The UFO Iconoclast(s)

Sunday, August 08, 2010

ROSWELL, BATTELLE & MEMORY METAL: The New Revelations by Anthony Bragalia

Copyright 2010, InterAmerica, Inc. [Permission needed to reproduce this material verbatim. Fair Use excerpts allowed, of course, but link to piece is preferred.]


Recent discoveries confirm the connection between the esteemed Battelle Memorial Institute and the study of extraterrestrial material. This new information helps to substantiate the astonishing truth: In the late 1940s Battelle was contracted by Wright Patterson Air Force Base to study "memory metal" like the debris that was found at the site of a crashed UFO at Roswell, NM. This was first detailed in a widely-read series of articles appearing last year [in this blog, which you can find in the archives here]:

Roswell Debris Confirmed as ET: Lab Located, Scientists Named Roswell Metal Scientist: The Curious Dr. Cross
The Final Secrets of Roswell's Memory Metal Revealed
Scientist Admits to Study of Roswell Debris

Some of this information was also related as a concluding chapter in the revised edition of "Witness to Roswell" by authors Tom Carey and Don Schmitt released in 2009.

It is a remarkable but complex story that continues to unfold. In the intervening year, work by a team of individuals has continued to pursue additional leads on the Roswell-Battelle connection. The results are revealed here for the first time. Critics of the Roswell-Battelle premise will be answered and their concerns about previously-published information will be addressed.

New findings that help to corroborate the Battelle analysis of ET debris are provided in telling interviews with those who directly knew the involved Battelle scientists. Additional clues are uncovered by a careful examination of the two previously "missing" Battelle Progress Reports from the late 1940s on novel metal systems that were finally uncovered through FOIA. Other findings are made by an investigation of Battelle's Executive Director at the time of the Roswell crash and on Battelle's continuing work on memory metal.



The intense interest in this aspect of the crash incident is because it speaks to Roswell's "Holy Grail"- physical evidence. If the crash occurred, the debris had to have been studied. It is likely that the "materials of construction" (i.e. the metal-like debris) would have been more easily studied than an entire craft or system. Though we may not now be able to fully comprehend their transport systems, we may be able to more easily understand - and try to replicate - the materials that comprise them.

Some of the Roswell crash material was reported by several credible witnesses to have had the ability to "morph" or change back to its original shape (shape recovery). This "intelligent metal" material is today known as Shape Memory Alloy. The best example of this is a material is comprised of Titanium and Nickel and is called "Nitinol." The concept of engineered shape recovery is a thoroughly "post-Roswell" concept. All major work in creating products with "material memory" was performed post-Roswell. And all of this work was initially directed by the US Government. Shape Memory Alloy is distinctly "Roswellian" and mimics in many respects some of the debris at Roswell.

And consider this: On the face of it, why would elderly witnesses ever even mention such a bizarre thing as "memory metal" in the first place? How many of these rural New Mexicans would have ever heard of "Nitinol" back when the crash happened - or even in later years - when they recounted their stories? What would give these independent witnesses - who were separated by distance and time- the idea to all simultaneously tell the bizarre story of having seen "morphing metal" debris at Roswell? The very fact that they describe shape-memory metal - without having likely ever been aware that such a thing as Nitinol - is in itself very telling.

In summary form, the story about Battelle, Nitinol and Roswell is this:

* In the months immediately following the Roswell crash, the Air Force contracted Battelle Memorial Institute to perform first-ever work on novel Titanium alloys. This included work on development of Titanium and Nickel alloy- the basis for "memory metal" today, and similar to some of the debris reported at Roswell.

* Four Wright-Patterson sponsored technical studies on "memory metal" in later decades cited a 1949 Battelle report on Nickel and Titanium (NiTi) alloy. Nickel and Titanium are used to create "Nitinol" - the premiere "memory metal" on the planet. The fact that the 1949 report was referenced in shape-recovery alloy research years later shows that somehow the Battelle report had a direct application and association to the memory metal subject. An earlier 1948 report was also uncovered that dealt with similar materials issues.

* The Battelle study was conducted under secret contract and was directed by Wright Patterson Air Force Base. Wright Patterson is the very base to which the Roswell debris was reportedly flown.

* The Battelle study was co-authored by a Battelle scientist who later confessed that he had personally analyzed ET debris from a fallen UFO while at the Institute. That he was a co-author of the Battelle 1949 study was discovered many years after the scientist's confession, when the Battelle reports were obtained under FOIA.

* Wright Patterson General Arthur Exon confirmed that he understood that some of the Roswell debris included an alloy comprised of "specially processed Titanium" and another metal. Exon said that a battery of tests was performed and that the reports on this are "still around." This mirrors the Battelle work. Another USAF General, George Schulgen, wrote a secret draft memo four months after the Roswell crash on UFOs - including a section on their "Items of Construction." Schulgen mentions "composite construction" using a "combination of metals" using "unusual fabrication methods." Schulgen is speaking of what we today call "intermetallics" - and Nitinol is a perfect example of intermetallics.

* The Battelle scientist who worked on this late 1940's report (who later had confessed that he had analyzed ET debris) was supervised by one Dr. Howard Cross. Dr. Cross (a metallurgist and Titanium expert who worked closely with the Navy where Nitinol was "officially" discovered) was also a secret UFO researcher for the Air Force's Project Blue Book and a secret UFO document called the "Pentacle Memo." He was also called upon to investigate other cases of unknown fallen debris and had unusual access to the heads of the CIA, the Air Force and the predecessor organization to NASA.

* Nitinol's "official" history is false. The year of its discovery is unclear; different reasons were offered as to why it was developed; and there are different explanations given for the circumstances surrounding its discovery at the US Naval Lab. The official "co-inventor" of Nitinol was interviewed by this author and was cagey about several matters related to the development of the material. This co-inventor was found to have been involved in bizarre "Mind over Matter" tests in which a key Naval scientist had recruited psychic Uri Geller to try to get Geller to "bend the metal with his mind." The elderly Nitinol scientist was silent when I mentioned the Roswell -impetus for his work and said "I have no comment on that. I am not going to discuss it." He may not have direct knowledge, but he must surely have wondered. He agreed that he was given a Battelle 1949 report with a phase diagram for use in the study of Nitinol, but would not disclose who in military or intelligence gave it to him. It has recently been learned that through theoretical physicist Dr. Jack Sarfatti that Eldon Byrd, the scientist who did the Nitinol Mind-over-Matter experiments with the co-inventor of Nitinol, "got into trouble and nearly got his ass handed to him on a platter by the administration of the Naval Surface Warfare Center for publicizing the laboratory connection with the experiments." Sarfatti made this incredible statement in an e-mail to researcher Bruce Maccabbee found archived on the Net dated March 15, 2006.

* Battelle seemed to control the fate of Nitinol after its "discovery" at the US Naval Labs. NASA -working with Battelle - also has been shown to have immediately taken over direction of further "characterization" studies of the material (a fact that Wang's Nitinol co-inventor, William Buehler, complained about in an oral history.) Uri Geller himself told me that NASA personnel were also present at the laboratory when the Navy was testing him on Nitinol mind-bending.



Battelle scientist Elroy John Center was a preeminent materials scientist and engineer. His contributions to the field are now known to have been major. His work is distinguished by over twenty years of discovery in materials and alloys, including breakthough work in developing analysis techniques. But Center is also distinguished for two other things:

Elroy Center confessed to having analyzed material from another world while at Battelle. Then incredibly, decades later, he was learned to have co-authored the very Battelle Progress Reports found through FOIA that were suspected to relate to the Roswell crash!

As a Chemical Engineer and Research Chemist, Center knew that (as General Exon said) the material had "special processing." It was engineered metal that was not from Earth. Center's focus was on developing new techniques for the micro-analysis of novel Titanium alloys which could be the basis for "memory metal." He contributed to an extended phase diagram of Nickel-Titanium. Center's story is told more completely in "Scientist Admits to Study of Roswell Debris" [in the archive files here].

Several new things have recently been learned about Elroy Center, and they are told here publicly for the first time:

As reported previously, Dr. Irena Scott (formerly of Battelle) had been told by a friend of Center's in 1991 that he had decades earlier been related the story of UFO debris analysis by Center. We can now reveal that this friend has been identified, located and interviewed. The name of the individual who told Dr. Scott the Center story is "Nick" Nickerson. Incredibly we find that Nickerson was himself a Battelle scientist for nearly twenty years, specializing in physics and electronics practice areas. He held Top Secret Clearance, holds several U.S. Patents for novel laser and other designs, and has achieved high recognition for his technical achievements. Though Nickerson was a very young man when Center told him that he had been tasked to undertake the debris analysis - Nickerson's credibility cannot be questioned. He was himself later employed by the same organization that Elroy Center was - and was himself highly awarded. He speaks calmly and with no embellishment. He has nothing to gain from this whatsoever. In fact, Nickerson was sought out by me. He did not "come forward." Understandably, his friend Dr. Irena Scott did not wish to reveal his name to me. Herculean efforts were used to deduce just who the man was who had talked to Elroy Center those decades ago.

Additionally, Nickerson (who had become interested in UFO study in part due to his talk with Center) later associated himself as an investigator with the civilian research group NICAP. Nickerson exposed the famous Zanesville, Ohio "Barber's Photo" UFO hoax, obtaining a confession from the barber that he had faked the pictures. Nickerson detests falsehood and worked to expose such in the world of UFOs. He is telling the truth about Center. When interviewed by this author, he added much additional information:

* Nickerson confirmed the details of what he had told Dr. Irena Scott nearly two decades ago: Center had directly and privately told him that he had analyzed a strange metal piece that he did not believe to be earthly and that he understood was from a downed UFO. Center did mention hieroglyphic-like markings.

* Dr. Irena Scott, formerly of Battelle,who first related the Center story (and with whom I have talked) also believes that Nickerson is telling the truth.

* A current and decades-long Battelle executive, William Jones, the Senior Contracting Officer for Federal Projects at the Institute, was told the same story by Nickerson many years ago. Jones also believes that Nickerson is telling the truth.

* Nickerson was a very curious young man who had interest in cosmic science. He had engaged Center (who had by then already left Battelle) in a talk outside the house that led to a discussion of the possibiity of the extraterrestrial. This is when Center cryptically related the details of his encounter with ET debris at Battelle. It is probable that Center - in a weak moment- privately told a young man the ET story because he knew that Nickerson would never be believed if ever he repeated it because of his youth. Center also probably believed that the young Nickerson would never jeopardize Center as he was his daughter's close friend. He was sure that Nickerson would keep the story related private. And Nickerson did in fact keep it private until the year after Center died.

* Center said that the material was kept is a secure safe with limited access

* Center seemed lucid and truthful, but was cryptic and brief. Nickerson had no reason to disbelieve him.

* Nickerson (himself a former Battelle "insider") believes that it is most likely that Battelle was engaged in such ET debris analysis. He knows the Insitute had a deep relationship with the US Government. It had the proximity to Wright and it had the talent, equipment and resources needed to study the Roswell debris.

* He says that there were other indications of Battelle having been contracted to study UFOs- even into the 1970s. He maintains that a Battelle superior told him that the CIA was still, at that time. involved in secret UFO studies - as was the Institute.

* One elderly Battelle Project Manager, who worked on Blue Book who was still at the Institute when Nickerson was employed there, refused to discuss his work on Project Blue Book, even though it was many years later and Nickerson had security clearances.



