NASA Chief: "We Just Built Antigravity Propulsion!”

Our American Alchemist this week is Charles Buhler. Dr. Charles Buhler has run 2,000 vacuum chamber experiments showing a propellantless thrust force that persists after the power is switched off, and cannot be explained by ion wind, magnetic effects, or classical energy conservation. The input is pure electricity and the output is millinewtons of thrust counteracting gravity. He believes his work vindicates the legacy of midcentury antigravity pioneer Thomas Townsend Brown and will lead to the future of propellantless deep space travel. Sign Up With Our Sponsors Below For Exclusive Alchemy Deals! KetoneIQ: Visit https://ketone.com/ALCHEMY for 30% OFF your subscription order PLUS receive a free gift with your second shipment—or find Ketone-IQ at Target stores nationwide and get your first shot free! Wild Alaskan Salmon: Get $35 off your first box of wild-caught, sustainable seafood—delivered right to your door. Go to: https://www.wildalaskan.com/JESSE. -------------------------- Support Our Other Projects Below! Grab Your American Alchemy Merch Here ➤ https://www.americanalchemymerch.com/ Join The American Alchemy Magazine Here ➤ https://americanalchemymagazine.substack.com/ Subscribe To Our Clips Channel (10 Minute Highlights!) ➤ https://www.youtube.com/@UC8ZKTXN9trt5dhixz6b6l6w -------------------------- JOIN OUR WHOP (Early/Ad Free Episodes) ➤ https://whop.com/jessemichels Instagram ➤ https://www.instagram.com/jessemichelsofficial TikTok ➤ https://www.tiktok.com/@itsjessemichels X ➤ https://twitter.com/AlchemyAmerican Spotify ➤ https://tinyurl.com/jessemichelsspotify Clips Channel ➤ https://www.youtube.com/@JesseMichelsClips Apply For Jobs ➤ [email protected] Sponsor Inquiries ➤ [email protected] Media Inquiries ➤ [email protected] Timestamps: 00:00 Introduction 09:22 Sponsors (KetoneIQ / Wild Alaskan Salmon) 12:40 Meet Dr. Charles Buhler 15:14 What NASA's Electrostatics Lab Actually Does 22:32 Buhler's Path to NASA 26:56 "There Had to Be a Better Way" 31:44 First Time Witnessing the Force 35:19 Meeting Drew & Forming Exodus Propulsion 39:21 Thrust Levels and Space Applications 43:48 Why the Vacuum Chamber Matters 48:37 Ion Wind vs. the Real Force 53:56 Live Experiment Walkthrough 58:42 2,000 Variations 1:03:42 Live Demo at the Electrostatics Conference 1:07:55 Childhood UFO Sighting in Brewster, NY 1:14:52 The Cocoa Beach Incident 1:21:43 Does This Connect to His Propulsion Work? 1:26:47 "It's Really a Force Crisis, Not an Energy Crisis" 1:28:37 Patents and National Security 1:33:33 Why This Must Be a Quantum Effect 1:38:16 Spinning Superconductors 1:41:41 No Physicists on NASA's UAP Team 1:43:53 Gary McKinnon's NASA Hack 1:48:39 Why Hasn't Anyone Done This Before? 1:52:26 David Chester Enters the Conversation 1:53:39 Buhler's QED Theory of the Exodus Force 2:02:26 Momentum Conservation & Virtual Particles 2:21:09 Falcon Space and Further Investigations 2:32:16 Closing Reflections Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:01Speaker 00

  This episode is brought to you by Google Chrome. You think you know a browser, but Gemini and Chrome? That's new. It can help you with practically anything on the web, like restoring a vintage motorcycle from a 50-page restoration block, or finally break down that long article you've had open for weeks. Gemini and Chrome is here for it. Ready to make anything online make sense? There's no place like Chrome. Check responses set up required. Compatibility and availability varies 18 plus.

• 0:26Speaker 01

  This episode is brought to you by Indeed. You're ready to level up your business, but the pressure to find the right person to make that happen is intense. Indeed sponsored jobs can help carry the load. It boosts your job post to help it reach quality talent fast. Cut through the chaos with Indeed sponsored jobs. Get a $75 sponsored job credit at indeed.com/podcast. Terms and conditions apply. Hiring now? Then this is a job for Indeed sponsored jobs.

• 0:57Speaker 02

  I've always believed there had to be a better way to move an object from point A to point B. There just had to be. So I spent two decades looking at hidden momentum.

• 1:08Jesse Michels?

  You do think you've discovered a propulsion mechanism that can get us interstellar travel?

• 1:12Speaker 02

  I take those lifters and I put them in a plastic box and put it on a scale. Turn it on, the thing lifts up and the weight's flat lines, does not move at all. Still about 200 micro Newtons of force still inside.

• 1:25Jesse Michels?

  How many variations of this experiment do you think you've tried?

• 1:29Speaker 02

  We are close to 2,000.

• 1:30Jesse Michels?

  2,000 instances of the experiment or 2,000?

• 1:33Speaker 02

  2,000 variations.

• 1:34Jesse Michels?

  Holy shit.

• 1:35Speaker 02

  Two test articles. Each one's tested multiple times.

• 1:39Jesse Michels?

  If you were to apply that to like a satellite in space in a zero-gravity environment?

• 1:44Speaker 02

  It would accelerate with the power off. Can't explain that to the scientific community. I just can't.

• 1:50Speaker 04

  The idea that you could just charge it up and leave it there and it gets thrust, like it hurts my brain to even imagine how is that possible?

• 1:57Speaker 02

  These are very weird things.

• 2:00Jesse Michels?

  It's like you create this thrust mode that just keeps going.

• 2:03Speaker 02

  I don't think I'm bending spacetime. Do me a hand.

• 2:08Jesse Michels?

  For over a century, humanity's journey to the stars has been held hostage by a simple, unyielding truth: Newton's Third Law: For every action, there's an equal and opposite reaction.

• 2:22Jesse Michels?

  It's the law that powers every rocket, every satellite, every probe we've ever launched. And it's also the law that keeps us trapped here on Earth. In order to get to the closest habitable planet in our very own Milky Way galaxy, a place called Proxima Centauri B, it would take you 50,000 to 80,000 years in a chemical combustion rocket. You would die before even getting 1% of the way there. And if you somehow figured out a way to live for thousands of years, by the time you came back to Earth after a trip like that, it would be totally unrecognizable. You'd be playing out the ending of The Planet of the Apes.

• 3:03Jesse Michels?

  To go anywhere in space, you have to carry fuel, massive amounts of it. Over 90% of any rocket's mass at launch is just propellant, pure fuel, burned and ejected out of the back to push the remaining 10% forward. Launching a rocket to get a satellite into space is like flying a fully-loaded 747 to deliver a suitcase.

• 3:27Speaker 05

  One of the challenges we have to solve is orbital refilling, where we dock on orbit and transfer propellant.

• 3:32Jesse Michels?

  The modern king of rocketry, and Mr. Occupy Mars himself, Elon Musk, has publicly stated that Newton's laws are the end-all, be-all for space travel. For some reason, he's quite adamant about that.

• 3:45Speaker 05

  There's no way around Newton's Third Law, really. You basically have to expel mass.

• 3:52Jesse Michels?

  The original godfather of American rocketry, Jack Parsons, believed this as well. In 1936, he and some colleagues at Caltech began launching the first rocket tests in western Pasadena. But what most people don't know is that a decade before Jack Parsons, in the 1920s, there was someone else at Caltech with some very different ideas for deep space travel.

• 4:18Jesse Michels?

  Townsend Brown. Townsend Brown. There's a guy named Townsend Brown. OK, OK, Townsend Brown.

• 4:23Jesse Michels?

  Brown had stumbled onto something that mainstream science still refuses to acknowledge. A possible break in Newton's laws, a new force, or perhaps a way to manipulate gravity itself with electromagnetism. Unifying these two fundamental forces has been the holy grail of physics for the last century. What Einstein died searching for.

• 4:48Jesse Michels?

  Townsend Brown discovered that when you apply a high voltage to certain asymmetric capacitors, they produce thrust. No fuel, no exhaust, no propellant, just electricity, converted directly into motion. A new model for space propulsion that could eliminate crude chemical combustion forever.

• 5:10Jesse Michels?

  Brown called his anti-gravity work electrogravitics. Meanwhile, physics textbooks called it impossible. And because of that, he was dismissed, ridiculed, and eventually erased from the official story of physics.

• 5:25Jesse Michels?

  But if you dig a bit deeper and read his incredible biography by Paul Shatskin, you start to piece together a very different picture, one in which Townsend Brown isn't easily dismissed as an amateur quack. In fact, his work was witnessed by the highest levels of government and military.

• 5:43Speaker 04

  Now we're getting some interesting territory.

• 5:45Jesse Michels?

  People like notorious Air Force Chief of Staff Curtis LeMay, who courted Brown constantly. People like Edward Teller, the father of the hydrogen bomb, Bill Lear, the founder of the first private jet, and Agnew Bonson, founder of the Institute of Field Physics at North Carolina. A lieutenant colonel from Wright Airfield, who went on to become a general named Victor Bertrandius, witnessed Brown's gravitator experiments in Los Angeles in 1952. He was quoted as saying, "Believe it or not, I think I just saw a flying saucer, and it frightened me."

• 6:20Jesse Michels?

  And if that's not all, we have audio of a deathbed confession from French aerospace executive Jacques Corneille, who witnessed Brown's successful experiments in a vacuum chamber in 1956 in Paris, explicitly stating he witnessed a positive result.

• 6:37Speaker 06

  So that was a positive result.

• 6:40Jesse Michels?

  This is to go along with an 120-page report around that specific experiment that's widely available online today. Nonetheless, stigma, tech protection, and scientific suppression are all very real. Brown's work is still likely classified by the Navy to this day. Over the last 70 years, Brown's experiments never went away. They just went underground. They've been replicated all over the world in places as far as Japan, but usually by persistent hobbyist teams or aerospace engineers stringing some funds together and operating out of pure passion. But in deep-black American aerospace, I believe Brown's work still exists

• 7:24Jesse Michels?

  in the form of whispers and vital subcompartments, where it gets explored further. OK, so that's the backdrop. Newton has us stuck on Earth. Industry titans like Elon can't be bothered to explore new propulsion modalities. And Townsend-Brown is a total ghost relegated to quacky UFO circles. That is, until today. Inside a quiet lab in Florida, NASA's lead electrostatic scientist, a man named Dr. Charles Buhler, has been running the same gravity-altering tests as Thomas Townsend-Brown.

• 8:00Speaker 02

  Where we see about 0.1 grams, that corresponds to about 1 millinewton of thrust.

• 8:05Jesse Michels?

  Only this time with modern instruments, more rigorous controls, and decades of electrostatics expertise from his work at Kennedy Space Center behind him. And what he's measuring is thrust, real, repeatable, directional thrust. No combustion, no reaction mass, the future of space travel.

• 8:26Speaker 02

  We say we have an energy crisis. Oh, my God, the energy crisis. Well, it could be considered an energy crisis, but it's really a force crisis. It's a transportation crisis. How do you get an object from here to here?

• 8:39Jesse Michels?

  At his company Exodus Propulsion Technologies, Buhler isn't just replicating Townsend Brown's work. He's validating it, scaling it, showing literal weight loss on scales due to upward thrust. Again, Buhler is not some mid-level guy at NASA. He's the lead electrostatic scientist in the entire agency. And you're also, I believe, about to be the president of the Electrostatic Society, too?

• 9:04Speaker 02

  That's correct.

• 9:05Jesse Michels?

  And he's contributed two fundamental principles to the field of electrostatics that are now widely accepted. The question is no longer whether the Bifield-Brown effect is real or not. The question is, where could this lead humanity? How can we scale this up? And what is the theoretical physics behind it? On this last question, Charles goes deeper on this show than he has in any other interview on his own quantum electrodynamics-based theory around how this force works. And I brought in my friend, a brilliant MIT-trained physicist named David Chester, to help stress-test and sharpen Buhler's theory. What happens when propulsion no longer requires fuel? When the tyranny of rocket equations finally breaks?

• 9:50Jesse Michels?

  Without further ado, please welcome this week's amazing American alchemist, NASA and Exodus Propulsion's very own, Dr. Charles Buhler. Ignition sequence five.

• 10:04Jesse Michels?

  How is this possible?

• 10:10Speaker 01

  Death. Existence cannot longer be denied.

• 10:22Jesse Michels?

  Before we continue, I want to take a second to thank one of my favorite products in the world, Ketone IQ, for sponsoring today's episode. Ketone IQ is one of the very few things I use that gives me clean, sustainable energy without the crash. It's just this little shot, and I take a drink, and I feel like I'm on fire. No ups, no downs, no nervous system weirdness, just clean, clear mental energy. The reason it works is pretty simple. It gives your brains ketones, which are almost by definition its most efficient fuel source. Instead of pushing your system, it actually feeds it. In fact, your body endogenously produces ketones.

• 11:02Jesse Michels?

  So when you drink this, it supports deep focus, long conversations, and sustained mental performance. It was originally developed through a multimillion dollar military program designed for high-stress environments where cognitive performance really matters. And today, it's used by founders, researchers, podcasters like myself, and people who need their mind to work when it counts. I always take a sip of one of these things before long podcasts. This product is also really personal for me because I've known the founders, Jeff and Michael, for over a decade. These guys are awesome, and for as long as I've known them, they've tried every supplement, biohack, and nootropic under the sun. So it was a pretty good signal to me that they decided to start a company around ketones. I use Ketone IQ regularly.

• 11:45Jesse Michels?

  It's like a mental cheat code, and it's genuinely one of the cleanest energy sources I've ever found. So before we get back into the episode, please visit ketone.com/alchemy for 30% off your subscription order, plus receive a free gift with your second shipment. Again, that's ketone.com/alchemy for 30% off your order. Or you can find Ketone IQ at Target stores nationwide and get your first shot free. Seriously, this stuff works. Thanks so much to Ketone IQ for sponsoring today's episode. Everyone talks about the Bermuda Triangle, but no one warns you about its colder, weirder cousin. In the heart of Alaska lies the Alaska Triangle, where planes disappear, hikers vanish,

• 12:28Jesse Michels?

  and the only thing that shows up reliably is my Wild Alaskan Company seafood box. I'm being serious here, guys. I definitely don't trust flying over portals, but I do trust this fish. Most seafood, I can't even look at it without wondering if it was farmed in a glowing vat near a nuclear power plant. But this fish, 100% wild-caught, flash-frozen off the boat, delivered straight to my door like it teleported through one of Eric Davis's wormholes, and it still tastes Better than just about anything your cousin microwaves. No antibiotics, no additives, no fish farm sludge, just real fish. Koho salmon, Pacific halibut, and my favorite, the sockeye salmon.

• 13:12Jesse Michels?

  Not all fish are the same. Get seafood you can trust. Go to wildalaskan.com/jesse for $35 off your first box of premium wild-caught seafood. That's wildalaskan.com/jesse for $35 off your first order. Thank you so much to Wild Alaskan Company for sponsoring this episode.

• 13:36Jesse Michels?

  I'm here with Charles Bueller, who, uh, this is a Holy Grail interview for me. I'm like a kid on Christmas because it's been like the search for Bueller. Ever since, uh, you know, we connected a couple of years ago because I made this Townsend Brown documentary. And as you know, and my audience knows, I'm obsessed with this mid-century inventor, Thomas Townsend Brown. I think he found a real force that lies outside of either the four fundamental forces, might have merged gravity and electromagnetism, I don't quite know, but something that transcends kind of our chemical combustion modalities that will take us interstellar. And as soon as I came out with that, a bunch of people hit me up and they're like, you gotta talk to Charles Buhler.

• 14:21Jesse Michels?

  He's the lead electrostatic scientist at NASA. And he's been doing this experiment, but his own kind of version of it, his updated, better version of it, in a vacuum chamber he's had access to for a decade plus. And so we connected a little bit, we kind of fell off. I'm so grateful to have you here now. It's just a total honor. And you're also, I believe, about to be the president of the Electrostatic Society, too?

• 14:48Speaker 02

  That's correct.

• 14:50Jesse Michels?

  So you have the credentials to say, if you're saying that we found another force, you have as good of credentials as anybody. Is that right? I mean, you don't, don't be humble.

• 15:03Speaker 02

  You know, I think I know enough about electrostatics to say that, but we're always still learning.

• 15:08Jesse Michels?

  What's your current job title?

• 15:11Speaker 02

  So I am the lead scientist of NASA's Electrostatics and Surface Physics Laboratory at part of Swamp Works at Kennedy Space Center. So before I go on, I have to diverse to make everyone aware that this is not affiliated with NASA, any of this work that we're doing.

• 15:26Jesse Michels?

  Absolutely.

• 15:27Speaker 02

  Sanctioned by NASA and it's, we are not given any credence to NASA in this.

• 15:31Jesse Michels?

  Disclaimer accepted. I think maybe it's a little bizarre that NASA wouldn't want to immediately kind of jump on this work. Okay.

• 15:38Speaker 02

  But they're probably going to be a customer later on. They're not, we're not working this technology at NASA, at least not in my laboratory, we're not.

• 15:45Jesse Michels?

  But you are, is it safe to say you're the lead electrostatic scientist at all of NASA?

• 15:52Speaker 02

  I would say that. I mean, we only have one electrostatics lab in all of NASA and I lead it.

• 15:56Jesse Michels?

  And you run it?

• 15:59Speaker 02

  So by default, yes.

• 16:00Jesse Michels?

  Yeah. Okay. So again, if this sort of force were attributable to basic electrostatics, you would know.

• 16:09Speaker 02

  Sure.

• 16:10Jesse Michels?

  Let's, let's back up a second and you know, it's a really impressive, cool title. What does somebody who leads electrostatics at NASA do?

• 16:20Speaker 02

  Our lab does a lot of things. It was founded about 26 years ago by Dr. Carlos Gaya, a physicist who spent a summer working at Kennedy Space Center, came back the following year and started the lab. We do electrostatics at NASA, at Kennedy Space Center because of incidents that occurred in the 1960s. So there was an incident that trapped 11 people in a spin test facility where they accidentally set off a rocket, a solid rocket. And there were some casualties there. So we also had the Apollo fire that you've heard about. So we've lost, I think, 14 people to electrostatics at NASA. So Kennedy Space

• 17:02Speaker 02

  News kind of led this effort to study this phenomenon and test it. And a lot of the tests that we do, that we've been doing, date to the 1960s, long before they had standardized testing from electrostatics. So Dr. Carlos Caix formed, he formed a research arm of that test about 26 years ago.

• 17:24Jesse Michels?

  Aren't there also issues with lunar dust, you know, getting attracted to the lunar lander and electrostatics sort of allowing or removing the dust or something like that? Is that, is that a thing?

• 17:37Speaker 02

  Yes. So when I get on the, on the stand and I talk about these things, my pedestal, I always talk about the safety indeed to study electrostatics, but no one pays us to study electrostatics. You know, it's a case by case thing where people will give us funding to look at and investigate, just like any other investigation. But doesn't pay the day, you know, doesn't pay the bills. So what we've done is we've understood some of the needs for NASA that are in the electrostatics realm. For example, the dust mitigation aspect. So dust is considered one of the two greatest challenges that have to be overcome for long

• 18:16Speaker 02

  term human presence on the moon or Mars. The dust was, was very problematic for the Apollo astronauts, where they couldn't even do a fourth EVA. They could do three, they couldn't do four. Dust would clog the suits and get into the, to the arms, into the helmet, into the, into the joints. And it just prevented further, you know, EVAs, extra vehicle activities. So. The dust mitigation is the serious ones taken by NASA. I think every center is working on it. But we actually have many dust mitigation technologies that we've developed over the years.

