A Fundamental Explanation of UAPs

The reason we made a website for this is due to its importance and to inform everyone. Share it!
We present a theory of how UAPs work that explains everything we can all observe about them.
By understanding them, we can also explain their origin and nature.

The structure of this page follows the scientific method.
Hypothesis -> Predictions -> Experiment / Observation


Updating Your Expectations to the Current State Research

Given the nature of the topic discussed here, we wish to make something very clear to everyone. The stigma surrounding the topic of UAPs and their potential non-mundane explanation is outdated and should have started to go away with the discovery of habitable exoplanets. Our capability to find such planets is so new that no one has had time to update their views and expectations.

As Richard Feynman said, “it is scientific only to say what is more likely or less likely.” We can now say there are 6 billion Earth-like planets in our galaxy alone. What’s more, in 2020, 24 planets were identified to be more habitable than the Earth, which is 0.6% of all the planets currently known. Applied to the whole galaxy, this leads us to expect in the order of 1 billion super habitable planets, which is one such planet per 200 stars. As we now understand, the galaxy is not only vast in size and time, but also habitable and super habitable planets. Even science-fiction, where we dare to dream freely, has completely underestimated the sheer abundance of habitable star systems.

The likelihood of a non-mundane explanation of some UAPs has increased so dramatically that it can no longer realistically be subject to ridicule without dismissing exoplanet research. Like many, the author of this website used to reject UAPs due to lack of convincing data and too much nonsense surrounding them. However, when the Pentagon and US Navy publicly acknowledged the reality of these objects, the conversation needed to change entirely.

On this website, we present a theory for the propulsion system of UAPs, which allows us to predict their motions, behaviors, and origin with surprising ease once we understand what these devices are actually doing. The data needed to come to a conclusion is already available and only required a theory to explain it.


  1. We present a theory and qualitative explanation for the physics of UAPs and discuss their likely origin.
  2. From the theory, we make a list of predictions that can be tested observationally. We want Navy personnel to be aware of these.
  3. We provide evidence of these observations within the data that is already available.
  4. For general readers, we have prepared additional pages with more detailed explanations of some of the physics involved.


In April 2020, the US defense department and Navy released three declassified UAP videos, which are also surrounded by information given by some of the Navy personnel involved in the incidents. This imparts a credibility to the reality of UAPs that did not exist prior to this time, and we can now accept the nature of the objects as a scientific topic of investigation. We assume this additional information to be factual since the Pentagon intended to “clear up misconceptions” and would hence not allow any personnel to confuse the public with a prank at the same time.

Understanding UAPs

Today, carrier strike groups track UAPs with multiple high-fidelity radar systems, infra-red systems, sonar systems (if they enter the water), and Navy personnel, all corroborating the information. A glitch within an individual system cannot occur across all platforms simultaneously in exactly the same way. From this, we know for sure how these objects move, their speed, and their accelerations. Modern radar systems provide 3D motion data across the entire battle space surrounding carrier strike groups. The videos so far officially released are only a small part of the information the Navy has available. Radar data on speed and maneuvers are far more useful than visually observed motions.

Yet there is only one piece of information we really need in order to figure out how UAPs work: their accelerations.

Visualization of the “Tic-Tac” engagement. Image Credit: Brian Bell

UAPs demonstrate linear accelerations within one second to speeds higher than ordinary aircraft. They are also able to maneuver around sharp angles.

Example: At one point during the 2004 “Tic Tac” incident, the UAP moved (on the radar) from 80,000 ft to various altitudes from 28,000 ft to 50 ft above sea level in 0.78 seconds. A motion in that time frame along, say, 60,000 ft distance yields accelerations above 12,000 g-forces and speeds above 100,000 mph if we assume half the distance was used to accelerate and the other half to decelerate.

Routinely, UAPs are measured and observed to suddenly move very quickly, starting at hundreds of g-forces to the extreme case as the one described above.

Our main insight is the following, as there is only one way the laws of physics will allow such motions. Since the accelerations are too large, they actually have to be zero. The way to make this happen is to move the craft along geodesics.

A spacetime geodesic, in short, is the trajectory an object will take if no external forces act on it. For a detailed explanation, see this page.