I have also communicated directly with family of Elroy John Center. Out of respect for privacy I will say that Center's daughter is highly-regarded within a major religious organization and I am loath to question her veracity. She did not come forward, but she was sought out and approached. What she says is stunning and helps to confirm the truth:

* Her father John ("Elroy" was rarely used in the home) did indeed have a very strong interest in UFOs and in things ET.

* Center's interest was so strong that he apparently went out on UFO hunts and even took a black and white photo of a UFO.

* The photo her father took appeared to be like a strange "domed disk" and was snapped by Center over a dam on the Scoto River in Ohio.

* Center had studied Battelle's UFO work on Project Blue Book at the time it was being conducted (although Battelle had not yet been publicly named at time as a contributor to the Project.) Center's daughter said that the Battelle UFO reports - or copies - were brought to her home and that her father had reviewed them. She strengthens the idea that (like Battelle's Dr. Howard Cross, Center's boss) select metallurgical scientists were simultaneously involved in UFO study at the Institute.

* Center was visited often at their home by an FBI agent whom she recalls was named "Jack." The subject of their deep discussions: UFOs.

* She was not aware of her father's private communication with her friend Nickerson until many years later. She is disappointed that her father had never told her the same story and wonders why - but does not discount that Nickerson is genuinely relating what he was told by her father.

* She does however recall overhearing one evening what might have provided the explanation as to why she herself was not told. Her father was overheard to say to her mother, while discussing UFO studies: "Whatever you do, don't tell her. She is too curious and excitable."

* After his time at Battelle, Center continued in an emotional and physical "downward spiral" and became a shell of what he once had been.

* Center's daughter, a highly-educated woman herself. holds out the distinct possibility that we are not alone in the Universe and does not find the Battelle scenario improbable, though she still expresses wonder at how it all could be.



Elroy Center reported to Dr. Lynn Eastwood, who in turn reported to one Dr. Howard Clinton Cross. The HC Cross story is told more fully here: Roswell Metal Scientist: The Curious Dr. Cross [in the archive files here].

Cross was a research expert at Battelle and employed there just a few years after the Institute's inception until the mid-1960s. He was a recognized expert in novel alloy development, had a special interest in advanced Titanium alloys and worked closely with the Office of Naval Research (where Nitinol was developed).

But Cross was no "mere metallurgist." In his strange "dual life" he was also secretly engaged by the US Government to conduct UFO studies for Project Blue Book and other studies. He even offered suggestions to the USAF Air Materiel Command on how to deal with the phenomena in his famous "Pentacle Memo." Cross had close working relationships with the CIA's Marshall Chadwell and Fred Durant, NACA/NASA and Wright Patterson's Chief of Analysis on UFO matters. Cross was once called upon to give his expert opinion on a fallen piece of debris from an unknown object at the request of a US Naval Commander. All the while he was working with people like Elroy Center on alloy development at Battelle.

Cross was also insistent on secrecy and privacy. He did not favor Battelle's name being mentioned in the Blue Book report, developing a code-word for it. He even physically snatched his "Pentacle Memo" on UFOs out of the hands of stunned USAF Investigator, Dr. J. Allen Hynek. (Apparently Cross was also a very intimidating man.)

This author interviewed someone who would confirm that fact, someone who actually knew Howard Cross while she was employed at Battelle herself: Ms. Jennie Ziedman. Ziedman was also for some years the personal assistant to Dr. J. Allen Hynek - the Air Force's UFO expert. She was also a CUFOs Board Member. Jennie - a delightful and highly knowledgeable woman - herself provided support to Project Blue Book in the 1950s. She knew many of the involved scientists.

Jennie characterized Dr. Cross to me as "frightful." People were actually afraid of him and many got nervous in the presence of Dr. Cross. Cross was known to be physically imposing and this would even show expansively in his actions. He would often bang tables, instilling fear in those around him. This parallels the way that Cross was reported to have physically accosted Dr. Hynek in lunging and grabbing back from him the Pentacle Memo on UFOs that Cross had authored to Wright Patterson. Dr. Cross gave meaning to the term "mad scientist."

And Cross was not someone of whom you would "ask too many questions" because of his authoritative firmness. Cross was brilliant and respected - but alarming and not well-liked. Such a tough and ruthless man would be an ideal asset to the US military and intelligence in pursuit of insight into the crashed craft materials at Roswell. Cross could be assured to control and brow-beat those who worked on the project, keeping everything in line. You did not get a "warm and fuzzy" feeling from HC Cross. He was a man not to get too close to - a man who could be entrusted with many secrets.

Phil Klass, the infamous and now deceased UFO arch-skeptic, was aware of Jennie Zeidman's work at Battelle. Incredibly, even he theorized that Battelle would have been an extremely likely place to which such crash debris would be taken. He commented on it in the 1990s in his SUN newsletter: "If Battelle scientists did analyze the Roswell debris, their reports might still be classified "Top Secret" and Zeidman could not be told due to lack of the required security clearances." Klass perceptively continued, "SUN suggests that the General Accounting Office (GAO) which is investigating the Roswell crashed saucer claims pursue Battelle." The GAO never did.

Zeidman, who was at Battelle in the early 1950s, believes that it is possible that certain individuals were involved in ET analysis at Battelle. She stated: "During the 1940s and 1950s Battelle was surely one of the premier metallurgy research facilities in the world. Battelle was well established as a trusted and respected facility for Top Secret work including the Manhattan Project. Its staff included top metallurgists, welding technology experts, physical chemists and fuel application specialists. The supposition that Battelle analyzed Roswell UFO artifacts is a simple and obvious theory. William of Occam would have approved." Many years later Jennie conducted interviews with some elderly Battelle scientists from the time period. She said that to her surprise, though, none would admit to such ET analysis and seemed sincere. But Klass himself answers this with his comment that some were not told "due to lack of required security clearances." And perhaps Jeannie did not consider the obvious: maybe the scientists she talked to simply lied to her.

It is likely that only a very few at Battelle were engaged in such ET debris work. The "core group" (which included HC Cross) may have had it confirmed to them by Wright that the material was from a UFO crash. Others may have been told it was of Soviet origin - and only suspected its off-earth origin. Still others may never have had any actual exposure to the material, but only "picked up" on the work of those that did. They executed work (in areas like memory metal) even though they did not even realize the real impetus for their research.



The Battelle reports (Progress Reports I and II) were initially believed to have been "missing" due to Battelle, Wright and the Defense Technical Information Center not being able to find them despite repeated attempts. In 2009, reporter Billy Cox initiated a request for both reports. After many months and reminder inquiries, the 60 year-old "DOD Restricted" documents were located, reviewed for release and sent to Billy. Some of the report content was incomplete and illegible. In addition to the stunning fact that both of the previously missing Battelle reports were co-authored by Elroy Center (who confessed to ET debris analysis) several other things were distilled from the reports:

From Battelle's "Second Progress Report" (Contract AF No. 33 (038)-3736) we learned:

1) Battelle had suddenly - after the Roswell crash - undertaken to perfect melting and "metal mixing" techniques and to create purity-levels for Titanium never before attempted. (Ultra-high purity Titanium is required to make memory metal).

2) Elroy Center was applying his new techniques for micro-analysis of novel Titanium alloys.

3) First-ever attempts at alloying Titanium with Nickel and other metals were made, including an expanded Titanium-Nickel "Phase Diagram" - the recipe for memory metal.

4) The report examines other Ti alloys that were later investigated by Wright Patterson for shape-recovery potential (including TiZr)

5) "Elongation" and "Minimum Bend Radius" tests were performed, indicating possible interest in morph-potential. Wright's General Exon recounted to author Kevin Randle similar tests being conducted on the Roswell material.

6) One of the report's authors (Lynn Eastwood) had as his boss Battelle's UFO-involved Dr. Howard Cross. Eastwood supervised Elroy Center confessor to the crash.

Some months later Billy Cox also obtained Battelle's previously missing "First Progress Report" through FOIA requests:

From Battelle's "First Progress Report" on "Research and Development of Titanium Alloys" (Contract AF 33 (038) 3736) we learned:

1) The work of the First Progress Report was similar to that of the Second. First-time ever work on characterization, melting, purification and diagramming of novel Ti alloys were conducted.

2) The report's cover letter is signed by LW (Lynn) Eastwood, whose direct superior was UFO-involved Dr. Howard Cross. Eastwood supervised Elroy Center, who confessed to debris analysis.

3) The report was done at the request of one J.B. Johnson, Chief of the Metallurgy Division at Wright Field in 1947. J.B. Johnson was supervised by Major General LC Craigie, Director of USAF R&D and the Engineering Division. Craigie's personal pilot (Ben Games) was interviewed by this author and by reporter Billy Cox in 2008. Games states that he had personally flown Craigie to Roswell Army Air Field immediately after the crash and then flew him to visit with President Truman.

4) Johnson appears to have facilitated the delivery of the metal ingots for the Battelle study and to have directed the submission and order of the Progress Reports. Johnson's behind the scenes involvement indicates that these studies were of high priority and urgency.

5) Elroy Center's work on Titanium purity (essential to make memory metal) is amplified on by scientists Mallett, Thomas and Griffith. They cite the work of one EJ Chapin of the Metallurgy Division of the Naval Research Laboratories where Nitinol was later said to have been developed.

6) A major discrepancy is found in the report and appears in the following, "The present data do not justify further investigation of binary Titanium-Germanium or Titanium Nickel alloys." However, this was not the case. In Battelle's Second Progress Report, we find that work was indeed continued on Titanium-Nickel alloy, to include feverish work on an extended "phase diagram," methods for melting Titanium, developing purification and micro-analysis techniques, etc. This is more than curious and it seems to indicate that Wright Patterson in fact was hell-bent on having the work continued. In fact results of these continued studies appeared in its next report for Wright under Wright's direction and insistence.



I have been taken to task by some who naively believe that such reports would have a direct mention of ET artifacts. That is not the way such science would ever work. Science reports that directly mention ET would never fall into civilian hands. And the Battelle studies that have been discussed here are not ones that were done on the actual debris itself. They are 'extrapolated studies' that were performed based on what was learned prior about the material.

Somehow it was learned from the Roswell debris that specially-processed, highly-purified Titanium - in composite with other metal like Nickel and Zirconium - could exhibit the observed and desired Memory Metal effect. Its use would be applied in our flying machines, just as it was with ET. Wright's General Exon said very similar things.

And of course they would hide and parse out this work in secret, folding it into existing R&D at places like Battelle. Some working on this would know a little, some a lot, some nothing at all. Some would wonder. Over the decades, institutional memories would fade and wink out. Those originally involved passed on.

They were using terrestrial materials and techniques to understand new alloy dynamics. These Battelle Progress Reports represent the beginnings of study on how to translate what was learned prior about the Roswell memory material into applications for defense and aerospace. The information was artfully "folded into" existing aero-metals research to obfuscate and confuse the real impetus of these studies - Roswell. Boring technical reports would serve as the perfect guise - they would "blend in" the ET research with ongoing development of our own avionic and aeronautic materials work. Later the application of memory metal was extended to civilian applications (as found in bendable eyeglasses and in medical devices).



Clyde Williams was the Executive Director of Battelle at the time of the Roswell crash and also during Battelle's participation with the USAF on the Project Blue Book UFO study. Williams was very close to Dr. Howard Cross, Battelle's exotic alloy metallurgist and secret UFO researcher. Clyde Williams was also very interesting for several reasons:

* Williams had to have given the ultimate approval for Battelle participation in government UFO studies, as they had conducted for Project Blue Book. As Cross's boss, he had to have been aware of Cross' continued involvement in working with various US military and intelligence agencies (as Cross did) on the UFO phenomenon.

