Navy Scientist Holds Patents for UFO Technology

Stop leaving yourself vulnerable to data breaches. Go to my sponsor https://aura.com/jessemichels to get a 14-day free trial and see if any of your data has been exposed. Today's American Alchemist is Navy physicist Salvatore Pais. Enjoy! Join our Whop! Exclusive Videos & Community Calls ➤ https://whop.com/americanalchemypremium Become a Member of American Alchemy: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCuG2KzrIMe3qoNcuDVpwnXw/join Navy scientist Salvatore Pais reveals his patents on UFO-like tech and an exotic spacetime-warping “superforce”. Are we on the brink of harnessing breakthrough propulsion once deemed science fiction? Key points below: 1. Inertial Mass Reduction: Pais describes a “P-effect” using high-frequency fields to decrease an object’s mass. 2. High-Frequency Gravity Waves: Pais links these waves to next-generation propulsion and cautions about their weaponization. 3. Room-Temperature Superconductivity: Pais sees a path to ambient superconductors, a game-changer for energy, transport and civil infrastructure. 4. Reverse-Engineering vs. Human Ingenuity: Pais suggests some UFO-like tech may be human-made dating back to Heaviside’s electromagnetic models in the 1890’s (rather than solely extraterrestrial). 5. Call for Global Unity: Pais envisions a united earth in light of very real non-human presence. 6. Physics at the Breaking Point: Pais believes pushing beyond standard models can open entirely new frontiers in science. Timestamps: 00:00 Introduction 03:05 Sal's Background 12:40 Man-Made vs. ET Technology 16:47 New Perspectives on Electrodynamics 19:18 The Path to Exotic Concepts 21:32 High-Frequency Gravitational Wave Exploration 25:16 Understanding the Pais Effect 27:03 Terahertz Frequencies and Quantum Vacuum 32:27 Engineering Challenges in Superconductivity 36:33 Room Temperature Superconductors 38:56 The Pais Effect and Quantum Mechanics 42:07 The Future of Superconductivity 43:58 Building the Next Generation Technology 47:39 Proliferation of Advanced Technologies 49:58 High-Frequency Gravitational Wave Applications 52:34 The Intersection of Science and Security 57:34 The External Threat 59:51 Historical Reset Events 1:01:03 The UFO Phenomenon 1:02:36 The Science of Remote Viewing 1:06:29 Mind-Matter Connection 1:10:40 Torsion and Gravity 1:13:06 Bob Lazar's Insights 1:15:25 Electrodynamics and Exotic Waves 1:20:01 The Legacy of Tesla 1:24:59 Unification as a Solution 1:27:42 Reflections on Human Nature 1:30:15 The Balance of Light and Darkness 1:33:33 Pushing Boundaries in Physics 1:36:41 The Role of Nikola Tesla 1:39:22 Uncovering Historical Mysteries 1:41:30 The Future of Alien Technology 1:48:03 The Need for Unity 1:52:03 The Farce of Disclosure INSTAGRAM ➤ https://www.instagram.com/jessemichelsofficial TWITTER ➤ https://twitter.com/AlchemyAmerican EMAIL/BOOKINGS ➤ [email protected] #physics #science #uap #navy #aliens Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

• 0:00Speaker 00

  I truly think that one day we must unite the factions. Because I think one day we shall have an external enemy. And by external enemy, I mean

• 0:10Speaker 01

  Very external.

• 0:11Speaker 00

  NHI. Think of the Earth. We are a very yummy apple. I think remote action is possible. Can you imagine stopping at heart just by thinking about it? Say, from Qatar. That's some scary shit.

• 0:24Speaker 01

  You have spoken publicly with these MH370 videos. And it seemed like the civilian aircraft just disappeared in the Southeast Asian territory.

• 0:33Speaker 00

  The most complex of problems has the simplest of solutions depending on perspective. When I saw that thing open up, I saw the Pise effect, actually. This is the Pise effect, come on, dog. So we're talking about artificial singularity.

• 0:51Speaker 02

  Different parts of the brain have different activities. But you know that, don't you?

• 0:58Speaker 03

  We're in people that you love. Maybe you should interview me.

• 1:21Speaker 01

  So excited to be here. This has been a long time coming. Because I've consumed a lot of your content. Before we get into our guest today, I want to present our co-host, the esteemed pseudonymously named Jack. He has to go under a pseudonym. He works in some sensitive areas, but he is very familiar with some of these heterodox scientific frameworks. And so, allah, my interview with Hal Puthoff and Eric Weinstein. Sometimes I get out of my depths scientifically, and I definitely am with Sal Pise. And so, I'm very excited to have Jack here. Thank you for joining us. Yeah, thrilled to be here. Thank you. What are you wearing, first off?

• 1:58Speaker 04

  Thought I'd give a little props to a very successful organization, eponymously known as Skunk Works. So, thank you for your service.

• 2:07Speaker 01

  There you go. And we have an amazing Navy scientist who has sent shockwaves in kind of UFO world. It's interesting, in 2017, you had revelations around the existence of UFO study groups and stuff, ATIP, OSIP, that sort of thing. But you also had these patents that were filed by a guy who was right here named Sal Payes, which touch on some very interesting subjects. One might even say that they seem to dovetail with how you might build a UFO. And we have a hat right here, which he's offered me at the beginning of the show, which is very nice. It's an F-35 hat. So, thank you, Sal. Thank you for being here.

• 2:48Speaker 00

  You're very welcome, friend. You're very welcome. And never, remember, as far as Hal Puthoff, as far as Eric Weinstein and Jack here, trust me, you are at that level. You're able to, trust me on this. I've seen many podcasts and you're one of the best. So, absolutely. Kudos to you, brother.

• 3:09Speaker 01

  Agree to disagree, but I'm happy to be the last mile of cogent distribution on deeper people like yourself. So, do you have any kind of disclaimers at the top? Because you are in very sensitive areas as well, and I want to make sure we don't get any tripwires.

• 3:25Speaker 00

  Let me CYA right off the bat with, yes, my name is Salvatore Chisar Payes. I work for the United States Navy. I used to work for the United States Space Force. Let me say at this time that I come on this podcast as a private citizen, and my opinion, my statements, everything I say, everything I have said is my own. The Navy and the Space Force are not responsible for any of these statements whatsoever. And also, I would like to say that I'm not on this program, on this podcast, to E-Cubed, in other words, to enlighten and educate the enemy. So, certain things that I think certain subject matter that we

• 4:09Speaker 00

  may touch upon, if it deals for certain frequency, Jack, you know this well. We keep numbers out of play and certain things that if you, for example, see me slip, please orient me and guide me accordingly.

• 4:23Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 4:24Speaker 01

  Before we dive into today's amazing episode of American Alchemy, I want to thank Aura for being the amazing sponsor of this show. Have you ever Googled yourself or maybe a friend and been totally freaked out by how much personal info popped up? I did it once and saw old addresses, phone numbers, stuff I didn't even realize was out there. Honestly, it made me wonder who else could see all of that. In 2024, there were multiple high-level data breaches, including a breach of the National Public Database. The incident compromised over 2.9 billion records used for background checks, including critical personal information such as full names, addresses, dates of birth, phone numbers,

• 5:04Speaker 01

  and most importantly, social security numbers. Their data broker opt-out tool goes after those shady sites that scrape and sell your info, so you're less of a sitting duck for scammers. Plus, Aura provides identity theft protection, monitoring billions of data points, everything from your social security number to your bank info, and lets you know fast if something suspicious shows up. If the worst happens, each adult on your plan gets $1 million in identity theft insurance, up to $5 million total if you have five adults. Aura also has other great features like a VPN and antivirus that all come bundled in an easy-to-use app. I'm not leaving my data out there for anyone to grab, and you shouldn't

• 5:47Speaker 01

  either. The best part is I get all of this in one app at an affordable price. I'm not leaving myself and my family vulnerable to data breaches and brokers. And if you don't want to either, you can go to aura.com/jessymichaels, Michaels with no A, to try two weeks for free. That should be enough time for Aura to find out if any of your personal data is exposed and for you to realize that Aura is a no-brainer.

• 6:12Speaker 04

  As Dave Grush said, "We're not here to help the adversary do their job."

• 6:15Speaker 00

  Absolutely.

• 6:17Speaker 00

  Mr. Grush is 100%. Correctly.

• 6:20Speaker 01

  But simultaneous to that, it's actually a national security risk. Extremely intelligent STEM students growing up in the wrong frameworks and not being privy to any of this stuff and thinking it's all flattery. That seems like actually a matter of national security risk.

• 6:37Speaker 00

  Yes.

• 6:38Speaker 04

  It's an absolutely broken paradigm. You're right. And it's something that has wheedled its way inside the R and D framework of our national defense infrastructure. And it's kneecap us from making critical advances that have national security implications.

• 6:54Speaker 00

  Absolutely.

• 6:55Speaker 01

  I want to start with a kind of autobiographical, because it's interesting. You go on all these podcasts and you're talking about the science and I want to get into the science and I think Jack can help kind of drive some of the conversation there. But who are you? Where are you from? How'd you get into this stuff?

• 7:11Speaker 00

  Oh, wow. Origins?

• 7:14Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 7:14Speaker 00

  All right. My name is Salvatore Cesar Paies. That's the way you pronounce it in Romanian. I was born in Romania, in Bucharest, Romania, as a matter of fact, capital of Romania. I came here when I was about 13 and a half of age, Queens, New York City, Queens, Queens boy, as they say, still say coffee and other things as well. Love a New York ruben. Oh, my God, you know, from the Brooklyn deli, a real ruben. Anyway, I'm not gonna, I'm gonna keep it nice since this is a family show, so it's all right.

• 7:55Speaker 00

  Every now and then I'll let it slip. The people that know me know that almost every other word, the real Salvatore will use is the F words. So every now, like you would not believe, I can weave a tapestry of obscenity second to none. Took that from a Christmas story, but hey, you know, every now and then you don't have to be an original. So, yeah, so again, I was born in Romania. I came here as a young kid. I grew up in the public education system. I went to Brooklyn.

• 8:27Speaker 00

  In Brooklyn, to one of the well-known high schools there was Brooklyn Technical High School. Not as on the same level as Bronx High School of Science or Stuyvesant in Manhattan, but from a technical.

• 8:44Speaker 00

  Point of view is very well known and very well liked. And then I went to Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio. No, it's not a military school. It's actually very highly accredited. It usually makes the US News top 50 universities almost every year. And I love my CWR. I would never exchange it, for example, going to MIT or any other school. It's just, I was brought up there and I stayed there. I did my graduate studies there. Then I was extremely fortunate to have, how should I say, a job at Northrop Grumman.

• 9:27Speaker 00

  Well, before then, I had a couple of stints in New York, Electronic Systems Associates, Cisco and Hennessy. But I was extremely fortunate to work for Northrop Grumman Corporation and Advanced Systems, Advanced Concepts and one other things. And then I transitioned to the USPTO. At the time, it was Alexandria, Virginia. They had moved from Crystal City. And then I was fortunate enough to come here, now there.

• 10:05Speaker 00

  And then certain things occurred and I was fortunate to work for Strategic Systems Programs at the Washington Navy Yard. And then I went for the Space Force and then came back.

• 10:25Speaker 01

  And so in 2017, you're probably most known for these patents.

• 10:29Speaker 00

  Yeah.

• 10:29Speaker 01

  The title of the patent just says a lot. Hybrid craft using an inertial mass modification device. How does one even get into a topic like that?

• 10:41Speaker 00

  I was very interested. I've seen certain things as far as what has been shown on certain documentaries. And then...

• 10:53Speaker 01

  Any documentaries or then Z convention?

• 10:56Speaker 00

  It was a lot of things that were done by Dr. Stephen Greer.

• 11:01Speaker 01

  Okay.

• 11:01Speaker 00

  And a great deal of things, as a matter of fact, I hold them in very high esteem. I'm very, I feel it's very unfortunate that the UFO field seems to be so divided. It's almost as divided as the country is at this point in time. And I wish people were more unified. I've always been a person that drives toward unification, unification of concepts, ideas. You can always work things out. You can always reach a compromise, always. And I think everybody benefits as a result. The alternative is the enemy wins. When we fight amongst each other,

• 11:46Speaker 00

  our strength is divided, is weakened. The enemy will always take force, take strength from that.

• 11:52Speaker 01

  So you're watching like Close Encounters of the Fifth Conline or Unacknowledged, things like that.

• 11:58Speaker 00

  Absolutely.

• 11:58Speaker 01

  How do these crafts?

• 12:00Speaker 00

  Operate. How do they work?

• 12:02Speaker 01

  How do they work?

• 12:03Speaker 00

  And then they work.

• 12:03Speaker 01

  So this patent is somewhat you kind of reverse engineering it. How, you know, you think they work based on the observables and these sorts of.

• 12:13Speaker 00

  Exactly. The whole idea is it can't all be Newtonian propulsion. You basically take something, you throw it out the back and the thing move forwards. The whole idea of the Newtonian third law of action, reaction can't all be Newtonian. What if there's non-Newtonian propulsion? So in other words, can we do something to the field that we operate in? The gravitational field, for example, to make objects have diminished inertia.

• 12:46Speaker 01

  Yep.

• 12:46Speaker 00

  Since inertial mass and gravitational mass, after all, there is equivalence between them.

• 12:51Speaker 01

  So I have a dumb question. You publish a thing like this and it seems like pretty well synthesized and have researched. Why doesn't, you know, presumably there are legacy programs. If you believe David Gresh, reverse engineering this stuff, why don't they immediately kind of hit you up?

• 13:07Speaker 00

  No idea whatsoever. As a matter of fact, at one point in time, I almost expected to be contacted. To be so then the idea almost occurred to me almost instantaneously that they must have this somewhere.

• 13:24Speaker 01

  They've already sort of.

• 13:25Speaker 00

  That they have figured it out and they already operating certain devices. And and then I hear these things about the reverse engineering craft. And then that thing bothers me because everything I've done is really based on all of Oliver Heaviside's version of Maxwell's equation.

• 13:43Speaker 01

  Yep.

• 13:43Speaker 00

  The four equation for unknowns that electrical engineers have have have grown up to love and use. Thank God, because the original were absolute transcendent, extremely.

• 13:57Speaker 04

  An unusual, yeah, unusable, yeah.

• 13:59Speaker 00

  Quaternian.

• 14:00Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 14:01Speaker 00

  Formalism, my goodness. Yeah. So again, the genius of all of Oliver Heaviside. And all you do, couple it with the Harmonic oscillator and certain things occur based again on resonance. Resonance is extremely important because it talks to energy amplification.

• 14:19Speaker 01

  So you're implying that you don't believe in the sort of ET craft hypothesis? You think this is all sort of made.

• 14:26Speaker 04

  Or do you think you've just stumbled across the same physics of operation?

• 14:29Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 14:30Speaker 00

  I believe that there's manmade tech and there's ET tech. It's possible the ET tech was reverse engineered from gifts or craft that were found. Historical items, who knows where and how.

• 14:47Speaker 00

  And there's another avenue, this manmade tech. Why can we have that kind of acumen, that kind of mind? You mean only these, they call non-human?

• 15:03Speaker 04

  Non-human intelligence.

• 15:05Speaker 00

  Only NHI can have this kind of intellect? Why can we?