• 18:53Speaker 02

  Our primary one is the Electrodynamic Dust Shield, the EDS. So this uses a surface that has embedded electrodes inside of it that lifts and removes dust without moving parts or gases or fluids or anything.

• 19:06Jesse Michels?

  Wow.

• 19:07Speaker 02

  So we can embed that into glass. We can embed that into thermal radiators, solar panels, solar rays, all kinds of materials.

• 19:13Jesse Michels?

  Very cool. And wasn't there recently like a lunar dust mission?

• 19:17Speaker 02

  That's right. So we almost just over a year ago, we landed our EDS payload. Had nine EDSs on there. So there were six EDSs used to get dust onto us. So we can use our EDS to get, show that we can get it off.

• 19:33Jesse Michels?

  Cool.

• 19:33Speaker 02

  We tested a thermal radiator EDS. We tested a glass EDS on the moon and a camera EDS. So we tested the technology on the lunar surface successfully.

• 19:43Jesse Michels?

  Very cool. That's amazing.

• 19:44Speaker 02

  So you work 25 years on something. You finally get it to the moon and it works. You're, you're pretty happy.

• 19:48Jesse Michels?

  Congratulations. Yeah, it would suck if it didn't. After 25 years, it's a lot of sunk cost, a lot of time and effort and energy. One other very credibility enhancing thing about you that I think it's really important to note is you've contributed to the field of electrostatics outside of this anomalous force that you're talking about. Is that right?

• 20:11Speaker 02

  That's right. So, you know, I've been in electrostatics for 26 years and it's, it's been around obviously for a very long time, but it doesn't get the attention that the other scientific disciplines get, I don't feel. It shouldn't be the case where I come in as a young kid and I should not be discovering phenomena in electrostatics, you know, like I did with the showing that there's no brush discharges in high vacuum conditions. High vacuum conditions, I know obviously people don't have access to that, but it was not, you know, generally accepted that this did not happen under vacuum, you know, pulling off charges from an insulator. We know that happens very well in air. Why doesn't that happen in, in high vacuum? When we were able to show that you cannot get the brush discharges the way you do in

• 20:56Speaker 02

  vacuum is you do air.

• 20:59Speaker 02

  It's more of a gas breakdown effect, which could be, you know, expected, but it was never shown. This is a little bit surprising.

• 21:06Jesse Michels?

  And you were the first person that showed that.

• 21:09Speaker 02

  As far as I can tell, yeah. And the literature. So, and that's, you know, obviously because I had interest to do that for the NASA mission. Not a lot of people want to do electrostatics in high vacuum, but it's something I love to do every day.

• 21:24Jesse Michels?

  Clearly.

• 21:27Speaker 02

  And the other phenomena that I discovered, which I thought would be child's play for sure, would be the fact that if you take a vat of particles of all the same size and tilt them, they would roll over top of each other. And the ones that do the rolling are positive and the ones left behind are negative. This is very intriguing because for particle charging dynamics, we know that in volcanoes and winds, um, cloud formation, the larger particles will become positive and the smaller ones will become negative. So there's a size difference. We don't exactly know why it occurs, but I was the first to show it has nothing to do with size. It has to do with dynamics.

• 22:09Speaker 02

  So the part, the particles that partake in the interactions more often will become positive than the ones that do not. So if you have a cloud mixture of bigger particles, giant spheres with small particles, the bigger ones are getting bombarded a lot. So you'll have the ability to sample more than the smaller ones. The bigger ones will be positive and the smaller ones will be negative. There's some basic band theory reasons why that might happen, surface state theory, but no one's ever showed that.

• 22:38Jesse Michels?

  What are the practical implications of both of those kind of more conventional contributions to electrostatics?

• 22:45Speaker 02

  Probably, um, maybe electrostatic beneficiation. That's where you separate materials. We do that a lot of times when we separate plastics and you recycle them. You can chop them up and you can tell the high density from the low density polyethylene by tribo-charging them together and to find particles, splitting them in a field. One goes one way, one goes the other. So you can separate plastics that way. There's a lot of different uses of tribo-charged electrostatically charged materials.

• 23:12Speaker 02

  For industry, that's one case. Obviously explains lightning, cloud to ground, lightning, volcanoes and things of that nature. So there's a lot of interest in our community on the tribo electrification of materials, especially for the moon Mars programs.

• 23:28Jesse Michels?

  How does, because you're honestly, you're probably living, you know, the dream of, you know, many nerdy kids in their, in their bedrooms right now, you know, thinking about NASA and, you know, working and, you know, sort of cool physics and electrostatics, doing stuff for them. What's the, how, what's your journey there? How did, how did you get hooked up with NASA? You know, uh, yeah.

• 23:55Speaker 02

  That's a long one. Well, essentially I've always had a fascination with space as a kid. I've always have. And that didn't end when I went to graduate school and after I graduated. So, you know, my PhD is in theoretical condensed matter physics. I got that at Florida State University while working at the National High Magnetic Field Lab. And after that, you know, the grad students, we went different directions. Some stayed in academia, some went, you know, got jobs, you know, in industry or whatnot. And I decided to go to NASA and there was an opening for a postdoc and the electrostatics lab under Dr. Carlos Caicedo, he's trying to start that laboratory back in Florida. I was living in Tennessee at the time.

• 24:41Speaker 02

  I said, it's a chance to get into NASA, see what it's about.

• 24:45Speaker 02

  You know, what, what was there to learn on electrostatics? Everything's known. It's Maxwell's equations. There can't be anything to learn there. And when I got there, I realized that even the most fundamental studies in electrostatics were not complete. Even understanding how you rub two materials together and you separate them, one's plus, one's minus, how does that even happen? They didn't even know if it was electrons responsible, ions, material transfer, all the above, none of the above. So there was a lot to learn. So I found it to be a very interesting field of physics that can, that the mainstream community doesn't care too much about. So I found it as a nice way to, to learn and to learn something new. And that's, that's what got me excited about electrostatics once I got there.

• 25:27Speaker 02

  And what really got me excited is it could help people, like it solved problems. That's what electrostatics does. It solves problems. And it's involved in just about every industry, whether it's making the dust masks for the, those are made by 3M, those N95 masks fighting COVID, those are electric filters. So you actually make those using electrostatics and they actually work for eight or nine hours because they can trap those nanometer particles. You don't know these things. Microphones are all electrostatics properties. That's an electorate. So there are so many different fields that electrostatics dives into. And it was very useful for us to, as NASA, go to these electrostatics conferences where you have

• 26:10Speaker 02

  the pharmacy industry there, the biologists are there, chemists are there. It's a very wide, open discipline because they all need help in electrostatics and they're all advancing that field. And so I could use what I learned there to apply to NASA. So whether it's the EDS technology that came from that community or other technologies that we learned from that community, like the electrostatic precipitation, that's air filtration. There are so many, so many technologies that come out of that field. It was originally discovered by, founded by the scientists at Xerox back in the seventies. So it has a very rich, deep history in America and that North New York area with Cornell

• 26:53Speaker 02

  and not Cornell, Corning, Kodak. And these companies that are very prominent back in the sixties and seventies formed together, this electrostatic society, and they, they share that technology with people.

• 27:06Jesse Michels?

  It's fascinating. Yeah, I always found it interesting that Townsend Brown, along with his thruster work, which involved what he thought would lead to interstellar travel. He also, I believe, was responsible for the patents that ended up, you know, Sharper Image ended up buying them and it was like an ion, you know, air filter or something. And so I found that really fascinating. At what point did you get the idea that maybe there was another force here that could take us to the stars and that chemical combustion and the rockets that you don't work maybe directly on, but you work around with your work at Kennedy Space Center might not be the frontier of space travel?

• 27:53Speaker 02

  I always knew there was something else, something more than just Newton's laws. So I kind of tailored my career just to try and understand physics enough to see if this, to see if something else could be done, just anything. So this goes way back into high school. So I started doing tests in high school. I started doing tests in college. I built rigs in graduate school. So it never really ended, but so I continued to do it, but it's hard to say when did it start? I've always believed, it's just a belief that there had to be a better way to move an object from point A to point B. There just had to be. Newton's laws is great. Relativity wasn't very useful to me, probably because I just didn't know it.

• 28:36Speaker 02

  But, but electricity and magnetism seemed to have a nice appeal because, you know, it's 19th century. There had to be a 19th century equivalent to it. Conservation had to be. So I spent, I don't know, two decades looking at the conversion from field momentum to mechanical momentum. If you're familiar with that field. So essentially, you know, you can convert momentum stored in the field into real momentum. They've done that in the seventies with the angular momentum. But the linear analog to it was always hindered by a third momentum called hidden momentum. So I went, I went out on a limb and tried to find systems that did not have hidden momentum.

• 29:20Jesse Michels?

  Fascinating. Well, we're going to dive deep into that and your theories around it. But I think first, just, you know, for the, the lay audience, mass ejection is the current kind of paradigm. And so it's, yeah, it's Newton's third law. And it's just, you know, you expel a ton of mass. You, a lot of these rockets like, look at like, you know, SpaceX's, you know, starship. It's mostly fuel in the rocket itself. That's, that's most of the, the tonnage is just fuel. And then you obviously have a, you know, a decently high payload capacity on top of that, but that's a very small percentage of the overall rocket. And so it's very inefficient from that standpoint. And then because you have a limited amount of fuel, you can't really get to like Proxima Centauri B.

• 30:04Jesse Michels?

  And if you could, it would take you 80,000 years with current, current speeds. And that's like the closest habitable planet. So. I always, you know, bring these things up because even if Elon Musk were sitting in your chair, there's no argument he would have to defeat. That's just physics, you know, like there's, there's nothing he could say to that. And so I think what you're looking into is like the most, you know, people can come back with first principles arguments and say you're wrong, but like it's the most important thing.

• 30:36Speaker 02

  For space, it absolutely is. There's no question because like you said, 90, I think it's 95% of the, of a rocket's mass is just fuel.

• 30:42Jesse Michels?

  Yes.

• 30:43Speaker 02

  And it's, you expel it almost immediately and then you're done with it. So then you're just out using inertia to get you wherever you need to go unless you have a little bit of fuel to get back. But, you know, just the amount of fuel that's going to take to get to Mars, how many starships it's going to take that have to be fueled just to get to Mars. It's just astounding. It's an incredible amount of mass of fuel.

• 31:05Jesse Michels?

  Yeah. I mean, just to the moon. Do you, I don't know if you know this, but the starship burns nine tenths of its fuel tank. It goes into low earth orbit, then it does butt to butt refueling with another starship that goes up, burns nine tenths of its fuel tank, and then that gets disposed of. So you end up with two tenths. You have to do that eight more times, then you have, you know, a full tank and then that goes to the moon and that's just the moon. That's not even Mars.

• 31:32Speaker 02

  Oh, it's, it's astounding. The numbers I've seen.

• 31:34Jesse Michels?

  It's astounding.

• 31:35Speaker 02

  It's, doesn't seem rational.

• 31:38Jesse Michels?

  It doesn't. And you never bet against Elon. He all, you know, any engineering feat, you know, people were saying starship itself wouldn't work and the, the Pez dispenser flap that allowed the starlings to come out was like, you know, that was get ripped off and that there are all these things they had and it seems like it's starting to work. You know, it has orbited earth. Um, and then there's still, you know, modifications and updates they need to make. So, you know, not pouring cold water on that engineering effort. But again, I do think from a physics perspective, from a pure design perspective, if there is this other force, we should obviously be looking into.

• 32:18Speaker 02

  Sure. I mean, there's gotta be a better way. And I always believed ever since I've started studying science that there has to be another way. So even, even as a young kid.

• 32:27Jesse Michels?

  Totally.

• 32:27Speaker 02

  Just, it doesn't make sense.

• 32:29Jesse Michels?

  Yeah, I agree.

• 32:30Speaker 02

  It doesn't make sense. So it's like, so I kind of just tailored my, my career, just, just understanding science, what we knew about it, everything that I could.

• 32:39Jesse Michels?

  So clearly you had this kind of imagination and just preconceived idea that maybe we could transcend the limits of chemical combustion. Maybe there was something sitting in electromagnetism, this 19th century modality. Describe and hopefully in detail, kind of in visceral detail, the first time you witnessed this force and what it felt like.

• 33:05Speaker 00

  This episode is brought to you by Google Chrome. You think you know a browser, but Gemini and Chrome, that's new. It can help you with practically anything on the web, like restoring a vintage motorcycle from a 50-page restoration block, or finally break down that long article you've had open for weeks. Gemini and Chrome is here for it. Ready to make anything online make sense? There's no place like Chrome. Check responses set up required. Compatibility and availability varies 18 plus.

• 33:32Speaker 02

  I would say the first time I witnessed it, or a force,

• 33:38Speaker 02

  based on the theory that I had, was probably 2010.

• 33:43Jesse Michels?

  It's wild.

• 33:44Speaker 02

  So that was 2010 with my brother-in-law, future brother-in-law. We were married then, but he was in the laboratory working with me and I set up an experiment and I had him run it.

• 33:57Speaker 02

  Now, the other scientist I was working on, on another project, thought I was just full of BS, which is perfect, fine. So he did not help us at all. You know, he's a seasoned physicist, you know, very well-known in his field and just thought I was just doing garbage. And that's fine, I don't care. So I still had, you know, my brother-in-law Nathan do the experiment in the laboratory. And we were looking at a laser on a wall. So you can see small displacements force in a chamber. It wasn't an air chamber, it wasn't a vacuum chamber. And he did the test and we saw the laser move. I'm like, well, that's pretty cool. It's supposed to do that, I thought.

• 34:39Speaker 02

  And my colleague, Dr. Clements Sid, stopped what he was doing, went over to Nathan. Okay, you've done this, you've done this. Okay, now we gotta do that. He just completely immersed in that experiment after that.

• 34:51Jesse Michels?

  Yeah, wow.

• 34:52Speaker 02

  It was like, what is happening here? This is really crazy. Something is weird. So that was the first time. That was very, very exciting for me because it was the first time we all seen it. And I happened to be a world-class scientist there to, to help us, you know, it was actually like, wow, what, what happened here?

• 35:09Jesse Michels?

  So you kind of, you converted him almost, at least into thinking it was worthy of inquiry.

• 35:13Speaker 02

  Didn't need to say anything else after that.

• 35:15Jesse Michels?

  That's amazing. Is he now a believer in?

• 35:18Speaker 02

  Oh, I, I think so. He's seen it a few times.

• 35:20Jesse Michels?

  And what's his background?

• 35:23Speaker 02

  He is an electrostatics expert.

• 35:25Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 35:26Speaker 02

  He is my mentor.

• 35:27Jesse Michels?

  And what's his name?

• 35:28Speaker 02

  Dr. Sid Clements.

• 35:29Jesse Michels?

  Dr. Sid Clements. Okay.

• 35:30Speaker 02

  So, yeah, he is my mentor. So that's where I learned electrostatics.

• 35:33Jesse Michels?

  That's wild, but he saw your experiment and he was like, oh my God, there's something else here.

• 35:37Speaker 02

  Something there, something there. It's exciting. It was an exciting moment.

• 35:39Jesse Michels?

  That's incredibly exciting. And so you see this, and what do you think is the next step at that point? Because you know, you see this little displacement, this laser displacement based on this possible force. Do you design a new experiment right after that?

• 35:56Speaker 02

  We designed many experiments after that. It led us down many different paths. You know, that's kind of how this goes. If you don't know exactly what's happening, it can lead you down different paths. Some were successful, some were moderately successful, some weren't. Really didn't hit too much success after that until I met Andrew. Okay. Here's the story with that, if you're interested.

• 36:21Jesse Michels?

  Very.

• 36:22Speaker 02

  So we had a colleague, Andrew and I, a friend named Mike. He knew about us working on this independently for years and never told us, never did. He wanted to see if we can do it independently. You know, like a race against, I don't know who, but

• 36:41Jesse Michels?

  So he was playing dumb.

• 36:42Speaker 02

  He was playing dumb.

• 36:43Jesse Michels?

  He knew about this force and he was just like, let's see how far they get.

• 36:46Speaker 02

  He, he knew Andrew was working on it. He knew I was working on it. He just wanted to see who was, who would win the race.

• 36:51Jesse Michels?

  Oh, Jesus. That's like this like Machiavellian level 4D chess going on.

• 36:58Speaker 02

  You know, and Mike, his, his excitement was that, you know, how we were not, we were both working at NASA or as contractors or been at NASA and he was just super excited that we were not doing this at NASA. So I thought this has a chance. Cause what you get at NASA and get a bureaucracy and get in the government, there's a lot of a lot of ways that can be hindered. So he was loving that we decided to do that outside of, of work. Of course, at the time I wasn't working at NASA, I was a, I was a consultant for ExxonMobil. But, um, so we worked together because Andrew needed an electrostatics guy. Andrew was, knew he was getting into the realm of electrostatics.

• 37:37Jesse Michels?

  Hmm. So what was Andrew's background?

• 37:40Speaker 02

  Andrew?

• 37:41Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 37:41Speaker 02

  Andrew R. Zima, he is an engineer.

• 37:43Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 37:44Speaker 02

  He, he's been an engineer for gosh, 35 years or so.

• 37:47Jesse Michels?

  And he goes by Drew.

• 37:49Speaker 02

  Drew.

• 37:49Jesse Michels?

  And he, so he wasn't getting into this via electrostatics. If, if that's the case, what, what exactly was he doing?

• 37:57Speaker 02

  Well, he, he was using the term electrogravitics.

• 38:00Jesse Michels?

  Oh, interesting. So this is the Thomas Townsend Brown.

• 38:03Speaker 02

  So he's in that, he's in that, it was in that camp.

• 38:06Jesse Michels?

  I love it. I'm in that camp.

• 38:10Speaker 02

  I'm not exactly there, but

• 38:12Jesse Michels?

  Yeah, yeah, yeah.

• 38:12Speaker 02

  I might move there. We'll see. I don't know. I'm still on the fence on the gravitics part.

• 38:17Jesse Michels?

  We'll, we'll, we'll, we'll meet in the middle. We'll figure it out.

• 38:19Speaker 02

  Yeah. To me, he was a little bit pretentious. It's like, okay, you're doing gravity and with electromagnetism. Maybe.

• 38:27Jesse Michels?

  So you meet Drew and then what happens?

• 38:29Speaker 02

  So at the time I was working with the, the field momentum converting into linear momentum stuff. I wasn't in the gravity world. I was in the field momentum world.

• 38:40Speaker 02

  So we go to Drew's house. I take my wife and we spent, you know, four or five hours looking at his setup, looking what he's doing.

• 38:50Speaker 02

  And, um, and I gave him a lot of pointers. You could try this, try that, try this, you know, all the things I would do in electrostatics to help him along. His experiment looked very different than mine. His was just a needle, high voltage needle in a, in a, in a Teflon casing.

• 39:08Speaker 02

  I said, you know, it's pretty interesting.

• 39:13Speaker 02

  If he's getting forces or that, that's kind of interesting. I don't know how you would.

• 39:17Speaker 02

  Until my wife told me, as we leave in the driveway, my wife was like, isn't that the same force you're working on? Just manifested differently. She's a physicist too. She's the best.

• 39:27Jesse Michels?

  Wow.

• 39:27Speaker 02

  So she like, we go back and forth on these things.

• 39:30Jesse Michels?

  Is she at NASA as well?

• 39:31Speaker 02

  She is.

• 39:32Jesse Michels?

  Wow. What'd she do there?

• 39:34Speaker 02

  She's in the launch services program.

• 39:35Jesse Michels?

  Cool.

