The Kinematic Anomaly

From Vixrapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The Kinematic Anomaly was an abnormal event that occurred at some time in 2016 in southern Wales. Several people were supposed witnesses of the event, but afterwards only one member of the party could recall any details of it, although even their recollection was self contradictory.

As far as can be reconstructed, the party were located indoors somewhere in southern Wales when the senior and most trusted member of the party (witness 1) threw an object across the room. According to the sole witness who could remember the event afterwards (witness *), that object "moved slightly" in the air. According to Witness *, this movement astounded Witness 1 and a third party to the anomaly (witness 2). As far as Witness * could remember afterwards, the reaction of Witness 1 did not merit the movement of the object, however, by their own sketch of the incident afterwards, Witness * drew the following:


In particular, the investigation ascertained that the object's motion both before and after the anomalous motion was in consonance: approximately aligned in trajectory and otherwise expected motion for an object in free fall. However, during the section of interest, the object moved anomalously. As far as the testimony of Witness * could be used to reconstruct the event, in written testimony they could not deny that the motion was extraordinary and could not be explained; however, curiously, they insisted in oral testimony that the motion was trivial and that Witness 1 was "dumb" for having been astounded by it.

Witness 1 had no recollection of the event at all afterwards. On repeated interrogation they insisted they could not recall either the event or their reaction to it. Witness 2 also professed no recollection of the anomalous event, although the investigators could not determine whether they were a direct witness of the event itself, or was a witness of any reaction to it, or was just present during the anomaly.

Witness * could not be convinced that their testimony was contradictory.


No explanation for the Kinematic Anomaly was proffered that was satisfactory to all the investigators, or indeed the witnesses. The basic facts themselves could not be verified and the sequence of events that was reconstructed was only the most probably ones given the testimony. The null hypothesis was that no anomalous motion occurred, and it was recollected incorrectly by the witnesses. However, the fact that Witness * both recalled the extraordinary reactions of those present and presented written drawings of the incident would indicate that something anomalous occurred. What the investigators could not explain is why Witness *'s written testimony contradicted their verbal testimony, and why all other witnesses to the anomaly could recollect no memory of it afterwards.