Ian Crossland, welcome to Hard Truths, man. How are you doing today? Great, dude.

Yo, first question. Do you know what these cards are over here? Can you tell those are

I know they're magic? I thought they were magic cards. I couldn't tell if they were magic or Pokemon, but I thought they were magic cards, but what

I can't tell what cards they are. Are they What are they? How dare you judge me? Think that I'm a Pokemon card player. I know you played

Magic cards, but do you did you play Pokemon? I played Pokemon Go, so like Yeah. Okay.

But I didn't play Pokemon cards or whatever. But okay, so I was a kid and I played I grew up with Magikards, but

like I never really like played, you know, in the 90s. And then as an adult, I kind of got into it.

And actually, uh, Wizards of the Coast sent me that uncut sheet right there. That's uh, War of the Spark, the one

with all the Planes Walkers in it. I don't know if you remember, but I bought some stuff from them and they like messed up the order, so they sent

these uh these cards up there. I just think it looks really cool, so I got it. It looks amazing, dude. Are they foil?

Yeah. Yeah, they're all like the foil plain. Oh, that looks so I don't know. I And I just lean into

being a nerd anyway. I'm not ashamed of it at all, you know. And it's mathematics. Magic the gathering. It's just math with the

colors and pictures of dragons and but it's all math. Yeah. Let me ask you that. That brings me to kind of my first question is have

you ever heard the uh thing about like um I know you're a musician um that

mathematicians when they were asked what study are do they most relate to? I

think that they overwhelmingly agreed music was the answer. Have you ever heard that before? Do you agree with that?

Yeah, I have heard that. It's works with me too. Especially geometry. I think of music as like spatial sound, spatial

awareness moving. Um I think a lot in terms of momentum and like um pattern mo

like when you move when you walk across the room it's like a pattern. I see like a pattern of motion and so I hear that

when I hear sound like da da da I can picture it 1 35 and I see it on a graph and that's just like a line graph. I can

picture the shape of the sound but then you can actually hear like the wholeness of tone as well and it's kind of creates

these like spherical canonical shapes and things like that. And I think a lot of it is like filling space. Similar

with cooking. Um you want to like make sure there's enough seasoning in all the little parts of the bowl and that no

part of the thing is too hot that all the temperature is evenly dispersed. So it's kind of with sound. It's similar.

You know, the other thing that reminds me of is uh I think this is something that we talked about on the podcast when

we were on Culture Wars was like waves versus particles, you know, is that when

you think of sound like that, when you think of uh you know, you're really describing waves in my opinion, you

know, it's like the up down motion is like this resonance kind of uh that's out there. I I think that the question

is is matter is matter a wave? Can matter be a wave? we stuck in this particle mindset where everything must

be this definite thing definite thing but is it possible that we are just a complex series of waveforms but we you

know that there's some other explanation do do you agree with the that kind of viewpoint that esoteric viewpoint

Exploring Quantum Mechanics and Sound

yeah and you know after we ping you and you came on and you you and you came on the culture war I started thinking a lot

about subatomic spin and like what's causing it you know the scientific community thinks maybe was it angular momentum but then they're like no cuz

that would mean that these two vortices are traveling the speed of light which is not possible. So what is it? They don't know. I think it's simatics that

there's a vibration of of spacetime that's causing the position of the subatomic space to face left and then

the the frequency changes and it faces north then it changes again. It faces east, faces south as the frequency

changes, but the frequency is changing so fast that it looks like it's spinning. And so there's some maybe low,

maybe not imperceivable vibration, but I think eventually we'll end up being able to measure what's causing uh shape to

snap to that form. No, that's a good way to put it. And so you're talking about quantum spin and we

know there is spin when we look at particles at the quantum level because we can see like the perturbation and we

can measure that like we can put electromagnetic fields next to them and we can see these things react. So, we

know that there must be this quantum spin, but then it's like, what does that actually mean? You could watch videos all day of people online trying to

explain quantum spin, but end of the day, it's like we know it has the properties of something that's spinning,

but at the same time, we think of it as just this like quantum kind of magical

uh you know, dot, this particle. So, it's hard for us to wrap our brains around that. I think one other thing

that could open the door to that is something that we talked about on the podcast, too, which is the ether. It's like the idea of this extra dimension

um that was thrown out you know like a hundred years ago because if there is this spin that's happening if there is

some effect that's where is it coming from what's causing that to happen surely there must be some force kind of

pushing on it from some direction to cause it to spin or for something like that to happen. Have you had any

thoughts about the idea of the ether and extra dimension at all? Well, yeah, but what does that mean? Exa, what is ether?

Exactly. Is that the fabric of spaceime? Is is ether? They think it's an actual fabric. So, not really. Like, we've kind of

moved away from this like fluid medium. I mean, it really would be a super fluid. It if you were to really

describe, there's a lot of different ways to describe it, but you could say that spacetime itself is like a flexible

solid. So, it can like it's solid, but it can move. It can jiggle a little bit. Like, it's connected, but it can move

around. um Leonard Suskgind who's written uh has kind of uh popularized er equals EPR I

think he would call it like anti-deitter space so it's almost like a counter space so like you have this the the

universe is trying to expand uh you know at the same time you have this force pulling it together at the same time so

but that's more I don't know how he geometrically like connect how they connected together but the way I

perceive it is like yin and yangs like you've got our observable reality and then you have this quantum reality And

they say it must be connected through this idea of quantum gravity that is in this imperceivable extra dimension. And

The Concept of Ether and Extra Dimensions

what this then opens the door up to is like, you know, wormholes and things like that where you would say that like

the holographic principle. So if I'm playing a video game, like if I'm playing Minecraft or something, it seems

like I'm in a three-dimensional world when I'm playing the video game, but I know I'm not really. I know really I'm

on a microchip somewhere, right? and that if I were to take that microchip, I could connect it to a different microchip somewhere else and now, you

know, they would be together, but you know, they would seem to be super far away. It's kind of like that idea. And I

think that the ether then adds this extra dimension to explain like how can you, you know, how can you wrap

something together? There must be some medium that you're in in order for like that type of thing to happen. Does that make sense?

Yeah. So it's like the subatomic re like the the fabric of the subatomic

reality. Yeah. And the so like molecules will like exchange energy with this ether all

the time. So it's the idea that like Hal Pud's 1987 paper that says ground state

of the hydrogen atom is he says that oh this at the hydrogen atom when it's at

rest it's not radiating energy but they would expect it to radiate energy. And they're saying well why doesn't it do

that? because it's spinning, right? It's got this quantum spin. And they say, well, it's because it must be in some sort of equilibrium. Like whatever

energy is being radiated out must be getting absorbed in at the same exact rate. So there's this idea that like

particles are actually just exchanging energy with this zero point energy all the time. So they might have like a

reservoir of energy that they're kind of like tapping into. So I think that's a way to put it. NASA Herman has this

concept of the um the Schwarz child proton where he had mathematically derived that every proton was two

protons spinning around each other at the speed of light putting information into the vacuum. Maybe it's the ether is what he's

talking about. He calls it the vacuum of spaceime. And so it's reposit depositing information into the vacuum. The vacuum

itself then is doing a massive calculation of everything in the known universe and then giving you a local

response in at light speed as the as the photon emerges from the vacuum back into reality. And so that may be how the

information is being or one way that information is being transmitted into the subsystem into the

Have you guys ever talked to him or had him on the show or anything like that or you just kind of watch his content? I've only seen his stuff. Yeah, I've

been People have been telling me to contact him for literally 19 years. I would love to get in touch with him.

Yeah. And I just realized we're actually live on YouTube. I accidentally went live without even realizing it. Uh so,

okay. I guess we're just going to play this out. Awesome. Rock and roll. Okay. Uh Whoops. Okay. I should post it.

Is there a link? Yeah, go ahead and post if you want. I'll like re-edit it, probably re-upload it later on. I accidentally just

realized this. Okay, so yeah, Nasim Heramine. Um, you know, he's I think he's the only person who can claim the

title of 0 point energy influencer more than I can probably cuz he's like the OG. And one of the things too, a lot of

these guys, one of the things I've realized is they use the different terminology for the same stuff. So you will hear hear people use like quantum

UFOs and Extra Dimensional Beings

vacuum or they'll use a vacuum but they'll also say well the vacuum is not empty you know it's not it's not an

empty vacuum and so it's the same idea is that 0 point energy the ether

uh they're connected through this idea of an extra dimension um and this is where I wanted to kind of take it in the

next uh kind of discussion with you which is that like the alien topic you

know especially recently Annipina Luna was on Joe Rogan and she was talking

about, you know, the extradimensional aliens. I mean, you guys have heard this. I think you guys have either had

her or Nancy Mace or, you know, you guys have had people on. Yeah, we had both. Yeah, we we we interviewed um Luna, Annapolina Luna,

while we were at Congress. We did like a round table where different congressmen were coming in and sitting down. So, she came in for about 20 minutes and then

Nancy Mace, we had on officially as a guest on IRL once. So, what are your thoughts? What do you think about Congress and what do you

think about this UFO disclosure stuff? I think that extra Okay, I think it is it's a misnomer to say extra

dimensional. That's insane. You and I are extradimensional creatures. We live in multiple dimensions. We are in the

fourth dimension. We actually exist in the fifth dimension even though you might not see it with your eyeballs. Um so that is like a really dumb layman

thing to say. Extradimensional that these things are extradimensional. Yes, of course. Uh you know, if we're talking

like spirits, that's uh I don't believe them. I don't believe that spirits are piloting airplanes. I don't.

Yeah. I need evidence. You said So, okay. So, this is why this is the thing, too. It's like I love your

take there. It's like extradimensional. What does that actually mean? Like, yeah, we're extradimensional beings. We live in three dimensions and a time

dimension. So, it seems like it's just uh like a red herring. They're just throwing this idea out there or they're

trying to make it sound scary or something or like sensationalize it like, "Oh, yeah, the extra dimension." Because when I found like, okay, there's

this extra dimension, this ether, and you know, maybe this explains how we can do wormholes. I'm going, well, I wouldn't call a being that goes through

a wormhole an extradimensional being. I would just say it just went through a wormhole. It's still in our universe. I

mean, you know, I mean, but granted, it could come from a different uh, you know, universe, if you believe in uh

multi-worlds theory. So, I guess what I would want to know from them when they're asking this stuff is like, are you saying that there's infinite

universes and that you can go to different ones? cuz that would be a major physics claim to say, right? Is

that there are multiple universes and aliens are coming from a different universe than we're coming from. Um, so

I mean, do what do you think? Do you think that she's just doesn't understand physics and science or do you think that

like this is some kind of narrative that's being pushed? Well, she doesn't understand what it

what extradimensional means. Obviously, if she's just repeating that, she's repeating what she was told by someone that probably was told that or decided

that's the narrative we're going to run with. But I also think they are working with like space-time warping technology

that they're creating cavitation bubbles and defying you know classical physics and things like that.

