EM Drive the "Impossible Drive"

Video Transcript

# EM Drive the "Impossible Drive" [Music] Out in the fields where the skies are wide. Talking about a journey through the cosmic ride. Einstein and Thorn, they set the stage for a trip through time across the space age. Wormholes connect distant points in space. Traversible paths to a far off place. No black holes pull, no crushing weight, just a cosmic tunnel to a distant gate. Talking wormholes, stargates, negative energy travel through the cosmos. It's our destiny. MH370, where did it go? Bon trip 7 through a wormhole. But we're talking wormhole. Sargates negative energy travel through the cosmos. It's our destiny. MH370. Where did it go? Boing trip 7 through a wormhole. [Music] [Applause] [Music] Exotic matter. Negative energy is the key to stabilize the wormhole for you and me. Quantum vacuums squeezed so tight, creating conditions for this wondrous flight. Static fields and lasers in the lab they play. Generating forces in a new kind of way. Gravitational squeezing chasm's force, negative zones. We need to stay the course. Stalking wormholes, stargates, negative energy. Travel through the cosmos. It's our destiny. MH370. Where did it go? Boing triples through a wormhole float. Thin shell formalism plate so fine spherical geometry we realign energy conditions that we must defy for a stable wormhole. Let's give it a try. [Music] Cool forces balancing the plates creating the throat. Open the gates from Earth to the stars in a single bound. A shortcut through space profound. Engineers and dreamers hold the key to future worlds and what we could be. With science in hand, we forge ahead through the cosmic paths that we now tread. [Music] We're talking wormho. What up everybody? Welcome to the stream. Good to have you here tonight. Tonight I'm your host Ashton Forbes as usual. Uh you like the siver song? Yeah, we'll play that to close out tonight guys. Uh hope everybody's having a good evening. Thanks for being here. I see Bernie in the chat always saying hit that like and subscribe guys. You know it. Press that like and subscribe. I want to get to 30,000 subscribers. I'm at like 29,800 or something like that. I don't know. Seems like a pretty cool milestone. Um, okay guys, I once again grab a drink, have uh relax. We're going to go ahead and we're going to dig into some science again tonight. Before we do that, there is a Twitter post I want to highlight because it uh involves UFOs and ARO and Eric Berles. So, we're going to take a very quick look at that. Um I think it's Matt Lazlo reporting. I thought this was really interesting. I just retweeted this out uh earlier. So, let me pull this up. Then we're going to look at this EM drive. Should be awesome. Um, here we go. Hey, thank you, Matt. Uh, Bartlesson, appreciate it, man. 400 $420. Perfect. 420 yolo. No swag, baby. Um, uh, you know what? I should have just shared my Hold on. Let me share like the right menu instead. The window. Okay, so Matt Lazlo was reporting on this and apparently he caught Berles outside of a a meeting or I don't know if he just you know jumped them and stalked them or whatever it is. So he mentions uh something about David Grush in terms of giving him staff position but then he mentioned something about Arrow. He said I found it interesting and this is Berles his interview or his discussion with ARO. So apparently Berles's talked to them. I found it interesting that they say there's nothing top secret about extraterrestrial UFOs. The only thing that is top secret is any of our technology that might be involved. So I thought that that was interesting because it's not specific to just the surveillance technology here. They're basically just talking about our technology in general, which goes to show you that when it comes to the secrecy around this stuff, it's not like that they're hiding the alien bodies. like they're hiding the technology. Any technology we have, that's that's why the government has to hide it. That's why the ARO has to hide it as well. So this is the reason why you, you know, they're not responding to me as well. He says, so if it was devices that we recorded, you know, captured footage or a radar, whatever, all that is top secret. But they don't they're not talking about the fact that we might have like propulsion technology they have top secret. I mean, at least they're not they are talking about that. They're just not saying that, which I think is an interesting koi way to phrase it, we are technically not lying. Look, if we find something, we're going to make it public. But so long as it doesn't compromise our technology to me, that's pretty damn that's a pretty telling statement. So that's the ARO telling Eric Berles that. So anyway, I just thought that was interesting, guys. Now, tonight we are going to talk about the EM drive. Okay. So, actually Wikipedia's uh document on this is is pretty good. I mean, it's it's garbage in terms of their opinions on stuff and on their opinion on the drive itself is exactly what you'd expect um in terms of how they document it, but they do have some good documentation for like what the history of it is and why it's been suppressed. So just kind of as an intermediary spoiler like um the EM drive is a propellantless drive that had that produces acceleration and this obviously caused a lot of drama and stir because technically it violates the laws of conservation momentum potentially laws of conservation of energy. But if you've been following this investigation, been following our science, you'll find that the idea of the ether of the zero point energy that's all around us all the time, uh, allows for open systems to be able to violate some of the laws of thermodynamics. Um, so I think what you're going to find here as a spoiler as we watch this is that I think that it definitely works and then it becomes a question of what does it do and what does it mean. Uh so contrary to my opinion that has evolved on the uh thunderstorm generator, which I think still could be something that can clean the the air in some situations, uh I'm way out in general on the thunderstorm generator in terms of interest, but with respect to EM drive, uh I'm very in on it here. So, let's read a little bit of the Wikipedia and then we're going to watch a couple videos and we're going to talk about some of the implications of the EM drive, which I think are pretty massive. Yeah, the AT&T Matterwave stream was really good. This one's going to be really good for if you want to understand what the EM drive is, why it's significant, and the implications of it. Because a lot of people ask stuff like, well, why don't you just make it? Why don't you just test it? And all this stuff is going to come up over the course of uh the stuff that we watch here today. So, if you're interested in those, answer those questions. And they apply not just to this, but to everything. You're going to get a better understanding of what this is all about. Yeah. Why does everybody feel like they got to enforce laws thermodynamics? Rude. Honestly, everybody's just a little narc. Um, okay. So, the EM drive is a concept thruster for spacecraft first written about in 2001. It's propos proposed to generate thrust by reflecting microwaves inside the device in a way that would violate laws of conservation momentum and other physics. Concept at the time has been referred to as a resonant cavity thruster. There's no official design for it. Neither person to a claims to invented it uh committed to an explanation for how it could operate as a thruster or what elements define it. Okay. Blah blah blah. Here's interesting part right away. 2016, Harold White at NASA, Harold Sunny White. If you guys have been following my science streams, we did a big video presentation we watched of Harold Sunny White talking about the Q thruster, which is an EM drive, and he also talked about warp drive and warp capability. He showed his experimental proof that they could bend space, which was really interesting. and it uses the Michaelelsson Mley experiment in interpherometer uh in order to show it. Hello Pontterbuck, welcome to the stream. So in 2016 his group observed a small apparent thrust from one such test. However, subsequent studies suggested that this measurement was caused by an error in the thermal gradients. A basically they blamed on the temperature. In 2021, Martin Tashmere's group at uh Dresden University replicated the test, observing apparent thrust similar to those measured by the team, but then made them disappear again when measured using a suspension point suspension, which I don't I don't even know what that means, but interesting. Um, no other published experiments have uh measured apparent thrust or within the margin of air. uh Tajir's group in Tajmar's group in uh 2021 published three papers claiming published results showing thrust had been false positives explaining each one by outside forces that conclude our measurements refute all EM drive claims by at least three orders of magnitude so right away you're probably already getting an idea like oh this has been debunked right you're getting the same kind of arguments every time right people and you'll notice the logic for why something doesn't work. They'll say, "Okay, well, somebody tried to do it and they failed. That means it doesn't work, or does that mean they're they either came to wrong conclusions, wrong assumptions, or did they not conduct the experiment the same way the other people did?" Those are the kinds of questions you should be asking as opposed to just assuming that things debunked. But there's a lot of people in this world that you're going to read something like this in Wikipedia and the very first thing you're going to say is, "Well, that can't possibly work." Um, and this is how they're able to keep it secret. you just convince most people that and then there you go. Uh I think that as we're going to watch here today, it definitely does work and there's people that believe very strongly that it works. It just becomes a matter of what exactly is it doing? Because I think that all of them will essentially claim that this type of drive is not going to produce huge amounts of thrust that are going to lift somebody into outer space. But it doesn't matter if it produces any amount of thrust with no propellant, even a tiny amount, that's still a huge win. That's what people need to realize. Okay. Uh so the first design of the resident cavity thruster was by Robert Shawer in 2001. So this is about 20 years old and basically it's going to be a cone. That was the initial way that it was designed. But other models don't necessarily have to be a cone. They can have different types of shapes, etc. Um, and so basically everybody's is a little bit different. So then there was a bunch of different recreations here that claim to observe small thrust. Um, and so it seems like there's like some people that claim it doesn't work and then there's some people as well that have claimed that it does. So this is where you start to get into a interesting situation. When you look into the media coverage, all the media coverage is both dismissive basically. Uh, they call it impossible drive. They say that it violates the laws of thermodynamics. to say that it violates the laws of conservation. And what you'll notice is in a lot of these cases, these are people that they have never done any of the tests themselves. So, as a quick spoiler, it's very expensive to run these types of tests. There's like a whole if you're following rigorous scientific methodology and testing methods that rule out any one thing at a time, it starts to become a whole business. It's extremely expensive to to to do and figure out. Uh which is why there's the difference between the people that are out there experimentally and they're out there trying to do the work like the Bob Greeners of the world for example and then the people that are just like well I know what we can accomplish. Here's what the uh science the physics the theoretical physics like says we can do. Um and so you need both of them honestly. Uh, but it goes to show as well why traditional academia can be so slow in terms of when you when you watch how many experiments they've done. It's going to it's going to blow your mind honestly. Um, okay. Let's see. Okay. So, White's first press conference. So, this is Harold White, Sunny White. I think this was right around the time we watched it. His first conference paper suggested the resonant cavity thrusters could work by transferring momentum to the quantum vacuum of virtual plasma, a new term he coined. They criticized this explanation because in the standard description of vacuum fluctuation, virtual particles do not behave as a plasma. Car also noted the vacuum has no rest frame providing nothing to push against. So it cannot be used for propulsion. Well, this logic doesn't really make any sense to me. I mean, we know there's quantum fluctuations there. We know the Casemir effect works. So, I think the claim that it it certainly can't be used as propulsion seems or just even can't be used as propulsion because there's no rest frame doesn't really sit with me. The part about virtual particles not being plasma seems like a nitpick. um you know in terms of like particles versus if something's a particle, a wave or what state of matter it's in. Seems seems to be spec uh unnecessarily specific. Let's see. Uh two other people pushed paper saying that electron positron uh showing electron positron virtual pairs of quantum fluctuation discussed by white's potential virtual propellant could not account for for thrust in any isolated closed electromagnetic system such as the vacuum uh the quantum vacuum thruster which I believe is the Q thruster. And now here's the the big word. This is what I wanted to get to is that your system is not closed. And this is what really the main understanding of physics has to change for the conventional close-minded people is that this is like saying that you a sailboat can't produce thrust. Well, of course a sailboat can produce thrust but only if the wind is hitting it otherwise the sailboat doesn't do anything. This is kind of the same situation here where it's like if you create a hypothetical closed system on paper and you assume that the quantum zero point fluctuation is zero then yes you're not going to be able to do anything. This is like saying okay a closed a closed system of a sailboat can't produce any thrust. Well of course not because you're excluding wind but wind exists. Same concept here. you open your system up. It really just a definition of what's your closed open system. If your system now includes the ether and the quantum fluctuations now you can basically have a situation where thrust is possible. So here's another interesting part is Eric W. Davis h see his name a lot and Sean Carol concluded that thrust measurements reported in the paper by both of them were indicative of thermal effect errors. This is like having your debunkers come out, right? You have your debunkers come out. They say it was just the temperature. It's like, "Okay, man." Like, you're not the one doing the work, you know, to just come out here and claim, "Yeah, it was the temperature." Wait till you see this first video we watch of the guy who's actually performing the tests. He actually addresses this fact, which is pretty interesting. He addresses the question of the temperature. The first interview we're going to watch here is going to be with Tim Ventur. We're going to get to in just a couple minutes. Uh, it was way better than I thought, honestly. the guy like knows his stuff and there's a lot of stuff to comment on when he talks about it. So again, the reason why you guys are watching this right now is because I want you to understand the landscape of the situation with regards to this technology. How does it really work? What's the boots on the ground of this stuff in terms of testing it? What are people saying about it? Boots on the ground, not just narratives that are out there and what can it be used for? Um, okay. So, let's see. There was one somewhere in here where I saw it said that basically Q thruster and the resonant cavity thruster and the EM drive are all the same. So, I don't know where that is, but it's somewhere out there. So, one thing to note on the image here is that the thrust goes towards in this case the smaller end of the cone. So, supposedly the microwave's coming here. The first idea was that it bounces around basically and then it's going to produce this thrust because it's pushing off the the zero point energy all around us. And I think it's interesting that this is such a controversial concept because we know the zero point energy exists. Nobody's even denying it at this