JASON report on high-frequency gravitational waves

JASON report on high-frequency gravitational waves

From the UAP Encyclopedia, the open encyclopedia of UFO and UAP history · 🗓️ Event

Contents 8
JASON report on high-frequency gravitational waves
Illustration of official papers and files
Illustration: official papers and files. An artist's impression drawn for this site, not a photograph of the event.
DateOctober 2008
TopicsSecrecy & cover-up (topic), Government programs (topic), Propulsion & physics (topic)
TestimonyShellenberger testimony, p. 167
Year2008 in UFO history
Timeline2008 on the UAP Timeline
Sources11

In October 2008 the JASON group, an elite panel of scientists that advises the U.S. government, completed a review of high-frequency gravitational waves (HFGWs) for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. It concluded that no foreign threat from them was credible.[1][2]

Background

Bigelow Aerospace President Robert Bigelow talks during a press conference shortly after he and NASA Deputy Administrator Lori Garver toured the…
Bigelow Aerospace President Robert Bigelow talks during a press conference shortly after he and NASA Deputy Administrator Lori Garver toured the… Photo: Bill Ingalls · Public domain · via Wikimedia Commons

Promoters, including physicist Robert Baker, had argued that high-frequency gravitational waves could be generated and used for communication, radar and even propulsion. The intelligence community asked JASON, administered by the MITRE Corporation, to assess whether such technology could pose a foreign threat.[1][3]

Findings

Illustration of a radar screen tracking unknown returns
Illustration: a radar screen tracking unknown returns. An artist's impression drawn for this site, not a photograph of the event.

The report, "High Frequency Gravitational Waves" (JSR-08-506), concluded that no foreign threat from HFGWs was credible, and rejected their use for communication, radar, propulsion and other practical applications, because generating detectable high-frequency gravitational waves would require impossibly large amounts of energy. It criticised some of the promoters' claims and warned that there was no substitute for seeking expert scientific opinion on such matters, noting that relativity and gravitation attract a great deal of pseudoscience.[1][2]

Response

Illustration of an open book about flying saucers
Illustration: an open book about flying saucers. An artist's impression drawn for this site, not a photograph of the event.

Baker disputed the findings in a published response. A year later the Pentagon's AAWSAP program commissioned a report on HFGW communications, one of its 38 Defense Intelligence Reference Documents, which became public in 2019.[3][4]

Significance

Illustration of a disc-shaped craft in the night sky
Illustration: a disc-shaped craft in the night sky. An artist's impression drawn for this site, not a photograph of the event.

The review remains the authoritative assessment of the subject, and is often cited as an example of the intelligence community seeking outside scientific advice on exotic technology claims.[1][2]

People and topics

Illustration of Earth, the Moon and space
Illustration: Earth, the Moon and space. An artist's impression drawn for this site, not a photograph of the event.

On the Timeline

Illustration of a jet meeting an unknown object
Illustration: a jet meeting an unknown object. An artist's impression drawn for this site, not a photograph of the event.
  • Navy officer on the Montauk claims (4 August 2008) — An anonymous forum poster says a Navy officer dismissed some Montauk claims as nonsense.
  • AAWSAP begins (2008) (2 October 2008) — Bigelow tells Vallée the DIA's AAWSAP project has started but promised access hasn't arrived.

See every 2008 event on the UAP Timeline →

References

Further reading

This page was last edited on 29 October 2026. Articles are written in our own words from the sources listed under References; disputed claims are attributed to the people who made them.

Discuss the article: missing sources, mistakes, or what should be added.

No discussion yet.

BrowseFeedArticlesTimelineOfficial filesMapTonight’s SkyStatsFavorites