Manipulating Time and Space

Yeah. And I mean you just have to listen to like what science and uh technology adviser uh Michael Katzios has been

saying if you you know if you question that I mean he literally said we have the ability to manipulate time and space to annihilate distance. And we've had

Trump say multiple times that we've got weapons that nobody understands how they

work. I mean, he said it multiple times like it had to be scripted. Basically, people think that manipulating

time and space is some magical sci-fi Star Trek type thing. But actually, it's

much simpler than that. It's really just about I mean, gravity is just mass

that's condensed into a region that's is pulling on something. And we that's the way we at least perceive it, right? It's

not necessarily exactly correct, but mass is just energy. E= MC². So in

theory, if you have a whole bunch of energy, then you should have gravity

being sucked towards that, right? I mean, that's a simple thing to understand. So then what then I would

say, okay, well, at what scale? Like does it have to be a a sphere of of mass like the this size of my this sphere

here, or can it be a super super tiny dot, right? Can it be a super tiny dot

and I just compact as much energy onto that little little tiny dot? Is it really about energy density? Right? It's

really about how much can you compact onto a little tiny point. And it turns out when you look at it from that perspective, it's not that

insurmountable of a challenge. It turns out we can have these super powerful lasers that focus energy onto a very

tiny point in time and in space. And that in theory could be enough to

stimulate a gravitational effect that can be, you know, measured. Um, and then that can also be useful for things like

fusion as well. So it's I don't think it should surprise anybody that they're at least working on the ideas of

anti-gravity or gravity manipulation, spacetime manipulation, whatever you want to call it, it's all the same thing. I would just call it like

manipulation of the ether. You were talking about simatics. Like the question is how do you manipulate

entanglement? How do you create entanglement? I think you need to understand where

you're going. So what you do is you have to map the matrix. You get a three-dimensional uh space and then you

you derive what is in each position, how the consistency, how much of it and

where. So what how much and where. If you can match that for every incremental

point in this three-dimensional XYZ cube, then you've mapped the matrix. You know what, where, and how much of each

in each space, then you have a mathematical map, you can teleport to.

So, if you know where you're going, if you know what you're going, you know where you're going, what you're going,

it's the same thing. What, where, it's all one thing. What is it? That is where it is. Um, if you know that and you can

calculate that, then you can target it, I think. And then you can re you can replicate it locally and be there at a

distance. You know they have a term for what you just said. It's called uh solving Schrodinger's equation. So actually

Cymatics and Energy Manipulation

there there are people working on this idea of like if there is a medium and even though we can't perceive it is

there a way where we can like reverse engineer like you said like figure out the matrix right like we only imagine we

only see this flat surface. Is there a way to figure out like what is all of this like this whole bulk here that we

can't see? Is there a way to measure me measure it and measure its effect on our flat 2D reality? And the answer is yes.

The Aaronhoff bomb effect is a good example of this. Aaronhoff bomb effect is a real experiment. They take a

solenoid that traps all the electromagnetic fields in a cylinder inside of it. And you would say, okay,

well, there's no electromagnetic field signal on the outside of the solenoid. So, if I shoot an electron past it,

nothing. There shouldn't be any interference or any, you know, shift in the phase pattern. But there is. There's

an actual measurable effect. It's called the scalar potential and so or the

magnetic scalar potential. Uh uh and so the question here then is if you can

measure this then can you reverse engineer it? There was a great uh presentation that I was watching about

or or optical vortices of light. And really what it was about was like trying to figure out like if you have this

vortex motion, if you were looking at a two-dimensional surface and you just saw a circle, could you map out what the

vortex motion is in an extra dimension? Could you map it out? And after they model it out a while, they come up with

and they say, "Oh, here's an equation that, you know, seems like it fits what the experimental data shows." And so

from that, that kind of, you know, answers the question to could you actually create entanglement? Could you

manipulate the ether or this extra dimension to cause two things to be, you know, joined together now? Maybe. Well,

yes, if you can solve it. Go ahead. If we can figure out the subatomic formation of the matter and then figure

out what frequencies, if this theory that it's a simatic, you know, phenomenon that's causing subatomic

formation. And if you can figure out what frequencies cause the subatomic formation to cause the matter to be what is thus like this this area that you

want to entangle to then it would be more of creating the frequency patterns in a system to reproduce the subatomic

features. Yeah, I think that actually is what it is. So because simatics if people are

not familiar the simplest explanation of simatics is you just take a metal plate and you put sand on it and then you just

hit it with uh or uh vibrate the plate at different frequencies and different

shapes begin to form. So the question here is is this connected to this idea

of the ether like why are those shapes forming from certain frequencies? Is it because we're in a medium and you're seeing this vibration and can you then

map that? That's what they are doing with Bose Einstein condensates. That's actually what Bose Einstein condensates

are. Now, we think of them at this thing at a very low temperature, but it really when you boil it down to what does it

actually mean? It's this coherent shape that's being created via frequency. And so, it's like how is that being created? Go ahead.

Fusion and Energy Production

And like the simatics on the plate you were talking about, that's a two-dimensional representation. When you see three-dimensional bubble simatics,

good lord. I think that is what is that Bose Einstein condensates. They think that they're bubble simatic or maybe

something getting close. I mean I think we're blurring the line at this point in terms of what yeah is it the same physics at

play in the bubble simatics as what we see in the Bose Einstein condensates I think so and the idea there is that we

are creating these coherent stabilized shapes and the other thing that then ether then opens up the idea to is like

just stabilized structures in general in geometry stabilized geometric structures so a good example of one would be like a

smoke ring you know a smoke ring like when you blow a smoke ring it's crazy how stable it is like that thing can

blow and blow and blow Oh, and it the reason why it's stable is because it's a toid. It's a too toidal shape. So,

you'll have the tooidal field and then you'll have the poloidal field going around the tooidal field as well. So,

you'll see the smoke kind of going around the ring as well as it blows. Um, this also holds true for plasma as well.

So, the question then is can we manufacture reality through these

concepts? Um, or you know going back to the disclosure question, can aliens do

it? you know, uh, can we make a Star Trek replicator out of this? When you start to be able to say, "Okay, I'm

gonna stimulate the ether with some, you know, uh, frequency and then I'm going

to cause an effect to happen, a coherent shape to happen." Now, it's just like, okay, I'm just going to tune it to

whatever I want to to occur, right? And and it and it would be about the impulse of it, too. So, about the

frequency and how fast you're introducing the frequency into the system. So like at a certain frequency

and then you like slow it down. Maybe you won't hit it but then you like so like there's this what impulse are you delivering and what frequencies are

being delivered and then you'll be able to produce hydrogen with that that impulse frequency and then if you do

that and add other impulse frequencies to produce heat or or magnetic confinement you might be able to produce

fusion. Yeah. So the hydrogen thing is really interesting because I keep thinking of

this one experiment, the dynamic casemir effect where real photons are just being

pulled out of the virtual photons. Because when I think about that from the perspective of, you know, the ether 0,

I'm going, wait, we're just pulling light out of the vacuum, out of nothing, right? Well, how is that happening at

all? And if we can pull light out of the vacuum, then well, E equals MC^2. So

light is, you know, energy is matter. So, and the most simple, the most simple element is hydrogen. So, can we just

literally produce hydrogen out of nowhere? I think the answer is yes. I I

think we actually can produce hydrogen out of nowhere and then transmute elements as well. The fusion aspect of

it, I think, is a little bit more complicated. I've been doing a pretty deep dive into fusion. And I don't think

the secret is just like understanding gravity or what have you. It's uh a little bit more complicated than that. I

think the real secret of fusion is actually um non-ignition fusion. Like in

The Future of Energy and Accessibility

our heads, we think of it as like we need to make a star and we need it to be this star that's roing with heat coming

out of it. But if you incorporate the ideas of like Nicola Tesla and like electric circuits that are super

efficient, then you can actually make an electric circuit electric generator using fusion that doesn't require

ignition that can produce over unity. So the idea being we can get smallcale

fusion reactions like temporary ones like pulseed ones like you're talking about and get fusion reactions to occur but we're not going to get this

permanent sun that's there and the output of that can be higher than the total energy input which is really what

we're trying to achieve which is just infinite free energy right I yeah in order to build these little

suns I was thinking I know I think I know how to do it there's this guy John Kansas he was a u a chemist in Ohio he

passed away in like 2008 he was looking for a cure for cancer and he was uh running frequency through saltwater in

his laboratory, different frequencies. He you and I don't know if you if you've seen this, there's video of this guy doing this. He he finds the frequency.

Uh I don't have it written down. He runs a certain frequency through saltwater. It lights off fire like a hydrogen

flame, 1600 degree hydrogen flame off the off the surface of the salt water. There's a gap between the salt water and

the flame. Just like the sun, between the surface of the sun and the corona, there's that gap. And I'm like, okay, that's an electromagnetic flame being

produced. So if that salt water was in orbit, it would coagulate into a sphere naturally. We run the frequency through

it. You get a light bulb, a star. It it and so you figure out if you can collect that heat somehow and use that heat to

produce the electricity to continue the frequency, you'll have an ever producing

star basically. But I wonder if that would produce like a zpinch phenomenon. If it would cause some sort of electric discharge into our own sun, into the

earth's magnetic field. Like it could be a real dangerous experiment, but it would be it would be an immense amount of heat

and you just have to fuel it with salt water. You just have to keep pumping salt water in. Yeah. And that's the thing is that once

we realize that we can use like water as a fuel source. I think uh I think it was

uh redheaded libert libertarian was posting about Stanley Meyer the other day and you know I thought at once upon

a time that the whole water powered car thing was nonsense but then I realized I watched this video about um if you take

water and put it in like a cup or a bucket and then take a tube and and go up like a couple hundred feet and just

in altitude like you know up some stairs or whatever and you have your water tube and you suck the water all the way up

through the tube. You get to a point eventually where above a certain level the water boils room temperature just

boils. So like the water will go up to this level. Everything above it just turns into gas automatically because why

the pressure? There's not enough pressure. So without enough pressure, the water can't stay together and the water just falls apart. And so this

would be how how are people able to make a water power car? Well, that's how you basically cause the hydrogen and the

oxygen to just fall apart. And now you can use either as the fuel source. You know, you can pump the oxygen, I think

it is, to your engine if you want to make it more efficient. Can potentially use the hydrogen directly as fuel source as well. Um, so we have fuel all around

us if we understand nuclear physics and nuclear science. And if we can manipulate gravity, if you can