point. We know 0 point energy exists. Undeniable. Casemir effect is absolute scientific proof of it that's easily reproducible. So for people to say that there's no way to manipulate, no way to do it, this is like saying there's no way to make a phone that can use wireless communications. It's got to be wired. It's like there's no way to do it. Well, I mean, you just have to think about how electromagnetic waves work and then you can figure it out. So, um, so then there's a bunch of people talking smack. Um, I'm trying to remember what else was. So, it looks like the Cany drive was the Q drive. So, I don't know if the Q thruster is the same as the Q drive, but it is important to point out there are several different people producing these. And actually in China, they were producing one themselves, but supposedly China's isn't as good for some reason, which I'm not sure about. Okay, let's let's read the theoretical inconsistencies real quick. All proposed theories about how EM drive works violates conservation momentum which states any interaction cannot have a net force a consequence of the conservation momentum is Newton's third law where every force has equal or opposite reaction all because force times velocity equals power. Uh now an often cited example of apparent non-conservation momentum is the casemir effect. In the standard case where two parallel plates are attracted to each other however the plates move in opposite directions so no net momentum is extracted from the vacuum and moreover the energy must be put into the system to take the plates apart. get technically uh but if you were able to develop a system where the geometry was set up in such a way where you don't need to pull the plates apart then you've now violated it. So this is the part where like they're not wrong here but this doesn't mean that it's not real. Um and it just means that that only the two plate system doesn't produce thrust like okay sure but it's because the plates are parallel. So don't make them parallel. Right? That's the basic idea behind the Q thruster or the uh EM drive. Um assuming homogeneous electric and a magnetic fields, it is it possible for the EM drive or any other device to extract net momentum transfer from either a classical or quantum vacuum? Well, there's probably not going to be homogeneous electric and magnetic fields. And one of the big things about a lot of this is manipulating magnetism. I don't know if the Q thruster is designed to do that. I don't think that it is. Um, but there are ways to to pull that off if necessary. Uh, okay. So, both Harold White and Mike McColl's theories about how EM drive could work rely on these asymmetrical or dynamical casmir effects. Exactly. So, it's just not asymmetrical. It's just not two plates right next to each other. It's more complicated than that. You know, asymmetrical would be like where you're losing your your symmetry. Um however if these vacuum forces are present then they are expected to be exceptionally tiny based on our current understanding too small to explain the level of observed thrust in the event observed thrust does not is not due to experimental error a positive result could indicate new physics. So what does this mean? What's on the line here guys is that even a extremely small amount of thrust is going to be hard for anyone to explain because they believe that the vacuum energy all around us is very small. But if that vacuum energy all around us is much bigger, then it does explain why you're having larger amounts of thrust. And so the result there is new physics. Basically, this part here says a positive result could indicate new physics. Says MH370X is correct. It's basically what that says. Okay. Um I think we're going to skip the rest of this. I don't know if Charles Buer is going to be mentioned in here. Uh they do mention the tapered cavities here which is like a resonant frequency cavity now which is interesting because the um coherent matter wave beam I believe had resonant cavities as well on it. So heads up on that. Uh I don't think was this Oh yeah. So this one right here. So November let's read this one because this is the recent one. This is the Q thruster test that just supposedly happened. November 11th, 2023, the Barry 1 satellite, a 3U cubstat was launched as part of SpaceX Transporter 9 ride share mission produced by Rogue Space Systems. Barry 1's primary objective is to test the company's hardware and software, which a future goal of offering hosted payload services. Rogue Space Systems announced the satellite is equipped with an experimental propulsion system referred to as Quantum Drive. There it is, Q Drive. Developed by IVO Limited, the satellites testing program includes a 60-day resting period post launch to stabilize its orbit, accounting for initial pertabbations such as outgassing. Subsequently, the experimental drive is planned to be activated with its effects observable through public satellite tracking services. So basically they were going to use this to move the satellite around to just shift it around because technically people believe that the satellites can't be moved around but if we have Q thruster capability we can move them around. H very interesting this might be relevant to the cers stuff as well. Do we have sat how much do you want to bet the DoD has satellites that can move around using Q thruster and uh EM drives? Basically, one of the things you're about to find out in this interview too is this is also discussed is the main what the very thing that they mention here is they mention the idea that you could use this to move satellites around because satellites are very light because the limitation as you're going to find out is that it's very small amounts of thrust but it is thrust without propellant. Okay. Um so on January 16th all of a sudden they start delaying and saying that the initial experiments are taking longer than expected. There's no set act date for activating the drive. So why this is suspicious? And then all of a sudden a month after that, February 9th, they announced the end of the mission with the loss of the communication of the Barry 1. For Rogue, this mission was still mostly characterized as a success. However, due to ongoing power system issues, the experimental drive provided by IVO was never tested in space. According to CEO, the company's in discussion about including a new payload on a future launch. So all of a sudden, they don't say anything. They don't say anything. Then all of a sudden, they come out with this answer. Why wouldn't our best satellites be movable? Okay, so I'm going to skip because we're going to go right now to the video, but I'm going to kind of spoil it because it's this maybe important to discuss. Uh this video is really good because it's answers a lot of these questions. Why is a satellite not movable for people that are up there? The answer is because you want it to be very light. The best thing that we can have is we want the least amount of mass possible for whatever we're sending into orbit. And the answer is because of laws of uh conservation, momentum, and everything else that we've got around there. We want it to be very light. We want to put it in the specific orbit that we want and we want to stay there. Now then, why can't it move? Because if you give it any type of ability to shift around, you're gonna have to manipulate its mass. You need to now have engines. And what do engines require? Propellant. They can require fuel. The moment the fuel runs out, now what? You've run out of fuel. Now you can't move your your your craft anymore. And now you have paper weights attached to you that you don't want in terms of mass. So this is the the rub here related to this. This is why EM drive is so important because if there's no fuel required and you can produce thrust, then you can move your satellite around and now you don't have paper weights attached to you. So, I want you to think about that. That's why it's very important. Um, and technically amateur astronomers, if they move the satellite in outer space, you're going to be able to detect its trajectory change. This is one of the things we learned about with the MH370 investigation was we learned that the satellites don't move around in outer space. They're like stuck in sp. So whenever astronomers see them, they can project their their trajectories for several weeks and then they check again and a week later and all the measurements check out. Hasn't moved, right? And it's just consistent consistent like the sun going up every day. That's how we were able to track the uh satellites. By the way, guys, when with our track every satellite that's out there, we looked at the amateur historical trajectories. I didn't, but a guy named Martin did and he was very dedicated. He looked up every single one and mapped them all out for that day. That's how we found USA 229. So, it's kind of crazy that like we mapped every satellite in existence out there, including the Russian and Chinese ones, and we found the satellite that was looking at the plane, USA 229. Like, a lot of people don't realize how significant it The satellite was in this position. Like none of the other satellites were in the right position. This one was in the exact right location in low Earth orbit staring right down at our coordinates within I mean technically it's up in the sky 900 kilometers which is I don't know how many 500 miles or something like that. Um but you know it's right there. So okay guys. Hey Heather Birdie. Nice to see you as well. Okay let's get to our video. Uh, I don't think I just realized these are YouTube videos. So, if I start getting copyright struck, we're I'll have to download them. Just start screaming in the chat if we get a copyright strike here. Okay, guys. Okay. Um, can the EM drive be detected by any means? Sure. The probably the easiest way to detect this is going to be a high frequency gravitational wave detector for the most part, a very sensitive one. But yeah, because what you're going to find out, this is another one of the answers to the questions here, so I'm just kind of skipping parts of the interview, is this does technically bend space. It's just bending space on such small scales that it's imperceivable and the thrust is going to be very small. So, let's dig in here. Let's go. I'm going to skip past the test overview and we're going to go straight to the test analysis and then we're going to go to listen to him talk about it and then we're going to listen to Charles Buer and then we'll probably call it a night after that. See if I can There we go. How's that look? Looks good. Okay, Python. I think um that's the code. Um and uh things of interest over here. This is force in millions on this graph. And um over here we have kilov voltage. So it would be zero kilovolts which is basically no power applied all the way down to 9.5 negative 9.5 kilovolts which would be down here. Um and then uh this from zero to about 17 which is the um micro amps current and the pressure was somewhere in the zone of around um somewhere around 7.5 * 10 - 6 to. So that's the basic parameters of the test. The green line across the middle it just meant the pressure was maintaining steady. So nothing really changed there. So the test would have begun um up here with zero voltage at zero time. Now, this particular thing has a a a really little quirk where it only starts at about 60 seconds because it takes the first 60 seconds to figure out where the zero line is and a bunch of other internal processing stuff. So, really zero is is way back here, but for the most part, it starts here. So, while the while the voltage was off, well, you see there's nothing going on here. There's no thrust. Thrust is just pretty much blank. Um there's a tiny bit of upward drift because again, this is a poor voice vacuum chamber. And then as soon as the full So they're using a vacuum chamber here as well, just for the for the record. They're not, you know, it's not just in the ambient air as well. Um, can the EM drive I already answered that. How would the red blue shift detector work? Uh, I'm not sure. I'm not smart enough to know answer that at the moment. Probably would be some type of shift that's happening, but it's going to probably be some type of proportionate to the effect that you're having on the environment. How much are you bending space? Why isn't this going away? No, there it goes. Okay. Voltage comes on because these are steps of 1,00 volts at a at a step. So, this is 1,00 volts, which corresponds to roughly 1,000 volts. So, here 1500. Um, so here's 1500, here's 3,000, here's 45,00 all the way down to 9500. As you can see, as the voltage was stepped down, every time there was a voltage step, there was a corresponding um spike in current. That's the capacitors charging up at that new um field voltage or the field uh field strength. And although I don't have field strength on this particular graph um basically it's about uh 2 * 10 the eth down here. So this thing's winding up basically and then I guess these green lines that shoot up. It's like it's the the capacitors are adjusting to the new voltage and then it looks like this is maybe some constant thrust here. Might small amounts here. Let's see what it says. By the time you get to 9,500 volts, the field strength at this at this voltage level is around um 2 * 10 8 volts per meter. So, every time there's a no voltage spike, you get a little current spike, but then it goes right back down. Then all the time you get all the way down to 9,500 volts, then you're all done with current spikes and you have just a just a continuous um replenishment uh current through here. This is really the current through the 100 megga ohm resistor that feeds the system and whatever the plates are losing in just um current for the most part. Um so as we're going along this was about uh 300 seconds worth of run time. This is what you when you pay money for thrust in a spaceship. This is what you're buying. Force times time. So this is this is this is what you buy. This is impulse this is a um impulse. So if I was if I was selling this as a service thrust service I would have had 300 millisecond I would have had 300 mill seconds of impulse. Okay. So if I was going to sell you know if I had if if there was a little spaceship that takes a finite amount of time to drain these things out. In this case it takes about 300 seconds to fully drain one of these capacitor plates. There have to be two of them in there. So it took about 300 actually charging the plastic. That wasn't the primary goal of this test. The primary goal of this test is an instant on, instant off thruster. But at those voltages, at these voltages, and at the at the the materials that I'm working with, it's almost impossible to not charge these plastics. So, what happens is you start out at zero, you great, it just equals time. So, and and you're exactly right. They're usually little chemical thrusters for the most. Okay. So, for the most part, I think that they are observing thrust. He could have done a better job explaining it, but the results and conclusions talk about like they're producing some thrust as a very small amount. I was hoping he would explain it a little bit better, but whatever. Um, hold on. I'm going to play this. I'm going to put the AC on. One sec. It's hot. In terms of this device, you're basically running tests. You have a layered capacitor. You're putting a voltage on it. It generates thrust until that voltage dissipates. And right now, you're generating, you said, micro of thrust, right? Well, thousand micro of thrust, but yeah. Yeah. Okay. And so this equals out to being over one earth gravity of thrust. I think that's the big breakthrough that Yes. Let me let me let me make sure that I fully explain what that means because um a lot of people think that you know we should have this thing hovering. Um when you when you're talking about ways to qualify your results, you can simply say I made a million of thrust. Well, that doesn't really tell you much because it may have taken 50 plates to make that 1 million. So what I did was I went to a a system where I call or I base everything on what I call earth unity and that is I know what um one of the plates weighs. They're generally around 360 milligrams. Now if I could generate after all this earth gravity because you know the weight of the plates, right? You know the weight of the plates. So let's say the plates weigh just keep the math simple. Let's say they weigh um 360 milligrams. Well, 360 mg if I was going to lift something that okay, obviously milligrams are mass and we're going to talk everything is in earth gravity. So 360 mg of force is about uh 3.6 millton. So if I if I had a balloon that could lift 3.6 6 mill and