Thursday, April 24, 2014

Electromagnetic Effects and Car Engines


I was doing some work for my book, The Government UFO Files, which is a cheap way to give it a plug and I noticed that I had included a sighting from November 23, 1957 made by an Air Force officer that included electro-magnetic effects. Given the discussions from the past several days, this case becomes relevant.

According to the story told by First Lieutenant Joseph F. Long, a pilot with the 321st Fighter-Inceptor Squadron, he was near Tonopah, Nevada when his car engine stalled. He reported:

… Attempts to restart the engine were unsuccessful, and SOURCE [Long] got out of his car to investigate the trouble. Outside the car he heard a steady high-pitched whining noise which drew his attention to four (4) disc-shaped objects that were sitting on the ground about 300 – 400 yards to the right of the highway. These objects were totally unlike anything he had ever seen, and he attempted to get closer for a better look at them. He walked for several minutes until he was to within approximately fifty (50) feet from the nearest object. The objects appeared identical and about fifty (50) feet in diameter. They were disc-shaped, emitting their own source of light which caused them to blow brightly. They were equipped with a translucent dome in the center of the top which was obviously not of the same material as the rest of the craft. The entire body of the objects emitted the light, they did not seem to be dark on the underside. They were equipped with three (3) landing gears each that appeared hemispherical in shape, about two (2) feet in diameter, and some dark material. Source estimated the height of the objects from the ground level to the top of the dome to be about ten (10) to fifteen (15) feet. The objects were equipped with a ring around the outside that was darker than the rest of the craft and was apparently rotating. When SOURCE got to within fifty (50) feet of the nearest object, the hum, which had been steady the air over since he first observed the objects, increased in pitch to a degree where it almost hurt his ears, and the objects lifted off the ground. The protruding gears were retracted immediately after take-off, the objects rose about fifty (50) feet into the air and proceeded slowly (about ten mph) to the north, across the highway, contoured over some small hills about half (½) mile away, and disappeared behind those hills. As the object passed directly over SOURCE, he observed no evidence of any smoke, exhaust, trail, heat, disturbance of the ground or terrain, or any visible outlines of landing gear doors, or any other outlines or openings on the bottom. The total time of the sighting lasted about (20) minutes. After the objects disappeared, SOURCE examined the place where he had first seen them on the ground. There was no evidence that any heat had been present, or that the ground had been disturbed in any other way than several very small impressions were very shallow and bowl-shaped, triangular in pattern (in equally sided triangles). SOURCE did not measure the distances between the impressions, but estimated it to be about eight (8) to ten (10) feet. After his investigation of the impressions, SOURCE returned to his car, and the engine started immediately and ran perfectly.


This is important simply because it was another example of someone reporting that the car stalled when the UFO was near, but that Long was able to restart it when the UFO was gone. Or, in other words, it didn’t spontaneously start. Long had to turn the key.

Yes, there is much more to this story, including a rather annoying assessment by Captain G. T. Gregory who was the chief of Project Blue Book at the time. He made the normal condescending statements about the witness because Long was a member of the Air Force Reserve. All that is laid out in The Government UFO Files.

As I say, I found this interesting because the car didn’t spontaneously start when the UFO disappeared. Long had to start it… which, of course, was the point of the post about Levelland. 

18 comments:

Joel Crook said...

PART 1

Here is a "battery event" from my father's papers [brackets "[]" indicate my edits]:

One Sunday afternoon, the date of which I am not sure but I think it was late summer or [the] fall of 1973 my wife and I went to the Antelope Valley [west of Lancaster California] and ended up at the "trash dump" [a specific location where people illegally dumped their garbage]. There was something fascinating about the place. We hiked around the place looking at all of the UFO "signs" and enjoyed the clean air and open spaces. When it was time to go home, the car wouldn't start.

The battery appeared to be completely dead. Now, there was not any light or other load switched on in the car and we had been there only a couple of hours. I recall one time when, at work, I left the headlights on all day and the car still started when I started home that night. Something else occurred to me-- My HP-35 scientific calculator was in the car but it had not been used since it had been charged. I checked it and found that the nickel cadmium rechargeable batteries were also dead. This had never happened before or since, either!

Finally, someone came by and gave us a jump start. By this time, it was almost dark. Usually, if a car battery is run down by some battery drain while the car is not running, as soon as the engine warms up, it is safe to turn on the headlights for the alternator will furnish enough power to charge the battery, power the ignition and operate the lights. After we had driven a reasonable distance, I switched on the lights and the engine died and we were back with the same problem as before.