* Williams sat on the Board of Directors of the RAND Corporation in the 1940s and 50s while simultaneously serving as the Executive Director of Battelle. RAND is a government think-tank that, like Battelle, was at the time highly involved in the UFO research. See "Deep Secrets of a UFO Think Tank Revealed" [in the archive files here] to learn more about RAND's deep association with UFO study.

* Williams was very close with Nobel Laureate Dr. Linus Pauling. In a private letter it was discovered that Williams beseeched Pauling in the early 1950s (during the very time of Battelle's involvement in Government UFO studies) to lend his expertise on the subject of "Intermetallics." Williams wanted Pauling to visit him to discuss how Pauling could apply his breakthrough analytical techniques to novel intermetallics development. Nitinol and Shape Memory Alloys are the best examples of the "intermetallic" system. (Again, General Schulgen referred to such composite metal systems when discussing the "Items of Construction" of UFOs.) It was discovered by this author that Pauling was also a secret UFO investigator and had performed private analysis and research of the UFO phenomena. More on this can be learned by reading "UFOs and Vitamin C: Linus Pauling's Flying Saucer Secret" [in the archive files here].

* Williams had a personal interest in Intermetallics as well as other Roswell-relevant materials. A January 28, 1949 shows sudden and urgent interest in Titanium Optimization, Super High Temperature Heat Resistant Materials, Super-Tough Lightweight Alloys, Titanium Zirconium (a potential shape memory alloy) and on Nickel manipulation at high temperatures (Nickel combined with Titanium can create Nitinol). Of course such interests may well be resultant from "normal" aeronautical research - but the areas of interest - and the timing 18 months after the crash - also sound distinctly "Roswellian." But it of course also makes complete sense that any work on the Roswell debris would be skillfully "folded into" existing military research on "traditional" aeronautical or naval engineering projects of the time.

* Williams was especially close to Major General Harold E. Watson, the Commanding Officer of the USAF ATIC. A 1950 document shows that Watson retained Williams to assist on a Russian intelligence-gathering project of grave import to National Security. The seminal "Project Grudge" USAF study was prepared for General Watson, which he reviewed and approved. Just a little later, Battelle itself was retained by the USAF to contribute to Project Blue Book and other UFO studies.



Though today Battelle has expanded its suite of services beyond metallurgy, they remain active in the discipline. Battelle operates six of our United States National Laboratories and they remain very close to US military and intelligence agencies. Battelle often works through these National Labs, or through Universities, to continue work on novel alloy development, including on Nitinol and other memory metals. Battelle has published on Shape Memory throughout the intervening decades. Treatise titles have included: "The Development of Melting and Casting Procedures for Nitinol"; "NASA Special Report: 55-Nitinol Properties and Applications" and "The Preparation of Modified Nitinol Alloys." Nitinol co-inventor William Buehler complained in an oral history that right after they did their work on the material at the Naval Lab, "Battelle took it back" and worked with NASA on "further characterization studies."

Some of this memory metal work is done off-shore in less-visible Battelle labs located in places like Geneva, Switzerland. In the following document, we see the Institute is still working on novel binary Titanium alloys - six decades after Elroy Center's Progress Reports. Interestingly, in this study, they are seen trying to optimize alloyed Titanium without the use of Nickel (as found in Nitinol) to achieve a shape-memory effect:




Some of the critics of the Roswell-Battelle connection show that their "knowledge" of materials engineering - and the history of science - go about as far as consulting Wikipedia. Others, however, have brought up specific technical and historical issues about memory metal work that I am happy to address. Some of the criticisms - and their answers - appear below:

Work on "Memory Metal" Material Was Being Conducted Well Before Roswell, As Early as the 1930s

This is probably the most common objection leveled against my thesis. It is also fundamentally incorrect. Critics point out that such metal systems as AuCd and CuZn were observed as early as the 1930s to have transition or elasticity properties. But truth is that there was no "memory metal" in the 1930s. There are fundamental things that these critics do not seem to understand:

1) The simple fact is that since man began forging metal by fire, the state of metal was known to be "changeable" or "pliable." That however, is not "Shape Recovery" or "Shape Memory." These critics often have a problem comprehending technical meaning.

2) Critics also mistake metal "elasticity" "malleability" and "flex" with true "Shape Memory." The terms are not interchangeable. These other alloy examples offered by skeptics are simply not reflective of Nitinol's properties and characteristics. They do not represent - then or now - "memory metal" technology. Only Nitinol (and its newer relatives) return to its original shape as an "intelligent" or "adaptable" metal. It is the "Cadillac" of Shape Memory Alloys. Any prior observation of psuedo-elasticity, transition or malleability in other materials has no relation whatsoever to Nitinol. Such material features were at the time ignored or merely viewed as a by-product or lab curiosity.

3) Additionally, Nitinol requires the introduction of energy to create the morphing effect. Other examples offered of earlier metals systems do not work in this way.

4) Comparing such materials as AuCd to Nitinol is like comparing a stone tablet to a computer - they are frankly not even within the same universe. And the proof of this is that only Nitinol and post-Nitinol like alloys are today used in aero, medical and other applications. The examples offered by critics never found any major future use, as did Nitinol. And these inferior metal systems mentioned by critics never received the continued and intense scientific attention within research circles as does Nitinol (and its alloy relatives) today.

5) Only the Nickel-Titanium metal systems ever got the attention of US military

6) Only the Nickel-Titanium system explored by Battelle was seminal to Shape Memory work - and was later even cited in Wright-sponsored research on memory metal.

7) And I challenge the critics to demonstrate where earlier metal systems such as AuCd or CuZn could ever do (or were ever intended to do) what real shape-recovery does: Bend, twist or batter the material into any shape and make it return with tremendous force instantly to its original shape - remembering its original form. Because that is what Nitinol does. That, my critic friends, is the definition of Shape Memory Alloy. The sorry examples offered up by skeptics such as 1930s AuCd or CuZn metal systems that were fallen upon by Europeans become laughable relative to what true "memory metal" means. And the skeptics do not like this:

8) The fact remains that Shape Memory Alloy research is a distinctly post-Roswell development. Subsequent memory metal work by the US Government cited the late 1940s Battelle Progress Report to Wright Patterson that Elroy Center helped author. It is as simple as that.

9) Shape Memory Alloy research is a formalized discipline within Materials Science and Engineering. The metal systems mentioned by critics have nothing to do with that discipline. They bear no relation to the subject. By contrast, Nickel and Titanium (Nitinol) have everything to do with the discipline of Shape Memory research.

10) The very concept of shape-recovery, the understanding of its potential value and the application of such material came only after 1947 - not before. The history of science confirms this, despite what skeptics would like to maintain. There is simply no way of getting around it.

I will make my point graphically for them. Such examples of material systems offered by skeptics will never be able to do this:


Titanium is Not a "Mystery Metal" and Work on it Was for "Normal" Aeronautical Metals Applications

Some have suggested that I "overplay" and "mystify" the metal Titanium. What they fail to realize is this: Titanium was specifically mentioned by Wright Patterson's General Arthur Exon as a specially processed alloy found within some of the Roswell debris. And not coincidentally, specially melted and ultra-highly purified and alloyed Titanium is required to make Nitinol. Exon likely did not know that "specially processed Titanium alloy" is needed to create Nitinol, and his mention of it is telling.

Secondly, Titanium is an extraordinarily expensive metal even today. Prior to 1948, high-performance steels and aluminum were the preferred defense metals. An Air Force report in the Spring of 1947 stated that Titanium could be useful for aerospace applications- but its cost was considered prohibitive. But still, for some reason, the military interest in Titanium spiked in the years immediately following 1947. Technical papers on the metal spiked as well, according to the Industrial Arts Index. As Encyclopedia Britannica noted, "After 1947, Titanium changed from a laboratory curiosity into an important structural metal."

I am obviously well-aware that Titanium was used "terrestrially" for many years prior. It is of course not (in and of itself) a "mystical" material. But when it is specially processed (as General Exon said) and "fabricated in an unusual composite" (as General Schulgen said of some UFO metals) it can do some amazing things. The sudden and urgent interest in Titanium - purifying it, melting it, diagramming it, alloying it, testing it - and pouring $2.5 Billion into its development and application in one decade (1948-1958) is remarkable. It is frankly unprecedented in the history of materials science. The mention by Exon of the material, the timing of its sudden and intense study by Battelle so close after the crash and the amount of money expended on its exploitation in the 10 years after the crash are things that simply cannot be ignored.

Skeptic Tom Printy says that my mention of Battelle's UFO-involved metallurgist Dr. Howard Cross and his early "feeding" Titanium information to the Navy (where Nitinol was "officially" created) was overstated. Printy points out that the "Titanium Symposium" sponsored by the Office of Naval Research in December of 1948 (and which Cross helped to organize) was an open symposium whose proceedings became public - and that there was no "covert" agenda. Printy is right. Titanium - or symposiums on it - were not in and of themselves by any means "unusual."

But what Printy does not know - and what is "unusual" - is that the Opening Letter of that very Titanium Symposium was signed by a very revealing individual - Rear Admiral Thorwald Solberg. TA Solberg was the Chief of Naval Research in the late 1940s. This is where Nitinol was to be invented. But - like his friend Battelle's Dr. Cross - he was a metallurgist who was also a secret UFO investigator.

We see, in an April 1949 US Navy document, the report of a sighting near White Sands Proving Ground. The document came via the "Chief of Naval Research" who was Thorwald Solberg. In the very year that they were holding a Titanium Symposium, Solberg was working on the UFO mystery. Here is the document:


Incredibly, the document details the sighting of a UFO at White Sands that year by none other that CB Moore, the very Charles Moore who decades later became a shrill Roswell debunker for the Air Force declaring it was a Mogul balloon!

Why did metallurgists employed in Top Secret capacities like Cross and Solberg also have such deep involvement with UFOs? Skeptics do not wish to answer this fundamental question: what the hell are metallurgists doing deep-study of Flying Saucers? The answer is of course because there had to be those "in the know" with top clearances who studied the materials of construction of the craft.

The Ratio of the Nickel-To-Titanium Found in Nitinol is Not the Same as Found in the Battelle Report

I have never claimed that Nitinol itself it the Roswell debris. What I maintain is that the military development of the concept of Shape Recovery Alloys resulted from the discovery of the memory metal found at Roswell.

Nitinol represents our best attempt at replicating the debris at Roswell - and some of that debris contained novel Titanium alloys that were specially processed, as found in Nitinol. It is a distinction that I have made that has been consistently ignored by such skeptics.

Critics say that the approximate 50/50 ratio of Titanium to Nickel that is found in Nitinol is not the same as the ratio of the Titanium and Nickel system used in the Battelle Progress Report studies of the late 1940s. But again, I am not maintaining that the material at Roswell was identical to Nitinol.

That said, critics would do well to note that the latest advances in Nitinol-related research are in fact using Titanium and Nickel in widely varying percentages and sometimes include the addition of varying ratios of other elements to achieve the memory metal effect. An excellent example of this is shown in a 2008 paper by Dr. Glen Bigelow of NASA Glenn Research Center: "Effects of Palladium Content on Shape Memory Alloys." Shape memory is being achieved with Nickel, Titianium and the addition of Palladium at a level of 15% to 60%. A combination of as low as 34% Nickel and as high as 60% Titanium (with the inclusion of a rare earth element) achieved shape recovery. This was demonstrated by a recently filed Patent Application "NiTi Alloy Composed of Nickel, Titanium and at Least One Rare Earth Element" (J Carlson, et al.).

