From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 19:51:46 +0100
Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:05:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Harvard Exorcising Its UFO Demons? - Dickenson


>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 13:18:50 -0700
>Subject: Re: Harvard Exorcising Its UFO Demons?

>>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 22:14:51 -0300
>>Subject: Re: Harvard Exorcising Its UFO Demons?

>>>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman.nul>
>>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2005 09:31:00 -0700
>>>Subject: Re: Harvard Exorcising Its UFO Demons?

<snip>

>You made the connection. But you're correct; there is no direct
>connection between the AA and "huge high performance craft
>capable of speeds like 5400". My information comes from
>examining the AA debris footage and one drawing made by the
>cameraman which shows the craft on the ground. I've concluded
>that the AA craft was not intended for star travel. Maybe it had
>a mothership.

<snip>

Just a theoretical suggestion - the feasible inter-stellar
propulsion (rather than matter translation) would be an inertia
drive - therefore a main ship would use amplified `universal'
inertia of distant masses or galaxies, while small craft would
have to use a `local inertia' drive opposing only the Earth's
mass (hence the falling-leaf motion often described).

So - if any inertia drives are used, even only locally, there
has to be a mother-ship. Because, although same principle would
enable both distant and local travel, it would be impractical
(and dangerous) to use either for the `wrong' kind of travel.


Cheers

Ray D


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Perceptions" http://www.perceptions.couk.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~