ZPE All Stars Douglas Miller Hard Truths Podcast

Video Transcript

Malaysian 370 contact 120 decimal niner. Good night. Good night. >> Are you ready chat? >> Breaking news tonight. A Malaysia Airlines flight [music] with 239 people on board, including four Americans, has gone missing >> even as these [music] grainy satellite images released today by the Chinese government. >> Again, the Malaysian flight was [music] a was one shot at China saying, "Knock it up. >> Why shoot it down though if it's not hostile? Our technologies permit us to manipulate [music] time and space. >> Why is it distance annihilated? >> This country is very [music] powerful, far more powerful than people understand. We [music] have weaponry that nobody has any idea what it is. And it is the most powerful weapons in the world. Not even close. I remember the [music] line from Hindu scripture [music] is trying to persuade the prince that [music] he should do and to impress him takes on his multi-armed form and says [music] now I am become death to destroy of worlds. [music] I suppose we all thought that one way or another. Oh boy. Welcome everybody to another Monday live stream, guys. Special episode as you can see up here. Hard truths podcast. No more delays. Let's bring up the man of the hour, Douglas Miller. How are you doing, good sir? Welcome, >> Ashton Forbes. Thank you for having me on your live stream, sir. I am good, >> bro. Let's just get it. Let's get it started. You know, sports ball is happening. People are getting excited. The leaves are changing. Starting to become fall. But we want to know about zero point energy chips. Screw sports ball. So, that's why I brought you on here because honestly, you're an expert in my opinion. I've seen your content. you've been pushing hard on social media. Uh so it just seemed like a natural fit. Let's get it started by what is your background because probably not a lot of people know about you. Where do you come from? Which um cloning facility did you get tubed out of? >> Right. Well, um first of all, I'm here. I'm good. I'm I'm safe. Um I am sterile now. Uh I will say my wife said no more kids. So I that was of my own valition. I did not get beamed up by my chest into a UFO where little grey men operated on me. And I was also not apprehended uh by people who drugged me into black Cadillacs and taken off either from the times traveling adversaries. Uh so we're good there. Last I checked, uh my operation is still uh yeah, I can still feel that that's they didn't reverse that. So, I am Douglas Miller and uh I was born in Titusville, Florida. So, interesting about that. I do have memories going back before I was three. Looking out the window, looking on the Sony television, I remember seeing Challenger explode, which is crazy because I would have been like three. That was uh core memory, I guess. And then moved to Texas after that where um I would say I'm a Texan because I've been here my whole life since then. Lake Jackson uh south of Houston area. Um, I am entering my 19th year with the Federal Aviation Administration. I am an air traffic control specialist. I work at Houston in route air traffic control center behind a radar scope. So, if you've ever flown to Cancun, which I know a lot of you have. You go right over the Gulf of Mexico. That's the airspace that I work. So, you're up at 30 40,000 not 40, 30 to 39,000 ft. I'm talking to your aircraft going across the Gulf. Um, I had no idea how many of you guys go to Cancun until I started working there. It is a lot. I work thousands of you across the Gulf to Cancun. Um, so that's been an exciting career. Um, I have six years left where I plan on retire because as a controller you can retire at 25 years and I want to go into ZPE. That's what I'm setting up for. Six years out. Um, I'm starting early getting started on that. Um, other than that, I'm I'm a nobody. I'm I'm just I'm there's nothing special about me. I have no autistic powers. My power of recollection is not great. Um I need notes. Uh I'm average IQ, you know. I'm no S Pis. I'm no Jack Sarati mentally. Um but when I was a kid, I was obsessed. I couldn't believe there was no such thing as an anti-gravity chamber. And so I went perusing through our encyclopedia Bratannica. I read everything there was on on Einstein's uh relativity, special relativity, wormholes, black holes. Every weekend we would go to the store. I would go to the magazine section, Rediscover magazine, Popular Science magazines. And I have a lot of those that brought home in my closet and you could see all the highlights, all my book full of notes, but I wasn't blessed with the mathematical mind. So in college, I didn't go that route. I went to Embry Riddle Aeronautical University. I got my degree. I got a pilot's license. I became a controller. But I've kept this passion with me and you know that's it. I'm there's there's nothing about me. People come at me and and say that you know you have no qualifications to be talking about any of this. Okay. Well, what about the Jack Sarodies of the world? You know um the guy Brian Green who who wrote the string theory books. Where are we after all these brilliant minds? don't have to have just a mathematical intellect to be able to talk about this stuff. You have to have a passion and um so that's why I created a company 0 Field Technologies because it's not about me. It's about what what can my company do? The company is a way more uh powerful tool than me individually. And so people are gravitating to that. Uh you know Gabriel Diaz and there's another one uh I did a live podcast with Ryan Hopkins of Arcane Magnetics. done great stuff with charge clusters which are plasmoids. So um that is me in a nutshell and uh I'll let you get your next question. >> No, I got questions on that. So first thing I want to say is I mean you're talking to Ashton Forbes. I am a healthcare uh healthcare consultant, healthcare IT consultant and I think it's interesting that we've got similar years of experience in our various careers but now we've both centered on this idea of zero point energy and we don't come back at it from an academic background. I actually didn't know that about you ahead of time. Um >> and matter I think it matters more about what is your perception of [snorts] reality and how do you intake information? This is why if you look back at the physicists that are pretty much the founders of all physics, a lot of them were self-taught. It's not that they, you know, read some books and I taught them like they taught themselves how things work because ultimately physics is the science of observable reality. And there are even debates about should physics go down a path of realism versus more of a path of like following the math. And you think about that, those are real debates because nobody really knows the true answer of how it all works because it's veiled behind it's invisible to us. We don't we can't see all the information. So that's why I think it's important to be asking everybody. the random janitor has just as much input in my opinion as long as they're well read on the subject as an academic, you know, physicist >> with a million podcast subscribers. >> So, if anything, hopefully that's what people take away from this conversation. And we now we're setting the bar pretty high here because the rest of this podcast, we better be educating people because otherwise we're going to look like some damn fools, right? Because otherwise, nobody's going to listen to you. But here's the more important thing. How did you get involved in 0ero point? What was it that got you excited about it? Because 0 point energy is not or was not like a common thing that people talked about before a couple years ago. >> It was not um and that's why I've done such extensive research on the history of it. Um it's surprising how far back it goes all the way back to Max Planck's second paper of 1911. Um it's surprising that uh Walter Nst in 1916 just a few years later took Max Plank's idea and said yes this is uh this is a a big deal basically and worked with Einstein and then um just the whole history leading up to uh Budaf and then and then today goes back to a real zero point energy field. So the history in the context of the history of a real zero point energy field is important. Um I when I found out about 0 point energy it was it was very exciting. It was I forget I was young. I don't remember if I was teenage years or early 20s somewhere probably 18 19. Uh I was at I guess I was at church. I can't remember. Um yes I'm a Christian. And I asked a doctor, an archaeologist, uh Dr. Don Patton, he's done several excavations to uh Noah's Ark. Um I said, "If what we believe is that the Earth is, you know, several thousand years old, say 12,000, I don't know. Um because of what we believe about the biblical account," I said, "How can we see galaxies? They're so far out. How is it that we can see the light?" And he his only response to me because he wasn't like a physicist in that regard. He's a very very high IQ man. But he said that's the right question. And just that one remark sent me off on that rabbit hole. That's the right question. It's all about asking the right questions. At some point in college, I did discover Barry Sedterfield. And I don't remember what year that was, but he has a whole website. Maybe you've seen it. Um and I ordered their book, Cosmology and Zero Point Energy. I've had that for several years. It came out in 2013. And so that sent me down a a journey of 0 point energy that is unlike anyone else's journey in zero point energy because nobody >> Yeah. >> looks at the 0 point energy in the same way Setterfield did. So when I talk about it is from that perspective, which is not the perspective anyone else talks about it, which is why I'm online doing everything that I can to present that monograph in an understandable way. >> So I've noticed that. So, first of all, what I'm hearing is that you've been interested and involved in 0 for like 15 years. Is that accurate? That's really impressive because I wasn't sure. You might have just gotten involved like recently, you know, for maybe I helped influence you. I know I've helped influence a lot of people, but it's interesting to see that you already were on it >> and you have sort of like this parallel branch >> that you've gone down, which is the ST uh stochastic electronamic sedd. That's right. Versus um extended electronamics route and I want to try to understand the difference. as far as I've been able to understand so far, it's just expanding upon Kudaf's um polarizable vacuum model and extended electronamics to turn into something that's engineerable, something that we can actually utilize. So, go ahead. How would you explain the difference? >> Uh that that's a great question. I had only just heard of extended electronamics um when I did my March um APEC on Tim Ventura. That week is when I heard about extended electronamics. I had not heard about it before and so I did a little quick research right before um I went on and I added it to my uh presentation there to talk about the difference um between extended electronamics and SED. And I got to be honest, I haven't looked at it since. Uh I forget what exactly extended electronamics says. It's different from SED. What I will say about SED, it is the the classical electronamics uh that goes all the way back to to Plank's paper and it has a lot of flaws. Um Pudof himself says uh that it's got a lot of flaws. And so this idea of extended electronamics is probably very similar to uh to what Setterfield's doing. He's extending SED um in different ways. I just I haven't um recently looked to see what those ways are. So my apologies on that. I can talk about the extensionsfield has made. >> Well, so Hudolf is going to say that a there's an ether and so that the spaceime is a polarizable medium and that that means that electromagnetism is the key to interacting with that medium and the key to basically turning electromagnetism into a gravity beam. And this is ultimately the big question. And how do you do gravity manipulation? Going back to your story from when you were young, right? You go, well, doesn't it make sense? Like just ask questions. That's what you're saying. It's true. Just ask questions. Is how do we do gravity manipulation? Simple question, right? Seems like the answer is by modifying electromagnetic beam. So this is what pud the basis of pudaf's theory. And now so then my my question is okay. So does uh what does Barry Setterfield's uh you know s uh stocastic electronamics how what does that help you understand about about the uh zero point energy >> right that's the exciting part is that from that perspective everything that we know is emergent from the zero point energy so there's a lot of aspects to zero point energy um to use an old internet pun it's not a one-trick pony It's an infinite trick pony from Ask a Ninja. Um, you have 0 point energy waves uh of a frequency cubed spectrum. And so that means there's very long waves at the scale of like you and I and then all the way down to the plank cut off length uh very high energetic shore waves, right? And so here's the thing. At the scale of you and I, there's not very many of them. Let's just say for example, there's only a couple and they're very low energy. And as you get smaller and smaller and smaller, there's more and more of them on a frequency cubed scale. Uh so if you have like two at the scale of you and I, you know, you would have six at the next scale down, so on and so forth all the way down to plank cutff. So it's very very energetic down there. And not only is it there more energetic waves, but there are more of them. And so that exerts a pressure everywhere. So that's your zero point energy waves. The waves have uh crests as Cedfield likes to say it uh where interference patterns and when that happens you have uh transient dipoles that in his view are very real. So it's a particle antiparticle pair that pops into existence and then back out of existence. But while they exist they can absorb light and then remit it and they control the permitivity and the permeability of the vacuum. Now because they're positive negative the whole