manipulate gravity itself, in my mind, you should be able to cause that that net pressure, that lack of pressure, you

should be able to cause that to occur. And then the question is, okay, well, how do I then how do you make a system? But it's actually pretty simple. You just have your area where you have the

water comes apart and then you send it to a different area. You either send the hydrogen or the oxygen where you want to

go to produce energy. Or if you want it to recombine, you just send it to a different area where now it's going to

it wants to come back together. It's just going to recombine there. And then you can use the excess energy or the

energy that's produced from fusion. So I think the idea of the water powered car is definitely within reason. And I think

that some of these like low energy nuclear fusion reactors, they're trying to do what you just mentioned, which is

like, you know, burn salt water or some cases they're using the air. Air is fuel

as well cuz air's got potentially enough elements in it. They don't need a lot of molecules in order to make, you know,

fusion reactions occur. Oh man, you're as you were saying about the d like making water reducing the

density so it becomes gaseous. I I realized, okay, so if I took my salt water out into orbit to to light it up

like a light bulb, it would turn into gas. So we maybe we need to take ice. We need to take ice into orbit and just

electrocute ice or or run a current through ice to give off maybe and then it would melt and create like a self I

like the sun. The sun doesn't just evaporate. It's keeping itself in position. So at some point I feel like

the heat would like be make a self-containing I don't know. So, let's talk about

fusion because this was the thing that man what a eye openener for me. I was really all like why have we been failing

at fusion for 70 years, you know, like we've been supposedly we've had the H bomb since the 60s, but I don't think

there's ever been an official use of the Hbomb and nobody really knows what a fusion bomb is. We just assume it's this

big big boom, right? We just assume that it is. So, when I started researching fusion trying to figure out like, okay,

why we failed? Why does it suck? First thing I found is that the the hot fusion people have really a onetrack mindset.

They're trying to get to ignition. They're trying to get to a star, producing a star that is really hot.

Now, here's the problem is that the energy efficiency of any system where we're just getting heat out of it is

really low. Like, let's I'm just going to throw a random number. This is just an index number like 30 20 or 30%. Let's

say if we could produce electricity directly from our nuclear reactions that

efficiency can get up to like 90%. So two three times more efficient than those other forms. So in theory we don't

even really want this all this excess heat. In in a perfect world what we'd like is we'd like our power plant to

produce electricity directly. Not like making steam and then having steam spin the turbine or whatever it is.

So, when I was looking in the fusion types, I found one that I've called that I can't say I coined it, but I'm calling

it cool fusion. So, cold fusion was this idea that you could put like metal rods

in water and then all of a sudden put like a current through it and now it's going to boil and there's going to be this excess heat in there. And this was

considered like basically like room temperature nuclear reactions. Hot fusion is like a tokamac. We're saying,

"Okay, we're trying to get ignition." And once we get ignition, then ignition happens. And now there's enough energy

that we've got this runaway star that that runs itself. There's a third option, cool fusion. And this is the one

I was kind of saying before. So the companies are doing cool fusion are uh Helion Energy, which is funded by uh

Myithil Capital, um George or um Palent uh whatever Peter Teal and Sam Olman.

And another one is uh Tri Alpha Energy. And both of these have backing by the

Department of Energy. And what they're doing is they're saying we're not even trying to get to ignition at all.

They're temp they're keeping their temperatures lower than that, but they're using a different fuel source. They're using helium 3. So they're doing

something where they call it a neutronic. The neutrons are where the heat comes from. So why is it all this

heat coming out? Well, the neutrons. So they found a form of fusion that they're doing where they call a neutronic fusion

where there's only a very very little bit of neutrons coming out. And so what this means is they can actually capture

the energy as electricity directly. The way they explain this is they say well okay we make this plasmoid and they're

literally creating a plasmoid like a plasma smoke ring and they create this plasmoid and it's magnetic field

strength is so strong that while it's trying to spread out and and come apart the magnetic field strength keeps it

together and the magnetic field strength pulling it together while it's trying to expand like this is where they pull the

kinetic energy out of the just and turn it into like an engine like this at least that's how it's described

you know what I and what I think that is is friction that excess heat that's

friction. I ch this ideal gas law. It's that the

pressure of a system is equal to the volume multiplied by the temperature. I think that's what it is. So there's an inverse relationship between pressure,

volume, and temperature of a system. If you increase the pressure, the system's either going to expand in volume or it's going to get hotter. And that's

basically this thing. But the the the ideal gas law is written for tubes to go longer and shorter to get water out of

wells. It was written in the 1800s. So fusion I think is this gas this this plasma you know the fluid and but it's

expanding but it's expanding spherically and when it happens it's expanding so fast that it the expansion itself

produces friction and that friction is brought from without the system it's outside of the system comes into the

fusive system. The friction then makes it get hotter faster which makes it expand even faster which adds more

friction which makes it hotter faster. So you get this runaway expansion.

It may not be as simple as just saying it's friction, but I think that that might be the phenomenon of Yeah, I think that's the idea, right? Is

that you're taking this kinetic energy and you're able to then convert this to electric energy. The way they describe it, like the CEO of Helium Fusion would

describe it. He says this high beta values, this high magnetic field compression. Uh I think he says like a a

biotic I forget how you say compression. Um, and I I guess this is the part where

people like struggle with this concept because it's so different than what we've been led to believe from the public perspective of like, oh, we're

trying to make this star, right? And the benefit of his approach is they they use a pulse approach as well. So they they

minimize the total input energy. So instead of like trying to like focus this huge amount of energy to make

ignition happen, they're like, "No, we're just going to hit it with this small pulse and then we're going to try to recuperate as much of the energy

pulse as we can as well." just like with uh like with an electric car with like how the braking in the electric car like

recuperates the energy. Same kind of concept. And so I just even if I didn't

believe that they were on the right track, I would still be like supportive of what they're doing because they're thinking outside the box about the

problem. They're going, "Hey, it's not really just a matter of trying to get to ignition, what if we make our system super efficient because once we get to a

point where we're getting more energy out of this fusion system than we're getting that we're putting into it, then we just have to scale it up, right?

Because then you just have you have infinite energy. Once you get to over unity, you're good. It doesn't matter if you have ignition or not, right?

Yeah. You're when you're talking about um getting a system started with like just impulses. I think of that when I'm

lighting my incense with a with a lighter. You can click the lighter and have the flame there and just hold the

stick and just run all that fire and you're going to get that stick lit eventually. Or you can burst it and just

tap it with flame and it'll get really really hot really fast and you let go and you can use like a third or a fifth

of the of the fuel to get it lit. It's it's just about efficiency of fuel,

efficiency of of input heat. You don't need to to lather your system with excessive amounts of heat to get it hot.

You can pulse it. And that's what Tim P was saying actually. He said um I'll probably never forget that he said free energy is about

efficiency, right? If we could get energy effi, if we could have energy that's even just 10 times less or more

efficient, less expensive than what we have right now, it would change everything

about the world. That's what free energy is really about. Everybody thinks of it as like free energy is like energy is going to cost zero. But it's not even

about that. And it's also not about producing something that, you know, produces energy from nothing at all.

It's about efficiency. It's about getting a system, designing any system, you know, the square system that you're

getting more out of it than what you're putting into it. If you've done that, boom. And can and like can people even get

access to it? You know, that's another aspect of is that energy free? Because if someone in a laboratory has unlimited electricity, but no one else can use it,

it's not really free energy, you know, freedom really means like can people use it? Is it accessible to people? Is it

efficient in that it is e easily utilized by the populace? Um, and that's what I wanted to ask you

next, which is, do you think they'll ever let us have this? Because, you know, just long story short, I dug into

it. They're definitely hiding fusion. Like, and it's kind of silly when you think about it because you go, we've had the fusion bomb since the '60s, but we

can't figure fusion out. Like, what what am I missing here? The 60s was like a long time ago. So, they figured the

fusion bomb out, but they just couldn't figure out how to get energy from it. Like, so the question is, are they going to

The Dangers of Fusion Technology

give it to us? and and why or why not? This is we I think every time we hang out this we we we talk about this and we

like keep asking each other this question cuz it's like I think I want you to be like oh yeah everyone's going to be I don't know dude it's dangerous

obviously this is like where where I come to is like how explosive is the potential force like what if some idiot

monkey drops it on the ground are we all going to die cuz if that's the case you can't give it to every idiot monkey no offense to the monkeys out there the

homminid species is a is a descended from apes according to genealogy records

um and people are make accidents and they somes times fall down or mess up or get angry and do stupid So, I'm I'm

not totally against like not giving every piece of information to everyone. I'm okay with with that. I don't know if

fusion's necessarily the answer to thriving as a species, but I do believe ei energy efficiency is. I'm more

interested in hydrogen, which I I'd like to talk about too, but where's your mind at? What do you think then? Where's the

line, right? Like where's the line between national security then and like

the public good right I mean if you can make the justification that well sorry

guys can't have fusion cuz you can make bombs that can annihilate the planet and I think you could in fact I think that's

probably what's going to happen that's just my personal opinion but you know where do you draw the line then in a scenario like that and I think that does

or maybe I'd ask you does that explain the certain the whole situation that we

National Security vs Public Good

have with the UFO phenomenon right now. Like why is this whole thing such a huge

mess? Is it because whatever it is that they're hiding is so dangerous that like there's a serious moral question over

whether or not it can be allowed to be given to the public that maybe like if they have fusion generators on those things. I don't

think they do cuz if one of them gets knocked down that would be like the the cat is out of the bag. It's such a risk

to put one on board. But if they're not on board, how would they be powering it? like by laser from a base station and moving it

around like a magnet or something. Could be. Could be. I mean, that is Bob Greener literally thinks that. Yeah.

Like with the orbs in the MA370 video, he thinks they're using like satellites and shooting lasers to create like

interpherometry to shoot them around. I think they are on board. And in fact, I would say I think some of that that has

happened before. I don't think like they've shot down like a plasma ball and then they were like, "Oh, we got this

plasma ball." But like there's a a drone called the RQ170.