I put the plate on there, the balloon would be able to hover the plate or so basically he's explaining that in talking about unity he's saying okay well how much force do I need to make this phone counteract the force of gravity to be able to hover. So they're using very light plates and then they're getting very small amounts of thrust. But he's basically trying to say, well, I want to make a balloon basically be able to lift this plate up or, you know, a balloon that is ambient that's not going to generally move. I want it to, you know, lift. I want to see some effect. Hopefully I said that right. If the plate was generating 3.6 milltons of thrust, it would be at one Earth unity. It would be able to lift its own weight. Not the weight of the power supply, not the weight of the vacuum chamber, not the weight of the frame that's around it, but one plate. So, my plate. So, yeah. And then, uh, people were talking about element 115. You don't need any elements for this. Like, again, any prop whatever propellant you're using for your thrust is, you know, stuff that, you know, you're going to use up. You don't want to have stuff to use up. You can just use up the energy that's around you. You don't need any elements this or that, right? You don't need any of that stuff. Right now, the test you just saw obviously only made 1 million of thrust and there were two plates. Okay, so that means I had 700 or so millions of material and it only made one 700 I'm sorry 700 milligrams of material and only made one mill of thrust. So obviously I did not make anywhere near unity. I made something on the order of seventh unity whatever that is 15. So that's good. He just explained exactly how much thrust this is making. So for the people that thought, oh, this is going to produce enough thrust to lift somebody off the sky, you know, lift somebody up and shoot them in outer space, it's not going to do that. It's only producing 17th of unity essentially. So for pound for pound, uh, you know, you're only getting 17th of what you need to lift somebody up. So it's not producing the amount of thrust that you need to escape Earth's gravity, but it doesn't mean it's not producing nothing. Yeah, this is solid state this device is. And forbula means want to know what that means. It means no new no moving parts%. But this particular test the beauty of this test is it went up. You saw it came down quickly and then it went back up quickly. This is a quick onoff. This is what I would consider a um navigational thruster. So it's something I want to I want to move to the left. Press it on and move to the ship to the left. Turn it off. Thrusters that are going to do real work like lift the weight of your spacecraft off the moon so that you don't have to have landing legs. it could just hover. That would be what a completely different thruster. Um, and that thruster takes on charge and packs on charge and keeps packing on charge. And like I said, as long as there as long as the spatial relationship exists, as long as the charge is in the thruster, it will continue to make thrust. So what we do is we run those thrusters for 10,000 seconds, 20,000 seconds and that that packs up five 6 7 8 milltons worth of thrust in the char in the in the system. So now I got two plates that weigh 700 mg that would need to make seven or eight millons of thrust in order to be at earth unity. Okay. But those thrusters can if you give them enough time, you give them 20,000 seconds, which is like five and a half hours. Um, and um, I don't know if you've ever ran a warp drive test for five and a half hours, but it's takes five and a half hours, you know, and I have other things to do in life. So, the goal is to to optimize both sets of thrusters. The ones that are designed to do the heavy lifting and the ones that are designed to do the quick lifting, the quick the quick. So, that's that's already really great, guys. Like, I love what he just said there right away. He's telling people like it depends. You design your engine for what you're trying to get it to do. It's not as simple as like just show it to me working. With respect to the ones that are just going to maneuver you around like a small Q thruster, you only need a tiny amount of thrust because all it takes is a tiny amount of thrust. If you just want to maneuver around in outer space, especially if you're already in orbit, you only need a little bit of thrust to move around. That's the thing about space, right? space allows us there's the medium's a lot less dense than the medium that we're in right here. The problem with with travel generally the reason why we can't accelerate is that the more faster we go the more friction we get for for going through the medium of the air and this is the big issue that we have. So, this guy talking is uh Andrew Arugima, Arogima, Arogma, I don't know, however you say his name. Uh, but he basically is the engineer. He's the guy on the front lines working with Charles Beller. Charles Beller was just on Glenn Beck. He was talking about the EM drive. He was talking about things like when he mentioned getting above Unity, this is what he's talking about. He's talking about producing an engine that's powerful enough that it can lift somebody off the ground and bring them into outer space with no propulsion required. So, pretty big. And like he just said here, he's going to say it again in a minute, but this is Star Trek Impulse Drive. This is what I've been telling you guys. This is Star Trek Impulse Drive. It has a different purpose than warp drive and has a difference purpose than an actual wormhole. Impulse drive like this is meant for just maneuvering. You know, you don't I don't need a warp. I don't need to go through a wormhole to go to my bathroom, you know? Like, think of it like that. I might need a wormhole if I want to go to Las Vegas, but I don't need a wormhole if I just want to go, you know, next door. But it would be nice if I don't have to get up. Like, if I can just sit in my chair like this and I can just be next door and I can just hover around. Now, that's your warp drive or maybe even your impulse drive. If I just want to maneuver around and reach my phone that's over there, but I don't really want to move, then that's just my impulse drive just as [Music] So important to understand the difference. Here we go. The reaction force, they're completely complimentary to each other. And right now the test you just saw was a quick reacting system. But what's in all the articles and what what everybody is is saying, well, why why don't we have flying cars? Well, that's coming. You know, we now have So, and also I just want to add as well that the what's the difference? Well, the difference is add in a huge amount of voltage. Keep the voltage. Charge up your plates. If you charge that plate up, then like he saw before when he showed us the graph, you're getting more and more thrust. So, the idea is instead of small amounts, get really, really huge amounts. And Charles Buer is going to explain some of this when we go through the second video. about um I'd say about one I've done experiments where I've gotten as high as 1.5 Earth unity on a plate. Yeah. Um it was very very very controlled. You know, it's a single plate. It's all in a big thing and and and it didn't float. Um but it could have if if if I had figured out a way for it to be isolated and charged and gave it the five and a half hours or so that it needs. Uh so here's the big issue, too. People are like, why didn't it just float? Because well when he's got it set up it's not freely it's not just freely suspended. It's not like he's got a plate freely suspended. He's got to have it like attached to stuff otherwise it's going to fall down. So he wants this plate standing up. Now he wants to be able to show that it could lift off. But how do you show that right? Like how do you make your experiment so that you can charge it? Because presumably it's got like uh you know wires connected to it for it to charge. But this it the concept is what's important is that if you can prove that this is a thing then you can make a craft that has it built on the inside that the whole craft floats up and charge up. It would have lifted its own weight. And one of the demonstrations I'm planning on doing is that exact thing. I'm going to build a thruster. It's going to be hanging on some some little thin wires and it's going to be um So he's talking now he just answered the whole question, right? is you're just going to wire it up on a really thin wire. So you build your experiment, it'll show that it'll it'll lift up kind of, you know, free to just hang there and then over the course of five and a half hours or so, it will actually lift up off the wires. Kind of like an old thruster or I'm sorry, an old lifter. It kind of, you know, lifts up and it's it's held in place by the little wires that hold it down. Well, the wires are going to be supplying ground and high voltage and they're really just there to keep the thing from flipping over because there's no guidance or control in this thing. So the the and uh little who Doug Crunkit basically just kind of spoiled it. But here's the idea then. So if you need to be able to add charge to your plates and and then you need to ramp it up. You need to ramp up the charge because the more charge you get the more lift you get. Then what's the best mechanism for something like you can't use something with propellant in it because you're going to run out and then once you run out now everything falls to [ __ ] Everything falls apart. So having an over unity generator, something that's constantly extracting energy from the environment gives you the mechanism that you need to have this perpetual charge getting flowed into the plates to achieve because then the point is like he's saying it takes five and a half hours to charge up. Who cares how long it takes to charge up? Who cares if it takes 10 hours? If it takes 10 hours to charge up and then I step inside of it and now I'm going to the moon. Boom. or I just play some cards or watch a movie and while I'm inside my craft that's got an overunityity generator next to me and it's got an EM drive. Perfect. What's even better than that? If I have overunity generator and I've got a EM drive and I've got a warp drive and maybe I have a wormhole generator. All three of those things. And now I can do any of the three things I want to do. If I want to just maneuver around, I can use my Yam drive. If I want real propulsion, I can just start charging it up and slowly my object just lifts off and goes into outer space. And then when I'm in outer space, I'm getting constant acceleration. So I can achieve speeds that start to approach the speed of light. And then if I want to go beyond the speed of light, let's say I want to go further away than the solar system, I want to go to a different galaxy or another star that's on the other side of our galaxy, that's where I use my warp drive. That's where I just want to blink from one location to the next. So, why is this important? Well, this is what I've been saying for months and months and months and months. So, if the MH370 videos are fake, how come all the science related to them is real and like on the cutting edge of what we're talking about publicly now? You come back next time. You come back in a couple of months. And um and what I want to point out is what day was this? This was seven days ago. Okay. Seven days ago. Let's give them a thumbs up. If you guys are watching this, make sure you give them a like on alternate propulsion. You'll be able to film a thruster. I guess we'll do it in in in time lapse and you'll be able to watch a thruster sit there and pull up against this little tiny Well, so the first application for this is probably like satellite adjustments. Oh, certainly. Yeah. So, there we go. He just talked about how weird is it that the Q thruster it was that whole purpose of the Q thruster was going to be for satellite adjustments. We just read the Wikipedia about it that said they were gonna be able to prove their work because amateur astronomers would just be able to look up and see that the satellite is in a different spot. Okay. The first thing is um because in in space um the the the value of mass is is king. You know that that's what wins the lower the mass. So for example um uh and and I don't want to use any any name brands but um the the the the satellites the loading mass is king. So here you go. He's going to explain what I just did. I mean, I've already watched This is why I knew, so I I'm not that smart, but here you go. I know. There's 8,000 of them up there or something right now. And they give you satellite all they give you cell phone all over the world. Um, they have they have little tiny uh Hall effect thrusters on them that look about like a a thick coffee cup. It's about the size of a coffee cup. Um, the whole propulsion system is um it's a tank. It weighs about 60 kg, whatever 120 pounds or so. There's four or five of those coffee can looking things. And they run for about six months. They they they because when they launch a satellite, they put the satellite into a kind of a iffy orbit and then they turn these things on and they and the and these thrusters run for about five months and they slowly spiral out. That's called a home in uh high energy transfer or a high efficiency transfer orbit and they get out to where they're going and after about five months you're pretty much out of fuel. Yeah, you got just enough fuel to de-orbit, I believe. Um I think that's what the international law requires. So that's interesting to know how the satellites work. So they give them propellant, they shoot them up, and then it takes them a while because they slowly get further and further away from the atmosphere till they get to their rest point and then the propellant is used up and that's it. And then maybe you detach the rocket thruster at that point so you don't have this dead weight or you just leave it on there, I guess. But you really don't have a lot of of maneuverability. And basically those satellites only last a few years and then they de-orbit and burn up and you got to put another one up there and they're millions of dollars. In our case, you would put basically Oh, and by the way, those little thrusters only put out like 30 or 40 milltons of thrust at most. Okay. The whole effect maybe. That's interesting. So even the propellant ones are only putting out 30 to 40 milltons of thrust. 10 millions of thrust. Something on that order. um for the same amount of mass. So the same coffee cup size thruster without the fuel tank or anything. So for for a few pounds, I can put a 100 million thruster that you can turn on and it does its job and then when you're done, you turn it off. Okay, my thrusters operate at that range at 100 millons. It'll operate at, you know, two watts, three watts. Okay, the Hall effect thrusters, they're up to two 300 watts. And when you, you know, if you run out of fuel, they're paper weights. They're they're they're worthless. mine since it never uses fuel, since it never uses oxidizer, there's no there's no interconnection with the rest of the the Earth forces or whatever. You turn it on, it runs. You leave it on for six months, it runs for six months. You turn it off, it's off until you turn it on again. It's funny. This is so similar to over Unity, right? It's turn it on, it'll run forever. Turn it off, you can turn it off. You know, it's just basically it's so clear that you can see the same scientific concepts are used in EM drive and over Unity because they're both manipulating the same thing, the vacuum, quantum vacuum. That's what the that's what the instant on, instant off was. So that would be an example of a use for an instant on. So basically what he's saying here is for a situation with a small satellite, this is ideal because this allows your satellite to get into orbit and you now don't have a dead paper weight attached to it. You can still move it around and you can potentially get into the correct orbit a lot quicker. But the fact you can move your satellite around is a game changer. Instant off thruster. Well, that's why I asked that also because a lot of people wonder what can you do with a micronut of force. You can't do anything with a micro force. Okay, it's just it's an annoying little unit that's that the only reason anyone you heard those words put together before is because no one's been able to produce a lot of thrust with these these devices before. millions are, you know, four millions is the weight of a of a of a of a So, this is interesting. He basically explains that the amount of the amount of thrust you're getting is like you're not even going to feel it. Like me dropping this whatever twist tie onto my hand. It's like I, you know, it's on me, but it's not it's not encumbering my hand. It's not making my hand feel heavy, you know? Uh, it's a very small amount, but once you get to outer space, that's great. Who cares? Because even a tiny amount of thrust is now infinite acceleration. That's the beauty of it. So when you get in outer space, it's it's amazing. Even that tiny amount, if you were to just keep pushing my body with it, you know, for free, it's going to start adding up. Paper clip, a plastic paper clip, four four or five millons is the weight of the paper clip. It's it's a ridiculously small amount of force. 