Tuesday, December 12, 2006

Orthoteny lives!

o.jpg

Aime Michel’s hypothesis that flying saucers travel(led) in straight lines was and is a fascinating concept, discounted by some but never really examined thoroughly by scientists or “ufologists.”

But here is an experimental model you can try for yourself, if you believe that UFOs still exist and still show up now and again in the firmament.

When a (supposed) UFO is spotted, one can expect a second sighting two days later, somewhere.

But if you plot the distance between the two sightings, you can determine where a third sighting will take place by doubling the distance between the first two sightings, along a straight line extended from the first two sightings.

And you can determine the time of the third sighting because it will happen seven or eleven days after the second sighting.

(Why the third sighting takes place seven or eleven days after the second sighting, or the second sighting two days after the first sighting is not clear by any means; it just is the case.)

Yes, this is not quantum measurement since, as Heisenberg postulated, one cannot know, simultaneously, both the exact position and speed (momentum) of a quantum artifact.

In the orthotenic equation here, quantum is eschewed and classical physics, or a simple mathematical model, are employed.

(Some UFO events are not quantum events, as we’ve indicated elsewhere.)

The orthoteny principle of Michel works and can be tested. Unfortunately, “ufologists’ are short on testing hypotheses and long on rant-filled, non-substantive refutation when their belief systems are challenged or questioned.

Nonetheless, Aime Michel was on to something, and a disciplined scrutiny of UFO sightings – those that are apparently still occurring – will follow the pattern(s) outlined here.

3 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Please post data used to come up with your theory -

December 14, 2006  
Blogger Charles said...

Below are a few links to related research related to orthoteny principle. Of those listed below Roy Dutton's work seems most impressive. It is my understanding that Dr. Steven Greer (of Disclosure project)supplemented his research by using Roy Dutton's work in vectoring in crafts... towards his Rapid Mobilization Investigative Teams (RMIT). In addition, Roy Dutton and colleague Edward Ashpole submitted an essay paper to the "National Institute for Discovery Science" as part of a global essay competition concerning the theoretical surveillance of our planet by an ET civilisation. The essay called "The Scientific Search for Evidence of Extraterrestrial Intelligence in the Solar System" won joint first prize and more information regarding the criteria and objectives of the competition can be found at the "National Institute for Discovery Science" web site http://www.accessnv.com/nids/essay.shtml.. For you convenience I have listed several links below regarding Mr. Duttons and others research.

http://www.worldgrid.net/About/About-Bruce-Cathie.htm
http://www.geocities.com/ufoiru/

December 15, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This simply is not true. For a start, Michels lines were all at random angles - like a bunch of sticks dropped onto a flat surface. In contrast, Cathie drew verical and horizontal lines to split map areas up into squares. He claimed UFOs had to travel along the lines. His system of orthoteny was completly different.

Other researchers have found that the UFO sightings on lines that Michel used were no greater than would be expected by chance, taking into consideration the number of sightings and the number and length of lines used.

Another problem is that Cathie derived some of his line positions by plotting the courses of bright meteors that travelled the length of New Zealand. They were not (nomatter how much he wanted them to be) UFOs. All sightings of misidentified aircraft, balloons, etc. need to be removed from the data sample before one can start plotting positions.

Lastly, in a large number of UFO sightings it is very difficult to know the exact distance from the observer that the UFO is. Plotted positions are actually of the observer and not the UFO. To get greater accuracy, only sighting where the UFO is known to be within 100 metres of the witness should be used. This was not the case with Michel or Cathie.

December 17, 2006  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home