological ETs that occupy the universe and some come to earth,

b) Travel at 0.5c+ is widely practiced with some races regularly achieving 0.98c,

c) UAPs are physical craft with appreciable mass (many tons based on physical evidence) at-least at low velocity and when landed and d) huge numbers of ETs live at high velocity most of the time-and take their families and associates. Keep in mind that due to proven relativity effects rapidly traveling ETs age significantly slower than those left at home depending on velocity.

 

1. Possibility that some physical UAP/ETs have visited earth         99%

2. Possibility that the same/similar UAP/ETs visit other “earths”   99%

3. Possibility that ETs or robotic ET craft compare earth to

    thousands of similar earth-like planets and life                           98%

4. Possibility that ETs study our civilization, ecology, resources     98%

5. Possibility that most ET UAPs utilize force-field propulsion      95%

6. Possibility that over the last 70 years ETs have become bolder   95%

7. Possibility that MOST ETs have been peaceful while here

 (Brazil may be an exception at-least for a period of decades

 -ETs may have misunderstood native deer hunters hiding in 

 the treetops)                                                                                      95%

8. Possibility that two or more ET races cooperate                         95%

9. Possibility that some ETs are humanoid-appearing                     

 (e.g. Nordics)                                                                                     90%  

              

10. Possibility that some visiting ETs live far longer than humans

 even at no relative velocity                                                               90% 

   

11. Possibility that some ETs are one of animal/reptoid/robotic      

(These may sometimes be utilized as crew, labor, soldiers)             80%  

  

12. Possibility that ETs physically abduct and/or “mutilate” 

animals at-least for biological research/bioproduction

purposes                                                                                             80%  

              

13. Possibility that actual ETs mentally “abduct” humans

(separate from people who dreamed such w/o real ETs)                 80%

14. Possibility that ET beings seen gliding across the ground

utilize elements of their own UAP propulsion technology

to do so                                                                                               80%

15. Possibility that UAPs utilize liquid-metal cooling                      80%

16. Possibility that at least the core of the “Ghost Rocket”

Phenomenon in Scandanavia was ETs testing the resolve of

Sweden (precision remote control wasn’t invented yet-

but some rockets achieved U-Turn and precision crashes

Into lakes with very close witnesses. All “rockets” were

 reduced to slag. High intelligence definitely shown)                       80%

17. Possibility that human inability to practice unedited 

telepathy on the level of ETs is a reason for non-contact                  75%

18. Possibility that some ETs experiment with human

groups wrt understanding or manipulating human belief

systems (e.g. Fatima 1917 events)                                                          75%

19. Possibility that actual ETS physically abduct some humans         60%

20. Possibility that some ETs reside long-term in the sea

(in/with their UAPs)                                                                             60%

21. Possibility that some UAPs have aerodynamic surfaces

(e.g. developed for use in their own thicker atmospheres)                  60%

22. Possibility that the Angel-Hair phenomenon itself 

unintentionally also spreads biological life                                          50%

23. Possibility that ETs utilize human-reproductive abilities or

 specimens for their own biological purposes                                       35%

24. Possibility that humans will develop force-field propulsion

systems capable of 1G+ in next 25 years                                                35%

25. Possibility that earths civilizations have been modified by

ET communications or visitations in the past                                      35%

26. For (24) above, possibility that the discovering nation will

NOT be the USA                                                                                    35%

27. Possibility that some ETs/UAPs have the ability to pass into

and through solid or liquid materials (walls. floors, earth..) 

based on numerous such observations around the world                     25%

28. Possibility that humans will discover at-least biological

life remote from earth in next 40 years (e.g. Webb telescope)             25%  

              

29. Possibility that human SETI projects (optical, radio) will

discover an intelligent signal of some sort in next 40 years                 15%

30. Possibility that life exists off-earth that has incorporated

some human and/or earth-animal genetic materials taken

from earth or humans                                                                            15%

31. Possibility that some ETs live among humans day to day

(with or without local human knowledge)                                           10%

32. Possibility that at-least one 1950s-1960s “contactee” actually

had a mental communication with an E.T. (not different

than (13) except for contactee salesmanship behavior                         10%

33. Possibility that the UAP/ET/CE3 phenomena can be explained 

WITHOUT involving off-earth evolved physical or 

nonphysical intelligences                                                                       5%