vacuum of space is filled with these things. The whole vacuum of space remains net neutral. But H bar in setterfield's uh description is a measurement of the ZPE density. That would be the pressure of the waves themselves along with their associated transient dipoles or particle and particle pairs. What QED calls virtual particle pairs. So >> so let me ask that. So that sounds like to me like you're saying that's the if that's the density that's the amount of zero point energy around us all the time then in my analogy that's like how deep the ocean is of of zero point energy and then above here is all our observable reality. So that would be saying that H bar that's how much energy density there is. This actually reminds me of something you were talking about the other week where you were saying theorizing about can the energy density of space have changed over time or be different in different regions of spaceime because now that's like hey >> okay that h bar that's different over here than it was than it is over there or it's different here than it was in the past >> and my huge analogy for that >> if that's true I would say oh that's like me pouring the paint on the canvas and then the can and the paint is spreading out and when it's spreading out it's getting thinner and thinner and thinner and thinner and thinner. That would be like the analogy your H bar like going towards an equilibrium where it's getting short smaller and smaller as it spreads out. Is that >> that's a pretty good analogy used a rubber band stretching analogy but that kind of sounds very similar to that. um [clears throat] in his analogy the rubber band stretches in the beginning like big bang era and then um that imparted a potential energy into the universe and then as that energy releases over time that's the kinetic energy that became the ZPE. So kind of the same as your paint thinning out over a canvas. So let's So that's important what you just said there because [clears throat] >> we're going to try to talk about free energy and then the question is well is it really free energy and when no matter how you look at it where's the energy coming from and what you just explained there is you said okay well this rubber band is stretching out but now there's this latent energy and zero point energy that's built in there and that's like saying oh well now I've got a balloon that's already filled up and you say well anybody could take a balloon that's filled up and you can squeeze and you can have it jet something around, you know, so everybody can understand that's energy there. >> So is that that's >> free energy everywhere. >> Yeah. So that's what you're saying about the zero point energy is that we have this energy there, this potential latent energy because this is the energy of spacetime itself or how would you explain it? >> Uh yeah, so uh you have to go deeper into the center field to explain where where the the ZP came from. There's plank particle pairs and cur particles or something like that. We're not getting into that today. Um >> yeah no I don't know >> but but yeah but go back to your um original question was um uh cosmologically Cedfield said that the zero point energy used to be lower in the past. So there were fewer ZP waves meaning fewer transient uh dipole pairs antiparticle pairs and so in the past you would have had this lower H bar which means lower pairs. Let's let's think of Usain Bolt on a track. Let's say it takes him 10 seconds to get from start to finish, but then you put hurdles on the track. It takes him longer to get to the finish line. He didn't slow down his running speed, but it took him longer to get to the end. That's those virtual particle pairs absorbing and remitting the light. So, back to my original question with Dr. Patton years years ago. Uh, which led me to Setterfield. Setterfield says, well, uh, in the beginning, light speed would have been almost very very fast, almost infinite, which is why we can see light from the galaxies because there was so few particle pairs at the time. uh light was just free to go through the ether and um as the ZP increased over time there's more and more hurdles for it to go through it didn't slow down it just took longer and longer to get to us as uh H bar rose C decreased that's an invariance [clears throat] and uh uh cosm um sorry the fine structure constant remains the same it does not move >> I need help understanding this so it works the opposite of what I would have imagined is that the ZP doesn't decrease over time. It's increasing over time. >> Yes, it increased over time. So, in the beginning it was very low with a very high light speed and also uh very fast atomic orbits, atomic processes would have been faster. Nuclear processes would have been faster. Everything would have been faster. So, if you're talking about well why why in the Bible on day one uh is God create light but there's no sun, moon, and stars till day four. How does that make sense? Well, possibly. This is where Cedell comes in with the cosmology part is that um those atomic processes by day four z would have z pinched all those massive filaments across the universe into stars and galaxies. That's why they would have all appeared in one day. Um and then uh where else was I going to go with that? Um >> okay, lost my train of thought. Sorry. >> No, that's a really Oh, go ahead. back back several ages back when you had gigantism like dinosaurs, two foot big uh dragon flies. Uh how was that possible? Well, because the think of like when you turn up your your volume in your in your audio equipment, you hear that loud hum. You can't get rid of that hum no matter how good your technology is. That's the zero point energy affecting um capacitance and all that stuff that's in electronics. And so when that was lower, your your um messages from your from your neural net and your brain down to your toes would have been much faster. So beings like dragon flies, dinosaurs would have been a lot more efficient long ago in a lower ZP environment. They might have died off naturally just due to the fact that the messages took too long to get from their head to their tail. >> Yeah, but what if I said humans keep getting bigger and it's been like 2,000 years not getting smaller. So that's not really a huge amount of scale time timewise, but you know that could be another. So I'm just pointing out there that, you know, it's just a theory. I think the current theory is that there was more oxygen in the air or something and that's why things were >> Oh yeah, there would have been a lot of factors for sure. Yeah, >> but >> it's not just [laughter] that factor. I do like that idea though that the zero point energy and the other problem with that though I would say is that if the zero point energy was impacting things at that level then probably planets would be bigger back then too right wouldn't that impact celestial sizes as well >> right so now you're talking about what I mentioned before with uh Anthony El Perat of Los Alamos with the how he advanced plasma physics so normal uh mainstream I should say physics prefers um evolution millions of years for galaxies to come together gravitationally. But Anthony Pratt advanced plasma physics where he shows in the lab that you can get galaxies and stars forming a lot quicker than you know millions of years. Um and if you take he he wasn't a Setterfield student. So if you take what he has shown without setterfield's view and then you go back in time and say oh take what Pat's doing and then do it in a lower ZPE. Where did that get you? >> Wow, I didn't know that. So that can let it make it so that stars and things formed a lot quicker that we need to probably have. >> Yeah, that would have been quantum tunneling would have been a lot faster process back then. So you would had, you know, right now we have electrons at quantum tunnel but at a certain rate, right? And so with faster nuclear processes, there would have it wouldn't have lowered the culum barrier, but it would have increased tunneling just due to the fact there was more tunneling happening per time. So, >> oh, I remember one thing I want to say real quick, don't let me forget this. It was it it was about what you mentioned earlier about uh the ZPE increasing around large masses. So, in the center of our Milky Way galaxy, I suspect that if there was a specific test that could be done to measure what H bar is in the center of our galaxy, then we would realize that it was higher than where we're at at in the outer rim. problem with those measurements is they only look at the fine structure constant and you can't figure it out by just looking at the fine structure constant because the other terms are the ones you need and they can change even though they're invariant, right? So you have a constant where fine structure never changes. Those other terms can change invariantly and fine structure stays the same. But the problem with what people look at is only the fine structure constant and they don't see it move. So they're not going to notice a changing h bar. So different tests have to be run if they're capable of being run because I don't know what those would be. >> So sorry you said it was higher at the center of the galaxy HR. >> So at the center of our galaxy are you know millions of suns >> within a space of like from our our sar alpha centuri there's like millions. So the the the the mass in the center of our galaxy is huge. And what Cutterfield says is around large masses you're going to have uh more ZPE which means more secondary radiation which means more virtual particle pairs. So H bar technically is higher around large masses. Well he was only talking about the sun like stars in his book. He didn't talk about the center of our Milky Way but I'm extending it. It's like well what about the middle middle of our Milky Way? What would H bar be there compared to H bar in the exact middle of us and Andromeda, right, where there is no mass. I suspect it's lower there. So, light leaving our galaxy might actually speed up on its way to M31. >> I like those ideas. Did What did Barry Sutterfield think about um crap, what was I gonna say? Uh h I forgot the thought. Um, oh yeah, the age of the universe. >> Age of the universe. He believe in the big bang. >> Uh, I don't know that he gave a number. He's, um, not, uh, on board with the big bang. Um, okay. >> In his view, uh, biblical creation was, um, God stretched out the heavens. That, my view would be the plasma filaments. So, plasma filaments are stretched off across the universe. And um that was the light referred to on day one of creation. >> Okay. Um >> doesn't say that specifically. I took that from his book. Uh I inferred it. He didn't say that specifically. >> But he is a creationist. So um everything that he says >> do. >> So it's a safe bet. >> It's a safe bet. It's a safe bet. Yeah. It's a safe bet. And you know you know I said I said I'm a Christian. Sfield's a creationist. Okay. That's going to turn off a lot of people. But remember what S Pa said in one of your interviews. He said something to the effect of [laughter] of science should never have been divorced from and fill in the blank because I can't remember what word he used. He probably didn't use religion. Maybe he said philosophy. I can't recall. But the point is it never should have been divorced. >> Yeah. I was going to ask I was literally I have that written down right here that do you think gohead there's a disconnect between faith and and and Z and science or zero point energy? Obviously the answer is no. Right. >> Correct. I I think mainstream science has had the upper hill on this for so long and have people convinced that they're two separate things and if you are a creationist or a Bible believing person then then your science is whack and we got to turn the tables on that. Um because when I first heard about Setterfield and his explanation of why we can see light from distant galaxies in such a short amount of time, say only 12,000 years because light would have been almost infinite in the beginning, that just made sense to me and I've liked it ever since. Yeah, and I would agree. I as somebody who at one point was atheist or at least agnostic, um I would have to admit that the more you learn about it and even the UFO people have been saying that the heart of this is consciousness. Out of all the things that the UFO thing could be about, the physics about, they say consciousness is. And that makes me think if you get to the heart of this physics, you're gonna get to like the soul. That's what this is going to lead to. And to me, that says that this is this science is inherently connected to faith. That's what faith is all about is all about understanding our being and how we connect to the larger universe. So it's like, yeah, I would say that absolutely is is connected. People that I think that don't see that they you'll find they also don't believe in any of this science either. They don't believe they'll say, "Oh, and zero point energy. There's nothing you can do with zero point energy. It's it's useless. The a vector potential is just a mathematical convenience." You're like, >> "Okay, yeah, >> our bodies are vessels." But our intellect, our soul, our mind is an eternal light. And so once we shed this vessel and and and die, uh we'll become Matthew 13 says we'll shine like the sun. >> So maybe there's maybe we're made of ZPE. I I don't know what that realm is is made of. >> Uh but it certainly sounds like we'll be some >> it sounds like a a conscious plasma >> or maybe ZPE at the smallest levels is a plasma. I don't know. >> Yeah. And I Yeah, maybe. And maybe plasma can tap into consciousness. I'm open to all possibilities, but I'm really skeptical of everything, too, because they can use a lot of this to sigh up us in a lot of different ways very conveniently. >> Hypothesis, >> skeptical about everything, but also open-minded. But let's go back to the um the zero point energy expansion of the universe all that jazz because I've got here a normie MSM academic and we're going to do a little reaction little reaction time here since we've got you live can do a little reaction. This is how guys when you do live