Anomaly•Registry
AR-0197

The Philadelphia Experiment

Debunked
Date Alleged autumn 1943. The story surfaces in one man’s letters in the mid-1950s.
Location The alleged event is placed at the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard, Pennsylvania, with an alleged instantaneous relocation to the Norfolk, Virginia area and back.
Coordinates 39.8911, -75.1786
Category Physical and Geological

Summary

The claim is that in the autumn of 1943 the United States Navy made the destroyer escort USS Eldridge invisible and teleported her from the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard to Norfolk, Virginia, and back in a few minutes.

No document from the period supports it. The story enters the record after the publication of Morris K. Jessup’s 1955 book on UFOs, in letters to Jessup from a man calling himself Carlos Allende, who said he had watched the event from another ship. He was later identified as Carl Allen. The ship’s war diary places her elsewhere for the whole period, the master of the merchant ship whose crew supposedly saw the event denied it, and the naval office said to have run the experiment was not founded until 1946.

the alleged event, and when the story enters the record 1943 the alleged event 1946 the ONR is founded 1955 Jessup publishes; letters follow 1956 annotated copy sent to ONR 1980 Allende named as Carl Allen no 1943 document supports the claim the war diary places the Eldridge elsewhere throughout the master of the Andrew Furuseth denied it in writing THE OFFICE SAID TO HAVE RUN IT DID NOT YET EXIST. The Office of Naval Research was founded in 1946, three years after the experiment it is supposed to have conducted. the navy has searched its archives repeatedly and found no record of it.
Figure Drawn by Anomaly Registry from the dated record. The alleged event sits at the left with nothing attached to it: every document that tells the story comes later, and so does the office said to have run it.

What is documented

Where the story actually starts. The Office of Naval Research dates the myth to 1955, with the publication of Morris K. Jessup’s book on UFOs. Jessup then received letters from a man signing himself Carlos Miquel Allende, who said he had watched from another ship as a vessel was "rendered invisible and teleported to and from Norfolk in a few minutes". In 1956 a copy of Jessup’s book was mailed anonymously to ONR, its margins covered in handwritten comments. No document from 1943 supports the account.

Who Allende was. ONR’s 1996 sheet still describes his identity as unknown. The researcher Robert Goerman identified him in Fate in 1980 as Carl Allen, the son of a family friend, according to Brian Dunning’s account, and Jacques Vallée names him as "Carl M. Allen alias Carlos Allende". Dunning reports that the annotations were all in the same handwriting, written as three characters in three colours of ink.

The independent witness, who denied it. According to the Navy, the crew of the merchant ship SS Andrew Furuseth supposedly observed the Eldridge arrive at Norfolk by teleportation. The Navy’s archives hold a letter from Lieutenant Junior Grade William S. Dodge, master of the Andrew Furuseth in 1943, "categorically denying that he or his crew observed any unusual event while in Norfolk". The Navy adds that the two ships "were not even in Norfolk at the same time".

Where the ship actually was. From the war diary: USS Eldridge was commissioned on 27 August 1943 at the New York Navy Yard; sailed for Bermuda on 16 September; remained in the vicinity of Bermuda for training and sea trials from 18 September to 15 October; left in convoy for New York on 15 October, arriving on 18 October; entered Norfolk on 2 November; left for Casablanca on 3 November, arriving on 22 November; and returned to New York on 17 December. The Navy’s statement is flat: "During this time frame, Eldridge was never in Philadelphia."

The office that did not exist. The Office of Naval Research, said to have run or covered up the experiment, records in its own information sheet that it was established in 1946, three years after the alleged event, and that it "has never conducted any investigations on invisibility, either in 1943 or at any other time". Its conclusion: "ONR scientists do not believe that such an experiment could be possible except in the realm of science fiction." The Navy’s Operational Archives separately reports that it "failed to identify records of a Project Rainbow relating to teleportation"; Rainbow in Navy usage referred to the Axis powers and to American war plans.

What Einstein was actually doing. "During 1943-1944, Einstein was a part-time consultant with the Navy’s Bureau of Ordnance", undertaking theoretical research on explosives and explosions. The Navy states: "There is no indication that Einstein was involved in research relevant to invisibility or to teleportation." ONR adds that his Unified Field Theory was never completed.