The Battelle-Roswell Connection is a Conspiratorial Case of "Connecting the Dots"

The critics say that I "connect dots" where none should be drawn. They say that all of this information offered reflect individual data points that have been mixed together to paint a picture of a conspiracy. Unto them I quote Shakepeare: "While you here do snoring lie, open-eyed conspiracy doth take."

You must be sharp to discern the tangled web that has been woven. No document you will ever see will outright declare that ET metal is here. Instead, one must carefully examine the contracts, connections and context of Shape Recovery research to understand its relation to Roswell. Like a sleuth, one must "back-track" the emergence of shape-memory metal. If one does this by studying its history, the documents that are available to us and the testimony of those involved - the truth becomes evident. It was astronaut Edgar Mitchell that said that the material had been in the hands of a quasi-public think tank of former military that had the required expertise and resources. Does he speak of a place like Battelle?



The Universe is not carved in stone. Existence can be shaped. The morph requires composite construction. It needs something to "morph with." It also requires the introduction of energy. Matter then has the potential to change state. The lesson of the ET metal - and the morphing UFO - is that our world is less rigid than we know. Things like space, time and matter are infinitely more flexible than we can yet imagine.

There is a "plasticity" to reality that shows that matter is not immutable. This is necessary for interstellar flight. The Morphing Metals demonstrate this fluidity. And the psychic experiments that were performed by the Navy on Nitinol show that there is also a relationship to be discovered about the mind and its interface with such adaptable, intelligent material. What Roswell's "changing metal" means is that we must change our understanding of energy and the states of matter.


  • This is the clearest and most compelling piece in the series. It literally demands mainstream media attention.
    The history of titanium itself merits mention. I made these points earlier in a blog unrelated to the metal debate, but I think they provide essential support. Today titanium is ubiquitous, but in 1947, it was only a laboratory curiosity. Titanium was never commercially produced until late 1948 . . . . by Manhattan Project contractor DuPont. The entire titanium industry was developed around US military demand for titanium for advanced aircraft.
    Let's look at titanium production:
    1945-a few pounds
    1947-two tons
    1951-500 tons
    1954-5000 tons
    1956-35000 tons (projected)
    "The exponential growth of metallic titanium production is unparalleled in the history of metallurgy."
    It is as if someone in government said, after decades of wood and then steel aircraft manufacture, it's titanium! The metal had been known more than a century, a process for it's extraction from the ore since the '30s. The question becomes why?

    Outstanding job, Anthony!

    By Blogger Frank Stalter, at Sunday, August 08, 2010  

  • Frank:

    Your finds were not (and are not) just supplemental, as far as I'm concerned.

    I think Mr. Bragalia was spurred, in large part, to provide his rebuke based upon what you uncovered and discovered to counter Gilles F's comments.

    (A New Yorker piece about the Washington Post's recent series on all the private, secret agencies set up after 9/11, went on to laud the work of the co-reporter, a blogger who dug up the information from online searches in the internet universe. This and your discoveries should quell the armchair opprobrium by old-time UFO reasearchers who are a bit miffed, I think, because they've spent time and money hoofing to places that UFO newbies now find on the web, without the cost and loss of human time that traveling
    all over the place to find UFO gems brings, often fruitlessly.)


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, August 08, 2010  

  • Rich-

    Thank you, that's very nice of you to say. I'd also like to thank cda and Gilles (who is also a Facebook friend, by the way). The issues they raise cause us to think deeper and get better. They are doing us all a great favor. :O)

    By Blogger Frank Stalter, at Sunday, August 08, 2010  

  • Greetings Tony,

    Impressive new work Tony, even if I dont share the same opinion about Roswell case and how sometimes the sensationnal is prefered to scepticism and minimal doubts (in the true sens of this word).

    I have some preliminar "remarks" between gentlemen, before others. If it retains a little your attention and time despite my difficulties in english.

    "Battelle had suddenly - after the Roswell crash - undertaken to perfect melting and "metal mixing" techniques and to create purity-levels for Titanium NEVER BEFORE ATTEMPTED."

    Titanium in its pure form had been discovered by William Gregor in 1791.

    Matthew Albert Hunter purified titanium at 99.9 % in 1910.
    In 1932, Luxembourg man William Kroll invented the process to produce metallic titanium. In 1938, he produced 50 pounds of titanium using his process, named "Kroll Process".

    BTW, He is too for Zircanium processes, if not the more famous name about zirconium too and zirconium was "same" as titanium late 40's and in the 50's. No one opacity here.

    Of course as already pointed, Titanium (as zyrconium) knew a boom (cause aeronautic etc new applications and interrest). I found it normal (including secret researches).

    2. As already pointed, two of the "famous" names concerning Shape Memory Alloys searchors are then L.C. Chang and T.A. Read. And they worked publicaly in the same period on alloys, including Titanium nickel ones.

    I think it is time to "mythify" them too in the Roswell saga, or to explain why what they did was not secret, but so similar of what Battelle did ?
    And then why to be surprised by Battelle documents.

    3. Why in the Battelle documents, when NiTi alloys are tested, they use 0 to 10 % of Ni if they are retro ingeneering a MSA ? (Niti MSA need 49 to 51 %).

    Why several alloys are tested as in many prior 1947 or after experiments on alloys, public or not ?

    Funny, the battelle reports examine many alloys (not niti only) and conclude such alloys have no real interrests !

    It is AFTER we will discovered they have interrest.

    I mean that for a retro ingeneering, I found it curious if they have ET metal on eyes or experimenting on !

    The boom and spectacular results we should waited ARE NOT AT RENDEZ VOUS in this reports.

    No, it will come step by step as in any other standard researches without ET invokation or deus ex machina. But nothing spectacular in such researches as it will be for Buehler and Physicist Frederick Wang years later.

    Why not spectacular results at rendez vous if retro ingeneering please ?

    (to follow)

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Sunday, August 08, 2010  

  • My heavens, Gilles! This is what I mean about getting an education on metals from Wikipedia....

    My whole point is that Titanium was known for a very long time, and that - in and of itself - there is nothing 'exceptional' about it...

    But you really need to do some reading. Most of what Center was trying to do in the Battelle studies was to analyze the impurities that they were finding in the Titanium and its alloys!

    Using his micro-analytical
    techniques, he was detecting Oxygen contamination.

    "Pure Zirconium" - I would like to know your definition. Titanium absolutely did not exist then in the ultra-high purity forms required to make Nitinol.

    The purity levels of Titanium achieved today far, far exceed those in the 1700s. That you would even say such a thing is disturbing.

    Do some basic homework on the challenges of metal impurities and metal contamination before you post a comment.


    By Anonymous Anthony Bragalia, at Sunday, August 08, 2010  

  • For the NiTi "bad percent" problem, you will probably reply you already replied in the body of your text.

    I found your answer ( but taking into account some remarks done by others, that's cool and must be thx), without offense, an "escape".

    You explained :
    "I have never claimed that Nitinol itself it the Roswell debris".

    and after :

    " some of that debris contained novel Titanium alloys that were specially processed, as found in Nitinol."

    I find the argument bad convincing. Why ?
    You speculate both "no NiTi" & "Ti alloys" in unprooved Roswell ET debris. You speculate too, because the Battelle Reports use Titanium alloys, Roswell (pseudo) debris are then Ti alloys too.

    In other words, you are additioning and are multiplying the speculations to seat down your opinion and to become out "falsifiability". That's "pseudo-scientific" imho or ad hoc, without offense, closed of syllogism.

    You have both and all possibilities in order to be abble to claim an extraordinary thing (ET retro-analysis here). What a comfort !

    But one more time, what you seems to forget as crucial imho (I think, but I'm open and falsificable), if facing E.T. Titanium alloy(s) :

    nor the results are spectacular,

    nor seems your searchors abble to decompose such ET debris in order to have something "spectacular" or correct concerning memory alloys.

    I suppose in 1947, it existed technics for it (I'm not an expert in this domain).

    Why are them unabble and manipulating "stupid" SMAs ?

    Excepted some elements which will be present in SMA alloys later,
    as in many other studies public or not, prior 1947 and after,

    the battelle reports present nothing really spectacular regarding many other studies.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Sunday, August 08, 2010  

  • I think the following article, published in 1953, is very informative regarding some of the early promise and difficulties in working with titanium.,+Inc&source=bl&ots=A7-_sPUkxp&sig=cNyWjWx3foS-_9WCV5h5Pr71UF8&hl=en&ei=JwleTN73JIH58Aby_tC0DQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=28&ved=0CJcBEOgBMBs#v=onepage&q=Rem-Cru%20Titanium%2C%20Inc&f=false

    By Blogger Frank Stalter, at Sunday, August 08, 2010  

  • It seems my humble part 2 have had a problem ^^ because a comment before

    Part 2

    4. I found curious in Roswell in general (and for your "new witnesses" it applied too), that people who have been part of so sensasionnal things in 40's 50's, you find as usual NO ONE personnal diaries, personnal correspondances, pieces placed to advocats or in bank coffers (etc.).

    I mean "materials" we could dated prior 1978 and mentioning something about this fantastic episode in a life... No, the usual anecdotical testimonies.

    5. Your witnesses seems to have a socio cultural ambiance in their life realy UFO related.

    So I ask myself without offense if it this" true" story which caused the interrest for UFO, or the interrest for UFO creating such claims...

    (combinated to point 4 of course)

    6. "Psychic" Uri Geller ? What a joke. Seriously Tony... Wake up about Uri as psiphil.

    7. The story of Zirconium is not opaque in my knowledge. Same as before, we are in standard things where military, as public offices are involved.

    I dont see the link with Roswell too.


    Secret researches, yes. Roswell linked, well (excepted "testimonies", but you underdand perfectly testimony is not a solide proof).

    So, without hypercriticism I think, I see no one "smocking gun" here :

    We found again the traditionnal collection of second hand testimonies;

    The lack of personnal documents prior 1978 to corroborate post 1978 claims;

    When you pretend to show "smocking gun" documents of the years in question (the battelle ones), nothing is surprising ;

    And speculations for extraordinary claims which need more than such ordinary things.

    Best Regards,

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Sunday, August 08, 2010  

  • Tony:
    Your analysis sounds good and any outsider new to the subject may well be convinced. But your whole essay has fatal flaws, or at least flaws which destroy your case that Nitinol was a Roswell inspired invention.

    Your article reminds me of Stan Friedman's defence of the MJ-12 papers and all the post-1985 evidence he uncovered which support his thesis. He 'discovered' lots of associations, meaning that he found coincident dates, the same names popping up in places, locations that coincided with other locations, people who knew certain other people who had at one time 'been there', scientists & top military men who visited certain spots on secret missions, even the 'oddities' like Dr Menzel and General Twining visiting NM during the critical (to Friedman) time of Roswell or soon afterwards. And so it goes on, and on.

    Some researchers who delved into the matter of JFK once discovered a number of 'unexplained' deaths of people vaguely connected with the assassination or who knew so and so who was connected with JFK.
    A case was then built up of all these presumed mystery deaths being part of some great conspiracy, etc. Part of the JFK mythos.

    You are associating events in time and place with each other when no real association exists. You even admit the real Roswell debris did not go to Battelle. Then where did it go? Someone must have examined the real actual debris. Who and where? Where is their report(s)?