60 milliseons, you couldn't even feel it. If somebody put 60 millons of of of weight on your skin, I don't even know that you'd be able to feel it. Um you certainly wouldn't be able to say oh yeah that's 60 millons. Okay, these numbers are are useless. But in space, 60 millons is enough to push a 600lb whatever 300 kg satellite given enough time. 5 months is a long time. 300 kg satellite is like what 5 600 lb something like that. It's even more, right? 600 almost 700 lb probably. So basically you can push something at 700 lb with that, right? So yeah. So even with that tiny amount of force, you can still push my body if you were getting it for free. So, could this replace the ion thrusters on Starlink? Absolutely. Absolutely. Right away, this has got me excited because he's listing practical applications that you could sell this to private military contractors for immediately. So, now I'm already wondering why are they not buying this? Because they've already got proofs of concept with experiments here and it's just a matter of scaling it up. So, I presume the answer is because they've already got it. They've already got it. We know they've already got it because we've been watching their [ __ ] warp drive and teleport and their wormhole stuff. The same idea of the warp drive and the wormhole and the MH370 videos. This is the same exact concept. It's the same overall concept. And that's why this that's why we're watching this right now. The difference is scaling it up and putting more voltage into it. And what you're going to find as well is that maybe there's a better medium to use than why why are we using two plates to do this? What if we just charge up our plasma? We just take some coherent plasma stuck in a magnetic field and we just start ramping up the voltage on it, right? What's going to happen then? Are we going to produce cold fusion? Just a thought. I don't know. I don't know for a fact. I'm just spitballing. And to never turn your rocket engine off. Yeah. So, yes, the forces are very small, but the time duration is very long. You know, there's whatever 3600 seconds in an hour. So there are so manyations for this too. So one of the things that I just wrote about he also said the time variable is very long. So this is another really good way to think about it because even with the tiny little amounts of thrust it's never going to wear out. So the problem with any thrusters in space is they they run out of fuel. This thruster never runs out. So even though it's doing a little tiny little amount of thrust on us here, it adds up over time. the so it's like it's basically the story of the tortoise and the hair. The tortoise is the EM drive and the hair is the rocket engine and the the tortoise wins in the end because it's got more endurance as the the battle that that wins was a proposal to send basically micro probes on an interstellar journey. And the idea there was to basically Yeah, I saw that. Yeah. Very lightweight probes and get them out. Okay. So, I'm gonna skip through some of this. Uh, actually, wait to, you know, like Alentari or something like that. I think he says Impulse. Yes. Um, and, um, I don't like to talk about Interstellar because this is the, you know, and and I'm probably going to get probably get in trouble, but this is the Star Trek Impulse engine. It uses it does warp space to produce the thrust, but it's it's effectively a sublight engine. Okay. You pack enough of these things together, you So, it's Star Trek Impulse Drive. It does technically warp space, but it's very small effects. Uh, what did he say there just at the end? Probably get in trouble. But this is the Star Trek impulse engine. Okay. It uses it does warp space to produce the thrust, but it's it's effectively a sublight engine. Okay. Sublight engine. So, it's sublight. That's the big thing, too, right? So, the fact that we always talk about breaking the speed of light isn't really that big of a deal. Like yes, it's cool that we can have the speed of light break and that I think that's like more of a wormhole and maybe even warp drive can pull it off as well honestly and maybe there is it's just becomes like a difference without a distinction at some point. I'm not even really sure but you have to realize that there are different purposes for what we need different things for. Same reason why we have like little scooters and we also have cars. Why don't you just drive your car everywhere? Why don't you just fly a plane everywhere? Because I don't need to fly a plane to go to my parents house. It's only a couple miles away. Right? I don't need an airplane for that. Doesn't make any sense. So, this is the big rub here. And why a helicopter can be more beneficial than an airplane. It's like a different tool for a different purpose. Together, you'd have Newtons of thrust. You pack enough of those together, you'd have kilton of thrust. So, yes, you could push something like a small spaceship or a probe or whatever you want to do, but it's never going to go past the speed of light, right? Yeah. So, it's never going to go past the speed of light with this kind of thruster as well, which is why if people wonder like why do you put down the EM drive? because this is just a rudimentary form. This is just the proof that we can bend spacetime. It's very small scales, but it's absolutely experimental proof. The same way the Kazmir force basically proves it already. So, this is why I'm not super excited about it, but why I'm taking it very import seriously and why we're doing a whole stream about it because this is the fundamental concepts that people have to understand. If EM drive is real and it works, it proves that we can do warp drive and we can do wormholes. just means we just have to scale it up and maybe find like a better experimental apparatus than just a couple plates that we charge. I did the math and you know I went online and I I got one of these things and you download and you say okay if I had Okay, so then I'm going to skip through this part here for the next few minutes. I think he does some more stuff here in a few minutes but basically he does all the math in terms of how long it would take to get to all the various places. And when you have something like this, you accelerate yourself up to the midway point. And then when you get to the midway point now, you turn your craft around and you decelerate yourself because you wanna you want to get to Alpha Centauri, which is four light years away. You want to get there at rest speed. You don't want to get there at the speed of light. Otherwise, you're just going to fly right past it. So, this is the limitation. So, it does cut down on the time travel or on the travel speed to get there, but there's still limitations. So, if you were to go to Alpha Centauri, you probably want to use your your your wormhole or you might want to use warp drive if you can achieve super luminal speeds. So, it's going to be a little bit different. Um, and then he does the math for some other places like the moon or what have you. So, then I think somewhere around here it gets spicy again. A new paradigm in propulsion. And we were talking about uh the example of the helium balloon earlier. I used that in a meeting the other day. Nobody questions where the energy comes from in a helium balloon to make it lift, right? You fill the balloon up and it will lift because the outside environment is pushing it up. All the all the physical geometrical parameters are satisfied and they're static. You may not see them, but the Earth's atmosphere is giving you buoyancy. Gravity is holding down all the other gas. There's a lot of there's a lot of moving parts in that system. Yeah. So, this is the thing, too, is that just because we don't visually see it doesn't mean it's not there. And that's a good example of like the balloon situation. Why does the balloon float? There's no propellant. It's just that there's a buoyancy and so the helium is lighter than the atmosphere. So the balloon lifts up. Simple as that. So imagine the same way but bending spacetime. Why does something fall? Objects are falling because there's a pressure of the spac-time ether created by the mass that's sitting on top of it in the form of our earth. So if we create a pressure in the opposite direction, your object is going to fall upward. So normally I'm going to have my coin here. This is a standard United States. Go to all America. Good old America quarter right here. 25 cents. So if I drop it, this coin is going to fall. But the only reason why it's falling is it's following following the geodessic of the mass. So if we create an artificial mass, it's going to fall upward if we can create one that's above unity in terms of what he just described. So let's keep going that you're just saying, "Oh, nothing's moving." How is it how is this magic working? Well, it's not magic. It's basic. It's basic physics and it's basic geometry. If you satisfy all the requirements of a balloon, it will float and it'll hover. If you and in the same way with this once you charge it up and you satisfy the requirements for propulsive force this will continue to go until it dissipates that charge. Yes. Until the charge bleeds off. Now this is physical material. Um you know there's no perfect insulators. There's no perfect dialectrics. There's no perfect anything. Um I mean it's going to leak charge. That's what the power supply is there for to to give you that tiny little bit of extra replacement charge. And then um I run test. So this is great too. I love what he just said. There's so many analogies to overun. Oh, also my chair is just in the background here. Hold on. Okay, we got rid of that chat ugly chair. And eventually the light will the planet will shift and I can put my poster back on the wall. Um, so the charge builds up. That's super important as uh I believe that was Rob Lee just mentioned. So once again, the benefit is that it's constantly acceleration and acceleration is a force. So as opposed to velocity where you can get to 100 100,000 miles an hour, but you're never going to speed up anymore. That's the benefit of these engines is you're they can constantly continue to get you to speed up and and up and up and up and up. And then the benefit then then the next thing you want is you want your mass to be as low as possible to get closest to the speed of light because the faster you go, the more massive you become according to Einstein. Um and then with respect to over unity uh you kind of have the same oh then what he says too but yeah with respect to over unity if you're making an overunityity device on earth and not in outer space I would recommend always having an input. So he explains we have an input charge. Why do we have an input charge? Because we are bleeding off charge over time to the environment. So how are we replacing that charge so that our device doesn't slow down? we're adding a little bit of push to it. We just keep adding the push to it and then we keep achieving our propulsion. So then you say, well, what happens because where are you getting the energy from the charge from? Well, if we can produce thrust, if we can produce work, then we can feed that back in. And if we achieve an overunity type system, which a propellantless drive that has no uh no um chemicals that it's using technically is this. That's why it's violating the law of momentum. Then we can feed that energy back into our system. And then what do we do? We store it in a battery. So when we need it, we can use it. When we don't need it, we let the battery charge up. And then we can feed that back into our system. And we can keep our system moving. And even though we're bleeding off energy and we're not 100% efficient, even if we're 90% efficient, as long as the overall amount of work exceeds the amount of energy that's going into it, we have an overunity type device. This is where coefficient of performance comes from. So same concept here with this type of device as well. And in that situation too, you could still have it be the battery getting charged like you don't need an overunity device on this. You could have a battery being charged by a solar panel and then you only bleed you only add the excess charge when you need it to make up for what you've lost or something. I mean you can do it any number of ways you want. Yeah. You can also reduce the speed of light. The other part I was going to bring up is well what if the material we're using is not the right medium to use. So now this goes to Salvador PZ's uh plasma. He talks about plasma all the time. We look at the orbs, we're seeing plasma on those orbs. Well, what if there's a better medium? What if we use a better medium than just, you know, a plate? What if we use a balloon, you know, a sphere of plasma that we can charge that will then produce thrust in the opposite direction of of the gravity. And maybe plasma is a better medium and we can get way better effects from it than using just two plates, right? So that's the part where the plasma thing comes into play where I was like, whoa, yeah, now it makes sense because nobody in the world is thinking about the idea of plasma. We're still thinking about Thomas Brown and using plates to generate our asymmetrical thrust or a cone or whatever we're doing. Why are we using any of that? Let's just use contained plasma and a magnetic field and then let's do it that way and charge that bad boy up. Can we achieve superc conductivity? And then I'm going to spoil the next part too because I want to make sure I don't forget it with Charles Buer is he talks about they're using DC which is direct current here. And when we talked to Salvatore Pas, he talks about high frequency and he talks about AC current. So maybe there's a way to advance this where you use AC current instead of DC current and potentially you can induce superc conductivity or achieve other effects that are uh I don't know anomalous let's say before where I've I brought it up to I can't remember exactly what it was 3 4 milliseons one day and I shut the system off left the vacuum running and came back a week later and it was still it was still and disconnected everything so So that the plates were isolated, came back a week later and it's making the same thrust and I got continuous I have a continuous recording of the thrust over the course of a week and it's the same. Now the overall concept is something that's been explored a lot by NASA and other agencies and what they've talked about are things like ion drives right where again it generates now in that case you are using a propellant but it's using very small amount it runs for a very long period of time it generates a small amount of thrust and so you are able to generate that constant acceleration until you run out of fuel until you run out of fuel. In your case, you're looking at a similar concept with no fuel, right? It just goes and and and you're absolutely right. Um the ion thruster, the Hall effect thruster, the Vasamer engine, these are all amazing toys. Um uh I have a degree in in advanced propulsions um rocket engines and stuff. So I have some basic understanding of how the things work. And um it's all about um ISP. It's all about specific impulse efficiency. Um a bottle rocket. Okay, this part's really good. ISP, impulse efficiency. Okay, so this is where he gives all the different examples of how efficient because think about the rocket in terms of like the ratio of how much thrust you get over time to how much propellant is in it that you have to use up because what they're saying is well ion drives cool but it still uses propellant. It's just very very efficient about how it uses the propellant. So the measurement he's talking about here is basically an efficiency metric of the propellant. I want you to listen to these numbers now that you understand he's talking about efficiency metric of the propellant of the rocket. Here we go. This is good. Okay. Somewhere around 100 on the scale. It doesn't matter what the scale is. It's about 100. Um the best chemical uh I mean the best uh solid rocket booster motor is about 160 on the scale. Um these new uh um so I think he said like bottle rocket was 100 and the best chemical rockets are about 160. Okay. So that's that's what our scale is 100 160. uh what it is um natural gas uh liquid oxygen burners they're around 240. So liquid gas, natural oxygen burners at a 240 in terms of efficiency on the scale. 