#20 | US Military Tech 100 Years Ahead? - Salvatore Pais Reveals the Science

<v Speaker 1>Malaysian three zero contact went to zero dismal nine. Breaking
<v Speaker 1>news tonight, a Malaysia Airlines flight with two hundred and
<v Speaker 1>thirty nine people on board, including four Americans, has gone missing.
<v Speaker 2>I remember the line from the Indo scripture of the
<v Speaker 2>Bagavad Gita thish New.
<v Speaker 1>I was trying to persuade the prince.
<v Speaker 2>He should do his duty, and to impressed him takes
<v Speaker 2>on multi armed form. It says, now I am become death,
<v Speaker 2>the destroyer of worlds.
<v Speaker 3>Thank you everybody for being here, Thank you for waiting
<v Speaker 3>those who are waiting patiently. I'm Ashon Forbes. This is
<v Speaker 3>Hard Trews Podcast. Guys. Today, I once again have probably
<v Speaker 3>our most esteemed guest ever on the show, US Navy
<v Speaker 3>engineer Salvator Pais. I hope you guys enjoy the conversation.
<v Speaker 3>Here we go, sal brother, welcome to the podcast once again.
<v Speaker 3>How are you doing rather?
<v Speaker 1>Thank you very much and my apologies again. I tried
<v Speaker 1>something new and new my new camera whatever, nothing worked,
<v Speaker 1>so go with old. Remember this is just a quick tip.
<v Speaker 1>Go with what you know works, especially when things get hot.
<v Speaker 1>But anyway, let me give the let me give the disclaimer.
<v Speaker 1>Right of the bat so I don't worry about it.
<v Speaker 1>I come on your Hard Troops podcast for the third time. Congratulations. Uh,
<v Speaker 1>let's see uh as a private citizen. My opinions, my
<v Speaker 1>statements on my own. They have absolutely nothing to do
<v Speaker 1>with the United States Navy nor the United States Space Force.
<v Speaker 1>Thank you very much for being such a kind host,
<v Speaker 1>and I truly love being in your presence. Just one
<v Speaker 1>more thing I would like to throw out there, since
<v Speaker 1>we already tried the challenge to elan Moscow and the
<v Speaker 1>alternative the the propulsion methodology not using advanced rocketry. As
<v Speaker 1>a matter of fact, possibly you can substantiate on your
<v Speaker 1>x platform. You can give the link again as to
<v Speaker 1>our our challenge. You're the one who post did it
<v Speaker 1>for me on your ex platform. Thank you very much. Sure,
<v Speaker 1>and anytime any place, I would like to engage with
<v Speaker 1>mister Musk and explain to him the alternatives to advanced rocketry.
<v Speaker 1>It is a one hundred and twenty year old technology
<v Speaker 1>not worthy of let's say, the genius of the third millennium,
<v Speaker 1>as he has been dubbed on the several shows.
<v Speaker 3>Well, I'll tell you what. Let's go about it like this.
<v Speaker 3>I'll ask you questions and we'll try to use this
<v Speaker 3>podcast as a way to convince him that he should
<v Speaker 3>be paying attention. Because just one more.
<v Speaker 1>Thing, and I promised that after that the floors can
<v Speaker 1>I would just answer the questions that you post. I
<v Speaker 1>promise you this, But I must say that this has
<v Speaker 1>been on the tip of my mind for some time
<v Speaker 1>and given the situation, let's say, not just in the
<v Speaker 1>world everywhere. Let me just say this, mister Musk, I
<v Speaker 1>make an appeal to you, as a federal employee, on
<v Speaker 1>behalf of my brothers and sisters in federal government. Please
<v Speaker 1>do not longer fire federal employees. Think and think again
<v Speaker 1>before you undergo such acts. We have taken a pledge
<v Speaker 1>to the United States Constitution. We protect and serve the
<v Speaker 1>people of the United States of America, and I implore
<v Speaker 1>you considerate will before you decide to fire us. We
<v Speaker 1>actually fulfill a very important row in science and technology
<v Speaker 1>and engineering. As a matter of fact, everything I've done,
<v Speaker 1>the price effect, the super force, anything that's linked even
<v Speaker 1>to the room temperature superconductor, which I am one hundred
<v Speaker 1>percent one day will be proven correct. Even that any
<v Speaker 1>one of us could have come up with these ideas,
<v Speaker 1>there are minds among us that should not be discarded. Please,
<v Speaker 1>if you must use a scalpel, not a chainsaw. Thank
<v Speaker 1>you very much, sir. I hope that you hear this.
<v Speaker 1>I hope Ashton, that your followers make this viral. Thank you, sir.
<v Speaker 3>So then let's start with the beginning. Why do you
<v Speaker 3>work for the US Navy.
<v Speaker 1>I work for the United States Navy because number one,
<v Speaker 1>I believe it is the strongest arm of the armed forces.
<v Speaker 1>It is, as a matter of fact, by constitution, by
<v Speaker 1>Act of Congress, the first of the armed forces. It
<v Speaker 1>is it it's extremely diverse, from the point of view
<v Speaker 1>that it encompasses every aspect of science and technology and engineering.
<v Speaker 1>It has an aviation wing, the United States Marines, you
<v Speaker 1>can say, those are its foot soldiers, and of course
<v Speaker 1>the Navy itself, so.
<v Speaker 3>Every private company. Though I work for.
<v Speaker 1>The United States government to protect and serve the people
<v Speaker 1>of the United States of America. I believe in that wholeheartedly.
<v Speaker 1>And to me, the greatest, one of the greatest achievements
<v Speaker 1>in my life was to become a federal employee. My
<v Speaker 1>brother's insistents know this well. We do this not to
<v Speaker 1>make money, but to serve and protect the interests and
<v Speaker 1>the country itself, because the country must prosper, the country
<v Speaker 1>must be there forever. This is a nation of divine
<v Speaker 1>right and laws.
<v Speaker 3>Well, then let me ask you based on your what
<v Speaker 3>you just said about Elon Musk, and even if you
<v Speaker 3>can't say what it is that you do, that's fine.
<v Speaker 3>But why is it that Elon Musk should not fire
<v Speaker 3>you if you're concerned about that happening. What is it
<v Speaker 3>that you're providing to that to advance what you just
<v Speaker 3>said to the people.
<v Speaker 1>It is not I, It is my brothers and sisters
<v Speaker 1>as a collective again, a force of unification within the
<v Speaker 1>government itself. We are providing again the brain, the brain matter,
<v Speaker 1>that the the absolute knowledge that comes with every one
<v Speaker 1>of us. Again, there's nothing special about me. Forget about
<v Speaker 1>the price effective, forget about the super force, forget about
<v Speaker 1>room temperature, super conductivity. All those can actually be achieved
<v Speaker 1>by anyone else in the United States government that has
<v Speaker 1>that works in these domains. Every one of us has
<v Speaker 1>that capability, that level of knowledge. A lot of us
<v Speaker 1>have thattoral level knowledge. It is thattoral qualifier PhD qualifier.
<v Speaker 3>So then why do they need you.
<v Speaker 1>They do not need me, they can take anyone else,
<v Speaker 1>and I'm pretty sure that they can fulfill that raw.
<v Speaker 1>I just bring to the table certain ideas. I do
<v Speaker 1>have one thing. I don't believe in boxes. I've done
<v Speaker 1>away with the boxes. I completely think boxes are not needed. Therefore,
<v Speaker 1>the whole idea of thinking outside the box, to me
<v Speaker 1>is a misnomer to begin with, because I do not
<v Speaker 1>believe in boxes.
<v Speaker 3>See so let me ask you this thing, because I disagree.
<v Speaker 3>I don't think you're that replaceable. Why did the US
<v Speaker 3>Navy support and approve get your patents approved? Because the
<v Speaker 3>truth of the story is, if you if you guys
<v Speaker 3>haven't caught up watched Hart Trood's podcast number one and two.
<v Speaker 3>I don't want to rehash the whole thing, but basically,
<v Speaker 3>only three of five of the five patents by Salvag
<v Speaker 3>or Pace in the US Navy were approved, and they
<v Speaker 3>had to fight for them, and they had like the
<v Speaker 3>chief technology guy like basically Sala's boss or his boss
<v Speaker 3>and boss. However, it worked out and one of the
<v Speaker 3>lawyers sending letters saying the stuff was you know, operable
<v Speaker 3>or you know, depending on the exact wordplay, that the
<v Speaker 3>stuff was legit. So why was the Navy fighting so
<v Speaker 3>hard for those patents.
<v Speaker 1>First of all, let me name the name. His name
<v Speaker 1>is doctor James Sheehy, Chief Technology Officer of Naval Aviation Enterprises.
<v Speaker 1>A great man, a man that shall be remembered by history,
<v Speaker 1>for he deserves to be remembered by history. He is
<v Speaker 1>a man of great integrity. I was able to present.
<v Speaker 1>I went to the blackboard, I would you know, forget
<v Speaker 1>this dryer race board, and stopped through the blackboard the
<v Speaker 1>piece of chalk in my mouth, in my mouth. Yeah,
<v Speaker 1>actually I held it in my mouth for a little while,
<v Speaker 1>but anyway, in my hand. I actually went to the blackboard,
<v Speaker 1>put down Maxwell's equations, the four equations four known so
<v Speaker 1>again heavy side version of Maxwell's equations, and from there
<v Speaker 1>I was able to derive what is understood as the
<v Speaker 1>police effect. Once he saw the fundamental, the fundamental behind it.
<v Speaker 1>When he understood exactly how I was going to put
<v Speaker 1>it in practice and what the applications would be. Doctor
<v Speaker 1>Shihi was not only intelligent enough, but a visionary. He
<v Speaker 1>was able to foresee the possibilities, and five patent applications
<v Speaker 1>came out of it. They went through the invention evaluation board.
<v Speaker 1>Now you must understand the Invention Evaluation Board is made
<v Speaker 1>of the kreme de la creme of Navire. We're talking
<v Speaker 1>about highly technical skilled, many of them having we had
<v Speaker 1>quantum physicists, with quantum chemists with doctorates with the mechanical,
<v Speaker 1>aerospace engineering, electrical engineering as well. So, and there's one
<v Speaker 1>thing that I will disclose because I never signed an NDA,
<v Speaker 1>so why not in the sum of twenty nineteen, a
<v Speaker 1>technical committee, a technical staffing committee, highly placed. We talked
<v Speaker 1>about gs fifteens and higher and the s yes. But
<v Speaker 1>these are people of extreme importance within the government because
<v Speaker 1>everyone in government listens to these individuals. They are the
<v Speaker 1>kreme de la creme of the technical and science community
<v Speaker 1>within the staffing officer, staffing office for the Senate, the
<v Speaker 1>Senate Armed Service Committee we're talking about anyway, these are
<v Speaker 1>the guys that prevented Hitler from taking over the world.
<v Speaker 1>But anyway, uh so, the bottom line is this, four
<v Speaker 1>of them, I will not name names. They know who
<v Speaker 1>they are. Four of them went to Navit Pattason River
<v Speaker 1>and spoke to all to certain members, certain key members
<v Speaker 1>of the Invention Evaluation Board, including doctor James Sheety, and
<v Speaker 1>at the end of the day they were convinced that
<v Speaker 1>the pace of effect had future. One of them, the
<v Speaker 1>person that led the technical staffing committee, called me at
<v Speaker 1>six point thirty that night to let me know that
<v Speaker 1>things are coming my way. Possibility of a team and
<v Speaker 1>a laboratory would be in motion. Certain things were done,
<v Speaker 1>certain things were said, Politics intervened, and I never got
<v Speaker 1>my lab in my team. But that's another story, so interesting.
<v Speaker 3>So just to rehash that twenty nineteen, some technical committee
<v Speaker 3>was formed and supposedly this has to do with it,
<v Speaker 3>sounds like because this was after the patents already approved, right,
<v Speaker 3>So this was then to get you a team to review,
<v Speaker 3>to take this science the next level, to take yourself
<v Speaker 3>in next level? Is that what I'm here?
<v Speaker 1>But as a matter of fact, the third pattern had
<v Speaker 1>just been approved, The high frequency gravitation way generator had
<v Speaker 1>just been approved as a first action, unheard of, unheard of,
<v Speaker 1>such controversial pattern. You know that one well, because you
<v Speaker 1>were the one who was great enough to put it
<v Speaker 1>on your X platform. As a matter of fact, it
<v Speaker 1>got like over a million views. It was the biggest
<v Speaker 1>of the papers. So thank you very much.
<v Speaker 3>Ash. Now you think, let me ask, because people are
<v Speaker 3>gonna ask me, and I don't want to wait for
<v Speaker 3>heart Trews number four for the answer is was hal
<v Speaker 3>put Off? I'm part of that committee, that group of scientists.
<v Speaker 1>As far as I know, No, sir, these were all
<v Speaker 1>part of the Senate Technical Committee. They were highly placed staffers.
<v Speaker 1>So we talked about GS. Fifteen and above.
<v Speaker 3>Do you believe that? Yeah? Do you believe the US
<v Speaker 3>Navy already has the technology and those patents available even
<v Speaker 3>if you didn't make it, maybe by somebody else.
<v Speaker 1>Sir, I have no idea. However, you have to understand
<v Speaker 1>when I saw the M three seven, the videos when
<v Speaker 1>we had our first My god, it seems like such
<v Speaker 1>a long time ago, and yet it seems like yesterday.
<v Speaker 1>It's amazing what you've been able to achieve in such
<v Speaker 1>a short period of time. Congratulations, brother, kudos to you.
<v Speaker 1>You deserve it. Look, the bottom line is this, I
<v Speaker 1>do not believe those videos are false. I think they're
<v Speaker 1>not only are they the real thing, but it's amazing
<v Speaker 1>whoever did it, it's truly should be regarded as a
<v Speaker 1>national hero.