In Earth’s gravitational field, geodesics are either orbits or cannon ball trajectories (free fall). To get a UAP to move however its pilot intends, local geodesics near the craft would have to be created by a hypothetical engine that can locally distort the spacetime into the shape required. This would enable the UAP to freely fall along an intended trajectory. By doing so, no matter how it moves, the object itself would experience no accelerations at all.

Let us run with this insight and bring it to its logical conclusions.

Our Hypothesis

UAPs create local distortions in the spacetime surrounding them to produce geodesics along which they move acceleration-free.

For your motivation: Further down, we are going to derive a list of predictions from this statement and indeed find evidence of it in the footage that is already publicly available.

It is elegant that we do not need to deal with hundreds of possibilities, or thousands of engineering options. We are dealing with a fundamental law of nature. There is no way to stick atoms together into any craft that can get around this. Any massive craft under the apparent accelerations we see can only move on geodesics, or it is impossible.


This section is not trivial but not necessary to move forward. Its purpose is to give you a sense and appreciation of how an engine that distorts spacetime is likely going to work, even without knowing how to build one.

Although we are now discussing the distortion of spacetime with technology, it is fundamentally incorrect to come at this from a direction of general relativity. Relativity is useful in understanding the motions of UAPs and all of our later predictions but not how the engine may achieve it. We are much further along today in our understanding of spacetime than classical relativity.

In recent years, beginning with the work of Maldacena in 1997, we are starting to see how space works at the quantum level. It is no longer the case that we are entirely clueless of quantum gravity, though a complete theory is very far away and needs a lot more work. Despite the fact that a complete theory does not exist, we can see where the journey is headed.

Space turns out to be a network of quantum bits that are all entangled with each other (here’s a section of a program where this is explained). These bits correspond to the points of the space they describe, and the amount of entanglement between two bits determines how close their corresponding spacial points are. So we understand more about space and the distances in that space, which then also enables us to understand what motion actually is.

Here is a clip from a lecture by Sean Carroll where he explains this briefly to a general audience.

Gravitation (the curvature of spacetime) appears to be nothing else but a property of said quantum entanglement network that has to do with its entropy. Such formulations are beginning to be attempted, perhaps most famously by Verlinde. None of them are yet complete but, again, we can see where the journey is headed. Verlinde’s description has already been demonstrated to be more accurate than hypothetical dark matter, as it predicts additional gravity on galactic scales on its own. (Yes, you read right. Dark matter may not exist, as the additional gravity may turn out to be a quantum correction to general relativity). A lot more work needs to be done on this approach but we have been seeing for quite some time that gravity is going to have some type of an entropy explanation, as also discussed by Padmanabhan in various papers like this.

If we had a complete theory of quantum gravity (a complete description of the entanglement network) then we should be able to create technology to manipulate that network just as we can build quantum computers by knowing quantum mechanics. If you find the thought of a spacetime manipulating engine outlandish, note that quantum computers sound just as much like science fiction. These are computers that we, and copies of ourselves, build in many parallel universes, which we then link together via entangled quantum bits. When we pose that computer a problem, it parallelizes across all the computers in all these universes, work on their part of it, and at the end everyone gets the answer. With every additional quantum bit, we double the amount of universes and computers. We already have this technology!

Instead of thinking about this from the old classical perspective, you can now think of it from a quantum perspective. Instead of wastefully putting huge energies in particular places to warp the spacetime, we could instead very precisely and with much less energy manipulate the entanglement network, which is equivalent to changing the geometry of the spacetime.

This means that our hypothetical engine of UAPs is applied quantum gravity in the same way that a quantum computer is applied quantum mechanics. We do know geometries in general relativity that move at high speeds (including super luminal speed).

Note: Since we don’t yet have a quantum gravity theory, the only way for a country to make such crafts in secret is if they had thousands of brilliant physicists working in secret, a kind of second scientific community that no one knows about, who have figured out quantum gravity decades ago and even developed the tools to actually build applications of it. This is highly unlikely. If we can demonstrate that UAPs use such an engine, it also automatically demonstrates they are not man-made.


According to our hypothesis, UAPs are not flying. They are falling.

We are now going to turn this hypothesis into a theory by deriving predictions that we can test with observations.

