It is said that research into space travel is unprofitable; no country, however rich, can raise the enormous amounts of money needed without risking national bankruptcy. True, research per se has never been profitable; it is the products of research that make the investment profitable. It is unreasonable to expect profitableness and the amortisation of research into space travel at its present stage. No balance has been struck to show the return from the 4,000 'by-products' of space research. To me there is absolutely no doubt that it will give a return such as has seldom been given by any other kind of research. When it reaches its goal, not only will it be profitable, it will also bring the salvation of mankind from downfall in the literal sense of the word. Incidentally I may mention that a whole series of COS-MAT satellites are already sound commercial propositions. In November 1967 Der Stern said:
'The majority of medical life-saving machines come from America. They are the product of the systematic evaluation of the results of atomic research, space travel and military technology. And they are the product of a novel collaboration between industrial giants and hospitals in America which is leading medicine to new triumphs almost daily.
Thus the Lockheed Company which makes Starfighters and the famous Mayo Clinic co-operated to develop a new system of nursing based on computer techniques. The designers of North American Aviation, following suggestions by the medical profession, are working on an "emphysema belt", which is intended to make it easier for patients with lung trouble to breathe. The NASA space authorities produced the idea for this diagnostic apparatus. The apparatus, actually conceived to measure the impact of micro-meteorites on space-ships, registers minute muscular spasms in certain nervous diseases.
'Another life-saving by-product of American computer technology was the "pacemaker". Today more than 2,000 Germans live with one of these apparatuses in their chests.
It is a battery-driven mini-generator which is introduced under the skin. From it the doctors insert a connecting cable through the superior vena cava to the right auricle of the heart. The heart is then stimulated to rhythmical movements by regular surges of current. It beats. When the battery of the "heart machine" is burnt out after three years, it can be changed by a comparatively simple operation.
'General Electric, the American concern, improved this little miracle of medical technology last year when it developed a two-speed model. If the wearer of this "pacemaker" wants to play tennis or run to catch a train, he simply moves a bar magnet up and down for a moment over the spot where his built-in generator is located. His heart promptly works at a higher speed.'
So much for the report in Der Stern. Two more examples of by-products of space-research. Who still has the nerve to say that it is useless?
Under the headline 'Stimulus from Moon Rockets', the newspaper Die Zeit contained the following report in its edition No. 47 of November 1967:
'The designs of space vehicles developed for soft landings on the moon have an interim interest for automobile manufacturers, for the knowledge of how such designs behave under conditions which cause their destruction can be appreciably increased. Even though it will not be possible to make cars safe for the passengers against all kinds of collisions, the designs used with most success in space travel can help to diminish the risk when collisions occur. "Honey-comb" sheets which are being used more and more in modern aircraft construction, guarantee high tensile strength with little weight. They have also been practically tested in automobile manufacture. The floor of the experimental gas-turbine-driven Rover car is made of "honey-combs".'
Anyone who knows the present state of research and the impetuous way in which it develops can no longer tolerate sayings such as 'It will never be possible to travel from one star to another'. The younger generation of our day will see this 'impossibility' become reality. Gigantic space-ships with incredibly powerful motors will be built, as the Russians proved in 1967 when they succeeded in coupling two unmanned space-craft in the stratosphere. One sector of space research is already working on a kind of protective screen, like an electric arc, which is attached in front of the actual capsule and is intended to prevent or deflect the impact of particles. A group of distinguished physicists is trying to detect what are known as tachyons. As yet these are theoretical particles which are supposed to fly faster than light and whose lower speed limit is the speed of light. Scientists know that tachyons must exist; it is now 'only' a question of providing physical proof of their existence. Yet such proofs have actually been produced for neutrinos and anti-matter! Finally I should like to ask the die-hard critics in the chorus of opponents of space traveclass="underline" do they really believe that several thousands of probably the cleverest men of our time would waste their impassioned work on a pure Utopia or a trivial goal?
So let me tackle UFO's boldly, ignoring the risk of not being taken seriously. If I am not taken seriously, I can at least console myself with the knowledge that I am in distinguished company.
UFO's have been sighted in America and over the Philippines, in West Germany and over Mexico. Let us assume that 98 per cent of the people who claimed that they had seen UFO's actually saw ball lightning, weather balloons, strange cloud formations, new unknown types of aircraft or even odd effects of light and shade in the sky at twilight. Undoubtedly, too, many people were the victims of mass hysteria. They claimed to have seen something that simply was not there. And of course there were also the publicity-seekers who wanted to make capital out of their alleged observations and produce banner headlines for the press in the silly season. If we reject all the crackpots, liars, hysterics and sensation-mongers, there still remains a sizeable group of sober observers, including people whose jobs make them familiar with celestial phenomena. A simple housewife may have made the same mistake as a farmer in the Wild West. But when, for example, a sighting of UFO's is made by an experienced airline pilot, it is hard to dismiss it as humbug. For an airline pilot is familiar with mirages, ball lightning, weather balloons, etc. The reactions of all his senses, including his first-class vision, are regularly tested; he is not allowed to drink alcohol for some hours before take-off and during flights. And an airline pilot is hardly likely to talk nonsense, because he would lose his nice, well-paid job only too easily. Yet when not merely one airline pilot, but a whole group of pilots (including airforce men) tell the same story, we are bound to listen to it.
I myself do not know what UFO's are; I do not say that they have been proved to be flying objects belonging to unknown intelligences, although there could be little objection to such a supposition. Unfortunately I have never seen a UFO with my own eyes during my world-wide travels round the globe, but I can reproduce here some credible, authenticated accounts:
On 5 February, 1965, the American Department of Defense announced that the Special Division for UFO's had been instructed to investigate reports of two radar operators. On 29 January, 1965, these two men had made out two unidentified flying objects on their radar screen at the Naval Airfield in Maryland. These objects approached the airfield from the south at the enormous speed of 4,350 m.p.h. 30 miles above the airfield the objects made a sharp turn and quickly disappeared out of radar range.
On 3 May, 1964, various people at Canberra (Australia), including three meteorologists, observed a large shining flying object crossing the morning sky in a north-easterly direction. During an interrogation by delegates of NASA the eye-witnesses described how the 'thing' had tumbled about in a strange way and how a smaller object had rushed at the large one. The small object had given off a red glow and then been obliterated, while the large 'thing' had disappeared from view in a north-westerly direction. One of the meteorologists said resignedly: 'I've always ridiculed these UFO stories. What the hell am I going to say now?'