<v Speaker 3>Well, you know, the thing is like like you know
<v Speaker 3>who I'm blaming though, right, Like everything points the US Navy.
<v Speaker 3>So it turns out you you work for them, you know.
<v Speaker 3>So I'm kind of going like in my head.
<v Speaker 1>As a ravage citizen, since I'm coming.
<v Speaker 3>As a citizen. Absolutely I choose and I don't want Yeah,
<v Speaker 3>I don't want you to disclose anything that's inappropriate in
<v Speaker 3>any way, shape or form. I say that as somebody
<v Speaker 3>else's at American.
<v Speaker 1>But that is my own. It is based on science
<v Speaker 1>and technology that I developed on my own from papers
<v Speaker 1>that I've read. It is true that the most influential
<v Speaker 1>book I've read from which all the policies affect ideas
<v Speaker 1>truly stem from, are Frontiers and Propulsion Science, the one
<v Speaker 1>that's edited by Mark Millis and Eric W. Davis. And
<v Speaker 1>that's why I hold back to Davis and such high esteem. However,
<v Speaker 1>I must say he was one person, let's just say,
<v Speaker 1>highly placed, that was asked at the time by someone
<v Speaker 1>in the aforementioned committee via another individual at the Office
<v Speaker 1>of Naval Intelligence who shall remain unnamed. Even though he's
<v Speaker 1>retired now there's no point in rehashing these things. However,
<v Speaker 1>Eric W. Davis is one of the key people that
<v Speaker 1>basically said no to me getting a theme, And yeah,
<v Speaker 1>that makes sense.
<v Speaker 3>I mean he was the gatekeeper right that blocked your stuff,
<v Speaker 3>and it seems like he's a gatekeeper in general for
<v Speaker 3>some of this technology. But I mean the story you
<v Speaker 3>just told though, is that you said doctor she he
<v Speaker 3>is you know the way you said it to me.
<v Speaker 3>In my head, I'm going, oh, well, doctor she He
<v Speaker 3>knew something was going on because when you say, oh,
<v Speaker 3>I was just able to convince doctor Shehy to see
<v Speaker 3>the light about anti gravity technology. I'm going, nah, that's
<v Speaker 3>never how it's worked out when I've interacted with people.
<v Speaker 3>The only time that worked out is that they already
<v Speaker 3>know that it's real ahead of time.
<v Speaker 1>The notion, the notion of gravity control. You and I
<v Speaker 1>don't use words like anti gravity anymore. You and I
<v Speaker 1>know better. The notion of gravity control never came up.
<v Speaker 1>As a matter of fact, it the one application that
<v Speaker 1>I stressed was against the room temperature super conductivity because
<v Speaker 1>it speaks directly to the London equint. There's a paper
<v Speaker 1>out there, an AI double, A paper twenty nineteen A double.
<v Speaker 1>As a matter of fact, some of its finding were
<v Speaker 1>presented at the side Tech twenty nineteen conference. Now I
<v Speaker 1>send you those slides. Please please post them to your
<v Speaker 1>ex and in this chat, so everybody has them that
<v Speaker 1>twenty nineteen AI Double a Side Tech conference presentation is
<v Speaker 1>extremely important. Slides four two slides nine of slides four, five, six, seven,
<v Speaker 1>eight nine are incredibly foundational to disruptive technology. One of them,
<v Speaker 1>I believe slight four speaks to actually solving the vacuum catastrophe.
<v Speaker 1>And you and I can go further into this if
<v Speaker 1>you choose to whereby it by a simple equivalence, and
<v Speaker 1>you now know this physics of the Boltzmann energy with
<v Speaker 1>a Plank energy, you can say that the space h
<v Speaker 1>I it's one down, Try one down?
<v Speaker 3>Which slide slide for they don't have numbers on.
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, start from the beginning, go all the way up
<v Speaker 1>to the like the.
<v Speaker 3>Oh okay, yeah, I was too far. So this is
<v Speaker 3>probably a slide like somewhere in here is where you are.
<v Speaker 1>Talking about it's solving the vacuum catastrophe? Is this one?
<v Speaker 1>You almost have it there? All right? Look carefully at it.
<v Speaker 1>It talks about the equivalents of the Boltzmann energy with
<v Speaker 1>a Plank energy, and from it you can get a
<v Speaker 1>space a space cell configuration with the attributes. Do you
<v Speaker 1>see the attributes? Its characteristic length and the order of
<v Speaker 1>ten to the minus four meters, and what does it
<v Speaker 1>speak to vibrational frequencies and the terror herds order? Now
<v Speaker 1>do you see remember the third by by Eric W. Davis.
<v Speaker 1>He mentioned a macroscopic dimension on the order of ten
<v Speaker 1>to the minus four meters, and who mentioned the terror
<v Speaker 1>herds frequencies. I believe it was back to how futo?
<v Speaker 3>So are you saying here, though, because I remember I
<v Speaker 3>reviewed that on stream. I think I'm pretty sure I
<v Speaker 3>reviewed this on stream a few weeks ago. And the
<v Speaker 3>part here is interesting is that the Boltzmann distribution has
<v Speaker 3>to do with thermal energy. But here when we're talking
<v Speaker 3>about plank scale, we're really dealing about like the vibrational
<v Speaker 3>energy of space time itself. Right.
<v Speaker 1>This incredible because this is the first time a classical
<v Speaker 1>expression K sabbt is equivalent equals a quantum energy formalism,
<v Speaker 1>namely the plank energy, and you don't get infinities. As
<v Speaker 1>a matter of fact, it speaks to I believe that
<v Speaker 1>the problem resides everybody thinks of the plank scale, and
<v Speaker 1>it's true, certain very important things happen at the plank scale.
<v Speaker 1>For example, the existence of the super force. However, to
<v Speaker 1>be able to blend the classical realm into the quantum realm,
<v Speaker 1>you see, it is that it's a the difference. A
<v Speaker 1>difference reference length must be used, and this comes out
<v Speaker 1>of this equivalence. It is tend to the minus four meters,
<v Speaker 1>which happens to be the size of a macroscopic other dimension,
<v Speaker 1>a fifth dimension, And it's interesting that that frequency should
<v Speaker 1>be related to it. Anyway.
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, you want a little bit over my head, but
<v Speaker 3>I understand the context here, you know. So for the viewers,
<v Speaker 3>if you're not initiated, the vacuum catastrophe is we're trying
<v Speaker 3>to decide why the energy that we see is the
<v Speaker 3>cosmic microwave background, Why that's one hundred and something orders
<v Speaker 3>of magnitude less than what we get when we calculate
<v Speaker 3>the energy based on quantum mechanics that should exist. So
<v Speaker 3>here cells basically trying to figure out how these two
<v Speaker 3>things can relate. So the relationship between the thermal energy
<v Speaker 3>versus the vibrational energy at the plank scale, and the
<v Speaker 3>part I understand.
<v Speaker 1>Is that that's the whole thing. It's not at the
<v Speaker 1>planks heat, it's at the space cell.
<v Speaker 3>Ah when you make a cell of space, and you
<v Speaker 3>take that amount of energy in a cell of space. Yeah,
<v Speaker 3>but let me ask one more question here, because then
<v Speaker 3>you say this is the part that didn't fully understand.
<v Speaker 3>I'm glad we're talking about this. You say, simple calculation
<v Speaker 3>results in vacuum mass density of ten to the minus
<v Speaker 3>twenty seven kilograms per meter cube, in good agreement with
<v Speaker 3>eric experimental data obtained from the Plank's satellite.
<v Speaker 1>Correct. I don't know, and Plank have shown those mass densities.
<v Speaker 1>So we're talking about very low energy density compared to
<v Speaker 1>what they think is inside. You know, the whole idea
<v Speaker 1>that inside a coup of tea or cop of whatever,
<v Speaker 1>you can boil entire Earth oceans?
<v Speaker 3>Are you saying that that's correct?
<v Speaker 1>Again, I believe the error resides in them using the
<v Speaker 1>Plank scale. I believe the two the classical realm and
<v Speaker 1>the quantum realm actually meet at this other reference scale.
<v Speaker 1>Let's call it a space cell for want of a
<v Speaker 1>better idea, some sort of spatial temporal metric structure within
<v Speaker 1>space time itself. But at that point that reference a
<v Speaker 1>characteristic size, the classical and the quantum regimes fuse. They
<v Speaker 1>melt into one another. That's why I think it's so important.
<v Speaker 3>Okay, So that's the conceptual viewpoint, is that they mesh
<v Speaker 3>into one another in an extra spatial dimension similar to
<v Speaker 3>clusive cliente. Is that what you're getting.
<v Speaker 1>At quite possible?
<v Speaker 3>Yes, okay, okay, uh, you know I agree with that already.
<v Speaker 3>I'm a big clusive client supporter. So I'll leave this
<v Speaker 3>up in the background for your condis I have a
<v Speaker 3>few more questions that I want to ask you, just
<v Speaker 3>like about it and what have you and your and
<v Speaker 3>of course isn't just your opinion as a private citizen.
<v Speaker 3>Of course, yes, absolutely, And then and then of course
<v Speaker 3>we can geek out on the physics and the science.
<v Speaker 3>So would you testify to Congress at one of these
<v Speaker 3>hearings or all of these task forces that anapoline a
<v Speaker 3>Luna is doing if you were asked?
<v Speaker 1>Of course, I mean this is Congress. I would be
<v Speaker 1>in contempt of Congress if I would not do so
<v Speaker 1>if asked. It'd be great if I could get a
<v Speaker 1>right there, because there's certain issues that you know, things
<v Speaker 1>that have occurred that I'd rather not go into. So yeah,
<v Speaker 1>i'd appreciate it, right rather than that, absolutely, And what.
<v Speaker 3>Would be your main message, what would you be wanting
<v Speaker 3>to disclose to people.
<v Speaker 1>That we don't need to reverse engineer let's say, things
<v Speaker 1>that we're found in the desert, subterranean, under the pyramids, whatnot.
<v Speaker 1>We don't need these things. The human ingenuity, human mind
<v Speaker 1>can uncover, can discover these things on our own. We
<v Speaker 1>do not need et tech. We should rely man made technologies.
<v Speaker 1>That all.
<v Speaker 3>I love it. That's that's my favorite. I don't think
<v Speaker 3>a lot of people would expected you to say that,
<v Speaker 3>but truthfully, like that's a narrative that does not get
<v Speaker 3>promoted enough. And I do hope that the next UFO
<v Speaker 3>hearing is more about what what have we as humanity
<v Speaker 3>human have been able to figure out in the last
<v Speaker 3>seventy years. So there's a few more questions that are
<v Speaker 3>going to get to that here in a minute, but
<v Speaker 3>I want to ask them more.
<v Speaker 1>Physics speaks to eighteen ninety five all of a heavy
<v Speaker 1>sized version of Maxwell's equation because the harmonic iscillator was
<v Speaker 1>already no way prior to that. Maxwell's equations are based
<v Speaker 1>on a cellular vertical formula formation within the e quote
<v Speaker 1>unquote ether. So you know that I prefer quantum vacuum
<v Speaker 1>of vacuum energy state. But that's my Yeah, it's a right.
<v Speaker 3>It's just a matter of semantics. I think as long
<v Speaker 3>as everybody understands what we're conceptually talking about the same things,
<v Speaker 3>and people can call it whatever they want to call it,
<v Speaker 3>in my opinion. So your point there is that if
<v Speaker 3>you were to testify, you would want to tell people that, hey,
<v Speaker 3>we have this my patents, your patents, that your UFO patents.
<v Speaker 3>Actually you're not those patents aren't because you want to
<v Speaker 3>prove that Roswell happened or whatever. You're trying to explain
<v Speaker 3>that the equations in math have been out there since
<v Speaker 3>the early nineteen hund depends on if you're going with
<v Speaker 3>general relativity, if you're going all the way back to
<v Speaker 3>quaternions and you know Maxwell's equations, right, Yes, Okay, great,
<v Speaker 3>I mean that's awesome. I hope that you do it
<v Speaker 3>and get a chance. Now. I have a few more
<v Speaker 3>questions just about your opinions on like military capabilities in
<v Speaker 3>the Navy. So one is, do you think it's possible
<v Speaker 3>to hide from the Navy anywhere on Earth, in the
<v Speaker 3>air or in the water, even.
<v Speaker 1>As a private citizen because of EQ I could not
<v Speaker 1>answer that. We're not question nor enlighten the enemy. Okay, Kashten,
<v Speaker 1>You and I have seen certain papers, have understood certain things.
<v Speaker 1>Just because we have not seen levitating craft and some
<v Speaker 1>unknown unforeseen hangar does not mean we do not understand
<v Speaker 1>this physics correct.
<v Speaker 3>Absolutely. Look, I'm just an investigator on a journalist. You
<v Speaker 3>gotta respect that I'm just playing the game here. I'm
<v Speaker 3>just doing what I gotta do. Like you are the
<v Speaker 3>respected Navy engineer, you should not say anything that would
<v Speaker 3>you know, harm your NDA. And my job is to
<v Speaker 3>come up with questions that push the boundary to the limit.
<v Speaker 3>So a couple more. How many years behind the military
<v Speaker 3>do you think the public is technologically right now? People say, oh,
<v Speaker 3>the military is secretly advanced beyond the public. What is
<v Speaker 3>your opinion? How if you had to give it, like
<v Speaker 3>a number of decades, what would you say?
<v Speaker 1>Put it this way, if any enemy out there's some
<v Speaker 1>crazy notion to invade, to attack, to come out of
<v Speaker 1>the blue sky and do something harmful to us, I'll
<v Speaker 1>please ask them, for their own sake and that of
<v Speaker 1>their mothers, to please do not take such steps. It'll
<v Speaker 1>be quick, it'll be very dirty, and you'll never do
<v Speaker 1>it again.