It was now getting too dark to drive without lights. After a while, someone came along and gave us another jump start but I was afraid to turn on the lights again for fear the engine would stop again. The battery charge indicator indicated that the alternator was not charging. We had a battery operated lantern in the car and by holding the lantern out the left window, I started again at about 5 miles per hour. The lantern was very dim also, and it normally had a reasonably bright beam. We continued in this manner.

Continued in part 2

joel crook

Joel Crook said...

Part 2 of a battery event described in my father's papers. My edits or clarifications are in brackets "[]":

"Our destination was what was once a country schoolhouse on highway 138, about 10 miles or more from where we were stranded, which had a pay phone out front. From this phone, we called our son, [my older brother] and asked him to take the battery out of our other car and bring it to us there. When he arrived, we exchanged batteries and the car started immediately and the battery charged normally!

At the time, it was generally accepted by followers of UFO literature that UFOs have some means to stop electrical devices from operating, but I do not recall trying to reason out what had happened to us in any detail, and how it could have been connected to UFOs.

Much later I do remember reasoning that the one thing that could have explained what happened to our car was that some force had partially nullified the flow of electrical power over a small volume of space and controlling the amount of total current that could flow, so there was just enough to power the car’s ignition. Now in order to do this, the controlling agency would need to be invisible and traveling with us, and it was over 25 years before I could imagine that such a thing was possible.. I know that in order to control the flow of electric power, the Poynting (power flow) vector must be overcome. [note: this is where Mu Zero and E Zero come in]

The next day when I took the battery back to Sears to get it checked, the Sears technician was upset with me for wasting his time by bringing in an obviously charged and operational battery in to be checked!"

********

You will note that he did not "see" a UFO but experienced an effect of a UFO event. [there is the implication that there was something there they did not see] They had several other events occur to them at or near "the trash dump"... He had observed lights "emerging from the ground" in this area.

Some of the "effects" he had found at the trash dump were circular burn spots some with melted aluminum cans [a fire will not melt aluminum] and landing pad spots.

regards,

joel crook

Woody said...

Is it thought to be an actual act performed by crew-members of visiting alien spacecraft to point a beam or otherwise aim an effect upon a primitive internal combustion engine such as those operated by the locals of the planet? Or is it as I've often heard described, simply an effect created by the mere presence of the powerful electro-magnetic field of said spacecraft.
How many people reporting that, after the UFO moved away, their vehicle started running again as if restarted? Compared to those who found themselves able to start the engine again through normal means?
As much as I admire your will to ask and examine such questions to further knowledge of the subject, Kevin, a part of me assumes something. As proponents seem well within their rights to assume the direction and achievements that our existing but barely touched upon technologies will reach, can I assume that any species reaching the level of benign, exploratory, manned (or aliened) spacefaring trips, can start or stop such engines running from a distance as much as they please?
I'm curious but doubtful whether we can judge much about the magic that we endow upon unknown 'devices' (be it amazingly advanced technology or not).

Joel Crook said...

@ Woody:

>>" Or is it as I've often heard described, simply an effect created by the mere presence of the powerful electro-magnetic field of said spacecraft."<<

Whatever you heard, wherever you heard it simply is wrong -- they obviously know nothing about the science of EM fields...

regards....



Don said...

"We hiked around the place looking at all of the UFO "signs" and enjoyed the clean air and open spaces."

What are "UFO "signs"", and why are they in an dumpsite?

Regards,

Don

Terry the Censor said...

@Joel
> You will note that he did not "see" a UFO but experienced an effect of a UFO event.

Every mundane event that a human can't explain is therefore unseen aliens?

Anthony Mugan said...

Joel
I'm very sorry to have to say this but the case you present is amongst the simplest to solve I have ever seen in my life.
It does your father's memory no justice to broadcast these ideas.

As you know I often disapprove of the level of rigour in much of the debate on UFOs, and I'm perfectly capable of making mistakes and have certainly done so. I also disapprove of the emotional tone some commentators take and I have hesitated all day about writing this as I am truly sorry to cause offence.

Unfortunately it is better to be frank about this...or at least I hope it is and this isn't another of my mistakes

Joel Crook said...

Part 1:

@ Terry:

Oh? The battery stops working for no reason... along with a portible hand calculator at the same time?

@ Don:

Burn marks in "impossible places", *melted* aluminum cans [go look up the melting point of aluminum], triangular spaced "landing pad marks"

As for why at a dump site: modern archaeologists learn a long by digging through ancient dumps... imagine how much what might learn about a culture by digging through its trash.