As described above, our hypothesis is that UAPs create local distortions in the spacetime surrounding them to produce geodesics along which they move acceleration-free.

All of the predictions below follow from that single statement.

  1. UAPs can accelerate nearly immediately in (possibly) any direction due to them being in zero-g. They should be round or geometrical as there is no preferred forward-facing direction.
  2. UAPs can maneuver in sharp angles at high speeds for the same reason as above.
  3. UAPs are not in contact with the air because particles are moving along the curved geometry of the space surrounding them, avoiding the craft. Thus, UAPs can move without friction both in air and water, which they can enter and exit without impedance. They can move faster than would be possible for any craft that is in contact with the air or water.
  4. UAPs move very quietly or silently, unlike jets. Also, they may not create a sonic boom when going super sonic, though this is unclear since the air particles do get lifted around the distortion field, which likely puts some energy into them.
  5. Since UAPs use spacetime as their control surface, they neither require physical control surfaces like wings nor afterburners of any kind.
  6. We should see gravitational lensing around UAPs, especially if they are moving in front of a background. When the UAP maneuvers, it must change the geometry of the distortion field to change it’s trajectory. Thus, you should see the lensed environment change, and also the UAP should change its apparent shape.

Point 6 is the most important one. As light enters the distortion field, the light paths follow the curvature of the spacetime and exit at different angles.

You never see a UAP directly since you are always seeing it through the distortion field – like an object in a distorted glass container.

If the UAP wants to maneuver or change its speed, it must change the local distortion of the spacetime to create a different geodesic, so it falls into a different direction. We should then see the object change its shape because the light paths change with the field.

This is a critically important point and we have never seen anyone mention it before. UAPs should generally change their apparent shape as they maneuver. We are going to dissect this further below.

  1. UAPs can be made invisible from below by choosing the distortion field in such a way that light going down from the craft is lensed back up or to the sides. From those upwards positions, we should hence be able to see one or more mirages of the UAP if such a cloak is active.
  2. UAPs need to surround themselves with a uniform distortion field if they intend to emit a beam, either to scan the environment, map the ground, or attack. Otherwise, any beam would be lensed in some other direction rather than go where it is meant to go. This means their shape should be more clearly visible if a UAP were to, say, map the surface. Also, this means a UAP cannot be cloaked while it does such operations or beams would be lensed away.
  3. UAPs may appear like they are surrounded by glass. This is in part due to the gravitational lensing but also because of point 3. Since the air is moving around the object, it has an envelope of vacuum around it. Light moves from air into that pocket of vacuum and then back into the air as it exits. When light moves from air to vacuum, it gets partially reflected and refracted, just like entering glass or other media. At high altitudes, direct sunlight may be lensed, reflected and refracted to produce gleaming spots or rings around the UAP.
  4. UAPs should generally glow. The energy output of UAPs should be significant, causing the heated air to emit a visible thermal radiation. This, however, will depend on the design and speed of the craft. If a UAP is cloaked, it may run on low energy and speed to avoid detection. So we cannot rule out that it is possible to avoid the thermal radiation depending on circumstances or craft designs.
  5. Some UAPs should display conspicuous rotations before disappearing. Since the maximum speed of any craft needs its engine to run at maximum capacity, we expect a UAP to use all of its spacetime manipulating capability to accelerate to its top speed. But the engine is normally used to hold the object up against Earth’s gravity and to make maneuvers, which we can expect to require a particular orientation of the craft depending on its design (likely pointing the engine down or up). To switch from normal maneuvers to its top speed would then require the object to rotate towards the travel point in order to focus the engine in that direction, creating something akin to an Alcubierre metric, which is a geometry where spacetime is contracted in front of the craft and expanded behind it. At least with some UAP designs, in particular flat designs, we expect a rotation of the craft before a jump to top speeds. Spherical or cube shaped UAPs may not need this since the field generators can be placed all around the shape of the craft.

Observations & Verification

All of the predictions above follow from the design of the engine alone. The points we need to discuss the most are 6. and 7. as gravitational lensing is the best observable to demonstrate the nature of the propulsion system.