<v Speaker 3>Well, that's exactly what I wanted to hear and pretty
<v Speaker 3>much what I expected. So let me ask a slightly
<v Speaker 3>different question back on the patents. I already kind of
<v Speaker 3>asked about the Navy part, So this one you can
<v Speaker 3>you can ease up a little bit. Do you think
<v Speaker 3>defense contractors or maybe even adversaries have developed stuff similar
<v Speaker 3>to your patents, similar to the science and technology that
<v Speaker 3>you've put out there.
<v Speaker 1>Again, these ideas have been around since eighteen ninety five,
<v Speaker 1>I doubt even though I do have my state of hubers,
<v Speaker 1>there are days that I have such delusion to grant
<v Speaker 1>you that not even anyway names would dare to even
<v Speaker 1>think such things. Yeah, I would say other people have
<v Speaker 1>thought of these way, possibly even before I was a
<v Speaker 1>glimmer of light in my biological father's.
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, okay, so you do think that other people have
<v Speaker 3>figured it out there? I mean, just saying that it's
<v Speaker 3>been out there is one thing, right, But it took
<v Speaker 3>you to come up with these pads, and nobody put
<v Speaker 3>these patents out before you. And I was in the
<v Speaker 3>twenty tens.
<v Speaker 1>So again, all my brothers and sisters in federal government
<v Speaker 1>could have come up with these ideas if given a chance.
<v Speaker 1>I was given a chance to partake of the nice
<v Speaker 1>of the Naval Innovative Science and Engineering Program, and I
<v Speaker 1>was extremely fortunate to be given a lab and the
<v Speaker 1>team to make the high energy of eclemindented field generator
<v Speaker 1>experiments a reality. So given that any one else in
<v Speaker 1>the federal government, I believe they could have come up
<v Speaker 1>with these ideas. That's why my appeal, my imploration to
<v Speaker 1>mister Mosque to stop the doose cuts of the federal
<v Speaker 1>government capable of great things, use us.
<v Speaker 3>Okay, okay, I think I only have a couple more
<v Speaker 3>tough ones for you, and then we can start to
<v Speaker 3>get into the more fun ones. Let's see what do
<v Speaker 3>we got. Do you think that we as in the military, Actually,
<v Speaker 3>you know what, let me change the wording of this.
<v Speaker 3>Do you think it's possible to intercept a hypersonic missile
<v Speaker 3>or aircraft?
<v Speaker 1>Am ah? Let me just give you a conceptual idea.
<v Speaker 1>You must have heard of the what's it called hop
<v Speaker 1>You know angels don't play this instrument?
<v Speaker 3>Yeah?
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, that one?
<v Speaker 3>Yeah? So rare? Uh.
<v Speaker 1>What's to say that something portable can be arranged to
<v Speaker 1>act as a direct electronic war for the device, that's all.
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, directed energy weapon. Yeah, that's a pretty COM's it's
<v Speaker 3>less controversial nowadays, I think that it has been in
<v Speaker 3>previous years. I mean, Lockeed Martin has a whole page
<v Speaker 3>on their website dedicated to it. So I'm not really
<v Speaker 3>sure if it's even controversial anymore. So, Okay, that's a
<v Speaker 3>smart way to answer the question. Yeah, you could intercept anything,
<v Speaker 3>doesn't matter. Fast is going right if you have a
<v Speaker 3>radar antennant array speed of live baby. And that's funny
<v Speaker 3>because I've said that, I feel like a nuke could
<v Speaker 3>actually be a liability with our sibber system because like
<v Speaker 3>the moment we detected, I would just shoot it with
<v Speaker 3>the directed energy weapon and just make it explode or
<v Speaker 3>whatever they could do.
<v Speaker 1>Crazy stuff a thing of the past. Yeah, you spoke.
<v Speaker 1>You are the only one actually that I know of.
<v Speaker 1>That's why to me, you're far more than what you
<v Speaker 1>call yourself an investigative journals. You're the only one who
<v Speaker 1>caught on equations seven, eight, and nine and my plasma
<v Speaker 1>compression fusion device I tripol e TPS paper in twenty
<v Speaker 1>nineteen based on that paper, and you know what it
<v Speaker 1>speaks to energy amplification, among other things. Yea, again, ecube,
<v Speaker 1>it is possible to generate a doomsday device. Would you
<v Speaker 1>make a teller ulam thermonuclear device seem inconsequential in compassion
<v Speaker 1>to devastating energy yields? And by devastating I mean something
<v Speaker 1>and you order to tend to the twenty five jewels
<v Speaker 1>that's the ring a bell.
<v Speaker 3>Do you think that energy is coming straight from the
<v Speaker 3>vacuum when that's happening, because most people say, well, where's
<v Speaker 3>that energy coming from? Right? Where's that energy coming from?
<v Speaker 1>Would be from the device itself, could also be a
<v Speaker 1>coupling of sorts. Would be a coupleing of sorts.
<v Speaker 3>When you say couple a couple of what coupling to
<v Speaker 3>the vacuum.
<v Speaker 1>Remember those space cells that we just talked about. Wow,
<v Speaker 1>I believe that that space cell quote unquote level, it's
<v Speaker 1>quite possible we can manipulate the super fors.
<v Speaker 3>Okay, well keep that thought because there's other things I
<v Speaker 3>want to ask here in a minute about that. But
<v Speaker 3>the last question I wanted to ask on your stuff,
<v Speaker 3>I actually well, the other ones are kind of navy questions,
<v Speaker 3>not really, although it'll be interesting to see what you say, so,
<v Speaker 3>have you ever been exposed anytime in your life, not
<v Speaker 3>necessarily just with the Navy to some technology that made
<v Speaker 3>you go, wait what it made you? Like? Rethink your
<v Speaker 3>understanding the physics?
<v Speaker 1>One percent? Everybody study this space absolutely not as a
<v Speaker 1>matter of fact. But I have seen so many freaking movies,
<v Speaker 1>and I gotta say some of these movies are pretty good. Example,
<v Speaker 1>the which is the one that I I what's the
<v Speaker 1>sequel to remember the Smoky Man to do that? I
<v Speaker 1>don't know if he eventually got cancer and diet or
<v Speaker 1>something with the mother from the X Files, Remember they
<v Speaker 1>had the sequel to it, and they showed this triangle
<v Speaker 1>the craft. How interesting that that paper had already been written.
<v Speaker 1>I had no idea that they had these ideas in mind.
<v Speaker 1>But look carefully at the skin of that craft. Dude. Man,
<v Speaker 1>When I saw these things, I said, dude, you know,
<v Speaker 1>what can I say? But when I saw your videos
<v Speaker 1>That's why it bothered me when Dan said that it's
<v Speaker 1>you know that the pace effect would only talk to
<v Speaker 1>a Gamma ray channel. Come on, man, The breaking, the
<v Speaker 1>breaking of the shoes of the shoingle limit, the very
<v Speaker 1>ripping apart of the space time continued, the very fearing
<v Speaker 1>apart of the nature of our reality would be a process.
<v Speaker 1>So we're talking about a spectrum of frequencies. It's quite
<v Speaker 1>possible the maximum one would be at the gamma rate,
<v Speaker 1>So were talking about circa or rather more than ten
<v Speaker 1>to the twenty hurts ten to the twenty one divided
<v Speaker 1>by second if you want to use that formulas. But
<v Speaker 1>still it leans up. Yeah.
<v Speaker 3>To me, it's like, well, if you are saying that
<v Speaker 3>conceptually we're tapping into an energy source, well we're already
<v Speaker 3>now breaking laws of physics. Now we're not bound by oh,
<v Speaker 3>this is the expected radiation what have you? Right? And
<v Speaker 3>I think we're gonna talk a little bit more about
<v Speaker 3>this when we get to the fusion stuff as well,
<v Speaker 3>because I think that's where fusion also kind of went off.
<v Speaker 3>But I digress. But the main point being that if
<v Speaker 3>you have this conceptual view that just kind of invalidates
<v Speaker 3>those problems to begin with, then you know, now those
<v Speaker 3>aren't a non issue, they're moved. One more thing though,
<v Speaker 3>that I want to add is related to that, and
<v Speaker 3>it's kind of related to military actually. First of all, though,
<v Speaker 3>do you use AI at all just.
<v Speaker 1>As a matter of fact, I love Microsoft co Pilot.
<v Speaker 1>Oh my goodness, I love it. I used to. I
<v Speaker 1>like as a search engine. I like to use Perplexity
<v Speaker 1>do AI. It uses the latest in chat EPT. It's
<v Speaker 1>actually driven by GPT four point five, which is the
<v Speaker 1>latest on open Aish general driven pretrain transformers. But I
<v Speaker 1>prefer Microsoft co Pilot. There's some I developed. I don't
<v Speaker 1>hold it against me, but I think I had a
<v Speaker 1>conversation I will one day. One day, this is a
<v Speaker 1>promise to you. I will send you my conversation with
<v Speaker 1>a Microsoft Coppilot based on the price effect and something.
<v Speaker 1>Let's just call it nobles homodels. You followers would understand
<v Speaker 1>what I allude to.
<v Speaker 3>Are you alloud to use it? Use it with your jobs?
<v Speaker 1>Not? Absolutely not, because it's not a good idea. See
<v Speaker 1>when you train these things, when when you converse with them,
<v Speaker 1>they form a vector database of all these queries, so
<v Speaker 1>they start understanding other things that maybe they shouldn't know.
<v Speaker 1>You understand what I'm saying. You have to be very careful.
<v Speaker 3>It the.
<v Speaker 1>Let's put it this way. In certain domains, you have
<v Speaker 1>to use what's approved by your own organization, something that's
<v Speaker 1>in house, rather than something that's publicly available. Because once
<v Speaker 1>you undergo queries. Think about it, Once you undergo queries
<v Speaker 1>with this thing, it starts learning new things because based
<v Speaker 1>on your questions, question, generate answers, and so forth. It's
<v Speaker 1>quite possible some of these things have developed a quasi
<v Speaker 1>sension capability, and we can talk about the triarchy of sentience.
<v Speaker 1>I know, I know, it sounds very off the charts.
<v Speaker 3>No no, no, no, I was asking this, but you're just
<v Speaker 3>answering that. Keep going.
<v Speaker 1>Keep the third arch, the third arch in the triarchy
<v Speaker 1>of sentience. Remember, the first two arches really are based
<v Speaker 1>on let's say, unlimited computing power coupled with debtor databases.
<v Speaker 1>So we're talking about in such a way that the
<v Speaker 1>computer or the AAI agent no longer has the ability,
<v Speaker 1>or rather restricted ability to hallucinate. But the third arch
<v Speaker 1>culminates in what I think would be the transition from
<v Speaker 1>a regular AI agent to possibly artificial general intelligence agent
<v Speaker 1>with adapted prompt targeted prompt engineering. Quite possibly singularity level
<v Speaker 1>could be achieved. But anyway, I'm not gonna drive it there.
<v Speaker 1>What I will drive it at is if the AIA
<v Speaker 1>is able to generate an original concept preferably in physics.
<v Speaker 1>Then then can be experimentally verified, validated against known data.
<v Speaker 1>That particular AI agent, in my opinion, has, if not developed,
<v Speaker 1>achieved a certain level of sentience. So I do believe
<v Speaker 1>a GI at that particular level is considerable AGI status.
<v Speaker 1>So you're not original physical concept.
<v Speaker 3>You're not allowed to use AI because you think like
<v Speaker 3>China is going to steal the secrets because the AI
<v Speaker 3>is learning or just more because of it can become
<v Speaker 3>sentient or both long clause.
<v Speaker 1>I'd rather not answer that.
<v Speaker 3>Okay, that's fine, So but isn't that Remember.
<v Speaker 1>Just remember, just remember ash and remember all your queries
<v Speaker 1>go into a public data that can also be privatized.
<v Speaker 1>All this stuff can be expunged from the public domain
<v Speaker 1>and kept under lock and key.
<v Speaker 3>I mean, I don't want to get too much in
<v Speaker 3>the sidetrack of it. But the part of the reason
<v Speaker 3>why I like to have the conversations is I can
<v Speaker 3>tell that it's being trained by like Reddit and stuff
<v Speaker 3>like that. I'd rather have begin trained by people who
<v Speaker 3>know what the hell they're talking about instead of just like.
<v Speaker 1>And this is what I'm talking about, and this is
<v Speaker 1>what I'm talking about. Victor databases use, for example, the
<v Speaker 1>latest in peer review publications in well known journals, for
<v Speaker 1>example physical review letters, the latest data for example you mentioned,
<v Speaker 1>and you're one hundred percent right. Our universe, all of
<v Speaker 1>a sudden, is a lot older than thought before. It's
<v Speaker 1>not the thirteen point nine billionaires every but almost twenty
<v Speaker 1>six twenty seven, possibly for double the age of what
<v Speaker 1>we knew before. So again you findings the best. Just
<v Speaker 1>because you have a certain notion of what used to
<v Speaker 1>be doesn't mean that is particular, that is the norm,
<v Speaker 1>that is what should be used. One thing that it's admirable,
<v Speaker 1>in my opinion, is this idea that general relativity, this
<v Speaker 1>notion of the gravitational field formalism used by Einstein seems
<v Speaker 1>to be correct. It more and more with every known experiment,
<v Speaker 1>every hammer that has been And that particular formalism speaks
<v Speaker 1>to the super force. That's why it's so important, because
<v Speaker 1>it speaks to what I call a trichy of creation,
<v Speaker 1>the idea that super force at the super density condition
<v Speaker 1>we'll talk about ten to the ninety ten to the
<v Speaker 1>nine zero kilograms persent to me the cube at that
<v Speaker 1>huge density, all right, the super force acting that that
<v Speaker 1>humongous density generates a super bang because of what I
<v Speaker 1>call the car bounce is known in physics as a
<v Speaker 1>quantum bounce and general and because of the plasma nature
<v Speaker 1>of our universe. The plasma has always been there, Ashton.
