by Dino Kraspedon

Astro-Navigation

Q: Shall we one day be able to journey through space and visit other planets?

A: Yes, it will be possible, as it is, in fact, at present. There is now much talk on Earth of journeys through space and of conquering other worlds and their inhabitants but before running the tremendous risks involved, one needs to know all the laws which govern the planetary system and the peculiarities of each one of the planets. If one were ignorant of these laws one would be destroyed before leaving the rarefied matter that surrounds the Earth; and if we are to have the pleasure of being conquered we should hate to see you come to grief without having got beyond the gaseous envelope of your own planet! There is no visible doorway into space, but it is shut to those who are ignorant of the fundamental laws that govern it.

Knowledge is the key that opens it.

But in view of the state of Earthly knowledge, this is as yet an impossible dream. Science will not be able, in one fell swoop, to achieve the conquest of space when it knows nothing about what happens more than 300 miles up.

How do you think that man, who knows nothing of the forces which move and maintain the planets in space, can leave the Earth? This would be tantamount to a primitive savage building an aeroplane and flying.

To achieve this using fuel propellants is impractical for various reasons, if only because fuel is unnecessary. If the forces which operate in the planetary system were indeed those which terrestrial science claims them to be, the saucer would be attracted by the Sun or by the planets and in this case the law of inertia that maintains acceleration imparted to a body would not be valid. Even at this point science has gone wrong.

If one were to use fuel, a tremendous amount of it would be required in view of the time it would take for a craft of this type to reach another planet. Then there is the question of the return journey. This method is obviously impractical.

The difficulty facing the people of Earth is an illusory one. They need only to understand cosmic laws and everything will be made easy. If we have been able to understand them, you also will be able to.

Earth’s scientists have got their terminology mixed. It appeared to them that the only thing that could conceivably maintain the Earth in orbit and account for its revolution was solar attraction, so they based all their calculations on this. In reality the opposite is the case; the Sun exerts a repulsive force on the Earth. Further, as it was obvious to them that a body could not maintain itself in an orbit when acted upon by a single force, they impute miraculous qualities to centrifugal force, believing that it was the second force that held the planets in their orbits. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Even if centrifugal force did give the necessary balance to a planet, which it does not, there is one glaring omission in this theory, namely the force that impels a planet in a certain direction. They see that a planet is attracted, they also see that centrifugal force counterbalances this attraction, but they do not see that they have overlooked a third force which gives a planet movement. When one whirls a stone on the end of a string, the string represents the force of attraction and centrifugal force plays the part of repulsion, but the individual represents the third force which gives direction to the stone.

Your term is “centrifugal force,” which means to say that all the points in a body tend to fly away from the center. We put it differently. In our view all the points tend to follow a straight line in space in the direction of the impelling force and at a tangent to the equatorial plane of the body.

It is this interpretation of centrifugal force which gives direction to the saucer when we leave the Earth or any other planet. Without it there would be no interplanetary travel.

Now let us analyze the consequences of the terrestrial system based on solar attraction and repulsion through centrifugal force: if all the points of a body tried to fly away from the center, the force of solar attraction resisted by the centrifugal force would give rise to a loss of energy and the planet would become stationary.

We should also bear in mind that this loss of energy would be a double one as the Earth develops two kinds of centrifugal force, the first due to its orbital velocity, and the second due to its axial rotation. Work cannot be performed by a body without a source of power. If Earth itself were the source of the power, then the whole of physics, thermodynamics included, would be wrong.

This alone is sufficient to show the incorrectness of terrestrial astronomy, as a theory is only valid when it answers all the relevant problems involved…

Jupiter, with a mass 317 times greater than that of the Earth, should be subject to a far greater attraction than the Earth, yet the velocity in orbit is not high enough to counterbalance this and maintain it in orbit. This planet has a large mass and a low velocity. This being the case, either the orbital velocity of the Earth is too great for its mass, and it should be flung out of its orbit, or Jupiter’s is too low, and it should be drawn into the Sun.

Note that I give Jupiter’s mass as 317 times that of the Earth, so as not to differ from your estimate which is based on the force of attraction of the Sun against centrifugal force. This figure, however, is incorrect.