• 15:11Speaker 00

  I mean, we should take pride in who we are, homo sapiens sapiens. We represent a certain intellect.

• 15:18Speaker 04

  And this is an interesting question. Are there multiple branches, multiple tech trees that could be filtering their way through the Defense Intelligence Base? Some of them approachably nuts and boltish from a technology that's a couple of hundred years more advanced than us, and then other examples that are far more exotic, that when you open them up, you see nothing familiar, you see nothing recognizable.

• 15:41Speaker 00

  Absolutely. So in other words, there's man-made tech and ET tech, and I think you can tell them apart. The one thing that struck me, based on what I came to understand from the idea of the superforce, if you take the gravitational field equations of Einstein, you can readily deduce that the superforce acting on the spatial-temporal geometric structure, what we understand as a quantum vacuum, locally, can actually give birth, generate energy density.

• 16:16Speaker 04

  Right. This is the idea of Robert Wheeler, the notion that energy density determines the shape of spacetime or the shape of the quantum vacuum, and the quantum vacuum determines the propagation of that energy density.

• 16:26Speaker 00

  And the superforce equation, which is really a re-rendering of the Einstein gravitational field equations, talks to this, talks to the... And then, Bob Lazar mentioned at one point that it seemed to him that the so-called sports model was as if grown out of the vacuum itself, absolutely smooth, like a 3D printing out of the spacetime fabric itself. The superforce speaks to that directly.

• 16:55Speaker 01

  Are you familiar with Ken Shoulders' work?

• 16:58Speaker 00

  Of exactly, vacuum objects. I've heard, I've read certain papers as well.

• 17:04Speaker 04

  It's very interesting, this idea of the vehicle being 3D-printed out of the quantum vacuum, because we can't seem to quite understand exactly, because when you talk about chemical vapor deposition, the manufacturing techniques associated with making very small nano-structured heterolab... Lattices, you know, my graduate work, for instance, is in topological material physics. And so we do know more than is generally acknowledged about how to manufacture those lattices. But there is still, we don't have a lot of control over where exactly the atoms go. We just spit them out and physics takes over and it deposits them where it wants to deposit them in the lattice. So if you need them to be an extremely specific lattice lattice points. And then you need to do layer after layer after layer to get these really novel behaviors.

• 17:49Speaker 04

  You know, topological superconducting layers, topological insulative layers, Joseph's injunctions. And then, and then one after the other. We don't know how to do that. So does that get 3D printed somehow?

• 18:00Speaker 01

  Hmm. Fascinating. Okay. Well, I want to, we're getting deep, quick. I want to just for the, for the mass audience, kind of lay some scaffolding, lay the groundwork. So you mentioned Heaviside. Most people now, when it comes to kind of classical electrodynamics, go off of all your Oliver Heaviside's kind of simplification of Maxwell's equation.

• 18:20Speaker 00

  Absolutely.

• 18:21Speaker 01

  So where is conventional classical electrodynamics off? Where you think you've found kind of a, you know, a different branch of Heaviside? Because most people adhere to him, right?

• 18:32Speaker 00

  This is not anything new. This is not new physics. This is, this is a new perspective on all physics. All our time was taking the Heaviside version of Maxwell's equation, couple them with a harmonic oscillator and shown that you get non-linearity with respect to the angacy, the angular frequency, either vibration and or spin. Because as you well know, the mathematics is heavily similar.

• 18:56Speaker 01

  Right.

• 18:57Speaker 00

  And, and, and come up with, on the second condition, you get resonance condition.

• 19:02Speaker 04

  So you get these emergent phenomena that are not immediately obvious under normal circumstances.

• 19:07Speaker 01

  So let's, let's break it down. What is a harmonic oscillator?

• 19:11Speaker 00

  A harmonic oscillator, if you think of, of the best way to describe it is from Hooke's law. The whole idea of F equal minus k x.

• 19:21Speaker 04

  A spring.

• 19:21Speaker 00

  Exactly.

• 19:23Speaker 04

  A spring oscillator that makes the sign, you saw it in X, Y.

• 19:26Speaker 00

  Yes, sir. And then you just write, as you well know, from Newton's second law, and acceleration or M D.

• 19:38Speaker 00

  X double prime dt square. The whole idea of M A equal this minus K X. From that results your harmonicas.

• 19:48Speaker 04

  So we're talking about derivatives from differential calculus. And this is how you go from Y equals K X, Hooke's law.

• 19:53Speaker 00

  Extremely simple stuff.

• 19:54Speaker 01

  For you combining that concept with Heaviside.

• 20:00Speaker 00

  From there, from what happens is from a simple scaler. As a matter of fact, I send you what we presented to the patent examiner and you can have that with a podcast. You can actually, sure, absolutely. That's been already presented. It's in the public domain, so it's considered non-governmental.

• 20:25Speaker 01

  Unclassified.

• 20:26Speaker 00

  Unclassified. That's it. It's public domain since the USPT primary examiner, a gentleman by the name of Philip Bonzell, has already has put it into the public domain. It was given to him via phone conversation. So that particular PDF was sent to him and then we had a phone conversation with the now there attorney, Mr. Mark Glut, which by the way, was tremendous. And every one of the five patent applications, mind you, three of them became patents. The two that did not become patents are the ones that seem to be most mundane.

• 21:11Speaker 00

  The high frequency gravitational wave generator became a patent. The high energy electromagnetic field generator became a patent.

• 21:19Speaker 01

  The most exotic concepts.

• 21:21Speaker 00

  Using an inertial mass reduction device became a patent. After some doing, of course, Mr. Philip Bonzell was extremely in awe of the.

• 21:33Speaker 00

  He said, this is not possible. I mean neutron stars cannot produce this electric fields and magnetic fields. We're talking about electric fields on the order of 10 to the 18 volts per minute.

• 21:44Speaker 01

  So yeah, how do we get to that? If you're combining the harmonic oscillator with the heavy side stuff, how do you get to those, you know, those that big of electric field size?

• 21:53Speaker 00

  Again, it is in that PDF and you can follow the math. It's extremely simple, but the whole idea is that you get from the scaling analysis, you get a simple relationship that shows that it must be correct because the electric field, that relationship, it gives you a relation, so the scaling analysis of the heavy side version of Maxwell equation give you a relation, a simple relationship for the electric field strength E and also one for the magnetic induction, otherwise known as the magnetic flux density, also known as the B field. Well, from those two relationships, you can actually see that

• 22:37Speaker 00

  E max divided by B max equals C equals the speed of light, exactly what Maxwell showed.

• 22:44Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 22:45Speaker 00

  The whole idea.

• 22:45Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 22:46Speaker 00

  So that must be correct. And when you couple the harmonic oscillator within those two relationships, you get something for the B field, which is amazing. It shows, it shows variance with respect to angular frequency squared. So in other words.

• 23:07Speaker 04

  That's interesting. So you, now I'm tracking because in your patent, you, you have the, you use microwaves inside the annular channel and it's like you call it.

• 23:15Speaker 00

  To vibrate.

• 23:16Speaker 04

  Yes, to vibrate the atoms. You called it a confined photoelectric effect.

• 23:20Speaker 00

  That's exactly what it is.

• 23:22Speaker 04

  What I found interesting is the high temperature superconductor patent is necessary for the high frequency gravity wave patent.

• 23:28Speaker 00

  They speak to each other.

• 23:29Speaker 04

  Because there's a high Q factor associated with the high temperature.

• 23:32Speaker 00

  But for some reason, the patent examiner did not even take that into consideration.

• 23:36Speaker 04

  Sure.

• 23:37Speaker 00

  Exactly what you said, because then just by that simple argument from an enablement point of view, he should have passed or they should have passed the room temperature.

• 23:46Speaker 04

  So what allows that frequency?

• 23:47Speaker 00

  Victor Lakhno, Dr. Victor Lakhno, Russian of the Russian Academy of Sciences, actually shows in his archive, published. Paper. I've never been able to publish an archive. So the man must have, you know, either known some moderators. Again, he showed that my room temperature superconductor from a mechanism point of view could work. And yet, the patent examiner just refused to grant the patent. So.

• 24:18Speaker 04

  It was an incredible idea because you describe what is a proximity superconductor, probably also a topological superconductor.

• 24:28Speaker 00

  From someone that actually has that knowledge. Thank you, Jack.

• 24:31Speaker 04

  Yeah. So again, cased in a ceramic. And so it's the interfacial layer that is superconducting. That's where the current moves. And so when you've got these 100 terahertz microwaves inside the annular channel of your triangle patent, it's exciting and you're setting up that standing wave. And that's the

• 24:47Speaker 00

  That's what it's all about.

• 24:48Speaker 04

  The W squared term is why this blows up. Yeah.

• 24:52Speaker 00

  That omega squared is very important.

• 24:54Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 24:54Speaker 00

  And for some reason, people refuse to see the mathematics speaks to the physics.

• 24:58Speaker 04

  Are you worried at all about that huge B field and the surviving materials surviving it?

• 25:03Speaker 00

  Because that's something we have to be aware of.

• 25:05Speaker 04

  10 to the ninth Tesla fields, you know?

• 25:07Speaker 00

  As you will know, as you will know, you have to be extremely careful because usually when you go above even above 10 to the second, maybe even pushing 10 to the third Tesla, we're talking about tremendous

• 25:20Speaker 04

  Well, we've never even

• 25:21Speaker 00

  yields on the

• 25:22Speaker 04

  B field is a magnetic field, measured in Tesla. We've never made a magnetic field any larger than 30 Tesla, 40 Tesla.

• 25:28Speaker 00

  Usually.

• 25:29Speaker 04

  In CERN and gigantic electromagnetic

• 25:31Speaker 00

  I heard of something up to 120 Tesla, but that's a rumor.

• 25:35Speaker 04

  Yeah. And the earth's magnetic field is like a thousandth of a Tesla or 10,000th of a Tesla.

• 25:39Speaker 01

  How would you insulate materials from that size of magnetic field?

• 25:43Speaker 00

  You wouldn't.

• 25:43Speaker 04

  You wouldn't insulate it. You would have to, you'd use something that, this would all want to be synergistic. So you would want to use something that benefits in some way from exposure to that field rather than trying to fight physics. I think that's where really brilliant engineering comes in is that you're not going to put a bunch of things together that are parasitically affecting each other in negative ways. And you're trying to finagle your design space to make it work. You'd put a bunch of things together that actually help each other work better with their side effects.

• 26:12Speaker 00

  Physics is not enough. The engineering of the physics trumps everything else. Again, experiment trumps theory every time. And I believe trumps should become a verb.

• 26:24Speaker 01

  Have you worked on this from an engineering perspective at all? Or is it purely theoretical?

• 26:29Speaker 00

  We worked on a high-energy electromagnetic field-generated experiment at NADIR. However, we weren't able to obtain a charge, an electrical charge of more than 10 to the minus 8 coulombs. We need at least one coulomb to show that the Pais effect is correct. I call it the Pais effect not out of hubris, as people would choose to call it, but because it was something purely original. And I decided, why not? Let's call it something that's never been called before.

• 27:08Speaker 00

  And there was one other Paeis there, Abraham Paeis, the autobiographer of Einstein himself, a great physicist of his own right. I said, okay, let's couple the names.

• 27:21Speaker 04

  In the context of all we've talked about, would you step through your explanation of the Pais effect from a high level?

• 27:26Speaker 00

  Absolutely. Okay. Usually I define it as controlled motion of electrically charged objects, usually from solace to plasma, based on accelerated vibration and/or accelerated spin, giving rise to extremely high energy densities. Hence, electromagnetic energy fluxes. However, it can also be thought of as the production, the generation of high-energy densities based on certain vibratory fields of plasmas, cold plasmas.

• 28:09Speaker 00

  We're talking about plasmas that have been driven far from equilibrium.

• 28:13Speaker 04

  Your xenon gas in the annulus that you kind of move it back and forth with your 100 terahertz alternating electric field.

• 28:21Speaker 00

  The terahertz frequency is an interesting field that should be looked into. But again, we're not here to educate and enlighten the enemy, so that's as far as I go.

• 28:31Speaker 01

  Well, it is interesting, you know, how Putoff has talked about these kind of micron layers, magnesium bismuth, and he says that they, you know, microsize wave guides for terahertz. And so...

• 28:43Speaker 00

  There's a reason. Look into the slide presentation that I presented at the 2019 AIAA SciTech.

• 28:52Speaker 00

  That presentation, please also post that in your podcast along with the patent examiner interview, those slides. It makes a lot of sense, but look very carefully, slides four to slides nine in that particular presentation, and you'll see why the terahertz frequency is so important. It's be something that Dr. Eric W. Davis published in one of those DIA reports that are so

• 29:24Speaker 01

  Tele voltage.

• 29:26Speaker 00

  More to do with a certain macro dimension.

• 29:30Speaker 01

  A fifth dimension?

• 29:32Speaker 00

  A fifth dimension.

• 29:33Speaker 04

  Right. So there's a, I don't know how much you want to say, but there's a, there's a, there's a coupling factor between the electric field that you're setting up to generate high-frequency gravity waves and this oscillatory behavior of the particles, which potentially polarizes the quantum vacuum and allows you, the analogy that I have used is imagine you have a Ziploc bag that's full of water, but it's kind of sloppy. And you imagine you can push on it on one side and you set up a pressure gradient. So now you have the quantum vacuum doing work for you and pushing on you with its own pressure. And it has such a tremendous energy density, like 10 to the 44th, you know, calories per

• 30:16Speaker 04

  square cubic centimeter or something bananas, that it does an incredible amount of work.

• 30:21Speaker 01

  So literally, you know, this is based on metrical geometry. It's using

• 30:24Speaker 04

  It is.

• 30:25Speaker 01

  And quantum electrodynamics, even Feynman would say, or whatever, you know, the zero point is full of energy.

• 30:31Speaker 00

  Absolutely.

• 30:32Speaker 01

  And Hall-Puthoff talks a lot about, you know, polarizable back that you can electrically polarize. And so it's using a, kind of creating a gradient, basically, to propel an object.

• 30:44Speaker 04

  Some of your work has cited Max Born, Paul Durok, and

• 30:47Speaker 00

  I talk more to the swing element, breaking the swing element. Why do I talk about that? Not just because I want to make black holes, but the whole idea is that when you put more and more energy into a particular spacetime locality, you can actually unravel what we understand as continuum, spacetime continuum within that quantum

• 31:09Speaker 00

  Quantum vacuum limit, the Schwingel limit, really, this whole idea of generational particle and antiparticle fields, this, this is exactly what the Schwingel limit means. And it's on the order of ten to the thirty-three watts per meter square, speaking, corresponding to an energy density on the order of ten to the twenty-five joules per meter cubed.

• 31:33Speaker 04

  Enormous amounts of energy.

• 31:34Speaker 00

  Enormous, speaking again to those electric field strength of ten to the eighteen volts per meter, commensurate with a B field on the order of ten to the nine volts per meter again.

• 31:45Speaker 01

  What is this Schwingel limit?

• 31:47Speaker 00

  The Schwingel limit truly, it, it represents how much energy density you, the quote unquote quantum vacuum or rather spacetime fabric can withstand before it breaks apart.

• 32:00Speaker 04

  And how does this impact the black hole information limit, right? Because you've, you've talked about this.