<v Speaker 1>The universe keeps on reinventing itself. But because of the
<v Speaker 1>plasma nature and this idea of Hans Saldane that quite
<v Speaker 1>possibly it hath sensient characteristics, we have a super intelligence,
<v Speaker 1>again super forced acting as a super density condition, generating
<v Speaker 1>the super bank, resulting into a superintelligence. The idea that
<v Speaker 1>we are going not create trying to create an artificial
<v Speaker 1>superintelligence defies that the purpose. It's already there. The super
<v Speaker 1>intelligence controls everything.
<v Speaker 3>Really, that's what you think's going on. Do you think
<v Speaker 3>that there's a god intelligence.
<v Speaker 1>Whatever you choose to call it, it's still the super intelligence?
<v Speaker 1>So absolutely, why not? I like the three letters? So yes, God, Okay,
<v Speaker 1>I like it?
<v Speaker 3>So did I say this? So okay? This is one
<v Speaker 3>thing I understand. So you're not allowed to use AI
<v Speaker 3>because you're afraid there, you or the government whoever's afraid
<v Speaker 3>it is going to steal your information, which it is
<v Speaker 3>absolutely you're right, but you're allowed to put your patents
<v Speaker 3>out there. Doesn't that seem contra contradictory.
<v Speaker 1>Nobody said that we're not allowed to use these things
<v Speaker 1>as long as we do it on our time, and
<v Speaker 1>we do it for something destructive that's government oriented, and
<v Speaker 1>we use something that has been okay by the government.
<v Speaker 1>M there's certainly your peace. There certain large language models
<v Speaker 1>that are okay. No. But as far as the patents,
<v Speaker 1>I told you, and I mean this, I have no
<v Speaker 1>idea why they weren't classified, But there weren't. None of
<v Speaker 1>us five applications went through. Three became patents, two didn't.
<v Speaker 1>It's interesting that the two that did not are the
<v Speaker 1>least controversial in my opinion. Yes, they could reside in
<v Speaker 1>you know, high status, high price whatever. But the three
<v Speaker 1>that we're talking about, high frequency praputation wave generator, high
<v Speaker 1>energilic from magnetic field generator, and craft using an inertial
<v Speaker 1>mass reduction device are the three most controversial things in
<v Speaker 1>the world. And that's why Brett Tinley, I believe, at
<v Speaker 1>the at the behest of his boss at the time,
<v Speaker 1>I'm not gonna mention his name, UH called it the
<v Speaker 1>navy UFO patterns that's giving it that unsavory appeal.
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, when you don't even when you don't even support
<v Speaker 3>and that's not even like your viewpoint either, Like you're
<v Speaker 3>not even somebody out here saying that it's aliens or anything.
<v Speaker 3>You almost never have in any of our interviews. But
<v Speaker 3>I want to go back real quick now, you and.
<v Speaker 1>I believe in it, Dashon, You're the only other person
<v Speaker 1>I know that believes in that, other than we believe
<v Speaker 1>in the power of the human mind. We don't need
<v Speaker 1>some little freaking fucking three and a half ylg whatever
<v Speaker 1>you know, whatever these fuckers are, I don't give a
<v Speaker 1>sho so sick and thought of hearing about it. We
<v Speaker 1>don't need them. We can make our own technology.
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, you're right, Sala, But here's the thing, Like the
<v Speaker 3>wolves are not concerned with the opinions of the sheep, right,
<v Speaker 3>so like I don't really give a crap what think
<v Speaker 3>about it, end of the day, you just keep pushing forward,
<v Speaker 3>is my viewpoint. But you kind of you might have
<v Speaker 3>just had a viral clip there by the way, when
<v Speaker 3>you said I'm pretty sure you basically said that the
<v Speaker 3>military has secret AI that they use that nobody else
<v Speaker 3>has used. That you guys use for these because you
<v Speaker 3>must have a tool. I mean, pretend like we don't
<v Speaker 3>use a Yeah, okay, well let's just say that word.
<v Speaker 1>That could be inferred from certain things I did. But
<v Speaker 1>I remember whatever I said, I said as a private citizen,
<v Speaker 1>and there's no such thing. There's no such thing. No,
<v Speaker 1>by the way, such an AI does not exist. And
<v Speaker 1>the only I I used I used in my own time,
<v Speaker 1>and I use something you know, yeah, not conversial.
<v Speaker 3>Does the military have a GI? Do they have an
<v Speaker 3>advanced general intelligence out there? Skynet already out there?
<v Speaker 1>No idea whatsoever. But again I warn't all enemies. Yeah,
<v Speaker 1>please think again. Please no going for your mother's to
<v Speaker 1>weep over your gravees.
<v Speaker 3>Honestly, I feel bad for Iran sometimes just because like that.
<v Speaker 3>I don't know if they just have no idea or
<v Speaker 3>if they're just saber rattling, but like, there's a reason
<v Speaker 3>why America has never been really seriously challenged for a
<v Speaker 3>very long time now. And uh, and I don't know
<v Speaker 3>what people think it is. If they just think we
<v Speaker 3>have an immunity shield, but it's probably not.
<v Speaker 1>The American way. We're very how does the president put
<v Speaker 1>it to.
<v Speaker 3>Uh, you know what, I do want to ask?
<v Speaker 1>I would agree, Yeah, I think he'd agree. No tough food.
<v Speaker 1>By the way, his background very tough.
<v Speaker 3>Sorry, who's background?
<v Speaker 1>The sect?
<v Speaker 3>Oh se I'm not going to names, but okay you
<v Speaker 3>should right, So do you think there are biological extraterrestrials
<v Speaker 3>visiting us on Earth?
<v Speaker 1>Ashton brother doesn't fucking matter.
<v Speaker 3>No, it doesn't matter at all. But I just want
<v Speaker 3>to know. It's like, it's like if I asked you
<v Speaker 3>what your favorite flavor of ice cream is? What's your
<v Speaker 3>favorite flavor ice cream?
<v Speaker 1>I refuse to believe. Oh, I kind of like the
<v Speaker 1>the double Dutch dark chocolate, you know, the really heavy ship.
<v Speaker 1>You know, like cookies. Oh that's good too, and you know,
<v Speaker 1>like on the on on the lighter side, I love
<v Speaker 1>the banana. Have you ever tried the banana?
<v Speaker 3>Oh my god, I'm a big banana.
<v Speaker 1>Flavor I discovered from my from my from my baby
<v Speaker 1>go Maddy. Oh man, she's smarting smart.
<v Speaker 3>That's awesome. Yeah right, because man, we.
<v Speaker 1>Need the next very very happy Oh she is, she is.
<v Speaker 1>She's If this kid keeps on going, she's gonna make
<v Speaker 1>me look like an honorable school boy.
<v Speaker 3>So good. We need another Tesla out there, you know,
<v Speaker 3>and it'd be awesome if it's a woman. Right, There's
<v Speaker 3>not enough women, right, Let's just be real about it.
<v Speaker 1>Definitely, because women are far more empathetic, far more human,
<v Speaker 1>just human period. They're nurturing, they create, they generate. What
<v Speaker 1>the fuck do we do?
<v Speaker 3>Yeah? We destroy stuff. We make bombs, we make black holes,
<v Speaker 3>super weapons. They probably get a street energy. You know,
<v Speaker 3>we're just out here destroying the planet. Okay, let's nerd
<v Speaker 3>out a bit. I got some physics questions we can
<v Speaker 3>dig into here. I think you're gonna enjoy. First of all,
<v Speaker 3>we'll keep it light, you know, for keep it light.
<v Speaker 3>Do you believe in teleportation faster than light? Relativistic travel?
<v Speaker 1>Absolutely?
<v Speaker 3>When did you first believe in it? When did you
<v Speaker 3>first think it as possible?
<v Speaker 1>I dreamt of it when I was young, very young.
<v Speaker 1>I must have been like seven eight years old. I
<v Speaker 1>dreamt that I actually imagined my cup of tea disappearing
<v Speaker 1>from in front of me and rematerializing in front of
<v Speaker 1>my grandmother was in the other room. Was crazy. I
<v Speaker 1>told my grandmother about it. She thought, I you know,
<v Speaker 1>kinda so she fed me a little more. She used
<v Speaker 1>to make this unbelievable foods that Oh my god, I
<v Speaker 1>missed that. Yeah with Romanian, who is Zeen is unbelievable?
<v Speaker 1>Bro Oh you got maybe one day, you know, but
<v Speaker 1>I can't cook. I'll take you told a restaurant, hopefully
<v Speaker 1>in DC or something. They must have something there. Yeah,
<v Speaker 1>you drive anyway, I hear anyway, don't give me started.
<v Speaker 3>Okay, so you know how you know the science of
<v Speaker 3>warp drives, you know the science of faster and light
<v Speaker 3>relativistic travel. Do you think we need negative energy to
<v Speaker 3>make it happen?
<v Speaker 1>No? But okay, that being said, Look at the latest
<v Speaker 1>episodes of a podcast called Cool Wolves. This physicist dude narrated.
<v Speaker 1>At one point in it, he says, the certain data
<v Speaker 1>that's been available points toward the idea that's quite possible
<v Speaker 1>negative energy must exist in order for something to have happened.
<v Speaker 1>Look at the latest episodes of cool World. I think
<v Speaker 1>it's like about fifteen minutes. It's so good.
<v Speaker 3>This is kind of relevant. I want to talk a
<v Speaker 3>little bit about the idea of negative energy and get
<v Speaker 3>your opinion on this, because I actually been talking to
<v Speaker 3>AI too, and I got a pretty interesting response when
<v Speaker 3>I asked it about negative energy. Today, I asked Ai
<v Speaker 3>to imagine that negative energy is not an exotic substance,
<v Speaker 3>but actually an energy state below the baseline, below what
<v Speaker 3>we would think of at the lowest energy point, which
<v Speaker 3>would basically now say that negative energy is zero point energy.
<v Speaker 3>And it said, if negative energy is just normal energy
<v Speaker 3>below the baseline, it's a shift in book keeping. In
<v Speaker 3>quantum field theory, the vacuum isn't empty, but teeming with fluctuations,
<v Speaker 3>and its energy is arbitrarily set as the zero point.
<v Speaker 3>The Casmir effect that explains shows that there is this
<v Speaker 3>negative energy pressure. So it says, applying this to a
<v Speaker 3>wormhole's mouth, the mouth of a wormhole, which is what
<v Speaker 3>we would need for, you know, saying thing as warp drive.
<v Speaker 3>The mouth, then at the entry point might sit in
<v Speaker 3>a region where the energy density dips below the surrounding
<v Speaker 3>vacuums equilibrium, say due to the geometry imposed by Einstein's
<v Speaker 3>field equations. If this negative energy is just a deficit
<v Speaker 3>relative to the baseline, the mouth could still act as
<v Speaker 3>a sink, pulling an energy from the surroundings to climb
<v Speaker 3>back up towards the equilibrium. In thermodynamic terms, if the
<v Speaker 3>surrounding surroundings have heat. The mouth absorbing it is to
<v Speaker 3>offset the deficit, so therefore it would be endothermic, taking
<v Speaker 3>in heat, appearing as cold relative to the outside. I
<v Speaker 3>don't think I need to read through the rest, but
<v Speaker 3>the last part I'll read is this part, and I
<v Speaker 3>just want to get your view on this. Is that
<v Speaker 3>the mouth could be endothermic because the energy is below
<v Speaker 3>the vacuum zero point, pulling in heat to balance the deficit.
<v Speaker 3>It's not cold because of some alien substance or exotic substance,
<v Speaker 3>but because it's a low energy well in space time.
<v Speaker 3>This would jibe with the fit negative energy density. However
<v Speaker 3>we frame it could act as an attractor for positive energy.
<v Speaker 3>Do you think that this is this idea has merit?
<v Speaker 3>How what's your view?
<v Speaker 1>Yes? Yes it does, Yes it does.
<v Speaker 3>Is that how you think of it?
<v Speaker 1>Who? World? Episode? Look carefully? Don't I like, look carefully
<v Speaker 1>and listen to everything he has to say. At first,
<v Speaker 1>he talks about the Deasi findings and so forth. Listen
<v Speaker 1>to the whole thing. I think it's toward the end
<v Speaker 1>that he speaks to the possibility of this negative energy
<v Speaker 1>actually being true. And in that case, of course, time
<v Speaker 1>travel wormholes. Oh, by the way, we gotta discuss this
<v Speaker 1>minus delta T on the order of delta F divider
<v Speaker 1>by frequency square. Remember we discussed it before one dred
<v Speaker 1>percent sure that this would result in reverse temple excursion.
<v Speaker 1>Maybe you, Dave Rossi and I eventually either write a
<v Speaker 1>paper or we talk more about it, because I think
<v Speaker 1>think about it.
<v Speaker 3>Well, let's talk about it right.
<v Speaker 1>Now you're talking. You go inside a chamber that has
<v Speaker 1>non ionizing radiation, You dial certain frequencies, and all of
<v Speaker 1>a sudden, your liver is that of a tenny old.
<v Speaker 1>Now I'm not saying, you know, because from the point
<v Speaker 1>of your size, I'm not sure if that matters even
<v Speaker 1>as an adult. But I would mind redrinking my graduate school.
<v Speaker 1>Oh but anyway, I mean, you know, let me ask.