streaming if you need a little short break you just you break out a reaction video you just let it play and then you just go to the bathroom whatever you got to do. No, but seriously, this right here, this is Daniel Whitson, guys. If you don't know Daniel Whitson, true story right now, 100% true story. He had to address me in his class at UC Irvine a couple years ago. I found out because I think like it was a student put a comment on one of my old videos or something saying that like, "Hi, I'm a student at this guy's class. He actually had to address you in the thing." So he was so triggered by me indirectly, never talked to me or interacted with me that he had to go correct me, you know, it was about zero point energy, of course, right? So here he is now. Now he's suddenly on the up and up. Now he's on his generational run. Now he's on Danny Jones podcast and he's talking about dark energy. Okay. So let's watch a little bit of this and then we'll pause and react a little bit. >> But also, you touched on something else. I thought you knew it. >> I'm going to play it kind of fast. So whatever >> we could talk about which is conservation of energy. You say like energy can't be destroyed or created but actually we discovered that's not true right that conservation of energy is something people assume and talk about and it seems obvious but what we've discovered is the expansion of the universe tells us that energy can be created and destroyed and it's happening all the time. >> What like black holes? >> No just like as the universe expands dark energy is this substance in the universe that has constant density. So, you know, like if you have 10 ping- pong balls in in a in a volume of space and then you increase the room, but you don't add any work to ping- pong balls, the density goes down, right? Increase the volume, you don't increase the mass, density goes down. That's what matter does. And um but dark energy, this thing that's accelerating the expansion of the universe, that acts differently. That has a constant density. So, you increase the space, it's like you get more ping pong balls to keep the density constant. Nobody knows how this happens or why it happens or where what dark energy is. But the thing we know about dark energy is it has constant density. So, what happens as the universe expands? >> Okay, so let's just react to this right away. Hold on. Here we go. Do you agree with this? Here, I'll break it down for you. Number one, he says conservation of energy. Just kidding. Don't even believe in that anymore. This is crazy. Academic physicist saying conservation of energy, throw it out. And he says the expansion of the universe itself is creating more energy out of nowhere. He's essentially saying that the ocean of energy is always the same. And because it's always expanding, it never it never goes down or up. It just keeps it creates more energy out of nothing. What do you What are your thoughts? >> Dark energy. I think that's code for zero point energy. Uh what else would dark energy be? Uh I believe Cedfield discusses uh the expansion of the universe in a book. I haven't read up on that recently, but if I recall correctly, he's not a fan of the idea that the universe is just continually expanding. I think he mentions that it's kind of equalized um the conservation I'm a conservationist I guess uh I believe in the conservation of matter and energy um and this goes right back to how pudaf actually pudof I put out an uh I published an article today about how pudof about being the consumate salesman of a real zero point energy field because really he didn't get the idea on his own it goes all the way back to plank and nurt uh they came up with it, right? he sold it. And so his 1987 put out 1987 paper is the uh ground state of the hydrogen atom. And the first bore orbit, he's got it all figured out, right? It falls apart after that. I don't know why. Um and that's why everyone I talk to says, "Oh, SEDD fails. Pudof says it fails himself." Blah blah blah. Right? In ' 89, he did another paper. Where does the ZPE come from? Pudof's all over the board when you start to look at it. um he's got all these different mathematical programs and in the 1989 paper about ZPE where it comes from that's the other side of the coin. So if if electrons are getting energy momentum from the ZPE over here, then he's saying that matter and energy radiate back into the ZPE uh over here. And that so the ZPE what the ZPE is in that paper is the radiated energy of all energy and mass of the entire universe, but only in that paper, not in his other work. And that was confusing. I didn't realize all that until this week when I had a conversation with someone. Um, and I really dove into that. Um, so what what I believe in is conservation of energy and momentum. I I think that matter and energy is constantly exchanging kinetic energy and momentum with the quantum vacuum with the ZPE in ways we haven't fully understood yet. And that it is a cycle, right? Just like an electric circuit. You have one electrode, you got to have a second electrode to close the loop, right? That's how it ultimately works. And we're going to figure it out. Uh that's one thing I want my company to really focus on is figuring that part out. I don't know why Pudof and everyone else hadn't figured it out yet. Um I don't know why it's so difficult um you know to build a microchip that that extracts energy or or creates propulsion, but apparently it's it's difficult. >> And so I'm a conservationist. I believe in the conservation of of matter and energy uh with the quantum back background, the quantum vacuum uh sustaining everything. >> Okay, let's let's let him uh I want to listen to a little bit more and we can react a little more. But I'm going to agree with you. I'm going to say I do agree with conservation of energy and just like you said, I think the way around this is the zero point energy and I think it's just a different conceptual viewpoint. Well, actually in this case, I think we agree on some of the probably more major aspects with um Daniel Whitson because he's saying, "Oh, well, the universe has expanded and just created energy out of nowhere." But then he's living his whole life by the fact that free energy is not possible. And I'm going, "Well, except for that one time when the universe expanded and you think that that's how it worked." And you're like literally saying that. >> So, if we could figure that out again, then I guess we would have free energy, right? Because that's how they think it works. But I don't even think that's how it works. I think there's always been the zero point energy all around us and to me the bigger question is why I asked you is like does it actually change over time or over regions or is it mostly just kind of static and I'm trying to figure out do we live in a static universe or do it was there really a big bang at all you know that's what I'm trying to understand from the bigger picture kind of perspective so let's see what else uh how else he responds here and what else he says >> more space comes with more dark energy that's more energy so the amount of energy in the >> By the way chat PhD academic physicist. So if you want to go get your degree and ignore us dum dums down here, then you know this is where you can this is who you can listen to. >> Universe is constantly going up as it expands because every new chunk of space that's created comes with new dark energy. So >> but we don't know what the dark energy is. Dark matter. >> We don't know what it is. Absolutely. And energy is also being destroyed as the universe expands. >> Which by the way, we don't know what it is. It's just dark energy. We don't want it. It's like, do you want to go to people that just they say they have all the answers, but then they say they don't know what anything is. Or do you want to go to people who say, "We don't really know what everything we don't have all the answers, but here's what it is." >> Take [laughter] a photon. Like we talked about these photons from the early universe. When they were emitted, they were super high energy because the plasma was super dense and super bright. It was like 3,000 Kelvin. >> But as the universe expands, photons get red shifted, right? They get go from blue to red. They get stretched out. But going from blue to red, >> going from blue to red means going from high energy to low energy. Like a red photon is less energy than a blue photon. Where did the energy go? When a when the universe expands and it stretches out all the photons, all those photons from the early universe are now super duper low energy. Where did that energy go? Nowhere. It just went. So that's an example of the expansion of the universe destroying energy. It can create energy. It can destroy energy. >> So what do you think about that? So >> he didn't mention he didn't mention the quantization of the red shift which setterfield makes a big point out point about in his in his book. So the quantization of the red shift is due to the fact that as the zero point energy field increased cosmolog over cosmological time uh the energy in the atoms would have increased but uh atoms don't electrons don't smoothly move from one bore orbit to the next. It would be a quantum jump and that has to do with the red shift. >> Interesting. Um so okay well let's let me keep going here. So energy is only conserved in a universe that's not expanding in a static universe. But that's not our universe. So we're not actually required to conserve energy. >> So this rewrites the laws of thermodynamics. >> No, the laws of thermodynamics are still valid. But you know there there's always an assumption when you say energy can't be conserved to destroy. It's like assuming a closed system assuming space is not expanding. And so those assumptions that you don't usually mention you mention it those are wrong. >> Yeah. If the assumptions don't apply then the rules don't apply. And that's that's another like amazing like wow the universe breaks. >> Yeah. And you know it's it's not small. Like the dark energy in the universe, it's like 70% of all the energy in the universe. 5% is atomic matter. 25% is dark matter. 70% of it is dark energy. So it's huge. It's not like a tiny little detail and it's expanding and it's taking over. Like about 9 billion years after the beginning of the universe, dark energy became most of the energy in the universe. And now it's 70% and then it's going to be 90% and then 99% because it causes the expansion. So as you have more dark energy, you have more expansion which gives you more dark energy which gives you more expansion. It's a runaway effect. So dark energy is just like taking over the universe. What? >> What? [laughter] That that part didn't make any sense to me. He says the dark energy is increasing and taking over and getting faster and faster and faster. I mean, if that's the case, I'd be very afraid because that would mean our universe is going to like self-destruct at some point. But that doesn't even make any sense to me at all because what he's saying is that the dark energy is expanding equally with the amount of space that's being created. So there shouldn't be any increase in volume of dark energy or it shouldn't be increasing faster or unless you're saying as space expands, space expands faster and faster because there's more and more dark energy getting created. I don't know. What do you think? >> I don't know either. Um [clears throat] I I kind of wish uh uh I haven't done much research on or listening to Eric Weinstein because he talks about this all the time as well. I don't know what he says compares to what he just said. Uh but I I basically think that's I wouldn't put much into anything that he just said there. >> Yeah. No, that's just seem it doesn't the problem with it is also doesn't seem self-consistent. Like he just said a second ago that you can create energy out of nothing as long because when space expands it creates energy and there's energy density volume there which that doesn't even seem to make sense to me. But then to say that and then also follow it up and be like oh yeah the uh the energy can be created and destroyed but also it's running away. that's running away and taking over the universe as well. Like I don't >> sorry that just doesn't make sense >> making it up. I want to point out Sabine Hosenfelder replied underneath this felt the need to reply underneath this after I quote tweeted it and said that you know this guy is like whatever this zero point energy there's no dark energy and she said he's correct about everything. Okay. Okay. Sabine. >> Okay. >> Wow. >> It's crazy. >> Yeah. Exactly. So this is an diagram that says the what the contents of the universe. Steve, scroll up. What's the top of it say? >> This is basically the energy density of the univer contents of the universe. Okay. Yeah. If you took like a cubic light year of space and you said how much of the energy in this cubic light year is due to atoms, that'd be 5%. How much of it is due to dark matter? That's 27%. And how much of it is dark energy? That'd be 67%. So it's the energy density of the universe. But you know, as the universe expands, these fractions change because dark energy doesn't get diluted and everything else does. >> That's crazy. >> And that's actually another piece of evidence that dark matter is matter. Because as the universe expands, dark matter's density goes down. It gets diluted just like matter does. >> Oh, it does. >> It does. Dark matter does. Dark energy does not. These two things, they sound similar. Dark matter. >> Dark energy increases with at the same rate. >> Exactly. >> What? Have you ever heard this? I don't even think I've heard this before just now. >> This relationship between dark and energy and dark matter. I've never seen an argument. How is he making a relationship between dark matter and saying that dark matter doesn't dilute when space expands but dark energy does dilute when space expands? Because this would now >> conservation of energy between dark energy and dark matter or opposite of conservation of energy between dark energy, dark matter. >> Is this what kids are getting taught these days? I wouldn't