It is already known that when you look at a UAP, it is notoriously difficult to understand what shape it may be. We are going to understand this fully once we look at the best video evidence that its publicly available. Before we can get into it, we need to talk a little bit about gravitational lensing.

The hubble space telescope sees gravitational lensing all over the place. Galaxies create huge distortions in spacetime due to their presence and as light propagates through that field, light paths are bent before arriving at our camera. This produces two main types of distortions in the image of galaxies and stars.

Einstein Ring

Simulation of a black hole moving in front of a galaxy. The light is lensed around it in the form of a ring. Rings, or pieces of rings, are very commonly observed.

Einstein Cross

Another common occurrence are duplicates of the same object. The four lights on either side all show the same quasar who’s light gets lensed around a galaxy in the middle and comes to the camera from multiple sides.

Now, let’s look at some examples

An illustration of how an Einstein cross comes about. Different light paths get lensed by the galaxy in the way between the telescope and the light source.

A collection of Einstein crosses, all of which are duplicates of the same objects.

Lots of Einstein rings, or sections of rings, as galaxies are lensed into ring shapes.

Dissecting UAP Footage

2013 Aguadilla, Poerto Rico

We are going to analyze what is likely the best footage of a UAP available to the public. The video is uncut and shows over 3 minutes of footage of a UAP moving low over the surrounding area of Rafael Hernandez airport at relatively low speeds (around 100 mph) and eventually dives into the ocean (unimpededly), where a second UAP of the same apparent shape appears to be present.

Because of its low altitude, we can see the background behind the object and can look for the following effects: gravitational lensing of the background around the UAP, apparent shape-shifting of the UAP whenever it maneuvers due to changes in the distortion field, unimpeded motion through water, and partial invisibility.

This is a Homeland Security leaked thermal video from April 25th, 2013, 9:20 pm local time filmed by a DHC-8 Turboprop aircraft controlled by the US Customs and Border Protection. The video was obtained from an official source on October 20th, 2013, whose identity (for reasons of persecution) remained confidential. All frames of the video have been analyzed, dissected, and vetted to be real, and the information was corroborated by radar data and eyewitness accounts on the ground.

Below you find the original footage and an AI upscale we have done at 1080P. While AI upscaling does invent some pixels, the overall effects are the same. It also has its benefits.
1) You can spot many small effects that you missed in the low res video. You can then go back and look for it in the original footage.
2) The AI makes many soft lines in the background stronger, giving you a clearer view of lensing effects in the vicinity of the UAP.

Original low res footage

AI Upscale 1080P footage

1. Duplications

Remember that in order to navigate, the craft needs to change the geometry of the distortion field, thus changing the gravitational lense. This causes light from the object to be lensed towards or away from the camera in different ways, changing the apparent shape of the object.

During the video, you can see several moments where a mirage of the object appears right above it. Upon slow-motion inspection, we find the mirage appears out of thin air, being transparent at first and then becoming stronger, sometimes replacing the original shape of the craft entirely. These are akin to Einstein Crosses. We can also see that it shows up when the craft is moving a particular way (up and away from the observer) and it disappears once the craft changes its flight path (levels out) but it is difficult to see exactly due to the motion of the camera.

Here are several instances looped for you in order of their appearance.

With our theory, this is suddenly easy to understand and even predictable. As the object changes its flight path, the camera looks into a direction where a different view of the same object is visible. Light coming from one side of the object gets lensed around the distortion field and exits in the direction of the camera. We think this mirage is actually a view of the object that is occluded by the invisibility cloak. If you were to stand below the object, you could not see it, as the light going down is lensed away. This light goes elsewhere, likely diagonally up. When the object navigates in a direction away from the observer, this diagonal-up direction points towards the camera, so we may be seeing the distorted bottom of the craft – or some other area. There is evidence for this, as the craft gets smaller and sometimes turns almost invisible when it goes the other direction, in which case the camera is looking into the direction of the cloak (see further below).

As the object changes its flight path, the distortion field shifts and we see into a direction where another view of the object gets lensed into the camera direction. We see the mirage appear above the original apparent shape. It is clearly above the object, not part of it.

We are seeing two versions of the same object from two angles. The mirage at the top swallows and replaces the original apparent shape on the bottom.

Another instance where the original gets swapped out by a mirage as the object navigates differently.