The degaussing kernel, and its limit. Degaussing cancels a ship’s magnetic field using cables around the hull, and makes a vessel effectively invisible to the sensors of magnetic mines. The Navy records this as what was formerly believed to lie behind the stories. The limit is the point: a degaussed ship "remains visible to the human eye, radar, and underwater listening devices".

How it reached a mass audience. Charles Berlitz and William L. Moore’s 1979 book on the case, in Jacques Vallée’s words, "has become the standard reference", and a feature film directed by Stewart Raffill followed in 1984.

Leading explanations

The story was invented by the letter writer (established as to origin). That the whole account traces to one man’s correspondence with Jessup in the mid-1950s. No document from 1943 supports it, the Navy’s archives have been searched repeatedly without finding one, the ship he described was elsewhere, and the master of the merchant ship whose crew supposedly saw the event denied it outright. Jacques Vallée, writing in the Journal of Scientific Exploration in 1994, reports that claims by purported witnesses "have been repeatedly found to be fraudulent", and calls the case "a story that simply refuses to die".

A garbled recollection of degaussing (the Navy’s former best guess; untested in its specifics). That the account grew from real wartime work wrapping hulls in cable to cancel their magnetic fields. The Navy notes that a degaussed ship is "invisible" only to the sensors of magnetic mines, and "remains visible to the human eye, radar, and underwater listening devices". It can explain the word, not the claim.

It happened and the records were falsified (rejected). Unfalsifiable as stated, and contradicted by the documentary record: the war diary, the repeated searches of the Navy’s archives, and the 1946 founding of the office said to be responsible.

What the popular version gets wrong

"The story dates from 1943, from sailors who came forward after the war." There is no trace of it in the record before Jessup’s 1955 book and the letters that followed, written by one man more than a decade after the event he described.

"USS Eldridge was in Philadelphia in October 1943." The war diary places her at Bermuda from 18 September to 15 October, in New York by 18 October, at Norfolk on 2 November and at Casablanca on 22 November. The Navy states she was never in Philadelphia in that period.

"The Office of Naval Research ran it, or covered it up." That office was established in 1946, three years after the alleged event, and states it has never investigated invisibility at any time.

"Einstein’s unified field theory made the ship vanish." Einstein’s documented wartime Navy work was part-time consulting for the Bureau of Ordnance on explosives, and the Navy finds no indication that he was involved in research relevant to invisibility or teleportation. ONR adds that the Unified Field Theory was never completed.

Current status

Debunked. The claim enters the record in the mid-1950s through one man’s letters, and every independent check that could be run has come back negative. The Navy has stated its position in writing more than once. Its archives found no documents confirming the event; the war diary places the ship away from Philadelphia throughout the relevant months; the office said to have run the experiment did not exist until 1946; and the master of the merchant ship whose crew supposedly saw the event denied it. For the event itself, nothing short of a contemporaneous document from 1943 to 1945, independent of the letters, would change this record. What real thing, if anything, seeded the story is a narrower question. Degaussing is the Navy’s own former answer, and a documented degaussing record for a vessel at the Philadelphia yard in the autumn of 1943 would bear on it.

Sources

  • Office of Naval Research, Department of the Navy. "Information Sheet," subject: "Philadelphia Experiment; UFO’s." 8 September 1996. Read via a university web archive capture and via a Department of Defense reading-room scan. Source of the dating of the myth to Jessup’s 1955 book, the Allende letters, the 1956 mailing, the 1946 founding, the statement on invisibility research and the degaussing explanation.
  • Naval History and Heritage Command, Department of the Navy. "The Philadelphia Experiment." 28 November 2000. Read via a university web archive capture; the live page is not reachable. Source of the war-diary movements, the "never in Philadelphia" statement, the Andrew Furuseth and the Dodge letter, the Project Rainbow finding, the limits of degaussing and the Einstein consultancy.
  • Vallée, J. F. (1994). "Anatomy of a Hoax: The Philadelphia Experiment Fifty Years Later." Journal of Scientific Exploration, 8(1), pp. 47 to 71. Read as a partial distributed text rather than the journal version. Source of Allen’s name, the standing of the 1979 book, the 1984 film and the quotations above. The informant Vallée interviewed is not named in the text the Registry read.
  • Dunning, B. (2006). "The Real Philadelphia Experiment." Skeptoid, episode 16, 24 December 2006. Read. Source of Goerman’s identification of Allende as Carl Allen and of the description of the annotations.
  • Goerman, R. A. (1980). "Alias Carlos Allende." Fate, October 1980. Could not be opened; cited through Dunning.