be surprised why kids are going crazy. This is why kids are transiting themselves, chat. >> Oh gosh. [laughter] >> This is why they're transing themselves because you're just confusing them. doesn't make any damn sense. I don't know. Let me see. Maybe Danny Jones will ask a follow-up. What odds of Danny Jones asking intelligent follow-up? Uh, about zero. Here we go. Let's see. I haven't watched this whole clip. So, >> yeah. So, dark matter is like stuff. It's out there. We know what it is. We know that it's matter. We don't know what it's made out of, but it's definitely matter and it dilutes as the universe expands. Dark energy does not dilute. So, if it's matter, wouldn't it be particles? We don't know, right? All the kind of matter we've ever seen is particles. [laughter] How can you say you don't know what it is, but you know it's deluding relative to another thing that you don't know what it is? Like, hey bro, what's dark energy or what's dark matter? I don't know what either of those are, but I know this one's diluting. This one's not. >> Oh my god. >> And that little sliver of what he called all matter in the universe, the tiniest sliver. So, is that where the plasma is in that one little sliver? Because most of the universe is plasma. So is he's putting the plasma in that one. >> If you mean plasma by observable matter then yeah. Yep. That's where they're putting it. Yep. Pretty much. Okay. >> It's tough to understand it because the other thing too that people like us and I mean us and then us in the chat too us high IQ people realize that when we're talking about vacuum energy, zero point energy, dark energy, we're also saying it sustains the atoms. You brought up Howal Pudaf's 1987 ground state of the hydrogen atom. This paper is so important because it tells us that hey what about this idea that the atom is in a constant radiating flux back and forth with zero point energy. >> This perspective changes flips everything around. Now we don't need to worry about we don't need to have these ideas that don't make any sense about dark energy and dark matter because we were using those for stability. We were using those to explain the space energy. So this energy that's constantly we're being absorbed, we can interact with it. So anyway, this is why it's so important to delineate between why the common understanding makes no sense versus why the secret true understanding, why it's so profound, and then also why it's so impactful. Think about what you can do. You go from a situation where there's no energy to interact with at all where now there is energy and now we're going to try to figure out how can we interact with that energy and get it out of that balloon that's there. So let's let him finish here and then we'll do one more reaction. >> Right? So maybe but look at how small normal matter is to say the rest of the matter should also be like this kind of matter. That's that's an extrapolation. Right? It's like saying hey I've only ever lived in Tampa. Everybody in the world must be like people from Tampa. Like you know probably there's thing there's something different. Probably there's things to learn. The dark matter is also all around us right now, right? >> It is absolutely. We don't know for sure, but we think that we're in a dark matter wind and like dark matter is passing through us. Like right now in this room, there is dark matter passing through us. We haven't been able to detect it. We've looked for it. We have these huge experiments underground filled with like tanks filled with, you know, a kiloton of xenon waiting for the dark matter wind to bump into one xenon nucleus so we can see it. Haven't seen it yet, but we do think this is a >> not a CERN. This one is in northern Italy and there are other experiments around the world that are looking for dark matter passing through uh the world. There's several different ways to detect dark matter. One, >> so this isn't like a money issue. This is just a a brains issue. I need people to be more creative to come up with different ways to measure or theoretical creative ideas to detect dark matter. >> Yeah, I think so. You know, it's we tried the simplest thing like let's assume dark matter is a particle because maybe it is and let's assume it's one kind of particle and let's assume it has a very simple interaction and let's go look for it. And you know, all of those are assumptions that could be wrong, but it's worth looking for, right? If it is the easiest possible thing, it'd be a shame not to find it. [clears throat] So, we've been doing that. We haven't found anything >> and it's definitely time to think more broadly like, okay, let's assumptions was wrong. Maybe it's not particles, maybe it's many particles, maybe it's a new weird other thing. Definitely. We need more creativity. So, this whole industry of people coming up with ideas for what dark matter might be. It might be this. >> Okay. >> You went looking for it. You'd be looking for a needle in a haste stack. >> We've been looking for dark energy for dark matter. I don't remember which one he said. We've been looking for how long now? 20 years. At least 20 years in my lifetime. We've been looking for this and we found nothing. This is like the guys looking for MH370 in the South Indian Ocean and they're like, "We know it's down here. We know it's down here. We've searched five times. We've spent $250 million and we've never found one piece of the plane. But we know that shit's down here. That's what these guys are doing. They're like, we know the dark energy is real. Look, we only made like four assumptions. We only assumed it was a particle. We only assumed it existed. And now we're just like, why can't we find it? >> I'm just gonna go find it. >> Why can't we find it? >> Idiot. What's your reaction? Go ahead. >> Uh, I think it's hilarious. I'd never heard of a dark energy wind before. And just the way he put it out there, like you said, we're just going to do four assumptions and we're we're gonna go find it. >> How are you also going to say, "Oh, dark energy wind is flowing through us all the time." Um, you mean the ether? It sounds a lot like the data. >> It sounds a lot like the ether. Yeah, >> right. Like that's just the ether with extra steps, bro. Why are you making this more confusing and more complicated for people, >> right? Right. Like sometimes it feels like they only came up with this idea of dark energy just so that we could not utilize the zero point energy that we couldn't interact with it. So we wouldn't play around with it. So um [clears throat] I want to get into well yeah let's let's talk a little bit technology which is you have a good plan. You said your plan here earlier and I like it a lot which is you're going to retire in a few years and you want to dedicate the next part of your life to zero point energy. I think it's a smart plan. Might be a little ahead of its time but you know the smartest pioneers are always a little ahead of their time. We'll see. Uh so what is your plan on doing zero point energy? What do you want to do? How are you going to get energy out of the the vacuum? Boy, that [snorts] is the question, isn't it? >> Yes. [clears throat] >> So, where does the vacuum? So, vacuum to some pe some people don't like the word vacuum. So, we got to we got to be more specific. The quantum vacuum, the zero point energy. Um, where does it live? So, like I said before, it lives at the tiniest of scales. At the scale of you and me, there's some couple of long form waves, very low energy density. So on you got to go where it lives. That's why I've made the point several time in the past uh that you you got to you got to do nano cavities or you might be seeing some effects in a fusion reactor where you have soft boundaries that would do like a dynamic hazmir effect that that they really haven't mapped out, but it's there. And so um I cannot do fusion um but I can design a nano cavity right and so um I believe microchips are the future or a future because obviously if we have if we have orbs flying around plasma orbs flying around maybe we do maybe we don't there certainly seems to be a lot of evidence uh eyewitness accounts that there are um don't know if you saw Dr. Beer's account on the Danny Jones, but he talked about seeing them personally and interacting with them. And then I'm an air traffic controller, so I have pilots key up and say, "Hey, you know, we're reporting some orbs, some lights, um, you know, certain azimuth direction and altitude, you know, from our position." You know, we get that a lot. So um you know maybe fusion powered uh craft already exists but I don't know how to design those. I can't design those and get those built in my opinion. Um what I do believe that I am capable of at some point is microchips. And the reason I like it is because that's where the zero point energy lives. And so you have a bunch of people before me with much better credentials that have already been working on, you know, microchips uh for decades with either trying to extract energy from the vacuum or trying to get propulsion out of the vacuum. Of course, Dr. Sunonny White seems to be uh experiencing the most success in that area right now. Certainly appears as though he's going to go to market with his Microspark chip. Very excited for him. I think that the history >> Well, let me let me jump in here and say something real quick because I [clears throat] actually I went to business school uh even though I don't do a lot of it now. And what I would say is that don't underell yourself number one. Uh a lot of business is just about copying somebody's ideas and implementing better than the next person did because there's a lot of different aspects about bringing something to market >> at the end of the day. So just because other people are ahead of you doesn't mean anything in this especially in an industry this young as it is and even if you don't already have a product right now that also doesn't necessarily mean anything. So what I would say number one is let's focus first on the fundamentals which is you said the you want to get to the energy where you can interact with it. Oh, one more thing I want to say is that I think it's smart to not try to do a fusion reactor for multiple reasons. [laughter] Number one, the upfront cost. Yes, I think you can probably extract 0 energy from a fusion reactor. Number one, the cost, the regulations, the government oversight. Look at David Curtley and how he won't react with anybody talking about zero point energy. Um, those are some pretty good reasons not to do F. But microchip, microchip seems like the way where you might be able to slip under the radar. Now, there's some challenges with that I'll talk about in a second. We'll get to that. But instead, I want to ask you, whose free energy microchip do you like the most? And how does your idea of how it should work compare or contrast? >> Obviously, right now, the one I like the most is the one that appears to be most successful. So, Dr. Sunny Whites. He has his power cell patent with a static casemir cavity with walls and three pillars in the middle for asymmetry. And he's connected them to where electrically the pillars are not uh connected to the walls and electrons tunnel across to the pillars and create a current. >> And so uh very very good design. I like that design. Um, >> just for helping people out there, I mean, you already said it, but I'm just going to reiterate. So, he's got two walls and I've seen the picture and then there's something in the middle and there's like something sticking out of the middle. So, it's not perfectly even, right? Level and and then this is you just create this pattern on a small scale with the right material and then you just get a voltage out of it. >> You do have to have the right material. If you read his patent, he mentions a possibility of materials because he doesn't want to like say exactly what they did, but I believe uh >> a be superconductors, right? Or something. >> Yeah. And so it's going to be superconductors and you you look at this and you say, "Well, that's pretty simple, man." >> Like what did we just say? Like this is really just a matter of material science more than anything. You're saying all it is is geometry on the small scales and you have to get small enough, >> right? And then the downside here too is that okay well now even if you prove this works which people already have uh Charles Buer already proved it you know they've got 3,000 experiments showing it the question is can you get enough energy out you know enough energy to be significant >> right and that is a connection I have been looking at a lot the last three weeks actually was in contact with them before they went on Danny Jones I had no idea they were about to blow up like they just did over the last couple of weeks and I've been in contact with Drew um Arugma. Um sorry, I probably just butchered that last name. Um >> I don't know how >> and [laughter] uh because they obviously are having success and Dr. Buer clearly says that the momentum is being exchanged with the quantum vacuum. No question about it. So yeah, you have an energy exchange, momentum exchange with the quantum vacuum in an actual device that they're going to send to space and it's going to work. So they're doing something right on a tabletop scale, which is even cooler, right? And so yeah, over the last couple weeks, I've done a lot of work trying to to look through his third order pertabation theory and say, "Okay, but that's virtual photons he's talking about. What if we put Cedfield's twist on it? How how do we translate it over to our microchip, right? What are the because you're dealing with the quantum vacuum either way. And so if you're getting moment a momentum exchange, how are they doing it? How can how can we possibly apply it to ours as well? So yeah, I've been doing a lot of research on that. >> Yeah, because I think the free the microchips that can produce propulsion are going to be just a slight twist on the microchips that are producing free energy in a voltage. >> Just a slight twist. As a matter of fact, if you watched Dr. Sony White um present his cast uh his um microchip. He mentions