/sci/ - Science & Math

Why do we continue using 17th century physics to engineer our spacecraft? Why aren't we back engineering Ayyy-tech like the Tic-Tac?

/sfg/ tic tac ufo edition
Last bread
>>12028168

It seems modern academia pulls at strings for some things, and drags their feet for others.

Take dark matter for instance. Not only have we found no proof of it, we are building theories on top of theories around it. We never stop to think whether dark matter is a byproduct of an inaccurate and incorrect understanding of physics.

On the other side, you have phenomena like the USS Nimitz encounters. In a week long span, pilots, super hornet FLIR pod cams, the USS Nimitz radar, the USS Princeton radar, and a spy hawk all detected cylindrical objects going up to mach 51+ within less than a second. However, whenever these are mentioned, instead of looking at this phenomena with wonder and curiosity, it only brings out irrational skepticism.

>how dare you question my UFO

The most common takes that skeptics say is that the blobs on the footage are jet exhaust, or that it’s some kind of optical illusion. Or that it’s all a glitch and that the pilots are crayon eaters. If they were truly skeptical and utilized occams razor, these theories would be out the door, and their main retort would be that the whole thing is a hoax, as it is way more likely

The Nimitz UFO shatters whoever improperly utilizes occams razor and makes them look like a fool. Pardon my pun, but I believe this is the great filter for genuine skeptics and “followers of scientism”

These things can go mach 50+ in less than a second, can make instantaneous 90 degree turns, and they have no discernible surface features: no ailerons, no exhaust, no windows, nothing.

This is the elephant in the room that no one is addressing

we already have

>>11725216

(Continuing)

Finally, on the 14th November, a group of UAVs were detected during a live exercise and the USS Princeton radioed two airborne fighter jets to intercept it. The two jets were two Boeing F/A-18E Super Hornets flown by Strike Fighter Squadron 41 (aka "Fast Eagle"), a fighter squadron within the USS Nimitz. The jets were redirected to the UAVs and made visual contact with an approximately 40 feet long bright white smooth skin elongated surface object at sea level. One of the fighter jets started a clockwise descent to better visualize the object, which immediately started a counterclockwise ascension mirroring the jet, engaging in a dogfight. The jet pilot then decided to fly across the circular trajectory to engage the UAV which as soon as it got around 0.5 mile distance accelerated out of sight. The jets returned to the super carrier and another pair of F/A-18s were scrambled, this time equipped with an onboard thermal/optical camera (AN/ASQ-228 ATFLIR), which produced the video that was leaked.


(Continues)

This is the photo apparently taken by the Nimitz.
Can anyone explain the lack of shadow on the prongs?
Why does it look fake?
Strange how one man was left on deck to explain what went on, and allowed to do so against rules.

I fully respect the theory that the pilot’s helmets, navy radar, and the infrared pods were playing a simulated UFO sighting to see how the pilots would react, and I understand the idea that it’s entirety fake. But occams razor falls when you try to say it’s swamp gas

Been looking in to the Nimitz incident and am wondering about what one of the pilots said about miles/second and the lack of a sonic boom on observation. Occurred in November 2004.

Bit of background and link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Nimitz_UFO_incident

Basically some fighter pilots on a training mission observed some "Anomalous Aerial Vehicles" and claimed they defied physics in their observed movements. The claims were that the craft moved from 60,000 feet to 50 feet in "a matter of seconds" with departure, turning and stopping velocities thought to be impossible.

Furthermore, the pilots claimed that there were no sonic-booms (of where there should have been many at such a rapid descent). Also when the pilots started to tail the "pill-shaped" craft, the object darted away only to be reported by radar as appearing sixty miles away from where the pilots last spotted it with "seconds" between the two events, requiring the event to have the object travel at least 42,000 miles per hour.

First of all, yeah, this could be total bullshit and there already exist a few logical explanations, but it has yet to be debunked and according to testimony by pilots present at the event, the rest of the recordings and data were confiscated almost immediately after the incident.

Given our aeronautical technology, what we know about human endurance at speed, and physical laws on Earth, is this event impossible? Anyone have a thought?

>FLIR Footage confirmed by Pentagon:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rWOtrke0HY&feature=emb_logo

>Article in PM

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/research/a30538203/navy-ufo-video-investigation/