@ Terry
what is mundane about a battery not working at all and the next day it is just fine? My father was not the kind of fellow to check the battery connects [he never went out there without a tool kit or jumper cables]. Now that we've checked off that he was not an idiot what explanation do you have for his vehicle not working in a place that apparently was regularly "visited" by "mystery lights that rose out of the desert floor"?

There seems to be a possibility that the 1993 Gulf Stream investigation where certain magnetic anomalies were measured after a UFO "disappeared into thin air" might give an indication as to some king of cloking technology. There has been some recent work [real science] in creating "meta materials" which can provide "cloaking effects" see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamaterial_cloaking

I am not saying that this is the case here but... given that my Father was not unaware of science and the scientific method I make the assumption that he had thought through the event and concluded that something "unnatural" was involved with the "discharged" batteries.

Joel Crook said...

part 2

@Anthony Mugan
And your solution is? That he was mistaken?

Let's clear something up so we can move on with a further consideration of his conclusions.

He was a consulting "Professional Engineer" registered in the State of California to provide "engineering services" [design, consulting, and implimentation] in electrical, electronic and mechanical engineering. He worked for among others, Douglas Aircraft [Missles systems] Ramo-Woolridge [Radars systems] , TRW Systems [electromagnetic space science experiments for detecting / measuring the solar plasma wind on numerous space science satellites, Degausing space craft, and designing the mechanical componets for an artificial heart], then he ran his own electronic testing, design and consulting company from 1972 to 2002. He was hired by Lockheed-Martin to build a very large Space Craft degaussing system [demagnetizing system so the space craft itself would not create distorted space science measurements]. In addition, in 1963 the designed and in 1969 patented a digital controlled transmission... the precursor to the modern "computer controlled transmission" and held at least four other patents.

So no your implication that he was an idiot that had bad battery cables or forgot to charge the calculator [hot damn that thing cost him $400+ when he bought it to replace his rosewood S+E slipstick... treated it better than me!] or forgot to change the batteries in the flashlight... or some other "normal" explanation does not hold water.

Joel Crook said...

part 3

Now that we've gotten rid of the mundane explanations, can you figure out why the battery would not work but the next day it was just fine?

While it is good to question and not take anything for face value it is also a bit dumb for some to pull "excuses out of thin air" do deny the testimony of a trained observer. Assuming that simple mistakes are set aside, and the observer is actually trained , how then should one evaluate a witnesses testimony?

If testimony of a witness is to be considered as "not valid" then in what areas are witness testimoney valid at all? We use untrained witnesses in criminal law and that seems to suit the Courts fine... and when observations are reported in science publications the authors are considered witnesses to the experiments. So at what point does witness testimony become "bad"? When an event does not fit with a "preconceived" notion of what is possible? If we assume that the witness observations were in some manner valid then what are we to make of observations which do not fit "every day" explanations?

I'm not talking about the Col. Corso's of the world who know nothing and make impossible or improbable claims... which does more harm than good... since his observations are "non-scientific" and only hearsay... What happens when a trained engineer makes observations? It's obvious: It didn't happen. He was mistaken, His ideas don't match a pre-selected answer... what if the observation was as reported? What then?

An untrained witness' untrained observation is enough to convict someone of murder but it is not good enough to state that for mysterious reasons at a particular location, where mysterious lights and other anomalous events were observed or occurred, that a car battery, a calculator battery and a flashlight all stopped functioning.

But that is the state of the work... an untrained skeptic can say "That's impossible!" and it seems to stick because untrained skeptics believe in their "religion of science" as much as some of the far-out believers in grey aliens from zeta reticuli... this leaves no room for serious science or investigation... which is what most of the actual scientists who might have made a difference have "left the field"... There id no point in having useless discussions with people that either a) think this is some real live science fiction "B" movie or b) are convinced that reality is a nice little prepackaged thing where in their version of science nothing "weird" ever happens... funny that. Science is built on maths that describes a reality we do not see and never will see... and the world described there just gets weirder and weirder.

I think it is rather pointless to try to walk a middle ground here. ETH is unprovable [even with corpses you've proved nothing] and at the same time the skeptics are living in the pre-Einstein / pre-quantum Newtonian universe of the 18th century where everything works like a clock... No point in trying to talk to people that are living in the past or people that are living in a "made-up" reality of conspiracies.

Regards everyone...