    Contrary to what Frank Stalter says, your article will never get mainstream media attention, for this reason. Mainstream journalists, if they bother to investigate, will soon realise your whole thesis falls flat. It is built up by association of one thing with another, and has no solidity, as Gilles says. If any mainstream journalist took it up it would collapse like a pack of cards.

    It has a superficial appeal but amounts to no more than wishful thinking.

    By Blogger cda, at Sunday, August 08, 2010  

  • Gilles and CDA:

    Gilles -- while you take the time to cite (via example) your criticism(s), you seem to sidestep specific points that Mr. Bragalia has found and made.

    Christopher, you merely critique, without taking a scholarly stance, citing exactly what you object to in Mr. Bragalia’s work.

    I, too, along with others, such as Paul Kimball, have been irritated with the frenetic support that Stan Friedman has foisted on MJ-12 and some of the Roswell story, but he, like Bragalia, has some substantial, circumstantial support for his views/opinions.

    Continuing to throw stones at those guys, without any scholarly backing or off-setting, concrete points makes it appear that you are just cranky – a skeptic without cachet.

    I know you are better than that, as you’ve provided material at that Randle guy’s blog which makes your points.

    But here, you’re merely clinging to Gilles’ convoluted and tortured attempts to fit his skeptical forays into the argument that Mr. Bragalia evokes.

    I would expect you two fellows to do better than that. Otherwise, we shall continue to be harassed by blather without substance – style maybe – but not substance.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, August 08, 2010  

  • "Then where did it go?"

    Wright-Patterson AFB. That was the standard procedure for crashed foreign aircraft. They had labs and scientists, including Paper Clip Germans, on site.

    In my reading on the development of titanium, I'm seeing an industry that sprang up virtually overnight within roughly a year of the Roswell crash, yet it has no father that I can find yet. Even atomic weapons had a Bush, a Groves and an Oppenheimer.

    By Blogger Frank Stalter, at Sunday, August 08, 2010  

  • I am not a metallurgist and have never studied the subject of Nitinol or its history. It is up to those who know its true history to have their say.

    I shall attack Tony Bragalia on his logic.


    "WHY NO MENTION OF ET? I have been taken to task by some who naively believe that such reports would have a direct mention of ET artifacts. That is not the way such science would ever work. Science reports that directly mention ET would never fall into civilian hands."

    This is the view of Tony Bragalia. Never, in any circumstances, would
    a science report on ET or ET artifacts get into civilian hands.
    Of course it wouldn't! This assertion (not backed up by anything other than wishful thinking) HAS to be used to explain why no such report has ever turned up.

    Yes I know that perhaps the USAF might want to keep it under wraps for a short period. But 63 years?

    I have no hesitation in labelling this assertion of Tony as total fiction. Does Tony really believe astronomers, biologists, space engineers et al would STILL be denied vital news about ET visits for all this time? Over something we on this planet have absolutely no control? This is the same kind of argument Stan Friedman uses. No real documentation exists, so he invents a plausible sounding but very flimsy reason why it would not. (Excluding MJ-12, which 'escaped' those over-powerful censors).

    Bragalia has to find an excuse for the lack of Roswell 'papers'. He therefore finds one. And he connects up a series of names, approximate dates and places to make his story sound convincing, based on 2nd and 3rd hand testimony.

    I am not going to go into the metallurgical side of it. Gilles can if he wants to. I merely repeat that neither mainstream science, nor mainstream journalists, will bother with Tony's article one iota.

    By Blogger cda, at Sunday, August 08, 2010  

  • Christopher:

    As a former reporter and with several guys here working in news media presently, I can tell you that mainstream journalists (and the science/academia crowd we circulate with in Ann Arbor, at U of M) won't touch UFOs or Mr. Bragalia's material because of the peipheral goof-balls who have taken hold of the UFO topic.

    The foolishness and pyschopathology of the UFO gang is off-putting, not the topic itself, although the ha-ha factor remains intact from the contactee days.

    That said, and I am in agreement with you about any fothcoming (or not forthcoming) ET news, Mr. Bragalia's presentation is more thorough and substantiated than most of the UFO crap one finds on the internet nowadays.

    For that we give him props and space here, where we eschew, as you know, ideas and opinion that border on obvious insanity.

    As for Mr. Bragalia's logic, one has to take into account the topic itself: one not conducive to ratiocination of any kind, inherently.

    That he continues to wade through all the obfuscation and dreck that has occurred over the years, especially regarding the Roswell event, should get him more than a slap in the face by legitimate skeptics, of which you are one (as I am myself I think).

    Again, I'd like to see specifics of where he has gone wrong, not just broadsides that he's wrong in some way or another, or illogical.

    You can do that, can't you?


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, August 08, 2010  

  • Tony, TY for my wiki knowledge, very much appreciated...
    I'm not a metalurgist of course, but if you want to play this game.

    A french friend of mine saw your point 7 :

    "Bend, twist or batter the material into any shape and make it return with tremendous force instantly to its original shape - remembering its original form. Because that is what Nitinol does.
    That, my critic friends, is the definition of Shape Memory Alloy."

    This is not even half of the definition of SMA or what Nitinol is.

    Obviously you have no understanding of the basics since you use words like "any shape", "tremendous" and "instantly".

    Any shape ? : no, there are limits in fact.

    Tremendous: not greater than the one applied to bend the material.

    Instantly: nothing is "instantaneous", and whether it returns to its original shape or not, It is TEMPERATURE-DEPENDANT.

    So concerning "logic", I dont remember Roswell witnesses used frigo, to claim the alleged debris where SMAs, as your definition of SMA or what is nitinol is very "special".

    There is no factual basis for linking the debris with SMAs.


    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Sunday, August 08, 2010  

  • I am by no means a skeptic...there's plenty of good evidence out there. But, in the case of physical material remains, connecting the dots simply, to even an open-minded person, will not do. Physical material must be recovered, which has properties current materials do not. Plus, it has to be recovered in the open-if a crash is to occur (never mind the obvious observation: WHY and HOW, would such an allegedly advanced crash even occur? Consider the SST, terrestrial technology, which was mothballed, after it's one and only crash.) recovery of any bodies or materials must be done under very strict guidelines.
    Consider, for example, the new dinosaur species being discovered. An agency with the right credentials must be on hand - the site must be photographed, scrutinized down to literally the last millimeter. Why? The bone wars, back in the day, as well as the very simple requirement of evidence or proof for such discoveries. This occurs in every kind of science, engineering and many related fields. You say you got proof of such and such? show me the trail of crumbs then. everything above board, no shennanigans, thank you.

    This the same problem that besets Roswell. Have military institutions recovered any ufo debris? Possibly. Problem being, they aint no open book. Thing is, considering the mass of reports, and film, from, say, airline pilots, I would have to say that yes, something is going on. But film, and even reports from professionals, isn't enough. a crash must occur, or an artifact must be found that can't have possibly existed at the time - say, a superconductor discovered in a dig in Egypt - which has the proper credentials, and trail of crumbs and such, and it must be out in the open.

    Such the like, you will never find in any military, or associate organization (such as Nasa). It's not in their job description to be anywhere near open. That this is a huge problem is obvious. It seems to be in any military's best interest to dig around and find 'neat stuff.'

    So it remains an interesting tale, a pretty cool bedtime story, and not all the connections, without deep evidence with a recognizable trail, shall suffice.

    I say this as a non-skeptic. It's basically the old "Show me the money" kind of thing.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Sunday, August 08, 2010  

  • I enjoyed the article very much.

    In defense of the connections being made, certain of those involved in the research admitted to some ET connection, in regards to their research. That part can't just be left out, since it is indeed part of the story.

    It represents one example of the way the connections were being made, not just relying on coincidences of "time sensitive" (i.e., 1947) metallurgical studies with Titanim, or whether shape shifting alloys existed before then even.

    Just my opinion, but Tony's article did a very good job answering some of his critics.

    By Blogger Bob Koford, at Monday, August 09, 2010  

  • I'll point out one item, the matter of Rear Admiral Thorwald Solberg, to illustrate Tony Bragalia's thinking.

    AJB tells us that Thorwald Solberg introduced the Titanium Symposium of December 1948 (sponsored by the Office of Naval Research) with a signed letter from him. Solberg was Chief of Naval Research at the time. However, we do not know the contents of this letter. Presumably it had nothing to do with UFOs.

    AJB describes Solberg as "a very revealing individual". AJB then tells of a May 1949 document, written by an official who has not signed it (but who is employed at a place called 'The Special Devices Center'), which describes briefly Charles Moore's UFO sighting in NM of April 24, 1949. This document has nothing to do with the Titanium Symposium but Tony introduces it for one reason: namely that it reached its recipient (the Chief of naval operations) via Solberg.

    The displayed document is dated several months AFTER the Titanium Symposium, but because Solberg apparently had an interest in UFOs,
    Tony tells us that "Solberg was working on the UFO mystery" at the very time of the symposium the previous December! Note the phrase "working on". This implies it was part of his official duties at the ONR. True, it may be that he was "working" on UFOs at home and not at his office, but Tony's phraseology tends to steer the reader into believing UFOs were part of Solberg's activities at the ONR. So one obvious question is: How does Tony know what Solberg was "working on" 5 months previously? [Answer: he doesn't].

    Tony describes Solberg as "a secret UFO investigator", who had "a deep involvement with UFOs". Where did Tony learn this, and who did he learn it from? I can concede that Solberg was interested in UFOs in 1948-49 (along with countless other scientists of many disciplines), but how come the "secretly working on" assertion?

    Presumably the reason the said Moore sighting document came via Solberg was that he was interested in reports of good UFO sightings, and this particular sighting was from an experienced balloon engineer.

    The link up is obvious: you have Solberg, Moore, the document writer, the recipient, and a totally unrelated Titanium symposium. From there you proceed to Roswell, NM 18 months earlier and the debris therefrom. They are all linked and part of a gigantic top secret plot - at least in the eyes of one person, Tony Bragalia.

    Where did you learn about Solberg's interest in UFOs, Tony?

    By Blogger cda, at Monday, August 09, 2010  

  • CDA:

    Your elaborate "rejoinder" isn't about logic but a lack of citation by Mr. Bragalia, which we are pushing him to provide when he posts one of his conjectural "articles."

    One can extrapolate from information found but that extrapolation better be supported by relevant connections, as you so dutifully note (here and elsewhere).

    One thing that bugs me about some of those commenting here is that they don't pick up on a few things that should invite scrutiny on their part or, at least, some intense interest.

    For example, references and/or documents that point to a UFO connection by someone or some organization.

    Persons commenting usually overlook those hints and clues, missing the trees for the forest (to mix the metaphor).

    UFO aficionados are lax in missing minute clues, which could be significant in determining what UFOs are or how agencies and constructs are keeping secret what they know.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, August 09, 2010  

  • CDA -

    If you are not aware of the US Navy's late 40s and 1950s work on the UFO phenomena, why don't you do some reading first and then get back to me?

    "TA Solberg" -and his interest and involvement in UFOs- will be the subject of a future article. It is a "Pandora's Box" that you will wish you did not open.


