Reader Ad Slot
Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
CIA RDP81R00560R000100010008 3
‹
Page 1
1 / 7
pt
, 7gee
UFO Consensus
I agree with Markowitz (“The phys-
ics and metaphysics of unidentified fly-
ing objects,” 15 Sept. p. 1274) that ex-
traterrestrial control of UFO’s is unlike-
ly. Nevertheless I find his arguments
unconvincing.
First, a minor point—he seems to
imply that Hyack is inconsistent when
he states thi: UFO’s have been’ seen
hy “scientificalty trained people” but
nave not been scen by “trained ob-
servers. 1 thias the distinction here is
eusonably hk
Tn this of
microwaves, wad superconducting mag-
nets, his appeal to the law of Stefan-
Boltzmann seems curiously unimagina-
tive, as does his dependence upon solid
surfaces to deiect high-energy particles.
lasers, superpower
He arrives at a power required for
interstellar flight of 3 x 10™ watts,
noting that it is 30 times the world’s
electric generating capacity. An cqually
pertinent comparison would be to note
‘that it is only 300 times the power of
a single Saturn V, and that on/y a single
decade of development effort separates
that vehicle from its 300 times smaller
predecessor! In any case, why does an
interstellar vehicle need an acceleration
of Ig?
On the other hand, a ship for such
a voyage would probably weigh much
more than 5000 kilograms. So in the
end, one must ce that a satisfactory
interstellar propu'sion system is quite
beyond the capability of our present
technology. arguments in no
way prove ©. tiaply that it is beyond
someone cl: vw even beyond what
we will have CO years from now. As
far as proving that interstellar flight
violates the Jaws of physics. his argu-
ments are simply irrelevant
His ihe ground should
ive where a UFO
sown also seems irrele-
. probable that such voy-
“excursion modules”
+ spose to do? And why
has to!
vant. Isi
jest as we
8 DECEMBE!. 67
Letters
use a specific impulse of 3 X 107 sec-
onds to lift off the earth when 1000
seconds or less would do? In short, the
use of an interstellar space ship to ex-
plore within our atmosphere seems
about as likely as the use of airliners
to explore the bottom of the sea.
Why suggest that a 1000-year trip
duration should make the voyagers anx-
ious to meet us formally? An alterna-
tive deduction would be that another
hundred years, more or less, is of little
consequence to them. The fact that
Columbus did noi hesitate to talk to
the Indians was not without conse-
quences that were unfortunate for Eur-
ope and tragic for the Indians. Per-
haps our interstellar visitors have
learned to be more cautious—and con-
siderate.
Finally, the suggestion that “hard-
data” cases should be published for all
of ‘the technical community to peruse,
just like observations of any other in-
teresting phenomena, seems construc-
tive. But why insist, on the other hand,
that the Air Force should completely
drop the matter? The only valid argu-
ment against extraterrestrial visitors is,
I believe, a statistical one. The proba-
bility of there being a civilization ad-
vanced enough, near enough, and dili-
gent enough to find us is simply not
very high.
Ricuarp J. Rosa
Avco Everett Research Laboratory,
2385 Revere Beach Parkway,
Everett, Massachusetts 02149
I acknowledge Markowitz’ analysis of
the UFO problem, and wish him well
in the next fieki to which he lends
his attention, since he has apparently
finished this one. He cannot depart
quickly enough, however, to escape the
objections of those he left standing
amid the shambles. His entire argument
against the possibility of extraterrestrial
control of UFO's resis on theoretical
grounds, and bears no relationship to
the contents of UFO reports. The one
link between Markowitz’ theoretical
For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81R00560R000199010008.-.
argument and UI reports is the fact
that objects have been reported to land
and take off. Having arbitrarily scttled
on a design for a ship employing an-
nihilation of matter for power and a
horribly inefficient photon drive for
thrust, Markowitz proceeds to imagine
this starship entering the atmosphere of
a planet and landing on its surface, us-
ing the full fury of its interstellar drive,
a process akin to docking the Forrestal
by running it up onto a beach. Since
the obvious results of such foolishness
have never been observed, Markowitz
concludes, “Hence, the published re-
ports of landings and lift-offs of UFO's
are not reports of spacecraft controlled
by extraterrestrial beings, if the laws
of physics are valid.” The non sequitur
is blatant: Markowitz has proven only
that his own design does not explain
reports of takeoffs or landings. He has
revealed his own haste to arrive at a
particular’ conclusion.
When Markowitz “assumes for pur-
poses of |discussion” the existence of
technically advanced beings, one might
expect that this assumption would play
a part in the discussion, but evidently
the implications of such an assumption
have escaped his notice. A technically
advanced: race just a cosmic clock-tick
ahead of.us in achievement would not
only have inconceivably advanced sci-
entific ability, but technological skill be-
yond our comprehension. Such beings
would effectively command immense
wealth; what would seem to us impos-
sibly ambitious, ruinously expensive, and
even frivolous undertakings would be
carried out with a casualness that would
shock our poverty-stricken souls. It is
no more possible for us to expand our
minds enough to encompass what will
be the truth in a thousand years than
it would have been for Charlemagne to
speculate’ on the present gross national
product of France, without even a word
for 10°, The contrast between the no-
tion of an advanced civilization’s mode
of transport (as one may legitimately
attempt to imagine it) and Markowitz’
sketchy design for a starship is ludi-
crous, |
Of course there may not be any ad-
vanced civilization, or any starships.
Nobody |can go beyond . premise-bound
speculations on those subjects, and even
our speculations are denied the use of
physical principles and effects that re-
main undiscovered.
| WILLIAM T. POWERS
Dearborn Observatory,
Northwestern University,
Evanston, Ullinois 60201
| 1265
Approved For Release 2001/04/02 : CIA-RDP81 R00560R000100010008-3
Reveal the original PDF page, then click a word to highlight the OCR text.
Community corrections
No user corrections yet.
Comments
No comments on this document yet.
Bottom Reader Ad Slot
Bottom Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
Continue Exploring
Agency Collection
Explore This Archive Cluster
Broad Topic Hub
Topic Hub
staff declassified
flying objects ufo
ufo
Related subtopics
Subtopic
Subtopic