I don't know if you ever heard of that, but during 2011 under Obama, Iran hacked

it this drone and they they they claimed they hacked it. The Obama administration denied it and then they like posted

pictures of it. You're like, "Oh, well that's definitely the RQ70 drone." And then they made their own version of it. And I kind of wonder

looking at it. I was reading into the other day like everything about it is classified. So, we don't even really

know exactly what propulsion like they they suspect there's a certain kind of engine they were using. But what I found

is that these fusion engines, they kind of use a Zpinch type mechanism. They call it dense plasma focus, but it's

like a zpinch mechanism. All they've done is they turn that uh the turbine the engine, they just remove the turbine

from the engine and they turn this into like a tube that's a heat exchange. So, you put these magnets along the edges of

it. They're like opposite polarity. And then this could just cause like any electron that goes through it or plasma that go through it like slows down. And

I think they use like a helical motion. So it creates the plasmoid in the middle of it and then the plasmoid creates the

jets that come out of it just like if you were looking at a neutron star and they just angle it. So those jets are

the propulsion. Like that's how you fly around. So if you shot that down like you could figure out the science behind

it but I don't know if you're going to figure out like fusion immediately. You know it's a slightly different concept. It sounds like rifling like the way that

they they built they they uh carve the spherical uh or the spiral into the

engine to create either accuracy essentially plasmoidal accuracy trajection

and uh very similar to how they built rifles. Did Yeah. Did you know that when they uh

some of the plasma fusion nuclear fusion scientists like there's a couple shapes that keep coming up? Toroids are one of

them, but helical motion is another one that comes up all the time as well like this vortex motion. So, it wouldn't

surprise me at all if there is literally a connection with like, you know, guns and the and the helix motion of like the

bullets and things like that. As well, you know, where I'm at now is the hydrogen uh revolution that it sounds

The Hydrogen Revolution

like is like right around the corner for the last 50 years out of Rice University. They're doing this graphine study. I talked with um Jim Tour, who's

like one of the head scientists down there working on it. And they figured out this process called flash jewel heating where they'll take they'll

electrocute carbon, any kind of carbon, trash, plastic, dirt, whatever. They put it in a vacuum and they electrocute it

with 7,000 degree pulses of electricity. And it it breaks it apart and then it it cools down and reforms into its most

stable form, which is the hexagon, which is the graphine structure. And so you get this powder, black powder graphine,

bulk graphine, and it gives off hydrogen byproduct. And so for every kilogram of hydrogen that's released, you get about

$4.50 worth of graphine. So they've inverted the cost. It used to cost money

to produce hydrogen. Now you receive Well, you receive product to produce the

hydrogen. So, after the cost of electricity induction, you get $4.50 in return for every kilogram of fuel,

hydrogen fuel you've produced. And he's saying our methane system across the United States is ready to introduce the

hydrogen for cars for fuel. So, if we want to start fueling our car, um it sounds like they have contracts with the

Department of Defense. He said, um that we're we're on the cusp of a hydrogen revolution fuel wise. I could see like a

hybrid petroleum hydrogen cars where you can pump one or the other. I don't know.

I think that they Well, I mean, my sources have told me that there's companies that were already in the hydrogen game producing hydrogen. I

didn't hear exactly how they were doing it, but once you open the door to solving fusion like and just what we've

already spoken to like simatics, understanding the ether, if you can create coherent shapes, now you can do

alchemy. Now you can produce any element that you potentially want and you can potentially do it at very low energy

costs. Part of go. Yeah. Tell So the last thing I was going to say is that part of low energy nuclear

The Future of Energy: Fusion and Beyond

reactions I I did this interview with uh ENG8 low low energy fusion uh company

and one of the claims they made was that they could potentially produce hydrogen at a much lower energy cost than what

the conventional approach would be to it too. So, you kind of have to keep your eyes open on some of these companies. Like, you know, if you were to look at

it, they may just look like a completely conventional company, but they might then be doing using some of these electromagnetic physics type concepts to

really be making more money than what you would be possible otherwise. When I think about Fusion, I think of the big ask that it's like, all right,

this is, okay, I'm from 1979. I'm cynical. That's just the way it was growing up in Ohio in the 80s. Our team,

Cleveland Browns, always lost. It was all we were always it never worked out. I had to ch break out of that mindset,

but I'm like that's what it feels like with fusion. It's like we're never going to get I don't want to say it. I don't even want to joke about it because I

don't want to manifest that it's it's happening. Obviously, we're getting fusion. People are fusing things. But do

you think it's actually reasonably going to be like a power source in the next 30 years for the common man?

Yeah, I mean it's it exists. I'll tell you that much. Are they going to give it to us? That's the that's the bigger

question, you know, and I think that they are weighing exactly what you just said, which is they're weighing the question of what's the risk of somebody

using this and creating a weapon that wipes us all out and can we stop it if they do? And do we have the deterrence

in place to do it, but absolutely, I think not only are we going to get fusion, I think it's going to get a lot weirder than that. Is that one of the

first things that's probably going to happen is we're going to have to start coming up with new new names for some of these energy sources. Maybe the hydrogen

revolution sounds like a good way. Maybe we'll just call it that honestly because I think it's going to be more all-encompassing. We're going to see

like fusion companies like uh helium that aren't even doing ignition that are producing excess energy and people are

going to be sitting there wondering how I mean I was watching a debunker person who's like a nuclear physicist

themselves and they were like listening to the CEO of Helium Fusion. They're wondering how all these claims can be

possible when these people are struggling to make a tokamac reactor, you know. Um, but then you're also going to see stuff like free energy microchips

at the same time. Like our low power devices, everything up to like a cell phone in the next five or 10 years, like

they're going to be rolling out free energy microchips. Like these devices just aren't going to be running out of energy anymore. And people are going to

be like, "How is that possible?" And they're going to come up with some they're going to call it like I've been joking. They're going to call it like

space juice. They're going to come up with some stupid like madeup name. They're going to call it's just harnessing space juice. Don't ask questions, right? Like and be like,

"Yeah, okay." It'll be like tapping into the pazo electric vibration of the of the ether or something.

It's got to sound something like really technical, you know, and then that's what they'll say and then everyone will just be like, I don't question why my

phone never has to run out of energy anymore, you know? You know, subatomic pazo electrics is a fascinating concept. I mean just PZO

electric in general that you can use like tensive vibration to get electrical charge and then if you can scale that

down at the to the microchip level the chips themselves power just just by atmospheric you know indenture create

their own conductivity there's probably like at least three different ways to do

Understanding Electricity and Plasma

free energy from the micro scale that I found one is using the casmir effect which uh Sunonny White has been doing

and I think Garrett Modell out of University of Colorado Paul Tibido is using like a thermal effect like the

thermal changes just vibrations and even it can be in a sta stationary

temperature but just the thermal just vibrations brownie in motion he made a microchip that basically just harnesses

that as well. So in addition to what you just mentioned, so there could be multiple different ways like the piso

electric thing people anytime you have like a PhD physicist come on especially

if you're talking to them like on Tim Pool on a big show you should always ask them what is electricity where does electricity come from because piso

electricity explains it like for people who are not familiar piso electricity is

like a quartz crystal you can squeeze the crystal and it'll produce electricity they use these in watches

low energy devices right because you can shake your watch and now you get electricity. The reason why that happens

is when you squeeze the crystal, the positive and the minus charges in the lattice structure of the crystal

separate. Normally they're in an equilibrium. The positive and minuses, imagine them being next to each other. When you squeeze the crystal, it pushes

them apart a little bit. So what is electricity? Well, electricity is just the positive and minus charges being

separated. Just like with the piso electricity. So anybody that understands electricity should be able to tell you at a basic level all electricity is is

positive and minus charge separated. Is it and we can go ahead. Is it because when you separate the positive and minus charge the they they

want to come back together so it produces an electrical current between them. Bingo. You nailed it. Right. So now you

can see like oh if I just look at it like that then it's a completely different view of what electricity even is. Electricity is like a breaking of a

symmetry. Right? It's like oh we're stuck in this symmetry. Oh if I just rip these things apart. Oh, now electricity

exists. Like, oh, and we should be getting taught electricity like that. That's a much more logical, intuitive

way than like, oh, the power plant is like producing this electricity and then shooting it through the wires and then

it's like coming into my house at the speed of light, which is not how it actually works. It just seems like how it works. Dude, I want to capture

lightning. I think that we've been staring at it the whole time. If we can produce tethers that can like graphine

tethers or some sort of metamaterial that can absorb that can conduct the heat to a base station and then absorb

it down at the station. Like you could have these like feathery tethers up in the atmosphere constantly pulling the

static charge. So you'll never actually have lightning strikes anymore. Like you'll prevent them and you'll just be absorbing the the current and then it's

just about having a battery that can capacitate it. I think it's even easier than that is like where's the electricity from the

lightning strikes even coming from, right? If you see those above, if you ever watch Above the Clouds, those those

sprites they call them, that god knows where out into the next realm of galaxy

or whatever. And I'm not like I like the electric universe theory. I think there's some

problems with it. But that was one of the fun things that I learned from is that I like hearing other people's point of views because then you hear like what

are the what do the electric universe people say about like the standard model and their view. And one of the big ones

that goes is like where's all this energy for all these lightning strikes coming from? Like where are us on this planet in equilibrium? What those are a

huge amount of energy coming from? And so of course they claim it's coming from the electric currents that are

connecting the earth and the sun and all the other planets in the solar system which I think actually makes a lot of sense. But then the point is whatever

electricity is whatever is causing those lightning strikes to happen, we should be able to tap into that. We should be able to harness that. But I mean my view

is that if if energy is mass and we can do stuff like dynamic casmir effect and

just pull light out of the vacuum then that means energy's everywhere. That means we don't even need the sun and we

don't even need to make a sun. We can just pull energy theoretically just straight out of the vacuum anywhere

The Electric Universe Theory

we're at. Dynamic casmir effect you're talking about. Is it light appearing out of the vacuum? Is that what that is? So that

it's a sort of like sonoluminescence where if you create a bubble underwater with a certain vibration, you'll create

light. And I I think maybe what's happening is that the Higs field um there's a vibration in the Higs field

and that if it hits a certain frequency, it cracks and produces photons and then those they basically it's like it's like

the photon is coming through the Higs field. This is an old idea I had 15 years ago. I don't know if it's actually

real or not. And then that cools down that those photons can cool down into matter. Uh but I don't that was just a

rough kind of a sure I mean the Higs field is the is really like 0 point energy but like with

tricycle wheels attached to it you know it's like they're like the Higsfield explains like 1% of mass you're like but

that doesn't really explain like anything then does it um but it is the idea that yeah there are these fields

that we are live in this structured uh this construct you know and so that would be open the door to zero point

energy and open the door to this um you know space-time flexible solid that can

be manipulated. Um, go ahead. I if if if like you're saying electricity

is produced when you pull apart a positive and a negative node and you and and it's trying to find itself. It's

trying to pull come back together. So, it has this current pulling then then a lightning maybe is that and

so the earth's core would be like the positive or the negative charge but it's both. I think it's both positive and

negative. It's an interesting there's but so it's a capacitor right and remember when Dr. U was saying when we were explaining um

why is gravity and electricity so like why are they the strength so different and Dr. After you took his magnets, he

took a string of magnets and the string of magnets could pick up the balls, right? But once you start folding the magnets over, you're equalizing the

charges. And what's happening now is that now all of a sudden the magnet can't pick up any balls anymore because it got so much weaker. So the earth is

also a magnet. And so why are we seeing the electricity, you know, strike down

from the sky to the earth is that you're seeing this this volt this potential difference. And as that potential

difference builds up eventually it gets so strong that zap you know the the minus the minus and the positive decide

that it can break through the insulator. What's the insulator? The insulator is the air the air is the insulator in this

case. Air is actually an insulator. We have to remember that even the air is a medium. So that's why we don't see

electric strikes that that's why we do see the electric strikes. And here's another one for you. The lightning is a

plasma cuz what is a plasma? All a plasma is is a positive charge and a

negative charge separated ripping the electron off the atom leaving behind a positively charged ion and a negatively

charged electron. So when you separate these out, are we just creating

electricity directly when we do that? And this is why I always thought like the whole idea of fusion using plasma

like it should be direct energy conversion because literally electricity is just a separation of positive and

minus charge. Now here's one of one of these things I'll thought I'll leave you with on this is that the electric

universe theory, one of their big questions is why is there a plasma corona around the sun? Shouldn't plasma,

if it's positive and negative charges separated, shouldn't it try to come back together and equalize? But if that was

the case, then we shouldn't see this corona around the sun at all. There shouldn't be an a difference of positive

and negative charges being separated from one another. So clearly, I think there must be something else going on. I