    By Anonymous Anthony Bragalia, at Monday, August 09, 2010  

  • Personally, I have nothing to gain but self retribution when criticizing anther's curiosity about
    anything. As far as the specific theory, I am still agnostic. I think personally, that titanium is a fascinating subject, as is all metallurgy in relation to avionics. I think magnesium is a more fruitful avenue to explore in relation to evidence, especially it's ability to remain magnetically neutral unless exposed to a field. The purity of magnesium samples are also interesting. Casting a wide net to me seems logical versus theory A versus theory B since this is about informed speculation and not about the presupposition of edicts.
    At least one would hope so.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Monday, August 09, 2010  

  • Once again Tony ,the skeptics completely ignore the comments of the people that were there and try to explain in mundane teams what happen in a secret lab 60 years ago. My apologies to all these skeptics but I think I will believe the people that were there rather than some UFO skeptical quarterbacks, who see each piece of Roswell evidence completely apart from each other. They really are laughable.
    UFO Media Matters

    By Blogger Joseph Capp, at Monday, August 09, 2010  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Monday, August 09, 2010  

  • Greetings Joseph Capp, UFO Media Matters (?!),

    Laughable is the matter ? Didn't know.

    Well, it is probably NOT laughable, that Roswell ETH proponent(s) is (or are) in "adoration" or "amen" on two studies : the 2 "smocking gun" "Battelle reports".

    Two totaly STANDARD reports concerning "alloys" and measuring COMMON things like "elongation" or "bend radius" or other common things in metallurgy... One more time, what is hallucinating you in such two reports "inside". The "outside" ? Yes.

    Contact or ask Mister Bragalia to follow his "supra serious" researche(s) in a Journal with "peer review". Such "standard" review will accept Mister Bragalia with no one doubt. Hoo, no, they are part or the conspiracy or they are affraid to loose something.

    We must be then in "total ecstasy" on standard "alloy" tests : "we" are laughable or "sceptic without cachet"...

    You can find many of such common researches in :

    * Extase yourself *


    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Wednesday, August 11, 2010  

  • "Two totaly STANDARD reports concerning "alloys" and measuring COMMON things like "elongation" or "bend radius" or other common things in metallurgy"

    It's the timing of the reports and the sudden appearance of a titanium industry with no clear history of who within the government said to do it that makes a Roswell connection a curious possibility.

    If you believe this article, it's USAF Col. John Dick.,9171,857343,00.html

    I think we can all agree that building an entire industry from scratch is outside the powers of a colonel.

    Here is the report on the famous Dec. 1948 symposium on titanium.

    By Blogger Frank Stalter, at Wednesday, August 11, 2010  

  • Dear Frank,

    USAAF was prepared to recover in few hours, in July 1947 an ET spacecraft in different sites and securized such places (how many if you follow the testimonies : 3, 12 14 or 15 ?) with FEW MP's at disposal,

    MP's still securing the only nuclear bombs base (their REAL role and function, regarding NATIONAL security, function suddently changing in a couple of hours, magicaly);

    As the MPs were "terrifying" the civilians in different places in N.M too (it is the function of MP's to harass civilians ! It is well known !).

    USAAF elaborated a massive cover-up in such few hours too, in a day (or two) in July ;

    USAAF studied ET debris in WF "in secret" in very few times after too,

    USAAF was then prepared for such a created media event (the 1947 FS wave), starting around TEN days before, and many documents declassified (not) demonstrate such a preparation .

    An OVERNIGHT reaction if an ET crash have really happened is without dubitative or legitimated question (laughable !);

    As after the event, many CONTEMPORAN top secret documents show us nothing was recovered late 40's or in the start of the 50's, by the Army (Fortean times N°114 Pflock article);

    USAAF "secret group" asked very soon after "Roswell" a massive industry "Boom" for titanium (or SMAs it will depend on what you are ready in a "I want to believe" syndrom) in few times too.

    ... 63 years LATER, and AFTER 3 decades of a non explained amnesia before Moore, Friedman and Berlitz taletellers made a book;

    And 3 decades after investigations by ufologists too;

    They are still few USAF persons seating down in a super secret hangar on Roswell "Graal". Amen.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Thursday, August 12, 2010  

  • "USAAF elaborated a massive cover-up in such few hours too, in a day (or two) in July"

    It's not like something not so terribly different had not been done before. 749 US servicemen killed.

    "USAAF "secret group" asked very soon after "Roswell" a massive industry "Boom" for titanium (or SMAs it will depend on what you are ready in a "I want to believe" syndrom) in few times too."

    I've been pretty clear I am not wholly convinced of an alien crash at Roswell. The titanium boom is a fact. It's certainly also a fact that titanium was a metal that was of some interest to both the Bureau Of Mines and the military before July 47.

    What isn't clear is where the tipping point came to cause the creation of an entire industry and who championed it. I am wholly convinced it is a fascinating yet unclear story and merits a closer look.

    By Blogger Frank Stalter, at Thursday, August 12, 2010  

  • Colleagues:

    My kudos to Tony for having the persistence to keep digging up new material and ideas regarding the recovered Roswell material. Like Tony, I think there is a real story there, and he is doing a valuable service in helping to uncover it. What I’ve noticed however is that this story has become confused with the story of Nitinol. I think this is a mistake because the two subjects are almost totally unrelated and the confusion is generating much more heat than light. This confusion is understandable and perhaps unavoidable, since the field of materials science and technology is actually a very complicated one and requires a lot of specialized knowledge which most people on this forum apparently don’t have. At the risk of creating even more heat, I would like to clarify a number of the technical points raised recently. I should note that my academic credentials are primarily in nuclear physics and aerospace engineering and I am not a materials science specialist, per se, but I have taken enough undergraduate and graduate courses in solid state physics and engineering materials to understand and discuss the issues involved.

    Let’s note that some of the elements of this case are pretty clear in their meaning, whereas others are based on conjecture and inference. In the first category I put the testimony of the two-dozen-or-so first and second hand witnesses who claim to have seen, handled, and otherwise interacted with the “Roswell memory foil”, General Exon’s statement that the Roswell material was taken to Wright Patterson for analysis and found to contain Titanium in unusual combination with other elements, and E. J. Center’s statements to family and co-workers that he worked on samples of material that he was told and strongly believed came from a crashed non-terrestrial artifact. One may question whether these witnesses are to be believed or not, but the meaning of their testimony is unambiguous.

    We begin to get into the realm of conjecture and interpretation, on the other hand, when we consider General Shulgen’s reference to a material of “composite construction using unusual fabrication methods” and the possible inference that he is referring here to so-called intermetallic alloys (of which Nitinol is one example). There is nothing in his description that would uniquely identify the material he’s referring to as an intermetallic or as containing Nickel (or Titanium, for that matter). A defining characteristic of an intermetallic compound is that it has a lattice structure requiring the presence of two or more atomic species in a fixed stoichiometric ratio to completely describe its crystalline structure and mechanical properties. The modern intermetallic alloy Nickel Aluminide (Ni3 Al) for example, contains 3 Nickel atoms for every Aluminum atom. The metals Nickel and Titanium are mutually soluble in each other over a wide range of ratios; when they are mixed together in a ratio at (or extremely close to) the stoichiometric 1:1 then the resulting Nitinol (NiTi) can be considered an intermetallic alloy. Nitinol obtains its shape memory characteristics from this stoichiometric ratio. When the Nickel to Titanium ratio departs from the ideal, then the alloy is not an intermetallic; it is simply a binary phase alloy and shows no shape memory characteristics. Shulgen’s description could equally as well fit other modern material fabrication technologies

    By Blogger Larry, at Thursday, August 12, 2010  

  • "It's certainly also a fact that titanium was a metal that was of some interest to both the Bureau Of Mines and the military before July 47."

    Dear Franck,

    Haaa ! I'm very "happy" to read it from you, concerning R.S. Dean team works from 1938 to 1947 in "references"^^

    Concerning titanium, the titanium "boom" is probably a fact and must be loocking closer.

    What I wanted to point or denonce or warn, maybe with a possible nervosity, it is when Roswell comes as the "first" cause or "explication" of its "boom" !

    Please, first the ordinary causes must be explorated before to call the extroardinary ones... or "some" are in pseudo-sciences here (no name^^).


    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Thursday, August 12, 2010  

  • "Please, first the ordinary causes must be explorated before to call the extroardinary ones."

    Gilles, I agree with this completely, but in my more active look at UFOs over the last year and a few months, titanium history is the most baffling subject I have come across. I am looking for the ordinary cause, but it is not entirely there.

    Titanium development was a true game changer in the history of avionics. Its' impact can not be understated.

    We have the ordinary cause: Titanium was a metal that demonstrated great potential thanks to research from various sources. This research reached a critical mass and it was determined that a titanium production industry was needed. But by who? I can't find the answer and it should be readily available. Certainly not a USAF colonel. A general or group of generals, a president, yes. But no one is given credit. Why? It's not like titanium itself stayed secret, it's development was widely promoted within a few years, the symposiums on its' potential quite public.

    The extraordinary cause: Research on titanium was already taking place when an alien ship, made mostly of titanium alloys, some of which were SMA, created the tipping point where these high ranking leaders came to a no brainer of a decision: a titanium production industry was needed. And curiously enough, the extraordinary cause fits with the Roswell crash timeline and the timeline of the titanium industry.

    By Blogger Frank Stalter, at Thursday, August 12, 2010  

  • To continue from my previous post:

    Shulgen’s description could equally as well fit other modern material fabrication technologies such as ceramic fiber reinforced metals, metal laminates (i.e., sandwiches), amorphous or glassy metals, and so-called metamaterials.

    There is no question that soon after the Roswell event Battelle Labs suddenly undertook the perfection of melting and metal mixing techniques to create ultra high purity-levels for Titanium. Does this imply that Battelle made the ultra-high purity Titanium because they wanted to make Nitinol? Not necessarily; vacuum degassed Titanium (aka ultra-high purity Titanium) is the starting point for metallurgy research into all Titanium alloy systems. Titanium at temperatures near its melting point will readily react with oxygen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and water vapor in the air and produce oxides, nitrides, and carbides which would be contaminants. Hot Titanium therefore has to be kept either in vacuum or under inert atmosphere whenever it’s necessary to keep it relatively pure for metallurgical research. So, yes, Battelle did employ the relatively exotic (for the time) vacuum melting technology to produce high purity Titanium ingots which were then incorporated into their research program. This would have been necessary regardless of the particular alloy system being investigated and does not point uniquely to Nickel Titanium alloys as being of special interest.

    Battelle’s First progress report on the newly formed Titanium research program states that, "The present data do not justify further investigation of binary Titanium-Germanium or Titanium Nickel alloys." Yet, in the Second Progress Report, we find that work on Titanium-Nickel alloys was continued anyway, including work on an extended "phase diagram". Was this a discrepancy? I would consider this a difference of technical judgment between the contractor doing the research (Battelle) and the customer paying for it (the Air Force). I can’t really guess why there would have been such a difference of opinion but my 30 year experience of monitoring research contracts for the government tells me that in the case of a difference of opinion, the customer is always right. My reading of the “Second Progress Report on Research on Titanium Alloys” is that in that second year they tested Ni-Ti alloys in ratios “extended” only up to about 10% Nickel. (I’ve never seen a copy of the phase diagram that is referred to in the report, so I’m only going on the basis of the text. If someone has better information on this, I would like to see it.) As discussed above, 10% is a level far below where you would expect to see the shape memory effect and is more consistent with the search for conventional high strength aerospace Titanium alloy systems that could be produced on an industrial scale and wouldn’t show any shape memory properties. Nothing in those reports points specifically toward Nitinol or Nitinol-like alloys being an objective of the research.

    By Blogger Larry, at Thursday, August 12, 2010  

  • TY very much Larry for your very interresting two posts as professional in the domain.