240 seconds of impulse. Um a really good like a space shuttle engine, liquid oxygen, liquid hydrogen. It's around 460 on the scale ISP. So 460. Yeah. So it literally is what I mentioned. It's the efficiency over time of the propellant. So ion engine is about 460. So that's three times more efficient than the best rocket engine in terms of fuel efficiency. um a hall effect thruster that these little cool little things that that super efficient. They're around 3,000. That's so the hall effect thruster is 3,000 and that's one that's super efficient. So it's like a super efficient like ion drive. I think 3,000. Wait for it. Amazing. You know, nuclear rocketry, nuclear propulsion, nuclear rocket propulsion 5,000 maybe. Nuclear rocket propulsion 5,000. That's where now I'm starting to think of Amy Escridg's dad, Richard Esgridge. He has a bunch of propulsion rocket mechanisms. This is why those mechanisms are sold to the, you know, defense contractors. 5,000 is the efficiency. That's basically as high efficiency as you can go before you start to just get up straight up like basically free efficiency. You know, breaking the law of conservation momentum. So, here you go. Yeah. So, like Jack just said, the best rockets have about 300 to 400 seconds ISP. That's all that's like nothing, right? He just said this this thruster he just talked about has 3,000 and then the one he just mentioned has like 5,000. The hall thruster 5,000 compared to tiny amounts of ISP. So here we go. The very best you're going to ever get out of ion engines. Okay, this vasor thing if they ever pull it off and actually shrink it down and make it useful, maybe 10,000. So the best you can ever get out of an ion thruster is 10,000. So conventional rockets, best rocket ever developed, 160. The hall thruster with an ion thruster, the best ion thrusters 10,000. So those ion thrusters still have propell propellant, but they are just extremely tiny amounts. Okay. Well, wow. That's that's that's great. If you started it started at 100 with bottle rockets and now you're at 10,000, that's amazing. Yeah. Okay. On that same scale, our my propulsion system is at a billion trillion because a billion trillion. Uh, okay. That's a lot of zeros. So, this thruster EM drive a billion trillion because basically the only loss of energy is due to the bleed of the of the voltage to the to the vacuum. So, it's just however efficient you can possibly make it basically. So that's the level of gamechanging we're dealing with here. We're dealing with going from 100 ISP efficiency for a bottle rocket to 10,000 for the best possible ion to now a billion trillion. So you know this is completely paradigm shifting. No matter how much your impulse, no matter how good your efficiency is, when you run out of fuel, it's a paper weight. And the other thing that I understand is that your system will become extensible over time and that could involve layering of materials, wider materials, new materials and substrate technologies, right? So this can improve and improve. Certainly this is all this is all very very basic. Okay. Um you know I I have I have a day job. So he's basically saying here so now this is like the the most basic configuration in terms of the design that they're doing. And that's where I started to immediately think about okay what about if we start using plasma to do this and what if we can slow the speed of light in our plasma what if we can make it come to a stop if we create superc conductivity. Uh so this is what is like really interesting related to it. um you know it's super efficient and it has some actual practical purpose for it. And when the con uh conventional rockets run out of fuel now you just have a rocket attached to your your craft and now that's mass that you have to account for if you want to accelerate. So super annoying and you know my day job is not building rockets that has really impressed me as well as impressed I mean again you guys have done the debrief popular mechanics uh I believe Dr. challenges. So, one thing I noticed right there, he goes through all the people that they've been on and they've talked to and stuff and I'm like, man, I've talked to even more people. Then I started to realize like I've talked to more people than the people who are developing EM Drive have talked to in terms of podcasters. So, part of me felt, well, that's awesome that, you know, I I've I've helped give these videos in the case of MH370 this new invigoration. And definitely check out the um I think is Mike's last name Adams? uh the h the health ranger. Check out the interview I did with him. Uh but at the same time, it's also sad because it goes to show nobody cares about this stuff, man. Nobody cares about this. Like, nobody cares that um that we have this technology. Nobody cares about, you know, they don't believe it. All these different issues, right? Uh they're not watching the EM drive stuff as well. Like, nobody pays attention to this stuff. setbacks that you have to overcome like for instance with the vacuum chamber which you talked about numerous times during your conference. Um you know you you've expressed uh all of these issues that you've had to overcome right in terms of turbo pumps getting it down to the right pressures ways that it can leak. Okay. So yeah he talks about all the issues I had to overcome as well. Um just want to ask this question. Did I change my mind on the lettered ashen? No. The lettered ashen is almost certainly real to some degree. Um, yeah, Apex's been covering this stuff for years and I I mean I I I'm guilty as well, guys. It's not that I'm putting other people down. It's that nobody pays attention to it. I basically don't pay attention either. And it shows how um yeah, it shows how easy it is to sweep this stuff under the rug. It's simple. It's trivial to sweep this under the rug. Nobody's paying attention to it. And what he talks about now is he's got this binder. They've done I think he says like 30,000 tests like 30,000 and he goes into details about the temperature stuff as well where like all the details they do to make sure the temperature is not an issue uh and they monitor like when they do the experiment and they make sure that all the humidity in there has been taken out so the the reader doesn't produce a false positive result. So this addresses a lot of the complaints in the Wikipedia. We're going to probably skip past that, but if you want to watch the video yourself, you can listen to it. He talks about all that they do for that and that you only change one variable at a time. Actually, we might be done here. Um, we'll go to one of the later questions. They basically change just one variable at a time because you want to make sure that whatever the issue is that you're addressing that. So, it's like the shape of it, the material they use, the coating they put on the material, every aspect of it can change your experiment. So, the last thing I want to say on that front is that people wonder like, why are you not doing experiments? I don't want to be that guy. I don't want to be Andrew. I love Andrew. I would actually consider hiring Andrew if I was doing this because I can tell right away that he's a very smart guy. He knows what he's doing with respect to experiments. Uh I just want to produce the stuff after it works, right? And this is the difference between somebody who's like an investor or a business person versus somebody that just wants to find stuff out. And then you realize too, well, if you just know how the science works, then you can reduce the amount of experiments you do because you can tell just intuitively what theoretically should work versus what theoretically won't work. It doesn't mean you're going to be right all the time, but that's how you can narrow down the possibilities. So that's why it's important that you have the people that are like the Andrews, but you also need the Charles Buers of the world who understands electrostatics who can say these are the types of stuff that should that should work. Uh yeah, how can anybody care about the Eminem dissing tracking people? Well, for you guys and my followers, you're very high IQ followers and you guys like science, but not just science. You guys know that we've been lied to and so you guys like to learn the science that you're not going to learn. They're not going to teach you in the history books or on the the Discovery Channel. But it's true. That's why you guys are here, right? Um and and this is a good time to say that like I know this this stuff's real beyond basically any doubt. Uh it's just it's wild to me. Like I'm actually already getting to the part where like I probably have to start being careful about what I'm saying as well because uh yeah, like it's getting a little bit too real in terms of how much stuff we're discovering and how much is already out there. Like clearly this is just being covered up by the government uh and that they've got better stuff than this. If you think that like this this guy who's doing the interview right now, not Tim, but Andrew, if you think that the government doesn't have better stuff than this, you are naive. like what the government has and what they can produce in their labs because the thing is one of the other last points I I just remembered this that he talks about here is he talks about the idea of well how expensive it is like the detector they have to put in there for the heat they bought the thousand version of it there's a million dollar version of it that's just the detector for having accurate temperature readings inside your experiment so that you can show that your experiment is really producing thrust as opposed to it's just the temperature variable that you the temperature is causing it. That's the difference. A million dollars just for one piece of that. So now realize that when they're doing these experiments in the private labs, they've got tens of millions of dollars worth of equipment. They have the best equipment. They know what's really happening because they have the best equipment. The people like Andrew and Charles who are trying to do this third party, they've got to get investors. They've got to get people funding this research. you know, it's expensive, really expensive, and their equipment, frankly, sucks compared to what the private military contractors have. So, this is why when people say prove it, it's a whole process of proving it. I don't want to prove it. Although, I don't mind proving if I've got the PMC, private military contractor labs. I don't want to do it privately. I don't want to be running the experiments privately. That that job sucks. I mean, for me, it does at least. I'm glad he enjoys it and I would love to have uh Andrew on my team, but I don't want to be the one raising money to run experiments. I want to be producing the stuff that works and putting it out there and that's what I'm trying to do, especially with Ether Techch. Here we go. You know, various types of capacitances that can happen inside. Lots and lots of little things you have to take into account and you actually have to overcome those in the real world. Actually, I think we are going to switch because we're getting short on time. Um, let's go to one of the last questions here. hard work day in day out, right? Overcoming the technical challenges like you said, you built an amazing diverse team of people who can all contribute different things to it, you know, and it is not an instant moonshot. You're starting out and working incrementally. It's doing a little bit better on every test than doing the one before. And over time, that builds, right? Yes. And that's that's realistic where we're going to be. I mean, hopefully uh a year from now, I'll be, you know, set up in a in a in a in my own little um building with my own team assembled around me and we'll be just working at this, you know, 24 hours a day. We're just never we're never going to go home. We're just going to we're just going to live at the building and Okay, so now I figured it out. So, basically, they're looking for funding. That's that's what I'm able to figure out here, right? They want funding to run more experiments. They basically were pumping this up to try to get investment funding, which is great, but if you're an investor, what's your return on this, you know? Um, I guess the answer would be after you've proven it's real, then you develop a prototype that you then sell to the the private military contractors for lots of money, you know, they probably bid it up and, you know, they then somebody buys it and then they do whatever they want with it, you know. So, you kind of have to think about like what's the this is the part where I come in with the business side of it is that I look at this and I go this is this is great, but how interested am I as an investor here? Like I don't want to just know we can produce thrust. I want them to produce something that produces the thrust like what is the what is the design? What is the the patent that you're making here related to this? And then how can I profit off that? How can I sell that to somebody? How can somebody utilize that and have it be economical? Q thruster is the same idea as the EM drive. They're all the same concept of pushing off of the environment. Um, but it's a matter of how you're pulling it off. And I just think just because of the MH370 videos, uh, you know what? We'll we'll go show that for just a second. Uh, the drone video is the one where I just I keep coming back to it. Like the drone video is the one, guys. This is this is the one that tells the story of the science. You know, you get to this part here and you look at this, you go, "Oh, why are we using plates? We want spheres and we want our sphere to be a plasma sphere. We don't want it to be a metal ball. And then that that's how you can learn about like you can connect what we've already learned to like what we're seeing in practice by in the black projects. Look at this. Look at this damn heat signature. Look at that heat signature. That beautiful heat signature. There's so much information right there. In my mind, that proves that this is a warp drive that's utilizing plasma and magnetic monopoles. Now, the part I'm still confused about is the shape of the heat signature and location of it. Like, is this self-contained within a bubble or is this just how far the energy levels like when you're creating your magnetic monopole that's just the natural non-radient barrier with the environment? I really can't tell actually. Like is there a physical shell around this or is there not? I don't know. My guess would be that you don't need one eventually, but I is this technology there not have a shell? I'm not sure. I mean, look at that. Look at this heat signature in front of the plane. This is the part where like when I look at a frame like this and the heat signature itself is a natural heat signature. It's not like it's all like a perfect U. You know, there's like a little bit of black in there. you can see, which is what you would expect for a device that's operating in the real environment. It's not going to be perfect every time. There's going to be little tiny discrepancies based on how fast it's spinning, the camera, all this stuff. So, that's why when I look at this, I go, "Holy [ __ ] that's that whatever we're looking at there is real science." So, magnetic monopoles would seem to describe it. Now, let's go to Charles Beer's video. So, that Andrew video was really good. I I liked it more than I even thought I would. Oh crap. Um, one sec, guys. Wait, maybe I have it queued up over here. Oh, here it is. Okay, so this is pretty good. Let's go. Think we're just going to start like five to seven minutes into this. for kids. Yeah. Yeah. I consulting. Okay. So, this is Charles Beller. So, this is the guy that's been going on Glenbeck or whatever talking about this EM drive. I don't know what they're calling it. I don't know if they have a name for it, but he works for Exodus Propul Prop Propulsion is the name of the company. Um, I'll try to paste this into the stream afterwards as well. I do not want to waste time doing something that is not real, that is not worth it. Uh, Drew is the same way. So we have to be 100% sure that what we're seeing is correct there and real and reproducible and leads to the next experiment. If A is correct and B is correct, then C has to be correct. So we've been following this progression uh since 2018 now, building upon it, improving