The Nature of the Sun and Energy Production

I think it's that similar thing with what John Kansas learned in his experimentations in the lab is that there's a frequency running through the

sun that's lighting it up. It's causing it to give off the flame. That's what the corona is. It's exactly like his

experiment. If you watch that video, John Kansas, it's ksus. It's like a 2007

video of him running a fre. He tells you what frequency it is, too. Run it through salt water. Get that hydrogen

flame. That's my guess. Interesting. So, so that that would lead me to believe that the that the sun then has the

chemicals make up salt water. Obviously, there's hydrogen in there. There's sodium in there. There's a lot of chemicals in the sun, but it

Yeah. And the sun itself, you know, maybe it just reaches a certain critical mass and then I mean that's I think that

the standard theory holds, right? You just have this huge amount of mass and then you have this critical event happen and yes, then we get ignition to occur

and then what's happening inside the sun. There's actually a lot of theories about that that you know could be something related to vibration. Planck's

constant is like what we imagine like the smallest possible vibrational scale

that's out there. That could be a cut off point. um that's what they use as the cut off point for calculating the

zero point energy actually. So there could be a connection to that. The other idea is that maybe the sun is like a

lattice structure like maybe it's more like a solid like in when you get inside of it maybe everything's so compact that

it's almost like a crystal structure and so then what could be happening would be more like piso electricity or like maybe

you have like this vibrational like lattice structure inside the sun in the middle of it which I think is a cool

idea that would make sense as to why a frequency would cause some sort of dissertation like that. I think that's

the right word. I like the way it sounded. Yeah, because it's a resonance effect, right? It'd be like, oh, if you hit it with a a frequency, then you're going to

see some type of counter resonance effect, just like the photoelectric effect, which was like when we shot

light at a metal, we did not see a significant difference when we increased the brightness of the light, but we saw

a difference when we increase the wavelength, when we when we change the color of the light that hits it. So, it

goes to show, yeah, resonance effects are what really seems to um, you know,

explain the universe. I think that comes from how photons interfere with um surface plasma and they seem to refract

off of the surface plasma at the center of every plasma cloud and transfer information. So that I think that's how

light transfers information to plasma and um if you look deeply into surface

plasma and the way that it changes the red and the blue shift of the plasma fields but depending on how light is

interfering with it. Hm. So the plasma front. Um let's see. Was there anything

else I want to touch on on that front? Uh so yeah, the other thing I was going to touch on is the dense plasma focus

paper that I discussed I think on the podcast that we did together which was finding out that they were taking these

plasmas and they were trying to turn them into drones or you know trying to turn it into a propulsion concept very

clearly in the papers. Uh and so plasmoids have another name. They're

called field reverse configuration, FRC. This is actually what they're called by Helen Fusion, um, as well as TAE. They

came up with a new name for them, which are apparently just tooidal plasmas that are being shot together at one another.

These FRC's, they have a distinct characteristic. They have a spheramax shape. So, they're

shaped like a plasma sphere, but they also have axial jets that shoot out of them because they're creating that

plasmoid in the center. They have these axial jets. So, at some point, the Air Force, and I don't know who the first

person was to think about it, but I'm pretty sure it's this guy Frank me, they were like, "Oh, well, if there's these axial jets, we can use this as

propulsion, and then we can have now some type of thing that's flying around." I think that the thing that

really took off was when they were able to turn into a drone. When you're like, "Okay, now like having a plasma propulsion is one thing. Great. You got

plasma flying everywhere, but that doesn't sound very safe. you don't want to be I wouldn't want to be near on a plasma a fusion reactor you know flying

around but once you turn into a drone now you have no problem now no human needs to be near it anymore so this is

where I personally my view I'm curious about your opinion that I think they figured out these plasma drones and

they've been flying them around for I don't know 10 20 years maybe longer who knows and that's where I don't know how

far back it goes and people are seeing them in the sky and they're going okay there's a light in the sky flying around

I basically anybody that sees that is going to think it's an alien, right? And now they're going, "Oh, UFO, alien." And

then this seems to coincide in the last, let's say, 10 years with this like emergence of balls of energy, balls of

light that everybody's talking about. Even Lu Alzando wrote in his book about three balls of energy and three balls of light. So my opinion is that they

governments figured this out. I don't know, maybe they figured it out from aliens, maybe they didn't. Not sure. What do you think about the idea that

Plasma Drones and Their Implications

like humans could have figured this technology out? This is like the biggest point of contention in the UFO community right now is like could humans have

figured this technology out? Could we have reverse engineered it? Or does it have to be aliens? Because you know we

can't understand this alien physics human all human if if we can figure out

electricity we can figure out anything dude anything. This is warping Um

it's pla I think a lot of it is uh talking plasma which is a term they gave to this idea that you can triangulate or

hit a point in in time into spaceime time time. It's funny a point in time

where uh you you'll hit it with a bunch of like lasers or something. It creates a ball of plasma and then you move that around like a laser pointer and then it

flies and then you how does it move so fast and it's like well it's because it's a it's an illusion that we're created. It's a ball of plasma. But then

now you're talking about plasma drones. I don't know. I'm now I'm just thinking of actual autonomous balls of plasma

that are using their own jets to maneuver that are being maybe given information from a base station. But how

would they be being produced? Either an onboard fusion then you're talking do they have onboard power or are they

being created by this talking fusion uh talking plasma? I remember like a year and a half ago I

was thinking that they were creating them the same way that you just mentioned with the talking plasma which I read which is honestly amazing. the

talking plasma thing they can do. I mean, the fact they can get it to literally talk to you means they can

modulate the frequency and the and the standing wave of it to like at will like constantly. It's a very impressive

thing. If they can do that, then in my mind, they can make their plasma ball like whatever size they want and need it

to be and it wouldn't take that much onboard fuel to make it happen. I think that though that what like the plasma

drone would look like would probably be like a tube with a bunch of stuff hooked up to it and then once it you like shoot

it and then it just spins up and once it spins up it's just a it's a plasma ball now and it just looks like a plasma ball

until it's turned off and um but I there a lot of people believe that these orbs

can be like shot out of like a cannon like you shoot a plasma can like plasma

sphere out of a cannon and now it's just like a self-contained structure and it's self-contained. until it dissipates,

which it's it's stabilized, so it won't dissipate or it has like a very long life span. And this would be the idea of

like the ether and simatics where like you've created this geometric shape where it's like a perfect geometric

shape that just doesn't lose any energy and is able to keep its form. I kind of struggle with that because like

especially in like the MH370 videos, these things are clearly moving with some intelligent control. It's not just,

oh, shoot it over that way, right? It's like homing in on things and locking in. But I don't know. What do you think?

Well, while you were talking about shooting a plasma drone as that would be

your bullet would be the drone itself. I'm thinking of like a coil just like the rifling we were talking about. Uh,

obvious maybe it would be a series of rings, but it would give that that forward momentum of spin that would

allow for some sort of energy propagation that could maybe blow it up like a plasma balloon for for the for

the, you know, excerpt for the for the journey that it has to to go to until it either dissipates or hits its target.

Maybe. Maybe. The idea that because I was Yeah. The idea that you would use that as the bullet itself and not the

gun is pretty cool. Yeah. Yeah. And that's that's something I had never really thought of, but that

okay, you've got these plasma bullets and now you might be able to use them for multi- things as well. I mean, they probably originated as like you said,

uh, like spoofing mechanisms, right? Um, because what some of these pilots when

they see these UFOs, they don't see them on radar, but then they'll see them like briefly show up. And this is, I think,

where some of this idea of, oh, is this a spoofing mechanism? Well, the plasma actually will reflect radar, but if you

were to change the wavelength of the plasma for a brief second, it may actually be it may show up. So, it could look like it's like a ghost out there.

Um, but then you can turn it like plasma itself is a physical phenomenon. It's not just an illusion, right? It's not

necessarily just a hologram. So, if you can turn it into that, now you've turned into a weapon because once again, what

is electricity? Electricity is just a separation of positive and minus charge. So if you can control that, if you can

spin that up into a ball of plasma that can shoot around, now you've got a literally lightning ball. Like you're Zeus now. Like shooting lightning ball

down on people. If it's like if it's just like what we're talking about electricity, you're pulling apart the positive and the negative. So gas either you're heating

it up. It's or or you're you're destroying you're removing the pressure so the gas expands faster. It'll be

easier to get it hotter. It'll be easier to pull the the the proton and the electron away from it because it's less

pressure or getting it hotter. So if you can in a within like the bullet of this

plasma torsion, if you can reduce the pressure or enhance the temperature, you might be able to produce an electrical

charge that way. And you know what the thing was that

took off? It was the lasers is what allowed this to all take off. Uh when you even look at Helium's uh field

reverse configuration reactor, they shoot these plasmoids at each other, these smoke smoke rings of plasma, and

then they shoot these like neutral laser beam injectors. And the thing that allowed this to all take off was that they got these lasers to be super

powerful, this uh chirped pulse amplification, Nobel Prize 2017. That's

where they found these they were able to come up with these atcond lasers because the the smaller the time frame that you

fit the energy into the more the energy density goes up. It's not just the region and the in the space that you

want small but the time region the time of the laser gets smaller the pulse gets smaller the energy density goes up and

that's how they're able to get these plasmas to you know reach these super high temperatures supposedly. So it

wouldn't surprise me if like the military had this laser technology that allowed plasma and all this stuff to

happen and then of course they just classified it because it's all weapons related related nukes you know I would

have classified it if I built it in the if I was working for the government and built that I'd be like all right well for now cuz they're probably all like

airing on the side of caution and then if if the Chinese are like we have it then they'll be like well we have it too

I guess but you know nobody wants to say it first. Yeah. Oh, we had that like the Chinese

going to be like we figured out warp technology. Trump's going to be like we figured that out 10 years ago. Sorry. You know what?