    As pointed above or in other previous threads, the tests of 0 % to 10 % nickel in niti alloys in the 2 reports were imho a key point to refrain "enthousiasm" and "sensationalism" about a pseudo-link between SMAs, Roswell and Battelle.

    Regarding Frank, your last interventions (One more time we aren't metalurgists) :

    I have read fastly the processings of the titanium Symposium and what seems to appear to me, it is there are many intervenants, coming from different labs, organizations, etc.

    The studies on titanium matter presented here sound to NOT come from an OVERNIGHT, as if something have taken place start of July 1947 to the date of the symposium cause "Roswell", like a "sudain" interrest for titanium.

    I mean that I suppose (even not metalurgist) and as it is STANDARD in other domains, we have here a "point of titanium situation" (works, summerizes,presentations of researches) coming from YEARS BEFORE other works, emboiting previous works, like sciences and technics work commonly "step by step".

    In such years, titanium researches reached probably a key point where it was decided a more "massive" production, due to YEARS before step by step researches, military or not, concluding it is or will be a "key" or interesting material for applications.

    But I "see" no sign of an overnight thing due to Roswell, even if my readings is probably a "folks" one cause not a specialist of the domain.

    I mean this period concerning titanium sounds more like the moment where the "APPLICATION phase" is taking place after "RESEARCH phase".

    Research phase NOT born the day after Roswell...

    Best Regards,

    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Friday, August 13, 2010  

  • Hi Larry -

    Thanks for you informed and balanced comments. You point out that "the customer is always right" - and the "customer" is Wright-Patterson, the base to which the debris was flown. We must always bear this in mind.

    Exon's specific mention of specially processed Ti Alloy, and Elroy Center's ET confession and involvement in micro-analysis of Ti for contamination to attain high purities - to me is very telling.

    To my mind, Schulgen's comments soon after Roswell about the "Items of Construction" of UFOs reflects an interest in intermetallics, composite construction, and other descriptors that are simply to close to what some of the debris at Roswell was found to be. He may not have meant Ti specifically, certainly...

    I have addressed the Nickel Content "issue" in the article. What is even more interesting is that Battelle is now working on entirely "Nickeless" SMA's!

    Too, we must keep in mind that any such research interest would not "stand alone." It would be folded into existing research. This was explained to me by Battelle's own Historian. She said that if the Government, for instance, captured a Russian MIG, they would parse out parts of it to different labs.

    They would rarely - if ever - tell the involved scientists the nature of the discovery, how it was found, where it was found, etc. They performed the work without questions...


    By Anonymous Anthony Bragalia, at Friday, August 13, 2010  

  • "titanium researches reached probably a key point where it was decided a more "massive" production, due to YEARS before step by step researches, military or not, concluding it is or will be a "key" or interesting material for applications."

    Yes, exactly! But the key point WHY and WHO made the decision are missing! There is an old saying, "Success has many fathers, but failure is an orphan." Titanium is a huge success, it would change the world, but is an orphan. That makes no sense.

    "But I "see" no sign of an overnight thing due to Roswell, even if my readings is probably a "folks" one cause not a specialist of the domain. I mean this period concerning titanium sounds more like the moment where the "APPLICATION phase" is taking place after "RESEARCH phase". Research phase NOT born the day after Roswell..."

    Titanium production is an overnight thing by manufacturing standards. I repeat an earlier quote from the early 50s:

    "The exponential growth of metallic titanium production is unparalleled in the history of metallurgy."

    Roswell connection? Not proved, of course, but this exponential production growth begins in late 1948, one and a half years after Roswell. Recognizing titanium within crash debris would undoubtedly happen quickly. For preparing commercial-quantity manufacture facilities, 1.5 years seems about right.

    By Blogger Frank Stalter, at Friday, August 13, 2010  

  • Gilles said:

    “As pointed above or in other previous threads, the tests of 0 % to 10 % nickel in niti alloys in the 2 reports were imho a key point to refrain "enthousiasm" and "sensationalism" about a pseudo-link between SMAs, Roswell and Battelle.”

    This is partially right, partially wrong. General Exon’s testimony establishes a link between Wright Patterson Air Base and material containing Titanium that originated from Roswell. E. J. Center’s testimony then established a link between Battelle Labs and Wright Patterson’s interest in researching Titanium-containing material recovered from an alien vehicle. Thus, there is a chain of testimony connecting Roswell and Battelle.

    There is no evidentiary link between Roswell and SMAs of the Nitinol type. The research activity covered by the first two Battelle Annual reports did not result in the production of Nitinol, because the proportion of Nickel they used was too low. It is important to recognize that they could have produced Nitinol in that time period if they had had a reason to, because they were obviously capable of making high purity Titanium and Nickel and could easily have mixed it in a 1:1 ratio if they had wanted to. I think they weren’t trying to produce Nitinol because they were not looking for an SMA. They weren’t looking for an SMA, because the Roswell “memory foil” was not an SMA (contrary to a lot of casual opinion to this effect).

    The “memory foil” witnesses reported in a mutually supporting way 9 significant physical characteristics of the foil, including:

    1)shiny metallic visual appearance (lustrous, silvery gray),

    2)extreme thinness (no thicker than aluminum foil in a cigarette pack)

    3)bulk mass density perhaps less than 1.0 (able to float on the surface of water)

    4)extreme strength (unaffected by hammer blows, rifle bullets, etc.)

    5)surface hardness probably greater than 58 on the Rockwell C scale (unable to be cut or scratched by carbon steel pocket knife blade)

    6)insensitivity to heat of match flame (no burning, melting, change of shape, etc.)

    7)porous or cloth like micro structure (air could be blown through it)

    8)straight (i.e., not jagged) edges of fragments (per comments of Earl Fulford, Jesse Marcel, Jr.)

    and of course,

    9)the famous “shape memory” characteristic.

    (To be Continued)

    By Blogger Larry, at Friday, August 13, 2010  

  • Continued

    The “memory foil” witnesses reported in a mutually supporting way 9 significant physical characteristics of the foil, including:

    1)shiny metallic visual appearance (lustrous, silvery gray),

    2)extreme thinness (no thicker than aluminum foil in a cigarette pack)

    3)bulk mass density perhaps less than 1.0 (able to float on the surface of water)

    4)extreme strength (unaffected by hammer blows, rifle bullets, etc.)

    5)surface hardness probably greater than 58 on the Rockwell C scale (unable to be cut or scratched by carbon steel pocket knife blade)

    6)insensitivity to heat of match flame (no burning, melting, change of shape, etc.)

    7)porous or cloth like micro structure (air could be blown through it)

    8)straight (i.e., not jagged) edges of fragments (per comments of Earl Fulford, Jesse Marcel, Jr.)

    and of course,

    9)the famous “shape memory” characteristic.
    Briefly, the high strength appears to be of a level comparable to (or somewhat greater than) either modern high tenacity polymers (such as Kevlar, Spectra, etc.) or modern high performance metals used for ballistic armor and the like. This is in the range of about 3.5 GigaPascals and is not consistent with any material known to exist in 1947. The shiny appearance, insensitivity to match flame, and high surface hardness argue strongly that the material was probably metallic. (More accurately, its outer surface was probably metallic; it is conceivable that the material could have been a laminate or sandwich of multiple materials.)

    The descriptions of a bulk mass density less than or equal to 1.0 and porous or cloth like character argue that the material was probably underdense from the presence of micropores or spongelike microstructure at a size below the resolution limit of the human eye. This is because all pure metals or metal alloy systems have a consolidated mass density considerably greater than 1.0. The non-jagged fragment edges are best explained by a material whose ultimate failure mode is brittle fracture, as opposed to ductile rupture.

    This leaves the famous “shape memory” characteristic to explain. Although the reported shape memory characteristic is often considered mysterious, inexplicable and even “paranormal” by some debunkers, it is actually extraordinarily easy and straightforward to explain using conventional materials science principles. The fundamental idea is that a set of forces (“stresses” in materials science jargon) exerted on a solid material will cause the material to deform. The amount of deformation, expressed as a fraction of the size of the undeformed material is referred to as “strain”. When stress is applied to a solid it will undergo a corresponding amount of strain. Up to a certain point (the elastic limit), the material will return to its undeformed state when the stress is removed. When you crumple up a piece of thin flat material by hand, the stress causes strain to concentrate in the wrinkles that are formed. If the peak strain in the wrinkles is below the elastic limit of that material, then the material will straighten back out when the stress is removed. To a person, that is all that the “Roswell memory foil” witnesses were reporting, no more—no less.

    By Blogger Larry, at Friday, August 13, 2010  

  • Continued

    This leaves the famous “shape memory” characteristic to explain. Although the reported shape memory characteristic is often considered mysterious, inexplicable and even “paranormal” by some debunkers, it is actually extraordinarily easy and straightforward to explain using conventional materials science principles. The fundamental idea is that a set of forces (“stresses” in materials science jargon) exerted on a solid material will cause the material to deform. The amount of deformation, expressed as a fraction of the size of the undeformed material is referred to as “strain”. When stress is applied to a solid it will undergo a corresponding amount of strain. Up to a certain point (the elastic limit), the material will return to its undeformed state when the stress is removed. When you crumple up a piece of thin flat material by hand, the stress causes strain to concentrate in the wrinkles that are formed. If the peak strain in the wrinkles is below the elastic limit of that material, then the material will straighten back out when the stress is removed. To a person, that is all that the “Roswell memory foil” witnesses were reporting, no more—no less.
    The tighter the bend of a wrinkle, the higher the strain level. This result derives purely from geometry and is independent of the specific material the wrinkle occurs in. This is undoubtedly why the Battelle research contained evaluations of the bending radius of various alloys—it is a simple and reliable test for the elastic limit of a metal.If you were to take a thin piece of material and fold it completely back on itself—thereby creating the tightest possible wrinkle—the peak strain level in the wrinkle would be essentially 100%. Most common metals (and all of the ones that were around in 1947) have an elastic strain limit of around 1/2 of 1%. Therefore it does not take a very tight bend at all to create a wrinkle in these materials that will not disappear after the stress is removed. On the other hand, a material like rubber can have an elastic limit greater than 500% (about a thousand times greater than ductile metals). I invite anyone interested in this topic to obtain a thin sheet of rubber and perform the experiment of crumpling it up by hand. Upon removing the stress, the rubber sheet will spontaneously return to its pristine condition—exactly as the Roswell witnesses described. No paranormal effects, just an unusually high elastic strain limit.
    (to be continued)

    By Blogger Larry, at Friday, August 13, 2010  

  • Sorry to disturb you, Larry.

    You are speacking about Exon and presenting him to the readers as if he is WITH NO ONE doubt a "direct" witness.

    Hey ? What a "shortcut" imho !

    His story (Exon) seems based entirely on rumors he had heard at Wright Field when you are facing the core of his assertions.

    As he was interviewed lately and very old (born in 1916) with a "methodology" an humble french doctor in cognitive psychology like me cant control or have no cues on.

    But anyway, records from interview(s) without methodology like the ones used in criminology or in cognitive sciences to avoid some bias creating intentionaly or not what the interviewer is recording or desire to record.

    Such socio-psychological pists are thought by readers or pro ETH as "ad hominem" attack against the witness(s). Not my goal.

    Some ufologists prefer the UFO than the observor or the condition of observation;
    The testimony itself, than the mecanisms which could have generated the testimony...

    And rumors, what was maybe suggested by interviewers = evidence or a direct testimony in ufology... OR it becomes second hand or dunno what ranked testimony.

    It is awesome (ing me).