• 32:06Speaker 00

  I, I've never looked too much into the information loss paradox.

• 32:11Speaker 01

  Summarize what you said for, sure. So, so basically, what you're saying is you're using this, you're using this electromagnetic amplification methodology.

• 32:24Speaker 00

  To create this energy density, yes.

• 32:26Speaker 01

  To essentially break the fabric of reality in a way that uses it as propulsion. Is that right?

• 32:32Speaker 00

  That's one hundred percent correct, because once you form this black hole, I truly believe that every black hole, quote unquote, has a white hole, has, there's a wormhole that truly forms between whatever that locality that you've broken the Schwingel limit and somewhere else that it talks to.

• 32:51Speaker 01

  And then what, where?

• 32:52Speaker 00

  Based on the superpods, believe it or not.

• 32:54Speaker 01

  What, what, where does?

• 32:55Speaker 00

  Quantum entanglement.

• 32:56Speaker 01

  Where does spin kind of, you know, where's, what, what has spin involved here?

• 33:03Speaker 00

  Spin? Oh, oh, oh. So in other words, you can accelerate either spin or accelerate in vibration, depending on which is easier from an engineering point of view. As you well know, when you spin something even surpassing ten to the four RPM, it's very hard to do so and keep this thing. So again, you might choose vibration. I just chose to to to put in both spin and vibration because the the mathematics is highly similar.

• 33:32Speaker 01

  Hmm.

• 33:32Speaker 00

  But from an engineering point of view, you'd want to go with vibration.

• 33:36Speaker 01

  When you say spin, you mean spin like literally spinning a thing, not like electric?

• 33:40Speaker 00

  Around its own.

• 33:41Speaker 04

  And this is interesting, right? There have been a number, there there's a there's a very common through line in a lot of alternate gravity manipulation approaches relating to either macroscopic spin vis a vis something called the Poems theory, Pope Osborne angular momentum synergy theory, something that Richard Eskridge looked into at Marshall. And then Alzaphon's nucleonic spin approaches that he sort of scrubbed with Feynman back in the 30s.

• 34:04Speaker 00

  Very complex, though.

• 34:06Speaker 04

  Yeah, yeah. But then you've got Ming Lee's work with the rotating superconductors, the YBCO.

• 34:11Speaker 01

  Also, Yu Pukletnov used rotating superconductors. And I didn't realize this, but Nick Cook, who wrote the hunt for zero point.

• 34:19Speaker 00

  In great book.

• 34:20Speaker 01

  Great book. He went up to Pukletnov and they were speaking. And for whatever reason, Nick Cook had this instinct to ask him about Victor Shalberg and some.

• 34:28Speaker 00

  Highway, actually.

• 34:29Speaker 01

  Yeah. And Pukletnov goes, yeah, my father was this Soviet agent at the time. Or is it your Russian agent?

• 34:36Speaker 00

  Yes.

• 34:36Speaker 01

  It's like, you know, uh.

• 34:38Speaker 00

  It was Soviet?

• 34:38Speaker 01

  Soviet, yeah. He was a, he said, my father was a Soviet agent and he was actually counter intel. And he was tasked with retrieving a lot of Shalberg's files. So Shalberg was one of the first people to talk about rotating, you know? I think in in his case, he had something called an impeller machine. This was pre kind of superconductivity.

• 34:58Speaker 00

  Based on implosion rather than, right? The whole idea of creation, again, a physics space and creation rather than destruction.

• 35:05Speaker 04

  Yeah. Well, and do you, do you think there's a?

• 35:08Speaker 01

  Yeah, but there was a connection between them.

• 35:10Speaker 00

  Absolutely.

• 35:11Speaker 01

  And then Pukletnov said, well, we just needed more higher RPMs.

• 35:15Speaker 00

  But again, from an engineering point of view, you know how detrimental that can be.

• 35:20Speaker 04

  It's very hard to do.

• 35:21Speaker 00

  It's very hard to do. That's why I chose.

• 35:23Speaker 04

  What are you going to put in there? Yeah, sure.

• 35:25Speaker 00

  And not just vibration on an electrically charged object, but.

• 35:29Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 35:29Speaker 01

  So you think that lineage doesn't make sense from an engineering standpoint? Actually, vibration makes more sense.

• 35:36Speaker 00

  Know why?

• 35:37Speaker 04

  Yeah, yeah, I mean, because

• 35:38Speaker 01

  Why?

• 35:39Speaker 04

  With with

• 35:40Speaker 00

  Let's listen to Jack. By the way, Jack is brilliant. No, no, far from it. Jesse, please. Please, one hundred percent. That is totally unfair. Never, never, ever say that.

• 35:52Speaker 01

  No, I mean, I, but I'm just, you guys are more advanced than me, so.

• 35:56Speaker 04

  Well, there's interesting things you can do when you set up standing waves and plasmas. I mean, you can, you can generate cold plasmas, as he was talking about. This is something I did in my graduate research back in the day with certain frequencies that will pull electrons off of the atoms. And then you can start doing interesting things with those electrons. And you can set up double layer plasmas and things like this. And, you know, if you can control where the charge goes. I mean, this is the problem with a lot of hot fusion experiments is that they can't control where the electrons go, they can't control where the hot ions go. And so you get all kinds of breaking radiation, you get Brems-Strahlung, and you get all kinds of, you know, tremendous losses. And this, this, this, this approach ameliorates that.

• 36:32Speaker 01

  So that's why you need cold plasma for the vibration.

• 36:35Speaker 04

  It's ideal, yes.

• 36:36Speaker 00

  Interesting. And how do you produce cold plasma? Not easy, not easy. That is E cubed.

• 36:43Speaker 01

  Okay, got it.

• 36:43Speaker 00

  Absolutely. We'll not touch on that.

• 36:45Speaker 04

  It's in the academic, it's in the academic literature, but perhaps we don't verify it.

• 36:49Speaker 00

  You're, since after all, this is my so-called

• 36:55Speaker 00

  first in-person interview.

• 36:57Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 36:57Speaker 00

  So I should offer something to the audience. It involves something that has been given the Nobel Prize Physics. Nobel Prize in Physics, I believe it was last year.

• 37:13Speaker 01

  Non-local reality, guys?

• 37:16Speaker 00

  Lasers.

• 37:16Speaker 01

  Lasers.

• 37:18Speaker 00

  Interesting. Leave it there.

• 37:19Speaker 01

  So, okay, so that's a better approach then. And then what does this have to do with superconductivity, I guess?

• 37:26Speaker 05

  You sound horrible.

• 37:27Speaker 01

  Oh, I feel worse. This flu is not playing around.

• 37:30Speaker 03

  Dad, you promised you'd be in my band, and it's showtime.

• 37:35Speaker 05

  Then it's Dayquil Intense Flu time.

• 37:36Speaker 06

  For fast and powerful relief of your flu symptoms, try Dayquil Intense Flu. Hit it.

• 37:41Speaker 03

  Yeah.

• 37:43Speaker 06

  Dayquil Intense Flu, the fast-acting daytime coughing, aching, aching, aching fever power through your flu medicine. Use is directed, keep out of reach of children.

• 37:53Speaker 00

  Believe it or not, everything is related at the quantum vacuum level.

• 37:57Speaker 04

  So I'll throw something out there. So in in superconducting physics, so we have this baseline theory called BCS theory.

• 38:05Speaker 00

  Bardin Cooper.

• 38:06Speaker 04

  Bardin Cooper. Yeah, so Bardin, brilliant physicist, two Nobel prizes, the transistor and superconductivity. And so most superconductors, their behavior is characterized by BCS theory. However, they're these are typically ultra-low temperature superconductors and extremely high B field superconductors. So these are not terribly useful in industrial, commercial application because the environments you have to put them in are very exotic. So of course, superconductivity is very useful because it's it offers lossless power transmission, very high electric fields, very high magnetic fields. I've often said that the development and discovery of a room temperature superconductor would be is as transformative to commerce and industry as anti-gravity.

• 38:48Speaker 00

  Very disruptive.

• 38:49Speaker 04

  100%.

• 38:50Speaker 00

  Completely disruptive.

• 38:51Speaker 04

  Now, so there's been a lot of research last 30 or 40 years into topological materials, topological insulators, and then something called topological superconductors. And the nature of a topological material is so typically you have crystal lattice materials. So metals are crystals, insulators are crystals, semiconductors are crystals. Ordinarily, those crystals have the same properties throughout the bulk of the matrix, like no matter which way, you know, frequently they're isotropic, meaning this way or that way, or they're anisotropic, meaning it's different this way versus that way. When you make semiconductor crystals, you get polycrystallines, you get grain boundaries, and you know, features stop at these grain boundaries. And so you start to get anisotropies. That's significant to manufacturing semiconductor

• 39:34Speaker 04

  materials where we're doping these layers with different atoms. And we've been doping since 1950s. I mean, this has been around some time. But the level of precision in semiconductor doping is three or four orders of magnitude lower than what we're talking about with these quantum heterostructured lattices, where you you really need these big chromium and vanadium atoms that that install their ferromagnetic ordering across the lattice. You need them in very specific lattice locations.

• 40:02Speaker 00

  Jack, you're absolutely brilliant and right on. But let's bring it to a very simplistic, again, Occam's razor, simplicity and minimalism. What does superconductivity truly represent? A macroscopic quantum phenomenon?

• 40:17Speaker 01

  Yes.

• 40:19Speaker 00

  And it speaks directly to macroscopic quantum coherence. Look very carefully, it's slides four to nine in the 2019 AIA double A site. A lot of people have gone over those slides as if there's nothing there. There's something of incredibly important substance.

• 40:36Speaker 01

  How do you maintain coherence at macroscopic scales?

• 40:41Speaker 00

  Not easy at all.

• 40:43Speaker 04

  Condensates.

• 40:43Speaker 00

  Because everything wants to decohere. Everything wants extremely cold temperatures. Again, the atoms being in this nice dance. Because again, because of electron Coulomb repulsion, these things don't want to pair up. And yet BCS theory says that they should. And Dr. Victor Lachno believes it's not the electrons that, but bipolarons, the whole idea of a bipolaron mechanism that occurs at these higher temperatures.

• 41:14Speaker 04

  Which is a quasi particle. It's a composite quasi particle of two polarons. A polaron is itself a quasi particle, which is.

• 41:20Speaker 00

  And the Pice effect speaks directly to what? To this mechanism of room temperature superconductivity? How? It basically says, once you form the, an alternating magnetic field, once you form this Bose-Einstein condensate that Victor Lachno speaks to, you can use a pulse current, again, an alternate current, to move it.

• 41:45Speaker 04

  To move it, to manipulate it.

• 41:47Speaker 00

  Room temperature. And yet, no one has touched on either the Victor Lachno paper or my patent.

• 41:55Speaker 01

  How, wait, how would?

• 41:55Speaker 00

  Thinking again, it's pseudoscience.

• 41:57Speaker 01

  How would you do this?

• 41:58Speaker 04

  So when, the reason generally you can't get superconductivity at high temperatures is because the atoms in the, in the material have all this thermal motion. They have all this thermal energy. And so the, the nature of superconductivity is that this thing called a phonon, which is a vibratory mode of an atom inside of a lattice, phonons facilitate the transfer of electrons through the lattice as Cooper pairs. So the polyexclusion principle only applies to spin one half bosons. I know this is really deep. But what happens is when you force electrons close together, they behave as though they're a spin one particle, meaning poly no longer applies. And so they can both occupy the minimum ground state. So they can move together. So there's no degeneracy. There's no energy splitting. And so they move very efficiently through the lattice.

• 42:43Speaker 04

  Problem is, if this lattice is warm and all these atoms are vibrating randomly, you can't get this coherent phonon behavior. In extremely novelly comprised lattices, you put atoms in just, just the right place such that these internal magnetic fields set up these roadways, stop signs, highways for current to flow, and you can get this behavior.

• 43:07Speaker 01

  So it would involve, you would need to fabricate materials on an atomic level. You need to get some, some things.

• 43:14Speaker 00

  But not the Pice effect. The Pice effect does not speak to anything depending on chemical composition. That's why Dr. Victor Lagno, he picked it up because he realized this is the solution to an active superconductor, one that's not passive, one that is not based on chemical composition, like the type 1A or the, or the type 2 superconductors. This is basically, it can be done as long as this thing at any point in its structure has been superconducting. For example, that's why I chose lead, cerconate, titanate. All, all three components at very low temperatures are superconducting.

• 43:57Speaker 01

  Sure.

• 43:58Speaker 00

  And yet, because of the bipolaran mechanism that Dr. Lagno, I believe in his paper, it's just a three-page paper, but on the third page, he gives the mechanism and he speaks to the Pice effect room temperatures for conductors. You believe it'll work.

• 44:13Speaker 01

  So these materials are superconducting in their natural state, even at room temperature?

• 44:18Speaker 00

  Not at room temperature, at very low temperature.

• 44:21Speaker 04

  He's describing conventional superconductors, like YBCO and from.

• 44:24Speaker 00

  Lead, cerconate, titanate, BB, ZR, TI. These are the components of what they call a piezoelectric material.

• 44:35Speaker 01

  You know, Townsend Brown spent a lot of time off of his career looking at piezoelectric material.

• 44:40Speaker 00

  They're very important because one talks to again, the whole idea that pressure induced what?

• 44:48Speaker 00

  The electric field can also induce

• 44:53Speaker 00

  pressure changes.

• 44:54Speaker 01

  In the vacuum.

• 44:56Speaker 04

  Well, I discovered something very interesting. The Townsend Brown ceramic insulator of choice was very

• 45:01Speaker 01

  It is very interesting. It's on the chalkboard in videos of him.

• 45:05Speaker 00

  And yet they have dismissed his work.

• 45:07Speaker 04

  This is what changed my mind about Townsend Brown.

• 45:09Speaker 01

  It's at Winter Haven, yeah.

• 45:11Speaker 00

  And they have dismissed his work. And he's a man of shah.

• 45:14Speaker 01

  By the way, at the beginning of Townsend Brown's Winter Haven proposal, he says, "Olga Halysa had a very adequate theory of gravity back in the 1890s." And we would be right to listen to him. So, you know, that was his opinion as well.

• 45:26Speaker 04

  I'm convinced that some well-meaning physicists just didn't see the application to exotic condensed matter physics at the time. You know, because I think these are subtle effects for which the coupling is small in natural materials. And, you know, as we started to manufacture semiconductor, this was the world's first meta-material in the broad sense. It's not an optical meta-material in the strict sense, but... And you start to set up these these solid-state environments that have fundamentally different environments. And we're just now getting to the point where we have the SEM tools to interrogate these things. And we have the chemical vapor deposition and the atomic vapor deposition to actually make them. And then we have the interrogation tools to know for sure what we really made. I mean, these experiments take years to set up and execute. That's why it's been...

• 46:11Speaker 01

  But they're not easy. They're not easy. What would be the next step for... I mean, because let's build a UFO. I mean, if there was ever a time where we were, you know, geopolitically unstable on a macro level and need to throw a Hail Mary, it would be right now. And I don't know what we have still. You know, maybe we were way more advanced than... I mean, what do you think? Do you think we're way more advanced than meets the eye?

• 46:33Speaker 00

  I truly believe we must be.