And you know, if you were like a black project engineer, you worked on this like you

know magic technology, alien technology, call it whatever you want to call it, would you come out as a whistleblower?

Would you? No. Yeah. Why? Why are we not? No. Cuz that that that it's a it's it's like life and it's like the Manhattan

Project. I wouldn't have I wouldn't have blown the whistle on that either if I was working for that. I believe in the ethos of the United States. free speech,

gun rights, property rights. I want to do whatever I can to uphold that. If it means giving us the best military on the planet, giving us an edge, you know,

within the AI fusion race, I'm down. Yeah. You know what? I I mean, I agree

The Ethics of Advanced Technology

the same way. That's why it makes it so hard is that like I don't even like doing this, but at the same time, it's like people deserve to know about this

science, about the technology. That's why the first question is like where is the line between this? Because I also

want us to have this technology. I want America to be the number one country. But I also like in the view of this,

you're like, okay, we've got warp drive technology, maybe wormhole technology, gravity manipulation, free energy

technology. I, you know, I wonder, you know, how we have to be able to get

some of this to the public people, you know, I mean, at some point, you can't hide this forever. Yeah. And relying

relying on the government or just because they're deep state and have access to the tech when they were kids

and now they get to learn about it and their dads had money and now they have money. Just because they have it doesn't mean that's the best setup. It might be

better for the populace to have it. So, and that's the big catch 20 or the I don't know if it's a catch 22, but

that's the big struggle that we're in. Cuz I agree with you. I would I would never go whistleblower either. If I was in Black Project, I wouldn't even have a

a social media account. I wouldn't do any of this stuff at all because I I do think it harms national security and I

think that if certain countries, certain cultures have access to this technology, I I think the planet's totally

definitely doomed. No question. Um but you know, it's a moral conundrum because we are talking about the ability to kind

of end poverty. The big thing for me is this. If America has this technology, why are we not why do we have so many

homeless people? Why do we have so much struggling on this planet? Why is our country not look like ancient Rome with

like you know colosums and uh you know the Renaissance everywhere? You know

that that to me is the struggle is that I think that at a minimum we should be able to leverage the fact that we have magical technology. You know

I I think it's because well one they don't they want to keep it secret. That's the main reason. Two is because

we don't have the batteries yet to capacitate the the power. Like we can't run well we have Tesla power walls.

We're getting there. But like really really good batteries that you can charge once and then they run your house

for 60 days or or 600 years or whatever, you know, like once we can build the batteries that can super like super

capacitor batteries, you know, graphine, cadmium, whatever the hell materials we're going to be using, probably crazy

metamaterial, surats and stuff, then I think the fusion will be like uh

what's the word? Functional like for the common man once they can store the battery because then you won't have to give them the fusion reactor. They'll

just be able to tap it in, get the power, and then benefit. See, you're you're thinking about it

pragmatically, like they're never going to give us a fusion reactor, or we're never going to get a portable fusion react because then you could just turn it on, blow somebody up. But I could see

they're going to give you a tap, right? They're going to say, "Here, you can tap into the energy and then you can fill up your local reserve, but it's not going

to be enough to annihilate the planet." you know, something like that where I think it was Hal Pudof even talking

about this where it's almost as evil and maybe even more evil than how they portrayed in the movies where he's like,

"Guys, zero point energy is real. It's coming out. This is a high-risk venture, but it's high reward." And he's like,

"Basically, everybody knows we can't just give everybody, you know, a zero point energy device in their home. The

way to do it is like when your old generators have to be replaced, just throw the old ones out and we'll give

you new upgraded reactors and no, we'll just never have to explain where that energy is coming from, right? And well,

if you save some money on it, well, you don't necessarily have to pass that savings on to the consumer, right? How

does the consumer even know how much you're, you know, uh, how much it costs you to produce the energy? That's what I

think is is really going on. And that's why I look at companies like Helium Fusion and I'm like I've identified them

as like this is a company that the DOE is backing and stuff and then I go well why is Peter Teal like one of the major

investors in this and he's connected to the CIA and Oh yeah Palanteer too that's a good sign

for Fusion. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. And this is why I tell people like look this isn't stock advice

but when Helen Fusion goes IPO just go look at Palanteer stock price and what's

happened to them as well. You know, it's like it feels like some of these companies are being kind of selected is

because they know or they have the right connections. And to kind of like counter a point that Elon Musk made, Elon's

like, why don't they compete with me? Well, just like you said before about like why don't they reveal this technology, let us have it because then

it would reveal the technology, right? So that's why they can't compete with it. But they also don't care about being

400 500 billion dollar, you know, richest people in the world. Give me $1 billion and I'm good. I'll go disappear.

you never have to know my name, right? So, that's the way it seems to work behind the scenes, but if people pay

attention, I mean, I think you can see it happening. So, you're saying Elon's like, "Why won't they compete with my space program?" Basically, is where he's at.

And then, and they're but secretly building drones that can go underwater and fly into space. Yeah. Exactly. Yeah. And I don't know,

the space part's weird. Like, I want to broach this topic with you a little bit, too, that

uh the more I research these plasma drones and stuff, I'm going like, do they even operate in outer space?

because I think they're using something called an air breathing system, magneto hydrodnamic system, which means they're basically using either the air or the

water is either a fuel source or as like a catalyst in the reaction. So that they don't have to have that stuff on board.

Well, outer space doesn't have nearly as much as like the air or like water. So there's two ways to look at. One

would be that like you don't need that much stuff in outer space cuz you're just like floating through the air, floating through space, right? But the

other view of it is, well, even if you lose like a tiny bit of your matter, your energy, then over a long distance,

you're going to lose everything by before you get there, right? So, I don't know if they can really be used.

It sounds like a local defense tool. Like, uh, I think it makes sense for planets to have local defense drones that are just plasma orbiting and

protecting the atmosphere. That makes sense. That's what I thought those New Jersey drones were. Actually, I was on with

Clint Russell. You know him, right? Um that was he and I did a really great live stream where we were talking about

that New Jersey drone thing back in December and I was like I think they're like a defense mechanism like what if

they're just drones sitting around their defense network where like if someone shoots a hypersonic at us our drones just intercept it and like wormhole it

to the sun or something or or like an asteroid or something. Absolutely right. Like the Apous

asteroid that I think is like 2029 or something like that. I'm not afraid of that because we got plasma drones that

Exploring Teleportation and Black Holes

are just flying around that can, you know, intercept stuff anywhere that they that we need to. But this means too,

this is something that I learned from old anime shows is that the smartest anime shows would be like the ones where

the guy's like trying to understand the villain and like what his power is and like what his weakness is in his power.

That's how when I look at like the teleportation technology, I was like, what are the limits to this? Turns out

there's a lot of limits to it. It's not just like, oh, I can just zap and just now I'm on the moon and now I'm back.

Turns out it's like a one-way trip kind of situation like you zap here and now

you're over here. But now you have to do it again if you want to go, you know, somewhere else. You know where I'm at with with

wormhole. Maybe you have more to say is uh charged black holes. I'm not sure if you're familiar with the charged black

hole. It's different than a regular black hole. It's like rotating and I think it's been woken up. I think it's a teleportation mechanism. If you travel

through a charged black hole, it will super accelerate you through that singularity. You'll go through so tight

and be shot out so fast afterwards. You'll super accelerate towards the first star you hit and then it'll slow

you down and you'll stop in front of it. And I think that's literally people will aim towards stars between they'll put

the charged black hole between them and the star and they'll go through it and that will teleport them to the star. And

that we can actually charge our black hole uh Sagittarius B I think is at the

center of our galaxy. We have a black hole, but it's not charged up yet. So, I think we can charge that thing and use it as a teleportation mechanism

or what a super accelerator basically. Not really teleporting, but it's at that at that speed, you know, it's hard to

tell the difference. Yeah. Leonard Suskin and Juan Meina, they believe that the black holes are

quantum entangled. But there's an interesting theory that I I hadn't seen before I read it yesterday, which was that what if the black hole like doesn't

have perfect entanglement? The difference between a black hole and a wormhole would be when you create a wormhole like I'm I'm zapping like you

know this airplane here and it's reappearing over here. But what if when the black hole pulls in matter it like

rips it out or shoots it out like a sprinkler like so it's like creating like multiple

entanglements like but it's like they're not all together anymore at that point. And what if that's the difference and

that a really a wormhole is like a black hole but it's like a stabilized temporary black hole like this temporary rip you make whereas a black hole is

like this huge amount of mass that's just like anything that comes in just ripped and shred to pieces

have we has scientific community located any wormholes yet like have

well I don't know how we would even do that that's the problem because like even if you see a black hole like okay well where is it coming out because what

we what do we learn from entanglement it could be anywhere it could be like literally anywhere So I think we

probably will find some because I I personally think that these wormholes and black holes exist. But the question is are they cosmological phenomenon

other than black holes or are they purely like a laboratory produced phenomenon, right?

