Video Transcript
about frequency selection. I don't want to get too in depth with this, especially since I know you're going to be >> This is the This is the most detailed we're going to get into the frequency selection and picking the frequency and finding the right frequency, so pay attention. >> doing this in the future, and I'm going to put a link in the show notes. I'm going to put links to all of our information in the show notes. >> level version of this is that you'll see that frequency of the Josephson junction AC Josephson junction effect it it it goes according to that exact frequency. So, if you put in a certain voltage, you get a certain frequency. It's 483 terahertz divided by voltage. And so, these are very small bias voltages, right? Uh that you if you want to get down to the gigahertz, you're you're in the nano or millivolts uh in order to do that. So, but that's that those are the that's the fundamental frequency of AC Josephson effect. So, that's what that's all that's being described here. So, for instance, for 24 gigahertz, you only need 49.7 microvolts of operating voltage across these little emitters. >> Okay, so low power. Low power. I mean, there are >> These are low >> so many of >> So, these are very low energy devices, which we kind of already knew in terms of how much energy it takes to run these things. >> amazing aspect of this. So, let me go down to phased array geometry. This is I mean, again, you've gone through this whole thing. You're working up a complete >> Yeah, so these layouts are very poor. Uh the AI got confused. >> This is the part that I think Jenny Nelson would appreciate the most, the geometry. Because this geometry is going to be the same underlying geometry as the structure of her theory, in my opinion. We'll see. >> Just here. If you want to look at the real layouts, you can look at my briefing separately. Uh but the idea is to orient these emitters and receivers so that there's one wavelength separating each of them. There's the bigger wafer you have, the more emitters you have you have to use the the one full wavelength spacing. Uh and then the pad size for the emitter shouldn't be any more than a quarter wavelength because you start getting out of phase. So, there's a certain limit to the size of each emitter pad. Uh as as we do in microwaves. Uh and so, that's that's the idea here. And so, even though these particular layouts are notional, uh you can look you can look at my briefing for the real layouts. >> Okay. And and then let me see beam focusing. And again yeah. >> So Fontana was looking at this and came to the same conclusion. You can't you can't create a lens out of matter that is going to change the phase of gravitational waves because the interaction is so weak. What you can do is shape the emitter so that it's just a delta T that's that's causing them all to come into focus. It's creating a delta T because you you have shaped all the emitters so that the delays are all correct to all come together together. So like like a spheroid conic section or you can do it with a flat one and then it's just due time delays into each emitter. Which is what we do with phased array antennas on aircraft. >> So right there he's talking about building in a time varying condition. He's talking about changing the delta T and taking advantage of the Observers. Chad, we're all living in the Observers. Everyone's going to be calling it that. Eric Weinstein called it the Observers. Taking in fact this right here immediately made me think about the plasma orbs. They must be using the exact same type of effect on a macroscopic level. >> Okay. So so we we can still create a focused array but we're doing it with time delays versus with a big curve. >> Well, it's interesting looking at the physical curve, right? That reminds me of something I was reading about. So when you talked about >> the the phase array delay line. >> do it with a time delay instead of a physical curve. So you would say Ashton, how can you just use three orbs to make a wormhole? Don't you have to make like a full bubble? And this is almost I think this is what Gary Stephenson is saying is that no, we don't need that. We can actually simplify it using the math and quantum mechanics. We don't need to have a full spherical bubble around this. We can just set up our array in an intelligent way. Wow. >> What immediately immediately came to mind just a few moments ago was like a Fresnel lens. >> For millions, yeah. >> Yeah, and >> Okay, let's get back a little bit. >> Okay. Yeah, you can separate them by quite a bit. So, you separate them and then you'll have the R squared or the D squared distance fall off um because you're changing the radius here. But, nevertheless >> Okay, I think we got that part. Let's go to the end. I think he asked some Here we go. Here's the next steps. >> I'm going to show You measured with your with your wave as well as the S wave. In which case, the whole thing could be cooled, you know, in a much Yeah, I mean, the immediate term is is build this and test it in a lab. Uh there are other fundamental breakthroughs that describe We talked about this a little bit that YBCO might be able to be used for the D wave as well as the S wave. In which case, the whole thing could be cooled, you know, in a much higher temperature. Maybe not 70, but maybe like 40 or 50 Kelvin. Um >> Why By the way, guys, why does this feel like we're we're like watching some Nobel Prize winning thing like years in advance? Why does it feel like that? Like there's nothing like this out there. And it feels like such an obvious thing based on the research of of Fontana. It's like how are we trying to get a gravitational effect? There should be some coupling. And what what Gary Stephenson was saying earlier is that perhaps the reason why we're not seeing this coupling is because we need to increase the frequency. We