• 46:39Speaker 00

  This democracy must win. This republic must stand.

• 46:45Speaker 00

  We must survive. So yes, I believe we shall.

• 46:51Speaker 01

  Do you think that what you're looking into has already been discovered? And then some in kind of private quarters? Or do you think that you're deriving something from that?

• 47:01Speaker 00

  Absolutely not. I do not think I'm an original in this at all. So as a matter of fact, the physics that I speak to was available in the 1890s. And there were great physicists at the time. Great brains. I'm 100% sure that I'm not an original in this, not at all.

• 47:20Speaker 01

  Many interesting things.

• 47:21Speaker 00

  It's just the way that I address the Pice effect, especially from the room temperature superconductor. Now, the Pice effect driven room temperature superconductor, I do believe I'm an original in.

• 47:30Speaker 01

  I would believe that.

• 47:31Speaker 00

  And Victor Lacno attests to that. He says it could work. Now, for a man of his capacity, his capability of his mathematical prowess and not just mathematical physics, we're talking about physical mathematics, where the physics drives the mathematics, not vice versa. This man thinks that this could work. I believe it should be looked at.

• 47:52Speaker 01

  Well, there are these claimed replications of room temperature.

• 47:57Speaker 00

  LK99, they refer in.

• 48:00Speaker 04

  Pretty, yeah, you're the only English speaking patent that's in citations. The rest are Korean and Chinese.

• 48:06Speaker 00

  But everybody thinks this is pseudoscience. How come?

• 48:09Speaker 01

  Well, yeah, so do you think that this has already been done? You think it's been discovered?

• 48:15Speaker 04

  Do you know that that team was so sure of their results that they published one paper with six authors and then they published another paper with three authors? Because only three people can share a Nobel Prize. They were that confident.

• 48:25Speaker 01

  Whoa. Then what happened upon the era?

• 48:29Speaker 00

  There were people that replicated it.

• 48:30Speaker 04

  Reproduction issues, yeah.

• 48:32Speaker 00

  There were Chinese teams that replicated the experiment. It went into the void as if.

• 48:39Speaker 01

  So you guys seem to lend a little more credence than meets the eye to LK99?

• 48:43Speaker 04

  Maybe, yeah. I think I had heard there were reproduction issues. Other labs tried to make it and I find it hard to believe like other labs would cover it up because again, it's grand galore waiting to happen.

• 48:54Speaker 01

  You have, well, you know, talked to Lurz, our dude, who I love, and I think he's an American here, a great guy. When I speak to him, he really has to speak super cryptically about like, you know, some.

• 49:08Speaker 01

  Very destructive.

• 49:09Speaker 00

  The sun going to you.

• 49:10Speaker 01

  That like save the world, but also destroy the world. We all have to play nicely together like the toy or whatever is this? Or is he talking about room temperature, superconductivity here?

• 49:19Speaker 00

  Who knows? Ask Lou.

• 49:21Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 49:23Speaker 00

  You said, the man doesn't drink, I believe. So you might not be able to get any information out of him. He's, he's also a very, you can tell the man has seen a lot. He's uh.

• 49:36Speaker 04

  So on that note, you know, on the subject of proliferation, um, I'm, I find it very fascinating to think about the fact that Manhattan, we got a little lucky in that nuclear weapons turn out to be very difficult to make. And so proliferation was slow. In terms of the weaponization of UAP physics, and we've of course mentioned there could be multiple branches and different tech trees. Do you have a sense that this technology will be difficult to replicate, difficult to manufacture?

• 50:01Speaker 00

  No.

• 50:02Speaker 04

  Or very easy?

• 50:03Speaker 00

  No, however, there's a paper out there, plasma compression fusion device. You and I were talking right before.

• 50:09Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 50:10Speaker 00

  Uh, it's being cited by some very important and uh, research teams

• 50:17Speaker 00

  in China. And the latest that's been just started cited is of this year, IEEE Journal of Cybernetics. Can you imagine making a plasma compression fusion device, something compact? Now, in what artificial intelligence uh, domain would cybernetics couple with if you were to use such a device? Say such a device was operational and could be made operational in a small footprint, a power source, something like Iron Man's reactor? Could you imagine what you would use that in? Why would the IEEE Journal of Cybernetics be interested?

• 51:01Speaker 00

  In that particular work, think what that would mean.

• 51:06Speaker 01

  Terrifying, I mean, you.

• 51:07Speaker 00

  Terrifying.

• 51:08Speaker 01

  Terrifying, there's so many ways. And enormous energy densities are terrifying in every way.

• 51:13Speaker 00

  Every, but imagine an army of those, what they could mean. Leave it there, Jesse, trust me, I'm not, leave it there. It's freaky. It's very freaky. Again, the fusion of ideas, cross domain.

• 51:28Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 51:29Speaker 00

  Ability of using information from different disciplines. That's in the open literature. That's why OSINT can be so incredibly important in the right hands.

• 51:41Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 51:42Speaker 00

  In cross domain technologies, interdisciplinary, cross those. OSINT could prove extremely dangerous.

• 51:50Speaker 04

  It already has, and it already is. You know, the use of AI tools in reverse engineering, all of these ideas right out of the, right out of the ether, right out of, off the internet is very powerful already. I mean, it's, it's helped a lot of us in the disclosure effort find things that are out there in the public domain that just maybe we didn't realize they were already in the public domain.

• 52:11Speaker 00

  However, it's also a cubed, not a good idea.

• 52:15Speaker 01

  Well, okay, so you also have written a lot about high frequency gravitational waves.

• 52:21Speaker 00

  Yes, sir.

• 52:21Speaker 01

  And so how does that play into all of this? And why don't we actually zoom out real quick and just explain how, okay, if you had a room temperature superconductor and then you had the Pice effect, how would this allow you to possibly build a UFO? Like, how does that play into, you know?

• 52:37Speaker 00

  I cannot speak to that.

• 52:38Speaker 01

  Oh, you can't?

• 52:39Speaker 00

  I cannot speak to that.

• 52:40Speaker 01

  Okay.

• 52:40Speaker 00

  But again, please, there is no such thing as faster than light travel. Einsteinian physics is never broken. Einstein was 100%. Everything Einstein has come up with is 100% real. And I truly believe that, for example, even quantum entanglement, we're not talking about instantaneous communication here.

• 53:02Speaker 01

  So you don't believe that, like, a lot of people in national security disclosure world talk about alcuvieri warp drives, you know, involving negative mass or negative entropy to allow for faster than light travel? You don't think that's possible?

• 53:14Speaker 00

  I do not believe then, again, once you break, once you create this black hole, Einsteinian physics no longer truly applies. Think of the paradigm.

• 53:27Speaker 00

  It's as if you have broken known physics to begin with.

• 53:31Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 53:32Speaker 00

  A whole, again, I choose not to call it new physics, but truly, that's what it truly.

• 53:38Speaker 01

  So let's get a little, so as you hit the swing of a limit, break space-time. What happens vis a vis this fifth dimension?

• 53:46Speaker 00

  We'll not.

• 53:46Speaker 01

  Okay.

• 53:47Speaker 00

  We'll not touch on that.

• 53:48Speaker 01

  Okay.

• 53:49Speaker 04

  What's interesting about Alcubierre Drive, I think, is this notion of negative energy. And there have been people who have associated negative energy with quantum vacuum energy. That's right. So what's interesting is it could be the case that the Alcubierre approach and the quantum vacuum approach, in fact, arrive at the same result. They're just different paradigms for looking at the same thing. Yeah. Correct. But what's interestingly different is Alcubierre is a strictly Einsteinian notion, in a manner of speaking. It operates entirely within general relativity. It doesn't require a TOE, it doesn't require new physics, whereas, which also is somewhat unhelpful because it doesn't give us guideposts to new physics. It's not really informative in any way.

• 54:33Speaker 04

  Whereas these kinds of approaches do require those things.

• 54:36Speaker 00

  Absolutely.

• 54:37Speaker 01

  Huge news, everyone. We've been sitting on a ton of unreleased footage that we will now be releasing weekly in our new WAP. Our first episode is a completely uncut, heated discussion between Hal Puthoff and Eric Weinstein on remote viewing. Yeah, you heard that right. I still can't believe I experienced that firsthand, and now I'm happy to share it with you all as our first exclusive video on WAP. Head over to wap.com slash American Alchemy Premium to become a premium member today. By becoming a member, you'll gain access to weekly premium videos, behind the scenes footage, and monthly group calls where we discuss the ideas we love most. Plus, you'll get early access to merchandise drops and be the first to know about the upcoming

• 55:20Speaker 01

  conference we'll be holding later in 2025. Our WAP community will serve as a private space where curious individuals and tech enthusiasts can come together to challenge the status quo and explore ideas shaping our future. If you're passionate about exploring unconventional ideas and want to dive even deeper into our content, I invite you to join our WAP today. Head over to wap.com. com slash American Alchemy Premium to become a premium member today. Thank you so much and enjoy the rest of today's episode. Can you talk about how high frequency gravity waves might allow for UFO like activity or?

• 55:57Speaker 00

  I would rather not.

• 55:58Speaker 01

  Okay.

• 55:59Speaker 00

  I would rather not, not go there.

• 56:00Speaker 01

  I found it interesting that.

• 56:02Speaker 00

  It could all, and that's just because it can be weaponized. So.

• 56:06Speaker 04

  It can be.

• 56:07Speaker 01

  Well, I did find it interesting just high level that.

• 56:12Speaker 00

  I believe Evgeny Podkletnov has hit on something already. And if it's true that he has made this impulse gravitational generator.

• 56:25Speaker 01

  Wow.

• 56:27Speaker 00

  Scary.

• 56:27Speaker 01

  Cause he's, he's sort of.

• 56:28Speaker 00

  Because he's funded by the Russians.

• 56:31Speaker 01

  And he's in, he's in.

• 56:32Speaker 00

  So what do they?

• 56:33Speaker 04

  Once upon a time, I was told he was working for an American contractor.

• 56:37Speaker 00

  Is he?

• 56:38Speaker 01

  I thought he might be.

• 56:39Speaker 00

  Because I, the latest rumors is that.

• 56:42Speaker 04

  I had heard Boeing.

• 56:43Speaker 00

  Repatriated.

• 56:44Speaker 01

  Oh, fantomore. Yeah.

• 56:45Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 56:46Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 56:46Speaker 00

  I hope.

• 56:47Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 56:50Speaker 00

  I'm pretty sure he's repatriated.

• 56:52Speaker 01

  Okay. So this is.

• 56:53Speaker 00

  Yeah.

• 56:53Speaker 01

  But anyway, yeah. Very setup because basically it's funny because after this conversation, I'm neurotic about this conversation, but I'm so much less neurotic about outing Townsend Brown, who I'm sure is right. Because that is so far down the chain of like, it's like so not dangerous. And it's, and it's, to me, it's absurd from an American national security standpoint that like it would all be controversial to de-stigmatize him, you know, he's this scientist, he was also a Navy scientist.

• 57:22Speaker 00

  He was a great man.

• 57:24Speaker 01

  Great man.

• 57:24Speaker 00

  He is a great man.

• 57:25Speaker 01

  Stigmatize his own work, probably for good reason, because at the time I think it was the tip of the spear.

• 57:29Speaker 00

  Absolutely.

• 57:30Speaker 01

  And it was this Cold War secrecy era, but just based on this conversation, it sounds like. All nations are pretty far advanced as far as these heterodox frameworks. And if you're the US, you need to be getting as many young people aware of these things as soon as humanly possible, at least from a high level.

• 57:48Speaker 04

  Yeah, otherwise where the hell's the talent gonna come from?

• 57:50Speaker 01

  Yeah, what like seriously?

• 57:52Speaker 04

  Yeah, and Weinstein has spoken on this too. And I think, you know, I don't, I don't, I think, I think there's missing names. Like what's going on? Who's, who's actually working on it, right?

• 58:00Speaker 01

  Right, totally. Or even just like, what are the proper frameworks? It's like, finally, it seems like string theory is capitulating after getting bashed over the head for the last, you know, 10 years by polemicists. You know, they've seemed like not a super, uh, you know, self-aware crowd up until like maybe the last couple of years, they're all saying, you know, like Leonard Susskind just went on theories of everything. Kurt Czerny, great interviewer. It's like, I think we've kind of, you know.

• 58:26Speaker 04

  With the cap on straight.

• 58:27Speaker 01

  Yeah. So, but, but it just would, you would, you would expect some sort of coordinated effort on high when it comes to the American national security state, when it comes to letting this stuff out. And it's, it's, it's, I always feel like, you know, I'm sort of in an awkward position with the, you know, for example, with the Townsend Brown stuff where it clearly that was the right thing to do, but it's in retrospect, I've had this sort of conversation and, you know, it's like, you never know what the right thing is.

• 58:55Speaker 04

  I, I suspect some of this has to do with the fact that the majority of the program was executed during the Cold War. And I think perhaps at one time, we were quite certain that we were the only ones with anything. And we thought, worst case scenario, we, we put a big footprint on this and just like Manhattan, the adversary infiltrates the program and steals what we've gotten. And all of a sudden, there's this proliferation of next generation weapons of mass destruction, as I'd spoke to Dave Grush about. And maybe they thought for the longest time, max priority is bury it, keep it totally, totally silent. No one knows it exists. Distant second priority, glean as many technical insights from it as you can every once in a while. And unfortunately, somehow, eventually, they did get it, either through their own crash

• 59:40Speaker 04

  retrievals or infiltrating our program, whatever it might be. And now there is a race and we are not in first.

• 59:47Speaker 01

  That's wild. What, what do you, what do you think gets it first?

• 59:51Speaker 04

  If I had to guess between Russia and China, I'd say China.

• 59:54Speaker 01

  That's, yeah.

• 59:55Speaker 04

  They're not distracted with a regional war. They have a significant amount of resources to put towards it.

• 1:00:00Speaker 00

  They have retreated a lot of their alumni from this country.

• 1:00:04Speaker 04

  Yeah, every year China graduates more STEM professionals than exist in the entire United States.

• 1:00:09Speaker 00

  They're brilliant.

• 1:00:10Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 1:00:10Speaker 00

  How many times they've won the math Olympians, you think that's simple?

• 1:00:14Speaker 04

  Sure.

• 1:00:15Speaker 01

  And you think it's probably, you know, it's like the three body problem or whatever. The PRC, if they want you to work on some highly classified stuff, they're just knocking you door. And here is just this complicated bureaucratic, you know, you have all these corporate thieves with local incentives taking shots at one another.

• 1:00:31Speaker 00

  I truly think that one day we must unite the factions because I think one day we shall have.

• 1:00:38Speaker 01

  One day, you need now, what do you mean?

• 1:00:40Speaker 00

  Listen, as soon as possible because I think we have an external enemy. And by external enemy, I mean.

• 1:00:47Speaker 01

  Very external.

• 1:00:48Speaker 00

  Very external.

• 1:00:49Speaker 01

  What are you talking about?

• 1:00:50Speaker 04

  NHI.

• 1:00:51Speaker 00

  NHI.

• 1:00:52Speaker 01

  So.

• 1:00:53Speaker 04

  The Doomer take?