Last reviewed: November 2026. Records are provisional. Where the evidence changes, the entry changes. Found an error? Tell us.

Related records
AR-0078 The Black Knight Satellite An alien satellite in polar orbit. The photograph is probably a thermal blanket lost on STS-88; the rest is sixty years of misattribution. Assembled from the 1950s Debunked
AR-0149 The Lost Cosmonauts Recordings Two Italian brothers said they recorded Soviet cosmonauts dying on secret missions in the 1960s. The opened Soviet records show no such flights. 1960 to 1965 Debunked
AR-0083 The Vela Incident A US satellite recorded the double flash of a nuclear test. No country has ever admitted it. 22 September 1979 Unsolved
AR-0030 The Tunguska Event Roughly 2,000 square kilometres of Siberian forest flattened by a meteoroid airburst. 1908 Later explained

Advertise on Anomaly Registry

A documentary archive of 200 investigated cases, read slowly and at length by an audience that arrives on purpose. Below are the current delivery figures and what is available to buy.

Figures are rolling daily averages, current as of September 2026. They are restated as the traffic changes rather than left to age quietly, and we are happy to screen-share the underlying Ad Manager and analytics reporting before an insertion order is signed.

Anomaly Registry is a reference archive rather than a feed. Every one of its 200 records is written to a fixed structure, sourced to contemporaneous documents, inquest files, peer-reviewed literature or credible reporting, and each carries a section setting out precisely what the popular version of the story gets wrong. Cases that were later explained and cases that were comprehensively debunked are kept alongside the unsolved ones, because an archive that keeps only its mysteries is not an archive. That editorial position is the reason people stay.

It also explains the shape of the traffic. A session here runs to more than four pages and close to nine minutes, which is several times what a typical content site sees. Readers arrive looking for one case, find the sources laid out, and follow the cross-references into the next record. For an advertiser, the practical consequence is that a banner on this site is in front of a settled, attentive reader for minutes rather than seconds, and it is seen repeatedly across a single visit without ever being the reason someone leaves.

Three placements are available on every page. The leaderboard sits above the masthead and accepts 728x90, 970x90 and 320x50. The in-article unit sits inside the body of the record, where the reader is already stopped, and accepts 728x90, 300x250 and 336x280. The footer unit closes the page and accepts 728x90, 970x90 and 320x50. There are three slots per page and there will not be a fourth: the inventory is deliberately limited so that each impression is worth more than it would be on a page carrying eight.

What we do not run matters as much as what we do. There are no interstitials, no pop-ups, no auto-playing video, no content-recommendation chumboxes, and nothing that reflows the page after the reader has started reading. Ads are served in reserved space so the layout does not jump. This protects viewability for the advertiser as directly as it protects the reading experience, and it is the reason we can quote the session figures above with a straight face.

The editorial environment is unusually safe for a subject area that is often anything but. This site does not publish conspiracy content, it does not promote pseudoscience, and it does not treat a rumour as a finding. Its entire method is to separate what is documented from what has merely been proposed, and to say plainly when a famous mystery has an unglamorous answer. A brand placed here sits next to sourced, corrected, carefully hedged writing rather than next to speculation dressed as news.

The readership is a general-interest one with a research habit: people who read long-form nonfiction, follow science and history coverage, and check citations. In practice the categories that fit well are books and publishing, documentary and streaming, museums and exhibitions, education and online courses, audio and podcasts, consumer technology, outdoor and travel, and financial services. If your product rewards attention and explanation rather than impulse, this is a good room to be in.

Everything is delivered through Google Ad Manager, so you can buy the way you already buy. Direct-sold campaigns can be trafficked as a guaranteed line item with standard reporting on impressions, viewability and click-through. Programmatic demand can reach the same inventory through the open auction or through a preferred deal or private marketplace at a floor we agree in advance. We accept standard IAB display creative and HTML5, and we can accommodate a reasonable third-party ad server or verification tag.

