Links:

https://bdigital.ufp.pt/bitstream/10284/781/1/223-239Cons-Ciencias.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20230614115415/https://bdigital.ufp.pt/bitstream/10284/781/1/223-239Cons-Ciencias.pdf https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Incommensurability%2C-Orthodoxy-and-the-Physics-of-a-Vallee-Davis/cc83574adbd009c4e36e1f8c5f80b1e884912b00

Original Portuguese:

Resumo

O argumento principal apresentado neste trabalho propõe que o estudo continuado dos fenómenos aéreos não identificados (“UAP-Unidentified Aerial Phenomena”), incluindo “aparições” de natureza religiosa ou espiritual, pode oferecer um teorema para a existência de novos modelos de realidade física. O actual paradigma SETI e a sua “suposição de mediocridade” coloca restrições às formas de inteligência não humanas que podem ser pesquisadas no nosso entorno. Um preconceito semelhante existe nas frequentes declarações dos ufólogos, segundo as quais se os UAP são reais, então devem estar associados a visitantes espaciais. Observando que ambos os modelos enfermam de antropomorfismo, os autores tentam clarificar as questões que se colocam em torno das observações de “alta estranheza”, distinguindo seis níveis de informação que poderiam ser extraídos dos eventos anómalos.

Translated:

Summary

The main argument presented in this work proposes that the continued study of unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), including “apparitions” of a religious or spiritual nature, can offer a theorem for the existence of new models of physical reality. The current SETI paradigm and its “mediocrity assumption” place restrictions on the forms of non-human intelligence that can be researched in our environment. A similar bias exists in frequent statements by ufologists, who claim that if UAPs are real, then they must be associated with space visitors. Noting that both models suffer from anthropomorphism, the authors attempt to clarify the issues surrounding observations of “high strangeness,” distinguishing six levels of information that could be extracted from anomalous events.

The Six Levels of UAP Analysis

Let us consider the characteristics of the sightings that are not explained by trivial natural causes; we can recognize six major “layers” in terms of our perceptions of these characteristics, as they can be extracted from earlier works about UAP phenomenology (Vallee, 1975a, 1975b) or from the current NIDS database.

Layer I:

First of all is the physical layer, evident in most witness accounts describing an object that:

occupies a position in space, consistent with geometry moves as time passes interacts with the environment through thermal effects exhibits light absorption and emission from which power output estimates can be derived produces turbulence when landed, leaves indentations and burns from which mass and energy figures can be derived gives rise to photographic images leaves material residue consistent with Earth chemistry gives rise to electric, magnetic, and gravitational disturbances

Thus UAP, in a basic physical sense, are consistent with a technology centered on a craft that appears to be using a revolutionary propulsion system. It is the existence of this layer that has led mainstream ufologists to claim that UFOs and related phenomena were due to extraterrestrial machines.

Layer II:

For lack of an adequate term we will call the second layer anti-physical. The variables are the same as those in the previous category but they form patterns that conflict with those predicted by modern physics: Objects are described as physical and material but they are also described as:

sinking into the ground shrinking in size, growing larger, or changing shape on the spot becoming fuzzy and transparent on the spot dividing into two or more objects, several of them merging into one object at slow speed disappearing at one point and appearing elsewhere instantaneously remaining observable visually while not detected by radar producing missing time or time dilation producing topological inversion or space dilation (object was estimated to be of small exterior size/volume, but witness(s) saw a huge interior many times the exterior size) appearing as balls of colored, intensely bright light under intelligent control

It is the presence of such descriptions that leads most academic scientists to reject the phenomenon as the product of hallucinations or hoaxes.

Layer III:

The third layer has to do with the psychology of the witnesses and the social conditions that surround them. Human observers tend to see UAP while in their normal environment and in normal social groupings. They perceive the objects as non-conventional but they try to explain them away as common occurrences, until faced with the inescapable conclusion that the object is truly unknown.

Layer IV:

Physiological reactions are another significant level of information. The phenomenon is reported to cause effects perceived by humans as:

sounds (beeping, buzzing, humming, sharp/piercing whistling, swooshing/air rushing, loud/deafening roaring, sound of a storm, etc.) vibrations burns partial paralysis (inability to move muscles) extreme heat or cold sensation odors (powerful, sweet or strange fragrance, rotten eggs, sulphurous, pungent, musky, etc.) metallic taste pricklings temporary blindness when directly exposed to the objects’ light nausea bloody nose and/or ears; severe headache difficulty in breathing loss of volition severe drowsiness in the days following a close encounter

Layer V:

The fifth category of effects can only be labeled psychic because it involves a class of phenomena commonly found in the literature of parapsychology, such as:

impressions of communication without a direct sensory channel poltergeist phenomena: motions and sounds without a specific cause, outside the observed presence of a UAP levitation of the witness or of objects and animals in the vicinity maneuvers of a UAP appearing to anticipate the witness’ thoughts premonitory dreams or visions personality changes promoting unusual abilities in the witness healing

Layer VI:

The sixth and last category could be called cultural. It is concerned with society’s reactions to the reports, the way in which secondary effects (hoaxes, fiction and science-fiction imagery, scientific theories, cover-up or exposure, media censorship or publicity, sensationalism, etc.) become generated, and the attitude of members of a given culture towards the concepts that UAP observations appear to challenge. In the United States the greatest impact of the phenomenon has been on general acceptance of the idea of life in space and a more limited, but potentially very significant, change in the popular concept of non-human intelligence. In earlier cultures, such as medieval Europe or Portugal in the early years of the 20th century, the cultural context of anomalous observations was strongly colored by religious beliefs.