he's like, "Okay, we're going to tie this in how it how it can get us to warp drive eventually." And then his plan for doing that was to show a video at the end. The video video conveniently didn't play and he's never like really touched on it since. And so we don't really know how his energy extraction chip gets us to warp drive. Do you I don't know if you remember one of his first presentations, I don't remember which one it was, he shows maybe it was the Joe Rogan where he's showing the negative energy volume of his microchip and it happens to be the exact profile of a warp bubble. >> The warp bubble. >> Oh, we just decided to also do this thing to see if it would fit the model of the negative energy pattern for a warp bubble. You're like, >> "Wait, what?" >> Yeah. You're like you were doing a free energy microchip and you just thought, "Hey, let's make one look like a warp bubble." Dude, that's not something that you just randomly decide to do. And he's also NASA's warp drive expert, >> right? And apparently him and and Doc and and Charles Chase do converse about this. Chase said so, >> right? I'm surprised Chase hasn't had more success with his his microchip, to be honest. I wanted to ask him some questions, but he can't even talk to me because >> I mean, he just did an interview on Tim Ventura and it was, "Oh, we thought we had figured it out, but as it turns out, it was a problem with the scale." [laughter] >> Yeah. Well, look at let's talk about that guy for a second because I always think because you're probably one of the only people that can actually like understand is that you look at Charles Chase, he graduates Berkeley, he joins Loheed Martin and that's his entire career career until 2018 like 35 years or something like that at Loheed Martin. His whole life working with Ben Rich skunk works rising to the highest possible levels as an engineer, right? if there's secrets, you know about them. And no question he knows about them because after he's after he's retired, he's talking about every free energy microchip there is and he's connected to every single one of them and knows them all personally by first name >> like every single one. So the question is really >> why isn't he more successful in his own venture that he did because he knows everybody and everything and he clearly knows about the secret technology too. And maybe the question is more of like look what he's not doing. He's not doing fusion. He made a fusion reactor for Lockheed. He's not doing fusion, >> right? >> You know, and it's like but I can't figure it out. I can't figure out if like >> maybe there's just not enough people believe in the physics that even someone who's credentialed as him can get financial support. I don't know. >> I do feel like that a little bit. I do feel like that might be a problem and I don't understand why. If so, I hope that's a bridge that I can help uh, you know, gap with or an issue I can help bridge for people because you know I think there's a lot of smart people that have money, the Elon Musks of the world, you know that those are the people that they should be investing with these guys and for them a few million dollars is pennies >> and that could be prototypes from microchips, multiple prototypes. Like >> microchips are expensive, but I'm thinking like hundreds of thousands, not millions, you know. >> Oh yeah, for sure. If you want to go to a foundry and create a microchip, uh you're going to have to start with some test wafers. Um and you got to have a team, you got to have ways to draw it up, CAD and all this stuff. You're looking at around just for the very first test uh wafer is about 500,000. But for a billionaire, you know, that's nothing. and and there's a lot more millionaires today than there ever were. There's a lot more billionaires today than there ever were. So, the the solution to this problem in my opinion is get people excited until you finally reach one of those guys who's willing to just, you know, lose some cash in a high-risk, you know, burn some cash. Uh people are usually tight wads. They don't want to do that. But at some point, maybe we can get there. Maybe some people like, "Yeah, I'll burn some cash on this. Who's the guy with the best idea here? let this guy work it out. >> Yeah. And I think the other part's going to be how to make it so they're not just burning cash. Like this is one of the things that I was criticizing I think Jason on when he was trying to reproduce a serial device. It's like first of all, why are we if we're burning cash, why are we trying to make magnetic motors? Let's burn cash and make microchips. Like what what are we doing here? Right? I you know, a free energy device that can power you know a car is cool. I'd like one that can power my phone though. Like that's like a lot sweeter for this time. So, but the other side >> I want you to look at the Oh, sorry. Go ahead. >> No, go ahead. >> Well, this is going to take a minute. Go ahead. >> Oh, okay. Yeah. So, um, but with I think the key is going to be getting to a point where it's not just burning money to test something and instead it's actually building something that can, you know, be a product for people. Now, for you, >> building that confidence is key. And now with Sunny White supposedly, we still don't know. It's not been third party replicated. And now with Exodus, now you've got two things actually doing something with the real quantum vacuum that's going to boost confidence in the long run in people with cash. >> So here's the problems. Let's be real with everybody right now. Honestly, I think we're some of the experts, people that have probably read the most about this and how to do this and the challenges related to it. Number one, I would say for you, you need to make partnerships, which you're already doing. You're talking to Charles Beer, you should be talking to the other free energy microchip engineers like the people that are investing in them. Maybe people that want to invest in you, right? Who knows? Maybe you start working with some of them at some point, consolidating together. Once start people start, you know, commercializing just that's just smart business, right? Um the other part though is you need to make connections to people that have the fabrication capabilities and can actually do the the designs. Like honestly, if I were you, I'd be emailing Gary Stevenson. You've seen him on Tim Ventura. you've seen him already do one microchip that's out there. He a has the connections to the fabrication labs. He's in there talking about Sandia like all these fabrication labs. Uh it was I think it was Charles Chase that was saying Sandia was doing their their microchip processing. Think about their connections because you have to imagine the fab labs have to be controlled for national security too. If if not overtly than covertly behind the scenes they're like who's what kind of microchip is this guy making? What's it doing? There's probably a red flag that goes up if you're doing something that's free energy related. So you there's only so many right now and yes in the future that's going to change and it's going to get cheaper like computers have gotten cheaper and we want to be ready to jump on that but right now they're somewhat controlled and then you also need somebody who can make your wafer who can design it. Look at what Gary Stevenson did. He was very smart. Gary Stevenson gave us two of the pieces to the puzzle. Number one, he said if we can increase our frequency, increase that frequency try, we can interact with the vacuum. We can increase the orders of magnitude we can interact with the vacuum by 18. He's basically talking about how do we get to those tiny scales. >> And then his second thing he says, well that's not enough still because our technology is still not good enough. Then we can make an array. And this is essential. It seems simple, but like just lining up all your little patterns so that on the macro scale they also make an array that focuses onto a point. That's the other thing. And he said they need to be separated by exactly one wavelength. So it needs to actually be like phase, what do we call it? I don't know. Phase locked to the exact >> That's what it's called. >> Is it? Yeah. And so if you do that, in theory, you're going to get a boost as well because we're dealing with effects that are tiny >> non-locality. >> We're dealing with these tiny effects and we're trying to figure out how do we scale them up because I think we're going to be able to prove the effects are real. That's going to be simple. It's going to be hard to distinguish from background noise at first, but the difficult part is going to be the person who's going to win the race to the microchip. It's going to be who figures out how to scale it up to a real level that is usable first. Correct. >> Right. >> Yep. Yeah. A lot of my research has been around that exact question. How do you how do you boost the signal? How do you scale it up? >> I wasn't sure initially if Chase's version is scalable. >> Um, uh, Sunny Whites is certainly only addit additively scalable. In other words, there's not going to be a nonlinear way to scale that. you're going to have to add more and more wafers or chips in his um >> Yeah, that's Go ahead. >> Speaking of that, uh resonance Charles Chase um his is a solid state microchip using arrays of resonant tunneling diodes and asymmetric nanoructures and um that is language that is also very similar to what you hear in Dr. Sunny White's work as well. When you read his patent, when you read his his peer-reviewed paper, um, which was, um, oh, I don't have it here, but his peer-reviewed paper. Um, so >> yeah, sorry. >> Well, what they're saying there, if people are wondering, is that they're saying they're making a waterfall. They're making a waterfall, an asymmetry in spacetime, perhaps on the smallest scales that's interacting with spacetime. And that's how it's able to create this uh current is that you have this buildup. Imagine a buildup of charge and then suddenly it jumps across and now you have this situation where you have a current that gets formed. That's what they're trying to do. So I think that usually you find that there's some kind of Joseph's injunction employed in a lot of these which is like a superconductor an insulator and then a superconductor on the other side. >> Yeah, I found it. Of course, this paper was emergent quantization from a dynamic vacuum. Quantization is an emergent standing wave structure in a vacuum that varies in space and time. So hydrogen hydrogen can be modeled as a standing wave resonance of a dynamic physical vacuum. >> Sorry, what's the context? Oh, that was the emergent quantization from a dynamic vacuum. The peer-reviewed paper of Sunny White. >> Oh, that was Sunny White's paper. And just to go over, so notice the resonant terminology there. Hydrogen can be modeled as a standing wave resonance of a dynamic physical vacuum. And by the way, I give kudos to I give kudos to Dr. White for for coming up with the term dynamic vacuum. It's like, what is that? Well, when he's trying to get his patent passed and and his peerreview paper passed, he can't talk freely like he does in on stage about his chip getting energy from the zero point energy field. So, he's got to come up with some terms that aren't going to get him stuck. So, he came up with dynamic vacuum. >> Um, yeah. So, standing resonance, this also reminds me of the uh what was that sound? This reminds me of the uh transmission resonance model of cold fusion. This idea that it's actually resonance that is how we can increase the quantum tunneling probability for fusion to occur. >> Yes. Yes. >> And we look at this standing resonance. But that paper, that Sunny White paper you mentioned, that's actually the one that says that it models the hydrogen atom based on the vacuum fluctuations saying that the atom is actually a product of the vacuum flu a product of the >> he compares it. He compares it to acoustics. He calls it acoustic in the paper, >> which is pretty much what Terence Howard was yelling about on Joe Rogan about octaves and all this stuff about um about uh you know the sound being related to uh uh atomic uh elements and >> yeah it would be interesting to meet Terrence Howard and and to hear that from from his mouth. It just be I think it'd be a fun conversation. I got invited by the curator of the Walter Wrestle Museum to go out there. He'd put me up and uh may do that one day. I'd be curious if Terrence Howard would go out the same time I'm there. [laughter] He'd want to have a collab. >> Yeah, I'd like to talk to him, but I'd honestly prefer to talk to I'd rather have an adversarial conversation to be honest with you. I've been aching for one for a while now. I want to talk to Sabine Hosenfelder or >> What about Jackie? >> No, he sucks. Jurassic Party is just not entertaining for me. And I I can't deal with the stories. Like >> I don't think you'd make it. I don't think he'd make it two minutes. >> No, I already spoke to him one time. He was dropping end bombs on my stream, so it was not great. Um yeah, a he's stonewalled, started talking about stupid stories I wasn't interested in. He always does that when I just want all I want to do is talk about physics and he just talks about these random stories. So, no, not Jackson, but Eric Weinstein or Eric or Sabine Hosenfelder or that uh Whit uh Whitson guy that we were just looking at or um Brian Keading, you know, one of these guys or even Avi Lo honestly that needs a kick in their pants that needs to understand that zero point energy is real and needs to be tested because the problem is they're out there sh throwing criticisms out but they're not holding their own ideas to the same level of scrutiny. Like they can come say, "Oh, you can't tap zero point energy, whatever." But they they can't explain dark energy, dark matter, right? And like those are the things that we can explain from the physics that we've been learning about. And I think the reason why they don't have those conversations is they're afraid they're going to lose in the public's eye and that people will agree with us and be like, "Yeah, those guys ideas makes more