• 39:36Speaker 02

  So she doesn't have a PhD in physics, but

• 39:41Speaker 02

  she's taken engineering physics in undergrad and she's really good at math. So if I need help with math, I just, hey, Janessa, help me with this. Help me with this integral. She'll have like a baby on her arm. Okay, fine. I'll do it for you.

• 39:54Jesse Michels?

  That's awesome.

• 39:54Speaker 02

  She'll come in and look at the whiteboard. She's like, this is not right. She's very smart. It's fun to bounce stuff off her.

• 40:02Speaker 02

  But uh, you know, she, she was clear. She's like, no, you, you should look at this, your force that you're trying to do with his setup. See if you're working on the same thing, just a different twist. I was, well, that can't be right. So I went back to my lab and I made a needle, but I did it differently. Using what I thought would work and I would, now I put a, there's videos of this on our website. You put a, a tube over the end of the needle and you put Scotch tape on the tube. So there's no iron wind getting out. And you shove the needle in that tube, you encased it on tube. Then I cranked up my power spy and that thing moved three, four feet in the air. And I sent that video to Drew. It says, and Drew's like, oh, I guess we're working together now.

• 40:44Jesse Michels?

  Wow.

• 40:46Jesse Michels?

  So you have achieved how much force roughly now with your current experiments?

• 40:51Speaker 02

  Additives, somewhere to five to 10 milli newton range.

• 40:54Jesse Michels?

  Okay. And so for people listening, if you were to apply that to like a satellite in space in a microgravity or zero gravity environment, that would be huge.

• 41:05Speaker 02

  Sure.

• 41:07Jesse Michels?

  You would be able to do.

• 41:08Speaker 02

  Yeah. Initial markets. That's what we're comfortable with. We're a space company. We all work at the space agency, different levels, not just NASA, but you know, the peripherals. And this is where we're comfortable with. There's definitely, when we say, when do we hit unity? Well, we've hidden unity for space, unity for moon, Mars, all of these places. So we can make flying cars in the moon and Mars and all of that.

• 41:34Speaker 02

  So it's a very exciting place to be right now.

• 41:36Jesse Michels?

  Yep.

• 41:36Speaker 02

  Without any significantly huge development.

• 41:40Jesse Michels?

  It could theoretically lead to deep space exploration. You could help maintain orbits for satellites where there's orbital decay.

• 41:48Speaker 02

  That's what, that's what our hope is.

• 41:50Jesse Michels?

  Okay. And you can move these satellites, maybe to other orbits as well. Like there's a, there's a company called Impulse Space. They're, they're like, you know, they do like kick stages where you would move, you know, between orbits where maybe you'd go up on SpaceX rideshare with another group of satellites, but you'd want to move into a dedicated orbit. You could use a thruster like this to do something like that.

• 42:14Speaker 02

  No doubt. That's what our goal is.

• 42:17Jesse Michels?

  Super cool. And then what about like replacing rockets? Could we ever do that with this?

• 42:22Speaker 02

  Well, if we get earth unity, we won't need rockets, right?

• 42:25Jesse Michels?

  That's true.

• 42:26Speaker 02

  You have to think about things a little differently.

• 42:29Jesse Michels?

  But could, could the 10 millinewtons of thrust turn into newtons of thrust? And could we end up launching things into space with this, you know, Exodus method or this other?

• 42:40Speaker 02

  That is our, our main goal to try to do that. You know, that's where we, the self-launcher is what we call it.

• 42:46Jesse Michels?

  Do you have blueprints around this self-launcher? Do you have a sense of the energy requirements or anything like that?

• 42:51Speaker 02

  Or? We, we don't.

• 42:53Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 42:53Speaker 02

  But we are on the path, so we know what we need to do. We just have to go set out and do it.

• 42:58Jesse Michels?

  Have you gone up in over the 2000 iterations? Have you gone up in millinewtons of thrust?

• 43:04Speaker 02

  Sure.

• 43:05Jesse Michels?

  Okay. So you have a sense of the levers to get more thrust.

• 43:09Speaker 02

  There are levers and there are several. And we're trying to optimize those.

• 43:13Jesse Michels?

  And what are the primary levers?

• 43:15Speaker 02

  There's like, we talked about voltage, the materials, properties, breakdown strength of materials,

• 43:22Speaker 02

  the type of signals we send.

• 43:25Speaker 02

  The physical limits on the materials, there's so many.

• 43:29Jesse Michels?

  What are the ideal materials for this sort of experiment?

• 43:33Speaker 02

  Well, we're dealing with high voltage, so we need materials with high dielectric breakdown strength. But we also have permittivity issues we have to contend with, geometry issues we have to contend with, static precipitation issues we have to contend with. There are a lot of other issues and that's just the DC. When you get to other frequencies or you get to other exotic types, you know, charge injection electrics, things can get even wackier. So we are looking at some of the interesting materials now that have other properties, which I'm going to keep to ourselves for now, but it's something that's very, very interesting for now. Just to see if it goes anywhere, it could lead to nowhere.

• 44:09Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 44:09Speaker 02

  But we're just looking at it.

• 44:11Jesse Michels?

  Cool.

• 44:12Speaker 02

  You know, there's other things out there.

• 44:13Jesse Michels?

  In the Townsend Brown context, barium titanate and bismuth often come up. Are either of those relevant to your experience as well?

• 44:21Speaker 02

  We have some, some experiments with barium titanate a couple of years ago. It's a good, high permittivity powder.

• 44:32Speaker 02

  I don't know what the results of those were. They weren't particularly interesting. What was the other one you said?

• 44:37Jesse Michels?

  Bismuth.

• 44:38Speaker 02

  Oh, bismuth. Yeah, I've seen bismuth a lot. Bismuth looks like fun. I would love to test with some bismuth. There's some cool things that they found, arts parts, materials.

• 44:48Jesse Michels?

  Yep.

• 44:50Speaker 02

  Which is kind of neat because they have some weird geometries in there, which I would project that we would have needed. But to see that in real life already made, I was like, oh, that's kind of cool.

• 45:00Speaker 02

  Can't wait to go test those exotics, but that's down the road for us.

• 45:03Jesse Michels?

  Yep.

• 45:04Speaker 02

  We're going to try to stay focused and do what we're good at right now and then work on the more exotic stuff later, I think.

• 45:10Jesse Michels?

  And so in doing these experiments, did you have access to a vacuum chamber? Because I feel like it's been a lot of. The reason, you know, everybody always questions me on this. They're like, this experiment sounds very simple because I always bring up the Townsend Brown experiment. And they're like, why has nobody done it yet? And I say, I give two reasons. I say, people always try to explain it away via the ion wind. And it's so similar to the ion wind related experiments that it's easy to do that. It's always easy to say there's ambient ionization in the vacuum. That's number one. And then number two, access to an industrial grade vacuum chamber is

• 45:49Jesse Michels?

  pretty limited and it's obviously very expensive. And so did you have access, you know, based on your kind of NASA background?

• 45:58Speaker 02

  Yes. Drew and I have access to a chamber. He's got one at his house. He's very resourceful.

• 46:04Jesse Michels?

  Amazing.

• 46:05Speaker 02

  He funded it himself. It's a nice sized vacuum chamber. He also has a second one that he's gonna get online soon, which is almost a walk-in size vacuum chamber. So very pricey, but hopefully with some funding, we can get that thing up to par and running. But yes, we do have access to a high vacuum chamber. That's where we do most of our tests.

• 46:26Jesse Michels?

  And let me, let's describe to the audience why it's important that ion wind can't get out. Because this is how, you know, I learned about all this stuff through Thomas Townsend Brown. And he used to do these experiments. So Thomas Townsend Brown's this super interesting, mysterious guy who pops up at extremely high levels of aerospace. He was at the Navy for a very long time. He was at Martin Corporation, the year that Skunk Works was formed in 1942 or three. There's an FBI document that is circulated now and out about him and says that he's the lead radar scientist in the entire Navy. He knows more about radar than

• 47:07Jesse Michels?

  anybody in the Navy. We have a lot of evidence that his electro hydrodynamics work, you know, this electric fields to manipulate airflow work ended up in the B2 stealth bomber. So you have like two out of three things that he's talking about definitely being legit. And then the third thing he's saying is I've merged electro- Magnetism and gravity, and he talks about electroggravitics. And it's specifically two experiments, 1956 in Paris, of which we have a witness who, there's an audio recording of a deathbed confession in 2009. This guy Jacques Corneon, who's a technical consultant for Sud West, which is, you know, an aerospace corporation there.

• 47:50Jesse Michels?

  And, you know, they say there is a force that is not only measurable in a vacuum at 10 to the negative sixth tor, but the force exceeds what you would ever see outside of a vacuum. And then he does the same experiment at the Bonson Labs, the Institute of Field Physics in North Carolina. And it's this remarkable thing where you have this guy, two out of the three things he's saying probably right. You have, you know, he's dealing with Curtis LeMay and the Rand Corporation, all these super high up people. And then this electroggravitics thing just gets stigmatized and people just kind of forget about it. And it almost feels like he's trying to, he has this wounded prairie chicken routine where he's trying to stigmatize his own work. And so it's fascinating.

• 48:35Jesse Michels?

  And the reason, so this is very long winded, but you mentioned ion wind. The way people write off any of these experiments, including Thomas Townsend Brown's, is they say that these capacitor experiments, especially if they take place not in a vacuum, you end up with ionized air. The ionized air then bounces off of other air particles. And it's basically just Newton's law taking place and then you get thrust. And so that's very different than showing this in a vacuum chamber. Or in this case, you mitigated ions in another way. Is that right?

• 49:13Speaker 02

  Well, you kind of have to.

• 49:14Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 49:14Speaker 02

  Otherwise you'll see the ion wind thrust. So you can either cap it, close it in a volume, whatever you have to do. But you don't want the ion wind to be playing a role here.

• 49:24Jesse Michels?

  Yep.

• 49:25Speaker 02

  And one of the things that's different about the force that we're talking about in the ion wind force, at least in terms of geometry, is that the devices will move with the wind. So imagine a rocket moving in the direction that the exhaust is.

• 49:37Jesse Michels?

  That's crazy.

• 49:39Speaker 02

  So you have to remove the ion wind because of the stigma from it.

• 49:43Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 49:43Speaker 02

  Because a lot of scientists have tried to do these things and they've seen the ion wind and it's not a real force in the sense, it's not a propellantless force. There's propellant there, the wind.

• 49:53Jesse Michels?

  Yep.

• 49:54Speaker 02

  Um, but the other thing is not, that's a different thing.

• 49:57Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 49:58Speaker 02

  That's a completely different beast.

• 49:59Jesse Michels?

  And you would be an authority in your ability to delineate between.

• 50:04Speaker 02

  Sure. I do, I do videos where I take those, um, the lifters and I put them in a, in a, a plastic box and put it on a scale.

• 50:11Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 50:12Speaker 02

  And you watch the weight. And you turn it on, the thing lifts up and the weight's flat lines, does not move at all.

• 50:18Jesse Michels?

  Wow.

• 50:19Speaker 02

  So Drew was like, man, I've never seen that video before. That's conservation momentum right there. That's what ion wind is doing.

• 50:24Jesse Michels?

  Yep. So that's exactly like the, all that you have all these DIY videos of these balsa wood lifters with tin foil and you have the ions moving around the copper coil or whatever. And then you end up with thrust, but that is not this electrogravitic force or what you are calling, you know, this, this Exodus force or, you know, electrostatic variation force, whatever it is, that is different. That is another force. Um, so it's important for, you know, any experimental physicists who want to pour cold water on this. And the funny thing is Brown himself would use the electrohydrodynamic stuff, the, the stuff involving ion wind to cover for the electrogravitics. He would literally

• 51:09Jesse Michels?

  like, because it's 95% similar, but it's not the same thing. And again, you are in a kind of an authoritative position in order to, you know, you have the ability to delineate between those two things.

• 51:21Speaker 02

  Yeah, that's important.

• 51:22Jesse Michels?

  I think it is really important. Yeah. Um, and it's, yeah, it's important because it's the, always the first order debunk on this entire thing. So you do this experiment that eliminates or controls for ion wind. I'm assuming you since then have done a series of experiments to control for all sorts of other possible confounding variables.

• 51:44Speaker 02

  Yes. So after Drew and I did these experiments in 2016, I think we spent about two years trying to package it. Now, there's one thing to put 100,000 volts on a device and have it move around in the room. Drew and I both knew that was completely impractical. You can't do anything with that because you have to make something to attach it to a vehicle, to a rocket, to something that people have to be around. And this better damn well go inside of grounded box. So we made a lot of effort, took a lot of effort those two years to get this sucker packaged up in a way so it can actually be transportable and confined. So that was the initial pull to go into, to get into a system where we can

• 52:28Speaker 02

  actually enclose everything. Coolen forces are the biggest killer in vacuum or in air. So you can, you know, you can apply high voltage to something, it'll attract to the wall, floors, ceilings, far away. It can still do that. So you have to make sure that everything you do is inside a very well grounded Faraday cage. So that is another one of our, our tests, our checks and balances. You know, do we have it inside of a Faraday cage? Is it all completely housed? Is it fields trapped within the system? Do we spin it the other way? There's a lot of checks and balances that we have to do along, along the, along the way.

• 53:02Jesse Michels?

  So Faraday cage would eliminate magnetic field interference?

• 53:06Speaker 02

  No.

• 53:07Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 53:07Speaker 02

  Only electric field.

• 53:08Jesse Michels?

  Only electric field interference. And then you also need vacuum chamber because, is that right or no?

• 53:16Speaker 02

  You don't need it. It's a lot easier.

• 53:18Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 53:18Speaker 02

  Because you get rid of the air. The gas breaks down like a million volts per meter fields. So the gases start breaking down. And when they break down, they create their own charges. And when they create their own charges, you can put charges where you don't want it. You can short, you can have charges leaking around the side. It really messes with you. So to do things in air is a bit more complicated than vacuum. Vacuum, you don't have to worry about that. Moisture is the biggest killer, especially in Florida. So you want to do stuff in, in a very dry environment or high vacuum if you can.

• 53:48Jesse Michels?

  So you're saying that in a vacuum chamber, you get more thrust?

• 53:51Speaker 02

  You could make a system work better. Yes.

• 53:54Jesse Michels?

  Interesting. Well, that's Townsend Brown also said you'd get more thrust.

• 53:58Speaker 02

  You get more thrust because the field limit is not 10 to the sixth anymore. It's 10 to the eighth.

• 54:03Jesse Michels?

  Right.

• 54:04Speaker 02

  So that's because it goes, the forces are related to pressure, they go up by field squared. So instead of 10 to the sixth squared is 10 to the 12th, 10 to the eighth squared is 10 to the 16. So now you have much, you have four orders of magnitude potential higher thrust just on the, on the exterior part of their, of your thrusters.

• 54:25Jesse Michels?

  So there's more to draw from, from the field.

• 54:27Speaker 02

  That's right. This is a field effect. It's not a voltage effect.

• 54:32Speaker 00

  This episode is brought to you by Google Chrome. You think you know a browser, but Gemini and Chrome? That's new. It can help you with practically anything on the web, like restoring a vintage motorcycle from a 50-page restoration block, or finally break down that long article you've had open for weeks. Gemini and Chrome is here for it. Ready to make anything online make sense? There's no place like Chrome. Check responses setup required. Compatibility and availability varies 18 plus.

• 54:57Jesse Michels?

  It's fascinating. Yeah, it's so interesting. And it's, but it really flies in the face of the debunkers saying that it's attributable to ion wind because in an environment where there is less ion wind, you are getting more thrust. And it might be due to this field effect, but still you're controlling for the ion wind, which is what they're saying is accounting for the thrust.

• 55:16Speaker 02

  Yes. And you have to also, when you're in a vacuum chamber, now you have a new falsity, which could be the walls of the vacuum chamber, giant metal ground. So you want to make sure that you put your test device, whatever it is, inside of a Faraday cage, and then you measure the force on the Faraday cage, nothing else, not what's inside of it. The whole box has to move. So you got to measure that, that makes sure that what you're seeing is real. Then you got to take, turn that sucker around so that you're not being attracted to the wall through the Faraday cage. So you want to make sure you're always going in the correct direction.

• 55:44Jesse Michels?

  So describe the current kind of state of the art experimental setup on this.

• 55:49Speaker 02

  So that's basically what I was saying. So we'll put it in a box. It'll be a Faraday cage. A lot of ways to make Faraday cages, ground it really, really well. If you do have voltage coming in from outside, or if you put the voltage inside, you have to make sure it's yielded really, really well. You don't want any Coulomb attraction to the walls or the housing or anything like that. We've gotten good where we've lowered our voltage way, way down. We don't need 30, 40,000 volts like we did 10 years ago.

• 56:14Speaker 02

  Try to keep it all contained and then reverse it, make sure it works. Put it in air, see if it works. Put it in the mass, put it on the scale, see if it works. Do the pendulum, do the rotator, do the spinner, do everything to make sure it's real. Because we hate falsities. They're, we hate them. We don't want them.

• 56:35Speaker 02

  Okay, so what we have here is a thruster that is set on top of a scale in room air.

• 56:40Jesse Michels?

  Okay, so what Buhler is basically saying here is that he's testing a small experimental in-air thruster to show that it actually works. His team puts the thruster on a sensitive scale. Next, they connect it to electricity, about 480 volts to be exact.

• 56:55Speaker 02

  If you look to the bottom right of the screen, you'll see the voltage that is applied. You can also see the current in the center, the electric field and the runtime. So this is a 42-minute video that we sped up to five minutes.

• 57:06Jesse Michels?

  They watch to see if the scale reading changes as a result of the thrust.

• 57:10Speaker 02

  We turn on the voltage here, it's about minus 480 volts.

• 57:12Jesse Michels?

  When they turn the power on, the thruster produces a tiny force.

• 57:16Speaker 02

  Within a few seconds, the force starts to be applied to the thruster, which is on top of the scale. And it goes in the negative direction, it's lifting up.

• 57:23Jesse Michels?

  They're specifically demonstrating that the force is real and controllable, enough to lift about 0.1 grams.

• 57:30Speaker 02

  Where we see about 0.1 grams, that corresponds to about 1 millinewton of thrust.

• 57:34Jesse Michels?

  When they turn the power off, the force goes away.

• 57:37Speaker 02

  Okay, so we leave it on for a few seconds and then we turn it back off and then you can see that it'll come back down.

• 57:42Jesse Michels?

  They repeat this to show it's not a fluke.

• 57:44Speaker 02

  So what we'll do is we'll do this again, we'll turn it back on, get it back up to the millinewton range, let it sit for a few seconds. So what we're showing is that you can actually turn this force on and off.

• 57:53Jesse Michels?

  They then flip the thruster upside down and run the test again.

• 57:57Speaker 02

  So you'll see that here in a moment. And the reason why we have it off the scale itself, we do not want any attraction of the thruster to the scale itself. Although the fields are very, very weak, and in most cases, there is a Faraday shield. We also want to make it so that it's very, very far away.

• 58:09Jesse Michels?

  Finally, they take full precautions to make sure nothing else is affecting the measurement.

• 58:13Speaker 02

  So we flip the thruster, we deionize it, basically we ionize the gases, we neutralize any charge that escapes. And then we re-tear the scale. It's typical, that's what's needed. For scale testing, this thruster itself is surrounded by ground plates. So we try to minimize the field that escapes, but just in case, we neutralize it anyway. And then we turn the voltage back on, in this case about 480 volts or so. Wait a few seconds, the thrust kicks on. And then we see the force is in the positive direction. So now it's being pulled down.

• 58:39Jesse Michels?