The wormhole, what is it exactly? What's the difference between a worm like what is do you know what the theoretical

working definition of a wormhole is? Yeah, it's just a bridge between two points in space and time. And so you

Understanding Wormholes and Space-Time

can't obviously really we have to only imagine it metaphysically because we can't see an extra dimension

but usually they represented as like two flat surfaces and then a tunnel between the two two surfaces like this right and

and so it's this conceptual view that like like I was saying before is that we are that spacetime is flat like I think

it's been proven that spacetime is actually flat. We don't really agree. And flat earthers are probably going to have a field day with this, but

spacetime is flat. We just don't perceive it as flat. And if it's flat, then you can just bend it like this. And now the points that were previously not

connected are connected. Now, that seems super weird to us because that's not how we see observe reality around us. But

that's because all of spaceime around us is in equilibrium. It's all perfectly equilibrium. But if we rip that out of

equilibrium, then we start to see these weird effects. But if it's true, if wormholes are real, then I think it

proves Ben Rich is right that all points in space and time are actually really connected. We just don't we don't

perceive them as being connected. And like motion and time and space and speed and all that, if you're in deep

space with no reference point and it's black everywhere all around you. If you start going faster, you won't know it

because there's no there's no perceptual inertia. I don't even think there's

inertia if there's no relative space. I don't think Yeah. Go ahead. There there is technically inertia, but

you wouldn't perceive it. So like and then your your distance would be shorter, but you wouldn't have realized

it was because you were going faster and didn't know it. Yeah. It turns out like a lot of this stuff is illusion. The illusion like

The Illusion of Distance and Relativity

cloaking or the illusion of distance or when something gets smaller when it gets further away. Like it turns out these

effects while they seem illusionary, they're also just physically real as well. So like if you contract or expand

space because of relativity you actually do change physical properties. One of the things that was being talked about I

think I Richard Bandurich he was uh he was making waves because he was talking about like alien metamaterials or

something like that. I don't know about all his alien metamaterial claims but he knows about electromagnetism and gravity

and he was saying that well if you have length contraction or length expansion from general relativity from you know

things moving at relative speeds then you can have current actually increase from but the perception of current like

if I'm looking at an object the electricity being formed will look like it's going up if you have length

contraction or expansion happening and he explains this from the perception of the electrons and you're like wow okay

yeah So general relativity actually starts to get really weird and this could even explain like why do we have

it like imagine this cube of spaceime like if I squeeze this cube of spaceime

what's going to happen what I would imagine is whatever's inside this cube of spacetime is going to get pushed out

it's going to get pushed out squeezed out so if I have contraction of spacetime what do I think should be happening well I think energy should be

getting shot out probably in the form of photons so personally that's how how my my view of the universe versus I think

the zero point energy is filled with this invisible energy that's in equilibrium and if you squeeze it you

get light. Oh, well that's son sonol luminescence then I guess you're you're squeezing the bubble underwater. You're

creating a vacuum. Well, you're you're what is it? You're running a vibration through and creating a bubble which then the pressure the squeezing of the

pressure releases a photon seems to. Yeah. Is it so sonoluminescence you take water and you just shoot sound uh create

Sonoluminescence and Energy Production

a standing wave in the middle of your sound and of your water and the sound the sound will actually create light.

light actually gets formed and it's because it creates a cavitation, an implosive effect that produces light.

Science struggles to understand why that's the case and why how there could be so much energy that light is being

released while like the glass that's containing the water doesn't break or why the water doesn't boil. Why does the

water not boil? You've got you've got light being produced in the middle of this but the water is not boiling. Some

people wonder is fusion happening in sonoluminescence? And so I think that the reason why I

love those experiments is that when I was digging through this, digging through the science trying to figure out like how are they are they really hiding

gravity whatever you find all these experiments that like have no like

palatable conventional explanation. Um and that's why, you know, part of the reason why I'm absolutely convinced that

all this science is real is that when you look at the underlying thread of it, you find out that it goes back to Tesla.

It goes back to Maxwell's original equations before they got reduced is we threw out this scalar potential because

we didn't see it. We didn't see it out there. Kind of like how we don't see wormholes out there. But that doesn't mean they're not real. The math says

that they should exist. Sure. So the scalar potential is real too. Maybe we just didn't

we didn't, you know, find the right effect to see it. Maybe it's mostly a lab produced effect. And this is what the effect of what

exactly that we're within. Yeah. The scalar potential is like the effect of the medium itself. So like the

effect of uh and I believe it can be I believe the scalar potential gets seen more when you

pull like you create an electric system and you shoot the voltage up super super high like above 30 50,000 volts is now

that scalar potential that was really really tiny before now you can actually see measurable effects related to it

and a common example of that is I was up hiking up in the clouds I was up in the mountains I was it was foggy I didn't know it was foggy because I was up there

it just looked normal and I was walking and I'm like why am I dripping with sweat literally as if I'd been in the

pool swimming in my clothing. I was dripping. My friend was like, "You're dripping like drip drip drip drip."

Like, why? Because the medium I was in imperceivably wet. I didn't know because I was inside of it. I couldn't see it.

Exactly the same kind of thing with with spacetime. There's so much potential energy in this medium that we don't perceive because we're in it.

And that's what allows for really all this science to be possible of free energy, of over unity, of fusion. I

think that if there wasn't a medium, why we wouldn't even be digging it. We wouldn't even be trying to do fusion. I don't think fusion would be possible if

there wasn't a medium of energy. I mean, you'd have to be pumping in uh the the

you know, all your fuel source conventionally, which I I don't know how that could ever achieve over unity from

a conceptual viewpoint if space is empty. Um but, you know, maybe maybe we can do it that way.

The Scalar Potential and Free Energy Devices

So, yeah, go ahead. Oh, I just I appreciate that you talked about distance um contracting and expanding

distance and that producing an electrical charge or even the perception of expanding and contracting distance that could produce an electrical charge.

I'm going to sleep on that one. That's really really Yeah, you definitely want to check out the Paul Tibido um graphine thermal

thing which is really cool because essentially what he's created is a battery that the battery's default state

is not zero. The battery's default state is, you know, pick a voltage number. It doesn't matter, right? Does because what

that would mean is that you can sap energy off of it and it always tries to go back to that equilibrium state. Yeah.

How crazy is that? Like charging battery selfy battery. Yeah. Nice job, Tibido.

Paul Tibido. Yeah, I saw that one. I'm just like, wow, that was a type of And so this is why I show I try to tell people like

there's so many different conceptual viewpoints of free energy devices. One of them is just a battery that just

never runs out. And so he's created an asymmetrical system that its equilibrium is not zero.

And of course every physicist that was in the presentation is going how is this how is this not violating the laws of

thermodynamics? And he says well because it's basically just harnessing brownie and motion from the thermal ambient temperature. Like it

if you do the equations the math shows it should work. They built a microchip. Microchip shows that it works. What else

do you want? Right? And they've also they created um nuclear batteries they were doing with like a small they have

like nuclear waste they put in glass or diamond or something and it produces exactly the same kind of pole electric

you know that's the stuff where I think you're talking about where they're using the word nuclear I think a little cleverly

where like I think they're like doing transmutation and they're just been like yeah it's just nuclear you know because

technically it is technically it is nuclear but you're like how are you doing it how efficiently are you doing it right like cuz you could

theoretically be doing this super efficiently making like tons of money and just producing stuff that would people would be saying is violating, you

know, the laws of physics, viol laws of thermodynamics. But yeah, I think that they're just doing it and they're doing it quietly and then they've got

contracts with either the government or other entities. Um, but they'll break off they'll break off like

that little one for the public and be like, "Hey, look what we figured out. You can you can maybe charge your iPhone with this."

Okay. Exactly. And now, you know, when we talk about the companies, I think I know where your politics are. You think

you're kind of more libertarian kind of like I am. you know, free speech, uh, freedom of, you know, expression, etc.

You know, recently, United States bought, uh, took control part of Intel because I think they're a microchip

manufacturer. I think a lot of what I found out about this is like we're well past the days of like magnetic motors

and these like free energy devices people were making that were like as big as a room. Now we're to the point of like people are making free energy

devices on little microchips. So, microchips are the future. Um there was

actually somebody floating today the idea of Loheed Martin being potentially uh nationalized as well. Apparently 97%

of their revenue comes from the government. I didn't even know that about Loheed Martin until today. So

where do you stand on this like you know nationalization of companies under national you know security or national

defense? I mean if the technology is that powerful if we have this crazy you know alien technology 0.0 Tesla

Nationalization of Technology and Corporate Control

technology and is it right to nationalize them or is free market win over it? This is I'm so glad you asked me this. I

just posted this on Twitter before we went live and that it's that in the the 20th century was basically the war

between fascism and communism. And it was one or the other. Pick a side. And the Western powers chose fascism with

the Federal Reserve and FDR. And it was instead it wasn't like Mussolini fascism. It wasn't that kind of violent

kicking doors in Hitler fascism. It was British fascism. It was peaceful fascism, but it was better than

communism. And it fascism won. And we live in a fascist system where our government can print fake money and

does so many businesses with corporations behind the scenes that uh is indicative of a fascist behavioral

but not on paper. They don't own any of the companies cuz that would be fascist. Well, anyway, Trump just did it

blatantly in public for the first time. He he he's showing our fascist nature by buying using government funds, my money

to print fake money to buy to he basically made my money worth less to print to buy a company and now they're

talking about going full communist and owning businesses. It's insane. Like we

at least need a visage of a free economy because Intel stock cook Intel stock went up 7%

after he he invested 8 billion or 10 billion. that's playing favorites in the market. What the hell's going to happen

to the other chip manufacturers now? How's nobody talking about this? I'm sitting here wondering like we just took

over part of a chip manufacturer and nobody's saying a word about we are 100% playing favorites. I mean there's no

debate. We're playing favorites. Of course their stock went up. The first thing I did was look at their stock. I'm like this must have shot sent their stock up. It's like so and I guess I can

see it from national security perspective, but I mean the public that's not been researching this stuff, they should be all over wondering what's

going on here. Like what's the justification for doing this? And how do we if now that we've set this precedent?

Now what? Right? Why aren't we taking over Loheed Martin? Why aren't we taking over Sierra Nevada Corporation? Why not

taking over Battel Institute? Like there's so many companies that are defense contractors that are basically all their money comes directly from the

US government. Why aren't they taking over? Right. Yeah, because that would be purely fascist or a communistic

dictatorship if they were to try to do something like that and ruin the free market. And and like the thing I I

remember from time to time is that most people are not really smart. There are small a very small there are people that

are really smart and they're considered really smart because there aren't that many of them. So they're put in that category of really smart. And a lot of

times people in the government that you get that same percentage. Maybe you get some people in government, they're very

charismatic people in government. A lot of them, especially the ones that speak for a living, in charisma and intelligence are not the same thing.

Intelligence and wisdom aren't the same thing. You might be able to remember what you were told to do and do it and have high intelligence and great memory

recall with no ability to discern if what you're doing is right or wrong because you don't have any wisdom. So, we have to remember that just because

they're people and they're given this badge of authority doesn't mean that they're good or intelligent or wise. And

we have to keep these people in check. That's the big problem. How do you keep them in check? Especially if they have,

you know, magical technology. Let's just assume that these disclosure people are all telling the truth and that there's

aliens here and we've got this alien technology. Well, things have gotten completely off the rails. If that's the case, if they've got free energy fusion

technology, wormhole technology from aliens from anything, how do you keep someone like that in check? You can't,

right? I think they let the mask slip now where it's like, you know, we just dunked on Iran. Uh Putin just came and

visited us. When was the last time Putin came to America? He just came to America basically bent basically bent the knee.