2. Invisibility

As discussed before, UAPs should be able to use their propulsion technology to cloak themselves simply by choosing a geometry for the distortion field that lenses downward light away to the sides or up. This way, no or very little light can propagate down, making it invisible from below. This craft appears to have such a cloak active, which may also explain the strong distortions we are seeing. Since the craft is moving low over a populated area at speeds of around 100 mph, using such a cloak makes sense.

At many instances during the video, the camera is looking in the direction of the cloak. We see this in the form of the craft shrinking to a smaller size, often the size of a small dot, and sometimes disappearing altogether for one or two frames. Noticeably, the craft then suddenly reappears, which seems to coincide with it leveling out again. In particular, it appears to us that the shrinking occurs when the craft moves in the opposite way of when it duplicates. So if it moves in one direction, we see a mirage, which is simply another view of the craft that gets lensed towards the camera. If it moves the other direction, we are looking in the direction of the cloak, where less light is coming our way. Again, the motion of the camera can make this difficult to spot but this pattern repeats throughout the footage, making it rather predicable. This is what we expect since the distortion field should change the same way when certain maneuvers are made. Of course, no maneuver can be exact every time, and speed also changes, which means the distortion is never exactly identical either.

Object gets smaller, then larger again.

Object gets smaller, then larger as it changes its direction and a mirage appears.

Object is small and gets larger as it changes its direction and a mirage appears.

Object disappears and is replaced by a different view of itself (from a different angle) as it shifts its flight direction, thereby shifting the cloak momentarily in the direction of the camera.

Same as before. The object is replaced by a second view of itself. Change of direction is difficult to see due to motion of the camera.

Object becomes barely visible as it moves towards the sea. Sparse trees are in the area, which do not occlude the object. The viewing angle to the camera is different than before and might be in cloak direction. We are aware of eyewitness testimony taken on location, saying the object looked like a forward facing horseshoe and turned into a sphere as it moved to the sea.

3. Background Lensing

Since the UAP is seen from above, we can observe how light from background objects moves past it and get lensed. The entire video features such lensing effects but they require a keen eye and patience to spot as you go from frame to frame. When looking at the object moving, the glassy looking lens around it is noticeable best while it moves. Screenshots or slowed down loops don’t do it justice.

Note: in this thermal view, black his hot and white is cold. The object appears as hot as truck engines driving on the street, while the surrounding air is cooler, appearing whitish. Thermal camera systems like this generally sharpen the image, causing any whiteness surrounding objects to increase. This white rim is not the distortion field we are talking about, though it does get influenced by it.

Here is a small collection of noteworthy moments.

Lines on the field get bent as the UAP moves above them in our  line of sight. This is easily visible in the upscale as the AI makes the lines stronger but the same can be observed in the original low res footage. Circular bent lines and shapes are seen throughout the video.

As the object leaves the field, its dark edge appears to stick to the object. This is because light that would normally move past the object gets lensed around it and goes towards to camera.

The edge of the water of this lake gets seemingly squeezed as the object moves across it.

(Low res footage) – As the object enters this dark area, one frame perfectly catches it just above the line between light and dark. This line gets lensed around the object above and below and makes curved shapes. Also, the dark background lenses around the object and exits darker (hotter), making a darker ring.

(Upscaled footage) – Here we see the same scene in the upscaled footage.

A sketch of what we are focusing on in this clip. We have no way of knowing what the distortion field really looks like, though it is certainly more complicated than a simple, spherical field. However, we can see a clear lensing effect as though the light was simply moving around the object from this angle.

Observe the dark ring around the object. Lensing around the object is confined to a particular radius, which shows us the size of the distortion field. The dark ring is light coming from the object itself that gets lensed back to the camera.

4. Diving and Second Object

Near the end of the video, we see the object dive into the Atlantic and meet a second craft of the same apparent shape. The camera operator zooms in and we can see a clearer view of the object, appearing as multiple splotches that are connected to each other. What’s more, the object retains its heat and moves at roughly the same speed as it did in the air, demonstrating that the water does not impede its motions at all, something that would be impossible for any craft that is in contact with the surrounding air or fluid.