  Now the force pushes down instead of up. This proves that the thruster itself is creating the force, not some outside interference or attraction to the scale, like electrical interference or the thruster just sticking to the scale. I would say this video proves the force fairly definitively to any skeptic. But you could technically say that this experiment requires a vacuum chamber because open air can get ionized. Again, ionized wind can result in thrust based on Newton's classical laws. But 480 volts isn't nearly enough to ionize the air. So it's kind of a moot point. But just for good measure, here is another variation of the experiment, also showing thrust, this time in a vacuum chamber.

• 59:23Speaker 02

  What we have here is a vacuum test highlighting actual movement in vacuum using a dual thruster pack in the vertical spinner orientation. And how we measure the forces here is we have pegs at the bottom of the stand that are about two millimeters apart. And the deflection, once the thruster is turned on, moves at about 14 millimeters, which corresponds to roughly about 2.5 millinewtons of thrust when we turn this device on. These devices are actuated externally to the vacuum chamber through a Bluetooth connection. So they're not in contact with anything. But the ITO walls that surround the thruster pack, shown by that clear transparent plastic, is perfectly grounded. So that eliminates Coulomb attraction to the wall. We're also in high vacuum, so there's no ion wind interference.

• 1:00:05Speaker 02

  Just to highlight that these thrusters are actually developing thrust internally, not an external effect. So power system's inside the chamber, all the high voltage is encased, surrounded with an indium tin oxide sheeting. And thruster does come on as expected and go off as expected for these earlier versions. So that is a nice way to show that there is actual physical movement in high vacuum. We're not just recording force measurements without actually corresponding that to real force.

• 1:00:30Jesse Michels?

  So these are just two out of the 2,000 experimental variations from Charles, Drew and the Exodus team. If you're an experimental physicist with a credible background, maybe you have a PhD or you're a professor at a top 200 physics department. And you're a bit bored and interested in exotic propulsion. And you want to see one of these experiments with me, live in person, to help vet it and maybe change the world in the process. Hit me up at usa dot alchemy at gmail dot com. Skeptics are extremely welcome. I want people who are in good faith, trying to poke holes in the experimental setup here.

• 1:01:10Jesse Michels?

  If I were to pluck a random experimental physicist from an elite college and place him in front of this experiment, the exact experiment you just described, is there anything they could say to deny the empirical effect that you're seeing?

• 1:01:27Speaker 02

  I honestly don't know. I mean, as far as we can tell, the electrostatics community and with my colleagues,

• 1:01:35Speaker 02

  because it's DC, that eliminates all the magnetic effects. So you can get all kinds of weird stuff happening when you have magnetics going on. Earth's magnetic field or whatnot.

• 1:01:45Jesse Michels?

  And DC is direct current. If you had, are you saying if you had alternating current, you'd have weird magnetic field effects?

• 1:01:50Speaker 02

  So you'd have to account for any fake readings with that, yes, if you have AC, sure.

• 1:01:56Jesse Michels?

  Interesting.

• 1:01:57Speaker 02

  DC eliminates a lot of that.

• 1:01:59Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:01:59Speaker 02

  And then when you turn it off and it's still there, that eliminates a lot of that. Right? So now you really are scratching your head like, what is happening here? And that's where we're at, like, what is happening here?

• 1:02:11Jesse Michels?

  Is there anything that they can hang their hat on as far as being skeptical about this actually happening or being able to explain it away through prosaic physics forces that are known?

• 1:02:22Speaker 02

  I mean, I think if you look at every single experiment, you can say, well, this might be fake because of this. Say, okay, we'll put it over here. Oh, well, now it's maybe fake because of this. Okay, we'll put it over here. So show me a rock. What about this? Okay, now do this, do that. So.

• 1:02:35Jesse Michels?

  Is there anything left is what I'm trying to ask you. Like, if you had to stress test your own.

• 1:02:40Speaker 02

  If there is, it's something quite exotic that I have no idea what it would be. It's it's I I don't know what else it would be.

• 1:02:48Jesse Michels?

  It's shown itself over and over again. How many variations of this experiment do you think you've tried sequentially from 2010 till today?

• 1:02:55Speaker 02

  Well, since Drew and I, we've been keeping track. We are close to 2,000.

• 1:03:00Jesse Michels?

  Oh, my God. 2,000 instances of the experiment or 2,000 variations?

• 1:03:05Speaker 02

  2,000 variations.

• 1:03:06Jesse Michels?

  Holy shit.

• 1:03:07Speaker 02

  2,000 test articles. Each one's tested multiple times.

• 1:03:10Jesse Michels?

  Whoa.

• 1:03:11Speaker 02

  Folders of folders.

• 1:03:13Jesse Michels?

  Has anybody come in thoroughly examined your experiment and come out skeptical? Or has everybody that's thoroughly examined it come out saying there's something here?

• 1:03:27Speaker 02

  I would say the latter for sure. There's something there.

• 1:03:30Jesse Michels?

  You cannot think of one person who is still like, I spent, you know, a day plus with the team. And I still, you know, think I can explain it with some other, you know, force.

• 1:03:42Speaker 02

  I haven't come across anyone. I can't really think of anyone. Granted, there's not been that many people have seen it, you know, a couple of dozen or so, but.

• 1:03:52Speaker 02

  But I don't think so. You know, what's really cool, though, is some people have called me up and say, you know, I represent an investor. I, you know, I would, I would like to. The investor would like to, you know, invest into your company or whatever. I said, okay, well, you have to do is you have to fly down. You have to see it, put your hands on it. And usually that's the kind of the routine. He's, oh, I don't need to do that. I said, what do you mean? I already built one in my garage.

• 1:04:18Speaker 02

  I got one million Newton. You showed us how to do it, so I just did it.

• 1:04:21Jesse Michels?

  Wow.

• 1:04:22Speaker 02

  So it's been the opposite. The people have been very taken into this and they're very excited about it.

• 1:04:26Jesse Michels?

  That's amazing.

• 1:04:27Speaker 02

  So the people with the no can do it. And the people that have seen it. I just don't know if they know what they're seeing, but they definitely like it. And they're probably not good enough to vet it, I would say. Because take vetting it would take.

• 1:04:44Speaker 02

  A lot more, a lot more work. And I think it would take a lot more expertise. We haven't had too many, you know, other than, you know, Dr. Clements. And there's other physicists that have seen it that have said anything negative about it. Um, we haven't seen any that have said it negative, but we haven't seen, it hasn't been exposed to the entire scientific community either.

• 1:05:05Speaker 02

  I think in this field, it's hard to find who are those people, like who would be interested in it? My hope is, um, the one thing I did want to mention is-

• 1:05:12Jesse Michels?

  I think everybody should be interested in it.

• 1:05:14Speaker 02

  Well, I think so.

• 1:05:15Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:05:15Speaker 02

  Um, you know, my, when we are hosting the Electrostatic Society of America conference this year, my lab is, um, that's in Cocoa Beach, Florida, and I will do a live demo of this.

• 1:05:30Jesse Michels?

  What is it?

• 1:05:30Speaker 02

  There in June.

• 1:05:32Jesse Michels?

  Can I come and film?

• 1:05:33Speaker 02

  You can.

• 1:05:34Jesse Michels?

  Ah, it'd be amazing. Let's go. I'm so excited.

• 1:05:37Speaker 02

  The Electrostatic Society of America is just a, the happy, it's called the friendly society.

• 1:05:41Jesse Michels?

  Cool.

• 1:05:42Speaker 02

  And, um, and this is an electrostatic phenomenon. So, you know, I'm going to highlight how electrostatics is so necessary for space.

• 1:05:49Jesse Michels?

  Hmm.

• 1:05:50Speaker 02

  And propulsion is one of the things I think it could help.

• 1:05:53Jesse Michels?

  Hmm.

• 1:05:53Speaker 02

  For sure. So I'm going to mention that.

• 1:05:55Jesse Michels?

  Why don't you submit this to peer review and try to get it kind of academically checked off?

• 1:06:00Speaker 02

  I'm trying.

• 1:06:01Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 1:06:02Speaker 02

  It's just a very busy person.

• 1:06:03Jesse Michels?

  Yeah, you're busy, but I want to see this de-stigmatized.

• 1:06:06Speaker 02

  I do too, but you know, you know, there's the path. Um, right now we're focused on getting the company started so we get some funding to, to really get the forces up. That's our, that's our main focus.

• 1:06:15Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:06:17Speaker 02

  The peer review and all of that's going to take 20 years. So I'm starting that.

• 1:06:20Jesse Michels?

  I don't know if it'll take 20 years.

• 1:06:22Speaker 02

  Maybe 30.

• 1:06:23Jesse Michels?

  What?

• 1:06:25Speaker 02

  It just will. It's too different. It's, it's-

• 1:06:27Jesse Michels?

  Oh, because of the antibodies.

• 1:06:29Speaker 02

  Yeah. So this is, this field's been poisoned multiple times for a century.

• 1:06:34Jesse Michels?

  You know, I would say that, and then I think people are becoming more and more open to these sorts of effects. Are you familiar with Sonny White?

• 1:06:42Speaker 02

  Sure.

• 1:06:42Jesse Michels?

  So, you know, he's-

• 1:06:43Speaker 02

  I haven't met him, but-

• 1:06:44Jesse Michels?

  He's another NASA guy, NASA Eagle Works, and he is kind of similar to you where, you know, he's, has this kind of pretty credentialed, impressive background, and he's claiming to 1.5 kilovolts, you know, powering up a little microchip based on the Casimir effect.

• 1:07:03Speaker 02

  Yeah.

• 1:07:03Jesse Michels?

  And the Casimir effect is this long, legendary, kind of anomalous effect that if you were to walk into elite physics, you know, departments, I don't think you'd get too many people denying the effect itself. But it's- Essentially two not charged but conductive plates. And it seems like there's some sort of maybe quantum vacuum fluctuation thing going on between them. And the the plates attract in this sort of anomalous, interesting way. And he's claiming to be able to tap into that, which is, I hate the word zero point energy. The term, you know, is so quacky, but it is that. And so you have that, you have Beatrice Villarreal. I don't know if you're familiar with her. And I don't know if you're into UFO stuff.

• 1:07:45Jesse Michels?

  I don't want to muddy the waters too much, but um, she's at Stockholm University and she's, uh, you know, again, like traditional astrophysics credentials, really impressive, you know, astronomer. And uh, she went back and looked at these plates from the Palomar Observatory, which is, you know, the was the most in use observatory in the late 40s and early 50s. And she looked at the plates from 49 to 57, so pre Sputnik. And she found all these transients, these light reflecting objects there that are flat and uh, mirror like. And uh, seem to exist somewhere probably in geostationary orbit. So kind of like outer, you know, earth orbit.

• 1:08:28Speaker 06

  And these short flashes and not streaks, they are associated with things that are extremely flat and extremely reflective.

• 1:08:36Jesse Michels?

  Wow.

• 1:08:37Speaker 06

  Like mirrors and that makes it more fun.

• 1:08:39Jesse Michels?

  Like mirrors. And they're exactly how all the early CIA documents would describe UFOs. And they show up 68% more around nuclear detonations, which is, we know UFOs are kind of attracted to nukes. Out of those 2,700 days, if there's no nuclear test, there's a transient on 11% of those days. But if there's been a nuclear test the day before, then it's uh, almost 19% of those days have a transient. So that 11 versus 19 is about a 68% increase in risk for a transient. If you've had a nuclear test. And she got that passed through peer review. So I don't know. I think the world is opening up to this stuff.

• 1:09:23Jesse Michels?

  And my hope is that 30 years is a way overestimate. And I hear you. I mean, academia is totally close minded and dogmatic. But I think maybe sometimes you just have to walk through the front door. You know, you just have to like knock and they'll let you in.

• 1:09:39Speaker 02

  Well, I'm gonna, I'm gonna be the front door. I'm gonna, I'm gonna be the house that lands.

• 1:09:43Jesse Michels?

  I love that.

• 1:09:44Speaker 02

  You know, peer review in a paper, the physics people are gonna debate for decades.

• 1:09:48Jesse Michels?

  Sure.

• 1:09:49Speaker 02

  I like having the website and Drew and having videos how to make the things. Go ahead, make them.

• 1:09:55Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:09:55Speaker 02

  If you don't believe me, go ahead and make them in the garage.

• 1:09:57Jesse Michels?

  Yeah, yeah, yeah.

• 1:09:58Speaker 02

  This has been very helpful. So you'll. People have done this.

• 1:10:01Jesse Michels?

  So you'll do this, like, you have like these DIY videos where it's like, go do this at home.

• 1:10:04Speaker 02

  Yeah.

• 1:10:05Jesse Michels?

  Whoa. And then where are these videos?

• 1:10:07Speaker 02

  They're on our website.

• 1:10:08Jesse Michels?

  Oh, wow. And where, where is that? Is that exodus space.com or what?

• 1:10:13Speaker 02

  Exodus propulsion dot space.

• 1:10:15Jesse Michels?

  Exodus propulsion dot space. Okay, check that out.

• 1:10:18Speaker 02

  Yep.

• 1:10:19Jesse Michels?

  And you've shown your experiments with all of the configurations that would.

• 1:10:23Speaker 02

  Not all of them.

• 1:10:24Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 1:10:25Speaker 02

  We have to keep some stuff quiet.

• 1:10:26Jesse Michels?

  Okay. Cool. So are you doing like lateral propeller experiments? Or are you doing things that involve like lifting objects?

• 1:10:37Speaker 02

  We're not lifting objects yet in Earth's gravity.

• 1:10:39Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 1:10:39Speaker 02

  We're measuring the forces of these objects.

• 1:10:41Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:10:42Speaker 02

  And seeing how much their force can lift as compared to Earth's gravity.

• 1:10:47Jesse Michels?

  Got it.

• 1:10:48Speaker 02

  So we do have thrusters that are theoretically capable of lifting themselves up. The, the problem is all of the hardware that goes with it. The voltages and the powers and the wires and the framing and all that other stuff is not there yet. So you have to, it's like saying your car engine can lift the engine, can move the engine down the street, but no tires and no frames and it's not very useful.

• 1:11:11Jesse Michels?

  Sure.

• 1:11:12Speaker 02

  But for right now, for what we have for lunar applications, space applications. Oh, it's awesome. It would be fantastic.

• 1:11:18Jesse Michels?

  That's amazing. So in microgravity or, or no gravity environments, you'll get a ton of thrust.

• 1:11:23Speaker 02

  Sure.

• 1:11:24Jesse Michels?

  That's amazing. And you're seeing weight reduction. Is that right?

• 1:11:29Speaker 02

  Well. We were saying that, yeah, the weight reduction would be something we're seeing, not mass reduction. Be careful.

• 1:11:35Jesse Michels?

  Okay. Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, I know that gets thrown around UFO world all the time. You're like, wait, are you reducing the mass of the thing?

• 1:11:42Speaker 02

  Definitely not negative mass.

• 1:11:44Jesse Michels?

  Yeah, yeah, yeah, right.

• 1:11:46Speaker 02

  But yes, we do those tasks. We have videos. I can share some with you.

• 1:11:50Jesse Michels?

  Please.

• 1:11:50Speaker 02

  Where we put stuff on a scale and we turn it on, it gets lighter. You flip it over, it gets heavier. We are going through a peer review.

• 1:11:56Jesse Michels?

  Okay, amazing.

• 1:11:57Speaker 02

  For our second patent.

• 1:11:59Jesse Michels?

  Oh, cool.

• 1:11:59Speaker 02

  The examiner's office is doing a thorough peer review. They're the ones going down that path.

• 1:12:05Jesse Michels?

  Okay, great.

• 1:12:06Speaker 02

  Which is apparently equivalent to a scientific peer review. So that's what I've been told.

• 1:12:10Jesse Michels?

  Amazing.

• 1:12:11Speaker 02

  So they're reaching out to people that have done, reaching out, people have signed affidavits to say, yes, I've seen it. Yes, I reproduced it, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. So they're going through that process now.

• 1:12:20Jesse Michels?

  What inspired you to pursue kind of more exotic propulsion to begin with? Did you have any childhood experiences around this sort of stuff?

• 1:12:28Speaker 02

  Yes. Yes, I did.

• 1:12:32Speaker 02

  I've always had a fascination with UFOs and I think it's been around a long time. Just, you know, strange phenomena, but I think it really hit home.

• 1:12:42Speaker 02

  I think I was 11 or 12. We worked our haunted house. My dad would make haunted houses in our garage in New York.

• 1:12:48Jesse Michels?

  Really? What does that even mean? Make haunted houses in your garage?

• 1:12:54Speaker 02

  Built a haunted house for the hotel that he worked at. A giant Holiday Inn, I think it was, or Hilton in Connecticut. And it was a massive haunted house. His job was to build the whole darn thing. So he liked that. So the next year we did it at our house and we charged people like 50 cents to get in and go through the haunted house. And it was probably, I think it was a nine by 11 single car garage haunted house. And we made $1,100. So many people showed up. It was crazy. It was a lot of fun.

• 1:13:26Speaker 02

  But you know, we had a haunted house and it would go on for several weeks. One night while I was there working it, um, a whole bunch of cars came into the driveway. And, uh, I recognized one of the kids getting out of the car. He said, Charlie, go look, look at that. And he shows me, you know, we look up and there's these six bright white lights at the top of the trees, just hanging over the trees, just going over the road, just not, you know, not moving very fast, just, just hanging, hanging out in formation, no sound, no wind, no nothing. And all these cars were following this, these lights for several days. This happened over a course of several days.

• 1:14:02Jesse Michels?

  Was this like a, a famous UFO wave or flap or something?

• 1:14:06Speaker 02

  It was, it was in the papers and all that jazz, Southeast New York in the mid eighties. It was a lot of fun, you know, I was, I thought that was pretty cool. So I kind of like geared my career towards trying to understand some of that stuff. I just wanted to know what the heck that was. And, uh, it got me interested in physics, I think, and science in general. I was always interested in science.

• 1:14:28Jesse Michels?

  Did they look like orbs or were they, were they part of a formation or do you think they were part of the same craft?

• 1:14:33Speaker 02

  They were different craft. I think they were just separate crafts.

• 1:14:38Jesse Michels?

  Wow.

• 1:14:38Speaker 02

  I didn't see a solid object or anything.

• 1:14:40Jesse Michels?

  And so this was for days at a time and it was.

• 1:14:42Speaker 02

  They would come every night, they'd come back and they'd be in different parts of the, of the city. I don't know what the heck they were doing or why they were there, but it was, it was pretty, pretty cool, pretty wild. This is about the same time, um,

• 1:14:56Speaker 02

  where somebody said they saw the men in black, which I thought was hysterical.

• 1:15:00Jesse Michels?

  Wild.

• 1:15:01Speaker 02

  Cause I was, you know, we were trick or treating out with my friends and we ran into another group of friends. And that group of friends said, hey, these two weird guys showed up in these 1920s outfits. And they said, you know, if you see something weird.

• 1:15:16Speaker 02

  They said, just close your eyes and tell it to land. Do you guys know what the heck that means? I knew, I knew what it was. I said, where are these guys? They're right over there. So we went running to go look for them, but I didn't find anybody.

• 1:15:28Jesse Michels?

  But you knew of the men.

• 1:15:29Speaker 02

  I knew the phenomenon. No one knew where the men in black were in 1980s, early 80s. I don't think that was a thing, but I liked to study that stuff. So I knew what, I knew who that was or what that was.

• 1:15:39Jesse Michels?

  That's fascinating.

• 1:15:40Speaker 02

  So I thought, oh, this is cool.

• 1:15:41Jesse Michels?

  How, how can we learn more about this UFO flap? Does it have kind of a, a name that it's been kind of preserved by? Or is there a way to search it or?

• 1:15:50Speaker 02

  You could just look at Brewster, New York.

• 1:15:51Jesse Michels?

  Brewster, New York. Okay.