increase the frequency and the effect of this coupling, electromagnetic coupling, to gravity becomes much stronger. It becomes much stronger with an increase of frequency. >> Uh it it depends upon what the doping level is. Uh and then um if you if you have a light budget that you successfully characterized, you can use this for basically gravity and magnet magnetics testing to test metamaterials. If you have a theory about material shaping a wavefront or changing gravitational aspects, you could test it you actually have a test bed now. So, that that would be very beneficial. >> Amazing. So, Gary, let me stop sharing on >> Is that it? I thought it That's not like a whole lot of details. Like, well, we could just uh build this and test this like Okay, what's the next step? You know what? Keep Gary safe, chat. We don't We don't need to I don't have any more questions. I don't need to know anything more about it. Just keep doing what you're doing, bro. Keep doing what you're doing. I can't wait for the next presentation on the Josephson junction gravitational wave. I'm calling it amplifier. Even though technically it's a geyser. Chat. Okay, our moment of zen tonight, very special moment of zen tonight. >> [clears throat] >> Where's my guy? >> [sighs] >> Hold on. Let me get it ready. Oh, boy. This is dramatic. >> [snorts] >> Let me see what we got. Oh, you know what? There was one more clip I was going to play before we go to that. I want to play this clip of uh James Woodward explaining the warp drive. Hopefully, if you've learned something tonight, this will make more sense to you than it did at the beginning of the live stream. So, here you go. >> people in the zero point field all cranked up cuz oh, the ether, the zero point field, and so on. And what he meant was space time is the gravitational field. It is not something else. It is gravity is not something in space time, it is space time. >> OH, MY GOAT. Gravity is not something in space time, it is space time. Zero point energy is space time. Do you get it? You say, Ashton, well, if all this energy is keeping up all the atoms everywhere, then we must be in some kind of ocean of energy. Yeah, it's called space-time. It's called everything you're in all the time. Exactly. That's what people need to get through their head. Gravity isn't some effect that's being exuded. Gravity is space-time being morphed, being bent, being shapen. >> So, when you manipulate gravity, you are manipulating space. That's why when you make wormhole, when you get a sufficiently a Jupiter mass of negative rest mass matter in a sphere say 10 m in diameter or thereabouts, you can create a wormhole. Okay? >> When you manipulate gravity, you are manipulating space-time. Thank you, Laura. Laura. Thank you. When you manipulate gravity, you're manipulating space. And that's why I say we have space-time manipulation technology A because it's true and B because it's also technically accurate. >> The problem is where do you get a Jupiter mass of 10 of negative rest mass matter? And the answer to that question, if you read chapters 7, 8, and 9, >> Chapter 7, 8, and 9? Like Salvatore Pais's equation 7, 8, and 9? He says, "Everybody agrees if I have the matter mass energy of Jupiter, I can create a wormhole. But we need negative energy. Where are we going to get the negative energy from, chat? Remember, our balloon is already squished. We need to unsquish our balloon, and when we unsquish it, we get the negative energy. So, let's listen to what Woodward has to say. >> Yes, it's all around us. You indeed contain within you and an utterly enormous amount of negative rest mass matter. It's the bare mass of all of the elementary particles that make you up. >> Everywhere around us. It's the bare mass of all the particles that make up you. It turns out the energy we need is all around us everywhere. He's saying the exact same thing. >> The only reason why it isn't exposed is because of the gravitational action of everything else in the universe on you. And if you can find a way to screen that interaction, you reveal the bare mass. >> He says all the other stuff, everything is connected, and it's all keeping everything stable. If you can screen that away, boom, negative energy. If you can screen the gravity away, screen that pushing force, stop the balloon from being pushed down, boom, the balloon will expand automatically because the balloon wants to expand. It's just being prevented from doing so all the time. >> And now you've got your Jupiter mass and negative rest mass mass. Okay? And that's that's that's a real real real tall order. But if the experiences that you and your compatriots are having and all that are true, it means that someone has or something has figured out how to do this. Okay? But within the physics that is we know today that's as far as I can see the only hope of making either warp drives or wormholes. >> You you >> Wow. Beautiful chat. Beautiful. Now you see this has been out there waiting to be discovered for a long long time and it's been an us problem. It's been a psychology problem. All that needed to happen was for us to wake up and realize these guys aren't full of We just needed the proof and evidence that would make it undeniable. That's why I asked Pat vetted on Saturday. Check out that the podcast guys. I asked him well if those videos ended up being true that made 370 videos you would agree we must have this crazy technology. And he said yeah if those got proven real he would because there it is. This is why I say all this stuff is real. I realized those videos were real and then just follow the science and boom there it is. It's all just here and turns out it's all the government contractors, government engineers and they're bragging about it. Bragging about it on podcast cuz nobody believes it anyway. You just have to watch and learn and see for yourself.