Category sponsorship is available for advertisers who want something more durable than a rotation. The register is organised into seven categories, and a sponsor can take the whole of one, appearing across every record inside it with an acknowledgement in the page furniture. Sponsorship never buys editorial influence: a sponsor cannot commission a record, cannot review one before publication, cannot have a record altered, and cannot have one removed. That rule is not negotiable and it is the thing that keeps the inventory worth buying.

Some categories are declined outright, and it is fairer to say so up front than to discover it after an insertion order. We do not accept adult content, gambling, payday or high-cost short-term credit, cryptocurrency speculation and token sales, dietary supplements making health claims, political advocacy, psychic or clairvoyant services, or anything that reads as a scare advertisement dressed up as an article. Nothing may be styled to look like a record or like part of the editorial page.

Rates depend on placement, volume, whether the buy is run-of-site or targeted to a category, and how long it runs. There is no rate card on this page because a sensible number depends on what you are trying to do, and quoting one in the abstract usually wastes both parties' time. Tell us the campaign, the flight dates and the budget you are working to, and you will get a straight answer including whether we think the fit is wrong.

To start, write to or use the contact form and mark the message for the advertising desk. Include the flight dates, the placements you want, the creative sizes you have ready and any verification requirements, and we will come back with availability and a quote. Media buyers who want the underlying analytics before committing are welcome to ask; we would rather show the reporting than be taken on trust.

Privacy Policy

This policy explains what information Anomaly Registry collects when you visit this website, why it is collected, how it is used, and what choices you have. It applies to anomalyregistry.com and to any subdomain operated by us. It was last updated on the date shown at the end of this policy, and we will revise it if our practices change.

We have designed this site to collect as little personal information as possible. You do not need an account to read anything here. There is no login, no user profile, and no comment system. In the ordinary course of reading the register, you are not asked to identify yourself, and we do not ask you to.

Like virtually every web server, ours produces access logs. These logs record the internet protocol address of the requesting device, the date and time of the request, the page or file requested, the referring page if one was sent, and the browser user agent string. These logs exist for security, abuse prevention, and diagnosing technical faults. They are retained for a limited period and then discarded. We do not use them to build profiles of individual readers.

If you write to us through the contact form, we receive whatever you choose to put into it: typically a name, an email address, and a message. We use that information for the sole purpose of reading and answering your message. Writing to us does not add you to any list, and we do not sell, rent, or trade contact details with anyone.

There is one optional mailing list, and you only join it by asking. If you submit the subscribe form we store the address you gave, the time you submitted it, the IP address it came from, and the exact wording of the consent you agreed to. We keep that record because Canadian anti-spam law expects us to be able to show when and how you asked to hear from us. The list is used to say that records have been published or materially revised, and for nothing else. Every message carries a way to leave, and asking to be removed by email works just as well.

Corrections are a special case, and worth stating plainly. If you write to point out an error in a record, we may act on that correction and revise the entry. We will not publish your name or your email address in connection with a correction unless you explicitly ask us to be credited.

This site is supported by advertising served through Google Ad Manager. Advertising technology providers may set and read cookies or similar identifiers on your device in order to select advertisements, limit how often you see the same advertisement, and measure performance. These identifiers are set by those third parties, not by us, and the data they collect is governed by their own privacy policies rather than this one.

We do not have access to the personal data that advertising partners collect, and we cannot delete it on your behalf. If you wish to limit interest-based advertising, you can adjust the advertising settings offered by Google, use your browser's cookie controls, or use the industry opt-out tools that are available in your region. Details are set out in our Cookie Policy.

We may use privacy-respecting aggregate analytics to understand which records are being read and how people move through the register. Where we do, we configure it to avoid collecting information that identifies individual readers. Aggregate figures tell us that a case page is popular; they do not tell us who read it.

We do not knowingly collect personal information from children. This site is a documentary archive intended for a general adult and older student readership. If you believe a child has sent us personal information through the contact form, write to us and we will delete it.

Depending on where you live, you may have rights over personal data relating to you, including the right to ask what we hold, to ask for a copy, to ask for correction, and to ask for deletion. Because we hold so little, these requests are usually simple to answer. Write to us and we will respond within the period required by the law that applies to you.