• 1:15:53Speaker 02

  Probably 86 or 85, somewhere in that range.

• 1:15:56Jesse Michels?

  Wild.

• 1:15:56Speaker 02

  Newspapers and television almost weekly carried reports of the sightings. From different places throughout the area, eyewitnesses all reported seeing the same thing. I looked up and right over my head, virtually, and it wasn't far off. It was right over my head and very still. There was a room of lights in the shape of a triangle.

• 1:16:19Speaker 06

  It was just a tremendous object. It was anywhere from wingtip to wingtip, about four, 50 or 60 yards. These were very, very unusual lights. I've never seen anything like it in my life. And so I pulled my car over and I had to take a look.

• 1:16:34Speaker 02

  But it, it, it was in the paper. I remember that because it lasted several days.

• 1:16:38Jesse Michels?

  And you hinted to me that you had an even more surreal experience.

• 1:16:41Speaker 02

  That was not a surreal experience. That was just me seeing some lights.

• 1:16:45Jesse Michels?

  Surreal for many people.

• 1:16:47Speaker 02

  Just lights. It was lights, but yeah. I had a more intense experience, I would say. Many years later. My wife and I experienced this. And this was, it was a pretty cool event. Now that it's over, a little terrifying at the time, but we, we live in Cocoa Beach. So we went out to the beach one night, I would say nine 30, 10 o'clock at night. And we're the only ones there. It's not uncommon though, back then, this is maybe 10 years ago. And maybe 12 years ago.

• 1:17:23Speaker 02

  So we live close to the Patrick Air Force Base, which is south of us. And so out in the ocean, maybe about three miles outside, south of us in the ocean, I would say about three miles. You can kind of gauge how far things are apart because we're used to the, all the rivers and they're all three miles wide. So this is about three miles out in the ocean. We see a red light. Just a beacon, just bleeping. No big deal. Just a boat.

• 1:17:50Speaker 02

  Thousands of boats. But not that night, there were not thousands of boats. And it gets brighter and it gets brighter. We're like, man, that's, it's getting kind of bright. What is that? What, you know, beacons don't get that bright. So it's gotta be a boat. Maybe someone's in trouble. And then it gets really bright. And then it explodes. So we see this giant, I don't want to say mushroom cloud, but it got very, very bright. So bright, it lit up the whole beach as far as the eye can see. For, you know, all the way from Cape Canaveral, all the way down. And I said, my God, what the heck happened there? My wife and I were like, that's crazy. Clearly someone's going to call the police and tell them that a boat exploded.

• 1:18:34Speaker 02

  You know, we're on the beach. We didn't have phones or anything at the time. Like, what the heck is that?

• 1:18:40Speaker 02

  So I would say five minutes later, it wasn't that long, ten minutes. We see one of the helicopters from the Air Force Base go out to it. So they get up and they, they fly over and they hover right over it. It's still blinking. It's not exploding. It's still there, still blinking. Just a nice pace, bling, bling, bling. Helicopter hangs over, looks at it, doesn't do anything, goes all the way back. So like, well, are they going to help the people? Are they going to, you know, rescue them? Or are they going to do any of that? Nothing. That is so weird. That's when it got fun.

• 1:19:15Speaker 02

  So now, as we're watching this thing, it's about 10, 15, 20 minutes into it. It gets closer. Still bring, still blinking. It's getting closer. It's leaving. It's moving.

• 1:19:28Speaker 02

  And then I guess within a mile, so it was up three miles, it's two miles, it's about a half a mile. And then somewhere around, I think about a half a mile, it's not one light anymore. It's split into six.

• 1:19:41Speaker 02

  And it's not just getting bright.

• 1:19:45Speaker 02

  These orange pinkish lights split and then they started rotating. And they just started rotating like bicycle spokes on a wheel. And they kept getting closer and then would go under the water and come back out, under the water, come back out, under the water, come back out. Like this is really weird and they got closer to us. So when it got about a quarter of a mile or maybe a thousand yards out, we're like, okay, we're, we're going to walk up the beach now. This, this been fun. That's a little bit too close. It kept following us, got closer, it got closer, it got brighter, it got brighter. And I think it was about when they got about, I wouldn't even be exaggerating if I said 50 yards. We got that close.

• 1:20:28Speaker 02

  I started getting a little scared and, and I, I know she was getting scared. Then after about 40 minutes of looking at these lights and, and trying to run from them, but not full out sprint, but kind of just walking super fast. Like 12 blocks. It went out.

• 1:20:48Speaker 00

  This episode is brought to you by Google Chrome. You think you know a browser, but Gemini and Chrome, that's new. It can help you with practically anything on the web, like restoring a vintage motorcycle from a 50 page restoration blog. Or finally break down that long article you've had open for weeks. Gemini and Chrome is here for it. Ready to make anything online make sense? There's no place like Chrome. Check responses setup required. Compatibility and availability varies. 18 plus.

• 1:21:14Speaker 02

  And then, um, then we walked home. And it was, it was terrifying, but it was not super scary, but it was scary enough. Cause I didn't know what the heck that was.

• 1:21:25Jesse Michels?

  That's wild. What year was this?

• 1:21:29Speaker 02

  Probably 2013.

• 1:21:31Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 1:21:31Speaker 02

  Somewhere in there.

• 1:21:32Jesse Michels?

  So you had already started your work on the more exotic propulsion stuff?

• 1:21:38Speaker 02

  Probably, yeah. Couple of years in by then, for sure.

• 1:21:41Jesse Michels?

  That's fascinating. It's so interesting. So you saw this thing out in the distance and then it started to loop in and out of the water. And then, and approach you and it got to like 50 yards ish away.

• 1:21:54Speaker 02

  Yeah, it got really close.

• 1:21:55Jesse Michels?

  Could you make out?

• 1:21:56Speaker 02

  Like where the, where the waves started.

• 1:21:58Jesse Michels?

  Did it still look like the same morphous light at 50 yards or could you make out the structure?

• 1:22:02Speaker 02

  There's no, I couldn't see a structure, just six or seven lights going in a pattern. Faster, slower, faster, slower, in and out of the water, like the water wasn't there. And just, it was responding to us.

• 1:22:15Jesse Michels?

  Really? Why, why? So why? Cause that's a common thing for people to say who've had UFO experiences.

• 1:22:21Speaker 02

  If we went up, it went up. If we went faster, it went faster.

• 1:22:25Jesse Michels?

  It was mirroring you?

• 1:22:26Speaker 02

  It was mirroring us.

• 1:22:27Jesse Michels?

  Did you get any sort of consciousness download or feel mentally locked in with it or anything like that?

• 1:22:34Speaker 02

  No. No, I don't think so.

• 1:22:38Speaker 02

  These lights are kind of common over there. If you, if you study these, these type of lights. Cause we live near a cruise ship, the ports. You see a lot of videos online with these lights. Steven Greer takes his, his group down there to that same, almost that same beach, about, about 40 minutes south. To look in, in, you know, kind of conjure up the lights. So that, and I have had other friends since then have the same experience or similar experience. Which I thought was super cool. Cause he was out at the beach with his family and they saw it late at night. The only ones on the beach, they saw them too. This is like maybe seven, eight years later. So it's pretty weird stuff that's happened.

• 1:23:15Jesse Michels?

  What do you think this Patrick Air Force based helicopter was doing? Do you think it was doing recon on this UFO or?

• 1:23:21Speaker 02

  I have no idea.

• 1:23:23Jesse Michels?

  So interesting.

• 1:23:24Speaker 02

  The way it behaved, it was just like, oh, it's these darn lights again. It, it didn't act.

• 1:23:30Jesse Michels?

  But it looked like it was intentionally dispatched from Patrick Air Force Base.

• 1:23:34Speaker 02

  After that very large bright event, which was blinding to look at is how bright it was. They addressed it and went out there and looked at it and. Still saw it there, you know, getting bright, dim, bright, dim. It was very bright still. Not blinding bright, but it was very bright. And it just, that's good. I just went back home.

• 1:23:53Jesse Michels?

  Do you ever get one step kookier and say, why did this happen to me? Do you, does it have something to do with the work that I'm pursuing?

• 1:24:01Speaker 02

  You know, I, I don't think so. It happened. A lot of people have seen these things. You know, these lights they follow cruise ships and boats. There's a lot of weird videos of it. So they're probably just chasing people.

• 1:24:11Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:24:12Speaker 02

  If I had to guess, I don't think I'm, I'm anything special. I'm just following people.

• 1:24:15Jesse Michels?

  Well, I might follow the person who's working on interstellar propulsion a little more disproportionately. Um, did you know that Thomas Townsend Brown had a, a very similar experience?

• 1:24:27Speaker 02

  Oh, really?

• 1:24:27Jesse Michels?

  Catalina Island and a little orb light approached him, literally came up to him. Townsend Brown had a UFO experience in Catalina as a teenager. Is that right?

• 1:24:38Speaker 06

  Yes. Yes. And I know the exact spot. He was where he was standing. I used to ride my horse up that ridge. It approached him. It actually approached him.

• 1:24:51Jesse Michels?

  And?

• 1:24:51Speaker 06

  And he said that he learned so much standing there with that ball of light that he went back to his, which at what the time was, he had a lab in Pasadena. It was funded by his parents. So he had his own private lab. And he said he went to work immediately and he worked, that was, that was the beginning of his life's work. And he said that everything that he ever learned about his work, he learned instantly.

• 1:25:27Jesse Michels?

  Wow. Wow. So you, that's so fascinating.

• 1:25:31Speaker 02

  I wish I got a download. I've been 10 years further ahead.

• 1:25:33Jesse Michels?

  Yeah. Well, maybe you've gotten a lot of downloads and you just don't know it, you know? It's, it's always interesting how, you know, science is treated like, oh, it's, you're just figuring this out. Like you figure out the last, you know, term of an equation on a chalkboard or something. And often if you were to probe the scientist in many Cases, I don't know if this comports with your experience. It's far more like revelation. It's like, ah, it just hit me.

• 1:25:59Speaker 02

  Yeah.

• 1:26:00Jesse Michels?

  You know, it's Dirac, we were talking about Dirac, Dirac, you know, staring at the fire in Cambridge and just downloading the Dirac equation. Or Heisenberg at Elgoland, you know, figuring out quantum leaps and, you know, probability matrices or whatever around, you know, electron shells. And so this is a very common experience. I don't know if you've ever had.

• 1:26:22Speaker 02

  I would say, yeah, some of the, the math is just very discretized. Oh, we'll try this and big leap there.

• 1:26:28Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:26:28Speaker 02

  And then months go by, oh, do try this. Oh yeah, that works better.

• 1:26:32Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:26:32Speaker 02

  More sense. Whether it's experimental or theoretical, yeah, it doesn't, it's not a super gradual thing. It, it does have, you know, step functions to it for sure.

• 1:26:41Jesse Michels?

  I don't think if you put one of these debunker types like Michael Shermer, you know, Neil deGrasse Tyson. I don't think if they were in front of either of you, they would be able to beat you in an argument.

• 1:26:52Speaker 02

  Like, oh, the argument to have to anyone, just go, go try it.

• 1:26:55Jesse Michels?

  Go try it. Yeah.

• 1:26:56Speaker 02

  Seriously, don't take my word for it.

• 1:26:58Jesse Michels?

  Yes.

• 1:26:58Speaker 02

  Go build this thing in your garage.

• 1:27:00Jesse Michels?

  I think they'd be too arrogant to show up, but I think if Neil deGrasse Tyson were in a room with your experiment, I don't think he could explain it. And that seems like a really important fact that you have one side that's like showing an effect. You have 2000 iterations of that effect. You are an expert in this field. You've contributed to, you know, really important things to the field itself that are conventionally now, you know, accepted. And you, you say you're getting an effect and then you have somebody else who's just smugly dismissing it. Like, I'm gonna go with you over the smug dismissal.

• 1:27:34Speaker 02

  Well, you know, that's, that's how science works, you know, it is inherently skeptical.

• 1:27:38Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:27:39Speaker 02

  You gotta understand everything, the theory, the modeling, the experiment. So I expect it. This is why I didn't go the peer review route.

• 1:27:45Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:27:46Speaker 02

  Per se, I went the other peer review route, which is through the.

• 1:27:49Jesse Michels?

  Well, it's a good, it's a good, um, that's a good attitude to have. And, uh, yeah, the patent office, there you go. It's smart. Yeah. Just, just make money off it. Just commercialize it. Just,

• 1:28:00Speaker 02

  you know, let's just do that.

• 1:28:01Jesse Michels?

  And if they're wrong, you win in the free market. And yeah, yeah, no, totally.

• 1:28:06Speaker 02

  It's still peer reviewed. The examiner's office is peer reviewing it. So,

• 1:28:09Jesse Michels?

  Yep.

• 1:28:10Speaker 02

  But in the meantime, I'll, I'll just keep building away, keep talking away.

• 1:28:13Jesse Michels?

  Having said that, I, I like, you know, Thomas Kuhn talks about, you know, in the structure of scientific revolutions, how science moves more around politics than it does truth. And I do think the fact that you lead electrostatics at NASA is this really important thing. There is the kind of, you know, uh, patent, you know, uh, commercial route that you can take. You can just do the kind of startup thing and just win on your own. And then there's another part of me where I'm like, you know, Niels Bohr didn't create the first semiconductor company. And, you know, if you really are, you know, contributing to fundamental physics in the form of this new force, I, I like that you're coming on this show and that you have

• 1:28:57Jesse Michels?

  videos and you're telling people to do it at home because it's hard to know where that even leads. And I hope you know that.

• 1:29:05Speaker 02

  Sure.

• 1:29:06Jesse Michels?

  And so I do think, um, you just letting this out in a public way, I think also will amount to a Cambrian explosion of people working on new cool ideas. And I think the more you let it out, the more you become a lighthouse for like, you kind of did it first. And the other high agency people who do other variations of what you're, you're doing will come to you. And so I think it's this flywheel where I do think being public about it is the, really the right thing. Cause God forbid, I mean, you have like all these other scientists that spend like, uh, their lives in secrecy. And then sometimes they, you know, the frameworks that they've helped establish just kind of go away and they're still stigmatized to this day. Townsend Brown bring a great example. So.

• 1:29:51Speaker 02

  I agree with that. I think getting it out there, letting people see it, it, this is something that's just too important to be bottled up completely. Let's be fair. Um, this is a new force. It's just what it is. Whether it's a gravitational force or some other quantum mechanical effect. Um, it's too important to just say, no, no, no, I'm going to work on it until I'm done. Then I'll let you, let you see it at the end. That's not what this should be.

• 1:30:15Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:30:15Speaker 02

  You know, we need this.

• 1:30:17Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:30:17Speaker 02

  We need it. We need it now. You know, we say we have an energy crisis. Oh, my God, the energy crisis. Well, it could be considered an energy crisis, but it's really a force crisis. It's a transportation crisis. How do you get an object from here to here? That is the real problem.

• 1:30:34Jesse Michels?

  Absolutely. And we've been flying with Boeing 747s or equivalents, you know, for the last 60 years. It's just crazy. We've seen total stagnation in the world of transportation. And so

• 1:30:47Speaker 02

  So the world needs this.

• 1:30:48Jesse Michels?

  The world absolutely needs this.

• 1:30:50Speaker 02

  If I can help, I will.

• 1:30:51Jesse Michels?

  Well, I love that attitude. That's, that's awesome. You mentioned a patent, a second patent. Your first patent, there was a national security hold on it. Is that right?

• 1:31:01Speaker 02

  We don't know.

• 1:31:02Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 1:31:03Speaker 02

  But it's possible.

• 1:31:04Jesse Michels?

  What does that even mean?

• 1:31:08Speaker 02

  Some patents apparently go through the Department of Defense.

• 1:31:11Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 1:31:11Speaker 02

  Before they're released. Depending on the nature of the patent.

• 1:31:15Jesse Michels?

  And some never see the light of day, right? There's the Invention Secrecy Act of 1952.

• 1:31:20Speaker 02

  Yeah, I believe that's, that was one of the risks that we were aware of.

• 1:31:23Jesse Michels?

  Mm hmm. Fascinating. Do you, so this is the weird thing about these sorts of experiments. There is so much smoke, not only from you. I know a lot of engineers who've worked at aerospace corporations, you know, Lockheed, Northrop, those sorts of companies. And they give you a little wink, wink, nudge, nudge. They often can't say that there's anything to, you know, the Bifield Brown experiment. But, you know, it's often you're on the right path, buddy. And there's weird things happen with high, you know, electric field strengths at short distances and with, you know, big gradients or, you know, asymmetry, you know, that off, that always comes up. And it is, is there something going on?

• 1:32:06Jesse Michels?

  Am I, am I wrong to say this? Because I, look, a lot of the physics is above my pay grade. But there is just an overwhelming amount of circumstantial evidence that there's a there there here.

• 1:32:19Speaker 02

  It seems like that.

• 1:32:20Jesse Michels?

  Have you met others who've probably converged across the same force that you have? They've, they've kind of stumbled onto it?

• 1:32:30Speaker 02

  I have to think about that. I can't think of anyone off the top of my head.

• 1:32:36Speaker 02

  But it's possible. I, to be fair, I haven't done that much research on the electrogovitics and all those folks. I've started reading some of the books and there are a lot of books on this stuff.

• 1:32:45Jesse Michels?

  Yeah, yeah, oh, there are a ton of these books.

• 1:32:48Speaker 02

  And everyone has a theory and I just try to have to sift through that to see where are the experiments?

• 1:32:52Jesse Michels?

  Yeah, yeah, yeah.

• 1:32:53Speaker 02

  Because, you know, the old adage is everyone, everyone has a theory, but no one believes a theory.

• 1:32:58Jesse Michels?

  Yeah, yeah, yeah.

• 1:32:58Speaker 02

  But the experimenter doesn't believe his own experiments, but everyone believes the experiments.

• 1:33:02Jesse Michels?

  But if you look at how science gets pushed forward, to me, the experimental physics is a bigger tell. The theory is like a prison or something. And so I never like, you know, this can't work because theory.

• 1:33:15Speaker 02

  Yeah.

• 1:33:15Jesse Michels?

  Like, I think it's, this worked and we have to explain it with a new theory.

• 1:33:20Speaker 02

  Yeah.

• 1:33:20Jesse Michels?

  And it's like the Casimir effect or like some of the, maybe the Casimir effect makes sense in quantum electrodynamics, I don't know. But there are a lot of these, you know, what's a good example? Like black body radiation in the 1860s with Gustav Kirchhoff. It was, should have produced this ultraviolet catastrophe and it didn't. And it was because of, you know, quanta, which Planck discovered 40 years later. And so there are a lot of these sorts of examples and you can't say the anomaly isn't right because of the theory. And there's just so much anecdotal evidence around this anomaly working.

• 1:33:55Speaker 02

  Yeah, I think there are examples. I gave some of those in the APEC. Some of the examples of what this, how this force might manifest, you don't even know that you're seeing it. Like momentum anomalies for spacecraft when they go around the earth and they get to the Van Allen belt, say the speed up or they slow down just by going through the, picking up charge as they go through the Van Allen belts, which doesn't make a lot of sense. So they have to actually add extra fuel to spacecraft to account for that. They don't know where it comes from.

• 1:34:20Jesse Michels?

  That's fascinating. So.

• 1:34:21Speaker 02

  There's all kinds of things like that.

• 1:34:23Jesse Michels?

  So those momentum anomalies are possibly attributable to this force?

• 1:34:28Speaker 02

  I, I think so. It's possible.

• 1:34:30Jesse Michels?

  And you're calling this the Exodus force and your company is Exodus Space?

• 1:34:34Speaker 02

  That's right.