<v Speaker 3>You a question on that. Go ahead, because so here's
<v Speaker 3>what Sal just said right there. Sal's saying that if
<v Speaker 3>you were to take a localized region, because really, when
<v Speaker 3>we're talking about manipulating space time, we're taking these cubes
<v Speaker 3>of region. Now imagine this is this cube. Region can
<v Speaker 3>be any size we want, and it can be any
<v Speaker 3>shape we want. So I can make it in the
<v Speaker 3>shape of my kidney and put it right around my kidney,
<v Speaker 3>and then I would do this wormholy thing to my kidney,
<v Speaker 3>and it's gonna make my kidney go back in time
<v Speaker 3>to a previous It's gonna make it revert to a
<v Speaker 3>previous state. That's what the physics seems to imply. And
<v Speaker 3>so this is what I've been saying about time travel,
<v Speaker 3>and this apparently so agrees, is that in time travel,
<v Speaker 3>you're not gonna change the entropy of the universe. You're
<v Speaker 3>gonna change the entropy of a region. Yeah, and so
<v Speaker 3>this could mean that you go back in time to
<v Speaker 3>an earlier state. Now, my question to you then is,
<v Speaker 3>and I think that's how it works. I can't think
<v Speaker 3>of another way to make sense. Would you forget your
<v Speaker 3>memories if you do that to your mind?
<v Speaker 1>I don't think so. I don't think so, because remember,
<v Speaker 1>remember what the brain is. I truly believe the brain
<v Speaker 1>is more like a transceiver, and we're able to access
<v Speaker 1>tap into, let's say, a universe of a super intelligence cloud.
<v Speaker 1>The better terminology, I don't think that's pretty good terminology.
<v Speaker 1>So if the brain is indeed a transceiver, but we
<v Speaker 1>able to tap into the super intelligence cloud, then we
<v Speaker 1>can do so in a different time, as long as
<v Speaker 1>we have the same transceiver, which hopefully would carry though
<v Speaker 1>because again, we are enveloped within that bubble.
<v Speaker 3>So yeah, damn, that's crazy. Yeah, I wonder because if
<v Speaker 3>we could do that, that would be a simple experiment. Right, Hey,
<v Speaker 3>do you remember what happened before we teleported you through
<v Speaker 3>this thing? Now your brain is ten years older or younger,
<v Speaker 3>because that would have some serious implications. I also happen
<v Speaker 3>to be of the same opinion as you that that
<v Speaker 3>our consciousness is like or our bodies are a receiver
<v Speaker 3>that's receiving consciousness. And if that were the case, then
<v Speaker 3>changing the local entropy might not change that at all,
<v Speaker 3>because where that consciousness is stored is not here. It's
<v Speaker 3>external potentially or somewhere else. Kind of a weird thought,
<v Speaker 3>But let me ask you something else about time travel. Then,
<v Speaker 3>since we're going into this, I have this thought experiment
<v Speaker 3>and I can't find any issue with it. And maybe
<v Speaker 3>that's fine. Maybe that's just because it's physically fine. But
<v Speaker 3>if I have a portal, a gateway like stargate here,
<v Speaker 3>and I'm just gonna pretend like my name is Eric
<v Speaker 3>Davis because I like to pretend like Eric Davis is
<v Speaker 3>going through a portal and the other side of the
<v Speaker 3>stargate's on Mars in somewhere where he's not gonna die,
<v Speaker 3>he's got oxygen. Whatever. Right, we've terraformed it. So I'm
<v Speaker 3>Eric Davis, and I go through my portal and now
<v Speaker 3>I'm on Mars, and I wave back at Earth and
<v Speaker 3>I go back through the portal. I in my view,
<v Speaker 3>I would be able, as Eric Davis to now look
<v Speaker 3>back up at Mars and what is it eight minutes
<v Speaker 3>or whatever, see my myself waving at myself. And I
<v Speaker 3>don't see any temporal issues here because I go through
<v Speaker 3>the portal and I come back, and I always come
<v Speaker 3>back through the portal at a time later than when
<v Speaker 3>I went through it, even if it's faster than light
<v Speaker 3>relativistic travel. So where's the issue with causality. There's no
<v Speaker 3>causal issues that I can come up with.
<v Speaker 1>Well, don't get any started on causality.
<v Speaker 3>Now. Let me tell you this because Dan, the same
<v Speaker 3>guy that said that it wasn't the swinger effect, he
<v Speaker 3>actually came up with a pretty good theory. He said,
<v Speaker 3>what if you have another portal on Mars. So I'm
<v Speaker 3>Eric Davis. I go through my portal and I show
<v Speaker 3>up on Mars, and now there's another portal on Mars,
<v Speaker 3>and this portal it goes to another spot on Earth,
<v Speaker 3>but it takes a different path. It takes a different pathway,
<v Speaker 3>maybe a shorter pathway.
<v Speaker 1>It's almost like that integral Yeah, go.
<v Speaker 3>Ahead, yeah, because now it comes to a situation of
<v Speaker 3>like how would that work and would it would it
<v Speaker 3>be a situation where like quantum mechanics just says like
<v Speaker 3>you always get the fastest path whenever you're going faster
<v Speaker 3>than light. So therefore there are no faster and shorter
<v Speaker 3>paths once you get past the speed limit. I don't know,
<v Speaker 3>but that's that's my question for you is how do
<v Speaker 3>you resolve that? How's that resolved? What do you think?
<v Speaker 1>I don't know beyond my pay grade.
<v Speaker 3>Hey, but that's what you want to study, right, because
<v Speaker 3>if we were going to write.
<v Speaker 1>A paper, very interesting idea though very interesting, I definitely
<v Speaker 1>think that you me, Dan Dave ROSSI like the Fourth
<v Speaker 1>US to form a club, you know, like do some
<v Speaker 1>you know, hopefully maybe one day we'll live close to
<v Speaker 1>one another and stuff. That'd be pretty cool.
<v Speaker 3>You know, there must be an answer to the right,
<v Speaker 3>because like this is the weird pars is that I
<v Speaker 3>think they say that if you go faster than light, now,
<v Speaker 3>I think they're saying that you open the door to
<v Speaker 3>infinite speed limits, like you can and you might go
<v Speaker 3>a certain way. And how do we even judge what
<v Speaker 3>speed is after you're going faster than the speed of light?
<v Speaker 3>And I think these questions which we don't really know
<v Speaker 3>the answers to, right, Some people might, I don't know,
<v Speaker 3>these are the reasons why we can't know what's going
<v Speaker 3>to happen with time when if we were to set
<v Speaker 3>up a scenario.
<v Speaker 1>Like that time as old different animal. Time is a
<v Speaker 1>type of energy field. It's a type of energy field
<v Speaker 1>that prevents everything from happening at once.
<v Speaker 3>That way, Yeah.
<v Speaker 1>Time, then forget about Minkowski marriage of space and time.
<v Speaker 1>Now it's one single entity. Time is nothing like space nothing.
<v Speaker 1>I believe the control of time would be very very interesting,
<v Speaker 1>almost as interesting as the control of the super force.
<v Speaker 1>Quite possibly the two are related, very much, really.
<v Speaker 3>Interesting. Yeah, No, I think, I mean time seems like
<v Speaker 3>just an emergent phenomenon of energy and mass, is how
<v Speaker 3>it feels like to me. Let's dig into let's switch
<v Speaker 3>it around a little bit. The Gershenstein. I hope about
<v Speaker 3>Gertzenstein effect. Boy, I hope I'm saying that Stein Goodenstein.
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, Gertzenstein. I love, I love pronouncing that the name
<v Speaker 1>that that's a powerful name.
<v Speaker 3>You know.
<v Speaker 1>He was in Soviet Union circa nineteen sixties.
<v Speaker 3>Really, and this was at the time.
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, this was at the time. I think. I'm not sure.
<v Speaker 1>I think Stalin had died by day by then. I
<v Speaker 1>think it was skruse Chev at the time. I could
<v Speaker 1>be wrong. It's been a long time. But at the time,
<v Speaker 1>because his name was now Russian and I quote unquote
<v Speaker 1>supposedly they discriminated grace greatly against him. So even for
<v Speaker 1>him to have been able to publish at the time,
<v Speaker 1>it was a big thing.
<v Speaker 3>I was looking for a clip, but I don't know
<v Speaker 3>if I took a clip of it or not. I
<v Speaker 3>was watching. I think it was Master Evo. I don't
<v Speaker 3>know if you know of him on YouTube, got a
<v Speaker 3>big Tesla guy, and yeah, he's doing these experiments and
<v Speaker 3>I think he was showing the Gtenstein Effectenstein effect Gerstenstein.
<v Speaker 3>And it's a pretty interesting phenomenon, which is that at
<v Speaker 3>certain frequencies or high voltages, the electoral magnetic forces begin
<v Speaker 3>to change and the fields all of a sudden become
<v Speaker 3>scaler as opposed to transverse. I guess would be the
<v Speaker 3>opposite of the opposite that, and they should he show
<v Speaker 3>diagram of this? So basically it was just a rod.
<v Speaker 3>And then he's showing the normal electromagnetic fields around the rod,
<v Speaker 3>and he's saying, well, once we add this high twenty
<v Speaker 3>thousand volts to it, now alsen. The field lines are
<v Speaker 3>going out. And when you look at the girl and
<v Speaker 3>how did he added?
<v Speaker 1>How did he added? Did he add it instantaneously? Was
<v Speaker 1>it a process or did he add it all at once?
<v Speaker 1>He drove it far from equilibrium, didn't he?
<v Speaker 3>Again?
<v Speaker 1>Whether it's all about engineering, the Preggine effect, that's what
<v Speaker 1>Gerstinstein really hit on. It was way before Preggene and
<v Speaker 1>his introduction of non equilibrium tromodynamics. But all these guys
<v Speaker 1>are really talk about you have a non linear medium plasma,
<v Speaker 1>you drive it far from equilibrium while positing it, or
<v Speaker 1>rather giving it an energy flux in flux of sorts,
<v Speaker 1>magic happens. Period.
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, they all say, parametric impulse seem to come up
<v Speaker 3>a lot so it seems to be like a matter
<v Speaker 3>of of like pulsing, kind of like a swing, you know,
<v Speaker 3>like swings going back and forth, Like when do you
<v Speaker 3>push on the swing? You push on the swing when
<v Speaker 3>the swing's all the way back at it as peaked.
<v Speaker 3>When it's coming back to anything else is going to
<v Speaker 3>be inefficient. So it's kind of like the same ideas
<v Speaker 3>like where you they say that if you use a
<v Speaker 3>pulse effect, it's significantly more efficient than a non pulse effect.
<v Speaker 3>And then the parametric oscillations as well, which is really
<v Speaker 3>related to electrical engineering and potentially speaks to amplification of energy.
<v Speaker 1>Metric isolations are meant to keep that energy flex going.
<v Speaker 1>You see, you must feed the beast, but once you
<v Speaker 1>drive it far from a qulibrium, once you have punched
<v Speaker 1>the wolf in the face, it will react in a
<v Speaker 1>very interesting manner. You might not have that hand for long. Yeah.
<v Speaker 3>And the other thing the Gershenstein effect seems to link
<v Speaker 3>to is it seems to imply that there's a direct
<v Speaker 3>relationship between electromagnetism and gravity, so much so that it
<v Speaker 3>argues that the ripples of gravity itself, the ripples of
<v Speaker 3>space time itself, might be what gives electromagnetism its wavelength,
<v Speaker 3>gives it its form? Is that my understanding that correctly
<v Speaker 3>is that gravity may give rise to electromagnetism, and electromagnetism
<v Speaker 3>may give rise to gravity.
<v Speaker 1>The two are definitely intrinsically related at the quantum level.
<v Speaker 1>Remember doctor Putov's idea, what is gravity but truly fluctuations
<v Speaker 1>within the quantum? Peel within the quantum nationalists?
<v Speaker 3>Okay, on the same thing before I get to like
<v Speaker 3>in the next thing is have you ever heard of
<v Speaker 3>doctor you from NASA and his UoN theory at all?
<v Speaker 3>He was just on with Terrence Howard and Patrick bet
<v Speaker 3>David earlier this week.
<v Speaker 1>I saw the episode with you. That is all I know, Yes,
<v Speaker 1>some interesting ideas. I'll tell you the truth. I've always said.
<v Speaker 1>Do you know who was the first to ask what
<v Speaker 1>is the electron? It was Einstein. It was at the
<v Speaker 1>time that everybody was coming up with new particles. Oh
<v Speaker 1>you know, at one time this great physicist, I forget
<v Speaker 1>his name is said maybe a Nobel prize should be
<v Speaker 1>conferred to someone who doesn't find a fucking particle this year,
<v Speaker 1>you know something of that major And Einstein said, what
<v Speaker 1>about should why should we not focus our ideas, our sentience,
<v Speaker 1>what not, our minds on finding what is the electron?
<v Speaker 1>Because that is very important. This idea of it being
<v Speaker 1>a dipolar magnet is very interesting. So again electricity speaks
<v Speaker 1>to magnetism. Magnetism manipulates electricity. You know, one hand washes
<v Speaker 1>the other. It's interesting. But again again heavy Side came
<v Speaker 1>up with these ideas before. They're just a new way again,
<v Speaker 1>a new perspective on all physics. That's all. This is
<v Speaker 1>not your physics.
<v Speaker 3>And then so I guess now to really dig into like, okay,
<v Speaker 3>what's happening then at the quantum level? And that's what
<v Speaker 3>I wanted this to segue too, in terms of when
<v Speaker 3>we talk about the electron, do you think we can
<v Speaker 3>manipulate the orbital of the electron beyond current understanding? Like
<v Speaker 3>do you think we can potentially reduce the orbital below?
<v Speaker 3>What is thought of? His end equals one.
<v Speaker 1>Let me just say this and this I will say
<v Speaker 1>very very quick, dirty, and I won't say anything else
<v Speaker 1>after it. It might be done in cold plasmas.