    Best Regards

    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Friday, August 13, 2010  

  • "As he (Exon) was interviewed lately and very old (born in 1916) with a "methodology" an humble french doctor in cognitive psychology like me cant control or have no cues on."

    Using Exon's age is a very disappointing argument. He was apparently first interviewed in 1991 at age 75. Not "very old" in my opinion. The same argument is used against both Marcels, one is too old during his recounting, the other too young during the incident. It is an incredibly weak point.

    By Blogger Frank Stalter, at Saturday, August 14, 2010  

  • I mean that the infos Exon delivered about Roswell are "second-hand", excepting maybe if you believe his fly over the crash area some monthes after the event itself (I dunno if he gived this infos in first 1991 interviews or if it came more lately ?). He disclaimed himself to have a direct knowledge of what he is speacking for. "He told he was told" about by others.

    Yes, not very old, I completly agree. I confused with William C.
    Holden, the "archeologist" :(

    Too much protagonists in Roswell !

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Saturday, August 14, 2010  

  • Frank:

    After age 60, there is, for most persons, a confluence of memories –some extrapolated from real events and others from fantasy or cognitive ephemerae (such as films, novels, et cetera).

    This confluence creates a whole set of new memories or scenarios that are unique and certainly not actual: The Smiley Blanton Syndrome.

    So any older UFO or circa 1947 Roswell witness accounts have to weighed with that taken into account.

    This is matter for psychiatry or psychological evaluation, not historical evaluation, and no one in ufology is qualified to deal with this matter of witness “falsification.”


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, August 14, 2010  

  • "This is matter for psychiatry or psychological evaluation, not historical evaluation, and no one in ufology is qualified to deal with this matter of witness “falsification.”

    Hey Richie-

    I am a lot more concerned with quotes and facts being manipulated, taken out of context and getting the dramatic license once over than I would be about any possible memory/age related syndrome.

    It certainly seems Exon still had his wits about him and didn't make any especially extraordinary claims.

    "Further, you both likely recall on many occasions during my visits with you in person and on the phone when you wanted me to meet others that I did not know anything first hand. Although I believe you did quote me accurately, I do believe that in your writings you gave more credence and impression of personal & direct knowledge than my recordings would indicate on their own! I felt that throughout the portions where my name was used the quotes were O.K. but authoritative emphasis was yours."

    -Exon to Randle, Nov. 24, 1991

    By Blogger Frank Stalter, at Sunday, August 15, 2010  

  • Frank:

    While I wasn't impugning Exon's memory per se, the mental acuity of older people is suspect generally among specialists in the topic.

    Information garnered from persons 60 and older has to taken with all the caveats in place.

    It just takes a careful scrutiny of data and information gathered to make sure that what is being relayed is accurate.

    Thus the two-sources (or more) stipulation (of reporters) would be the template for getting and using what one finds during research.

    It's a rare ufologist who does this. Mr. Bragalia is one. Kevin Randle and others are not.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, August 15, 2010  

  • Colleagues, I apologize for my redundant posts (above) on this topic—I’m still learning the peculiarities of posting on this particular website. I just want to make one final post of a technical nature on this topic; the behavior of the “Roswell memory foil” described by the witnesses is entirely different from the way Nitinol and similar alloys behave. When Nitinol at normal temperatures is stressed beyond its elastic limit its microcrystalline structure changes from one geometric pattern to another (from Martensitic to Austenitic). When the metal is heated, the heat energy allows the structure to revert to its original form. Nitinol is technically referred to as a “thermal shape memory metal”. The witnesses were not describing a “thermal shape memory metal”; they were describing a metal with an anomalously high elastic strain limit (probably 10% or more). These materials are termed “superelastic”, not “thermal shape memory”. Overall, the properties of Nitinol do not actually match many of characteristics the witnesses described; true, it is a metal, but it’s too dense (and can’t be made underdense), doesn’t have a high enough tensile strength or surface hardness, and it’s ductile, not brittle.

    Metals with properties described by the Roswell witnesses are coming into existence today. They are so-called amorphous or glassy metals. As the name implies, they have no microcrystalline structure at all. An example of this class of metals is the alloy LM-001, produced by the LiquidMetal company. It is predominantly a Titanium-Zirconium alloy and could theoretically be produced in a foamed, underdense foil (although it currently is not produced that way). If it were, it would have 8 of the 9 properties the Roswell witnesses described, including all of the important ones of appearance, strength, density, porosity, hardness, brittle fracture mode, and high elastic limit. However, it would probably be flammable in thin sections because of the high Zirconium content. Thus, I would not suggest that the Roswell “memory foil” is literally the LM-001 alloy. I merely point out that modern amorphous metals have physical characteristics that are approaching those attributed to the Roswell “memory foil” and therefore constitute a kind of an existence proof.

    As luck would have it, the Apple Computer company announced yesterday that it will produce next generation iPhones out of glassy metal. The history of this material is at least as interesting as Nitinol.

    By Blogger Larry, at Monday, August 16, 2010  

  • I agree Larry -- that Apple announcement of glass-metal is intriguing.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, August 16, 2010  

  • Liquidmetal Technologies certainly is an interesting company Larry!

    Dig deep as I have done and you will find ties to Battelle! More on this in a later article...


    By Anonymous Anthony Bragalia, at Monday, August 16, 2010  

  • Larry,

    TY very much for your precisions !

    Not my goal to give credits to Memory alloys and Roswell debris connexions. Just wanting to better understand

    I think (one more time, not a specialist), following the same discussion we have in France that austenite martensite phases can occur WITHOUT temperature changes.

    Reading you, this is not possible for nitinol alloy (it concerns other(s) material(s) like amorphous or glassy metals if I well followed ? That's right ?

    I have a second question too regarding Aluminium (linked to the corner deflectors and regarding pro-ET Roswell argument the materials were "common").

    I heard that aluminium foils wasn't so common in 1947 for "standard Joe". It would be when it became available in grocery stores in the mid to late '50s and when US saw it covering TV dinners around late 50's.

    Do you (or other) have links or knowledge in order I can "validate" such impression and what I heard ?

    Best Regards,

    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Monday, August 16, 2010  

  • Tony said:

    Liquidmetal Technologies certainly is an interesting company Larry! Dig deep as I have done and you will find ties to Battelle! More on this in a later article...

    I, for one am definitely looking forward to that article.......

    One of the reasons I have been hammering on this topic is because it actually could be dispositive of the Roswell case. (Many observers and commentators on the UFO scene are of the opinion that nothing new can possibly come out of studying Roswell, and we might as well move on to other topics.) But consider:

    When the Roswell memory foil witnesses came forward with their stories, the material they were purportedly describing was both unknown and inexplicable. Neither the witnesses themselves nor the general public had ever encountered material with the properties described, before or since. Moreover, even if material with the described properties actually existed, nobody involved could explain the physical principles from which the strange properties might arise and the technology by which such material could be produced.

    Skeptics, of course, use the presumed “impossibility” of the Roswell memory foil as proof that that it never really existed and therefore proof that stories about it were false and therefore that the Roswell story itself is mythological.

    On the other hand, if it turns out that it is possible to not only understand the physical principles underlying the material properties and to create a technology for manufacturing the material, then it turns out that the witnesses were not describing something impossible or paranormal. I think we’re very close to that point.

    If what the Roswell memory foil witnesses were describing is both possible and understandable on the basis of arcane knowledge which lay 30 years or so in the future of 1947, it seems virtually impossible to believe that all the witnesses were able to make a lucky guess (either independently or collectively) to that effect. They could not have done so if they had wanted to. The only conclusion left is that they actually saw what they said they saw.

    By Blogger Larry, at Monday, August 16, 2010  

  • Gilles said:

    “I think (one more time, not a specialist), following the same discussion we have in France that austenite martensite phases can occur WITHOUT temperature changes.”

    I believe the property of Nitinol that you are referring to is termed “pseudoelasticity”. As described above, you can change Nitinol from the Martensitic to the Austenitic microcrystalline structure by bending it. When you heat the Nitinol up past its critical temperature, the structure will change back to Martensite. If you artificially maintain the temperature at or above the transition temperature when you do the bending, then the change back to Martensite will occur immediately upon removing the bending force. Essentially, the Nitinol would already be above the critical temperature. To the eye, Nitinol would simply appear to be a “superelastic” metal.

    “I heard that aluminium foils wasn't so common in 1947 for "standard Joe". It would be when it became available in grocery stores in the mid to late '50s and when US saw it covering TV dinners around late 50's.”

    I was actually born in 1947, so I can reliably remember details of everyday American life from about 1952 on. I can verify that there was nowhere near as much Aluminum foil in the consumer environment then as there is now. For example, a candy wrapper that might be made of Aluminum today would have been made out of cellulosic plastic (“Cellophane”) back then. I think the reasons for this are part technological and part economic. These days, Aluminum beer cans are made possible by alloying agents and heat treatment processes that make the Aluminum superplastic. Those alloys had not yet been created in 1947.

    Aluminum as a material available on an industrial scale came along relatively late in the industrial revolution, mainly because it requires not only heat but also electricity to refine its ore into metallic form. Of course, during WWII, Aluminum was a strategically important metal because of its use in aircraft construction, so the US made correspondingly large investments in building new Aluminum smelters to fill the wartime need--often locating them near major hydroelectric dams. The consumer reaped the benefits of this investment after the War, as production capacity could then be turned toward consumer products. Throughout my lifetime, however, Aluminum has almost always been more costly than Steel because of the higher energy requirements for refining it. I think this is why it was not so common in 1947 for the common Joe, although it was readily available for any military or commercial use where its higher cost could be justified.

    By Blogger Larry, at Monday, August 16, 2010  

  • Thank you very much for your answer, Larry, very much appreciated.

    Beyond the aluminium matter (or inside) itself, I have always been "concerned" on how laminated aluminium-paper foils, like the ones used in radar reflectors, can or not "surprise" the "witnesses of Roswell".

    To "contextualize" the different assertions or quotes we read here or there too, is for me very important, or the key.

    I devoted my own investigations with the desire, or the method, to contextualize the event for the 1947 contemporans. Not ours.

    Taking the place of the own protagonists in 1947, where "flying saucers" term have not the same "semantic" of today or later it will have (extraterrestrial association I mean).

    I concluded in my book, they acted legitimaly, but no one ET craft is the real matter, just a "Flying Saucer", contextualized.

    That's hard for a french native !

    With such an attempt (or methodology), I consider Roswell today as a myth "fabricated" consciously or not after 1978.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Monday, August 16, 2010  

  • New Titanium Alloys Near 'Magic' Strength Threshold

    The result, Shiflet says, is an alloy with "spectacular properties" and the promise of materials that "may have the strength to carry a load and be able to perform another distinctive capacity, such as sensing damage and perhaps even repairing themselves."

    By Blogger Frank Stalter, at Tuesday, August 24, 2010  

  • I was reading about memory metal found at Roswell crash site. It dawned on me that they might be talking about Nitinol. I experimented with some samples sent to me by Battelle back in the 80's. I did a search at Yahoo and low and behold here I am at this website giving me lots of information on the connections between Battelle's Nitinol memory metal and Roswell. Extraordinary!!! I'm sure everybody knows that Titanium was rare in the USA in the 40's & 50's. The Skunk-Works (Lockheed) somehow attained the only source of Titanium from Russia to build the U-2 spy plane. The irony is the U-2 was used to spy on Russia. Nitinol is made of Titanium and Nickel.

    By Blogger Denton Fender, at Tuesday, October 08, 2013  

Post a Comment

<< Home