The ARV story is chaff; misdirection to fill the void with something semi-plausible, at least to some degree of consistency, yet whilst only providing bumsteer. The UFO equivalent of red mercury. Visitors' craft are obviously surrounded by some kind of glowing orb phenomenon, commonly assumed to be plasma; superficially, consistent with application of a high electric field density, sufficient to exceed the breakdown density of the surrounding air molecules. Thus, so the logic goes, generating warp fields must have something to do with powerful electric fields.
Of course we're being asked to walk the plank there however - so far as the standard field equations are concerned, the electric field density required to cause such significant yet highly-localised spacetime deformations as we're seeing could only be contained by a miniature black hole; it's circular logic. But even the plasma ball hypothesis doesn't hold up to basic logic - we predominantly see orange / white hues - the former might imply helium, but that's only a trace element in air, and besides, we'd then need to invoke a conserved supply of different gases to ionise for every other colour of the spectrum these things can rapidly cycle through. Air's 70% nitrogen, which fluoresces violet from the combined preponderance of red and blue-wavelength electron shell transitions - the familiar colour or electrical arcing. Even worse for the plasma theory are the results of diffraction spectroscopy, revealing a continuous spectrum consistent with sun or starlight, or the CMBR, as opposed to the discrete line spectra of specific fluorescing elements. See the Hessdalen example for instance. Then of course there's the fact that these orbs persist underwater, or out in space. So for starters, UAP glow is not ionised gases! Some ionisation is occurring, but as an effect of the light, rather than its cause; this is due to the +UV components of these broad-spectrum emissions, forming ionising radiation that for instance breaks up O2 which then preferentially de-excites by forming O3 rather than by releasing a photon, and thus responsible for the 'pungent' or 'chlorine' odour of ozone often reported in the vicinity of sightings. This likewise accounts for the many instances of skin, eye and hair damage, shorting of exposed electrical equipments, plant and soil damage (O3 blocking leaf stromata, inhibiting respiration and in turn causing lasting carbon-depletion of the underlying soil microbiome). The most consistent explanation for this light production that can be formulated from what is currently known is that it is Casimir radiation from the interface of curved and flat spacetimes - akin to Unruh radiation, but in this case the thermal bath effect is produced by relative compression of the Planck length, blue-shifting of the enclosed volume of virtual photonsphere along with shrinking of its coordinate space, as opposed to observer acceleration. In essence it's the familiar heat-pump principle, wherein the 'heat' is the EM four-potential and the 'gas', spacetime. Squeezing spacetime makes it glow, like. It adds relativistic momentum and energy to virtual photons, causing the vacuum to begin expressing real photons of all wavelengths, per Casimir. This is why UAP glow is continuous-spectrum, and persists in space and underwater: it is stimulated emission of radiation from vacuum caused by the second law of thermodynamics trying to equilibrate between the enclosed value of raised false-vacuum, and ambient; the two disparate values of vacuum potential in close proximity immediately around the craft. It is thus environmental energy flowing almost incidentally around the craft like a kind of vacuum-wake, rather than energy being dissipated by or lost to the craft themselves (which for their part likely operate at or above the Carnot efficiency limit, as long implicated by Mr Robert Lazar esq). It is biased towards the longer-wavelength, redder end of the spectrum (thus warm-white) by the conservation of energy, bluer photons requiring more energy so being less common. AKA a Planck distribution. This is why UAP can be captured using cheap IR monoculars from Amazon, since even when not emitting at visible wavelengths, they're almost-inevitably still producing an IR signature (i've filmed dozens myself this last year). But just as electric field density alone cannot explain such extreme spacetime manipulations - it's all very well attributing spontaneous EM radiation to them, if we still can't explain how they're produced - more to the point, we cannot explain UAP warpfields within the confines of the standard field equations and mass-energy density alone. We need some kind of conceptual leap or bridgehead that can be reconciled with much stronger spacetime deformations at much shorter ranges, and at much more modest (and practical!) mass-energy densities.. This too has been provided by Lazar: the strong nuclear force reduces to an effective curvature of spacetime, only much stronger and much shorter-ranged, a la 'gravity A' as compared to our more-familiar and weaker gravity B (apparently MJ12's working terms not Lazar's own neologism). Of course we currently formulate the nuclear binding force in terms of virtual charged pion exchanges, as a tertiary effect of the more-fundamental quark-gluon interaction holding nucleons themselves together. You'd think, since we can design working fusion bombs and fission reactors, that this model would be pretty close to reality by now, yet Sonia Bacca's recent work on energising helium nuclei - the simplest example of nuclear binding - showed that the current standard model was unable to predict the maximum stable radius with greater-than-chance accuracy! We're evidently in a stop-gap solution, then.. epicycles and phlogiston. Led astray by the particle zoo. If there is merit to particle formulations of the strong nuclear binding force, our guests are demonstrating greater merit in a more classical resolution along the lines of Hestenes et al derivation of electron mass, evidently having resolved what we regard in terms of second-order QCD effects with SR and GR.. They don't have a 'quantum theory of gravity', so much as a relativistic theory of quanta..! The proposition is thus, that under certain circumstances the field we regard as the strong nuclear binding force can be extruded out via amplifying waveguides to enshroud a craft in a conformal bubble of much denser spacetime (not quark-gluon plasma!). Words may struggle to convey just how much stronger a curvature of spacetime we're talking about here - you'll see plenty examples of gravitational lensing and of course that ubiquitous warm-white glow, but to really get a sense of what's at the heart of it, consider the following capture: youtube.com/watch?v=5uPouoZhYFA&t=2288s - note the red and blue wavelength-shifting either side of the event horizon there, consistent with spin-Doppler or frame-dragging about a vertical axis.. forget about your ropey M-81 pics; here's the real deal, in 1080p at point-blank range and hovering over a suburban street. Why isn't it sucking in all around it, like a violent puncture in the atmosphere? Because the strong nuclear force only has a range of some 2.5 femtometers - about twice the proton width - hence the surrounding air molecules are effectively neatly brushed up against an ordinary solid, and in no more danger of falling into their own atomic nuclei; this gravity well steep enough to trap light, cordoned off from the rest of the world by ordinary electrostatic repulsion, Pauli exclusion and degeneracy pressure. This black hole might as well be on the other side of the universe, but for its brilliant aura of Casimir radiation here. One person, exclusively, predicted we might see such objects.. Bob Lazar, and decades ago! So even if Lazar made the whole thing up and strung together a winning sequence of lucky guesses, he's still hit the jackpot. No one else has bridged that conceptual void that's left Alcubierre et al adrift. I don't know if element 115 is critical or might be substituted by some exotic condensed-matter species or whatevs, only that this correlation of the strong nuclear force with gravity is the only framework that delivers the goods consistently, the only game in town AFAIK. Going back to basics, all we need is an attractive force with a scaling function greater than that of the Coulomb repulsion (ie. cubing rather than squaring with proximity for example); this produces the core effect of protons / neutrons attracting only when approaching close enough (that femtometer range). On the balance of knowns / unknowns, that's not a big ask, to me.. Should we then treat his other revelations with equal merit of esteem (such as the claims of orientation material suggesting we're basically Frankenstein's monster)? All i know is, he's the only one expounding a warpfield theory consistent with the abundance of available video and observational evidence. Maybe there's more than one way to skin a cat here, but the ARV story's big on claims while short on physics.. Lazar's physics OTOH - more recently explicated by Riccardo Storti (check him out!) - are meat-and-potatoes propositions..
