Forbidden Nuclear Technology Hard Truths /w Salvatore Pais & Dave Rossi

Video Transcript

# Forbidden Nuclear Technology Hard Truths /w Salvatore Pais & Dave Rossi Hello everybody and welcome to another episode of the hard truths podcast. Guys, today's episode is with Salvatore Py, US Navy Engineer and Dave Rossi, who is a defense contractor engineer himself as well. Sal's having some technical difficulties right at the moment. Uh so we're going to just get started with Dave and I right off the bat. Dave, welcome to the live stream. How are you doing today, brother? >> Good. Thank you so much for having me. I appreciate it and I've been watching your stuff and it's uh always a pleasure to to be back on. I know it's been I think about a year at this point. So, it's it's about time to come back. So, thank you for having me. >> People keep saying you got to have Dave back on. We got to chat. Especially because, man, you've had some crazy interviews. So, right before we jump into that, I can see S down in the in the bottom. He's got some technical difficulties with his camera, guys. I apologize. Uh he's going to try to get it figured out. Um but if we can't, then we may cut it short and we may reschedule the S portion. But I've got a lot of great questions for Dave. Um, starting right off the bat with what I really wanted to ask you about is Eric Davis. Like you >> and nobody can get an interview with Eric Davis except for the the infamous salad interview now, which is one of my favorites where they like ambushed him like Jesse Michael's crew or something ambushed him and did an interview with him with a salad. Like how is it that you're able to get these interviews with Eric Davis? Do you have like a personal relationship with him? >> Um, I will say yeah, we're we're friends. Yeah. Uh, person on a personal level. Um, I again out of respect for for his privacy and whatnot, um, I I promise that with further questions, I won't be uh, you know, playing footsy, so to speak. But yeah, no, he's a he's I can tell you, and I'll come full circle with this answer. He is certainly without question, one of the smartest people I've ever met in my life. Um, the guy is literally, as you've seen from my interviews, right, the guy's literally like a library. You can ask him something no matter the time of day and and he'll pluck it out and he'll tell you. Um, personally, yeah. No, we're we're we're personal friends. Um, and he's, uh, I consider him in certain aspects or regards, you know, like, uh, much like S, like a, you know, mentor. I look up to a lot of Eric's papers and work and and whatnot. Um, I guess we've just had a bit more of a personal relationship where, you know, when I've asked him sometimes, would you want to come on the show? He he says yes and he's happy to do it. And, uh, to be fair, there were other times, you know, when I asked and and he was busy and so on and so we had to wait. But yeah, no, that's um um don't I'm reading between the lines. I believe me, you and your audience, I know you guys are getting that and I and yes, I will say he's a he's a personal friend. Um uh very very uh very nice guy. He's always been very nice to me and everything. And uh I've um I am always blown away by his uh by his physics work just like uh just like S. [clears throat] >> Um so let me ask so so he's your mentor. Is that is that true? Uh I I don't want to go around and you know boastfully say oh this person's my mentor this or that or whatever. Um he's someone that I would say I sure I look up to I go to for you know uh advice in in scientific realms and whatnot. And you know I've presented some things to him that are considered you know sort of on the out there of of physics. And I will tell you that one of the things I really appreciate about him is that he doesn't dismiss any concepts or any proposals off offhand. um he's always very much investigating into what is actually being proposed and he really does take the time to listen to uh to the technological possibilities of what you're trying to present. Um so I I will say that yeah he's he's very attentive in that in that regard. I remember he did a radio interview I think about six or seven years ago where uh the interviewer had said you know what's it like working in fringe physics and he said well it's not really fringe physics we don't like to call it that it's more just outside of the box physics and so that's that that's what I would say and you you could say yeah I look uh definitely look up to him in that regard >> so and I want to talk about the outside the box thing in a second but before we do that I hope this isn't too personal is that I think I don't remember who it is but somebody said that Eric Davis isn't capable of lying and I will say From my own impression, watching interviews, he seems very forthcoming with information, but at the same time, he's kind of guarded. Like I think he even implied that he was trained by the CIA to avoid questions or he said something along those lines in your interview. So where's your do you think that he is lying to protect national security with respect to like technology and advancements? I mean, specifically, I'm talking about his wormhole teleportation physics science because there's a big disconnect in my mind between him bragging to uh I think it was George Knap or something like or on Coast to Coast or whatever, bragging about General Lonnie holding up his teleportation physics study going, "This is the type of research I want done in my Air Force research labs, right?" I'm going and then but then you ask him like, "Oh, well, does anybody have this?" And he's like, "Nope. Nobody has this, nobody's had. It's like how do I connect? >> How do you how do you reconcile? Sure. And believe me, my mind has gone to the notion that of course are there facilities out there in which are not connected with the air force or are connected to the air force or the military in non nonofficial capacities per se or an indirect direct I call direct indirect ways that may in fact be working on that. I I think it's it's very possible. I mean I don't rule it out. Now the in terms of the the progress that's been made