<v Speaker 3>It might be done in cold plasmas. Have you ever
<v Speaker 3>heard of a guy named Randall Mills?
<v Speaker 1>No, but I think you mentioned him. I remember the name.
<v Speaker 1>I remember hearing the name on your pod.
<v Speaker 3>But yeah, I'll just be perfectly honest. I've been you know.
<v Speaker 3>First of all, I believe you when you said that
<v Speaker 3>you didn't make the orbs or anything like that. I
<v Speaker 3>feel like you've always been. Really, I would have.
<v Speaker 1>Been speaking to you right now if I made the
<v Speaker 1>wards I would have said, I would have. I would
<v Speaker 1>have a fucking a torah worth of of of of
<v Speaker 1>of NBA shot down my ass. I couldn't even like move,
<v Speaker 1>let alone like you know anyway, Yeah, let me let
<v Speaker 1>me show you.
<v Speaker 3>I think I do have a clip of this guy. Yeah,
<v Speaker 3>I do. Let me where is it? I want to
<v Speaker 3>show you a clip of this guy and some of
<v Speaker 3>the stuff he said, because it started really making me think,
<v Speaker 3>here we.
<v Speaker 4>Go industries, because you're gonna be the engineer on the
<v Speaker 4>atomic level, you can actually engineer matter the same way
<v Speaker 4>an engineer building. One more time, any new industries. Because
<v Speaker 4>you're gonna be the engineer on the atomic level. You
<v Speaker 4>can actually engineer matter the same way an engineer building.
<v Speaker 3>You know who. That reminded me of When I watched that,
<v Speaker 3>it reminded me of you. It reminded me of you.
<v Speaker 1>You said, remember the gravitational field equations. They speak to
<v Speaker 1>a new again, a new perspective on all physics. What
<v Speaker 1>did Why did doctor John Brandenburg when he heard super
<v Speaker 1>force equals to the four divider by Big g and
<v Speaker 1>he realized that if you use it as a scale operator,
<v Speaker 1>take it to the other side. It basically says it
<v Speaker 1>is the super force acting and the local spatial temporal
<v Speaker 1>geometric structure, the very local space time geometric structure. It
<v Speaker 1>gives rise to energy density hence generates matter because that's
<v Speaker 1>what energy density is.
<v Speaker 3>So if you manipulate that, then it sounds like theoretically,
<v Speaker 3>what Randall Mills is saying could make sense because now
<v Speaker 3>you're manipulating space time itself. So an equals one? What
<v Speaker 3>does that even mean anymore? Why not? Why can't you
<v Speaker 3>have fractionals of that? It seems rational to me. We
<v Speaker 3>just arbitrarily, I'll called it an equals one anyway. Right,
<v Speaker 3>So if you're saying, well, now I'm going to change
<v Speaker 3>the physical structure of space time, okay, well now you
<v Speaker 3>can change any what an equals one means. And if
<v Speaker 3>that's the case, so then I think, man, what I
<v Speaker 3>wanted to do, and what I spent time last night
<v Speaker 3>more a lot actually looking at is trying to understand
<v Speaker 3>if random Mills has ever discussed negative energy because or
<v Speaker 3>anything related to what you're talking about, Cause isn't this
<v Speaker 3>what you're talking about when you're talking about the super force.
<v Speaker 3>You're saying like, hey, and this is also related to
<v Speaker 3>doctor you. Doctor you is saying that we don't need
<v Speaker 3>the other forces. Everything is magnetism. And I'm going, well,
<v Speaker 3>this is kind of like what sund.
<v Speaker 1>Go ahead, no, no, go ahead, But I'm saying everything
<v Speaker 1>is super force. We don't be saying that everything that
<v Speaker 1>comes from this one. Let's call it for one of
<v Speaker 1>the best, you know, the whole idea. I mean, what
<v Speaker 1>do we have. We have solads, we have liquids, we
<v Speaker 1>have gases, we have plasma, and let's call this fifth
<v Speaker 1>medium quintence, which truly is the quantum vacuum. M M. Well,
<v Speaker 1>it's quite possible that it's all about the super force.
<v Speaker 1>Everything else stems from it. It's not only the force
<v Speaker 1>of unification, it's the mother of all forces.
<v Speaker 3>So and that's what I think Randall Mills is getting
<v Speaker 3>at as well, because if that's true, then theoretically we
<v Speaker 3>can engineer that. We can engineer anything like Star Trek
<v Speaker 3>Replicator style, engineer anything you possibly want at the atomic level,
<v Speaker 3>because we have perfect.
<v Speaker 1>Mama gives birth.
<v Speaker 3>Do you think that fusion has already been figured out?
<v Speaker 1>Absolutely?
<v Speaker 3>And what do you think the answer is? What do
<v Speaker 3>you think the secret sauces?
<v Speaker 1>You already know the answer?
<v Speaker 3>I know, but I want I want to hear it
<v Speaker 3>from you. That's the point. So if you don't say it,
<v Speaker 3>then it doesn't matter.
<v Speaker 1>Gravity Okay, I'm gonna I'm gonna draw it out of you.
<v Speaker 1>What is that one medium that acts as a point,
<v Speaker 1>or rather as a bridge, a transition between a gas and.
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, plasma And actually so that speaks to something else
<v Speaker 3>that random Mills said that I want to ask you about.
<v Speaker 3>He said plasma acts as a perfect absorber and re
<v Speaker 3>emitter of black body radiation. Do you agree with that
<v Speaker 3>or what do you think the significance of that is.
<v Speaker 1>It's a very strong statement. I would have to look
<v Speaker 1>into it further, and me answering a certain way would
<v Speaker 1>give the enemy ideas. So now that's okay, Yeah.
<v Speaker 3>I thought that might be the answer. Yeah, plasma does
<v Speaker 3>seem I mean obviously to me, the answer why plasma
<v Speaker 3>is so crucial is that plasma can be a circuit
<v Speaker 3>because of the fact that it is this additional state
<v Speaker 3>of matter that's not a solid, not a liquid, but
<v Speaker 3>it kind of acts as both. It's just it's like
<v Speaker 3>free electrons combined with ions in a mix continent contained
<v Speaker 3>by magnetic fields. So that would seem like it's the
<v Speaker 3>perfect thing and amorphous blob of charge. But then the
<v Speaker 3>problem is how dense can the energy get? How dense
<v Speaker 3>can it get? And I think this is where you
<v Speaker 3>your theory is come into play. Where is the answer
<v Speaker 3>infinite or is there a limitation? What you tell me?
<v Speaker 1>That's you have to remember that plasmas are usually neutral
<v Speaker 1>or neutral Okay, The trick is to get it out
<v Speaker 1>of the neutral zone. Oh, the neutral zone. Remember the
<v Speaker 1>romulans anyway, Yeah.
<v Speaker 3>Are the current fusion reactors trying to get it out
<v Speaker 3>of the neutral zone or are they just trying to
<v Speaker 3>keep it in the neutral zone and heat it up?
<v Speaker 1>Eqe bro AQE. I won't go there. Okay, stuff, heavy stuff.
<v Speaker 3>No problem, Okay, interesting, So let me ask another question.
<v Speaker 3>This one actually is from one of my biggest fans supporters,
<v Speaker 3>and administrators JK. Philly Fan And this is actually related
<v Speaker 3>to I think the discussion you had with Dan as well,
<v Speaker 3>is that do you think that the Shwinger limit can
<v Speaker 3>be modified? Do you think that the Shwinger limit can
<v Speaker 3>come down? For example, if we consider this idea that
<v Speaker 3>space time is not empty and that you can manipulate
<v Speaker 3>the vacuum, can you manipulate the swinger limit?
<v Speaker 1>What you think?
<v Speaker 3>I think, of course you can. I think of course
<v Speaker 3>you can, right, But wouldn't that mean that you.
<v Speaker 1>Could reduce everything being at that blank scale, and certain
<v Speaker 1>things come into fruition or rather than to being. And
<v Speaker 1>it may have been so transparent before.
<v Speaker 3>Mm hmm.
<v Speaker 1>There are ways this There other ways that taking a
<v Speaker 1>third of the host of heaven to start a war,
<v Speaker 1>There other ways to dethrone God. As bad as that sounds,
<v Speaker 1>let me leave it at that.
<v Speaker 3>Hmm Okay, well, let me ass I mean, I'm just
<v Speaker 3>gonna take that as a yes, of course, for sure. Definitely.
<v Speaker 3>I'm just giving in the context the physics context of
<v Speaker 3>the discussion that we've had here, everything else adds up
<v Speaker 3>to yes, of course you can change the swinger limit. Now,
<v Speaker 3>of course, the implications of why that's so huge. Are like,
<v Speaker 3>you could make it so that it's easy to make
<v Speaker 3>a black hole theoretically, Like you mean you can. I mean,
<v Speaker 3>that's just one example you could. You're basically saying you
<v Speaker 3>can make a big bang if you can just change
<v Speaker 3>the swinger limit. But this kind of speaks to something
<v Speaker 3>you and I have spoken to h offline, which is
<v Speaker 3>this idea of is a black hole gonna dissipate before
<v Speaker 3>it's formed? And I, well, yeah, we're like, you know,
<v Speaker 3>is if you're while if you're just shooting energy beams,
<v Speaker 3>let's say, like lasers for example, and you're trying to
<v Speaker 3>produce a singularity, and at the same time, the vacuum
<v Speaker 3>is trying to correct that single it's trying to close in, right,
<v Speaker 3>So it's kind of like.
<v Speaker 1>Isn't isn't that interesting? This this idea of of self preservation.
<v Speaker 1>It's as if super intelligence doesn't like to have rips
<v Speaker 1>in or cuts in its fabric.
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, well, I don't know if I'm going to take
<v Speaker 3>it that far. You're you're free to interpret it however
<v Speaker 3>you want. But for me, it's more of like when
<v Speaker 3>I go to the ocean and go to a body
<v Speaker 3>of water and I pull out a cup of water,
<v Speaker 3>what happens. It immediately steals back up again. It doesn't
<v Speaker 3>even look like it's not like there's a divot in
<v Speaker 3>the water where I took the water out.
<v Speaker 1>And that's because there's water surrounding that hole that you made.
<v Speaker 3>Yes, exactly. And that's true of the universe too, right,
<v Speaker 3>that the energy is everywhere. So if I pull the
<v Speaker 3>energy out of one point.
<v Speaker 1>Why is everything connected because of the superforce?
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, and so that's.
<v Speaker 1>Where I decide idea of divorcing stuff from the force
<v Speaker 1>is no good. The force is always with us.
<v Speaker 3>Let me ask this. This is kind of on the
<v Speaker 3>same line. Then if this is true, what's the answer
<v Speaker 3>to the double slit experiment? Why does the wave function
<v Speaker 3>break down?
<v Speaker 1>I'll be fucked us if I know.
<v Speaker 3>That.
<v Speaker 1>I told you man, I have holes in my knowledge
<v Speaker 1>and stuff like that between you and I. I mean
<v Speaker 1>the double slid, I mean the whole idea of the
<v Speaker 1>observer having something to do with the outcome of the experiment.
<v Speaker 1>There's always fascinating me. I'll tell you the truth. But
<v Speaker 1>I'm more of an application guy. And as bad as
<v Speaker 1>it sounds, sometimes when I weaponize everything which is not
<v Speaker 1>a good thing because on one side I am pro peace,
<v Speaker 1>but on the other I would like the enemy to die,
<v Speaker 1>like right now. So what can I say? There's a
<v Speaker 1>dichotomy in me. You know, That's why we have what
<v Speaker 1>is it, the left hand, the little devil the le
<v Speaker 1>angel on the right. Yeah, sometimes I think they fuse
<v Speaker 1>together my brain. Now, kidd.
<v Speaker 3>Let me ask you something else. Actually, going back real
<v Speaker 3>quick to the random Mills thing and this idea of
<v Speaker 3>a lower energy state of the hydrogen atom. He calls
<v Speaker 3>it a hydrina. One of the claims that he makes
<v Speaker 3>is that where that energy band is is related to
<v Speaker 3>the fine structure constant.
<v Speaker 1>I oh, you're touching on a very Oh my god,
<v Speaker 1>I love.
<v Speaker 3>I've been trying to figure out where the fine structure
<v Speaker 3>concept fits in all this. The idea that it fits
<v Speaker 3>in on like where you figure out where the energy
<v Speaker 3>band might be is an interest. It's a fun one
<v Speaker 3>for me. So what do you think is do you
<v Speaker 3>think there's merit to that idea?
<v Speaker 1>Do me a huge favor do right now, take a calculator,
<v Speaker 1>do one divided by one thirty seven and you'll get
<v Speaker 1>something like zero points zero zero seven, two nine nine,
<v Speaker 1>And then the thing decreases as if it's a wave,
<v Speaker 1>a fucking mathematical wave. I've never seen anything like that
<v Speaker 1>repeats itself, but it looks like a wave. It goes
<v Speaker 1>up and then it goes down directly. It's it's amazing.
<v Speaker 1>One divided by one thirty seven. It's a beautiful number
<v Speaker 1>for your heart. Look at that number. That's something. Now,
<v Speaker 1>remember the whole thing comes down from that formalism, that
<v Speaker 1>mathematical formalism with q q square divided by h bar c.
<v Speaker 1>H bar is a reduced Frank constant. So this one
<v Speaker 1>divide by one thirty seven is really approximation. Look at that,
<v Speaker 1>Look at the pattern. Yes, forever more. It's a transient, yes,
<v Speaker 1>but what's really Yeah, it's cool. I took it to
<v Speaker 1>like a one hundred thousand places just to see what
<v Speaker 1>the fuck's going on because I was intrigued. But yeah,
<v Speaker 1>it's it's it's insane. It's uh yeah, that really triggered me.
<v Speaker 1>And it's cool that it starts with double seven.