• 1:00:54Speaker 01

  So, yeah, what evidence do we have? Because, you know, when you speak to Lou Elizondo, you have sort of this like idea that something is imminent. Possibly hostile contact, maybe they're prepping the battle space. I tend to think, at least historically, looking back.

• 1:01:10Speaker 00

  Think of the earth.

• 1:01:11Speaker 01

  Okay.

• 1:01:12Speaker 00

  People have worked for less than the place of extreme natural resources. We are a very yummy apple.

• 1:01:24Speaker 01

  Very.

• 1:01:25Speaker 00

  Yeah, but do you have any? Everybody's eye.

• 1:01:27Speaker 01

  Sure, but like, it's like you have thousands of years of history where like we haven't had contact. Or maybe if we have had contact, at least it's ephemeral enough where like our modern historical perspective, I believe we've had contact with thousands of years. But in this weakly entangled ephemeral way, in a way that, you know, if you were to talk to like a conventional historian, they would not say that, you know, they'd say we're alone. We're at the top of the consciousness food chain. So do you guys have any information that I don't when it comes to something coming down the pike? As far as hostile contact?

• 1:02:01Speaker 04

  Well, there are people who feel strongly that there have been reset events, right? Human history reset events. For instance, 70,000 years ago, we know genomically there was a bottleneck. There was a human bottleneck event where, you know, something like 7,500 members of the population are our ancestors.

• 1:02:19Speaker 04

  And I don't, I don't know what to think of that. I mean, I don't really necessarily see the purpose, but you, you do have to speculate. There's so many degrees of freedom associated with, what are their motives? Are they resource constructed in some way? What continues to be interesting in 50,000 years?

• 1:02:31Speaker 01

  Isn't it fairly well documented that, that was, you know, Luis and Walter Alvarez, Luis Walter Alvarez, the father who was in the Manhattan Project, they had this theory that, you know, an asteroid hit the earth wiped out the dinosaurs around that period. And then you get this Cambrian explosion of new life.

• 1:02:47Speaker 04

  Right, right.

• 1:02:47Speaker 01

  So like, that doesn't feel like non-human intelligence to me.

• 1:02:50Speaker 04

  No, no. I don't mean extinction level event resets. I mean, I mean more recent than that, like in human history. Um, for instance, the, the, the Toba event and, uh, the, the Randall Carlson stuff and the Graham Hancock stuff, the reset 12,000 years ago.

• 1:03:05Speaker 01

  But that might be just like a comet airburst from a torn.

• 1:03:10Speaker 04

  Absolutely. Oh, yeah. Fully agree. So like, it's not, it's not the metal.

• 1:03:13Speaker 01

  Okay. So like, okay. But then this, again, you need more evidence. If you're going to say that non-human contact that's hostile is coming down the pipe.

• 1:03:20Speaker 00

  Well, there's a book out there.

• 1:03:22Speaker 01

  Okay. What's the book?

• 1:03:23Speaker 00

  Charles Ford, Book of the Damned. It starts with very interesting words. It's, I believe we are property. Dot, dot, dot. Read that book. It's very interesting. Sure. It's for your audience. Let them look into this little breakdown.

• 1:03:43Speaker 01

  We're property.

• 1:03:44Speaker 00

  And we are property.

• 1:03:45Speaker 01

  So we're already colonized.

• 1:03:48Speaker 00

  What are we? Again, the whole idea of are we a civilization with amnesia as a certain gentleman?

• 1:03:55Speaker 01

  Well, we.

• 1:03:56Speaker 00

  Graham Hancock.

• 1:03:56Speaker 01

  Graham Hancock. Sure. Well, we, we definitely seem to, you know, follow this like local incentive, scarcity, gamified thing that doesn't seem like it's in the best interest of our race ascending into anything, you know, more real. And, uh, that's the thing that attracts me to the whole UFO phenomenon for all its weird cast of characters and, you know, a hall of mirrors vibes. It, it, it feels like a somewhat transcendent topic where, you know, maybe we can descend out of our.

• 1:04:26Speaker 00

  I think we will soon, soon enough, anyway, face a tremendous threat from without.

• 1:04:35Speaker 00

  As the great Ronald Reagan once said, if we do not come together as a unified earth, we will not withstand what's coming.

• 1:04:45Speaker 01

  Do you think it's already, I mean, you have these rumors of like, you know, the gray aliens collecting biological samples.

• 1:04:52Speaker 00

  I do not know. I truly do not know.

• 1:04:55Speaker 01

  Why do you think we have to have contact? Because that's a crazy, that's a really big assertion.

• 1:05:00Speaker 04

  Do you ascribe to the battlefield preparation hypothesis that the vehicles acting aggressively with fighter planes, that the vehicles, you know, overflying the missile fields and shutting missiles off?

• 1:05:12Speaker 00

  Of course, the testing.

• 1:05:13Speaker 01

  You think so?

• 1:05:14Speaker 00

  Oh, and that's why we should be very careful on putting all our money into reversed engineered IT craft. Because, because they already have their own technologies. They know how to defeat their own thing.

• 1:05:28Speaker 01

  What if there's good factions and bad factions? Like when I speak to Robert Hastings.

• 1:05:34Speaker 00

  I'm praying for that because otherwise we do not have a chance in hell.

• 1:05:38Speaker 01

  Well, a lot of, a lot of the nuclear stuff is like shutting down silos. And maybe, and then a lot of the messaging that people get seems to be like, you're going to destroy yourselves in some sort of nuclear holocaust and you need to come together now and focus more on the environment and that sort of thing.

• 1:05:53Speaker 04

  Right. It's like Green PC type things.

• 1:05:55Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 1:05:55Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 1:05:56Speaker 01

  And I'm so, I'm not saying that's not some tricksterism, you know, it's, it's hard to say is all I'm saying. We need to maintain that.

• 1:06:01Speaker 04

  If there are multiple, yes, I completely agree. If there are multiple actors in the space, it's incredibly hard to attribute what to what. Yeah.

• 1:06:08Speaker 01

  How does your work, Sal, connect with the great Hal Puthoff?

• 1:06:13Speaker 00

  I read a lot of his papers and he is great indeed. Don't forget, I, I believe this man, if he was not connected with things that are taken as non-scientific, and I'm pseudoscience, like remote viewings, would have deserved, is deserving of a Nobel Prize. Truly, especially the, the physical review paper on gravity and that's, that's pure brilliance.

• 1:06:39Speaker 01

  What does he say about gravity?

• 1:06:41Speaker 04

  When he describes gravity as an emergent property of the underlying spacetime foam, and it's how it's put off like seminal work of spacetime.

• 1:06:50Speaker 01

  So if you can electrically polarize the vacuum, then you can manipulate gravity like you can manipulate variables in Maxwell's equation.

• 1:06:57Speaker 04

  Yeah, and he's the first to talk about that.

• 1:06:59Speaker 01

  Yes, yeah, and it's funny, he was touching on it in my interview with him and Eric Einstein, and we didn't quite get into like the mechanism, because this idea, I think, you know.

• 1:07:11Speaker 00

  Eric couldn't believe that he worked on remote viewing. I could tell that, again, for Harvard-trained mathematician, the idea of even remote viewing being possible is such an abnormality.

• 1:07:27Speaker 04

  What do you think of remote viewing?

• 1:07:28Speaker 00

  I think remote action is possible.

• 1:07:32Speaker 01

  So that's even farther than remote viewing?

• 1:07:34Speaker 00

  Can you imagine stopping at hard just by thinking about it? Say, from Qatar?

• 1:07:39Speaker 01

  That's scary.

• 1:07:40Speaker 00

  That's some scary shit. Anyway, who needs the CIA's hard-stopping gun when you can do it with a thought?

• 1:07:49Speaker 01

  Oh.

• 1:07:50Speaker 00

  Anyway.

• 1:07:51Speaker 04

  Well, and there are rumors about the fact that there was other teams of remote viewers being trained by Pat Price and Joe McGonigal other than put off.

• 1:07:59Speaker 01

  Yeah, there are rumors that it's still going on. And I mean, even if you read Skymarkers at the Pentagon, it was definitely still going on in the context of OSAP. But like, you know, I don't think it ended in 1995. I mean, you have Joseph McGonigal won the Legion of Merit for over 200 times, which he helped to elect intelligence hostage cases, drawing up, you know, nuclear sites, that sort of thing. You don't end a program like that. It just wouldn't make sense. But yeah, I also think we're emerging, we're figuring out more and more possible physical models of consciousness that might explain remote viewing. So if the brain is a hybrid quantum classical system, which, you know, you kind of rose would be one model, and I don't know if microtubules are the right thing,

• 1:08:44Speaker 01

  but they can maintain coherence up until the, you know, single point, you know, the gravitational.

• 1:08:49Speaker 00

  That's important.

• 1:08:50Speaker 01

  And if that's the case, then in quantum systems, you have temporal non-mortality, and you can send, you can reverse cubic positions in quantum computations.

• 1:08:58Speaker 00

  Correct.

• 1:08:59Speaker 01

  And so if. Then if you get into a working quantum computer, maybe you can send information on the application like back in time. Many people building quantum computers say that. So if your brain is a hybrid, you know, quantum classical computer, maybe you are accessing shards of information from the future, especially if you're given confirm.

• 1:09:18Speaker 00

  How does the brain prevent decoherence? That's the question.

• 1:09:22Speaker 04

  Probably through non-Abelian statistics, just like the bias effect.

• 1:09:26Speaker 01

  So how would you, that must be, you know, some meditation technique or something?

• 1:09:31Speaker 04

  No, I'm sorry. Non-Abelian statistics, it's like Fermi Dirac statistics. It's a type of particle statistic model that emerges from standard model physics.

• 1:09:39Speaker 01

  I know from a mathematical perspective, but like a dog isn't doing vector calculus when he's catching a frisbee. Like what protocol should we do to maintain coherence?

• 1:09:50Speaker 00

  Great question.

• 1:09:51Speaker 01

  Sal, what do you think?

• 1:09:52Speaker 00

  Great question.

• 1:09:53Speaker 01

  What do we do?

• 1:09:54Speaker 00

  Great question.

• 1:09:55Speaker 01

  How do we get to the fifth, how do we hit the Schröinger limit?

• 1:09:59Speaker 00

  EQ. Oh, I'm 100%. For example, in these UAP phenomena, they speak of mind-matter connection. Uh huh. Called Stephanie there.

• 1:10:12Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 1:10:13Speaker 00

  But there must be, there must be a transfer. There must be an intermittent medium. What is that intermittent medium?

• 1:10:18Speaker 04

  It has occurred to me that these.

• 1:10:20Speaker 01

  The vacuum itself?

• 1:10:21Speaker 04

  Oh, yeah.

• 1:10:22Speaker 00

  What else can be there? The medium for which? How does light transfer?

• 1:10:31Speaker 01

  Two photons.

• 1:10:32Speaker 04

  But you're saying, where's the medium? Because every other wave has to move through a medium.

• 1:10:37Speaker 00

  A medium.

• 1:10:38Speaker 01

  The eager?

• 1:10:39Speaker 04

  I don't know. Something.

• 1:10:41Speaker 00

  A quantum vacuum.

• 1:10:42Speaker 01

  Sure.

• 1:10:43Speaker 00

  But is it, does it superforce level? Is that at the Planck scale?

• 1:10:46Speaker 04

  Right.

• 1:10:47Speaker 00

  Are we talking about, I mean, the superforce? We're talking about 10 to the 44 Newton.

• 1:10:51Speaker 01

  It has to be in a bidimensional state.

• 1:10:53Speaker 04

  It would have to be.

• 1:10:55Speaker 01

  Which Ken Shoulders talks about, fifth dimensional space for exotic vacuum object.

• 1:10:59Speaker 04

  Yeah, I suppose it doesn't have to be. It's not, it's not necessarily required that we have higher dimensional spaces. I mean, there could always, so Kaluza Klein compactified subdimensions, it has problems, but it, the general notion of higher dimension, it solves some problems. It explains the hierarchy problem, explains the gravitational weakness problem. Why is gravity, you know, 31 orders of magnitude weaker than the strong nuclear force or something?

• 1:11:24Speaker 00

  And remember what Kaluza thinks of electrical charges. What motion in the? Fifth dimension.

• 1:11:30Speaker 01

  Hmm, really?

• 1:11:31Speaker 00

  How interesting.

• 1:11:32Speaker 01

  Charismatic. It was interesting.

• 1:11:35Speaker 00

  Charismatic.

• 1:11:36Speaker 01

  I was reading from Frontiers of Propulsion Science by Eric Davis.

• 1:11:39Speaker 00

  Great book, by the way. Eric W. Davis, no matter what he says of my visits, the man must be congratulated for that book, just for that book alone.

• 1:11:50Speaker 04

  I brought my copy.

• 1:11:50Speaker 00

  Him and Mark Millis are amazing, but you can tell that the real forte behind the physics is Dr. Davis.

• 1:11:58Speaker 01

  Well, he says.

• 1:11:59Speaker 00

  My head off to him.

• 1:12:00Speaker 01

  He says something around the Lippold-Brown effect, which he believes, and that was from the book. If you take the face value, that that's, you know, just a, you know, coronal wind or ionized wind, and it's not actually, you know, a tie between electromagnetism and gravity. But I think at one point, he says you would need a fifth dimensional space to connect EM and gravity if this weren't actually work.

• 1:12:23Speaker 00

  So exactly.

• 1:12:24Speaker 01

  Very interesting.

• 1:12:25Speaker 04

  I think fundamental.

• 1:12:27Speaker 00

  Oh, Dr. Davis is very intelligent.

• 1:12:29Speaker 01

  How does torsion going?

• 1:12:32Speaker 00

  Cosine. Jack, please.

• 1:12:35Speaker 04

  Well, so one of my favorite subjects.

• 1:12:37Speaker 00

  Now we're going into heavy pseudoscience for everyone out there.

• 1:12:40Speaker 04

  So here's what's funny is that.

• 1:12:41Speaker 01

  This is all fake.

• 1:12:43Speaker 00

  That's right, brother.

• 1:12:44Speaker 04

  If you talk about heavy side as a more fundamental treatment of Maxwell, similarly Einstein Cartan is a more fundamental treatment of Einstein, because Einstein felt the torsional tensor should be treated symmetrically in free space and therefore zero out, you know, T two one minus T one two equals zero. And Eli Cartan came around and said, no, you can't make that assumption. You know, there could be exotic environments where this is a non-zero contributor. And so basically, the two contributions to gravitational force in a geometric context are curvature to spacetime and a twist to spacetime. So torsion is the twist. And what makes that interesting from a gravity manipulation standpoint is that contents of the torsional tensor are the spin density tensor, which can contain contributions from electromagnetic spin.

• 1:13:27Speaker 04

  So if you can do really novel things with spin, either by coupling electron spin to nucleonic spin, or maybe like you're talking about axial spin to harmonic vibratory modes that sort of blow up real fast, you can maybe generate really large contributions to the spin density sensor and get these torsional repulsion fields that act like gravity, look like gravity, but technically they're not exactly gravity.

• 1:13:51Speaker 00

  No.

• 1:13:52Speaker 01

  Wow.

• 1:13:53Speaker 00

  However, they can couple to it.

• 1:13:54Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 1:13:55Speaker 00

  Yes.

• 1:13:57Speaker 01

  So then you could basically, because gravity can't traditionally manipulate in a lab, so you might be able to manipulate in a lab.