probably pro possibly far more than than we may think. Um in terms of in terms of that but uh I guess you could say officially I mean for sure he was definitely uh uh as he said trained uh I believe I don't want to speak for him but uh by CIA in certain aspects and areas and do I think that uh certain things have to be uh have to be watched carefully for the protection of national security? Yes. Um, do I think that um, how can I put it? Um, it's it's not it's it's it's like it's like a it's not a it's not a binary one or zero type answer. There are things that are very uh fringe so to speak that that he will speak on and see possibilities in. Um but then if taken to a certain next level uh sometimes again there's a no comment response or there is a uh you know nothing nothing's there response and sometimes you have to wonder maybe if that is indicative of something else. Um, yeah. >> So, here's another side question related to that is he brought up the peds, presidential emergency action documents, which I had never heard of before, and he brought them up in the context of like this is where they're hiding the UFO stuff. What do you think is in those peeds that would be connected to UFOs that is at that level where the president and who do you think >> or let me just this is the other part I'll say is that so first of all what do you think the peeds are like if you had to list an example of what a pied might be for people it could even be a hypothetical one and then do you think people like Hal Pudof for example might be somebody who the CIA calls upon to determine when they enact those peds. Could that be a thing? >> Sure. So, one thing I'll say is that I'm just to clarify for your audience, of course, I'm not wellversed in the whole notion of, you know, government uh government acronyms and documents and what certain documents may entail over others or whatnot. I'm as you know, more of the engineering, you know, interest in science and all that approach. But um I would say that if again my opinion those pets probably are comprised of some type of cohesive overall breakdown of what a presidential um executive authority enacted many decades ago and what has since led to that. Or maybe simply just the description of what that executive action entails is enough to just that the by definition that that entire description on those pages would be enough to force a um classification to the point where it would be above top secret. I would imagine that in my mind I would envision the peds as being some type of uh certainly a quote unquote juicy document if you will but something that gives a breakdown uh an a matterof fact established breakdown of why the executive order was signed what the executive order entails and dare I say go as far as you know you know potential crash retrieval um potential uh you know recovery of certain materials and and and whatnot and I think that ultimately that would be it would not be something that an engineer could look at and say, "Okay, I could make something from the what I see in these documents." I I think it would be more of a an overall breakdown for someone like the president who is not um scientifically uh inept enough to understand equations if he looked at them and so on and so forth, nor is that his job. So, I think we'd be looking at more of a um an overarching breakdown of a set of events that the executive orders um authorized. Uh, and that would of course still be damning if ever leaked or released, obviously. >> So, you know what I think about? I mean, you're implying that there could be crash retrieval type stuff. And honestly, I don't know what's in the pets. I think nobody really does know what's in them. Uh, I I think we do know that they have a branch that's like an administrative branches parallel to the presidency that has some level of control over them. >> Um, >> oh, and I'm sorry. I'm sorry. You had asked if if people like Dr. Pudof and others would be part of that decision. Let me just say if I could parallel that. Um, you mentioned a parallel branch which I appreciate you saying very much because I think we we have to reconcile the notion that a lot of these not just programs but a lot a lot of these um a lot of these actions and and uh movements that have been taken uh for better or worse and efforts that have been made often report to an unofficial body, if you will, that is purely based on uh credibility and trust and you could say handshake agreements in which nothing is ever put on paper. that does have an influential say in the parallel branch, which would be the official government, uh, if you will, because it's been speculated by others in the past and by others that have been inside some of these programs allegedly, that the these programs are and the people who over the groups that oversee these programs are a mixture of both quasi government and non-government entities, right? So I think that something like that would probably be in parallel with um a an official government uh uh structure. Now whether you want to call that a shadow government or what have you, that's that's up for debate and you know we can discuss that at a later time. But I think there would be parallel groups um unofficially having large influences in fact in areas, departments and compartments of government that they they would wield power that is um how can I put it uh stronger than the official government. So you mentioned that you you gave an example of like okay maybe there's crash retrieval stuff and there's a thing that says okay if the aliens crash and this is how we're going to capture it. I that seems more low like that doesn't seem like the kind of thing that would have to go to that high a level for me. When I think about it, you know what I think about is what would be the plan for when Russia shoots a hundred nukes at us and then how do we respond? We can't wait for congressional approval when you have nuclear winter about to happen. To me, the peds definitely have nuclear >> Oh, absolutely. >> responses in them, right? >> I think you're absolutely correct more so than myself. Absolutely. I think also the P's pro very likely entail breakthrough