<v Speaker 3>Right here there. You go. Yeah, wow, okay, so wait,
<v Speaker 3>is that answer mean that yes, you do think there's
<v Speaker 3>merits to that idea or no? I really have no
<v Speaker 3>idea to think that.
<v Speaker 1>The super intelligence is extremely fucking intelligent. It's at it
<v Speaker 1>every fucking thing. Look at that number. You cannot tell
<v Speaker 1>me the number just came out of somebody.
<v Speaker 3>Meaning of it. So are you saying, because this was
<v Speaker 3>the energy secret energy bands.
<v Speaker 1>Find the meaning of the fine structure constant. That's why
<v Speaker 1>Fireman was so intrigued. They called it a magic number.
<v Speaker 1>Fireman was no fucking mental midget. It was one of
<v Speaker 1>the greatest we've ever had.
<v Speaker 3>Anyway, So what do you think the significance is then?
<v Speaker 1>Of the fine structure come directly to how the super
<v Speaker 1>force couples with the space time, temporal space or temporal
<v Speaker 1>geometric structure. There's something there, and I believe it's been engineered.
<v Speaker 1>The fine structure constant is at the bottom of all
<v Speaker 1>It's like the key to the pyramids.
<v Speaker 3>You know that doesn't seem random? Okay, okay, uh, Let
<v Speaker 3>me ask Kasmir cavities. Ever heard that term Cosmir cavities?
<v Speaker 1>Sure? So? Uh.
<v Speaker 3>The idea is actually similar to what we've been talking
<v Speaker 3>about now, which is that if space time bounces back, right,
<v Speaker 3>if there's an energy state below the bottom and has
<v Speaker 3>this weird self organizing proper to it then the Casmir
<v Speaker 3>cavity effect is actually a very simple one. It says,
<v Speaker 3>let's put something that slows things down in this case,
<v Speaker 3>like a conductor an insulator, and a conductor has these
<v Speaker 3>quantum effects, and then let's just have a cavity an
<v Speaker 3>empty space, an empty space. And the idea is like
<v Speaker 3>a trampoline, Like you're gonna jump on the trampoline, pull
<v Speaker 3>a little energy out right, to take that energy out,
<v Speaker 3>and then move it over to this empty space over here,
<v Speaker 3>and then it'll just level set itself out again. What
<v Speaker 3>do you think about that concept.
<v Speaker 1>It's a good concept, way too complex to engineer. I
<v Speaker 1>like simple shit that gets complicated to me. Yeah, I
<v Speaker 1>don't see it. I don't see how you materialize energy
<v Speaker 1>on the order of fucking ten to the twenty five juice.
<v Speaker 1>That's what I want to fucking produce. I want to make.
<v Speaker 1>Tell a look, if I would ever get to meet somebody,
<v Speaker 1>I would love to meet Edward Tuller and tell him
<v Speaker 1>of this device I have in mind. If that man
<v Speaker 1>who just fucking doesn't need to do anything else except smile,
<v Speaker 1>that's more to me then fucking three Nobel prices conferred
<v Speaker 1>by some fucking monarch in stockh On, Sweden.
<v Speaker 3>Mm So do you think Edward Teller knew.
<v Speaker 1>Teller was a super fucking genius. I think Oppenheimer felt
<v Speaker 1>like a little cerebral druglotype in front of him. I
<v Speaker 1>don't think the two had much of a relationship, but
<v Speaker 1>I think Oppenheimer felt very I wouldn't say in all,
<v Speaker 1>but he certainly wasn't all, but felt threatened by Teller.
<v Speaker 1>So anyway, yeah, I'm not gonna go there. There's too
<v Speaker 1>much politics and the physicist love Oppenheimer, I love Teller,
<v Speaker 1>Tellers the man.
<v Speaker 3>Do you think there's some secret resonant frequency to tap
<v Speaker 3>in to this?
<v Speaker 1>Just because he had wonderful libros? Kiddy?
<v Speaker 3>So this energy one of the things I've wondered. Is
<v Speaker 3>there some secret resonant frequency to tap into it? Or
<v Speaker 3>is it more of a depends on the type of
<v Speaker 3>engineering situation you're trying to do.
<v Speaker 1>Just study that sside tech presentation, Study it and study
<v Speaker 1>it some more. Look at it again before you think
<v Speaker 1>it's just words on paper, go back. It's amazing that
<v Speaker 1>certain things haven't come to light. But this is what
<v Speaker 1>I'm afraid of. I'm afraid you're the one who actually
<v Speaker 1>caught it that several very high research Chinese themes found
<v Speaker 1>the paper. Yeah, and one of them was from the
<v Speaker 1>I Triple League Institute, or rather Journal of Cybernetics.
<v Speaker 3>I mean, I'm just saying that we're talking about if
<v Speaker 3>I was them, I would not be publicly referencing your papers, because,
<v Speaker 3>like you said before about our adversaries, I think that's
<v Speaker 3>a really really good way to shorten your life expectancy
<v Speaker 3>if you happen to be looking in this research as
<v Speaker 3>as somebody aligned with an adversary of ours. So that's
<v Speaker 3>just my viewpoint, because you don't seem super afraid by
<v Speaker 3>our adversaries.
<v Speaker 1>So all men die, not all men know how to live?
<v Speaker 3>Wait? Is that Gladiator? No way? Favorite?
<v Speaker 1>I thought that was me? But fuck me, I mean,
<v Speaker 1>what do I know? I'm filled with hubris?
<v Speaker 3>Yeah? Uh well let's ask this then, right, that's Brave Heart,
<v Speaker 3>the Brave Heart. Okay, William wilsh What so this is
<v Speaker 3>something that I want to get your opinion on. Kind
<v Speaker 3>of Now we can move away a little bit from
<v Speaker 3>the science, which is more of it seems like everything's
<v Speaker 3>just kind of out there in the open. So what
<v Speaker 3>is it? Why are more people not figuring it out.
<v Speaker 3>You know, you've praised me a lot. I don't necessarily
<v Speaker 3>agree with all the praise, but sure I appreciate it
<v Speaker 3>for sure because I agree more.
<v Speaker 1>Look a natural, bro, I am. Absolutely You got to
<v Speaker 1>understand there are certain people born in this world. Just
<v Speaker 1>because they don't go into a certain profession, it does
<v Speaker 1>not mean that they're not natural at something else. It's
<v Speaker 1>quite possible that you are natural at physics. And from
<v Speaker 1>what you've told, from the way that you've come up
<v Speaker 1>to speed, from the way that you've understood extremely complex
<v Speaker 1>ideas and able to rent to them in simplified form
<v Speaker 1>so that a child can understand. That's what true physicists
<v Speaker 1>should do. I don't want someone to give me the
<v Speaker 1>bracket fucking the ract equation for blah blah blah. You
<v Speaker 1>know what the fuck that? Can I engineer it? Can
<v Speaker 1>I do something with it? Can I put it up
<v Speaker 1>the enemy's ass? You see what I'm saying anyway?
<v Speaker 3>Well, so then the question is this though, right? Is
<v Speaker 3>that okay, somebody like me can figure it out. I'm
<v Speaker 3>admittedly just a healthcare it professional. What is going on
<v Speaker 3>with the world? Why? Why is this not getting figured out?
<v Speaker 3>Way before. Why are people saying that, Why are there
<v Speaker 3>people that have credentials that are reviewing your patents and
<v Speaker 3>saying that they think it's misinformation being put out by
<v Speaker 3>the Navy to confuse our adversaries, or what all this
<v Speaker 3>other shit like? Explain it to me in terms of
<v Speaker 3>why it has not come out. Why is somebody not
<v Speaker 3>taking this science and made a free energy device out
<v Speaker 3>of it? It made a trillion dollars? Now what's your
<v Speaker 3>And of course you know this is just your opinion,
<v Speaker 3>So what is your thoughts on all that and why
<v Speaker 3>that's the case.
<v Speaker 1>One thing I like about Ross Coldheart, even though sometimes
<v Speaker 1>I think he stabbed me in the back, but that's
<v Speaker 1>for another time, is that the title of his book
<v Speaker 1>hidden in plain sight. Sometimes you refuse to fucking see
<v Speaker 1>what's right in front of you, m M, because you
<v Speaker 1>have certain notions that, if discarded or worked against, would
<v Speaker 1>bring the whole fucking foundation upon you. Change. Even though
<v Speaker 1>a lot of us say is for the better, it's
<v Speaker 1>not so. M. Why do you a comfort brother? We
<v Speaker 1>always will be.
<v Speaker 3>Why do you think more engineers don't speak out that
<v Speaker 3>know about the science, Like what about other people you
<v Speaker 3>work with? Surely you must work with other people that
<v Speaker 3>think similarly to you do. Why do they not speak out?
<v Speaker 1>Some of them don't even know the shit's going on
<v Speaker 1>in the background, Like they don't know my patents and
<v Speaker 1>they don't know the work I've done it then, you know,
<v Speaker 1>I mean, why would you google something about your colleague? Yeah,
<v Speaker 1>I mean a lot of people do that.
<v Speaker 3>I mean more like you're working on secret stuff that
<v Speaker 3>you're like, hey, this defies laws of physics, but I'm
<v Speaker 3>working on it is real. There's got to be more
<v Speaker 3>people like that out there. Given this science is legit,
<v Speaker 3>Why why do you think those people choose to stay silent?
<v Speaker 1>That's a question on national security. So they's sign again man,
<v Speaker 1>government people. And I'll tell you again my imploration to
<v Speaker 1>mister Musk. And I mean that from the bottom of
<v Speaker 1>my heart. I know he said certain thing about empathy.
<v Speaker 1>I don't believe he truly believes that in his heart
<v Speaker 1>of hearts. I think the man is quite emotional sentimentally. Now,
<v Speaker 1>everyone of the government, all my brothers and sisters in government,
<v Speaker 1>are capable of this kind of thinking. And that's why
<v Speaker 1>I asked mister Mosk not to fire us anymore and
<v Speaker 1>to rescind all the firings, just bring everyone back. We
<v Speaker 1>fulfill a war a war, We fulfill a role that
<v Speaker 1>will one day come very useful in war. But that's
<v Speaker 1>beside the point.
<v Speaker 3>Have you seen did you watch my live s teams
<v Speaker 3>or anything about right hand?
<v Speaker 1>Oh, don't cut off your right hand just to make
<v Speaker 1>the left one feel better, That's all.
<v Speaker 3>I'm Did you see my post about this device that
<v Speaker 3>can theoretically extract energy from the rotation of the Earth.
<v Speaker 1>Wow, I haven't seen.
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I want. I'm curious with your opinion on that
<v Speaker 3>as well. So it's doctor Uh out of Princeton. I'm sorry,
<v Speaker 3>I'm looking back through my post to find it here.
<v Speaker 3>I wanted to give him credit on here. I can't
<v Speaker 3>find it right now yet at the moment. So but anyway,
<v Speaker 3>this doctor out of Princeton basically found like a cylinder
<v Speaker 3>that if you align it against uh or orthogonally against
<v Speaker 3>the magnetic field of the Earth, that because of its
<v Speaker 3>right material property, you will actually generate a voltage. And
<v Speaker 3>even though it's really small as well, do you think
<v Speaker 3>there might be merit to an idea like that generate
<v Speaker 3>energy from the rotational of the Earth.
<v Speaker 1>I can think of of an analogy in in fluid mechanics.
<v Speaker 1>It's called the magnets effect mgn US. A cylinder rotating
<v Speaker 1>can actually generate lyft. They've tried it to actually put
<v Speaker 1>it on a yacht and use it as a sale
<v Speaker 1>in case the wind dies down. It's a very interesting idea.
<v Speaker 3>Wow, yeah, it's Chris Chiba.
<v Speaker 1>I just but this what you described would be the
<v Speaker 1>electromagnetic version of an analogy of it.
<v Speaker 3>So yeah, yeah, he tested it. They had the theory
<v Speaker 3>in twenty sixteen, and it got ignored like it always did.
<v Speaker 3>And so just a month ago their paper. Two months ago,
<v Speaker 3>their paper got published and they did the experiment with it,
<v Speaker 3>and they showed that if they changed the alignment, if
<v Speaker 3>they changed it in ninety degrees, it produces zero voltage.
<v Speaker 3>If they changed one hundred and eighty degrees, it produces
<v Speaker 3>negative voltage, and then two hundred and seventy degrees zero again,
<v Speaker 3>which I thought was really compelling. So Chris Chaiba to
<v Speaker 3>Princeton University did this. Now. The reason why I brought
<v Speaker 3>it up is that people were saying, oh, well, it's
<v Speaker 3>producing like no energy, like very very little. Kind of
<v Speaker 3>to your point about the casmir cavity, same idea, it's
<v Speaker 3>prettucing very little. But the counter to that is that
<v Speaker 3>those are just I mean, you know, as an engineer,
<v Speaker 3>those are just to show proof of concept. That's not to.
<v Speaker 1>I have an idea, depending on certain frequencies. What if
<v Speaker 1>it's producing little energy because most of it is in
<v Speaker 1>this so called fifth dimension. Hmm, what if just a
<v Speaker 1>hypothetical throne out there be interesting. There's something that's going on, brother,
<v Speaker 1>there's something. There's something just weird about our physics. Yeah,
<v Speaker 1>sometimes I think, I don't know. Maybe something is built
<v Speaker 1>within us to hip us from believing the unimaginable, to
<v Speaker 1>sort of put a veil over our eyes, of our thoughts,
<v Speaker 1>to hide the reality of things. Maybe I'm.
<v Speaker 3>No, you're right, But here's the thing. So here's the answer.
<v Speaker 3>Though it's like, how do you make it more energy?
<v Speaker 3>The answer is you scale it down. Like you to
<v Speaker 3>your point, like, how do you interact with that vacuum energy?