• 1:14:04Speaker 00

  Again, the whole idea of the graviton itself being a spin two, whereas the photon spins at one.

• 1:14:12Speaker 04

  Yeah. Now, in the broader context, torsional physics is not a theory of everything. It's just going to be a piece of a more complete theory of gravity that slots into some broader theory of quantum gravity.

• 1:14:23Speaker 01

  Interesting. Do you think, oh, so that's fascinating. So, so, but, but this would be torsional physics, a way to manipulate gravity that binds to gravity more tightly than traditional transverse Hertzian electromagnetic waves.

• 1:14:37Speaker 04

  Along the lines of multiple tech trees, this could be one of those branches that's important and significant.

• 1:14:42Speaker 01

  That's fascinating. And what do you think of, you know, you mentioned Greer, you were watching this stuff and that's sort of inspiring some of the work did Bob Lazar. Do you think that he was?

• 1:14:51Speaker 00

  I think Lazar is right on the money. When I, I'll tell you the truth. When, when I saw in, in, in the superforce equation, C to the fourth divided by big G being the superfort. And, and that talking as a linear operator really to the spatial temper, temporal geometric structure, thereby giving rise to energy density. When I saw that and I, I remember his words that this sports mile is as if it was 3D printed out space time. That's exactly what that equation says. So that means that they had the capability to manipulate the space force

• 1:15:34Speaker 00

  at a Planckian level. We, we talk about a physics that we, it's unfathomable. That's why I'm saying they could, at a, that, that's.

• 1:15:47Speaker 04

  This is root access.

• 1:15:48Speaker 01

  That's a pretty one. And so what about his idea of gravity A, gravity B to two different?

• 1:15:54Speaker 00

  I don't know about that.

• 1:15:55Speaker 04

  It's occurred to me, maybe it's curvature gravity and torsional gravity.

• 1:15:58Speaker 00

  Ah, could be.

• 1:15:59Speaker 01

  Interesting.

• 1:16:00Speaker 04

  I know.

• 1:16:01Speaker 00

  There could be different explanation of some of that.

• 1:16:03Speaker 04

  Encouraging him, but.

• 1:16:04Speaker 01

  Well, no, I've, I've come around them those way. I, I, I, I never, I never fully ruled.

• 1:16:11Speaker 00

  Rogan says that he believes.

• 1:16:13Speaker 01

  Raza.

• 1:16:13Speaker 00

  Yeah. So do I.

• 1:16:14Speaker 01

  I, I.

• 1:16:15Speaker 00

  I believe Lazar is not saying.

• 1:16:18Speaker 01

  I'm starting to do, well, I, I think he was pushed out by Intel, I believe. Cause John Lear gave the files to George Knapp. But, and so maybe it was like at the time that Majestic 12 was coming out. I think a lot more about the Majestic 12 was correct as well. And that was maybe go, went by another name and there are, you know, false names in there, whatever. But that's how kind of passage material works. And that's how, you know, recruiting works where you, you know, you have to give a quack even ear or whatever. So I, I don't quite, you know, maybe believe the story fully prima facie, but I think you experience real stuff.

• 1:16:53Speaker 00

  Yeah.

• 1:16:54Speaker 04

  And it was given passage material, maybe some of it was authentic.

• 1:16:57Speaker 00

  No matter what he did on the side and no matter.

• 1:17:01Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 1:17:01Speaker 00

  Don't forget this guy actually knew Teller.

• 1:17:04Speaker 01

  Right.

• 1:17:05Speaker 00

  Teller did not approach anybody that was so. Do you? We're talking with one of the greatest physicists of all time. If it wasn't for his, uh, his disdain with Oppenheimer and how much Oppenheimer's loved by the rest of the physics community.

• 1:17:19Speaker 01

  Right.

• 1:17:19Speaker 00

  Edward Teller would be remembered forever as one of the geniuses of our time. Remember, this is the man that not only is responsible for the Teller Wuam device.

• 1:17:29Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 1:17:29Speaker 00

  But for something called Project Sandile. It's unclassified. Look into it.

• 1:17:34Speaker 01

  Well, if it's unclassified.

• 1:17:36Speaker 00

  So.

• 1:17:36Speaker 01

  What happened?

• 1:17:37Speaker 00

  Look into it.

• 1:17:38Speaker 01

  He's a.

• 1:17:39Speaker 00

  Imagine creating something instead of a 50 megatons, the Russian Tsar Bomba. Imagine something billion.

• 1:17:47Speaker 01

  Whoa.

• 1:17:49Speaker 04

  Yeah, he, he wanted a hundred gigaton.

• 1:17:51Speaker 01

  Oh.

• 1:17:52Speaker 04

  I don't know why.

• 1:17:53Speaker 00

  Project Sandile.

• 1:17:53Speaker 01

  Jesus Christ.

• 1:17:55Speaker 00

  Man was an absolute genius from every world.

• 1:17:57Speaker 01

  Genius.

• 1:17:58Speaker 00

  Yeah.

• 1:17:58Speaker 04

  He had, he had no limits.

• 1:18:00Speaker 00

  No, no, he rightly believed. No, no earth, no, no world in, in its right mind. We all sane. Trust me, we are sane as an earth. That's why we must come together, unify somehow.

• 1:18:14Speaker 01

  Come down with that. Amount of energy.

• 1:18:17Speaker 00

  No, no, no. He believed that no, no sane world would ever execute such a weapon. So just the very existence of such a weapon, knowing that you have that sword. This is the sword of Democles. The man must have been very well versed in the classics. Sword of Democles, always hanging above your head. Nobody is crazy enough.

• 1:18:42Speaker 01

  We have enough of a sword of Democles in my thinking. But what, what, what do you think? Cause you made an interesting, you've been talking a lot about Heaviside here.

• 1:18:52Speaker 00

  Yeah.

• 1:18:52Speaker 01

  And him being, you know, kind of an inspiration for you.

• 1:18:56Speaker 00

  Absolutely.

• 1:18:57Speaker 01

  I interviewed a Navy scientist, another Navy scientist who actually was anonymous in my Townsend Brown episode. He talked about this framework of extended electrodynamics. So he talked about the original 21 Maxwell's equations and a more faithful adherence to those equations. And the quaternary and, you know.

• 1:19:17Speaker 00

  No quaternary, yeah.

• 1:19:18Speaker 01

  Uh, being somehow essential to all these new exotic electromagnetic waves beyond the transverse hurting waves. So scalar wave, scalar longitudinal waves, things like that. Do you agree with that model or?

• 1:19:32Speaker 00

  It, I believe there are many roads that lead to Rome.

• 1:19:35Speaker 01

  Okay.

• 1:19:36Speaker 00

  I understand that view because they believe there's, that truly what we're seeing, again, the whole idea of the Arnold Bohm effect. The whole idea is that what's true is the vector and the scalar potentials, not the electric field per se and the B field. It's the way you look at it, the way you use, again, physics should drive the mathematics, not the other way around. I truly believe that.

• 1:20:02Speaker 04

  What's interesting is I read a paper recently, cause I've always been skeptical of scalar longitudinal scalar wave theory. But I read it primarily because we don't see them. So the question is, is I, I, you know, I'm fundamentally an empiricist.

• 1:20:13Speaker 01

  Yeah, we're only going to see these.

• 1:20:14Speaker 04

  Yeah. What was interesting is apparently there's a possibility of mistaking very small sub harmonics in AC waveforms. For, or I'm sorry, mistaking longitudinal. With scalar waves for subharmonics. So the notion was if you expose some kind of a novel matrix, something like what we were talking about, that that sort of pulls the waveform apart in the same manner that a prism pulls apart, you know, a light wave and shows you the different frequencies. That you might see something novel out of that, that you're like, wait a second, that's not normal. That's perhaps your scalar wave. So there's a possible experimental approach to verification or discrediting.

• 1:20:50Speaker 00

  And don't forget the fundamental papers of E.T. Whitaker.

• 1:20:54Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 1:20:55Speaker 00

  1904, 1905. English, British mathematician by the name of E.T. Whitaker writes these two fundamental papers whereby he actually shows that scalar waves, non-Herzian.

• 1:21:11Speaker 00

  So non-transverse waves are feasible.

• 1:21:14Speaker 01

  Interesting.

• 1:21:15Speaker 00

  As a matter of fact, wasn't it Colonel Tom Bearden that mentioned?

• 1:21:20Speaker 01

  Yeah, Tom Bearden talks about scalar physics. There's a guy now, V. Hyblin, who publishes papers about woodson. There's another guy publishes papers about extended electrodynamics and these other wave types.

• 1:21:31Speaker 04

  I mean, these things are not expressly forbidden, so.

• 1:21:33Speaker 00

  No, anything that's not forbidden by physics is allowable.

• 1:21:37Speaker 01

  Yeah, and you're not.

• 1:21:38Speaker 00

  Now, is it engineerable?

• 1:21:40Speaker 04

  Right.

• 1:21:40Speaker 00

  That depends on the genius of some people.

• 1:21:43Speaker 01

  Well, you need to polarize the vacuum again, right? Because it's all about the, in the Lorentz equation, right? Having a sort of a gauge where the scalar vector potentials

• 1:21:53Speaker 00

  Which way?

• 1:21:53Speaker 01

  are automatically kind of negated or equal zero. But in fact, yeah, there might actually be a real scalar magnitude or scalar vector potentials that are present, even if magnetic field is not present. And the prosaic explanation for that is the electromagnetic four potential. But a lot of proponents of extending electrodynamics said that actually explains this stuff way, way better.

• 1:22:17Speaker 04

  This is why I think condensed matter physics is the most exciting field of physics today, because these things are being interrogated.

• 1:22:23Speaker 00

  And please don't forget Nikola Tesla.

• 1:22:25Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 1:22:25Speaker 00

  His idea of radiant energy is based on what?

• 1:22:27Speaker 01

  Scalar waves. Scalar waves, yeah, interesting. Very interesting. What was?

• 1:22:33Speaker 00

  He, he was totally against Hertz, by the way.

• 1:22:36Speaker 01

  Was he?

• 1:22:36Speaker 00

  Tesla was very outspoken. Known to be here hidden anyway.

• 1:22:42Speaker 01

  Because he thought his own these exotic way, well, he was experimenting.

• 1:22:46Speaker 00

  Don't forget Einstein thought that Tesla was the most intelligent man in the world at one point in time. This is Einstein.

• 1:22:53Speaker 04

  I've never interacted with this. I've never consumed Einstein's commentary about Tesla. That's interesting.

• 1:22:58Speaker 01

  Well, I it's funny Tesla and Townsend Brown were doing the same thing. Tesla was doing similar stuff to what Townsend Brown was at the end of his career. At Wardley Cliff and in Colorado Springs, extremely high voltages across short distances where you would expect to get these type of anomalies. The fact that it rips and.

• 1:23:15Speaker 00

  Somebody should ask the president-elect about his uncle.

• 1:23:19Speaker 01

  Well, you want to know the one interview with John Trump is available in a documentary on the Philadelphia experiment. Philadelphia experiment is this quacky psyop, you know, experiment with Townsend Brown involved. There probably was a real thing going on underneath the, you know, veneer, the fake thing that was distributed that Townsend Brown actually pulled off. But John Trump gets interviewed in this documentary by Bill Moore. And John Trump was tasked with looking through Tesla's files when they confiscated him from his apartment in New York. And so he was the nationalist. He was very close with Van der Bar Bush. If there is a legacy UFO program, John Trump had to be. He was the top radar expert in the country.

• 1:24:02Speaker 01

  I think he even owned a company called High Voltage LLC or something like that.

• 1:24:07Speaker 00

  I believe Tesla physics quote unquote can bring these things down. This is our trump card. I truly believe.

• 1:24:16Speaker 01

  Bring what stuff?

• 1:24:17Speaker 00

  It's the genius of Nikola Tesla that will one day help us in the upcoming, let's say, if there's such a thing of. Cosmic war.

• 1:24:27Speaker 01

  Oh, you're saying invasion? Well, that's what I mean. That's what Reer says. I don't like to talk about that. I think that's a bad. I think I think we shouldn't mess with the stuff and let it.

• 1:24:37Speaker 00

  Let them decide.

• 1:24:38Speaker 01

  Let them decide. I think they're way more advanced.

• 1:24:40Speaker 00

  Again, I believe we have property.

• 1:24:45Speaker 01

  Oh, man, I think they're factions, and I think they're they're good initiatory factions, and then they're bad, malevolent, more actively fucking with us faction.

• 1:24:55Speaker 04

  Well, interesting math emerges when you look at the the sheer number of galaxies, the sheer number of stars per galaxy, the age of the universe, the number of emergent species that can that can emerge from a given planet, the numbers blow up very quickly. So this notion of one, two, three, four species gets really strange. Like, why aren't there 25,000? You know, why aren't there 30,000?

• 1:25:15Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 1:25:15Speaker 04

  And so I think there must. So on the nuts and bolts side, I think there are power scaling restrictions in play that restrict how far you can go with any sort of FTL technology. But at the same time, I think it informs the political landscape.

• 1:25:29Speaker 01

  Yeah, well, we assume, right, this like binary angels and demons or angels for demons.

• 1:25:36Speaker 04

  Right.

• 1:25:36Speaker 01

  But it's no gray cell. Well, if you have a hierarchy of beings, it's likely more of a kangaroo explosion, more diversity on the food chain above you, maybe, maybe even then below you or whatever, because you have these, you know, all sorts of path dependencies. And yeah, so maybe there's just it just gets extremely complex.

• 1:25:57Speaker 04

  As a counterpoint, I Peter Thiel gave a very interesting interview where he talked about how he thinks there's an argument for the fact that that there might be selective forces that lead to one very good and one very bad.

• 1:26:11Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 1:26:11Speaker 04

  And this that this could this could give rise to the binary. And I raised space on it. We talked about it. It's very controversial because there are people that hate this interpretation.

• 1:26:19Speaker 01

  Well.

• 1:26:20Speaker 04

  But I think it's very compelling.

• 1:26:21Speaker 01

  Well, it's compelling.

• 1:26:21Speaker 00

  But it's biblical.

• 1:26:22Speaker 01

  It's biblical.

• 1:26:23Speaker 04

  It is.

• 1:26:24Speaker 00

  The war between the children of light.

• 1:26:26Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 1:26:27Speaker 00

  And the children of darkness.

• 1:26:29Speaker 01

  That's yeah, if it ever felt apocalyptic, it does now. I mean, look at what's going on. You look at where the war is actually taking place. It's pretty wild. It feels like we're in the Book of Revelation, but also.

• 1:26:39Speaker 00

  Truly, end of time.

• 1:26:40Speaker 01

  It's weird. But like, I think the point he was making was that tech itself is a forcing function. And so if you have warp drive tech, if you have faster than light tech, you never see it coming. You it's hard to have your defense against that.

• 1:26:56Speaker 04

  That was an excellent point.

• 1:26:56Speaker 01

  And so because of that. You either have to inflect towards this like totalitarian total clamp down one world government state, or you need to reflect inflect towards like complete altruism and like heart centeredness. And if you have one, you know, maybe you'll be okay, you know, with the work drive stack and it'll be saving up humanity. And if you have the other, yeah, you just, you need total control. But you know, that's not, that's I hope you don't flip in that direction.