We note that in certain areas of the world, many locals, especially fishermen, have reported seeing such objects move in and out of the sea. Given that we now have video evidence of two such an object, we see that accounts from the public cannot simply be dismissed. While there are certainly hoaxes and mistakes, the reality of these objects means that people do, in fact, notice them and give real accounts. It calls into question how many eyewitness accounts may be actually real, especially given the large number of accounts over the last century.

The object enters the water without impedance. Some of parts of it appear to be glassy, possibly a feature of the cloak and showing the background, or because there are certain places on the object that are hot. As it enters, water has to move around the object, following the distortion field and occluding the view partially.

Moving right along the surface of the water, the bottom dark spot appearing like a reflection. All of the spots remain within a noticeable radius that seems to be surrounded by a transparent sphere, increasing the likelihood that we are seeing multiple angles of the same object. The field may have a complicated geometry.

The object enters the water quickly and without slowing down. It is further away from the observing aircraft than it was over the land. Water is moving around the craft, though it is difficult to spot due to its low temperature.

The object is moving fast under the surface of the water at around the same speed as it did in air.

The object emerges from the water without impedance and looks as though it is splitting in two.

We now see that it may be a second object of the same type and lensing pattern that is accompanying the first one. The two objects are moving together like wingmen, still appearing hot to the thermal camera. Before entering the water, the object seemed to consist of more dark spots than now, which suggests the object actually consisted of up to four UAPs locked together and moving as a single unit, which then split into two units of two UAPs each. This would explain the two distinct spots of each object unless they are just hot spots on a single object. Note that there is a moment where the top object is entirely invisible.

While the footage on land did not show these spots at all, we only began seeing them in the water because the camera operator zoomed in on it. A possible reason to use a union of multiple crafts is that one could hold the union up against gravity and do the navigation, while others use their distortion fields entirely to create the cloak. However, multiple field sources would interfere and cause the final distortion field to be messy. Since that field is the control surface of the object, it would end up moving in an erratic, uncontrolled fashion. The only way around this would be if the objects were truly locked together without moving relative to each other and functioning as a single device, all field generators controlled together by one computer when they are in that unified configuration. While either option does not change the observations from before, a union of multiple objects would demonstrate a much higher level of control and sophistication of this technology than previously thought. We are more inclined to regard these as two distinct objects with lensing and hots spots instead of a separated union.

FLIR Footage

One of the videos officially acknowledged to be real by the defense department is called FLIR, filmed by a system designed to automatically track fast moving objects, in particular missiles. Operators of such equipment state that in thousands of hours of using it, the system never looses track of objects. If it is mounted on a vehicle which hits a large enough rock, causing a sudden move of the vehicle and its camera, the camera may loose track momentarily. Below, we see several moments where the system looses track of the same UAP.

The object is tracked, then suddenly moves in a circle as if it had no inertia, and the FLIR system needs to regain its track. We expect such motions due to interference between Earth’s gravity well and the distortion field overlaying it.

The object hovers and suddenly accelerates to the left, causing the system to loose track again.

Slowed down to 10% of the original video’s speed, we see the object perform a vertical, diagonal motion at sudden high velocity, starting from a stand still. The object is moving so fast that it jumps from frame to frame as the frame rate of the camera is insufficient to capture the motion smoothly. Notably, as the object accelerates, it becomes blurry while still being tracked and still at that moment, pointing to a distortion field being generated to create the geodesic along which the object then moves.

The FLIR Video

Conclusions and the Origin of UAPs

The most striking predictions stemming from a gravitational engine have been demonstrated by the 2013 footage alone, such as gravitational lensing in exactly the way as we can expect. We observe mirages, invisibility, and unimpeded motion through water at high speeds. Furthermore, we have the FLIR footage and accounts of US Navy pilots and other military personnel, speaking of incredible accelerations and speeds, as well as observing objects that seem to be surrounded by glass.

All of the known observables (and more) of UAPs are explained by the single technology we have described in the beginning. At this point, gravitational lensing is a telltale sign for us to distinguish genuine UAPs from pranks or mistakes, not only because they are striking but also because this is a new theory and level of understanding. From what we have seen, no one has noticed or described it before, only noting unclear shapes or shape changes but never offering a fundamental explanation. Someone who creates a video prank is highly unlikely to even think of adding some sort of gravitational lensing, at least until this new explanation becomes widely known, which means we need to be aware of future prank videos featuring such effects to look more genuine.