You might raise the objection that Jupiter, with its large mass, revolves in an outer orbit according to the theory that spheres of greater mass are said to be more subject to the action of centrifugal force. Against this we have the case of Mars which is smaller than the Earth, yet is farther from the Sun; or again, the planets beyond Jupiter which are smaller than it, and yet revolve at a tremendous distance from the Sun. Moreover their velocity in orbit is very low. So that does not make sense either.

The phenomena of Nature are simple and can easily be explained. The difficulties lie in the capacity of beings to analyze the facts, and they often elaborate complicated systems which are often quite ridiculous. There was one which lasted for some time which maintained that the Earth was held in space by elephants. If anyone had had the sense to ask what the elephants were standing on, this theory might have had a shorter life.

Nobody can equate problems without weighing all the factors which lead to their solution. Scientists forgot, when dealing with the movement of planets, that energy must have been used up as a result of solar attraction working against the two centrifugal forces mentioned. If no explanation was given as to the source of power necessary to sustain the movement–which in this case is what the elephants’ feet stand on–then it is because the problem was based on false premises.

In the theory which I contend is the correct one, this force is derived from difference of energy potential which sunlight sets up by illuminating one face of the planet while leaving the other m darkness. A body which is balanced between two opposing forces (attraction and repulsion) has no weight and moves like a stone whirled round on the end of a string, the radius of its orbit being represented by the string. All the mechanical phenomena of the Universe are explainable.

Q: There is one great difficulty you appear to forget. If there is any logic in your theory that planets can be maintained between the attraction of the magnetic center of our system and the repulsion by the light of the Sun, how can your theory be applied to satellites? For example, how can you reconcile these factors with the problem of the Moon’s movements?

A: By the theory of centrifugal force which is what I have not yet explained. Before showing you the solution I would like to point out the difficulties in the theory that Earth’s people have elaborated.

The Moon does not describe a truly circular orbit round the Earth. Sometimes it moves closer and other times it moves away. The distance between the planet and the satellite can vary by as much as 26,000 miles. If the Moon were maintained by the action of gravity against centrifugal force, its orbit should be perfectly circular and there being a balance of these two forces, the Moon would be unable to alter its distance from the Earth, unless there was some inconsistency in the laws of gravitation, which would be inadmissible. This does not take into consideration the fact that when it moves into close orbit, the balance is upset and the satellite should be drawn towards the Earth. The first satellite of Mars represents a curious phenomenon which completely negates your conception of the truth; while Mars completes its axial rotation in 24 hours 37 minutes, its satellite completes three revolutions round the planet, taking 7 hours 39 minutes per revolution.

We are thus back to where we started, wondering what supplies the force which enables the satellite to disobey the gravitational force of the planet and complete three revolutions instead of one. Even more curious is the behavior of the ninth, tenth and eleventh satellites of Jupiter, which utterly defy the laws of gravitation as you suppose them to be. Jupiter and its satellites move anti-clockwise, whereas the above three satellites move in the opposite direction.

I will now show you why the Moon is held in space without colliding with the planet; it is because it lies within the periphery of the etheric envelope which surrounds the Earth. There is a magnetic attraction between the two bodies, the poles of the Earth acting on the poles of the Moon and vice versa. While there is attraction between their magnetic fields, the two bodies themselves are repelled by solar light.

Q: How?

A: Sunlight is reflected from the Moon to Earth and from the Earth to the Moon. The combined reflective action of the two bodies supplies the necessary repulsive force to overcome the magnetic attraction. The result is that the satellite maintains itself in orbit. When the reflection of sunlight between the two bodies is greatest, the pressure increases and the Moon moves away from the Earth; when, however, the Moon is waning the reflection of light is less, which proportionally decreases the force of repulsion and the magnetic attraction increases so that the satellite moves closer to the Earth.

This variation causes the Moon to describe a perfect ellipse around the Earth. It is wrong to suppose that tides are caused by the attraction of the Moon. What happens is the exact opposite; this can be proved by observation. Sunlight reflected from the Moon exerts a pressure on the liquid mass of the ocean. Being compressed at one point, this liquid is raised up at another. This is the explanation of the retardation of tides caused by the Moon…

Q: Knowing all these things, how do you set about traveling though space, or better still, how should we go about it if we were to attempt to do so?