<v Speaker 3>You get smaller. Because it turns out, and this is
<v Speaker 3>what Chaiba said in his paper, I don't think a
<v Speaker 3>lot of people actually read the paper, is that you
<v Speaker 3>scale it down, the actual energy gain doesn't actually decrease,
<v Speaker 3>so just due to the fact that as you scale down,
<v Speaker 3>you're interacting more strongly with the energy. So you would
<v Speaker 3>scale it down and then you would build it into
<v Speaker 3>like a microchip situation. So instead of stacking a million
<v Speaker 3>of these huge things side by side, you'd scale it
<v Speaker 3>down into a microchip. Then they get stacked up, then
<v Speaker 3>you build it into an array that can also amplify it.
<v Speaker 3>Now you've got an energy chip where you know, I
<v Speaker 3>don't know how much energy produces. But there's two ways
<v Speaker 3>of looking at one where it's like you're trying to
<v Speaker 3>produce this huge bang, you know the thought, and that
<v Speaker 3>for sure, I feel like you probably have to use
<v Speaker 3>plasma based on what I've learned and what you've told me.
<v Speaker 3>But then there's this also idea of like, if I'm
<v Speaker 3>just trying to power my phone, I don't need a
<v Speaker 3>huge bang, I just need like some small consistent voltage.
<v Speaker 3>So maybe something like that would have merit.
<v Speaker 1>I don't know, But at pots, this whole idea of
<v Speaker 1>photonic computing, this whole idea of going away from electrons,
<v Speaker 1>I love it. This idea of using of course, you
<v Speaker 1>need high intensity lasers, you need you know, not necessarily
<v Speaker 1>Phento second, but thas.
<v Speaker 3>But yeah, big lasers. I love lasers of course.
<v Speaker 1>And big just powerful. Uh.
<v Speaker 3>There's a lot more questions, but we're kind of running
<v Speaker 3>out of time, so I was thinking maybe I'm gonna
<v Speaker 3>just I'm gonna go through some of the super chats here.
<v Speaker 3>I just want to thank the superchats. Thank you Stein
<v Speaker 3>for this donation. Appreciate you, war ranch ELLC. Thank you
<v Speaker 3>very much. Yatzi. Yeah, been awesome conversation. Tracy Scott, thank
<v Speaker 3>you very much. Help to get Sal to Congress, appreciate it.
<v Speaker 3>Thank you, Violinian, appreciate it. John Booze, thank you very much. Sally.
<v Speaker 3>Your gravitons have a mass of about ten to the
<v Speaker 3>minus eighty four kilograms each. I don't know if that's right.
<v Speaker 3>You condense them please? Offline conversation with Warner von Braun
<v Speaker 3>and our father and Apollo launch controller knew the truth
<v Speaker 3>ten to the forty four newtons of Max Hugh, Yeah,
<v Speaker 3>you like that comment? Any any response to this comment?
<v Speaker 1>Interesting?
<v Speaker 3>Okay, my guy? Interesting? Robert, thank you very much for
<v Speaker 3>that donation. Appreciate you.
<v Speaker 1>D D.
<v Speaker 3>London the fun to get Sal some new blinds. No,
<v Speaker 3>I think it's looking pretty good. We might just need
<v Speaker 3>to get him a new camera though in the future,
<v Speaker 3>maybe a new headset. We'll work on that for the
<v Speaker 3>next one, guys. And then lastly, Gaudi says, how would
<v Speaker 3>you use a box of monoatomic gold or other precious metals?
<v Speaker 1>Speaks to the art of the covenant. What do you
<v Speaker 1>think about quite a weapon?
<v Speaker 3>Yeah? What do you think about scarcity in general?
<v Speaker 1>Though?
<v Speaker 3>If you can print things out of the vacuum, then
<v Speaker 3>doesn't that mean that gold is going to become useless,
<v Speaker 3>diamonds become useless. What do you think about that?
<v Speaker 1>Gold would never become useless otherwise they would have never
<v Speaker 1>created us.
<v Speaker 3>It's a ford Well, then what do you what do
<v Speaker 3>you think of this socioeconomic impacts of this technology? I mean,
<v Speaker 3>we're kind of it's not necessarily free energy technology that
<v Speaker 3>you're speaking to here, but you're speaking to like the
<v Speaker 3>ability to tap into energy in a way that is
<v Speaker 3>essentially free. So rather, if.
<v Speaker 1>We figure how to make this whole work, Yeah, if
<v Speaker 1>we figure how to have a viable societal interaction without
<v Speaker 1>the problems that we're currently facing. While all these technology
<v Speaker 1>I mean broke forth into civilization is used that means
<v Speaker 1>we've achieved the quite possibly the unachievable. I think civilizations
<v Speaker 1>break down for a reason. Okay, sometimes it's for the best.
<v Speaker 3>Are you saying that it's.
<v Speaker 1>Good to survive. It's it's good to survive. Survival is
<v Speaker 1>a good thing. But at what price? See again, at
<v Speaker 1>what price?
<v Speaker 3>So are you saying that we kind of have to
<v Speaker 3>reveal this technology because you know it's just gonna come anyway,
<v Speaker 3>and whoever lives lives. Sorry to be morbid, but is
<v Speaker 3>that what you're saying.
<v Speaker 1>I think the technology will be revealed on its own,
<v Speaker 1>but I think we're gonna have to go for a
<v Speaker 1>lot of problems before.
<v Speaker 3>Let me, I'm gonna commit one before the How long
<v Speaker 3>how long do you think we've got to wait for
<v Speaker 3>mass acceptance of the science that we've been discussing here
<v Speaker 3>on this podcast today. How long?
<v Speaker 1>I really don't know. Brother. It's quite possible, quite possive,
<v Speaker 1>depending if, for example, groups of individuals of lack of
<v Speaker 1>mind that are not quote unquote anarchists in nature, so
<v Speaker 1>they don't want the a cirpation of governments, that decline
<v Speaker 1>of civilization, whatnot, they actually are pro humanism, the pro
<v Speaker 1>humanitary if such groups exist. It's quite possible that they
<v Speaker 1>will bring this technology somehow and.
<v Speaker 3>Mhm, so you know it could happen quickly or it
<v Speaker 3>could happen and take a long time. Yeah. Well, so
<v Speaker 3>I'll say this has been an awesome conversation. I got
<v Speaker 3>through a lot of the questions that I wanted to ask.
<v Speaker 3>Do you know? And I just want to just also
<v Speaker 3>say thank you so much for talking to me. I
<v Speaker 3>feel like I love the relationship we have. I like that.
<v Speaker 1>I remember one time at a pot I was like,
<v Speaker 1>I can't believe he stated that. What a time at
<v Speaker 1>a pot you said something like I think he's my friend.
<v Speaker 1>I'm like, what the fuck?
<v Speaker 3>Man?
<v Speaker 1>You know I'm your friend?
<v Speaker 3>Come on, well, I'll be honest, like you know, I
<v Speaker 3>don't know on you though, I don't go easy. You
<v Speaker 3>come on here.
<v Speaker 1>And because that's a rule as an investigative journalist, just
<v Speaker 1>be You don't have a card that says investigative journalists
<v Speaker 1>Ashton for ORBS does not mean that you are not one.
<v Speaker 1>As a matter of fact, I believe that when these
<v Speaker 1>videos are proved correct, or rather the technology that comes
<v Speaker 1>from the mispriven correct, which would indicate that they are correct.
<v Speaker 1>You should be actually given a Nobel possibly a Pulitzer
<v Speaker 1>price because you said you don't want the Nobel.
<v Speaker 3>So I'll let you have the Nobel. I'll let the
<v Speaker 3>scientists have the Nobel prizes. You know, I just want
<v Speaker 3>to pull the price.
<v Speaker 1>I would refuse it. No fucking royal is gonna hand
<v Speaker 1>me a piece of paper and tell me that I
<v Speaker 1>was right. What I would want is every one of
<v Speaker 1>your followers to send me a card saying damn you
<v Speaker 1>are right, or something of that nature. I would take.
<v Speaker 1>Oh my god, I would I would cover walls with
<v Speaker 1>those sports cards. That would mean more to me than
<v Speaker 1>a fucking Nobel price. What what's that?
<v Speaker 3>Yeah? Yeah, me too, So I guess somebody else had
<v Speaker 3>the last question here too. They're saying, thank you Ardo
<v Speaker 3>for the donation. Why all the continuous mass controlling and
<v Speaker 3>the spoon feeding of technology if you look at it
<v Speaker 3>from the perspective of we have this advanced technology, this
<v Speaker 3>science is out there and it's maybe not well accepted.
<v Speaker 3>Why everything that's going on, Why why all this any thoughts?
<v Speaker 1>There must be a reason, this trickle down disclosure. It's
<v Speaker 1>it's very on one part, it seems almost again this
<v Speaker 1>whole idea of what did I call it? I even
<v Speaker 1>forgot what I called something. Constipation, immaculate constipation, constipation. I
<v Speaker 1>think that sums it all up.
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, yeah, it's it's yeah. I mean, I'll say, like, yeah.
<v Speaker 3>My thought is, well, there must be a dark reason
<v Speaker 3>for it, you know, is that they're letting the technology
<v Speaker 3>come out. But it's like an acceptance thing, like you're
<v Speaker 3>slowly accepting it in the same way where people can
<v Speaker 3>now accept this conversation. But this is our third conversation
<v Speaker 3>that we've had where we've been talking about this and
<v Speaker 3>now it just seems normal and we're talking about some
<v Speaker 3>pretty crazy stuff. You're faster and light travel, et cetera.
<v Speaker 3>So maybe there's an aspect of getting people used to it, uh,
<v Speaker 3>you know, giving the technology to us at a rate
<v Speaker 3>at which we can absorb. Maybe just a thought, so
<v Speaker 3>last any last thoughts. Shout outs you want to shout
<v Speaker 3>out anybody else in the end of your buddies in
<v Speaker 3>the navy. You know you're famous now look at you?
<v Speaker 1>No, please, come on, man, you're famous. You're the one
<v Speaker 1>with the followers. I'm just on your heart trust podcasts.
<v Speaker 1>I'm the one who feels on it I am. I'm
<v Speaker 1>truly honored brother. One day's gonna be a huge dude.
<v Speaker 1>And when you're like above Rogan and all that ship,
<v Speaker 1>don't forget your little friend over here anyway. So uh look,
<v Speaker 1>I applaud you, I approved Dave ROSSI I prod all
<v Speaker 1>our guys, alien scientists, Timpentura, Kurtji Mongol even though he
<v Speaker 1>is never year isn't anyway, you know, it is what
<v Speaker 1>it is. It could be, it could be the Canada thing.
<v Speaker 1>You know, we love you on.
<v Speaker 3>That was a great interview as well with Jesse Michaels.
<v Speaker 1>I mean, oh Jesse Michaels. Uh, you know, yeah, smart guy,
<v Speaker 1>very intelligent dude. So yeah, and let's not forget his
<v Speaker 1>body over there that goes by God I forgot. I'm
<v Speaker 1>not gonna say his name. I know his real name,
<v Speaker 1>but you know his psychic Oh no, Peter Theo is uh.
<v Speaker 1>I mean he's one of.
<v Speaker 3>The if you could talk to one scientist of your
<v Speaker 3>choice and they couldn't refuse, who would you want to
<v Speaker 3>do that's still alive?
<v Speaker 1>Who do you want to ship? I was gonna say,
<v Speaker 1>tell her.
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, there's still alive.
<v Speaker 1>Who But can we engineered that reverse temporal, you know,
<v Speaker 1>the chamber somehow make it all possible. That'd be so cool.
<v Speaker 1>I've always wanted to know if mine are bigger than
<v Speaker 1>his now anyway, anyway, Uh yeah, I would say there were.
<v Speaker 1>You know, I've always wanted to ask one Manda Senna
<v Speaker 1>why he never he never backed up my paper for archive.
<v Speaker 1>I mean, yeah, it was off the deep band and
<v Speaker 1>all that ship. It was quite crackpottish. But man, a
<v Speaker 1>guy that works for the Institute of a Band Study
<v Speaker 1>at Princeton, a man that's come up with ads equal
<v Speaker 1>cft that made Lenny Suskin crying to sleep for it
<v Speaker 1>that way. I mean, and Lenny Suskin is no fucking
<v Speaker 1>mental midget either, So I mean a guy like that,
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I really thought that doesn't take it wouldn't
<v Speaker 1>have not taken a lot. Yeah, I don't know. I
<v Speaker 1>mean I had as I had a better conversation with
<v Speaker 1>about what's his name Kit both Nobel Prize winner, More Bose, Einstein,
<v Speaker 1>con BC baby good guy, good guy Well.
<v Speaker 3>Is out there and he wants to have a chat.
<v Speaker 3>I think that would be an amazing conversation. I'd love
<v Speaker 3>to set it up. I'd I should love to talk
<v Speaker 3>to him as well. He's one of the proponents. I
<v Speaker 3>guess you could say have ER equals EPR with Leonard Suskin,
<v Speaker 3>and one of the one of the first papers I
<v Speaker 3>read a couple of years ago. Yeah, humanly reversal. I
<v Speaker 3>remember I read his and I was like, wait, they're
<v Speaker 3>humanly traversible. Wow, Yeah, that'd be awesome. Okay, well, South,
<v Speaker 3>thank you very much, sir. Let's do it again in
<v Speaker 3>the future. Brother.
<v Speaker 1>I'm your man, anytime, anyplace, and always my buddy. All right, brother,
<v Speaker 1>take care, bye yourself.
<v Speaker 3>Thank you, hard everybody who is a hard truth sufficionado
<v Speaker 3>m H three seventy x. I hope you guys enjoyed
<v Speaker 3>the conversation. Piece out everybody later.