Unidentified Transient Object

From Razing-Wiki

Transients In Place Of Flying?

Many UFO researchers dislike the acronym "UFO" in part because it implies something the observer may not intend. For instance, if I see something out of the ordinary floating in the sky I really want to say that "I saw an unidentified floating object" not an "unidentified flying object." The problem of establishing the object's means of propulsion, if applicable, and spatial-locality is compounded when looking at cases that involve waterborne objects that appear to be capable of transitioning into the air and speeding through the water. In this sort of circumstance, a more accurate description would be an unidentified submersible-flying object (USFO). In effect, any property we can assign to something that is unknown creates a new acronym. Unidentified Aerial Phenomena. Unidentified Nonlocal Object. Unidentified Entity Object. And so on.

This is why I originally argued that "unidentified object" (UO) was the best replacement for UFO because anything a person is incapable of identifying falls in to the category of something that we would eventually like to find a complete explanation for. However there is a big difference between an unidentified rock and the sighting of an unidentified transient.

Meditating on this distinction led me to rethink Beeblebrox. Ultimately I decided the tool would be best suited to study things that have a short temporal nature. Meaning Beeblebrox could be best described as an application for identifying Unidentified Transient Objects or UTOs. Utilizing Beeblebrox to attempt to identify a stone that can be brought to a lab is an inefficient usage of the application since we have a permanent record of the object where researchers can materially examine its structure. Transient phenomena on the other hand require rapid prioritization and a large number of observation channels to be able to record and provide quick analysis.

This reveals that UO's can be classed into two major varieties. Those that are transient versus others that are re-observable or permanent. So in place of UFOD, CUFO, UFOP, IFO, TRUFO, and NMUFO we would substitute 'T' in place of the 'F' for each position. Giving UTOD (Ut-ah-d), CUTO (Cue-toe), UTOP (You-tup), ITO (Eye-toe), TRUTO (True-toe), and NMUTO (New-toe).

So, as a quick recap, people who discuss transient objects (UTOs) are often interested in a subcategory of anomalous observations referred to as UFOs. This usually has the connotation of implying 'flying saucer' (as the UFOP) and a spatial frame where the object is presumed to be maneuvering through the air in a self-directed manner. For the eventual formal proposal, I am suggesting science should take a larger interest in macro-level transient observations be it biological in nature (possibly representing a new species), new atmospheric phenomena, or anything that's large enough that a person with an average education might have the ability to observe and pick out that the object is unique amongst the set of knowns.