The U.S. Air Force, Anti-Gravitation & UFO’s


Until now such revelations have scarcely ever triggered off any waves in the realm of theoretical physics, and shortly you will understand why this is so. On the other hand, there is good reason to think that they might be taken seriously in Intelligence circles, but I fear that the latter do not perceive the extremely grave implications that follow from it.

For matters aren’t as simple as they might appear, and these revelations need to be examined from a critical point of view that, it seems to me, has scarecely been taken into account until now.

The problem which is posed is this: Is it realistic to believe that, via the distribution of countless sums of dollars to feed planned ultra-secret research, the discovery of the theoretical physics of antigravity (not to speak of its practical application) could be achieved in any reasonable period, starting out from the fundamental basics of our terrestrial science, without the rest of the scientific community knowing about it, and, above all, without the appearance of any prior signs of a crisis in physics obliging us to modify or enlarge those basics? I insist that the answer is NO. And here is why:

Far too often people confuse fundamental physics and applied physics (the latter leading to industrial applications). This confusion carries with it the risk of leading too many responsible politicians and Military to cite the example of, say, the Manhattan Project, in support of the idea that, simply by “going all out” on a project, the Americans are capable of achieving a decisive breakthrough within a reasonable period of time, and yet still keep all the research secret.

Well now, the Manhattan project was in fact merely a technological project to build the atomic bomb. Certainly it was indeed gigantic for that period, but in no way whatsoever did it call into question the very foundations of theoretical physics. Quite to the contrary, it was entirely founded on them and, more precisely, on the theoretical principle of the equivalence of mass and energy (E = mc^2) which derives from Einstein’s Restricted Relativity, added to which was the experimental fact of the chain-reaction of neutrons in a critical mass of uranium or plutonium, discovered already as early as 1939 and known to all atomic physicists from the start of World War II onwards.

If there was a secret, it was initially the secret of the nature of the project itself. After that, it was the secret of the techniques to be developed in order to achieve it: the separation of the uranium isotopes, the manufacture of the plutonium, the experimental determination of the critical mass (which cost the lives of several researchers who died from radiation, etc).

It was possible to keep such a technological piece of research as that secret for a period -which was in any case only limited by maintaining all the different branches of it so compartmentalised that only those who had conceived the project knew what the final objective was.

BUT, on the contrary, the development of a system of antigravitational propulsion would imply that its theoretical bases have already been discovered! At the present time the theoretical bases are completely unknown to terrestrial physicists (even though some may suspect that they do know what they are) for the simple reason that they apparently do not derive from the bases of our own established physics, and at first sight seem to contradict them.

In the three-dimensional model of Space (which is the visible Universe in which we live) “gravity” -which Newton called “the force of attraction” of masses of matter is inherently present in these masses which, in the modern framework of General Relativity, actually bend the “geodetics” of Space-Time (i.e. the trajectories of the mass bodies) as though a “force” were being applied to these bodies.

All matter attracts other matter in this fashion, deforming Space-Time, and today we know that even antimatter, in our universe, is attractive, and not repulsive, as at one time was thought.

General Relativity is evidently not the last word in science, even if up till now it has been confirmed with great precision by numerous consequences that one can deduce from it. It is possible that tomorrow certain experimental tests may produce a set-back for it. But we aren’t at that point.

Moreover, quite a number of variations of the theory have now been proposed, still within the framework of a Universe of three dimensions. None of them has prevailed over the rest so far, but in any case all of them retain this fundamental property of the gravitational effect being inherent in mass. Moreover, the new attempts at the modelisation of spatial complexes with a Universe of several “leaves” (such as Dr Jean-Pierre Petit’s idea of twin universes which would permit the discovery of spatio-temporal short-cuts for travelling in space) still retain this fundamental property of gravity.

So -at first sight- gravity does not seem at present likely to be cancelled out by any means whatsoever in the present state of our best established theoretical knowledge, unless it were possible to cancel out mass itself, which is nonsense. In fact, however, certain physicists do suspect that there may be a way out which would amount to considering gravitation as a consequence of electromagnetism, and not as a separate force on its own. Whence comes the idea that certain electromagnetic devices would enable weight (i.e. attraction) to be nullified without, of course, nullifying mass. (Maybe this explains why the journalists who talk about the Air Force’s secret projects always mention “research on electrogravity”.)

Among the known attempts made in this direction by certain university researchers, some have turned out to be mathematically erroneous. Others are not open to the same charge, but under no circumstances can they lay claim of being a structured scientific theory analogous to Relativity or to the Quantum Theory:

At the very most (Puthoff, Haisch) they are exploratory perspectives that are more qualitative than mathematically established, and still totally unsuited for experimental exploration, and even less for an industrial one.


Such -in short- is the present state of the knowledge of the academic community of the world on this matter. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that an experimental plan, and an experiment, are said to have been carried out in 1992 by Podkletnov and Vuorinen of the Tempere University in Finland. These two authors are said to have produced an antigravitic effect yielding a 2% reduction in weight of objects placed above a core of superconductive ceramic in rapid rotation. (New Scientist, Sept 21, 1996).

No explanatory theory for the phenomenon was furnished by the authors who, curiously enough, were refused publication of their paper in the Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, despite the contrary judgement of the three referees commissioned to examine it. Podkletnov is said to have claimed that he was subjected to pressure not to divulge anything before a patent for commercial exploitation had been issued.


Just as Nuclear Physics is not a chapter in chemistry, but transcends chemistry, so the physics of tomorrow will transcend General Relativity (or the improved theory that in the near future will replace it). Maybe a so-called “unitary theory” will finally be worked out which will reconcile gravitation and quantum mechanics, and will be the prelude to a new scientific revolution opening the way to the electromagnetic concept of antigravitation. At present this concept remains outside of the classic bases of the physics that is taught, and is not truly on the agenda in the institutes of theoretical physics.

Such a revolution, of importance at least equal to the importance of General Relativity or Quantum Mechanics, could not take place in some university’s theoretical physics laboratory without being known throughout the entire world, because all the specialists in these matters know each other personally, exchange ideas, publish their papers, and meet each other at international congresses.

This is the very condition required for their creativity. To impose secrecy on those of them who would get contracts with the Armed Forces would be both prejudicial to that creativity, and totally unrealistic.

The research worker in theoretical physics does his job with paper, a pencil, his intuitive sense, and his mastery of his mathematical tools, and also -nowadays- a computer for testing numerically the results derived from his models. He has to let his ideas ripen slowly and freely. And the minute he finds something he has to tell about it.

As one of my colleagues said to me one day: “It is more difficult to confine a theoretician to his office than antimatter to a bottle!”


Leave a Reply