I know people don't want to agree that he bent the knee, but I think he did. And then now we're also just in, you know, nationalizing ma chip

manufacturers. So I look at this, I go, we're letting the mass slip here. And like this is this type of stuff I would think would

need to happen to put safeguards in place so that if we did want to release any of this technology, you know, we

aren't going to be able to destroy ourselves. and America will feel safe that like China is not going to get our super advanced microchips or whatever

that's going on. You think this the safeguard is purchasing the private companies so that

the other cuz I'm like fascism isn't always evil. This is another thing I wrestle with. It's not always evil. Sometimes fascism can be good. You know,

you want to make that dumb argument. It's true. Sometimes you can use fascist tactics to create a stable, healthy

system for people even at the we're still conquering and and absorbing resources from overseas. that's probably

how we're able to maintain fiat fascism. But it doesn't mean it's evil just because it's fascist. So there there is

the argument that in the name of, you know, survival. We have to come together, use our our private our

government funds to buy what the have we not done this test. You buy 10%

first. Oh, it's not real communism. It's only 10%. He doesn't have a controlling share. Yeah. Not today.

Yeah. Well, I mean, we just they can never that company can never fail now, right? because we've just bought 10% of them. So, they will never obviously

never fail anymore. So, yeah. I mean, that's just it's it's ridiculous the whole idea that we're just buying this stuff uh these companies up. But, um I

guess the the last part would be like, well, what really is even disclosure at this point? Like, if we assume that

there are let's just assume that there's aliens and we've got this technology or what have you. Like, how do you even

Disclosure and the Ethics of Knowledge

define disclosure anymore? This is why I came up with this term called woke disclosure because I think the woke disclosure people look at kind of what

we laid out here and they come to a similar conclusion like we can't have all this. There's certain stuff that's

got to be kept secret for national security. But they got to do something. It's like co, right? We have to do

something. It's like a cold virus. There's nothing we can do. It's a cold virus, man. We have to do something. Make everyone wear masks. Just make

everyone wear masks. We got to do something, right? I feel like they are doing the same thing with the aliens. They're going, "We have to do something.

Okay, just tell everybody aliens are real. Look, we can do that. That's not going to hurt national security. No one's going to make a super weapon out

of that, right? Just tell aliens are real. The problem with that is it's so stupid. Like, okay, if aliens are real,

um, how are they getting here? Like, where are they coming from exactly? And how are they getting here? And what is

the fuel source for their magical UFOs that are flying around defying gravity? Right? Like those are my first three

questions. So I this is the part where I think that the whole woke disclosure thing is like I think they just think they're better than us and they know

better than us and they might even be right honestly. But I hate that viewpoint of this idea of like we just

they have to control our lives because we will kill we will blow ourselves up if we if we do like honestly for me and

I want to know your opinion. I just say if that's the case if if it's between us blowing ourselves up with this

technology or just living a lie forever let's just I'm going to roll the dice man. We're just going to blow ourselves. If that's the case then that's how we go

out. That's the end of our story. I guess that's kind of how I roll. What do you think? Like honesty and deceit. I used to think

like honesty is the only way and deception is a mortal sin. It's not. The Catholic Church actually says honesty is

not a virtue. Lying is not a sin to the Catholics. I mean they don't care. Uh it's so I firstly if aliens came here

they would not discern between our governments and our people. They would just show they would just be here and everyone would be like what? It would

be, you know, that it wouldn't be like we secretly had a message with the guy we think might be able to tell the like

what the They're here for power. They're here to that's why they're here. They're here to expand. That's why they came. Uh so whatever. But I I I just I

agonize over this this the thing about the the plebs, you know, like the the common man and then the elite, the uh

the the the royal f the royal and their subjects. the yeah the the Romans called

them the plebs and then the the leaders whatever the but what it is is generations of people with good uh

nutrition develop very powerfully capable brains, good thinking, good intelligence, good wisdom and then their

children have good intelligence and then they give they have there are family lines and communities of people that

have had ex excellent nutrition over generations. So they're very equipped to organize and lead and run things. I get

it. But that doesn't mean that other people can't. It just means that maybe they were dealt a bad hand coming in or dealt like a non-nutritious brain

matter, you know, body. Now, but that then you got to think, well, they're still animals. Humans are

animals and and a dumb animal is a very dangerous creature. Um, so you got to tr

you got to just play real cards as they're dealt and that is a true fact of

nature. So, I hate the idea of keeping things from people, man. Especially when I see someone that I know could be great

and they haven't become great yet, but they're not great yet and I can't treat them like they are.

So, so what do you think? What do you pick then? If if it's choices between

ignorant bliss, living the world that we're in right now, you know, our 21st century world. Um, or taking the risk

that we destroy ourselves, but we get Star Trek technology, you know, wormholes, warp drives, even

replicators. Not immediately, but soon. Which one are you going to choose? What which one did you choose? I'm interested in the risky path, but we

have to discuss the risk. What's the what's the calculation here? Now, let's build a system of risk

Risk Management in Advancing Technology

management and um go from there. And that's where I think that's where I

would I think that's a good spot to kind of leave the conversation today because this is what I would say that I would hope that you know you would take from

this as somebody that you know is on with Tim Pool all the time talking to these Congress people that are looking at disclosure and what have you. I think

it's got to the conversation has to become bigger than just aliens, right? The conversation has to become more about okay, what comes with that? What

kind of technologies come with that? And then what do those technologies mean? If they really are free energy

technologies, these these technologies that are like Star Trek stuff. Then what is that discussion like? How do we put

those guard rails up so that we can get these technologies to humanity in a safe

way where we mitigate the risk, right? Yeah, man. I'm thinking of I don't know why I think of the CCP as the boogeyman.

I don't like having a boogeyman on planet Earth. I don't think we need to have a boogeyman. I think that's just kind of human nature. We're so used to

it genetically from always fighting against this animal coming to trying to eat my family. I don't think we have to

live like that all the time anyway. But I just imagine like a a virulent, you know, angry regime that's hellbent on

destroying everyone getting access to some superpower. But like I mean if it's going to happen, you know, living in

ignorant bliss doesn't necessarily make it not happen. uh kick the can down the road, right? Like

that's not gonna not really solve anything in the long run. Let me ask you another question. Oh

yeah. Does the Do you remember a time when China like wasn't our adversary? Cuz I

feel like I when I was younger, even in my 20s, like China wasn't even like our adversary. They were never our adversary. They did

TMN Square and it was like what the Like it was obvious they had were completely batshit psycho when they did

when they massacred all those students for rising up in protest at TMN Square. I thought that was like okay these guys

are off the book evil to do that to their populace. That's that's terrifying that

they would a government would do that to popul. That's what I took in the early 90s from the CCP and then never had a

problem with them. I've always loved I mean I know Chinese products are shitty and cheap. I don't buy them. I try not to buy them. Um, I love China, the

history of China, the Han dynasty, Romance of the Three Kingdoms was a huge part of my childhood. I read the novel twice, the game, Lu Bay, Sao, Dongja, I

mean, all the characters. I I identify with Choku Leang, this ancient teacher of of the Chinese people who invented

the repeating crossbow and like he could control the weather, you know, as the story says, he could call lightning and

things. Um, I love China, Chinese history, and the people one-on-one when I meet them. I'm just always concerned

with u communism and central governments, you know, trying to centralize authority is insane to me, which is like buying intel with our

government. It's insane to me. Okay, I agree. I don't think I don't think I don't even think they're our villain.

And and you know what, but um Scott Horton on Lex Freeman just did a 10-hour interview with Lex Freeman talking about

what caused the War of Terror. Basically starts with like the the Iranian regime in 1979, goes all the way. I've only

watched a couple hours, but he said in the 50s and 60s when they were developing counternuclear war protocols

uh in the United States, if the Soviets go to nuclear war with the United States, the plan was we're going to nuke

every metropolitan city in the Soviet Union and we're going to nuke every metropolitan city in China because if

the Russians and us are going to take ourselves down, there's no way in hell we're letting those commie bastards take this planet. And that's the US protocol

is basically if anything goes down, we're wiping all of China out. And I think the Chinese know that.

Yeah. And I think they all know that and I think that's the reason why you can't have this technology comes out because if somebody has, you know, super black

hole weapon, then everybody's going to make it's going to become a Mexican standoff, right? And now we're back at a point where anybody does anything, the

whole planet's destroyed. So, oh man. And this is where I kind of wonder about the China question. Like, yeah, they are

communists. No question. They're a controlled government, but it's like if you know, if you knew about free energy

technology, if you knew about the dangers of this technology, and you were one of those elites, like you probably would do this. I think most of us would

do the same thing. That's the scary part. And so then it's a matter of just like how do we change the incentive structures in a in a positive way where

we can have, you know, some of this stuff an actual disclosure of information technology.

Reducing fuel cost is a big part of it, which is why the hydrogen revolution excites me. Whether that's through fusing hydrogen into helium or using

hydrogen gas as a propellant or or as a excitator for heat to get propulsion

like the hydrogen revolution reducing the cost of fuel will reduce the real national debt from 36 trillion on paper

to if if fuel's a tenth of the cost then our national debt may say 36 trillion

it's a tenth of that in reality like and that's a rough a rough calculation but it might you might pay $100 but your the

value it's easier to at $100 because it's so much cheaper for your fuel. That's the point. And then that reduces

global tension and then as humans we'll be able to reinvigorate the 21st century

tech. I'm with you. Unless Saudi Arabia is like, "Wait, you don't need oil anymore? No, we hate you. We're going to blow you

all up now." But no, I think that they're smart enough to like get on board with this before like they're they're investing in this technology, I

think, like already. And honestly, you can use that flash jewel process I was talking about where you electrocute carbon. You can do that

to oil. You can put oil in a vacuum and electrocute it and turn it into graphine and get hydrogen. So,

it's still useful carbon. Like, you don't have to burn it for fuel. You can use it to create graphine and then it's even better fuel in a lot of ways.

Well, you do that with coal, too. Yeah, this is an awesome conversation, Ian. Um, go ahead. Do you want to shout

out uh you know, any of the projects, anything you're working on? Oh, yeah. Uh, well, I'm working on a lot of music behind the scenes. I got a

movie upcoming that I'm producing right now. And obviously, I'm working with Tim Pool all the time. I'll be on Friday. Uh Timcast IRL on YouTube and Rumble.

Timcast IRL at 8:00 PM Eastern Standard Time. You can always follow me, Ian Crossland on really any social media

networks that you find me on. I do Rumble, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, X,

you know, Instagram. Those are my top I think at the moment top five. Mines. Follow me on Mines. Happy to be here

actually, man. This is great, man. Yeah, this was awesome. So yeah, this was great. Let's uh meet up again sometime soon. Play some Magic cards and

uh let's be in touch and we'll talk uh more science. This was awesome conversation. Excellent, man. See you. Take it easy.