sense." >> Can I talk about the Kasmir effect real quick? Yeah. Is that sound from you or me? I'm just wondering. I'm hearing a >> Is it a high pitch sound? >> Yeah. >> This is Cicadas. This is the Cadas. I can go I can go inside real quick. >> Okay, you're good. I just thought I was going crazy for a second. You're fine. Okay, keep going. >> If it's bothering the live stream, I'll go inside. >> No, you're fine. Go ahead. Make make a comment. Go ahead. >> Yeah. So I I want to talk briefly on the Casemir effect because I think Setterfield's version has some significance that I want to put out there and that's that the 0 point energy field is this pressure and like I said um at our scale there's not very many waves and they're very low density. So when you go down to the nano scale and you got two plates, let's just dumb it down a little bit. You've only got a couple of more ZPE waves outside the plates than you have inside. and they're the lower pressure end of the spectrum. So you have fewer number of them and they're lower energy density and yet that's still enough to push those plates together. What I'm interested in is what's still in between those plates. Basically the entire 99.99% of the force of the zero point energy is still inside. And that's why you got to go to where it lives if you want to try to create an asymmetry in there and exchange momentum in such a way that you get thrust or you get energy out of it. >> So because it increases exponentially, right? Like even you get you said even if you get really small still 99% of energy is still trapped behind because it gets more and more and more the smaller smaller smaller you get. So you really have to push out like all the zero point energy modes as many as you can. Right. The reason I really don't like the terminology that Sunny White uses and really all of QD uses is is that when you restrict those couple of modes on the outside that now you have a negative energy density in here. I don't view it that way at all. Most of the energy density is still in there. >> And again, it only gets more and more uh powerful the smaller you get all the way to that plank cut off. So >> that's a great point. You know what? This is something that's always bugged the out of me is that it shouldn't be called negative energy at all. The problem is this guys is like we think the balloon is empty, but the balloon is full. So when we remove energy from the balloon, we say that's negative energy, but that's just normal energy that was always there. It was just trapped and we just didn't see it because it was in the is in the balloon and we just we thought it was empty and we were wrong. We made a false falsy assumption. And so that's why I say, "Oh, this negative energy that's here, it's just normal energy. It's always been there. It's always chilling there. The problem is we think that zero point energy is zero and that's nothing. But there's still energy. >> Zero point energy only has to do with thermal temperature. You take all thermal energy out. Now you're absolute zero temperature. That's the zero part of zero point energy. It should not be confused in any other way. >> Yeah. Well, yeah. So, we say technically remove all the light and remove all the heat and you still have this zero point energy there. But yes, absolutely. And so this is the part that they get messed up is that so it's negative energy is a definitely a misnomer. You know >> it's a misnomer. Yeah. >> Because really what we're doing is we're tapping into this energy here. But it was always there. >> And if I reverse >> that's why I think that's why I think ontology matters because if if you're trying to build a microchip all these other guys out there that are doing it will they have success ultimately? I don't know. But I want to come at it from a different perspective and see if I have success. One other I the two if I'm giving you advice and you can take it or leave it. Sorry I hate doing unsolicited advice here but I would look at two different possibilities. I would also take a hard look at Paul Tibido's thermal graphine microchip because we might be able to do it through a different way that accomplishes the same thing. And then the end of the day it might just be which of these two methods is cheaper. Like can we do one or the other cheaper and produce the same exact effect? Because hey, I don't give a crap my free energy microchips pulling it from the heat or pulling it from the zero point energy quant fluctuations. As long as I get free energy, I get free energy. >> Yeah. So, we're going to do something that no one else out there is is doing right now. We want to actually change those vacuum modes dynamically. Um, when the dynamic Casmir effect is talked about, it's not actually moving actual boundaries. You know, they do it electronically. I want to actually actually move boundaries is is how I've designed mine. Um, and so that's going to change the number of modes that are allowed with a time structure built in. And you're going to be able to do it along a taper. So, you're going to be able to adjust it in different sections of of of the cavity. Um, which is going to allow you to do things and test the zero point energy. um test materials, test boundaries, test things that we've never been able to test before. So, we're going to be able to learn a lot about the ZPE by doing it that way. >> The problem is you don't want moving parts. The problem is any moving parts you involve, you're going to have friction. You're going to have a million things go wrong. There's a reason why none of the guys are doing moving parts, but I think there's some and I there's definitely something to what you just said, which is utilizing dynamic Casmir effect. I mean, if we're going to be skitsos, and we are for sure, which at least on this channel, MH370 videos tell us dynamic hazmir effect is way more powerful than we thought. I mean, we just watched three orbs come together and just rip a hole in spaceime. That tells us, holy dynamic hazmir effect is really powerful because the only thing that happened there, these orbs just came together, right? So, it's like we should be using that if we want to pull energy from spaceime like we should definitely be using dynamic casmir effect in our setup. And that's the thing I think all these microchips don't really do because they're all trying to do solid state. >> Maybe >> I don't have anything on a lever moving. No, it' be it'd be like Sales talks about vibration. >> And to let you know, I think I don't remember if it was Thorston Lwig that tried to do the lever or if it was one of Frank me. I kind of get all my free energy stuff mixed up these days, but they tried to do the lever thing and the levers would break and it became a huge >> Yeah. You don't want to do levers. >> No. And that's the thing. And that's why I say no moving parts, but maybe you could do like a virtual situation, right? Because you think about this, we're just dealing with charge, right? So, what if you could create a virtual situation that allows you to still do what you want to do with plasma or charge or what have you that doesn't require a lever or moving parts, right? >> Um, that would be probably the next step. Something that can create a dynamic kasmir- like effect without having to have the moving component, the physical moving components. And people may say, well, that seems extreme, but they are already looking at things like reversing the Casmir effect, which might be the same thing, right? If you can if you can create a situation where just through electromagnetic means, flipping a switch, I can make the Casmir effect reverse on its own, that would be >> You did a live stream on that, I thought. >> Yeah. Oh, see, >> that was a cool one. >> Yeah, >> I like that one. >> Ultra magnetism. Yep. Look at me. >> Ultra magnetism. That was cool. I had never heard of that before. >> Yeah, that's one to check into also. So, happy to be a resource uh for you on that front. But my other thought, yeah, like I said, would be reaching out to Gary Stevenson and other people that have built these microchip engineers or uh you know that have worked on this stuff before and then just waiting for basically you know your moment to strike. And I think you're getting a lot of people you're going to have a lot of people contact you that want to reach out. I already see people in the chat who want to assist, you know. So, uh, you know, I think some of the people that watch this show are very knowledgeable and I do envision a world hopefully in the future where we can all like many of us who are interested can work together at some point and help drive this industry because I think we're actually the beginning of it. I think what you're watching here is like this is like what Bitcoin was, you know, 15 years ago, 10 years ago, right? At the beginning when people were just talking about it like a meme, but it's not really. 10 years from now, there's going to be a lot of companies and when people are >> making free energy micro, there's going to be people going, "Wait, I want to get into this, but I can't get there. Maybe there's somebody else working on it." Right? >> Why waste your time on endless hours of podcast having people on talk about, "Oh, this guy knew what this guy said about what that guy said about UFOs when you could be doing this." >> Exactly. That's another good point, the UFO stuff. So, what's your take on all of that? Because you're right. The more I've looked at it, I was going to make a post today and I'm probably going to make one later this week, which is like, how are these UFO people feeling right now? Is that they've been talking the same for the last three years since I started doing this? They're no closer than they were three years ago to getting the aliens revealed. And if anything, we're getting closer to it. Every day, we get more revelations. We get Space Force investing in Sny White's microchip. I mean, it's nothing but us, right? >> What are your thoughts on all the UFO stuff, the alien stuff? >> My thoughts are aliens, there's no reason why God could not have created aliens. They could be out there somewhere. Uh, I personally think it's highly unlikely that they would have been able to make their way here. Um, because if we if we talk about your orbs and teleportation, that doesn't seem very helpful. We could teleport here on Earth would be super cool if it's real. Uh but it wouldn't get us to Alpha Centuri because you got to have orbs on the other side, right? >> You got to have a send and receive point. Um so then we would need something like a warp drive, right? And that gets to the vacuum engineering metric. So, and that gets to can we you talk about bending spacetime, you know, and and being able to do the Akubberry effect, Akubier effect, uh where you have, you know, a bubble inside, a negative bubble on the side, and it pushes you forward. Um I typically don't like the idea of space time being able to bend, fold, etc. Um, I think the ZPE exists out there and then so my ultimate question was what if we could increase or decrease ZPE density in a bubble type setting. I'm not sure if we can do that yet or not, but clearly um I think that we have seen orbs and things flying around. I don't associate those with aliens though. And so my opinion is I don't give aliens much thought. I don't see any reason to. It seems like a big waste of of time. And I I spend a lot more time thinking about the physics of orbs or the physics of microchips, the physics of fusion. Um, if aliens exist, sure. Okay. But show me a spacecraft. Show me a body. Like, let's get on with it. >> It's pretty funny how I think all the people that are super into the this physics of it really don't care that much about the alien stuff. Even the sunny whites, none of the free energy microchip people. I think if you were to ask them, they would all have a very similar response um to what you just said right there. But let's talk. >> I don't care if I don't care if they exist, but I I think there's um I agree with South Pis on that one. And you shied away from him going there in his interview. >> Which was way which one? >> Uh you asked him about aliens in the ocean and he said, "Yeah, there could be aliens, but he doesn't think it's aliens in the ocean. He thinks it's people that followed the from the Samrian creation account uh >> a god into the ocean, right? And so he he talks about >> uh in key the brother of El Liil or what we know as Yahweh. And so I thought that was very fascinating because I'd never really looked into the Samaran creation account before. And I have some deeper thoughts on that if you want to go there. If not, we can move on. >> Um, maybe let's come back to that though because I don't want to forget what I was I was wanted to follow up on this warp thing because going talking about the warp drive stuff and the alien stuff. Sunonny White also has warp drive papers. So, he's doing free energy microchips, but he's also publishing warp drive papers talking about N equals three NLS to that you don't need a full bubble. You might just need three points to make your warp drive and create your warp bubble. Now, when it comes to bending spacetime, I don't think we're literally physically bending spacetime. It's just a useful analogy for people to understand what's physically occurring because, you know, you can imagine two points like this and you can imagine spacetime folding together and you could see how that could be possible. That's not what's really happening. We look at the MH when we look at the MH370 videos, it's not spacetime getting yanked together. Um, yeah, that's okay. Is getting pretty wild there. It's not spacetime getting yanked together in those videos, but it is the N equals 3 NLS. You do see that. So, what I was going to bring up here is with respect to the warp drive and creating the warp bubble, isn't it interesting that in those videos when the the orbs converge, is it possible that's changing the energy density, the H bar that you were talking about? Because I think that's essentially what would be needed for vacuum polarization. If these orbs are just balls of electromagnetic energy, then in theory they