technologies that are considered so sensitive that uh as we saw with I forgive me I forgot his name Matthew Borland I think he said when he talked about the value of of these craft is not the structure of the craft itself or whatnot it's the power source and >> I think of course that's where um a lot of this lies right the and and we also have to consider multiple ways of building that power source. Yeah, I think that that's exactly what they're doing. I spoke to Dr. Greer a few weeks back, maybe about a month ago now. And I think that when I think Eric Davis implied that they were using the peds to cover up this advanced technology, this UFO technology, what have you, and that would make sense that they would add to it is like you come to you get some major breakthrough from reverse engineering or even just if it's doesn't even require reverse engineering is that you would add it to those P's and you would hide it at that level that that level of classification. that's kind of just above everything else. Um, >> right. And if I so if I could say very quickly, we also know that there are certain things within government that parallel with this unofficial set of entities or factions of groups in which certain information is deemed so classified that it doesn't even go through official classification processes because the the the the processes it would have to go through too many hands would be touching and seeing that information. So in some cases, sounds crazy, but in some cases it's a literal handshake, you know, wink and a nod old, you know, like in the the old days type kind of agreement. >> No, that makes sense. Although I do think a lot of it's classified. I mean, if you look at even nuclear codes and nuclear secrets, like it's all very it's all organized classified. That's how the government works in that respect. And then you just have to have a very high level of classification to even be able to see it on reports and things like that. >> Absolutely. Absolutely. I think that one thing that's concerned me that I've learned and I want to get your opinion on this um is that there feels like there's a little bit of like I mean this is going to be obvious but like a good old boy club or like a cult of actual secrecy around >> oh sure >> technology this let's call it UFO technology for now. >> Yeah. >> Um and that's the reason how it hasn't come out is that people are generally shunned if they did it. And my personal view is that it's it's connected to nuclear weapons. That's why I was kind of implying the peds and stuff. So I actually before we get into all that and the good old boys club thing, I I guess what I want to ask is one more question on on Eric Davis. Um and this is a a question that came from JK Philly fan, but I wanted to know too is that Eugene Potclav has >> been pretty popular for basically pushing this idea that we can get gravitational manipulation with spinning superconductors and we can produce thrust. um depending on the design and the engineering of it. >> Um I watched an interview with George uh Hathaway actually on Charles I think it was on Charles Chase's onlab videos >> right >> where they go deep into it and George Hathaway pretty much says like we tried to build it but like you know um Popcon didn't give us everything. He didn't tell us all of it, so we had to do our best to do it. And then we tried to do it and it didn't work. So, you know, we wanted it to work, but it didn't. And >> I got kind of sketchy vibes from listening to him >> where it's the same thing that people tell me about like the MH370 videos is people be like, I wanted it to be real, but you know what? It's just not. So, just stop talking about it. You know, and and when Eric Davis gets asked about it, which is he's he kind of poo poos it as well, like no, it didn't really work. It's not really legit. And I'm kind of like, huh, if you're the kind of person that believes in like, you know, wormhole physics, science, and and gravitational manipulation and waves, like you should be pretty much cheerleading that, I would think. So, like, what is your take on these guys? And like what's going on with it? Does the PCOV stuff work and they're just, you know, doing disinformation on it or does it really not work? And are those guys right? Did they have something wrong? Like, >> sure. Well, you you make an interesting point cuz one thing I wanted to point out before I answer your question as well is that I know from a podcast that was done or hosted by um I believe an miss Mrs. Anna Brady Estz of the >> Yes. of the National Science Foundation. I know that um uh Lou Desaro, a highly respected naval engineer was on that that podcast panel and he brought up Pod Kletnoff as well. And I find it interesting that no one on that panel objected. Now maybe it was out of respect because it was on a podcast but hard to say. Now I will tell you that I I know from my personal experience there were attempts at replicating the the potent experiment in which uh did not work by groups I know and others. However, I want to emphasize the notion of giving up too easily and and not trying to go down that path. I believe in my humble view I do believe that there was a there there to some extent whether it is with the setup that Pod Kleinoff had established or with other setups that for example were more pulsebased like Claude Poer's example of a super pulseed superconductors and so on. Um I will say though that it is and I really mean this in the sincerest way. There were attempts at replications and they were not successful because certain conditions were not met. Now I do believe in my humble view there are much better approaches to take than the podclenov spinning disc. But if those results were able to be replicated, they would certainly indicate that there is a there there and I can say for certain that in my humble view there is most certainly a connection with ro uh rotation uh torsion. Um there was something a long time ago I saw on the internet that the Soviets called gravitational rotation. They had deemed that, you know, Einstein's general relativity model was considered a static model at best and that u you know