• 1:34:35Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 1:34:35Speaker 02

  Yeah, the force is really two forces. There's a surface force and a volume force. We call the surface force, that's actually electrostatic pressure force, just because it comes from electrostatic pressure. And then we have a divergence in the E field force. For the volume element, because the integral has a surface and a volume component, at least the classical version, which is not truly correct. It's close, but it's obviously you can't explain this force, I think, in classical mechanics. You have to use quantum, but at least the classical kind of steers you in the right direction because you can actually build something on that to test it. But to be fair, it has to be a quantum mechanical effect. It's not a classical effect. What we're seeing, which has always always been known.

• 1:35:20Jesse Michels?

  Why are you sure it's not a classical effect?

• 1:35:24Speaker 02

  Well, for one, we're not conserving energy in the in the in the classical world.

• 1:35:30Jesse Michels?

  Right.

• 1:35:31Speaker 02

  You know, we put something on the scale and we turn it off. It should go off. Because the fields are intact, the force remains. So now we're dealing with something else, just like the Casimir effect. It's dealing with something else. You don't need power for the Casimir effect. You could just put two plates in space and they will attract. Do not need to add power for that. It is an artifact of the structure of the vacuum. This might be another similar thing, just in a different light.

• 1:36:01Jesse Michels?

  And, you know, in the Townsend Brown experiments involving electrogivitics, they were capacitor experiments. So you had a negative electrode, you had a positive electrode, you had a high K dielectric in between them. The high K factor, which is the ability to store and discharge easily a lot of, you know, high electric fields was this really important factor for determining the thrust in the experiment. Does that make sense in the context of your experiment?

• 1:36:30Speaker 02

  Sure.

• 1:36:31Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 1:36:31Speaker 02

  So usually if you have a high capacitance, you can store more charge, right? Some more charge, more energy. But um, we have to look at, we look at all the capacitances, not just the capacitance between the two plates.

• 1:36:46Speaker 02

  We look at the fields and how you can strengthen the fields. Sometimes high capacitance or high K values, high dielectric constants can lower the fields. So you want a high field, depending on where you're where you want the thrust to be. So you can tailor some of that with capacitance, just like Townsend Brown did. But it is a field effect. So those are the things, those are some of the knobs you have. You have a lot of knobs. You have geometry knobs, capacitance knobs, voltage knobs. You have a lot of things that we can do. But how you could explain this force classically, I don't really know. At least with the conservation of energy stuff.

• 1:37:22Jesse Michels?

  Is the, you know, Brown would use DC pulsing and like, you know, kind of high climb rates of the voltage. So that the voltage would, there'd be a steep climb rate where it would, you know, increase very, very sharply. Is that also consistent with your theory or?

• 1:37:38Speaker 02

  I don't really know. I mean, we try to stay away from the AC stuff or the very high slew rate stuff if we can.

• 1:37:44Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:37:45Speaker 02

  Damages to the plastics or damages to the metals, damages to the materials, too many, too much current.

• 1:37:53Speaker 02

  We haven't explored all of the different ways to actually enact it. We're still exploring the DC versions. We haven't explored all the different ways you can apply different voltages and different currents to it. Which is something that we can, we have a lot of room in the future to improve upon. But we're doing so many variations with all the other parameters. We don't really need to change the, the slew rates too much yet.

• 1:38:15Jesse Michels?

  Do you take issue with the term anti-gravity or?

• 1:38:18Speaker 02

  I don't like anti-gravity.

• 1:38:19Jesse Michels?

  Okay. Well, because that is, that would be like an opposite of gravity force.

• 1:38:25Speaker 02

  Yeah, or the, you know, like the electroggravitics. It's very pretentious to say that we're messing with gravity.

• 1:38:30Jesse Michels?

  Yeah, yeah, yeah.

• 1:38:30Speaker 02

  Uh, even Drew calls this warp drive. I'm not there yet. You know, I'm not, I'm not there yet with the bending of spacetime.

• 1:38:38Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:38:38Speaker 02

  There are experiments to check that. You can use interferometry or something like that. And I believe the Apex folks are, are looking into that. So we'll see what they find. But um, I don't know if we need to, I don't think I'm bending spacetime with my, my 2000 volts and, you know, plates and wires and needles. I don't, I don't think I am. Maybe I am, but I don't think I am.

• 1:39:00Jesse Michels?

  But you do think you've discovered an inroad towards a propulsion mechanism that could get us in, into kind of interstellar travel and actually deep space travel. Which that, that's amazing.

• 1:39:13Speaker 02

  Yes, but I don't know if I'm bending gravity for that or not.

• 1:39:16Jesse Michels?

  Sure.

• 1:39:16Speaker 02

  I don't want to go there yet.

• 1:39:17Jesse Michels?

  Yeah, yeah, yeah. Fair enough.

• 1:39:19Speaker 02

  You know, cause. If that's the case, then you'll go down other paths, other rabbit holes that I don't want to go down. Like, oh, well, then you can make a teleportation device, or a wormhole, or this, or all that other stuff.

• 1:39:29Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:39:30Speaker 02

  Yeah, I don't, I don't, I'm not ready for going down those paths yet either.

• 1:39:33Jesse Michels?

  Have you looked into any of the other kind of exotic physics world work? People like Ning Li or other people who've claimed kind of weight reduction?

• 1:39:44Speaker 02

  Have you heard of that? There's a story about this Chinese scientist that was working on anti-gravity and then vanished.

• 1:39:53Speaker 02

  Yeah, real excited about the spinning superconductor stuff.

• 1:39:56Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:39:56Speaker 02

  Cause you know, my PhD is in high temperature.

• 1:39:58Jesse Michels?

  I was gonna say.

• 1:39:59Speaker 02

  Yeah. And I was like, oh, maybe that's, that's a way to shield gravity, something like that. And then someone else, I think NASA reproduced it and they couldn't, didn't see the effect.

• 1:40:09Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 1:40:10Speaker 02

  So I never did anything with it. It's a very expensive experiment to do.

• 1:40:14Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:40:14Speaker 02

  It's something very large, superconductor and spinning it. Superconductors are not cheap.

• 1:40:20Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:40:20Speaker 02

  They weren't in the 90s. But I, I, I don't know. I haven't seen anything that's definitive.

• 1:40:29Jesse Michels?

  Yeah. There's this guy Pukletnov at the University of Tampir in Finland who claims weight reduction based on spinning superconductors. And I believe there might be a connection between him and Victor Schauberger, this like World War II Nazi, I guess he was in Austria. I don't want to call him a Nazi. He was just like a hapless scientist, but he had this whole model for spinning superconductivity. And I believe Pukletnov's father was like, like Stasi guy who was doing tech retrieval for the Soviets. And so, you know, I think there's some sort of lineage there. Nick Cook describes this in his amazing book, Hunt

• 1:41:09Jesse Michels?

  for Zero Point. And, and then you have Ning Li popping up in the early 2000s.

• 1:41:15Speaker 02

  Love that book.

• 1:41:15Jesse Michels?

  It's a great book, right?

• 1:41:16Speaker 02

  I love that book, yeah.

• 1:41:16Jesse Michels?

  Yeah, it's awesome. And then Ning Li has, yeah, he's amazing. By the way, everybody should read that book.

• 1:41:21Speaker 02

  Yeah.

• 1:41:22Jesse Michels?

  Nick Cook is a hard-headed aviation journalist at Gene's Defense Weekly in the UK. And he just stumbles onto all this gravity research in the 50s and then realizes it just vanishes and goes nowhere. And he looks through the entire lineage and he comes to the very interesting conclusion that there's so much smoke, there probably has to be some fire, but like never kind of finds a smoking gun, never knows exactly, you know. What the there there is, but it's fascinating.

• 1:41:51Speaker 02

  It is. Eventually he's like, it's somewhere in America.

• 1:41:54Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:41:54Speaker 02

  It has something to do with zero point.

• 1:41:55Jesse Michels?

  That's right. That's right.

• 1:41:57Speaker 02

  And that's where he ended it.

• 1:41:58Jesse Michels?

  Do you think there that in the black, we've discovered some of this stuff?

• 1:42:02Speaker 02

  Honestly, don't know.

• 1:42:04Jesse Michels?

  Has it?

• 1:42:04Speaker 02

  I, I don't know. That's, I just don't know.

• 1:42:07Jesse Michels?

  Has the DOD ever reached out to you? The, I guess the Department of War now, or the Pentagon or DARPA? Have any of these organizations reached out to you?

• 1:42:15Speaker 02

  No.

• 1:42:17Jesse Michels?

  It's so strange.

• 1:42:18Speaker 02

  It's very sad. I was hoping to be, you know, taken away and work on some weird UFO project.

• 1:42:23Jesse Michels?

  I know.

• 1:42:24Speaker 02

  Well, it hasn't happened.

• 1:42:26Jesse Michels?

  I mean, if anybody should, you know, deserves it, it's just, it's so weird. It's like, it's like they already know and are miles ahead and they're sort of gaslighting and waiting for us to catch up. Or they're brain dead and it's just bureaucracy.

• 1:42:42Speaker 02

  Yeah.

• 1:42:42Jesse Michels?

  And I don't know if you lean on either side.

• 1:42:45Speaker 02

  I don't really know. Like your last interview pointed out how few physicists there were for the retrieval program. This can't add up. It's, it's a two line proof. It defies the laws of physics. We haven't made progress. We have no physicists. You know, I thought that was very interesting because my wife and I were approached to help with the UAP. NASA was doing their own UAP thing. And they finished one report and then there was a second one, a second follow on.

• 1:43:13Jesse Michels?

  Really?

• 1:43:15Speaker 02

  I forget the name of the gentleman who reached out to us saying, yeah, we're doing this investigation again. Really like your help. I said, oh, okay. Just put me in with all the physicists. Oh, there are no physicists.

• 1:43:24Jesse Michels?

  What?

• 1:43:24Speaker 02

  What do you mean? There's no physicist? Why am I the only physicist? You know, um, and it's an instruments group, so they're, they're, they have advanced instruments to try to capture these events.

• 1:43:34Jesse Michels?

  Sensors.

• 1:43:35Speaker 02

  Sensors or something. I'm not, you know, quite familiar with, so I didn't really have time to join that group. But I was shocked by that too. Like, why are there no physicists here? Maybe I'm missing something.

• 1:43:44Jesse Michels?

  It's very bizarre. Yeah.

• 1:43:46Speaker 02

  It's like, you would think there would be only physicists.

• 1:43:49Jesse Michels?

  That was one of the most bizarre conversations I've ever been a part of.

• 1:43:52Speaker 02

  I would, I had to watch that twice. I was like, are you serious?

• 1:43:55Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:43:56Speaker 02

  Why, why wouldn't there not be any physicists?

• 1:43:57Jesse Michels?

  I don't know. Either again, they've figured it out and they've are sort of gaslighting us where they have this limited hangout strategy where some of the more popular physics frameworks, like you hit certain areas of it and then you get sucked up, or it's brain dead. Or the UFO stuff is so weird and consciousness based that our physics is so clearly kind of not equipped to deal with it, that it's like futile to even deal with physicists. I don't know.

• 1:44:27Speaker 02

  I don't know.

• 1:44:28Jesse Michels?

  But it was weird. Did you, you didn't see my Gary McKinnon interview, did you?

• 1:44:33Speaker 02

  I was just a guy, normal guy, interested in UFOs, happened to have some IT skills, nothing genius level.

• 1:44:39Jesse Michels?

  You hacked into the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, the Department of Defense, and NASA. Do you know who that is?

• 1:44:45Speaker 02

  Name sounds familiar.

• 1:44:46Jesse Michels?

  So this is a guy who, he lives in the UK. He was, in 2001, he was like in his girlfriend's aunt's basement at 4 a.m. smoking weed, had some IT skills because he worked with a bank, and was a UFO nut, obsessed with UFOs. And so did some like basic blank password phishing techniques to essentially hack into NASA, Navy, Army, CIA, DIA, like every elite.

• 1:45:20Speaker 02

  Is it the guy that's still trapped over there?

• 1:45:21Jesse Michels?

  He's still there. Yeah, because there's a live arrest warrant out for him now. Theresa May, former Prime Minister of the UK, has finally given him kind of, you know, safe harbor or whatever, so he's there. But he can't, he's not allowed in the US. There's, he's on the Interpol red list. And he specifically queried, when he was, when he got in, he was like, oh my God, I'm in. And then he queried the Johnson Space Center, because there were, there was a UFO whistleblower named Donna Hare who worked there, who saw basically images of UFOs being airbrushed out in a specific building, building eight there. And so he looked in and he saw a Tic Tac object floating around the earth, like in

• 1:46:06Jesse Michels?

  Earth's orbit.

• 1:46:07Speaker 02

  And the hemisphere comes into view and it's very blocky, but it's kind of blue and white, so I'm thinking, well, it must be Earth. And then suddenly there's a big, straight, kind of silvery line.

• 1:46:18Speaker 00

  That's coming down, then that's, I guess, what they now call a tic tac, but it's what we used to call cigar shaped object.

• 1:46:25Jesse Michels?

  And this was in the early 2000s before David Fravor's sighting at Nimitz. Super wild and interesting. And then, so for our purposes, why I think this was an interesting conversation, is he then stumbles upon a list of non-terrestrial officers, of which there are 40. And it was very strange, right? Because as of now, if you look at, you know, any of the, you know,

• 1:46:52Jesse Michels?

  ChatGPT, Anthropic, any of these things, it'll tell you that we have like roughly 10 people in space, like globally. And so 40 people in space, that's strange, right? And it's the names of these 40 people, non-terrestrial officers, fleet to fleet transfers of these specific materials. And a lot of the materials are high K dielectrics. And they're, they seem like these thinly layered materials. And then there was like, this one material, I think it's like molb- molbdenium.

• 1:47:19Speaker 00

  Molybdenum?

• 1:47:20Jesse Michels?

  Yeah, molybdenum.

• 1:47:21Speaker 00

  Yeah. Molybdenum.

• 1:47:24Jesse Michels?

  Molybdenum. There you go. And molybdenum is good for like alloying. And so we came to the crazy conclusion on the spot that maybe there is a microgravity supply, space supply chain for materials for these high K dielectrics, which ironically, those high K dielectrics work well for these experiments, for these, you know, again, the quacky word is anti-gravity experiments, for these experiments showing this other force. Okay, so there's like a space supply chain where humans are manufacturing these exotic materials in space that you literally couldn't make.

• 1:48:04Speaker 00

  Physically impossible on Earth.

• 1:48:05Jesse Michels?

  On Earth, yes. That's fascinating. I don't think, has anybody ever explicitly tied together your thing like this, like we're doing now?

• 1:48:14Speaker 00

  No, this is fresh and unique.

• 1:48:16Jesse Michels?

  I love this. And there are, there are commercial companies trying this right now. So for anybody who thinks we're crazy, like, that's a thing. And, and then what would you do it with first in kind of a more, you know, like covert setting? You would do it on things that are of extremely high value. And, you know, if you, if you produce materials in microgravity, you know, the kind of signal, the noise is much better, you know, there's less, you know, Dust and interference issues. And so you could do things like, you know, atomic layering, you know, way, way easier. And so I wonder if there's something like that that then works into some of these experiments being done. I don't know if you have a take on that.

• 1:48:59Speaker 02

  There's a lot there.

• 1:49:00Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:49:02Speaker 02

  I mean, yeah, I mean, we're working with high K dielectrics and

• 1:49:05Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:49:06Speaker 02

  layering materials and different things, but I have not heard of anything going on in space manufacturing for that.

• 1:49:12Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 1:49:13Speaker 02

  Not on my end.

• 1:49:14Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 1:49:16Speaker 02

  But um, it'd be very interesting.

• 1:49:18Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:49:18Speaker 02

  Space manufacturing is something NASA is trying to get more and more involved in.

• 1:49:21Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:49:22Speaker 02

  Because of the, some of the reasons you mentioned.

• 1:49:25Speaker 02

  But I've not heard of any spacecraft being manufactured in space.

• 1:49:29Jesse Michels?

  I have to ask you, while I have you, what's your best argument for the moon landing hoax people?

• 1:49:36Speaker 02

  I would say that the, uh, the lasers that are beaming back to earth, or you can beam, there's reflectors, we just put a new one on from Firefly, you can send a laser, it'll come back. So that's been there since the Apollo days.

• 1:49:49Jesse Michels?

  But you could put a photo reflector up there with the rover theoretically. So it's not super concrete evidence.

• 1:49:56Speaker 02

  It's not super concrete, but you know, we do have a lot of the Apollo samples.

• 1:50:00Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:50:01Speaker 02

  I have a 200 grams or so in my lab.

• 1:50:03Jesse Michels?

  You have some moon rocks?

• 1:50:04Speaker 02

  Not the rocks, the dust. The rocks were given out to different countries and stuff. I, JC probably still has some rocks. I don't have any rocks.

• 1:50:10Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 1:50:11Speaker 02

  It's vastly different than the, than the simulates that we play with.

• 1:50:15Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:50:15Speaker 02

  It's, it's got a very high, um, angle of repose.

• 1:50:18Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:50:19Speaker 02

  So basically you try to, try to flip it over. It doesn't, doesn't want to flip over. It's very jagged, very different. Um, it's interesting stuff. There's no doubt it's not weathered. It's not seen a lot of moisture, you know, those kinds of things. It's, it's different stuff.

• 1:50:34Jesse Michels?

  Have there been any bad actors trying to kind of come in and debunk in like a bad faith way or?

• 1:50:42Speaker 02

  I don't think so.

• 1:50:43Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 1:50:44Speaker 02

  I haven't seen any.

• 1:50:46Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 1:50:49Speaker 02

  No, most of the people are, you know, like the epic folks are out there, open, open to everything.

• 1:50:53Jesse Michels?

  How do you answer the question, why has nobody done this yet? I mean, the, the other answer to that question is they have, and we just listed some of the people earlier who have actually pulled off the experiment, but do you have a good answer as to why?

• 1:51:08Speaker 02

  It takes a bunch of things to line up.

• 1:51:09Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 1:51:10Speaker 02

  You have to have high voltage experiments. Cause these tests can be lethal.

• 1:51:15Jesse Michels?

  Right.

• 1:51:16Speaker 02

  They have to be packaged up properly. Put into a Faraday cage or you're going to get fake positives, false positives. They'd be attracted to walls or floors or ceilings. You have to make sure you're not doing that. You have to prevent the ion wind, which is very well known. Fun thing to make. Does give you some forces, but they're not what we're interested in.

• 1:51:38Speaker 02

  So there's a lot of facets there. Then you have to have the technical savvy to, you know, show it in many different ways, pendulums, spinners, rotators, force measurements, scales, all of those things. And each one of those can be fooled. So you have to make sure that you are, do your due diligence and do not, you know, get any false positives, especially on the scales. Everything has to be shielded pretty darn well.

• 1:52:02Jesse Michels?

  Can I bring up another thing that I think limits?

• 1:52:06Jesse Michels?

  Our ability to, to do this. I think it's, the amount of people who think it's possible that there is another force outside of the conventional forces. And so you need a hypothesis to get, you know, a positive result in certain cases. And I think if you are so dogmatically, you know, confined to, you know, very conventional physics, you would never even try this experiment, maybe. And so you, you have to have the imagination to, you know, realize that there might be a there there to even try it in the first place.

• 1:52:39Speaker 02

  That's right. That's right. You have to, try to do something, if you believe in it, try to do it like I did with the field momentum, the linear momentum. I tried that for 15, 20 years. I failed. But that doesn't mean I had to give up. I was still seeing a force even in that, even if it had nothing to do with that theory. So you keep trying. That's the best thing I can say. You gotta keep trying. If you believe it, if you keep trying, maybe you'll see something. Here, that's the case, I think.

• 1:53:08Jesse Michels?