should be changing the H bar, right? Or should be capable of changing the H bar from Setterfield's perspective. >> I certainly hope so. I didn't lose you. You can still hear me, right? >> Yep. I'm >> um I certainly hope so. The whole idea when I first um designed microchips uh the the microchip was that inside the cavity I would be increasing uh and decreasing H bar. Um that remains to be seen if that's what happens or not. Um in the meantime with the help of Gabriel Diaz we're we're talking about um just um organization and participation of of the ZPE that's already there. Not really increasing or decreasing it. But my original hope we kind of moved away from for the moment is that it is possible to increase or decrease EP density locally if we can figure out how to do that >> and that that would change everything locally. Right? So by the way if you could do that people say oh batter would collapse. Okay. Well, remember h bar is in a lot of equations and formulas and and u the speed of light uh would let's see here the speed of light if you increase uh zero point energy would decrease as h bar increases everything remains invariant fine structure constant remains the same matter locally would not collapse everything would be in its own physics >> this is the thing that's the rub right there and this I think goes back to loren variance which is that everything still is in its own physics. So what we see from the outside which would seem like physics is being defied from the inside physics is still normal right this is the rub this is the cheat this is actually what Einstein's time dilation taught us which is that if we take the airplane scenario the teleporting airplane scenario the airplane looks like it's moving faster in light from our outside perspective it looks like it's defying physics but it's not that's not what's really happening from the airplane's perspective it's never moving faster than the speed of light so this is the right this is how Loren and variance is still being upheld while you look at you say yes in every frame of reference >> the speed of light is constant that's actually what allows for the cheat to occur there it is >> I would like there to be a a capability of fusion orbs or whatever to be able to change the local density of the ZPE because to me that would allow warp drives or uh teleportation and that's very exciting so I do hope that that is possible >> oh boy it's definitely possible all let you know 100% it's possible. Now exactly how it's possible that's you know still up in the air but it is definitely possible and I still see people in the chat saying so as well I mean just from a theoretical perspective it's possible the question really is can you get to the energy densities required and really we're looking at the opposite of what we said before there's two ways to do this we either go up really high ramp up really high or we go really small right these are the two methods that >> we're trying to interact with the zero point energy those are >> and this is such a cool idea because no one ever really talks about changing the zero point energy density locally. It's just not a conversation that's had. And I only made that leap because of my study of setterfield. He said it changed over time. I said, "Well, can we change it in the lab?" And so it's just it's a newer conversation in in the realms of of of uh you know theoretical physics. >> Yeah. I was looking for my book, my second Bible. It's somewhere around here. But I was looking for faster and light because this is what David Frroning was saying. This is why he was making his teardrop shade too. He literally says he's trying to change the density of the zero point energy locally in a certain region. And he said they were successful in doing this. And this is what this is what led to their conditioned electromagnetic beams. What we would call a gravity beam is first thing they did is to say can we change the density of the zero point energy. Yes. They created a a wound toid and instead of making a perfect donut, they made it like triangle on one end, a teardrop shape. They were successful in that. And then they did something which is unknown to this day, but we think it's related to scalar physics, polarizing the beam, twisting the electromagnetic beam to then turn it into a gravity beam directly, which must be inherently polarizing the vacuum, inherently manipulating the medium is what I would expect. So >> yeah, >> I certainly think it's possible. Go ahead. >> Oh no, no, it is possible. >> Now, let me ask you this. Catalyzed Fusion, you deserve quite a bit of respect for coming up with this name. What we just said from a physics perspective, if you believe that we're going to obey Lorent and variance, but by the way, are the Cicadas really 17ear cycle and it just happens to be this year right now? That's crazy. Okay, >> but I don't know about that. >> I don't know. People are saying that in the chat. Anyway, this is what allows for basically catalyzed fusion, which is a great great idea, great concept, great term, which is that locally there's no violation of physics happening. But when we look at it externally, we're seeing the violation of physics faster than the speed of light, just like with the airplane situation. And now, if you take this to the atomic level, now you say, "Oh I should be able to do fusion with this." The same thing that we saw happen to MH370. This should make fusion like really trivial too where now you can change the nuclear forces by manipulating H bar and now the nuclear forces change and now the coolum barriers reduced and now it takes like a tiny amount of energy to create fusion to occur. >> That's where the cosmology comes in. >> That's where the cosmology comes in of of uh this lower ZPE uh back when stars and galaxies were formed. you can translate that to what if we can you know change H bar in the lab. Um unsure just yet as to how effectively we can lower the culum barrier. Initially I thought you know you change H cool barrier would change too. Not so sure. But here's here's what my my here's where I'm solidly at right now is a vacuum catalyzed fusion is a hypothesis that a driven non-equilib equilibrium sorry non-equilibrium electromagnetic vacuum environment can increase nuclear tunneling probability by modifying the effective interaction potential the screening the polarization relative coordinate dynamics or correlated encounter rate of reacting nuclei while leaving the nuclear energy release and overall conservation laws intact and I would add explicitly that it does not presently require or establish a literal change in H fine structure constant H bar fine structure constant or the barculum law um that is my current postulation on vacuum catalyzed animatronic fusion where I'm at right now >> okay tunneling rates >> dictionary definition but sure >> yeah it was sorry increased tunneling rates as opposed to a lower cool barrier so So the processes are happening faster >> faster than they would normally. So your tunneling is happening faster. >> Uh I hope that we can lower the cool barrier. >> Yeah. So it may be multiple different ways to skin that cat on that front. But I still like the idea just in general just the theoretical idea that if we can tap zero point energy, if we can even get energy out of the vacuum, one of the first things we should do with it is do fusion. Like even if >> we can't get that energy out relatively efficiently, >> if we can get energy out at all, even inefficiently, first thing we should do with it is probably do fusion with it. I mean, >> no matter how you look at it, increasing the tunneling probability, lowering the cool barrier. >> There's multiple different ways in which fusion becomes simpler and fusion is the most efficient mechanism of energy generation on on Earth as far as I know. >> So, it seems like a logical step. Which uh fusion company do you like the most? Oh, I'm I'm a big fan of Helion, which I was going to ask you if you were willing to answer why you think Devin Nunez said that Trial Alpha doesn't hold or um nobody holds a candle to trial alpha because I mean David Curley and Helion like what why do you think Deon Nunes said that >> gamesmanship you know some of its gamesmanship like Tri Alpha is older so Trial Alpha's been around a lot longer we don't even know like how is Trial Alpha making money? How like what are their revenue streams? They're a private company. They were private company before this. So from a business perspective, what you need to realize is that Trialpha never had to show their books to anybody. Nobody knows how they're doing it, how they're making money other than generally, you know, I'm sure it's all above board, but the point being like they can have been working on this for a long time. So for Devin Nunees to come out and say these are the crown jewel, nobody really knows about them. This is the next Manhattan project. all this crazy stuff like he that's him tipping the hat saying that these guys have been working on stuff behind the scenes and if we think that they've had fusion we think they've covered up zero point energy which I think both of us probably do think that then you have to start to wonder which of these fusion companies knows some of these people have to know they're not all morons if if what you just said about non-equilibrium fusion tab zero point energy is true some people have to suspect it at a minimum they have to suspect it. So, think about it like that perspective. So, that's why I think that they're saying that >> and there's no guarantee. It doesn't mean it's the guarantee, but I see that and I go, "Oh, boy. That's where I want to be investing my money." Like these these people know something. They're they're going to tip the scales. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. They And even if they don't, they will. Uh your fusion is is happening at the nuclear scale. The reactors macro size, but the fusion is happening at the nuclear scale. What lives at the nuclear scale? The zero point energy. there's an exchange of momentum and kinetic energy happening that we haven't mapped. Um, and maybe they're seeing some over unity there. Obviously, they would not be Helion wouldn't be in its final reactor. What's this one? Orion or Polaris? I forget. Uh, the one they're building to power Microsoft. >> I don't remember the other one. >> Polaris. Yeah, they wouldn't they wouldn't be this far. They've had seven different seven several other smaller reactors, one each one bigger than the next. They wouldn't have progressed to the next and the next and the next if they hadn't shown over unity already. So I don't know what their Q factor is right now, but it's something greater than one. Right. >> Well, so here's this the long and short for people that are lost in the fusion sauce. The answer number one was to flip the magnetic field around. Instead of trying to confine the magnet the plasma externally with your magnetic field like the tokamac, flip it around, have the magnetic field on the inside. The only way this is possible in a fusion reactor is using a virtual cathode. Meaning you're using the plasma itself to have a separate electric negative and positive charge. So you create a virtual cathode with the plasma. And this is why you see the busousard engine is what do they do when they invert it? Now the center point is like a negative potential well and everything is being pulled the positive ions are being pulled towards it. So that's their idea of doing it instead of having a physical mechanism. So the first of all they inverted it. This created something called a high beta which means now you're getting like the most out of your magnetic field strength as you can. That's the number one thing. And then right after that you scale it up because once you've created that proof of concept the problem is and Robert we already talked about this you can do fusion but you're only doing tiny amounts of fusion. But the benefit is once you've proven that it scales up exponentially. So you only need to go from like a onemeter fusion reactor to a three meter fusion reactor and suddenly now you're getting real power. And if you were to scale it up even higher, you're getting like real power out of it. And now you can see the danger is that you can just scale it up and start doing cra like now you have the power of the sun in the palm of your hand, right? So that's the rub. That's why I go with anybody who's doing field reverse configuration, Z pinch or any of these other mechanisms because this is what they're doing is they're just those are the core concepts behind it. >> Yeah, anything I can invest in that's doing that kind of fusion field reverse configuration, I'm I'm going to um so >> I think that I think that we're going to power civilization with fusion. >> Yeah. And by the way, when you break when you break the ZPE band-aid off, everyone wants to go, "Oh, it's going to destroy everything. The world's going to turn upside down. It's going to be endgame." Well, wait a minute. >> Our whole lifestyle is based on petroleum. The clothes we wear, the soap we wash with, the computers made out of plastic. Everything that we have is is made out of petroleum. So just because you lose an energy sector, it doesn't mean the whole petroleum industry goes kaput. Petroleum's used for plastics are used for a lot of stuff, too. I mean, yes, it's going to get devastated when we change this, but I don't think that's the main thing holding it back. I think the bigger thing is probably psychological and then control over the world in general when it comes to energy. Um, I think the civilizational change is the bigger impact. Although absolutely like all of oil getting wiped out overnight is you know a certain huge aspect of uh suppressing this technology hiding this technology. >> But the petroleum is used for products not just energy. >> Yeah. Exactly. Yeah. They use the petroleum for just sub. >> It's not going to get wiped out. The energy part of it sector will to an extent but >> yeah. So um let's chat a little bit more about mainstream physicists. You've been a harsh critic of Aaron Eric Weinstein. What is your main arguments