Anthony Mugan said...

Joel
a) the car battery
The alternator wasn't charging. A loose connection can create the kind if intermittent fault you describe
b) the calculator. Yes, it is possible that someone left in on and drained the batteries.

I'm sorry but this is a pointless waste of time. Invisible aliens leaving saucer signs in the garbage indeed!

I have more time for extreme sceptics. At least the have the use of making sure any ideas are sharpened up.

I don't think this is worth discussing any further

Anthony Mugan said...

In terms if the question of self starting engines...
This is purely speculative at put forward for discussion.
If I understand it correctly when a starter motor is engaged a current is applied to a solenoid with becomes an electromagnet. This physically engages the starter motor with the main engine and closes the contacts for the main current to turn the motor.

Could the EM field of the UFO occasionally act to engage the solenoid but with the higher resistance in the wiring discussed earlier prevent the car from starting until the external field withdraws?

Speculative and really needs some experimental data I know. Survey data such as those quoted by McCampbell in his 1983 paper suggest around 10% of cases only report this effect.

Thoughts???

David Rudiak said...

I think my problem with Joel is that his position seems to be "everybody is stupid except for my father, who was an EM god not to be questioned."

I have been going through the "saucer" papers of his father, which I am very glad Joel put online, as his father provided an experienced, different perspective on possible UFO physics from people like James McCampbell. (Gaines Crook's papers were written before Paul Hill's book came out posthumously. It would have been interesting to get his take on that. Hill was more of an unknown antigravity force guy than McCampbell, who thought many UFO effects might have conventional EM explanations.)

Joel should reread them, especially the parts where his father says that nobody can think of everything and he might have missed something when it comes to dismissing EM as a cause of this or that. Indeed, I have noticed a few things he DID get wrong.

E.g., on people being paralyzed by UFO encounters, he writes: "We know of no electromagnetic interaction that can cause a person to be paralyzed at a distance. This is not electromagnetic."

WRONG! People’s nerves most definitely CAN be stimulated remotely with powerful pulsed magnetic fields, a field I was involved in in the 1990s and know a great deal about. People obviously can also be electrically paralyzed with tasers by direct electrical stimulation of nerves and muscles. The same effect could in principle be achieved remotely with large, pulsed magnetic fields, which stimulate nerves indirectly through EM induction of currents. I also once read about a taser concept being developed utilizing a laser to ionize the air between the taser and the subject, the idea being to create a conductive path through the air rather than using wires. It apparently never came off, but the idea seems plausible. In fact, we do know of cases were people have been paralyzed and small burn marks were found on them. (The Brazilian saucer wave comes to mind.)

Your father also wrote: "Electromagnetics does not describe the manipulation of objects remotely, the levitation of objects... and manyother things which have been reported as associated with UFOs and called 'electromagnetic effects'."

That is mostly true but not entirely true, depending on exactly how its read. Humans now know how to manipulate very tiny objects remotely with laser light (look up "laser tweezers"). As for "levitation", this reminds me of Usenet debates I had in the 1990s when it was announced that things like frogs could be floated or levitated in a magnetic field. A skeptic, who claimed he had a PhD in physics, wrote it was an obvious hoax because he knew magnetism could do no such thing.

This PhD didn't know about the phenomenon of diamagnetism, which was the explanation, usually a small laboratory curiosity and often skipped over entirely in EM courses in undergraduate physics (that was the case with me anyway). Diamagnetism is a quantum effect of all materials that causes repulsion in a magnetic field, but is usually extremely small, EXCEPT in very large fields, which were used to float the frogs, goldfish, water blobs, etc.

It generally requires modern laboratory superconducting magnets. It also scales about as the square of the magnetic field, so repulsive forces greatly in excess of the 1G force required to float something can in principle be achieved (this could also act as an "inertial shield" to cancel most inertial forces from high acceleration). In fact, this conceivably would be one way UFO's might propel themselves in the atmosphere (and I don't mean by pushing off the Earth's magnetic field, which Gaines Crook dismisses, but there is another way which in principle could work).

We're here to put our collective ignorance together and maybe figure some things out. But that won't work if your position is "my father knew everything, he said what you say couldn't be done, and that's the end of it."

David Rudiak said...

Joel wrote:
I think it is rather pointless to try to walk a middle ground here. ETH is unprovable [even with corpses you've proved nothing] and at the same time the skeptics are living in the pre-Einstein / pre-quantum Newtonian universe of the 18th century where everything works like a clock... No point in trying to talk to people that are living in the past or people that are living in a "made-up" reality of conspiracies.