  And you think that this vindicates the work of Thomas Townsend Brown, too? Maybe he didn't understand what he was dealing with in the way that you do.

• 1:53:15Speaker 02

  But if he says he understood the ion wind, like he said, like he said he did.

• 1:53:18Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:53:18Speaker 02

  He did things in oil. Where you can't have ion wind, then he's possibly came across it. He might not be the only one.

• 1:53:25Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:53:25Speaker 02

  People that play with high voltage, with asymmetrical capacitors, been around a long time. So it's entirely possible that.

• 1:53:32Jesse Michels?

  Maybe Tesla.

• 1:53:34Speaker 02

  Maybe. I don't know if he did much of asymmetrical. He did a lot of energy stuff.

• 1:53:37Jesse Michels?

  Yeah, I don't know either, but um, there's a, actually, you mentioned transmission oil. There's a team in Japan, um, I believe they came out of Honda. And I think Mushia is the scientist's name. And he claims to, they've submerged the capacitor in the transmission oil, which, you know, apparently doesn't ionize, or at least ionize very well. And they claimed some results and they kind of have gone silent. But like, they never retracted those results. That paper's still out there. So there's so much of this.

• 1:54:07Speaker 02

  There's another group I'm working with in Germany who's reproducing this, so.

• 1:54:10Jesse Michels?

  Really?

• 1:54:11Speaker 02

  Yeah, so it's coming.

• 1:54:13Jesse Michels?

  It's amazing. Well, I'm really excited to get into, you have a whole theory about how the thrust works in your Exodus experiments. And it involves quantum electrodynamics. So I asked you if I could bring a friend of mine, David Chester, who is quantum electrodynamics specialist at the Inerteoretical Physicist. And so, um, are you down to have a group conversation? We can change sets and, uh, sweet.

• 1:54:40Jesse Michels?

  All right, so we have David Chester here, who is a friend of mine. He, uh, got his undergrad at MIT, uh, PhD from UCLA, both in physics. And is, uh, kind of specializes in general relativity as well as quantum field theory. But I, to me, you are the guy who is. The kind of intersection, if you have kind of two circles in a Venn diagram of kind of smartest and best credentialed, who will entertain all of the quacky stuff. And so we've had long conversations about a lot of this extended electrodynamics and some of these weird topological or experimental physics effects. And you really, I think, understand kind of the lay of the land as well as anybody.

• 1:55:24Jesse Michels?

  And I was speaking with you, Charles, about doing this interview. And you were like, I'm developing this quantum electrodynamical theory of how this actually works. And I was like, I probably won't be able to say anything about that, but David will. So I'm really excited to have both of you. And maybe we start with you, Charles. If you could just kind of present what the theory is, and then you guys can kind of go back and forth.

• 1:55:52Speaker 02

  Sure. No, but this is a good opportunity to talk to a real physicist about my, you know, my proposed explanation for the force that I'm seeing. So I don't like to create stuff up. That's kind of one of my mantras. I don't want to do that. I want to use what's known in the physics community to see if it can explain what I'm seeing. I don't want to be one of those guys, I have to come up with a whole new theory. I don't think that's necessary. So my approach was to say, what are the tools we have now to try to explain this? Can it be done within conventional physics that we know? Just maybe one other step further or something within the realm of what we already know. And we have a lot of tools in quantum electrodynamics. We have a lot of tools.

• 1:56:37Speaker 02

  So I started from what I have in my experiments, basically two charges. So I have a plus and a minus charge. That's my starting point. I don't have anything else, not as far as I know. If I'm bending spacetime or doing something silly, that's beyond my knowledge. But are there the tools available to understand the forces in just knowing what we know with QED with two charges? QED is very, very powerful.

• 1:57:04Speaker 02

  I found an example of how QED can solve a very simple problem, which can be easily solved with electrodynamics. So let's make it infinitely more complicated with QED. And that's what physicists do. It's because it's a more fundamental theory. So I started with QED to explain Coulomb's law, force of attraction, repulsion between two particles. So that's very well explained with Coulomb's law. But in the context of QED, I found a book that actually did this. In my grad school, we were not trained how to do that. It's not uncommon. There's a lot of very remedial physics problems that take two or three hours to solve that are not going to cover in a class. But I saw the QED version of it and said, oh, this is very helpful. I know where it comes from.

• 1:57:46Speaker 02

  I know where the, I know where the momentum's come from. And then you do the math appropriately, you'll get Coulomb's law coming out of it.

• 1:57:54Jesse Michels?

  And Coulomb's law, for people not familiar, can you describe it very basically?

• 1:57:59Speaker 02

  So basically, it shows that if you have two particles, their force is related by one over the square of the distance away, relation to the the charge, the charges that you have. Very simple rudimentary physics.

• 1:58:12Jesse Michels?

  And it explains things like electron repulsion to like forces repelling.

• 1:58:18Speaker 02

  It basically explains everything that we know about two particles, two charges. Just about everything.

• 1:58:22Jesse Michels?

  QED. Explains why how atoms are bound together.

• 1:58:25Speaker 02

  Sure.

• 1:58:25Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 1:58:26Speaker 02

  So I did not think we needed QC, QCD, quantum chromodynamics, W particles, E particles. I didn't think we needed that. We're not looking at the interactions between protons and neutrons. So we're not looking at the high energy realm. We're just looking at low energy Coulombic charges. That's it.

• 1:58:43Jesse Michels?

  And when you say you're explaining the Coulomb charge with quantum electrodynamics, how is it normally explained?

• 1:58:51Speaker 02

  Usually you'll do Maxwell's equations or something simple to derive Coulomb's law. It's not very complicated. F equals QE. So we know the electric field is point part, point charge times Q.

• 1:59:03Jesse Michels?

  And Maxwell's equations govern electromagnetism.

• 1:59:06Speaker 02

  All of that.

• 1:59:06Jesse Michels?

  19th century.

• 1:59:07Speaker 02

  That's right.

• 1:59:08Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 1:59:08Speaker 02

  But what they don't tell you is how do these particles interact? Like what is causing them to repel or attract? And what is the physical mechanism? QED provides us a nice little solution. QED says, well, thanks to quantum or Feynman and Schwinger, they are exchanging virtual particles.

• 1:59:26Speaker 02

  So they're not real particles. You can't see them. You can't observe them, but they're virtual. So basically you can picture, this is the cartoon that people use. You have two ice skaters. One of them is holding a bowling ball. They, the first one throws a bowling ball, so they recoil. The second person catches the bowling ball, so they fall back, except there's no bowling ball. So not real one that you can see, but you can see the interaction between the two particles. And that's the Feynman diagram. What you do is each time you write a Feynman diagram, each one of those lines in the Feynman diagram represent a different term, and you multiply them all up and you get what's called the scattering matrix element. And you can try to find how these things interact. If you were to take this particle A and shoot it at particle B, you could see where to flex on a board somewhere

• 2:00:11Speaker 02

  if you, if you actually measure that. That interaction is all described in that. QED, using QED to solve, to derive Coulomb's law is very complicated. But I found a book that did it. So I copied that, looked at what they did. So, okay, this is a good model. Let me just do one thing different. I don't have just Coulomb's law. I have something else. So what I think it is, and what I proposed now, is what would happen if I just went to the next order? So quantum electrodynamics, the QED doing Coulomb's law is a second order equation on using time independent perturbation theory. Perturbation theory is the best tool

• 2:00:56Speaker 02

  that we have in physics, I think, bar none. Perturbation theory, it's awesome. It's outstanding. It's very powerful.

• 2:01:03Jesse Michels?

  What is perturbation theory, high level?

• 2:01:05Speaker 02

  High level. So high level, you can get the energy states or the states themselves using perturbations. Just changeable thing. You change an energy state, you add that back in, you do another perturbation. You see how it changes with a small perturbation of the energy in this case, or the states, and evolves. So, and there are many perturbations. So I'm using second order perturbation theory for, that's the lowest perturbation. And I think the highest perturbation for two charges, Coulomb's law. And after that, I don't think anyone's done anything after that. Cause you not only get a close answer, you get the exact answer. So I was like, why go further? You have two particles that either attract or repel. It's Coulomb's law. Do you need to go further?

• 2:01:46Speaker 02

  Not so I'm like, well, this force with that I've seen with Exodus, selective static pressure force is much, much weaker than Coulomb's law. There's no doubt, much weaker. But I decided, well, let's try the third order. What does that give me? And when I tried it with my math, which may not be perfect, I'm sure I was seeing three charges now. So basically, one of the charges was weighed twice, multiplied by itself. And then the third order is it's being multiplied by the first charge. So there's already an asymmetry sort of in the charges, even with two charges, which I thought was useful because I wanted

• 2:02:27Speaker 02

  to try to get that with classical dynamics. You can't derive that from classical energy, three charges. But the Q E D was kind of nice to show that. So I looked at that and I said, okay, there's, there's not, there's no longer four terms like there are in the, you know, the second order.

• 2:02:44Jesse Michels?

  What would classical electrodynamics give you if not?

• 2:02:46Speaker 02

  So basically, when you try to do conservation of energy, you start with a kinetic energy and a potential energy. And so for adding more charges to a system, you just keep adding more and more charges to a system. The superposition principle adds them all up. It doesn't multiply them all up. It adds them all up. But I needed the addition. I needed the, the pressure that I'm creating, working on the charges that I'm creating. So I have a pressure on one side and charges from the other. So I have a multiplication effect, experimentally. So I didn't know how to derive that other than quantum electrodynamics, but classically it doesn't, doesn't show that. But I thought maybe Q E D might. And it shows up there. But that was the first thing. And the other thing, there were 12 terms now

• 2:03:28Speaker 02

  instead of four, because I'm, I'm scattering. So what happens in Q E D or, or time independent perturbation theory, you start from the zero, the state, the vacuum state, you scatter to the first state, then you go over first state, you scatter to the second state, and you go to the second state, scatter to the zero state. That's just how it works. There's a lot of scattering states and matrices that you have to solve for, then you multiply them together. So I have 12 terms now. Some of the terms are kind of interesting.

• 2:03:55Speaker 02

  It looks like that when you draw the diagrams from those states, that you looks like you get the same things you had in second order perturbation theory, where you have a little exchange of photon, the other ones will absorb it, vice versa. But there are some states are a little weird. You'll have states where they'll just absorb or just emit. Kind of like the first order, which I didn't talk about, but the first order is basically just a charge with a field line. We're not field line, but with basically a charge with a scalar photon. So you have, there's four kinds of photons in Q E D. One of them is real, one of them is observable, the other three are not. But um, two of them are real? I thought I only read that there's only one of them was real.

• 2:04:39Speaker 04

  Well, you have a H, you have plus and minus H bar for two different spin states.

• 2:04:44Speaker 02

  Okay, well, that's cool. Two of them are real.

• 2:04:46Speaker 04

  If it was massive, it would be three, but since the photon's massless, you get two states. I mean, light is polarized, you can polarize it in a.

• 2:04:53Speaker 02

  Okay, I didn't know that applied to photon, because I just remember the textbook saying only one of them was real. Okay. But anyway, so these are not real things. But in Q E D, if you look at the vertices and every time you draw a vertices, you conserve momentum at that point. So if a particle comes in, it's, you know, we use these silly fiber diagrams. They're not Cartesian coordinates at all, but they're basically a momentum vector. And then the momentum changes. And when the momentum changes, another momentum is created or absorbed. And that's all it is. You can't think of it any more literal than that.

• 2:05:32Speaker 02

  So that's what the, that's what I should, you know, I see in third order. Third order are these vertices that are even giving out these scalar photons or absorbing them. Whatever these things are in reality is how these things seem to be conserving momentum. If this model is correct. So that's the difference between the third order and the second order. At least what I've found mathematically is that you don't absorb this, you don't emit this scalar photon and absorb it in the same pairing with the two charges. There are cases where the two charges emit and don't absorb or absorb and don't emit.

• 2:06:08Speaker 04

  And what is a scalar photon as opposed to a photon?

• 2:06:10Speaker 02

  It's a mathematical.

• 2:06:13Speaker 02

  Photon, you can describe it better than I can, but it has many names, dark photons.

• 2:06:18Jesse Michels?

  And deals.

• 2:06:19Speaker 02

  Is it different? I think it is. Anyway, I think it's just, it's a mathematical term.

• 2:06:24Jesse Michels?

  Okay.

• 2:06:24Speaker 02

  It doesn't have the polarization that a real photon has, right?

• 2:06:27Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 2:06:27Speaker 02

  Very different.

• 2:06:28Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 2:06:28Speaker 02

  It's just a mathematical term. That you put inside the major season, you get the, I don't know how it works.

• 2:06:35Jesse Michels?

  So what are the, what are the?

• 2:06:36Speaker 04

  Scalar.

• 2:06:37Speaker 02

  It's a scalar, it's a scalar, it's no vector.

• 2:06:39Jesse Michels?

  Scalar, no reference. Yeah. So the idea of just emitting or absorbing these scalar photons in this third order perturbation, how does that allow for this effect that looks like this new force in electrostatics, or it looks like antigravity, or you know, what you're kind of experiencing?

• 2:07:03Speaker 02

  Well, what it shows is you have an imbalance. And the system can be made to be imbalanced, which is weird. So, because you're not enclosing, I don't know what happens to these scalar photons, where they go, or I don't even know if they go anywhere. They might terminate somewhere else in the universe. I don't know. E fields don't do that. They do terminate somewhere. But it does, you know, show this weird kind of, you know, imparting into momentum, into something that is already asymmetric. So it's very odd. So wherever you have these.

• 2:07:39Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 2:07:40Speaker 02

  Wherever you have these, I think that's where the field is, non-zero, where these things exist. Where these things don't exist is where the field is zero. So that's the difference. It's basically an electric field.

• 2:07:53Jesse Michels?

  And super high level, you end up with this kind of virtual particle transfer, and due to conservation of momentum, you end up with thrust.

• 2:08:02Speaker 02

  I think so.

• 2:08:03Jesse Michels?

  Okay. And what do you think, David Chester?

• 2:08:07Speaker 04

  Well, first of all, I want to commend you on your experimental efforts. I think you're really brave with what you're doing, and it's quite amazing how much data you guys have been collecting. However, I would just advise you to be a little careful with some of the theoretical claims you're making. First of all, it sounds like you're saying you can get a momentum, you're getting a kick in momentum in the center of mass frame. However, typically in QED, while momentum is conserved and you still have translational symmetry. So you're, I mean, you're typically not able to.

• 2:08:42Speaker 04

  Get virtual photons to give radiation. That's the, that's the first thing. So it sounded like you were saying you, you believe that there's this scalar virtual photon that is getting radiated out. Uh, there's, I see two issues with that. The first being, first of all, I mean, the scalar mode in Q E D is not physical. Second of all, so you could say maybe there's some virtual stuff going on in that, but the virtual particles typically refer to internal lines, whereas in the Feynman diagrams, whereas the, you know, the radiation are the external lines. So you can't have a virtual radiation mode in Q E D.

• 2:09:26Speaker 04

  So that seems to be

• 2:09:29Speaker 02

  So what is it then? What is the

• 2:09:34Speaker 02

  the equivalent, I guess?

• 2:09:36Speaker 04

  I mean, I'm not exactly sure.

• 2:09:39Speaker 04

  I don't know what's going, I don't know the best way to describe your experiment, if that's what you're getting at.

• 2:09:45Speaker 02

  No, I'm just trying to figure out like, how would you draw the Feynman diagram for just a point charge and its field? Not the self-energy, but just the regular.

• 2:09:53Speaker 04

  Well, yeah. So if you think about what the electric field is, it's the force that you would get if you had a test charge located there. So you could imagine exactly as you're saying, uh, you know, it's a four-point tree level scattering Feynman diagram where you have two electrons going in, two electrons going out, and you could have, it's a little subtle here because it's a classical phenomenon, but there is that internal line. And at first it becomes virtual, meaning it can have complex momentum that's off shell. But there's also momentum conservation, as you were saying. So that when you do that Feynman diagram and you're integrating over the momentum, you get this delta function from momentum conservation and that

• 2:10:36Speaker 04

  basically conserves momentum such that, you know, you get classical momentum that can be transferred from one electron to another, and then they can get forced apart. And, you know, it's worth mentioning, you can also find the electric field in classical electromagnetics for as many charges as you want. It sounded, maybe I misheard you, but it sounded like you were saying you can't study things classically for three charges or something, but

• 2:11:02Speaker 02

  Well, not multiply together. I think the superposition is an addition of all the charges.

• 2:11:07Speaker 04

  I also noticed, so you mentioned that you're doing time-independent perturbation theory, which I didn't pick that up. So perturbation theory, yeah, mathematically, it's kind of like a Taylor expansion. So the basic idea is you can have polynomials, so you could have, you know, a constant term, then a linear term, and then a quadratic term. And the idea is, if you're doing an approximation, let's, hopefully, the thing is small, so the higher-order terms can be neglected. And then, so perturbation theory is this approximation scheme that you can use to find solutions to things. And there's different ways you can apply perturbation theory in physics. Typically, when you refer to perturbation theory in quantum electrodynamics, it's not

• 2:11:49Speaker 04

  about time independence, it's more about, when you write down the Feynman diagrams, you can have what they call tree-level diagrams, and then loop-level diagrams. Typically, the tree-level, the tree-level diagrams correspond to the classical interactions, and the number of loops in the diagram is the level of perturbation theory you're at. So the language that I'm familiar with is, you'd have, the classical theory is essentially the zero-third order terms, and you can think of it as a perturbation in H-bar, because H-bar is small, that's a kind of way to colloquially think, colloquially think of it. And so you could have a one-loop diagram, that would be a first-order correction, a two-loop diagram, second order, so on and so forth.

• 2:12:34Speaker 04

  However, I mean, in quantum mechanics, before getting into quantum field theory, you could, I'm pretty sure that you, you could do time-independent perturbation theory. I mean, for what you're working with, you have a lot of DC, it's DC, so there's no time dependence, right? And so you could look at the frequency, and you could say, well, it's a really long wavelength excitation. So I'm actually, you know, I'll have to think more about what exactly you are doing, because I just assumed that you were doing the typical perturbation theory of quantum field theory, but now you're saying, you're mentioning time-independent perturbation theory. Yeah. So I've, I've seen some of your, your notes. Obviously, you haven't published something yet, so I haven't, you know, I, I looked

• 2:13:17Speaker 04

  through what you were able to send me, but I'm just realizing now that you mentioned time-independent perturbation theory, which wasn't what I was thinking. So maybe that is worth disentangibly, so I'm not saying you necessarily have an error there, but I'm just realizing that now.

• 2:13:33Speaker 02

  No, I mean, I, you know, this is, I haven't done Q E D in 26 years.

• 2:13:37Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 2:13:38Speaker 02

  So could use a refresher.

• 2:13:40Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 2:13:40Speaker 02

  But um, I was just intrigued by just doing the time independent perturbation theory and getting something. I love your help translating some of that. The vertices that don't end, I understand these particles don't. They're not real, right? You can't capture them, but I pictured them more like electric fields. Where you, you can't pull the field from the charge, right? Have you now, field line? It doesn't work that way. And that's what these things I think represent. So that's why we have things like renormalization, these really complicated tools to try to address these infinities. A lot of infinities here. And that, that is a nasty integral that I have not been able to solve.

• 2:14:20Speaker 04

  Yeah, yeah.

• 2:14:21Speaker 02

  I'm only looking at the cartoon picture, trying to interpret it. But if you want to help me with that, that'd be awesome.

• 2:14:29Speaker 02

  With the real math, that's some, I had to five or six kids started work on that. Gamma functions, error functions, these are not fun things.

• 2:14:36Speaker 04

  Yeah, the integrals are definitely hard.