• 1:27:23Speaker 00

  I believe the physics that will win is the physics that's based on creation and destruction.

• 1:27:28Speaker 01

  So Victor Shabro, well, how do we, how do we get to, because a lot of this conversation is, you know, it's fascinating and it's mind opening, but it's also bleak and scary because I, it's starting to dawn on me just how we live in a multipolar world and you have these exotic lineages of physics that all of these countries are somewhat privy to. And they're, they're very destructive. And so how do we get to a more generative, heart-centered, positive version of physics in the global landscape?

• 1:28:02Speaker 00

  Many roads lead to Rome, but there's only one Via Appia.

• 1:28:06Speaker 01

  Only one what?

• 1:28:07Speaker 00

  Via Appia, the one that the aqueduct was built along. It was the major road that led to Rome. So there could be many roads that led to Rome, but there was one of choice. I was usually followed by the legions. There may be just one way of doing it right.

• 1:28:26Speaker 00

  Can we find it before something tragic happens?

• 1:28:31Speaker 01

  What do you think that way is? There's a

• 1:28:33Speaker 00

  Unification, unification.

• 1:28:37Speaker 01

  But it can't just be a physics solution.

• 1:28:39Speaker 00

  Can we reengineer human nature? I once asked that of Kurt Chaimango. I think he's still thinking on it. Can we reengineer human nature? That's where the secret of all this lies. What are we? Who are we?

• 1:28:58Speaker 01

  What do you think?

• 1:28:59Speaker 00

  I think it's possible. But again, I think it demands a great effort on our part to leave our individualistic ways and come together as one collective who are willing to live in total equality. See, Marx attempted that. He did. And yet.

• 1:29:23Speaker 00

  The practice of Marxism resulted in tremendous atrocities, pogroms.

• 1:29:30Speaker 01

  Well, he was diagnostically.

• 1:29:32Speaker 00

  And you could say that it was the Leninist uprising and the revolution that led to Nazism, that led to National Socialism. So in other words, everything came from trying to put this idea of equality into practice, but in the wrong manner, because it formed elitism. Once you have elitism into the equation, you've destroyed everything.

• 1:29:57Speaker 01

  Well, it's just so anathema to human nature and Marxism. And maybe it's sort of diagnostically somewhat correct as far as how capitalism creates these sort of alienation dynamics or whatever, but prescriptively, it's just so beyond idealistic.

• 1:30:13Speaker 00

  But isn't it a beautiful thought, the equality of man?

• 1:30:16Speaker 01

  I think, um, man, I like, you know, I don't like meritocracy. I think is overused and kind of in an annoying way, but it's meritocracy is way better than equality. So like the idea that we're all like, you know, for equal outcomes or whatever, that's crazy. You know, maybe some sort of, you know, equal footing or opportunity, but that even you end up in these sort of never ending conversations of how exactly to engineer that.

• 1:30:42Speaker 00

  Right.

• 1:30:42Speaker 01

  In these sort of technocratic ways that lend themselves actually the power co-option ultimately of people that don't even care about those things. It's sort of a bait and switch. And so, I don't know, I think it's a really hard conversation. If the 20th century was a refutation of anything, it was a refutation of these technocratic ideologies where you could engineer society into anything. It was the, it was, you had all these utopian ideologies and none of them weren't Nazism, Bolshevism, communism, you know, Trotskyist Marxism, they all failed.

• 1:31:13Speaker 00

  No.

• 1:31:14Speaker 01

  And, um, you know, I think it really was a refutation. It's the most deadly century we've ever had. So. I don't know how we we get out of this, but it feels like it has to be a much more individual. Kind of.

• 1:31:26Speaker 00

  Maybe we need a common enemy from the outside.

• 1:31:28Speaker 01

  No, that doesn't seem really good or carries down like at all.

• 1:31:32Speaker 00

  You think that there would be an enemy from within? There would be a fifth column that there would be people taking their side?

• 1:31:38Speaker 01

  Well, I think I think the the right thing is.

• 1:31:40Speaker 00

  Scary, yeah?

• 1:31:40Speaker 01

  The right thing is to look within, you know, it's to to really, really look at yourself, think about who you are. And and and and fix what's broken there. And I think that that's probably better part individually.

• 1:31:53Speaker 04

  I think we've seen enough microcosms of the outside enemy to to assert, unfortunately, that there would be fifth columns and and with some manner of speaking.

• 1:32:01Speaker 00

  That's what the problem is.

• 1:32:03Speaker 01

  What do you mean?

• 1:32:04Speaker 00

  And again, that would only.

• 1:32:07Speaker 04

  That there'd be some disruption to the idea of global unity by way of an external. Because the the ideology is that there'd be some.

• 1:32:16Speaker 00

  So we must go to the most basic of units, the reengineering of human nature itself.

• 1:32:21Speaker 04

  Do we have enough self-awareness to do so, you know?

• 1:32:24Speaker 01

  I don't I don't know if I believe in that in some sort of psy op way. Well, yeah, what I mean, what what is another question? What do you guys think? You know, Reagan men, what you have rumors, right? Of like MacArthur.

• 1:32:35Speaker 00

  Why would he have said it in a plain session of of the United Nations?

• 1:32:39Speaker 01

  So so, yeah, so this is this is the story is that Reagan was speaking with Gorbachev. Gorbachev tells this story. That uh, he says in an interview, I think with Charlie Rose or something. And Reagan whispers to him right before the conversation starts, he says, you know, hey, if aliens invaded, would you have our back?

• 1:32:58Speaker 00

  Well, then.

• 1:32:58Speaker 01

  Me kind of, you know, co-padrate on that and defend the earth together. And Gorbachev was extremely taken aback, but. Yeah, this idea of kind of astral astral politics or something. Do you do you think that? That and this idea of MacArthur, there are rumors that, you know.

• 1:33:14Speaker 00

  I'm interested, though. What was Gorbachev's? Was it then the affirmative?

• 1:33:19Speaker 01

  I think it was. He said, he said, yes, Mr. President, we would we would defend you.

• 1:33:23Speaker 00

  He meant it too. And Gorbachev.

• 1:33:26Speaker 01

  Is that is that real, though? I mean, does that is that like Reagan, like kind of passing on it, or?

• 1:33:31Speaker 00

  Sometimes you have leaders that are meant to be there at the right time, under the right circumstances. I believe they're born for that particular purpose, to make sure. That earth is not pushed toward the precipice of perdition. Maybe we're meant to have a certain balance between the children of darkness and the children of the light.

• 1:33:54Speaker 01

  What do you mean?

• 1:33:56Speaker 00

  Equilibrium. And yet, everything happens far away from equilibrium. Everything that's physically important. How interesting.

• 1:34:05Speaker 01

  Well, this is not, we're speaking of a mystic. What's going on? What do you mean?

• 1:34:09Speaker 00

  I don't know. Jack, throw some light on.

• 1:34:12Speaker 04

  Analogously to the Pius effect, which takes place far from equilibrium, where, you know, you can, you can see these novel behaviors. In the book, you know, you have, you have average behavior. You have average outcomes. And so he's making an analogy to that.

• 1:34:29Speaker 01

  Well, yeah, I mean, you have like thermodynamic law around that.

• 1:34:33Speaker 04

  Right.

• 1:34:33Speaker 01

  And then it does seem like, it does seem like all these exotic effects I get into are like a result of like, quote unquote, high energy physics. Or like extremely granular manipulation of, you know, materials or whatever. And so it's like, it's, you're really, you're pushing the boundary. It's like, um, you have this, uh, Ken Wilson was this CERN physicist. He had this concept of renormalization. It's funny, it's like, it was, it's really used to describe phase transitions in materials. But it's like, you know.

• 1:35:03Speaker 00

  Who was against it? He said, someone spoke against that idea, saying that it's like, uh, is like, uh, putting, putting infinities under the rug, like sweeping infinities under the rug. Was it Feynman?

• 1:35:17Speaker 01

  I don't know. But I'm just using really philosophically, just like pushing systems to their logical boundary. In your case, the shorting of one day.

• 1:35:25Speaker 00

  Right.

• 1:35:27Speaker 01

  You get kind of weird effects. Like it is a famous quote of Agnew Bottson, who's sponsoring the Chapel Hill conference and kind of creates quantum gravity, which sends physics down a cul-de-sac because string theory.

• 1:35:37Speaker 00

  Very strange what happened.

• 1:35:39Speaker 01

  Very interesting, but he's also funding Townsend Brown's work.

• 1:35:42Speaker 00

  Yeah.

• 1:35:42Speaker 01

  Back at the house. And he says strange phenomena occur.

• 1:35:45Speaker 00

  And you have four incredible names. You have Bryce and Cecil DeWitt.

• 1:35:50Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 1:35:50Speaker 00

  You have John Wheeler and you have Louis Whitten.

• 1:35:55Speaker 01

  I wanted to ask you, Bryce DeWitt in 1968 writes a paper about, uh, superconductors and gravitational drag. Does that actually act with your work at all?

• 1:36:05Speaker 00

  No comment.

• 1:36:09Speaker 01

  All right. Yeah, I know. It's a lot of odd characters there. The whole, you know, the whole conference, you know, that was sponsored by sponsored by Wright Airfield.

• 1:36:16Speaker 00

  Yeah.

• 1:36:17Speaker 01

  So very, very interesting history and and Agnew Bonson himself is the patron, writes a book about manmade UFOs called The Stars Are Too High. Actually, it's about this plan to unite the world via this manmade UFO invasion. But uh, he also, you know, says strange things occur at high megavolt, high megavolts across short distances. And he's describing Council Brown's work. So it's clear that pushing things to the limit, even plasma itself is the fourth energy state. We can't go beyond that, at least conceptually.

• 1:36:47Speaker 00

  It's fine.

• 1:36:48Speaker 01

  You know, you get you get some more uh, greater truths by, you know, pushing pushing the boundaries in science.

• 1:36:54Speaker 00

  It's true. It's true. Must always push the boundaries. Yeah.

• 1:37:00Speaker 01

  But is that is that this Faustian Promethean thing? Are you playing with fire when you push the boundaries? Uh, you know, you're sort of immanentizing the if if tech is an apocalyptic forcing function, are you uh, immanentizing the eschaton when you do that? And is that a bad thing?

• 1:37:16Speaker 04

  It's most certainly a point of inflection.

• 1:37:18Speaker 00

  Beautiful question. That's a great question. Gorgeous question.

• 1:37:22Speaker 01

  Thank you, Sal.

• 1:37:25Speaker 00

  It's true. Jack, you want to attack that one?

• 1:37:26Speaker 04

  It's most certainly a point of inflection forcing function such that when you approach it, something perhaps uh, under some some black swan event is going to take place. And I think that's where we talk about things that are way far from equilibrium, right? Is these are these are uh, founder events. Yeah.

• 1:37:45Speaker 01

  The world is inflecting, going, and we're in a weird timeline and.

• 1:37:50Speaker 00

  Extremely, very strange one in time. Time. You know, things that there may be a, you know, I've I've always said this and I will hold this to this to my dying breath. The whole idea is that I describe matter as.

• 1:38:10Speaker 00

  Condensed or rather, how do I say it? I say it in a certain way. Contained energy or rather energy that's contained, that's bound within fields and frozen in a quantum of time. You know who believes in Confined in a quantum of time. That's it, confined. That's that's I that came, no joke, out of the quantum vacuum. I choose not to to use the term ether because Einstein was so much against the idea of loop, even though he introduces it in 1921 on a paper.

• 1:38:48Speaker 01

  And everybody goes back on it. He says, actually, the ether is compatible with

• 1:38:52Speaker 00

  Our orthodox physicists that already believe me, a pseudoscientist and crackpot and stuff. I don't want to force

• 1:39:01Speaker 01

  Do you think Do you think that in your lifetime, on a sort of more mass audience scale, you get vindicated in your work?

• 1:39:11Speaker 00

  It's a dream, brother. It's an absolute dream. Do you know how many tears and sweat and blood and freaking nightmares and sleepless nights I've had? It just, that's why the lack of paper means so much to me. That's why I honor that man, you know? We're supposed to not like the Russians and not like the Chinese. We're all people, brother. We're all people, and that's why sometimes I pray for this external enemy. Because it's the one thing that would create a forcing function to unify us once and for all. A united earth, as it should be. I mean.

• 1:39:50Speaker 01

  Do you think you should want to know about it?

• 1:39:52Speaker 00

  Nah, please, but Putin, absolutely. I own this. Dr. Putin. That paper is one of the papers that got me thinking.

• 1:40:04Speaker 01

  He's so early on everything. He's just implicated in

• 1:40:09Speaker 00

  I'm pretty sure that he's had many a sleepless night too. And concerned about what others have

• 1:40:15Speaker 01

  Well, he's 88 and he's still completely listed. I saw him maybe a month and a half ago or something. We watched James Lox's documentary together. He's just sharp as a tack.

• 1:40:28Speaker 00

  He's just He's an incredible What a mind that man.

• 1:40:31Speaker 01

  Look at that guy. And I, you know, I felt, especially when I, you know, I met him, you know, maybe twenty eighteen ish, twenty nineteen. And like, I felt really crazy and thinking about a lot. All this stuff's now like in vogue, like, you know, UFO celebrities. Back then, I felt totally quacky because I was like really, you know, I felt like a deep resonance with, with, he was like the one guy who I felt like was, you know, somewhat credible, who, who really, uh, there was a.

• 1:40:57Speaker 00

  He's very incredible. But because.

• 1:41:00Speaker 01

  The deeper I've got.

• 1:41:01Speaker 00

  So serious, I realize he is.

• 1:41:03Speaker 01

  And just for context for the audience, Magenta was a rumored crash, I believe in Bologna, Italy.

• 1:41:10Speaker 01

  That ended up, it was in Italy's hands for like the next eleven, twelve years. It was, uh, actually rumored to be held at the Vatican at some point and then it was returned to the US, so.

• 1:41:19Speaker 04

  Well, I think it, we do think it maybe went to Germany, but we don't know when for sure or whatever. But, and Grush wouldn't speak to when it came here and all that. But, yeah.

• 1:41:30Speaker 00

  Some heavy physics there.

• 1:41:32Speaker 04

  It's interesting. It's possible it was a first one-off vehicle that we had at some point before Roswell that, you know, was at Rife Field or something like that. And.

• 1:41:41Speaker 01

  So you think that picture of the, because you, you see pictures of Comler stuff, you know, and, and Breslau, you know, and, and, and Pilsen, you know, and Czechoslovakia and Poland. And, um, you see this test rig that's like shaped like, you know, it looks like an acorn or bell or something can be fit in there. You think they were testing?

• 1:41:59Speaker 04

  Maybe.

• 1:42:00Speaker 01

  The Magenta crap?

• 1:42:01Speaker 04

  I've heard it's also.

• 1:42:01Speaker 01

  Exactly.

• 1:42:02Speaker 04

  On that side.

• 1:42:03Speaker 00

  Also, I mean, why have that shape at all? Why that shape in particular?

• 1:42:09Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 1:42:09Speaker 00

  Given.

• 1:42:10Speaker 01

  And then it was transferred maybe to a rape pad or something?

• 1:42:12Speaker 04

  Right. Like, like at the end of the war when we got in or something like that.