upon it, and uh trying to increase the force density with every test article that we Oh, he goes by Drew. Okay. Yeah. Oh, that's Drew. Okay. Andrew, duh. So Drew. Yeah, Drew. I like him a lot. Drew is a smart guy. He I can tell within a few seconds of watching that earlier today that Andrew Drew, the guy we were just watching, he knows definitely that this stuff is real and he understands the scientific concepts behind it. My only complaint with him would be that he's doing it the hard way, right? You're going through 30,000 iterations and you're trying to make it better every time. Like you need to be a little bit more focused in terms of like this is the design that's going to work. And what you're going to hear Charles say here is that he's going to say they're using DC DC input as opposed to AC input. Because I talked to Salvatar Payas, I would be looking for extremely high frequency alternating current inputs potentially also having some type of alternating magnetic field as well. And that's mostly from looking at Ning Le's research. But I don't know, maybe those are the answers, maybe they're not. That's what I would be doing personally if I was doing this type of research. We make um but because we're self-unded, we can only travel in one straight line. We can't attack all of the different possible um concepts that can arise. The science is very general. It's not very specific. It tells you in general what you should build, what you should do, but it's not very specific. So, it's open to a lot of interpretation. I want to get into this term asymmetrical electrical pressure, which comes out of older work in this field, right? There was TT Brown's research into asymmetrical capacitors um effects that were observed in antique fitso condensers which ended up later being called something. So you notice asymmetric asymmetrical capacitors comes up a lot as well and that's what TT Browns was is that you have a different charge on the one plate than the other and then you get this thrust. So you shouldn't be just trying to reproduce that. You should be trying to say what's the scientific concept behind that that makes it work and how can I push it to its extreme. So, when I used to play Magic cards, uh, what you learn about when you play Magic cards is creating a cool deck is one thing, but now you've got a vanilla deck that performs in the middle 50%. You know, and if you take a bell curve, you're performing in the middle. You want the deck that's going to break the system, breaks the game, makes you win 99% of your games. Generally, you're only going to win 50% of your games against somebody who's got a deck or is as skilled as you are. When you break make that 99 percentile deck, now you're making a deck that just crushes people that people are not prepared for. It's winning on a a game on a um dimension that your opponent's not ready to win on. And a lot of time you find these decks do really crazy weird stuff like they're beating you based on just lands or they don't have any creatures in their deck. Uh well, that's not even that weird of a one, but weird stuff like that. or they're trying to beat you by milling all your cards out because they find little combinations that basically allow for just broken things to happen. That's what we want to do with this drive as well. Right now, you've got the basic 50% drive. Okay, cool. I want something that's going to break that system and allow us to bend spaceime to create a wormhole. That's what I'm interested in. The gravity capacitor. So, what makes your device unique? So what where we're different here is um I think the fact that I would say that we would understand it and that's important. It's not just an experimental test and then where do we go for the next experiment? We actually have physics to say this is why it works and then if the physics is correct that should explain the next experiment and then that should explain the next experiment and that should explain the next experiment. I also want to point out what chaotic good setup here um rotating mirror setup with amplifying the energy. So, Kaic Good is basing her opinion. I know what she read. She read the I think it was the warp drive paper or was it the wormhole paper? One of the two mentions the idea of a rotate mirror. But if she read the other paragraph right after that, it mentions that you might not even need a rotate mirror if you use some type of gas as your medium. And why is that important? Because now you're talking about making a plasma. So, we might argue that you don't need a rotating mirror inside of the orbs. As long as the orbs have the right type of medium, type of fluid or plasma inside of there. Maybe it's helium, maybe it's not, you know, maybe it's helium 3, maybe it's sodium, maybe it's some other gas, maybe it's some combination of gases that produce those effects. I think in fusion, cold fusion devices, they use like dutyium or something like that. Correct me if I'm wrong, chat, but that's what I would be thinking about is how do we make a sphere that maybe has a magnetic field going through it and a very high charge and what gas do we put in there and then we shine our laser beams towards the middle or whatever it is and we create our little singularity to produce our magnetic monopole. And now our magnetic monopole is basically acting like a little black hole inside of our contained uh orb. Anyway, so 1,500 experiments later, that's where we're at. You know, we followed the same path until the we final experiment that proves it wrong. So in so in doing so, we've uncovered a lot of u nuances from experiments. One of the nuances is the fact that there are two types of charge, free charge and bound charge. That's known very well from electrostatics. So um but we can take advantage of that because they have different Yeah. The problem with talking to these guys like Ryan B mentions here is like there's no way to talk to these people without coming across as completely condescending and egotistical and narcissistic. There's just no way to do it. Like I understand why the debunkers think that I'm some kind of narcissist. I'm like the really not in any respect whatsoever. Um but I can understand why they think that because from their perspective I'm somebody that's just sending [ __ ] to people and none of the stuff I'm talking about is possible. Right? Right? So, from that perspective, you must think in order to reconcile your beliefs that I'm a narcissist. But if it turns out that this science is real, and I just know it's real, it's like it's like claiming the person that says 2 plus 2= 4 is a narcissist. Why are they smiling at me when I say 2+ 2 equals 5? And I keep telling them that 2 plus 2 can't equal four. It's not possible. You know, it's like, of course, I'm gonna appear like I'm narcissistic. What do you want me to do? You want me to pat you on the head and tell you, "Yeah, just keep trying. 2 plus two equals five." Right. It's not a matter of It's just a matter of it's going to come off as condescending if I'm like, "Yeah, EM drive is really awesome. Uh, but what do you think about just bending spaceime entirely with it?" And maybe it'll work out. Maybe they'd be like, "Oh, yeah, okay. Well, you know, that's something that we could work on, but we're not really there. We're still on the small scales. We're still in the baby steps of this, blah, blah, blah." Um, and so that's why the conversation is a little bit difficult because I want to be like, "Okay, let's talk about the plasma orbs, you know, like let's talk about magnetic monopoles. Like, have you looked into any of that?" And they'll be like, "No, we haven't. We're not at that level yet." Blah, blah, blah. So, it's like saying 1* 1 equals two. Don't worry, I'm not one of those guys. I I believe that math actually works, but I do believe that geometry is what we need to understand better. personally uh contributions to the force if you will. One of the things that makes this device unique is that the propulsive force begins once the device is charged, right? So that that makes this device really unique and there have been I guess concerns about this possibility of like violation of conservation of energy, right? Because if you're putting energy in to charge it and then it generates force till it discharges. Do you see any potential conflicts there? Oh, absolutely. I mean, as a scientist, it's very mindboggling, right? because we can't explain how when we turn the power off it's still there. Now the physics will tell us that free and bound charge bound charge does not need a power supply. Static electricity does not need a power supply. So once you apply the charge to a geometry as long as the fields exist the force should exist. But that doesn't rest easy with myself or other physicists of how come the force continues to act. So that's really interesting guys. You know what this reminds me of? Uh do I have the electrostatic force in space? Let me see. I don't know where I have the video. Maybe I just reposted it. But the force where if you take the needle the the knitting needle and you rub it with a cloth in outer space and then you have the water drops, you'll see the water drops float around the knitting needle. It's like where's that force coming from? Why is it manipulating around the need knitting needle? That's what he's talking about here is you apply the charge, you create the electrostatic force and then it's producing a field and now you have propulsion. But how can that be? Are we how are we getting that force? Are we violating the laws of conservation of of momentum of of energy? What's going on there? So the electrostatic force and this is why Charles Buer is an expert on electrostatics. And then the question is why is that working? And now this is the part where I'm trying to read Charles Beer. I'm trying to use my poker skills right now. I'm trying to get a read on him like does he know that we can go way beyond this and that's why he's confident. Is he just being koi right here being like it's hard to reconcile this or is he really not realize the implications? like maybe he's not looking far enough ahead to realize he's talking about free energy machines and he's talking about if you scale this up now you've got a wormhole creator. You know, it's the same technology and science and he's looking at the most the tiniest scales and you pump it up and now you know what is this capable? What is this really capable of? Because now you're doing work without putting additional energy in problem. So in terms of thrust right now I believe this is generating again one earth gravity but that comes out to being I believe millisetons or micronuttons in terms of overall thrust. What do you think the upper limit is for this? And and again I believe Drew had mentioned he hopes to be able to generate 1 kilogram of thrust in the future. Um do you think that so I like that because this is why you watch this that other one first with Drew because now he's referencing the stuff that Drew was talking about and Charles is more of like the front facing guy. like how is Charles interpreting this? We're learning about like what he how he sees the the technology working could generate that in the next year or so and do you think it can go beyond that? Right now we don't have an upper limit at least in terms of the physics of what the force could be. Um since we don't quite understand the microscopic foundations of it, we don't know what the upper limit would be. So the math does not tell us. So again, I can't get a read on him because my answer would be, well, where's the energy coming from? Right? That's the question here. When he's talking about this and he gets asked, if how are we violating the laws of energy, the first question is where's the energy coming from? Because if the energy is coming from an unlimited source, the space, time, ether all around us, then what's the answer for what how much you can charge this up? You can charge this up infinitely until something until you break reality. That's how much you can charge it up. You can just keep pumping it up, right? Keep amplifying. This is why Salvatore PZ talks about being able to destroy a planettoid if you amplify the energy. And why he puts in a big disclaimer about how we got to make sure we don't destroy the world, you know, because that's what we're talking about here. The same concept is if we add a thrust to my body in outer space, even if it's tiny, it's going to start ramping up. So, same deals. You you charge this system up and then now it hits this equilibrium point. It's self-sufficient, self- sustaining. Maybe you can amplify it more. Maybe take three orbs and you jam them together to amplify it even more. And now you create a system where you can amplify the energy in any space-time locality that you want with your floaty orbs. United States government. So Drew rejects a kilogram. Maybe we could get a kilogram. Not sure. we have to go uh to very very different routes experimentally to prove that. So we'll need new Oh, I do want to answer this question. So why do these guys who make free energy devices not just mine Bitcoin? Who says that they're not free energy device doesn't mean infinite energy immediately? There's a time factor as well. This is one thing that you learn when you play a lot of video games online, multiplayer games. People are always cheating. They're always cheating. always looking for an edge. Not even just in video games, in every game. Every game and everything ever. Everyone's always looking for an edge. So to answer your question, some people are doing it and that impacts the price of it. And those people are exploiting the system and they don't want to tell anybody else about it. Now the other side of it is that not all of these people know about how to mine Bitcoin and they don't even know that you can do that. And at the end of the day, that energy is still worth something. So, there was just a video about how somebody went to a hotel and used their energy to mine Bitcoin. Kind of a smart gimmick, you know, because the hotel doesn't realize it, but the hotel starts to realize you're pulling a huge amount of energy, they're going to cut you off because you could sell that energy back and presumably the price of the energy is uh got some relationship to the the price of the Bitcoin. So, those are your answers. Um, but it's not a bad idea. Like honestly now that you guys say that like with the the Ethertech over unity device, one of the issues is what happens if you use up in any overnity device you don't want to shortcircuit it. So you have a capacitor that you charge up. So whatever energy you're producing, if you're not using all that energy, you got to put it somewhere. So you put it into your battery and then you release that energy from the battery. But it's really an issue of you want to be using all the energy that you're producing from the ether. You want there to be an equilibrium where you're using all the energy perfectly. And so what do you do with the excess energy? If if your energy production is way up here from your overun device, but you're only using this much energy. Now you have this much difference here where you've got to figure out where you're going to put that energy. Well, here's the answer. You mine Bitcoin with it. You use all this energy from here to here and you mine Bitcoin with it. You use all that energy till you get to a point you use the Bitcoin mining to equilibrium to equilibri equalize to create an equilibrium between how much you're producing and how much you're using. That's how I would look at it. Yeah, it's funny you mentioned the data center thing. There was a couple people related to data centers that emailed me. I think that data centers are definitely an area I want to get involved in because it's the same concept where it's like you tell me how much you're using and we'll make a device that will produce an an equal amount so that we can just negate it out entirely. Then the question becomes what do you do when the the energy company comes knocking asking why how you're producing all this energy without taking anything from the grid. Uh magic. We're just doing magic out here. We got some we got some solar panels on the roof. They're uh yeah, you know, we'll see. Okay, here we go. Let's finish this up. Technologies, new materials, new test setups. There's a lot that could be done. We've just basically scratched the surface as to uh how we can take advantage of this force. Um there's a lot more to go. This is chapter two of a book. There's chapter zero, chapter one. We're basically chapter two of probably a 10 chapter book. That's what I believe. So, there's a lot uh that can be done. There's a lot of different paths stewing in our