Jeez, Joel, I'm having a very hard time figuring out what your "middle ground" is supposed to be. It would seem because your all-knowing father didn't accept the ETH, people who think it viable "are living in a 'made-up' reality of conspiracies."

Apparently, not even corpses prove anything in your "middle ground" world. Really? At the very least, I would think experts should be able to determine if they have any relation to living things on Earth. In fact, this should be very easy to determine through biochemical analysis of DNA, proteins, etc., cell structure, comparative anatomy, isotope ratios. Not like anything on Earth, then not of this Earth, which leaves where for their origins exactly? Your "middle ground?" Or is it some "middle Earth" you believe in?

If you're going to propose some other reality or universe (really just other versions of the ETH), you better be prepared to defend that with concrete theories of how that could happen or how it could be tested. Otherwise, you would be just as guilty of invoking magical explanations as you seem to accuse others of using. In fact, your blanket acceptance of your father's belief that invisible UFOs caused electrical problems with his car and calculator, though conceivably possible, might also be interpreted as sort of a magical belief and a conspiracy mindset of its own.

Terry the Censor said...

@Joel
> what is mundane about a battery not working at all and the next day it is just fine?

What specifically makes that, by necessity, a "UFO event"?

As the others have pointed out, there are possible mundane causes. Doesn't make those explanations correct for the circumstances you describe, but it nixes the unwarranted leap of logic directly to UFOs.

Your absurdly arrogant response on Rich Reynold's blog was the typical defence of a crank.

http://ufocon.blogspot.ca/2014/04/none-of-this-speculation-gets-us-any.html#c8614188899805671909

Deeper Current Within said...

We are living in a physical universe. We need resources, the ET being more technologically dependent (& advanced) need even more resources. Our planet is a rare gem of a planet with a lot of resources biologically, like water, trees, minerals, blood, plasma, biological co factors.

As the free Briefings at http://alliesofhumanity.org/the-allies-of-humanity/ state & the http://www.AlienInvasion.org blog states, the Allies of Humanity's off planet observations show that the intentions of those races on our planet are here purely for access to resources, the Allies of Humanity state technological societies need more resources, technology creates more problems, & that being physical beings, they are clever & deceptive enough to tell us exactly what our psychology & thinking make us "prefer" or want to hear. To prepare people for this great evolutionary leap in Greater Community awareness & discernment, a preparation has been given.

The Allies' three sets of Briefings are part of the preparation for living in a Greater Community of intelligent life, the other critical part of it is the development of higher consciousness in a free book of pure spiritual meditation practice that is free online & geared towards discernment & inner guidance is www.StepsToKnowledge.com daily 365 Steps. Steps for me has been about coming to a point of personal revelation of who I am, why I am here in the world now, & whom I am here to meet. It is potent & has efficacy & resonates through the essence of all of the world's existing spiritual & religious traditions.

These ET being clever not barbaric take the long range approach that gets us to mine the planet for them, & non-hybrid real humans, they engineer a leadership layer to dupe the people & bring the planet to its knees, in war, division, competition & historical issues & tribal animosities, to take the planet down for them.

People's critical discernment skills are being disabled. This is not good for us & people are afraid to say anything, particularly the abductees about their real experience simply because they have been conditioned that "it is not good to do that" If more people would tell their real experience at the hands of these off planet forces, then the truth of the ET agenda & lack of ethics would begin to be common place and reverberate through the global mind-scape. This is truth, it must be shared & stated & experienced. Real experience trumps anything the mind could ever intellectually come up with, it is true, it was lived, it was felt, the person was affected during their abduction experience, often times permanently. Experience & developing the higher consciousness & getting educated on the objective ET literature, is really important I feel. Otherwise, being more concentrated in the mental environment, the ET are able to influence & persuade people mentally, altering the perceptions, logic & thoughts & behavior to effectively control them into thinking that this abduction & stealing of resources is intact a good thing. Which it is not, and a growing freedom & sovereignty movement worldwide is documenting this.

Terry the Censor said...

@Deeper Current Within
> As the free briefings state...

So many words! Have our alien allies given us a video briefing? Call me old-fashioned, but I need to see their faces to judge if they are genuine in intent... Surely, their superior tech has achieved the stage of motion pictures?

ufonalyzer said...

i just read that diesel engines are either immune or more resistant to UFO presence than spark plug engines due to no spark plugs. i find that interesting.