Due to our lack of a complete theory of quantum gravity, no amount of clever engineering can close the gap to what has been observed not only in the video above but many additional videos and accounts over the course of decades which all fit this pattern and are explained by our theory.

If a foreign country had developed such technology in secret, it would have been done decades before the year 2000 since a completed craft existed during the 2004 “Tic Tac” incident. We have to conclude that the likelihood of these objects having an extraterrestrial origin is very near certain.

Given the large number of habitable and super-habitable exoplanets we are discovering, this seemingly non-mundane result is actually becoming ever more mundane. We note that it is much more extraordinary to suggest such technology was developed by any country at a time when our computers still used floppy discs. This opens up a world of data since no one’s accounts can be outright dismissed anymore. What’s more, the vastness of cosmic time scales demands that if they are here today, they have been for a long time and should have been noticed throughout history, which may explain the UAP accounts we have from classical antiquity.

About Our Remaining Predictions

  1. The accelerations were our initial hint that UAPs move along geodesics. It is a well established observation.
  2. Same as above. Note that sharp turns are not turns at all but local distortions of the spacetime along which the UAP is moving straight but they appear curved as seen from the reference frame of a distant observer.
  3. It is well known that UAPs routinely go into the ocean or emerge from it. Radar contact turns into sonar contact as the UAP enters the water. Unidentified Submerged Objects are a thing, as are Hyper Velocity Underwater Objects.
  4. UAPs are known to move silently as we would expect from a device not in touch with the air. This may likely include sonic booms but we have no conclusive evidence of that yet.
  5. Their geometric shapes without preferred forward direction are well established.
  6. See previous section.
  7. See previous section.
  8. There are multiple credible eyewitness accounts of this from military personnel, often for black triangular UAPs, some of which appear to map the surface as they move back in forth over areas in patterns.
  9. We are only aware of a very clear account by a Navy pilot who saw a “black cube surrounded by a sphere of glass”. Said sphere was simply the vacuum inside the distortion field. As light goes into the vacuum sphere, it refracts and reflects just like it would if it was a sphere of glass. This happens for light changing from any medium to another, including vacuum. For this to be visible, direct sunlight is likely required.
  10. The starlike thermal radiation around UAPs is well established. Slow moving UAPs, in particular those of different designs, appear to sometimes not glow but still exhibit heat around them (if one believes some witnesses that ended up with burns as they got to close to such an object).
  11. The UAP in the Gimbal video exhibits this exact behavior, which leads us to predict that it was about to jump to its top speed or other high speed. Conspicuously, the video cuts at this point, thus not showing the jump. If the object had continued to move mundanely, there would have been more footage and no reason to cut the video so suddenly after the rotation. But if the world saw the object suddenly disappear, everybody would know what it is and even the most biased person would have had no choice but to accept it. We must, therefore, point out that the nature of this craft is likely known to the camera operator and senior personnel that have access to the uncut video. See below:

The Gimbal Video

Appendix A: The Lima UAP

This UAP has been spotted multiple times in 2019 and 2020 over Lima, Peru. Videos and images have been taken both from an airliner and from the ground. It hovers for a while and eventually disappears in all instances.

We normally stay away from data supplied by the public as it is hard to gauge its validity. However, this case stood out to us due to multiple sources over much time, and because it seems to feature gravitational lensing.

Video by an airline pilot taken at high altitude.

Video taken from the ground a few days before the airline pilot’s video.

Photo from the ground.

Photo from the ground, slightly out of focus.

We see a dark spot in the middle, a glow ring around it, a dark ring, and another glow ring. While we don’t know what the exact geometry of the spacetime surrounding these crafts might be, it looks very much like gravitational lensing is happening here.

The point in the middle is most likely the actual UAP, or a piece of it. The glow around it is the normal glow because of the energy dumped into the air by the distortion field. We think the dark ring is actually an Einstein ring of the same object again, and the outer glow ring is a duplication of the inner glow ring. So the outer half of the object is nothing else but the inner half, as light from the sides gets lensed to the front.

Scroll to Top