Condign volumes 1 to 3

Read from the scan by GLM-OCR; expect the odd misread word.

# UNCLASSIFIED

UK RESTRICTED

from UAPs the following zones on the shaded diagram are of interest. Lines A and B (Figure F-1(d) & (e) are the value of electric current densities occurring in tissue. The information at Figure F-1 is converted into incident E and H fields at Figures F-2 and F-3. Since, for this study it seems likely that UAP radiation affect the human temporal lobes, a sphere is used as the model at Figures F-3 and F-4, with the same current densities as at Figure F-1.

8. The source of these values $ ^{1} $recognises that the maximum current densities may be in error by up to an order. Hence, they can only be used with caution. In general, from 3 to $ 3 0 0 \mathrm{M H z} $ power densities $ < 1 \mathrm{m W.c m}^{-2} $ are considered 'weak' fields.

9. Athermal Effects Very little agreed scientific knowledge exists about athermal effects other than stimulating effects. Localised absorption is known to occur, for example at 3MHz around the ankles and head, indicating a higher likelihood of higher current distributions (see Figure F-1) in the body area where brain stimulation may be affected. This is not to imply that adverse effects are certain because no biophysical action model exists to produce reliable information on which to base a firm hypothesis. It is not known whether UAP emissions produce mixed frequency effects.

10. Modulations Effects on humans are also concerned with any modulation which may be present and this clearly affects total received energy and may therefore affect human brains in different ways, depending on the coupling mechanism.

11. Near-Field Coupling Due to complicated near-field structures. with temporal phase differences between the E and H fields, a considerable variation can occur in polarisation. Very few investigations have been made to determine near-field coupling and absorption. Optimum coupling into a body can only take place when its orientation (polarization characteristic) is identical to the incident wave at that point. It is clear from this

that it might be possible for a human to be close to a UAP radiation. in fact within its near-field with little effect. while a short distance away the coupling conditions may cause another human to receive stimulation resulting in quite different description of what is being seen. The generalised values deemed to be acceptable radiation hazard levels do not necessarily apply in the case of UAPs, where it is suggested that very low levels of radiation in the near-field (and possibly containing unknown modulations) may couple with the human brain. There is also some evidence that some humans are more susceptible than others to this phenomena. This may well account for the fact that often the same person repeatedly observes' UAP events while others do not.

12. Radiation Pattern Although it may be assumed that the (idealised) shape of the radiating UAP is spherical and that its radiation pattern is uniformly omni-directional, in practice this may not be the case. Frequent reports suggest that the (assumed plasmas) take up a variety of shapes and have 'hot spots' which are visible. Conventional logic is that the inhomegeneity and shape variation will lead to a non-uniform radiation distribution. Hence, there may well be 'hot spots' of radiation emanating along some axes - which the close observer may or may not be exposed to. Further, the objects of interest are often observed/approached by witnesses travelling in cars which will provide some screening. On other occasions the screening is supplied because witnesses are in aircraft. Finally, there are cases where people have left their cars and suffered both immediate and after-effects.