background. Self fakes. I love this idea. Sell fake solar panels. Just like make it look real legit, but it's just like painted on a wooden board. Like, yeah, it's it's our solar panels. Just don't let them get too close. Like, you just like you you look at it from a distance. Not even plugged in. Like, I love this idea. Actually, we might do that self. With every overunion device, you get two fake solar panels. Solar panels are so useless. We're faking them just to make people think that we're using solar. We're trying to encompass, but it'll take time and funding to do that. But there's no, you know, there's no theoretical reason why we can't generate more thrust than we are, at least based on the equations. Well, and speaking of, you know, this long-term path to testing, refinement, and evolving this design. So, Drew again when I visited yesterday showed me a stack of thousands, I think he said something like 3,000 tests that he has run in the past. I think his model has been to test and then change one variable and test again and again an enormous stack of binders. You know, he's very good about storing his data. I think that that shows the kind of work that you guys are doing on this, right? So, you're putting a lot of time and energy into doing this right, refining the model and basically improving efficiency over time, right? That's true. I mean, we've made roughly 1500,600 test articles, but they've been tested multiple times. So, that means it could be 3,000 tests. I'm not exactly sure. It's hard to count them. Yeah. But he does have the notebooks, he has the data, he has the images, the videos um saved. He he is documenting what he's doing since 2020 very very well. Prior to that uh many of the notebooks are here where we didn't uh have the high vacuum chamber. These this lab was done uh in air air tests and all the test articles we test. So 3,000 experiments is what they've done already guys. This is a bit part of it. Yeah. It's too much work proving it. Not enough work building working products. Exactly. Little Huda Kunka is becoming one of my favorite uh viewers and uh I recognized him on on Twitter as well because I think he understands the and this is what I wanted you guys to get out of this. Look how much work it is to prove it. People are like just prove it. What you want me to become Charles Beller and try to fund 3,000 experiments to get one experiment that shows results then to have every [ __ ] debunker on the planet come out there and say I couldn't reproduce it cuz I made a little at home setup and it didn't work for me. And then everybody goes, "Oh, it's not possible." Like, this is how stupid we are generally, right? Like these guys are doing methodical experiments. So for people to come and start pooping on your results after you've just done 3,000 experiments, you've compensated for everything. You have this elaborate setup for compensating for the temperature as well. And then for somebody to come in and say, "I tried to recreate it and failed on my first time." It's like, yeah, they failed like 2,900 times. It was the hundred times that worked that matter, not the 2009 100 times that you fail. It's crazy. And that's why I don't want to do any of that crap. That's why when I decided who I wanted to work with on Over Unity, the number one factor was, oh, have you already produced it? If you've already got it figured out and you've already produced it, that's the best scenario. I don't want to be one of those people who's like asking for money for investing to prove that the science and technology works. I don't give a [ __ ] about any of that. I already know it's out there and people know how to do it. I just want somebody who's got the working product. That's the best case scenario. So, if you're interested in open sourcing it or whatever [ __ ] people think you're going to do it, you can go be Charles Buer and you can go open source it and try to prove to the world that it works and spend I would guess are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars, probably closer to millions of dollars in terms of investment just to prove to academia who doesn't give a [ __ ] that it works. Maybe you'll end up winning a Nobel Prize is best case scenario. Great. Nah, I just want to produce it, sell it, make some money off of it, and then it gets out to the world. That way, people will just accept it. That's the difference between my mentality and the mentality of the people who are doing experiments like this. And for the record, 100% support what Charles Beer is doing because when he's able to prove this to academics and you've got the Sabine Hassenfelders of the world, and I'm not comparing her to like the Neil Degrass Tyson. I think she's much better than they are. But you still got your Neil Degrasse Tyson's. Accept the fact that this is a real effect that's really out there. Then I'm going to jump in and go, "Yep, and this is nothing. This is nothing. We've already ramped it up. We ramped it up decades ago and now we've already got Warp Drive and we've already got Wormos, right?" I guess why it's just it's boring. It's the same reason why I don't care about UFOs and aliens anymore. UFOs and aliens are cool, but you know what's cooler than UFOs and aliens? Uh [ __ ] free energy. having a device that just produces energy like significant amounts like coefficient of performance greater than two maybe greater than three maybe higher than that. Uh warp drives where I can just be in my little bubble and just [Music] or just straight up Stargates. I want to go through a Stargate. I want to go through a Stargate. I'm not really answering a lot of questions regarding the overunityity stuff, but I'm already been setting up meetings uh with people who sent inquiries. So, if you happen to be somebody who is interested in the overunityity thing, uh you've got to answer the questions about what your budget is, what your power consumption is, uh you know, what you're trying to use it for, and then we'll set up a meeting with you. We'll discuss it and we'll figure something out from there in terms of proof of concept and showing you how it works. We're not doing it all publicly anymore. It's just it's not worth it. Same reason why other people haven't done it is like you don't want a million idiot trolls like telling you that it doesn't work. I already know it works. I don't give a [ __ ] about how many people think it doesn't work. So, you know, we'll just sell it to the people that wants to see it work and wants to use it. Solved. That's why that's how you skip all this [ __ ] that like Charles Buer is like painstakingly going through. Like bless this man. Bless this man for going through all these motions. Especially if he knows that it's real and he's still doing all of this to try to prove it to the world. Give him the Nobel Prize. He deserves it. I mean, there's already people that have already figured this [ __ ] out decades ago, but give the man the Nobel Prize for the effort, you know? At least somebody's doing it. I'm not going to do that. I no interest in doing that whatsoever. So there you go. SNET basically a year and a half from the wall behind you. So the documentation has been uh has been outstanding so far. Um but it'll take years to go through that data to be fair because it's not something that uh either one of us really has the time to do. All we can do is look at the test results and then determine quantitatively qualitatively how well that it performed. Um but it will take some time to go through that data. So in terms of this model and in terms of I guess extending our knowledge of physics, does this point the way towards even more powerful I guess approaches to propulsion in the future? And the reason I ask that is what you've discovered really seems to um overturn this idea that propulolis propulsion is impossible, right? And so once that door is This is a good question. Honestly, Tim Ventur's question is really good as well is like doesn't this just open the door? Like Tim Ventura gets it. So, I've also been judging Tim Ventura on some of these discussions. I want He's got I think he's got a really good poker face. Tim Ventura does. He doesn't really reveal how much he knows in his interactions. I can't get a beat on him if he really knows all this is real or if he's still skeptical and up in the air for me. You guys know how my opinion I I know this is all real. That's my opinion easy enough. Uh we we probably will have Tim Ventur on Hard Truths for whoever just asked that as well. That's probably going to happen. I've just been I've just been waiting for the right time. Um, I definitely want to do a deal with data centers in general. I think the data center idea is perfect because it gets around the issue of creating the equal uh the uh equality between the inputs and the outputs honestly. But for the most part, guys, like I'm not going to answer too much stuff on the over unity stuff. Um, other than I'll say that the first wave is in progress. We're vetting people, etc., etc. And, you know, it's it's pretty exciting. I'm not going to lie. It's exciting, but it's not the only uh iron I've got in the in the forge either. So, um it it's pretty amazing. Like everything about MH370 investigation has changed my life. And I'm very happy that I learned that all this is possible and that I've made connections that I'd never have before. At the same time, like the downside of that, and I knew this would always come, is that the more I learn, then the less I can speak publicly about some of the stuff because some stuff is proprietary. Some stuff is just for privacy reasons. Like I don't want to talk about my clients and the people that we're talking about. Um, and then for strategy purposes as well, like I don't want to reveal too much information to other people, to our adversaries, you know, all that stuff. Um, and then to the lesser extent, there's the NDA issue. like I haven't signed anything with the government or anything like that, but even from a proprietary perspective, like you know, if there's a way to figure out how something works, like I, you know, other people are going to figure it out. You want to be the person who's going to be able to bring it to market before everybody else. So, I'm uh somebody who's feels like I want to give to the community, but I don't want to just give away all the the secrets for how everything works. Like, you guys can figure it out yourselves, make your own businesses, you know, do that kind of stuff, take the risk. So, uh, altruistic is the word I was looking for there because part of it's like, "Oh, well, don't you want to be the guy that reveals it to the world?" I wish. If that's how the world worked, I'd love to do it. The way the world works is if I start blabbing about how everything works, A, I'm probably going to get a bullet. Uh, I might get Amy Escridged or uh, you know, Ning Lead or whatever, all these Boeing whistleblowered. A B, every media is going to say that what I'm saying is [ __ ] and that I made it up. you're gonna have every debunker in the world saying it can't possibly work. And then we go back to square one again where nobody knows anything and I'm dead. So you got to be like a little bit more forward thinking in terms of some of this stuff, guys. And that's the reason why it's never gotten out as well because because of all those things I just mentioned. I mean, we just read through the Wikipedia that basically debunked this. So if you're somebody who thinks this is debunked, well, I don't know. This that's the problem, I guess. Like how many other ideas might come out of it? Oh, I think a lot. I think we're creating a force from essentially nothing is very profound because you have to ask the question if you're creating a force from we believe the vacuum can you not create energy from the vacuum they're commensurate oh okay now we know right he just gave it away he knows guys right he knows if you can create force from the vacuum can you create energy from the vacuum what is energy from the vacuum guys over unity free energy so there you go um I might have to clip this 15 minutes. He had another one earlier too. Uh so uh it's not a matter of bringing it to market, you know, that's the thing. You try to bring it to market in a public sense and you're going to get sabotaged. It's not never going to happen. If you bring it to market by just quietly selling it to people behind the scenes, then eventually enough people have it and then you know hard harder to deny that it doesn't work, right? People can be like, "It doesn't work." And you're like, "Well, like a hundred people have them and they're working." So, and then what do they do? What what's their game plan after that? Their game plan after that is they say, "Oh, they find the one person out of a hundred who's dissatisfied." And they go to that person. And that person goes, "It didn't work the way that I wanted it to work." And then all the headlines read, "It doesn't work. It doesn't really work." The 99 people got scammed. The one person was the person, right? You guys got to be You got to be thinking more holistically. The world is not as simple as people believe that it is. There's people out there that just believe that if you reveal this information, you become a famous billionaire tomorrow. If that was true, I would already be famous for MH370. Everybody would have realized those videos are real. They would have tracked down Edward Cyn. The media would have tracked down Edward C. Lynn. They would have beenounding the ARO to get an answer for if those videos are authentic videos. None of that ever happened. The first step didn't even happen. The media never even looked at the videos. Everything about the videos was verifiable and nobody looked at it. So, you're telling me if I just come out and open source this and say how this all works that all of a sudden everyone's going to just what? Suck my dick? No, that's never going to happen. Nobody's going to accept it. Nobody's going to listen. And then you're going to have people attacking it and it's going to get litigated in social media. So now you understand the thought process for why I'm not bringing it to market, why I'm not going on CNN, why I haven't been making any more challenges or declarations to anybody. Right? It's not that simple. Either you believe and you know it works or you don't. Doesn't matter. it what is nice about it it can I think give you a little bit of insight into the structure of the vacuum and I think scientists beyond what I've done will try to explore that a little bit further um there's a lot of unknowns about the energy of the vacuum so he just talks about going on two components to explore should they be willing to he talks about manipulating the energy of the vacuum think about that guys what is manipulating the energy of the vacuum you manipulate the energy of the vacuum state now you're creating a pressure differential Is that basically the same as creating a negative energy pressure which is creating repulsive gravity? Now maybe you can even polarize your situation. So you know you abuse the laws of thermodynamics. If let's say I have two halves of space. I've got this half and I've got this half. If I shrink this half, what's going to happen? This half is going to come to fill it in. If I shrink this half, what's going to happen? Then this half is going to come to fill it in. What happens if I expand this half? If I expand this half, then this half is going to come fill it in. If I go back to this now, I expand this half, then this half's going to fill it in. So now you can realize there's four different ways to manipulate it. You can polarize your situation one way or the other depending on if you want this side to expand or contract relative to this side. And you can flip it back and forth. You can have it go either way that you want as well. So, it's pretty interesting to think about like how you can manipulate spaceime to produce different forces of what we would refer to as gravity. But, um, in theory, you can manipulate to then turn and move in any direction you want at any point in time you want. You can have the inertia go any direction. You can spin on a dime. All you have to have is some kind of, let's say, induced pulse laser effect that shoots that and creates that space in front of you or however it's doing it. The orbs the orbs every time the orbs of the forces that we're making right now like Drew will tell you we've been focused mostly on DC. There's no reason not to go AC or so this is the last part I think I want to listen to. He says there's they're focusing on DC. There's no reason to go to AC. High frequency AC or there's no reason not to go to AC. Let me switch back a few seconds. Right now, like Drew will tell