Our servers are located in North America, and information sent to this site is processed there. If you are visiting from elsewhere, your request necessarily crosses borders in order to reach us. By using the site you understand that this transfer takes place.

If we change this policy, the revised version will be posted here with a new date. Material changes will be noted plainly rather than buried. Questions about this policy should be sent through the contact page.

Cookie Policy

A cookie is a small text file that a website asks your browser to store, and that your browser sends back on later requests. Similar technologies, including local storage and pixel tags, do comparable work. This policy explains which of these are used on Anomaly Registry, by whom, and what you can do about them.

The registry itself is a reading site. It does not require a cookie to show you a record. We do not set cookies to track you across the internet, and we do not operate a first-party advertising identifier of our own.

Strictly necessary cookies may be set to keep the site secure and functioning, for example to help mitigate automated abuse of the contact form. These are limited in scope and are not used for advertising or profiling.

Advertising cookies are set by Google Ad Manager and by the advertising technology partners that operate within it. Their purposes include selecting which advertisement to show, capping the number of times a given advertisement is repeated, detecting invalid traffic and click fraud, and measuring whether an advertisement was actually seen.

Some of these advertising cookies support interest-based advertising, in which the advertisement you see is influenced by inferences drawn from browsing activity over time and across sites. Whether this occurs depends on your region, your settings, and the choices you have already made with those providers.

We may use aggregate analytics to count page views and understand which records are read. Where an analytics tool is used, we prefer configurations that do not identify individual readers and that do not follow readers across other websites.

We do not embed social media widgets, share buttons, or tracking pixels from social networks. This is a deliberate choice for an archive of this kind, and it removes an entire category of third-party tracking that most content sites carry.

Your browser gives you direct control over cookies. Every major browser can block third-party cookies, delete existing cookies, and clear stored data on exit. Blocking third-party cookies will not prevent you from reading anything on this site, though it may make the advertising you see less relevant.

You can also manage advertising preferences with Google directly through its advertising settings, and through the industry opt-out mechanisms operated in various regions. Because these are operated by third parties, we cannot make the choice on your behalf.

Where the law in your region requires consent before non-essential cookies are set, a consent notice will be shown and your choice will be respected. Withdrawing consent later is possible through the same mechanism.

Advertising partners may change over time. Rather than publish a list that goes stale, we identify the advertising system in use, which is Google Ad Manager, and direct you to Google's own disclosures for the current set of partners operating within it.

If you have a question about cookies on this site that this policy does not answer, write to us through the contact page and we will answer it.

Anomaly Registry is an independent documentary archive. It is published as a work of reference and public interest reporting, and it is supported by advertising. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or acting on behalf of any government, university, police service, coroner, scientific institution, or investigative body named in any record.

The register documents real events, including in some cases deaths, criminal investigations, and inquests. Where a record concerns a criminal matter, nothing on this site should be read as an allegation of guilt against any living person. Where an individual has been named in the public record, we report the fact of that naming and its evidentiary standing; we do not accuse.

Records are written from sources. Where a source is a primary document, we say so. Where a claim rests on secondary reporting, we say so. Where sources conflict, we state the conflict rather than quietly choosing a side. Where a widely repeated claim cannot be traced to any source, we say that too, because an untraceable claim is itself a finding.

Every record separates what is documented from what has been proposed. Hypotheses are labelled as hypotheses and attributed to whoever advanced them, together with their standing: peer-reviewed, contested, dismissed, or untested. We do not advance theories of our own.

The registry treats its own entries as provisional. Records carry a review date, and they are revised when the evidence changes. A record you read today may be corrected tomorrow, and that is a feature of the method rather than a defect in it.

Despite this method, errors will occur. If you find one, write to us. Corrections supported by evidence are made promptly, and we would rather be corrected than be consistent.

Scientific and forensic conclusions reported here are the conclusions of the researchers and officials who reached them, not ours. Reporting that a study proposed a mechanism is not an endorsement that the mechanism is correct, and the status assigned to a case reflects the state of the evidence rather than our opinion of it.

Nothing on this site is legal, medical, psychological, financial, or safety advice. Records that touch on medical or psychological matters, including mass psychogenic illness, report the diagnoses reached by clinicians at the time and afterward. They are not a substitute for professional care.