against him or what what do you think about him in general in terms of influencer? You've seen him on Joe Rogan, Danny Jones, all the big podcasts talking about spooky hidden physics, the Times Travelers. They're coming for us. >> Maybe the man is too smart for his own good. He's very eloquent. He as he's a he's another Jack Sarfati. He has his own view of things and if you don't agree uh the conversation's not going to last very long. Um and the stuff he says I don't know where he gets it. Uh you know he was in Austin when Gabriel went to go see him talking about dark energy. Um he honestly I don't spend a lot of time listening to people talk about dark energy and dark matter. >> I don't think I have a reason to. So, I'm not the best person to ask about what Eric Weinstein Weinstein is saying about it. Um, but he comes across as well pompous and he's clearly been given this pedestal. Like, why why else is he everywhere right now talking about this stuff? Crazy stuff. Times traveling temporal adversaries. >> Well, some context. He was a big skeptic a few years back on the whole UFO thing. And now he's done a complete 180. Even when he spoke to Hal Pudof, that was only like three years ago. And he was a huge skeptic back then. He even said, "If any of this is true, I'm going to march on the National Science Foundation with my pitchfork and my for." And now he's out here going, "Yeah, we need to come up with more physics and the aliens are definitely real and they're hiding physics from us and all this stuff." But this is the part that bugs me is that the arrogance to do a complete 180 and then pretend like you're the one with all the answers. Oh, the government came to me to help me for me to reveal like, hey, um, you were kind of wrong about everything. Maybe you should listen to some of the people that weren't wrong about everything. Like, uh, we're out here. >> Why he's been given the pedestal, I don't know. >> Oh, well, that's the reason why, like, look at this. Like, look at what we've been talking about. If normal people understand zero point energy, you don't have to be a academic PhD to get it. You can just be a you can be a air traffic control uh controller. You can be a healthcare IT guy and you can understand this. For this to be kept secret, it had to be institutional. This had to be a brainwashing campaign to make sure we don't figure this out because otherwise this should have been figured out before we were born, right? Like that's how old this physics is. It's old. >> So why is Eric Weinstein and Avi Loe the ones that are picked? And I'm pretty sure about this because they know they're not going to figure it out. Those are the people that can never figure out if it was you that they printed on here. You're going to figure out those UFOs real quick. You're going to write a report about how it's ball lightning and how it goes back to William Bostic and Ken Shoulders and it's going to be [laughter] it's going to make so much sense, right? Like that's what they don't want that. No, they need somebody that's like, "Oh, I think they're uh interdimensional entities that are that are haunting us at Skinwalker Ranch." Like, yeah, those are the people that Ooh. Oh, Did somebody say demons? Oh, I'm gonna check into that at 7 o'clock tonight, right? [clears throat] Like, that's that would be my argument. Maybe I'm too cynical, though. Maybe I'm too cynical. I don't know. >> I don't think so. >> I don't think you're too cynical at all. No. No. I agree with everything you just said. >> No. >> Okay. Well, so how do we get this out? Like this is kind of what it sums up to, right? Is how do we get this out? We've, you know, you've set yourself up, I think, to be in a good spot in the future. I think uh it's very smart and you're looking forward. I think you're kind of guy that people that are looking to invest in this. Like you're the kind of person who's a good leader for a company that has a good vision, knows what you want, and you seem to have your feet on the ground in terms of what it's going to take to pull off. So, what do you think? What do you think we got to do? >> Yeah, I think the work that we're doing right now is uh cumulatively all of us is is heading in the right direction. Um you you talked about why you're not out there building a a fusion power plant yourself. Well, that's not your role. Um I'm doing the role that that I was given. You know, I created a company. When you create a company, you don't know where it's going to go or or what's going to happen. But um networking, like you said, that's going to be a big key. Um so what we can't do is just wait for something to happen, right? >> We can't just sit around like, "Oh, this guy knew this about that UFO over there." >> That's not going to get us anywhere. Okay, this disclosure UFO talk doesn't get us anywhere. So, we have to get to work um actually trying to figure out the physics, which you're helping out with hugely on your um live streams. And then engineering is the other big part of it. At some point, you got to start engineering. And that's what I like about my account right now being so small is that people come to me all the time. And I have time to respond. And there's so many people out there that are doing stuff engineering wise. Like I haven't made I haven't got to engineer anything yet. I'm I'm all, you know, just theoretical at the moment. Uh, but people are out there actually building stuff, engineering stuff. And you know, ultimately we got to I don't know why like the people the big names right now, the Charles Chases, Sunny Whites, why everybody can't just get together and work in one lab or whatever and really just nail this out. But apparently that's not how it's going to work. So, the next phase of this is going to be people like you and me and all the other people who I've met uh since getting this going, who are actually out there engineering stuff and getting stuff done. Um, we're going to push forward. We're going to push and like I said before, the zero point energy is you can connect to it. So, what you will to happen can happen. So, we're going to we're going to be out there. We're going to will this to happen. We are going to make it happen. We're going to manifest destiny and we're going to create a generation of ZPE engineers. >> Hell yeah. Okay, that was great. I love that. And that's exactly what I'm trying to do. That's what I'm trying to help do as well is trying to manifest destiny. It like that's the reason why I brand all this stuff. That's the reason why I try to make ZPE disclosure and a neutronic fusion disclosure because if we talk about it, we will it into reality. 100%. I believe in that. And yes, >> if you would have gone to say, well, what's the what's the actual impact of that? Because we're pushing this stuff along. Like, look at it like this. Do you think Sunny White still gets that contract by Space Force if like there's no MH370 on the scene? If we're never talking about his free energy microchip, I don't know if that still happens. Like free energy microchips. Like I was a major pusher of all the free energy microchips on the stage. I'm not going to say I didn't get him onto Joe Rogan, but like part of the discussion of that locally was, you know, got him onto onto Joe Rogan into that level. So, if you look at this, I would say we're we're not directly building this stuff, but we're influencing and making it happen quicker, right? >> Yeah. And and what those guys have accomplished in their lifetimes and careers, they had to follow the system very carefully, walking on eggshells to get where they're at. and and they have to follow the rules. Uh the next generation's gonna have a separate set of rules, a different set of rules. >> This is what I love about it. I think we're actually creating a community here now where if you look at this, like we're breaking all the rules. Like you're right, all those guys, even the Charles Chases, >> they've lived in this academic world where they have to be afraid to say free energy, ether, cold fusion. These are all no no words for them, right? They can't ever even say these things >> because they get black by everyone if they do. >> And we're coming in and we're going, we're not even we don't even have PhDs. We're not even educated in that. We didn't even do any of this. I'm we're just off the street. And we're going, we're figuring this stuff out here. We're creating a new standard. And this is what I want to tell people. I told like a 10-year-old kid this. And I said, you can be a warp drive engineer. We should be telling kids this and it's true. >> And people are going to come out and say you should tell kids that's fake son. No, it's not fake. You should tell kids. They can be a warp drive engineer. They can be a free energy microchip engineer. That will give them purpose in this life. And it's truly >> you can literally do anything that you will to happen. Anything you can imagine, anything you can dream up. So imagine, dream, become an imagineer. So, this has been a great conversation. Um, where can people find your company? Um, and do you want to shout out anything that you're either currently working on or anything in general? >> Right. So, um, my X handle is at ZPF Technologies, I believe. Let me just double check that. Yeah, at ZPF Technologies. [snorts] So, just start there and then you'll be able to find our website and our Substack. I put a lot of content up on our Substack. I try to keep that going. Um, I'm very pleased with Thank all of you so much who do follow and subscribe. Um, we're up like crazy percentage right now um since we first started. So, thank you all. Um, you know, follow us, subscribe us to us, follow our work, uh, our content. Um, so, um, I'm I'm hoping to make some inroads, um, with Exodus Propulsion maybe. And, uh, if if that doesn't go anywhere, um, I do have, uh, your advice on who to contact, but I also have something in my back pocket. Um, I'm not excluded from a foundry, let's put it that way. So, um, we are, you know, what I can from what I can tell you with some certainty, we are gonna build a microchip. So, um, I'll leave it at that. >> Hell yeah, man. I'm excited for that and I want to know more and have you come back when there's a progress or just whenever, honestly. Let's go through some super chats real quick. Thank you very much. 1013 flies. I appreciate that you are just going for it. Uh, also I'm a ERU alumni. >> No way. >> There you go. Boom. Er alumni. Awesome. Depot says, "Douglas Miller, I can help you. Check out Tom Kle Jr. OnX." So, check out Tom Kle Jr. OnX. He wants to connect with you if you're interested. >> Voice for good. Thanks, Ash. And thank you, Voice for Good. Appreciate you. And then the followup says, "We will voice this. Will this into existence?" Exactly, guys. Honestly, it's hard to compete in this world, in this economy, this attention economy today where everything's hyperol politicized. Everything's about these social issues and we're out here just going, "Hey, man. Um, energy is free and we can like make pull free energy from the vacuum and make warp drives. [laughter] It's hard for us out there, chat." That's why I say honestly when people criticize others and say, "Oh, that person's a grifter." People were saying, "Oh, you went a Michael Salah." And he was griing off of Amy Es. I'm going, "Guys, nobody in this industry is griing. Nobody's really making serious coin in this industry." If you want grifters, go look at the political arena. People are making up fake every day in that arena. So, even the people that I don't agree with, like I don't I don't criticize them on this arena. So, um, any last thoughts before we close out? >> Oh, no. Thank you very much, Ashton, for having me on your live stream. It's been a pleasure. >> Awesome. >> And thank you guys, everybody in the chat for hanging out tonight. We appreciate you guys. And we'll be back on Wednesday. Take it easy everybody. Later. [music] Out in the fields [music] where the skies are wide. Talking about a journey through the cosmic ride. Einstein and Thorne, they set the stage for a trip through time across the space age. Wormholes [music] connect distant points in space. Traversible paths to a far off place. No black [music] holes pull, no crushing weight, just a cosmic tunnel to a distant gate. Talking wormholes, [music] stargates, negative energy travel through the cosmos. It's our destiny. MH370, where did it go? Bing trip 7 through a wormhole. But we're [music] talking wormholes. Stargates, negative energy. Travel through the cosmos. [music] It's our destiny. MH370. Where did it go? Boing trip 7 through a wormhole flow. [music] [music] Exotic [music] matter, negative energy is the key to stabilize the wormhole for you [music] and me. Quantum vacuums squeeze so tight, creating conditions for this wondrous flight. [music] Static fields and lasers in the lab [singing] they play, generating forces in a new kind of way. Gravitational squeezing [music] [singing] cases force negative zones. We need to stay the course. Stalking wormhole, [music] stargates, negative energy. Travel through the cosmos. It's our destiny. [music] MH370. Where did it go? Boing trip 7 through a wormhole float. Thin shell formalism [music] plate so fine. Spherical geometry we realign. Energy [music] conditions that we must defy for a stable wormhole. Let's give it a try. [music] >> [music] >> Cool forces balancing [music] the plates creating the throat. Open the gates from Earth to the stars in a single bound. A shortcut through space profound. Engineers and [music] dreamers hold the key to future worlds and what we could be. With science in hand, we forge ahead through the cosmic paths that we now tread. We're talking wormholes, stargates, negative energy. Travel through the cosmos, [music] sitting star destiny. MH370, where did it go? Throwing triple [music] 7 through a wormhole flow. From the fields to the stars, we break the chains. Understanding the universe, we make the gain. Little Hula Crump [music] shines, bringing truth to light. Through his music, we'll explore the night with wormholes and stargates. Our path is clear. Exploring the cosmos. Our future's here.