The facts confirm the UFO crash happened. Officials deny it. What don’t they want us to know? In 1965 a massive wave of UFO sightings occurs worldwide. In 1967 residents of Shag Harbor, Canada, witness a huge UFO crash into the bay. Three Royal Canadian Mounties watch it float before sinking. Navy divers mount an extensive search. Now officials say nothing ever happened. Why? Researchers Don Ledger and Chris Styles—Styles himself an eyewitness to the Shag Harbor crash—have tackled one of the best documented and most top-secret incidents in the annals of UFO sightings. What they have found out will astound—and outrage—readers. From mysterious surveillance twenty-five years after the crash to the sudden disappearance of written records, someone wanted the investigation stopped. But Ledger and Styles now file their stunning report—and reach a chilling conclusion about the Dark Object, what really happened, and what remains hidden today. . . .

"Black holes are one of the extraordinary phenomena in the universe whose existence was surmised not by observations, but by theory. The black hole is a prediction of Einstein's 1915-1916 gravitational theory, general relativity, which replaced Sir Isaac Newton's gravity theory, published in his famous treatise Principia in 1687. In 1784, Reverend John Michell, a fellow of Queens' College and Professor of Geology at Cambridge University, had already envisioned what we now call black holes. He asked what would happen if a star's gravity were so strong that its escape velocity - the speed at which a rocket, for example, would have to travel to leave the star - exceeded the speed of light? Michell realized that any light emanating from the star would have to fall back to its surface. He speculated that the escape velocity would exceed the speed of light for a very massive star, making the star invisible to an observer"--

What is reality, really? Are humans more special or important than the non-human objects we perceive? How does this change the way we understand the world? We humans tend to believe that things are only real in as much as we perceive them, an idea reinforced by modern philosophy, which privileges us as special, radically different in kind from all other objects. But as Graham Harman, one of the theory's leading exponents, shows, Object-Oriented Ontology rejects the idea of human specialness: the world, he states, is clearly not the world as manifest to humans. At the heart of this philosophy is the idea that objects - whether real, fictional, natural, artificial, human or non-human - are mutually autonomous. In this brilliant new introduction, Graham Harman lays out the history, ideas and impact of Object-Oriented Ontology, taking in everything from art and literature, politics and natural science along the way. Graham Harman is Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at SCI-Arc, Los Angeles. A key figure in the contemporary speculative realism movement in philosophy and for his development of the field of object-oriented ontology, he was named by Art Review magazine as one of the 100 most influential figures in international art.

The vertebrate eye has been, and continues to be, an object of interest and of inquiry for biologists, physicists, chemists, psychologists, and others. Quite apart from its important role in the development of ophthalmology and related medical disciplines, the vertebrate eye is an exemplar of the ingenuity of living systems in adapting to the diverse and changing environments in which vertebrates have evolved. The wonder is not so much that the visual system, like other body systems, has been able to adapt in this way, but rather that these adaptations have taken such a variety of forms. In a previous volume in this series (VII/I) Eakin expressed admiration for the diversity of invertebrate photoreceptors. A comparable situation exists for the vertebrate eye as a whole and one object of this volume is to present to the reader the nature of this diversity. One result of this diversification of ocular structures and properties is that the experimental biologist has available a number of systems for study that are unique or especially favorable for the investigation of particular questions in visual science or neurobiology. This volume includes some examples of progress made by the use of such specially selected vertebrate systems. It is our hope that this comparative approach will continue to reveal new and useful preparations for the examination of important questions.

45 downwards because (j on the average increases with height; but this conclusion does not follow from (18.3) when the dependency of Kc upon ~o is taken into consideration. s 2 ERTELl and PRIESTLEY and SWINBANK have shown that the upward eddy flux of sensible heat must be larger than indicated by (18.3), because this formula does not account for the fact that rising eddies are systematically warmer than sinking eddies because of the effect of buoyancy. The reader is referred to the reviews by SUTTON [22], [23] and PRIESTLEY and SHEP PARD [15) for further details concerning eddy-flux of heat and turbulent diffusion. 19. RICHARDSON'S criterion. The right-hand side of (15.10) represents the rate of production of eddy energy. The last term represents energy loss by dissipation; in order that the eddy energy shall be maintained, it is therefore necessary that P div V" - (! V" v" . grad. v > O.