The following article was submitted to a perfectly respectable astronomy magazine. For some reason, they sent it back!
A new law of physics -- and what to do about it.
I would like to report the discovery of a new law of physics. It formalises a well known but previously unquantified interaction between Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) and people who 'believe in' alien forms of life (BAFLs). It also predicts the existence of a new type of black hole.
Many astronomers will have observed phenomena similar to the following. We may be discussing where the Sun's energy comes from with a non-astronomer, they respond by saying 'I believe in UFOs'. Perhaps we are explaining the phases of the Moon to a friend, they ask 'Do you believe in UFOs?' Conversations about variable stars are invariably interrupted by cries of 'Why don't you believe in UFOs?'
It is the use of the word 'believe' which is the key to this law. Note that I am using believe in the sense of being immune to reason and observation, this usage will be familiar to many BAFLs. I call this law The Uforia Principle.
Let U = force of attraction towards UFOs felt
by a BAFL
S = BAFL's coefficient of susceptibility to UFOs
N = number of TV programmes about UFOs that the BAFL has watched
P = number of planets (including the Earth) that the BAFL can
accurately identify
Then the Uforia Principle states that U = S x N
/ P
The Uforia Principle comes in a Strong form and a Very Strong form. The Strong form (P=1) allows U to assume very large values, thus behaving like a deep potential well with the BAFL trapped at the bottom. He/she may show apparent signs of interest in reality, but little inclination to actually experience it. Attempts at rescue are met with whimsical appeals to 'reason'. The Very Strong form (P=0) equates U with infinity. In this case we have a black hole from which the BAFL absolutely does not want to escape. Indeed, some have been heard to argue against the existence of reason entirely!
This particular egocentric model of the Universe comes complete with its own set of laws, such as the Certainty Principle. These laws, as a result of an unknown form of positive feedback, invariably tend to increase the BAFL's coefficient of susceptibility without limit.
Eric, the laboratory cat, has volunteered to be the guinea pig in an experiment to test the Certainty Principle. In this experiment he is shut in a box with a television set showing non-stop UFO programmes. I am certain that this will produce useful data. My co-worker is certain that it will not.
Eric after his hideous ordeal. He is much better now, thanks.
This new law can be applied to related
phenomena with illuminating results. I have in my possession a
number of metallic discs which appeared from nowhere (or another
plane of existence, if you like) whenever I lost a tooth. I have
also seen photographs and films of fairies. The discs could not
have been made by human hand and are undoubtedly fairy objects.
(Come on, pay attention!) If I had a big fairy coefficient I
would 'believe in' the tooth fairy.
The evidence for UFOs is no stronger than the evidence for fairies but, bizarrely, any number of otherwise intelligent people insist that they believe in UFOs. You could try to reason with them -- you could even determine their P value if you are interested, but be careful that you don't get trapped in a black hole. Time passes very slowly in a black hole. (This is a prediction of the General Theory of Gullibility and is a consequence of the speed of thought being equal to zero for all BAFLs -- but that's another story!)
As for me, no more conversations about astronomy will be taken over by people who 'know' that we are being visited by aliens but who cannot recognise the planet Jupiter when they are looking straight at it.
As Eric says, what's good enough for the tooth
fairy is good enough for UFOs.
David Conner.
David Conner is an amateur astronomer who believes that fairies should stay at the bottom of the garden where they belong.