A: I explained to you how the atmosphere can be ionized by cathode rays. The ionized “bubble” is absorbed by the atmosphere creating a vacuum in its rear into which the saucer is drawn, thus rising upwards. Now, the Earth develops a surface speed of 1,040 mph, but no one feels it move. This means to say that if we continued to rise in relation to a point on the Earth’s surface we should be increasing our speed, but would have no sensation of acceleration. On reaching a height of 250,000 miles from the Earth’s surface we should, without any other effort than that of going upwards, reach a speed of 66,000 mph, which is equal to the speed of revolution of the planet in space. We neither see nor feel the speed we have reached as we have no point of reference; but if there were a stationary observer outside the etheric envelope, in which we have no sensation of speed, he would see us moving at a terrific angular velocity.

Having reached this speed we would try to escape from the etheric covering, falling into the vacuum. Due to the tendency of moving bodies to move in a straight line, we would leave the etheric envelope at a point at which the saucer, by following a straight line, would reach the planet we wanted to get to. The procedure would, of course, be different if we were using the “electric fluid” of the planet as our means of propulsion.

In order to explain one principle to you, I have had to omit another. I said “a straight line” in order to simplify the reasoning, but we have to, in fact, take into consideration the deflective action the forces of attraction and repulsion would have on us. We would, however, follow a rectilinear course because we have means of offsetting these differences. If we create a magnetic field with the powerful solenoids at our disposal, we should be attracted, and if we switch off the field, we should be repelled. That is why it is necessary to understand fully the laws of Nature, otherwise we would not reach any planet at all.

Also for the sake of simplicity I said that we leave the Earth at a speed of 66,000 mph. In practice the minimum escape velocity we use is 125,000 mph, of which 66,000 are supplied by the Earth and the difference by the speed developed by the saucer within the atmosphere. Sometimes we use even higher speeds which to you would seem incredible. Nature has resources which the people of Earth have not dreamed of.

Using a speed of 66,000 mph with which the Earth provides us gratis, it would be possible for people to attempt a journey through space and reach other planets, but there would be certain dangers due to loss of energy through solar repulsion. It should be noted that we move at right angles to the direction of solar repulsion. If we were to move in the same direction we should be impelled by it, and if we were to move in an opposite direction we should be repelled by it, in which case we would suffer a loss of kinetic energy. Therefore a higher speed is required, as the laws of inertia are valid to some extent. A pilot who is used to making these flights could do so using this low speed, but it would take him a long time. With a high escape velocity we only require fuel or other sources of energy in small quantities for use within the saucer.

We can completely disconnect the Crookes and Geissler tubes which bring about the atmospheric disturbance because we have no need for them. Once in a while they are used to deflect meteorites that we meet with en route. We generally connect them up when wandering meteorites appear on the screens of our detecting apparatus.

At a certain height above the Earth’s atmosphere a body begins to rotate violently. This fact has been observed by you countless times, and it is these same factors which cause the Earth to rotate. Under low atmospheric pressure a body illuminated on one face, with the other in darkness, tends to rotate on itself on an imaginary axis. This is a grave danger for the inexperienced for the same thing happens in space. In order to correct this we heat up that part of the craft which is away from the Sun, and this maintains our balance.

The principal technique in astro-navigation lies in establishing contact with the etheric covering of the planet we wish to reach. We must always approach the planet in the direction of its rotation. If we were to approach it counter to its rotation, our craft would be broken to pieces. For this reason we approach the etheric mass at a tangent, following the direction of its movement. Two bodies traveling in the same direction have no relative velocity; it is as though they were both stationary. Then the contact between them does not give rise to any friction.

I should also add that we have means of stopping and starting the saucer in space and, naturally, of increasing or diminishing its speed. If we were traveling at 175,000 mph it would be dangerous to make contact with the etheric covering of a planet with a low speed of rotation, even if this took place in the direction of its movement. In such cases we reduce speed until we are moving at the same speed as the etheric covering.

This is a convenient place to explain to you the phenomenon of meteorites which reach the planets. If they reach the etheric envelope against the direction of the planet’s rotation, they are broken to pieces, but if they come into it following the direction of rotation they sometimes manage to reach the surface of the planet. This, however, depends on the speed at which they reach the planet. If we go from Earth to Jupiter, we generally use Mars or Venus as staging posts, depending on the positions of the planets at the time.