Quotations from sources are used sparingly and for the purposes of reporting, comment, criticism, and review. Copyright in quoted material remains with its owner. If you hold rights in material you believe has been used improperly, contact us and we will address it.

Original text, structure, record numbering, and editorial apparatus on this site are the property of Anomaly Registry. You are welcome to quote briefly and link to us. Wholesale reproduction of records, including reproduction for the purpose of training generative models, is not permitted without written permission.

Outbound links are provided as references. We do not control linked sites and are not responsible for their content, their accuracy, or their handling of your data.

This site is operated from British Columbia, Canada, and these notices are governed by the laws applicable there, without regard to conflict-of-law principles.

Accessibility Statement

Anomaly Registry is built to be usable by as many people as possible, including people who use screen readers, keyboard navigation, magnification, or other assistive technology. We treat accessibility as part of the build rather than as a later remediation.

We aim to meet the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.1 at level AA. This is a target we work toward continuously rather than a certification we claim to have completed.

The site is written as semantic HTML. Headings describe the real structure of a record, lists are marked up as lists, and the register is a genuine table with proper header cells, so that a screen reader can announce which column a value belongs to.

Every interactive element is reachable and operable by keyboard alone. Focus is visible at all times, and a skip link at the top of each page lets keyboard and screen reader users jump straight to the register without traversing the navigation.

Status is never conveyed by colour alone. Each status carries its written label in text, so a reader who does not perceive the colour difference between "Unsolved" and "Debunked" still receives the distinction.

Text colours have been chosen to meet or exceed the contrast ratios required at level AA against the page background. The typefaces are set at a comfortable reading size with generous line height, and the layout reflows to a single column on small screens without loss of content or function.

The site contains one animated element, an annotation on the home page. It respects the reduced-motion preference set in your operating system, and when that preference is on, the annotation appears without movement.

Text can be resized up to two hundred percent in the browser without breaking the layout or clipping content. Nothing on this site depends on a specific screen orientation.

Advertising is served by a third party. We control where advertisements are placed and label them as advertisements, but we do not control their internal markup, and their accessibility is ultimately determined by the advertiser.

We are developing an audio version of each record. When it is published, it will be an alternative way to receive the same content, not a replacement for the written entry, and the written entry will remain the authoritative version.

Accessibility work is never finished, and parts of this site will fall short of the standard we have set. If you encounter a barrier, we want to know about it. Please tell us what page you were on, what you were trying to do, and what assistive technology you were using.

Write to us through the contact page. We aim to respond within five business days and to fix genuine barriers promptly.

Terms of Use

These terms govern your use of anomalyregistry.com. By using the site you accept them. If you do not accept them, please do not use the site.

Anomaly Registry is offered as a free documentary reference. There is no account, no subscription, and no paywall, and nothing here is offered as a professional service of any kind.

You may read, quote briefly with attribution, link to, and print records for personal, educational, and research use. This is an archive, and it is meant to be used.

You may not reproduce records wholesale, republish the register or substantial parts of it, or scrape the site systematically. In particular, you may not reproduce this content for the purpose of training generative models. Permission for other uses can be requested through the contact page and is often granted.

Original text, the record numbering system, the status taxonomy, the editorial apparatus, and the design of this site are the property of Anomaly Registry. Third-party material quoted or referenced remains the property of its owners.

We work hard to make records accurate, and we correct them when they are not. Even so, the site is provided as it is, without warranty of any kind, express or implied, including any warranty of accuracy, completeness, or fitness for a particular purpose.

Records are provisional by design. A status can change, an identification can be confirmed or overturned, and a leading explanation can be displaced by a better one. Do not treat any record as a final word, and check the review date.

To the fullest extent permitted by law, Anomaly Registry and its operator are not liable for any loss or damage arising from your use of, or reliance on, anything published here.

If you send us a correction, a source, or a suggestion, you grant us permission to use it in the register. You will not be identified in connection with it unless you ask to be credited.

Do not use the contact form to send abuse, threats, spam, or automated submissions. We may block access to anyone who misuses the site or attempts to interfere with its operation.

Outbound links are provided as references and are not endorsements. We are not responsible for the content or conduct of any site we link to.

We may revise these terms. The version published here is the version in force. These terms are governed by the laws of British Columbia, Canada, and any dispute will be heard in the courts of that province.