Look at the language officials use: “We can’t confirm what these are.” “We can’t release the clear imagery.” “The performance characteristics are classified.” That sounds less like alien disclosure and more like capability protection. A clear image of a classified vehicle is not just a picture. It gives away geometry, surface design, thermal behavior, radar profile, and maybe even the control method. That’s why they aren’t releasing shit, you think the military will show you how it works? That’s why there is all this pushback. Then look at the shapes: Disc. Lens. Sphere. Egg. Tic-tac. Bro - Those are not random. It’s based off field symmetry. All fixed wing aircraft look the same because they work on AIR!!! This doesn’t, it doesn’t ‘surf’ air with wings. Once you realize that the real “airframe” is a plasma/EM envelope around the hull, those shapes make sense now. The shape is the mechanism!!!!!! Disc / lens: 360° rim symmetry = best for hover, lateral “slide” movement, station-keeping, surveillance, and force-vector changes without banking. Tic-tac / capsule: clean axial symmetry = best for fast forward transit, intercept, high-altitude recon, and smooth nose-to-tail field shaping. Sphere: perfect omnidirectional symmetry = best for probes, swarms, decoys, sensor nodes, and movement with no preferred front/back/top/bottom. Egg: sphere plus forward bias = best for missions needing hover + directional travel, atmospheric/water entry, and smoother transition between stillness and speed. Lozenge / rounded diamond: directional symmetry with broad faces = best for stealthy sensor/platform roles where field control, radar profile, and payload volume all matter. This can’t be a coincidence. All the REPORTED UFO shapes seem to line up with fields symmetry! But public aerospace is not the whole tech tree. If this is ours, it is not a better fighter jet. It is a field-envelope vehicle. submitted by /u/Competitive-Nose8532 [link] [comments]