In your case, as you would not have any reliable means of correcting your speed in space, you should, if you were to undertake a voyage to Jupiter, proceed as follows: Earth moves in orbit at 66,000 mph, Mars at 54,000 mph and Jupiter at 29,000 mph. The solution would be to use Mars as a staging post, and attain a speed identical to this planet’s rotation, that is to say 54,000 mph. A difference of 25,000 mph between your speed and that of the ether of the planet will not produce too great a friction. In order to prevent accidents the Geissler tubes should be switched on at the moment of contact in order to avoid as much friction as possible. With the velocity supplied by Mars, the journey could be continued to Jupiter, but the trip would take a long time.

No landing should be made on Jupiter itself, but on the satellites. The small etheric envelope makes contact very dangerous, unless the craft has its own means of deceleration in space. You should aim by preference for Ganymede, which has a large etheric envelope and atmosphere moving at a high speed. Io can also be recommended. It would be wrong for you to pass via Venus since this planet has a velocity of 77,000 mph and the difference between this speed and Jupiter’s would be too great.

Q: What would happen if we were to stop the craft? For example, if we approached a planet with only vertical acceleration and no horizontal acceleration?

A: You would only do this once, there would be no second time. You would be utterly destroyed. The shock would be of unparalleled intensity. It would be as though you were standing on a railway line and a train ran into you at high speed. We know because many of us made this mistake and died. It was also difficult for us to learn the secrets of space. You will not have these difficulties if you undertake a space journey one day, because we shall have told you the dangers that can dog the steps of the most courageous traveler.

You have only to listen to us and tell the pundits of Earth that it is wiser for an individual to profit by the experience of others than to reach the same result at the price of his own life. We are aware that you threaten to dominate and even to destroy us, but we do not wish to bring about your ruin that way. On the contrary, we would be sorry to see the people of Earth fail, as we are sorry about many of the things they do. We would prefer to see you as horsemen of space, holding the reins of a fiery chariot, or as intrepid sailors braving the turbulent seas of the Cosmos.

Maybe men would then come to understand the grandeur of the works of God who dispensed riches abundantly in every corner of the Universe, and see that there is no need to fight for land and lebensraum. To fight for these things shows an ignorance of the greatness of the Universe; man behaves like a turkey held within an imaginary circle, lacking the intelligence to see that he needs only to take a single step to freedom.

Maybe men would also cease destroying one another in warfare over some wretched oil wells which are no more important than holes in the ground. If they need energy, space sends it to them from all directions by means of cosmic rays. It is as though they were dying of thirst while sailing down the Amazon. They have only to lower a bucket into the water and fill it as often as they wish.

If they would cease making war, and live like rational beings, we would show them how to harness energy, be it atomic, solar, magnetic or cosmic energy. If they learn to be peace-loving and merciful, the elder brothers in the solar system will show them how to turn this Earth into a Garden of Eden.

Everyone is responsible for the misery and oppression in which he finds himself. If man changes his heart and makes up his mind to be merciful and good, he will at once have countless brothers at his side to help him, not to mention the help and joy from on High. Rest assured that the Father is more ready to give than the son is to ask.

If one day you should recount to others what I have told you, tell them that I, personally, in the name of the inhabitants of my planet, assure them if one day any country in the world decides to abandon destruction, I will come, together with thousands of others, to give them material help and moral support. Even if this should happen to a man instead of a country, we would still come to this man, and not a hair on his head would perish. We do not rely on our forces alone, but on the paramount power of the Universe, which always supports the efforts of beings who follow the right path.

At the moment the Great Powers of Earth are preparing to make war. In a few years their swords will be drawn, making a holocaust in honor of their Moloch, and a host of victims will fall to the self-interest of a few potentates who stop at nothing to gain their objectives, even at the cost of many living. Human blindness is deplorable. Men preach peace but destroy the Earth; they talk of love and perpetrate deeds of hatred; they believe in progress but disregard finer feelings, becoming worse than beasts.

However, we are ready to help you with all our resources, asking for nothing in return save the right to call each other friends. We are not interested in your raw materials, because we can obtain them at will by transmutation. We would like to see your Earth and land in your cities, to live together with the people and enjoy their company. If we were in too much of a hurry to come down, we would greet you with a friendly dip of the wing. You would come to us and be able to live in our world, making use of all that we have, because in our society, all goods are held in common. Among us the only currency is brotherhood.

Excerpt from My Contact With Flying Saucers

See Part I here. See Part II here.