you, we've been focused mostly on DC. There's no reason not to go AC or high frequency AC or or other types of alternating current. Okay. Um, so like I said, high frequency AC. It feels like that was a subtle nod to Salvatore Pay. High frequency alternating current. That's that's the one I'm most interested in. Now, I don't know exactly what the best one is. Maybe there's other stuff we don't even understand, but high frequency alternating current is what I gleaned from Salvatore PI is we're just scratching the surface of what we can do, what we can take advantage of. And um so to answer your question, yeah, the future is wide open. I don't know what the bounds are. We do know that we can stack these devices to have the forces add up. Um we do know that we can run them in parallel. We know that we can we can run them over and over again. have on and off switches if you want them to to have on and off switches or we can stack that. Sorry, I had the volume at half. I was wondering why that was a problem. The volume was stuck at half. That's totally my bad, guys. So, hopefully the mix isn't as bad as it was before. Charge in there and just leave it. So, you can adjust your volumes here now. Sorry. I'm so sorry, guys. I can't believe I had it at half in there and then keeps adding more and more stacks to it. All of those things give you, you know, give you ideas of what you'd like to focus on and what you'd like to increase the thrust in. How you'd want to do that. Yeah. uh uh one of the things that I understand is that you can approach this from kind of a semiconductor manufacturing process also right using vapor deposition for these layered metamaterials and that by applying the the charge the voltage in a certain way you can actually as you mentioned create stacks of these create grids and and approach this from kind of a mass production way right I think that would be a long-term goal I think that's one thing we'd like to do because we've learned unlike Thomas Brown and and the other others before me um voltage is not the critical dial That was very interesting what he just said there about how you massroduce it and semiconductors. Very interesting guys. Do you don't think it's interesting that all of a sudden Tim Ventura mentioned semiconductors and manipulating semiconductors. What what time was that? 17 minutes into this. So I think he basically just told how to build them. I mean not specifically but like theoretically like how would you build this and how do you how do you manufacture this into something that's useful that like you know the defense contractors can use that makes these devices move. It's electric field and all that means is that you can have a very strong electric field in a very small volume with a very small voltage get the same electric field even orders of magnitude that tal Brown did. So you don't need the the large structures to create the large forces. So that gives you the idea that wow we can stack these things. We can microscopically make them. They can be vapor deposited. They can be thin films. Whatever field of research, microscopically, we can make them microscopic, chemically vapor deposition, physical vapor deposition. However you want to make them um that will be beneficial. Vapor deposition. That now that's really interesting. Is he talking about plasma right there? When he talks about deposition, I think he's talking about the medium, the material that you use. So instead of using the plate, you would just use some type of hot plasma. To me, like I said before, that that's how I would do it. I would be using plasma. I would just be recreating what I saw in the MH370 videos. And uh so I I don't see the upper limit there. You know, it'll be based on breakdown of materials, breakdown strength. So no no upper limit. He doesn't he doesn't even see the upper limit because it's like it's going to be based on whatever those materials are. So if the answer is using some sort of super hot um fusion through like cold fusion through low energy nuclear reactions it's going to depend on the material materials. How much fuel can you hold in a very small volume? Those are the kind of limits more material limits not physics limits more materials limits. Yeah. Um, since we're always generating new materials all the time, why not, you know, increase increase the voltage, increase the voltage a little bit, increase the field a lot. So, it's exciting to think about what the possibilities are. Well, and yeah, the reason I asked about that manufacturing process also is um I'm familiar with system on a chip manufacturing for computer chips, right? And um I'm not necessarily sure if you could fit everything onto a chip, right? especially in terms of high voltage and things like that. But there is this exciting idea of being able to massproduce something and just insert it into satellites for orbital adjustments or something like that. I mean even something that simple could be transformative. Oh absolutely. I I completely agree and you know should we get funding someday to try that? It would be it' be fun thing to try. Um there's no reason not to try. So two aspects feels like Charles Buer knows more than he's saying publicly and secondly you mentioned him talking about if we get funding for that like he's experimentally trying to prove this stuff which is noble but he's not really talking about commercializing it. He's just he's talking he wants to win a Nobel Prize, which maybe he's gonna win one. Uh but he's not talking about building stuff and selling it to people, you know, and but maybe if he is able to prove that this works and then he can patent some version of it that works, then he can sell that patent. Yeah. So that would be a nice long-term goal. Nice little solid state. I do kind of wonder if he's controlled cuz like this is so rudimentary compared to what the military already has. It feels like he's being allowed to disclose this tiny aspect of it. And yes, it's it's still huge because once you open this Pandora's box, everything's coming with. But you know, this is nothing compared to what the military has. Military probably had this 25 30 years ago, right? Maybe even longer. Device, turn it on, it gives you thrust and turn it off. In terms of physics models, you're using I mean standard quantum mechanics for this, right? But do you think that this may offer support for things like this polarized vacuum model or anything like that? Really our only contribution to the quantum mechanical portion of it is the experimental one. So we know that the forces that we should get classically we know that we're not seeing. Okay. So that means we're off by a factor. What factor are we off by? Well, it turns out we're off by a factor of alpha squared. That is not at all surprising. Alpha is a coupling between fields and charge. Alpha squared is a quantum mechanical. Alpha the fine structure constant is a quantum mechanical constant. Shows up everywhere. So that is not surprising. So what we know about quantum mechanics is that physically to see the object move we have to pay the quantum mechanical price of alpha. That coupling between fields and charge and it's less for the balance charges than it is for the free charges. That is our definition of alpha. Every field um that has or discovers an alpha comes up with a new definition. So you know alpha is the definition. It has many definitions but it's the ratio of the electrostatic charge energy divided by the energy of a photon of the same wavelength if you're looking at the pure physics energy. But there are many other definitions of alpha and they pop up everywhere. So our definition of alpha would be the ratio of the force of the strength from E field of of the free charges divided by the ratio of the strength of the energy of the bound charges over 137. That's what we see experimentally. It's pretty cool. But beyond that, the microscopic really is one out of 137. That's interesting. That's the ratio that they find. That sounds like that's engineerable. Oh, interesting. I did not realize that. One out of 137 level of what's happening because that's the real connection between our force and quantum mechanics. We haven't really done that. So are free free charges would be could we say that that is electrons then and then bound charges would be ions inside of the dialectric. They could also be electrons, right? You can trap electrons into your hair or balloons or you know most charges are probably going to be dominated by electrons. Most because electrons are easy. They're lightweight. They they can move around. They can transfer easy. But ions can too. But whatever is bound is not able to be mobile. So you can easily have electrons that are trapped too. just like is like ions can be mobile. So it's not a distinction between electrons and ions but it is a distinction between bound and free and that's what's interesting. So the bound charges a lot more energy has been put in there to shove those particles those charges into a dialectric you know to begin with much less energy than it would have taken to move electrons around in a metal and this will work. So you create a bound charge that can't move around, right? You create a bound charge. Maybe you bind your charge that's so powerful that it actually produces a singularity in cold fusion. I don't know. And then you start extracting the free electrons from the environment. Better much better in vacuum chamber testing also. Right. Well, the benefit of going to vacuum is that um whenever you're trying to encompass very high electric fields, you're going to hit the breakdown of the gas. Oh, but if you don't have a gas, then the limiting factor is not gas breakdown. It's what we call field emission if you get high enough vacuum. So that's the benefit. We can get two orders of magnitude higher electric field if we just do it in very high, you know, high vacuum. That's why we do the test in high vacuum. Otherwise, we're very limited to what voltages we can apply in air. So test article that works well in vacuum will not work in air most likely, unless we do an outstanding job of coating it in dilectric, a very thick dilectric. That increases the weight significantly. Okay. Okay. Well, I think that's that's enough nerd talk for tonight chat. Uh, so that was really interesting. So, I think that we started with Wikipedia, which is Debb. And Debunker Heaven says, you know, they didn't prove it to our satisfaction. and these other people tried to do it and they they didn't produce it successfully or they blame it on the temperature which the temperature argument I think is the most offensive because when you listen to Drew he's done 3,000 experiments and there's a part in that clip that I didn't play where he talks about how they like wait 12 hours for the chamber to get completely dried out of any type of excess moisture or uh humidity that might be in there. And so it's like when you're going to that length and you've done that many experiments like you can tell if your results are related to some temperature variation, you know, you're account you're already accounting for that. Um when I listen to Charles Buer and I listen to Andrew talk about Drew talk about the guy whose boots on the ground. These people are only doing it because there's something there. There's something there. And the beauty about the EM drive is if there's something there, then it's we're opening Pandora's box up. It doesn't even matter if it's almost negligible as long as it's measurable. If it's measurable at all, you've proven that the ether exists. You've proven the energyy's out there and you've proven it's possible to break the law of conservation of energy. And we're not really breaking it. We're bending it because we're opening our system up. You always see when we look at Wikipedia, it's all about closed systems. Well, we don't need a closed system. We open our system up the same way we open our windmill or our surfboard or our um sailboat to the wind. We open our system up to the quantum fluctuations in the environment. We use that as our medium. If we use that as our mechanism, then now we don't need anything else. And then the last thing I'll say again is that there's this repeat idea of well, you never really have a perfectly efficient system. So you're going to have some efficiency level. So because you're going to lose some charge to the environment, you want to have some amount of input. And for this then you want to have like an overunity motor that's producing excess output that you can then use to feed in. And your overunity motor is just the only difference is your overunity motor is taking that thrust and it's turning into actual usable energy and it's feeding that energy back into its own system. So pretty wild fun guys. Yeah. And the the trick here too is that we're manipulating the medium. Inertia, gravity, we're manipulating the medium itself. And how are we manipulating the medium? With extremely high voltages. So extremely high voltages. That's one of the things he mentioned several times. Both of them mentioned is you watch the step-wise production as you increase the voltage. And then in my opinion, you manipulate certain frequencies related to alternating current. And it's like it's like creating a tuning fork or getting to the point where like if I scream, I'm I'm using energy to scream and my glass my wine glass isn't going to break. But if I hit the wine glass at the right resonance, cause the right resonance to occur, all of a sudden that that wine glass, the medium is going to snap and then all of a sudden the wine glass shatters if you hit the right pitch, if you hit the right frequency. Um, that's how I look at it with respect to this. And if you think about it like that, then I think you're going to be able to produce over unity free energy. I also think that you're going to be able to produce EM drive. I think you're going to be able to produce wormholes and warp drives. All of the above, guys. All of the above. So that's the mix. I don't care about what the sacred geometry is that makes it happen. But it also wouldn't surprise me if there is sacred geometry involved like the one divided by 137. You find out there are ratios because it's all geometric and the right ratios of this to that are what's going to give you the allow you to break the system. So when I talked about the magic cards where it's like you have your deck that's 50%. We want to hit we want to get the deck that's the 99th percentile that breaks the system. How do you do that? You find those resonant areas of the frequencies and you manipulate those. You abuse those. Those are the breaking of the system. Like when Sheila was showing the three-dimensional aspects of the vibrations, when she got to the coherent shapes, when they're not coherent, you see the stuff vibrating, shaking around, right? It's not it's not breaking yet. When you get to the coherent shapes where all of a sudden it stands still and doesn't move anymore. Now you've hit your singularity where you you've got your deck now. That's a 99% winner. That's how you should look at it in my opinion, guys. So, I hope you guys enjoyed the EM drive. EM drive is the same as the resonant cavity drive. It's the same as the Q thruster and the Q drive. And it's also the same. Actually, I think that's it. But they're all the same concept. And all these concepts basically open the door up to all the other technology we've been talking about. That's why I wanted to chat with you guys tonight about it. Uh, I appreciate it, guys. Ashton Forbes here. I'm going to go get some ice cream, guys. You guys have a good night. Peace. Uh, this one. Infrared eyes scanning the black, tracking the heat, never turning back. And roll 22, a coverted gaze. And roll 33 in the cosmic maze. and rolls in the mix. Secrets untold. Silent watchers, brave and bold. In the shadows they silently glide, protecting our interest far and wide as spears. Sentinel of the night, watching over with infrared sight, alerting us to threats of guiding our defenses like a guiding star. In the silence of space, they keep their post. Shields unseen yet feared the most. With precision and speed, they warn of danger, keeping us safe from the missile's anger. As Beer, Sentinel of the night, watching over with infrared sight, alerting us to threats afar, guiding our defenses like a guiding star and rolls in the mix. Secrets untold, silent watchers, brave and bold. In the shadows they silently glide, protecting our infants far and wide and fierce. Sentinel of the night, watching over with infrared sight, alerting us to threats a far, guiding our defenses like a guiding star. The spears, Sentinel of the Night, watching over with infrared sight, alerting us to threats afar, guiding our defenses