• 1:42:16Speaker 01

  That would be a very interesting.

• 1:42:18Speaker 04

  Or if it wasn't.

• 1:42:19Speaker 00

  Scary shit, hell. If it's true, it's because the implications of.

• 1:42:23Speaker 01

  But so do you think that was a UFO crash? You don't know. But like in nineteen thirty-three, you don't have some sophisticated bell on your, your building. I was like, nature brown.

• 1:42:36Speaker 00

  Again, the price effect, eighteen nineties physics.

• 1:42:40Speaker 01

  Okay, okay. So you think people like maybe, maybe girl off figured this out?

• 1:42:44Speaker 00

  What I'm worried about is, uh, uh, no, Walter Basley, you know, the friend of Dr. Joseph Farrell, Walter Basley, the whole idea of Nenza. The fuck were these guys? The airship, board on board mystery? What's going on here? Because that's around Hades side sign, that speaks to the bike.

• 1:43:02Speaker 01

  Yeah, but that's, that's a really quick, quick translation from physics to engineering. You think the eighteen nineties airships?

• 1:43:09Speaker 00

  There was some engineering geniuses back there. Look at Nikola Tesla.

• 1:43:13Speaker 01

  But that's, that would just be wild. That's beyond belief to me.

• 1:43:16Speaker 00

  What if it's all fucking connected?

• 1:43:19Speaker 01

  You think it could all be human stuff from the eighteen nineties on?

• 1:43:23Speaker 00

  All of the records could be gone, you know?

• 1:43:27Speaker 01

  I mean, that's just a crazy cover up.

• 1:43:30Speaker 00

  And just use the empty craft, kind of like, uh, because they never, again, I believe their fucking craft touches on manipulation of the superforce.

• 1:43:39Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 1:43:40Speaker 00

  How the fuck do you do that? How, how do you manipulate something at, at the plant scale?

• 1:43:44Speaker 01

  Keep that secret for a hundred and forty years.

• 1:43:48Speaker 00

  That seems great.

• 1:43:49Speaker 01

  They also didn't have a lot of the material technology advances yet, you know?

• 1:43:52Speaker 00

  Sometimes survival makes you crazy.

• 1:43:56Speaker 01

  They, well, they would need some sort of parapsychological root access to, you know, control. They would need, you know, they would need the mind stuff.

• 1:44:04Speaker 00

  Sure. That, or possibly a brotherhood of the occult?

• 1:44:08Speaker 01

  Yeah, something like that, like a breakaway civilization, like that.

• 1:44:11Speaker 00

  Breakaway civilization, arriving at some insights. Read up on Dr. Farrell's ideas on the breakaway civilization. Also Dolan, don't forget Richard Dolan.

• 1:44:20Speaker 01

  But who is, who in the eighteen nineties would have been privy to Hades side's insights in a way that allowed them to finance the building of, you know, these exotic craft?

• 1:44:31Speaker 00

  No, there's some powerful families back then. I'm not gonna name names. These are still extremely powerful. Put it this way, it's much better that we know certain names, but we don't know the invisible ones. Because touching even on the invisible one's existence is not a good idea. And impact our survival. And again, none of us here are suicidal. We love being alive.

• 1:45:00Speaker 01

  Absolutely.

• 1:45:01Speaker 00

  Absolutely.

• 1:45:01Speaker 01

  Yeah, that's right.

• 1:45:03Speaker 00

  No, it's, yeah.

• 1:45:05Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 1:45:06Speaker 00

  Let's not go there.

• 1:45:07Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 1:45:07Speaker 00

  Change the direction of this.

• 1:45:09Speaker 04

  All I was gonna say was, I was, I was, I was in graduate school doing a pulse IC fusion work. When I went to a conference to present, I was introduced to Eric Davis, Hal Putoff, John Nalle, and Sonny White.

• 1:45:23Speaker 00

  And oh, Sonny White, yes. Should mention Sonny White.

• 1:45:27Speaker 04

  During OSAP, it turns out.

• 1:45:28Speaker 00

  Yeah.

• 1:45:29Speaker 04

  Eric Davis was helping write that book at the time for BDP.

• 1:45:32Speaker 00

  What a book.

• 1:45:33Speaker 04

  What a book.

• 1:45:34Speaker 00

  That book opened my eyes, man.

• 1:45:36Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 1:45:36Speaker 01

  So you think Sonny White, you know, is, was a NASA engineer.

• 1:45:41Speaker 00

  Eagle, Eagle Works, huh?

• 1:45:43Speaker 01

  And he was trying to implement the Alcubierre warp drive. And I think now he's funded by DARPA, his company called Limitless or something like that. Do you think there's anything to?

• 1:45:55Speaker 00

  Oh, absolutely. Dr. White is right on the money.

• 1:46:00Speaker 01

  You think so?

• 1:46:00Speaker 00

  Oh, yeah.

• 1:46:01Speaker 01

  Because NASA's.

• 1:46:02Speaker 00

  Have you noticed he hasn't published anything lately?

• 1:46:05Speaker 04

  Always a sign.

• 1:46:06Speaker 01

  Yeah, right. Yeah, and I think they said it failed or something.

• 1:46:10Speaker 00

  That shit happened right before Ning Li just.

• 1:46:13Speaker 01

  Yeah. Interesting.

• 1:46:16Speaker 00

  Anyway.

• 1:46:17Speaker 01

  So this like Hampton, you know, Langley incursion last year that we now are understanding, you know, happened. You know what I'm talking about? You have Hampton Air Force Base. You have a 17-day incursion where it seems like drones are swarming around the area in our airspace. We have no defense against this. It seems like there's maybe a mothership. Chris Mellon said there's a mothership.

• 1:46:41Speaker 01

  What do you, what do you think about that? What do you make of it?

• 1:46:43Speaker 00

  Let me ask one crucial question here. I don't know why people don't ask these questions. Fine, safety of life, they're important, yes. Was anybody killed? Yes or no?

• 1:46:54Speaker 01

  I believe so.

• 1:46:55Speaker 04

  I don't know that they would. I, I mean, if it were, it would be highly concealed.

• 1:47:02Speaker 01

  Do you think maybe?

• 1:47:02Speaker 00

  I don't think anybody was killed.

• 1:47:05Speaker 01

  And so when?

• 1:47:05Speaker 00

  There should be an answer to you, Chris. I'll, I'm not gonna go further.

• 1:47:09Speaker 01

  Is it extraterrestrial?

• 1:47:10Speaker 00

  I'm not gonna go further. Interesting. Again, there's ET tech and there's manmade tech. Many roads lead to Rome, but there's only one via.

• 1:47:25Speaker 04

  If it's adversarial, it's awful, confrontational. And if it's some, if it's some advanced tech, they've got it way away from their shoulders. Over our territory where it could be down and captured by us and process attribution, do many reverse engineering. It's the only reason I'm skeptical of an adversarial origin. But at the same time, there were witness reports that hear about that. There were like lawnmowers, there was, they were audible. And I'm, Tom, what do you do with that, you know?

• 1:47:53Speaker 00

  But I think we remember the reverse engineering part. Lazar speaks to this, how, why he was there to begin with. He was there as a replacement for someone that had gotten killed trying to what? Use a blowtorch to go through this. Again, again, why did they never crack that? Because, because their bucket physics talks to engineering the superforce. I don't think we can do that. But I think there are manmade tech that can go around. And again, the most complex of problems has the simplest of solutions depending on perspective.

• 1:48:35Speaker 00

  What if we found another perspective? Which one is the same problem?

• 1:48:40Speaker 01

  So you have spoken publicly with a guy named Ashton Forbes, who is a big proponent of these MH370 videos. And these are these videos where you see these three orbs and they seem to circle around. The MH370 is this Malaysian aircraft. It was on CNN for like, you know, a couple of months. And it seemed like this civilian aircraft carrying passengers just disappeared in the Southeast Asian territory. And this guy Ashton Forbes took to Twitter maybe around a year ago saying he thinks this is manmade tech and that the craft was somehow teleported out of the sky. What do you think?

• 1:49:19Speaker 00

  Don't forget Dave Rossi's fourth orb. That's why Ashton now. Goes by four orbs, orbs, four orbs. There must be a four orbs. Remember the whole idea that once you open the black hole, what if there is a white hole? But the three, the three orbs would, would, would have your three axes, hence your point of origin, but there must be a destination. So there must be a fourth orb.

• 1:49:48Speaker 00

  There must be a fourth orb.

• 1:49:50Speaker 01

  So you think this is?

• 1:49:52Speaker 00

  It's not me. Dave Ross, he came up with this idea that there must be a fourth orb. I think he's one right on the money. Dave Ross is a very interesting engineer that should be looked into as well. So he's very smart.

• 1:50:05Speaker 01

  Why would you?

• 1:50:06Speaker 00

  Brilliant.

• 1:50:06Speaker 01

  Teleporter, commercial airplane, and where did the airplane end up? Is it the plot or?

• 1:50:11Speaker 00

  All I'm saying is when I saw that thing open up, I saw the bias effect in action. And I told Ashton Ford, that was his first podcast, Hard Truths Podcast. I told him, this is the bias effect. I'm gone.

• 1:50:26Speaker 01

  So you think we have room to put Dusy Berkin in the topic too?

• 1:50:29Speaker 00

  Those orbs also speak to AGI, artificial general intelligence, autonomy, AI autonomy. So we're talking about artificial singularity. I think, I don't know.

• 1:50:46Speaker 01

  It's funny, I just.

• 1:50:47Speaker 00

  Da, da, da.

• 1:50:47Speaker 01

  I just interviewed Matthew Pines and he goes, he goes, there's an iron triangle. He goes, the AI, quantum and the Grush stuff. He says, or he was, he was talking to somebody who was like, you know, deep in national security world or whatever. And he was like, the, you know, triangle, the connection between those three things is somehow this incredible technological scene.

• 1:51:10Speaker 00

  Again, cross domain disciplines coming together. Fusion of these ideas resounding into what? Disruptive technology, exactly what Jack was talking about.

• 1:51:21Speaker 01

  Very interesting.

• 1:51:22Speaker 00

  I hope one day you give your, your correct name because you're brilliant. People should know you as you are.

• 1:51:28Speaker 01

  You're welcome. Do you think that any of this stuff makes it into our civil infrastructure? I mean, we're sitting in a decaying.

• 1:51:39Speaker 00

  Weaponization by God forbid, a third party, not even a country. I don't think this is hard to engineer.

• 1:51:50Speaker 01

  So basically, the physics stagnation, we have to, our physics has to be stagnated because...

• 1:51:56Speaker 00

  Can you imagine some nut, some effin person that hates the world engineering this?

• 1:52:05Speaker 04

  Well, my hope is that these nano-structured 3D lattices turn out to be really hard to make. Interestingly, it would be fabs like TSMC doing their 2 nanometer structures. You would need sub-nanometer, maybe the sub-hector, hector is 10 to the 0.10 meters, whereas a nanometer is 10 to the 0.9 to manufacture the structures.

• 1:52:26Speaker 00

  But what if there's another way? What if there's a resonance-based way?

• 1:52:32Speaker 01

  Of fabrication?

• 1:52:33Speaker 00

  That's not based on material composition, that's not based on fabrication, method of fabrication, protocols, procedures. It's simple.

• 1:52:43Speaker 01

  Interesting.

• 1:52:44Speaker 00

  You don't want a nut figuring that out. That would be bad. That would be a bad day in hell. Or heaven, either way.

• 1:52:55Speaker 01

  What do you want the world to know? What sort of message do you have for people out there?

• 1:53:01Speaker 00

  We need to unify, 100%. Need unification. We need people to come together. And if these ideas can bring them together, then so much better for it. But too many things are dividing us now. And what we need is a unifying factor.

• 1:53:18Speaker 01

  Do you want to build the UFO to take us over?

• 1:53:23Speaker 00

  I want, what I want to build is something that can defeat an external enemy, one that's external to Earth. So let's say somewhere close to Proxima Centauri, as we're speaking right now, an alien armada is being formed.

• 1:53:43Speaker 00

  I would like for us, us, everyone in this room to come together and with other people, bring together our, our minds to create in what, what, see, one thing about what Dr. Eric Weinstein is saying is that he thinks that the best of the best, the greatest physicists should be brought together to come up with these ideas. I think even Joe the Plumber can contribute, given common sense and enough knowledge. As a matter of fact, look at Ashland Forbes. I am completely surprised what he's been able to achieve

• 1:54:22Speaker 00

  in almost a year, studying this physics on his own. Look into his podcasts. This guy's come up quite a bit. He does not have a physics, a physics pedigree. Again, what if Joe the Plumber comes up with the greatest physics idea of the moon, whatever that may be. But one, again, that helps us come together as an earth.

• 1:54:52Speaker 01

  This interview is coming on the backs of congressional hearings in Washington, DC around the existence of non-human intelligence and unidentified anomalous phenomena, but also programs thereof housed in the government around data collection, quarantining these UFOs, tracking them, that sort of thing. What did you think of the revelation of immaculate constellation, this idea of this, you know, top secret program around UFOs?

• 1:55:20Speaker 00

  Do you mean immaculate constipation? Because I believe such little information was excluded from those hearings that one could not fathom, for example, coming together, unifying these concepts into something that can save us, homo sapiens sapiens, from an exterminator. If we continue on with this trickle by trickle disclosure, this farce.

• 1:55:49Speaker 00

  Again, immaculate constipation. We'll get nowhere, absolutely nowhere.

• 1:55:56Speaker 01

  Do you think that there are deeper programs than immaculate constipation? You think that's sort of...

• 1:56:02Speaker 00

  I guarantee that Arrow will get nowhere in no time at all. So in other words, nothing will come of it again.

• 1:56:12Speaker 01

  You should come with me.

• 1:56:12Speaker 00

  They'll generate another great report that will say absolutely nothing.

• 1:56:16Speaker 01

  So there's a senate hearing this coming week into Arrow's activities and Arrow's recent report. You should come with it.

• 1:56:25Speaker 00

  That would depend on my higher ups and I would, because of my... Anyway, because of certain personal issues, I'll need a ride. If my higher ups decide I would be refused, gladly. But again, please let someone drive in there. I need a drive. That's all.

• 1:56:48Speaker 01

  Yeah. Do you have anything else you want to get in, Dinger?

• 1:56:51Speaker 00

  What you forget.

• 1:56:53Speaker 01

  Dr. Sal Payes, this is an absolute honor. We appreciate you doing this.

• 1:56:57Speaker 00

  The honor was all mine, sir, and please, you are our intellectual equal. Trust me, what you've... Certain things you've said during the interview make me say that. I would not say that otherwise. I don't just come up with stuff.

• 1:57:12Speaker 01

  I get audition instincts and, you know, maybe I would not.

• 1:57:16Speaker 00

  Whatever it is, it is a glimmer of hope. And we need all the hope we can have.

• 1:57:22Speaker 01

  Appreciate that, man. I appreciate the hat. Wear that.

• 1:57:25Speaker 00

  Yes, sir. Please, please do. Yes. Looks really good. Woohoo! Looks good, brother.

• 1:57:31Speaker 01

  All right.

• 1:57:32Speaker 00

  All right.

• 1:57:34Speaker 00

  All right, bro. The end.