34. Possibility that gravity itself can be negated (as opposed to

providing far more likely new positive propulsion force fields)          2%

35. Possibility that only earth has intelligent life (man, dolphins..)     1%

36. Possibility that we could avoid destruction at the hands of

E.T.s determined to erase us from earth in the next 50 years 

(no evidence that this is in the cards or that E.T.s even think

In that manner)                                                                                    0%-2%

37. Possibility that most crop circles are made by ETs                      

(the simplest roughest historic circles such as found in the

Australian lagoons were made by UAPs which were seen)                   0%  

    

38. Possibility that self-sustained self-generated intelligence can

exist without associated supportive biological or material 

bodies                                                                                                perhaps 20%   

39. Possibility of “overlapping” universes wherein visitation or

communication between them has happened (if you can

travel at 0.9c+ in a lone universe is this even necessary

or natural?)                                                                                                 ?

40. Do “Men In Black” actually exist-whether human or ET              

(with the exception of a few human intelligence agents)               probably 0-2%

41. Possibility that two or more ET races have waged lethal war

with each other, not necessarily recently or locally                                  ?

42. Possibility that some ETs avoid human-like teaching and

learning and instead have a way to infuse knowledge into 

other ETs or humans that is instantaneous or self-grows with

age as appropriate                                                                              probably 50%

43. Possibility that a world government has any kind of deal

or agreement with ETs                                                                       probably 0%    

 

 

                                                                                Part (C)

 

  Manned flights to Mars are hugely more complex and risky than manned flights to earth’s moon as of today. If there were a remote accident and one or more mars astronauts were to die there would be immediate knee-jerk reactions to cancel manned space flight. Recall the ridiculous pulling of the plug on NASAs SETI program-and that didn’t even involve lives being lost in a far-away place. 

As much as I would myself like to visit Mars I believe that in the short term (50 yrs?) it makes far more sense to send robots as we have been doing. Robots can and will work together to return samples as already planned. Given that ability we save a huge amount of money and still can perform the full suite of science experiments on the samples when they arrive on earth. Why not do it together with the Chinese? They have good Science as we do. Think long-term. Take advantage of something both countries desire. If we cant cooperate on something like that to some degree its not promising for the future.

  It will not at all be a surprise to me if China proceeds anyway with manned missions to Mars in an attempt to gain apparent space exploration temporary “superiority” as the US did on the moon. It would be further unsurprising if Elon Musk does the same and I believe both China and Musk have the right to do so using true volunteers. It seems to me the best approach is a federal/private partnership along the lines of the SpaceX approach.  Yet I still say robotics on Mars surface is the best approach until we have force-field propulsion craft.

  Once we (USA et al) have our own craft with force-field propulsion we can have humans go to Mars and other places routinely and more safely (quickly). Those places would then be a few hours or days away and we could have rescue craft stand by on earth or at Mars. Further, the pleasant surprise that helicopter flight is possible on Mars should expand the set of experiments that can be done remotely from earth. Further again, we know well designed robotic craft can last decades and don’t require large amounts of food, oxygen and water as do humans. The issue of Mars dust blocking solar cells will be solved once landed rovers cooperate.

  A multinational effort to develop force-field propulsion would be advantageous to get there more quickly. I’m sure I will be critiqued as naïve for such a suggestion as the military and intelligence services of the world would try and stop such a public and cooperative effort given long-developed current mindsets. Even if one or more nations develops force-field propulsion independently (secretly) the technology will leak and spread in just a few years as did nuclear bomb technology after WW2. Such a cooperative effort would be a great test of whether humanity has grown up yet. Truly aggressive (lethal as necessary) measures would have to be taken to control the acceptable use of the technology. The U.N. is currently not up to any kind of enforcement in the Technology Arena. That could change provided forceful enforcement and the elimination of veto votes in this arena. Unlike for nuclear weapons, all countries should have legitimate and safe uses for such broadly enabling technology but should be certainly punished for abuse.

                                                                                                                        

 

 

Disclaimers:    1) I have no relationship with the Devon Software Company or Apple                                                                           2) My conclusions are my own. You should come to your own conclusions.

                        3) I respect any conclusions you yourself come to or have already come to.

                        4) If my presentations cause you to reconsider-great, if not that’s good too.