• 2:14:38Speaker 02

  They are not hard. It's not a beautiful solution like Coulomb's law. It's different.

• 2:14:43Jesse Michels?

  Does the fact that Charles is talking about a time independent perturbation, which you kind of hadn't anticipated before the conversation, does that change anything as far as the viability in your mind with Q E D? Or is it, is that something you have to kind of?

• 2:14:56Speaker 04

  Well.

• 2:14:57Jesse Michels?

  Think about offline?

• 2:14:58Speaker 04

  You can do, you could, you could do perturbations with frequency. At the classical level. So if you're claiming it's a quantum effect at some point, I think, I believe, I mean. With the fire diagrams that you have, would there be any loops in the diagrams that you've been studying?

• 2:15:18Speaker 02

  Well, the zero disorders are there, right? The, the non, where they start and then the end, yeah.

• 2:15:23Speaker 04

  Also, I noticed.

• 2:15:23Speaker 02

  The self-energy you're talking about? Yeah.

• 2:15:26Speaker 04

  Yeah, there's self-energy.

• 2:15:27Speaker 02

  There's 12 terms and I think half of them are not very useful. But maybe the other half are, that's the, that's what I'm proposing. Maybe they're interesting. Because they don't, they don't close in like you would want them to. Can't make the picture nice and neat in your head. And so it's, it's, this is a game and I love this game because it's like, try to, try to use your mind and our brains are not good at this. If I take two charges, we know they can attract and we know they can repel. But if you didn't see this one and you see this one go there, go there, your brain will say, I can't do that. Or if I take two charges and I stick them on a box, don't let them touch. Take the electrodes away.

• 2:16:12Speaker 02

  Are they still attracting? Damn right, they are. For how long? Forever. So that is a fundamental property of charge fields. Which QD I think explains quite well. So, but is it conserving energy? You know, that's what you have to think about. Is it conserving energy? Still, you've removed all your energy to get that there. Why is it still there? So there's a little mind games with this, I think. Kind of helps. I think this exodus is kind of a, haha, here's another mind game for you.

• 2:16:44Speaker 04

  I mean, it is hard to imagine what is going on there. I have to experimentally, I don't know what's going on. I it, but it's curious because we have Noether's theorem, which describes energy momentum conservation from spacetime translation symmetry. And Noether was actually studying quantum field theory and discovered something profound about classical mechanics, about the conservation laws. But even still, things are conserved off shell. So it's hard to, as you're saying, I mean, maybe there's some charges that we're overlooking, right? But they're, honestly, it's at the point where if it appeared as if momentum conservation was violated,

• 2:17:28Speaker 04

  then you would claim that there's something else there that we don't understand, right? There must be something carrying that momentum. I mean, that's how the neutrino was discovered. Initially, they, they had these decay channels and they're accounting the energy, they're accounting for the energy. And it's like, wait a second, this, the bookkeeping isn't adding up.

• 2:17:49Jesse Michels?

  And then, isn't that how science kind of moves forward in some ways? I guess if you were to take your physics hat off and just as a human being, look at all of the kind of overwhelming anecdotal evidence. Cause I know you've, you've kind of systematically surveyed a lot of these like weird fringe experiments and exotic propulsion, free energy, all sorts of things like that. And to me, you know, with the, without the, any sort of physics background, I think you almost have to be dogmatic to say that there isn't some sort of there. There specifically around the lineage of the type of stuff that, that Charles is discussing. I don't know what, what you would say there. Yeah. What do you, what do you think? Because clearly that is a way often that science moves forward.

• 2:18:34Jesse Michels?

  You know, if you look at, you know, Thomas Kuhn and the, you know, uh, uh, structure of scientific revolutions, it's this like anomaly buildup and then that sort of breaks the dam. And then the theory often is playing catch up on the anomaly.

• 2:18:46Speaker 04

  Yeah, definitely. It can go both ways as well. But I mean, certainly out of all of these weird phenomena that seem to not fit into conventional theory. I mean, I would say your experimental results are, you know, gotta be in the top 10 in terms of most convincing things I've seen. I mean, there's other groups where they do one experiment and they're measuring pico Newton forces. Right? We've all heard these stories and then people get in debates. Oh, is it some experimental error? Obviously, as you point out, you're not a hundred percent sure. There could be some prosaic explanation, but the fact that you've done so many different things and you're seeing the self-consistency. I mean, even as a scientist, I have to say that is encouraging and we should explore this further.

• 2:19:30Speaker 04

  It's not something we should just sweep under the rug and forget about.

• 2:19:34Jesse Michels?

  What would be your best way? You know, obviously you haven't like rigorously, uh, kind of studied the experiment itself. You haven't been like onsite with them, but would you have any way of explaining it away? Like if he is controlling for and eliminating this ion wind effect and actually showing that in a vacuum chamber, you get more thrust, you know, that to me, that's feels like pretty, pretty convincing. And then obviously this is being done in a Faraday cage, you know, so there's no electric field interference. Is there any way that you could kind of poke at it or kind of straw man it from afar?

• 2:20:11Speaker 04

  Honestly, no. And I I've interacted with Drew multiple times on APEC with Tim Ventura. I've had private communications with him. I've interacted with him publicly. I've seen these, I've seen him, his iteration rate, first of all, is phenomenal, right? He's just always testing new things, trying different stacks with different materials and different geometries. And he's really dialing it in. It's really impressive, the innovation rate that he's going at and your whole team. And so, I mean, if you've checked all these things that you say you've checked, right? I, you know, I obviously I haven't been in the lab with you, but it is, I can't think of anything, to be honest.

• 2:20:53Speaker 04

  I can't think of any prosaic explanation. I mean, if, you know, you're right, there's not much magnetic stuff going on. There's a lot of electrostatics, right? Not much charge moving. I, it's just so mind blowing though. I mean, the idea that the claim is you power it up and then you unplug it from the wall and then the thrust continues. And indefinitely, well, you know, obviously you haven't tested it for an infinite amount of time. Drew would sometimes act as if it would last forever. I mean, my skeptical brain is saying, well, eventually wouldn't that capacitor discharge? But still, even if it lasts a day, you know, it seems like it lasts longer than a day from what you guys have done.

• 2:21:35Speaker 04

  As far as I can tell, in terms of the claims, it's, it's, it's hard to imagine how, how could that be continued? Like the fact that it's not getting drained, you would think, okay, well, wouldn't it require energy to get that thrust? Wouldn't that quickly drain the capacitor? It doesn't seem to be what you're claiming.

• 2:21:53Jesse Michels?

  Yeah, that's the hard part.

• 2:21:54Speaker 04

  Tested it in so many different ways that it's. It's a tough challenge for anyone to try to describe what's going on there. It's very mysterious.

• 2:22:03Jesse Michels?

  You're also friends with and looked at the experiments done by Falcon Space in this sort of area, in this sort of electrogravitic or maybe, you know, new electrostatic force area. They basically tried to pull off the Bifield Brown effect. What was your take on that experiment?

• 2:22:23Speaker 04

  Yeah, so it was actually interesting. It was curious. So it's not scientifically conclusive. Not all the experimental errors ruled out, but there was something interesting that was seen where they did the tests at not too low pressure and they noticed it's spinning in one direction. And then eventually they kept pumping down further and further. And eventually it started spinning in the other direction, which it's qualitative. We don't know how strong the force is. I don't know what the friction was. They had a nice mechanism to hold it up so it minimized the friction using magnets, which introduces additional potential errors. But I'm not too worried about the magnets.

• 2:23:07Speaker 04

  But if you're going to do a demonstration for others that are skeptical, you should probably maybe think to do it another way. So it was, I think it was interesting and it was worth further study. It's suggestive, but not conclusive, I would say, where more work is needed.

• 2:23:23Jesse Michels?

  Because of the magnets or what?

• 2:23:25Speaker 04

  Well, no, honestly, so there was this other thing where the way the high voltage was delivered to the thrusters on one end, it used the spiraling around the chamber. I mean, that's something you'd point at and say, ah, let's just say it's that. Honestly, I doubt it would be causing what was seen, but you know, it's something to consider. Really, to get a confirmed thing, it's best to do multiple tests, right? Not just one and do it in different ways. But really another issue potentially was the fact that there were these discharges that were observed. And Tim Ventura was actually one of the first to kind of get a little skeptical of Sun degree

• 2:24:06Speaker 04

  because he had worked with those ion lifters back in the day with the triangular ones and the tinfoil. And so he had worked with high voltage and he was aware because. It took me time to realize this. You would think naively, well, okay, there's this, all this ion wind stuff, and that's because you're ionizing the air. So you just remove the air and do it in vacuum and I'm good, right? No ion wind to worry about. But what if there's ions or electrons literally flying off the thruster itself? Or what if the wires connecting them, we could see different discharges that were occurring. So what if you're spraying out these ions?

• 2:24:46Speaker 04

  What if that's causing the force? So it's something that it's also amazing to look into. It's first of all, it's a challenge enough just to work with high vacuum systems. Then it's another challenge. I mean, you're well aware of this stuff to work with high voltage.

• 2:25:02Speaker 02

  Sure.

• 2:25:03Speaker 04

  But then to combine the two, it's remarkable.

• 2:25:06Speaker 02

  Yeah, you definitely want to enclose everything with the can. When I saw Mark's video, I was worried about the coil because that would be dubious. Why do you have a ground there? But it's not a ground, I guess, is the high voltage wire. But it's interesting that it went one way, like you would expect if it was a Corona wind and then you pump it down, goes the other way. That would be, that's cool to see.

• 2:25:28Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 2:25:29Speaker 02

  But you don't, like you say, you don't want the discharges. You don't want the current coming off, even in a high vacuum. You'll get field emission, it's called.

• 2:25:36Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 2:25:37Speaker 02

  From material. So you want to kind of make sure you encapsulate everything. So that would be the only thing that might be a hiccup is the possibility of field emission. But I've not seen the experiment. So, but that's easy to prevent. You can Corona dope it. You can do all kinds of things to kind of prevent that encapsulate it. But yeah.

• 2:25:54Speaker 04

  Yeah. So I found it encouraging, but you gotta keep studying further, I think, you know, to really get to the bottom of it.

• 2:26:02Jesse Michels?

  Well, on that note, I know we went deep into all sorts of, you know, out there, out there theories. But this was super, super helpful. And if you were to give Charles any advice as far as kind of fleshing out his theory, or, you know, places to look, what would it be?

• 2:26:19Speaker 04

  Well, I would say, yeah. So if you're doing it, you could consider two different types of perturbation theory at the same time. So you can do the time independent one, and you can do the H bar, the quantum corrections as well. So you could keep track of both of those. It's a little more complicated. You might not even need the time independent assumption, but since you're working with electrics I also see why you're doing that. So it could make sense to do that approximation because it would simplify things, but then you just gotta be, yeah, I mean, if it's truly DC, yeah, it probably would be a good approximation to do. Yeah, so I think that would be one thing to do.

• 2:26:58Speaker 04

  Just, yeah, look into renormalization, the self-energy, those perturbative corrections can affect the electron self-energy. Also, this is a puzzling thing. If you look at the Dirac spinner, which is used for your electron in quantum electrodynamics, the spinner field, those equations, you can still have classical equations of motion for a quantum field, and those equations might have E or H bar or C. So you can get alpha in thing in classical equations, but it's subtle because it's a quantum field theory, but you know, there's a classical limit there. So, yeah, I would say, I honestly just try to learn as much as

• 2:27:40Speaker 04

  you can. Keep trying to, you know, we can, we can correspond via email and try to talk more about quantum electrodynamics and we'll see. I, you know, maybe something more is needed, but I think it's a good effort to at least see where does quantum electrodynamics take you.

• 2:27:56Speaker 02

  Sure.

• 2:27:56Speaker 04

  But also, just recognize it is a possibility that the results you're finding can't be described by quantum electrodynamics. Just keep that in mind.

• 2:28:05Speaker 02

  Yeah, you know, the reason why we like to use the QED, we haven't mentioned it much, but because of the alpha that shows up experimentally. You know, that's, that's really cool. Some the fine structures, you know, showing up in terms of the forces and fine structure constant squared. So it's always some kind of function of alpha keeps showing up experimentally. There's not too many experiments you could do in your garage to get you an alpha.

• 2:28:27Speaker 04

  And that points towards quantum electrodynamics.

• 2:28:29Speaker 02

  It points to quantum.

• 2:28:30Speaker 04

  Quantum in general.

• 2:28:31Speaker 02

  Yeah. No one knows where alpha comes from. I don't think anyone has a clue, but it's there.

• 2:28:36Jesse Michels?

  Why does the fact that a fine structure constant is showing up point towards quantum mechanical effect?

• 2:28:44Speaker 02

  That's a good question.

• 2:28:45Jesse Michels?

  So.

• 2:28:46Speaker 02

  It's the coupling between fields and charge is what alpha.

• 2:28:48Jesse Michels?

  Okay, okay.

• 2:28:49Speaker 02

  It's not too.

• 2:28:50Jesse Michels?

  So it's like a, it's like a primitive in quantum mechanics and that keeps showing up.

• 2:28:54Speaker 02

  In physics in general, it shows up all over the place.

• 2:28:57Jesse Michels?

  Yeah, yeah, yeah.

• 2:28:57Speaker 04

  There's also another way to look at it where you can kind of look at it from a natural unit perspective and just kind of set H bar and C to one. I know a lot of people might not like that, but. Sorry.

• 2:29:08Speaker 02

  I don't like that.

• 2:29:08Speaker 04

  Yeah, I can understand why. I get what you're saying, but I mean, at the end of the day, alpha is proportional to, was it E squared? And.

• 2:29:16Speaker 02

  Yeah.

• 2:29:17Speaker 04

  The, the interaction term between the electron and the photon introduces a factor of alpha. So once you, you have that Feynman vertex where you have electron, positron and photon, there's like a factor of alpha there.

• 2:29:30Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 2:29:31Speaker 04

  And so if you're going to build these loop order corrections, you're going to need more vertices. So you will require more factors of alpha as you go out in the, you know, the quantum perturbation theory. However, just remember that even for the Coulomb force where it's a tree diagram, no loops. There's still, you could do a unitarity cut on that photon internal line. And there's still two interaction vertices, alpha and alpha that get multiplied together even for a classical process. So certainly tracking powers of alpha is helpful in perturbation theory. But just keep in mind that it comes in at the classical level as well.

• 2:30:14Speaker 02

  It's exciting, yeah, because I've been doing the deriving the orders of magnitude between third order. I think, yeah, I didn't go to fourth order, but yeah, I actually did fourth order, third order, second order, first order. And you could see the perturbations in alpha. Alpha is nice to use because it's, you know, dimensionless.

• 2:30:31Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 2:30:31Speaker 02

  It's the ratio of the energy of two charges divided by a photon of that same wavelength. Of where those two, how far apart those two charges are. So that's what alpha is. It's the ratio of two energies. That's the best way to to describe the Sommerfeld constant. So.

• 2:30:48Speaker 04

  Oh, there was something else I want to mention you to. You'd mentioned the term hidden momentum. So I believe there is work, certainly by the 1980s, where if, because in classical electrodynamics, the pointing vector is what carries the momentum density and that is proportional to E cross B. And so there were experiments where people, part of the reason why hidden momentum was found was in statics as well, where they had an electric field that was static and a magnetic field that was static and they're perpendicular. So you get this E cross B. And it was puzzling because you would have a pointing vector implying there's

• 2:31:29Speaker 04

  momentum. But, I mean, I'm pretty sure if you just take a symmetric capacitor with an electric field going through and then you put it inside a solenoid with a magnetic field perpendicular, nothing's going to thrust, right? And the hidden momentum is what describes what cancels out so that you don't get thrust in those experiments. So that's just another thing to look into.

• 2:31:52Speaker 02

  That's where I started, right? So I started looking at field momentum being converted into linear angular, linear momentum. And the crux was this 1970s hidden momentum, which is a relativistic effect. So even if you have a magnetic field, a current, you can always draw that as a kind of a square. And whenever there's the Faraday field, it will accelerate charges in one loop and decelerate them in the other loop. So it's basically a kind of a change of momentum physically of the loop of the electrons hitting the walls. That's how they describe the hidden momentum. So every time you have a static E cross B, nothing moves. Like you can't, you have a highly charged electric, you know, electric charge to a bar magnet doesn't fly across the room because of the hidden momentum.

• 2:32:34Speaker 02

  So that can be scaled down microscopically. So even the magnetic moments can be pictured as little currents. And they have hidden momentum. They're relativistic. So I first started out for last, I started about in the 2000s to look at maybe the conversion from field momentum to mechanical momentum could happen like it does in the angular case, but for linear momentum, if there's no hidden momentum. So what's the opposite of relativistic charges moving? Electrostatics.

• 2:33:05Speaker 02

  Keep the charges static. Do static charges possess hidden momentum? And that's my, my theory was it didn't. So that led me down to that path where in 2010, I saw the forces initially. Could have been something else, but that's where I started. And it wasn't until after two years working with Drew, I said, oh, Drew's got the, he's got the conversion down from field momentum to mechanical momentum without static charges. My wife pointed that out. And so we did the test. And so for two years, we thought that's what the case wasn't until 2018, where I realized that I didn't even need the current. So I'm not even setting up the E cross B fields anymore. To this, there's two electric fields and one magnetic field for that all to work. You have the E cross B and then you,

• 2:33:51Speaker 02

  you kill the B to make a second E field called the Faraday's law field to convert it into mechanical momentum. But if you don't have hidden momentum, you should see thrust. So that's what we thought we were seeing until I realized just before going on a trip that I didn't even need a B field or a current. So, oh man, I'm in pure electrostatics mode.

• 2:34:16Jesse Michels?

  Whoa.

• 2:34:18Speaker 02

  So I don't have any field momentum, which was good and bad.

• 2:34:23Speaker 02

  Let us down this path.

• 2:34:24Jesse Michels?

  Yeah.

• 2:34:25Speaker 02

  Okay. So now we'll have to study that first before going back to that, which is far more complicated.

• 2:34:30Jesse Michels?

  Super fascinating. Well, this has been a really fun discussion. David, thank you so much for lending your expertise here and for, you know, talking to Charles in a, in a way that's clearly like not dogmatic about the experimental results. And then kind of helping sharpen his, his blade on the quantum electrodynamics. So really appreciate you both.

• 2:34:51Speaker 02

  Thank you.

• 2:34:52Speaker 04

  Thanks for having us and it's a pleasure meeting you.

• 2:34:54Speaker 02

  It's a pleasure meeting you too. Thank you.

• 2:35:42Speaker 00

  Stone Fire Naan is made with real buttermilk and ghee. It's the perfect flatbread for any occasion.

• 2:35:48Speaker 01

  I put out Stone Fire Naan with dips at every dinner party.

• 2:35:51Speaker 00

  I make naan grilled cheese when my daughter has friends over. I use Stone Fire Naan to reward the humans who do my bidding.

• 2:35:57Speaker 01

  Right, it's perfect for camping trips.

• 2:36:00Speaker 00

  Dance for it, feeble mortal.

• 2:36:02Speaker 01

  Sorry, is he talking to me or...

• 2:36:05Speaker 00

  Dance.

• 2:36:07Speaker 00

  From our tradition to yours, Stone Fire. Together be naan. Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile. I don't know if you knew this, but anyone can get the same premium wireless for $15 a month plan that I've been enjoying. It's not just for celebrities, so do like I did and have one of your assistant's assistants switch you to Mint Mobile today. I'm told it's super easy to do at mintmobile.com/switch. Upfront payment of $45 for three-month plan, equivalent to $15 per month required. Intro rate first three months only, then full price plan options available. Taxes and fees extra. See full terms at mintmobile.com.