the ether or the quantum vacuum should be viewed more as a fluid-like substance and should be treated as a real physical um entity if you will. And so I think that Pod Kletnoff spurred a lot of uh he's his experiment or at least the claims of his experiment springboarded a lot of people like Ning Lee. And I I personally believe that Ning Lee had a significant amount of success, which is why her stuff went classified. Um, and that'll be that could be for a different conversation. But I think that Pod Kletenoff's uh initial experiments were conceptually appropriate to motivate people. But just because they didn't work in replication doesn't mean that people shouldn't be looking at torsion and superconductors in my opinion. Now, there have been rumors that some people have successfully replicated his results. Um, but I've yet to interact with any of those people on a direct level. >> You know what I always think about when I think about the spinning superconductor thing is I think about Eric Laith White and I think about >> the Veritassium recreation. Veritassium, very popular YouTuber. I think he's got like 20 million subscribers, does physics, >> and he did like the the fact check or the the mythbusters thing on it and basically took this spinning 40 lb weight, I think, on a at the end of a stick. A 40 lb weight at the end of a stick. So, you can't lift that up, right, with one hand unless you're like really well, you know, fit and you just spin it around and I don't know exactly the RPM, but all of a sudden now you can just lift it over your head with one hand. as long as you're like moving it in the direction of the motion of the spin, you can do it really easily. And I was thinking about that because I remember his answer is, well, yes, it's real, but it's just normal physics, right? It's just normal physics. And I always laugh at that because I go, yeah, everything is normal physics. So anti gravity manipulation is also normal physics, right? It's just like we, you know, it's all in the math that's already there. It's like there's just a little recipe missing. You know, this is like a little thing missing. And I would say if we add what like S his whole thing is charged matter, right? The movement of charged matter. >> Well, manipulation gravity. Go ahead. >> Well, I was going to say yes. As a matter of fact, Eric Laithweight, I think throughout the mid to late 70s and certainly throughout the 80s, he was going around giving speaking engagements in which he was emphasizing the notion of anomalous effects with rotating gyroscopes without question. Um, it's unfortunate that a lot of his work was suppressed. I think that that guy should have been put in way more uh many more you could say scientific halls of fame if you will. But I believe that without question there is something mysterious with regards to uh gyroscopic rotation. There have been um people in the past that have tried to conflate or uh deliberately uh confuse people. Although the people I'm referring to now have since passed away. They're they were trying to say, well, there was investigation into gyroscopic rotation, but that has nothing to do with anti-gravity. And I would uh very respectfully uh push back on that and say that the two are very much interconnected uh very much so, especially when you consider the notion that yes, it's it was a rudimentary experiment, but it was a proof of concept nonetheless. that when he spun that gyroscope around him, he was able to um [clears throat] he was in fact able to uh make the the gyroscope was much lighter. He was able to lift it above his head very easily. >> Yeah. So I I just I don't know. I think that's interesting. I think that the lesson that people need to learn is that there like a lot of physicists and scientists and engineers have been out there working on this stuff and they've been doing it since I mean even the 40s, 50s, 60s. And that's the main topic I wanted to get to tonight or today. So if just in case people are just tuning in right now, uh Salvador Pis is having technical difficulties with his audio and his video on both of his computers today. So I think he's trying to restart right now. If that doesn't work out, I'll reschedule with S and potentially bring Dave back to do some questions together. But um without him, I'm going to keep going and I want to talk about because I want to ask you the same questions I want to ask uh S about. I mean, I think that you guys have been watching some of my live streams, so you can kind of predict what some of these questions are going to be, but I want to ask them in a little bit more fun way. Uh, let's go back to UFOs. Um, in the UFO community, in the lore, there is this big connection between nuclear weapons and UFOs, right? >> There's this idea that uh I think it was um crap, his name's uh Bob Robert uh what's his last name? I forgetting it. Crap. I met him in person, too. But uh so like this idea that UFOs are turning off nukes. What do you think the connection is between UFOs and nukes? >> Sure. So um I'll get right into explaining and I this may [clears throat] take a few minutes to explain but I'll come full circle on it. We know that there's been discussion over the decades and again it's been considered fringe. Some will call it seinal depends on who you're asking. Uh with regards to um Oh yes even Robert I think Salas. Yes. Right. Right. And so I would say that when it comes to that aspect, it's interesting because in engineering we know that there are certain phenomena that exist where if you were to take the electric and magnetic fields and sum those fields to zero. Classically we're told that nothing occurs. But in cert when certain conditions are met under those uh uh parameters, you actually get this other type of force in which is um it they're like electromagnetic sound waves but they're not electromagnetic when you measure them. It's a little par it's a little uh counterintuitive. Now the reason I bring all of this up is because it's been proposed that th that leads to the generation of what's been called uh longitudinal scalar waves. And there have been some papers published that have shown uh proof of concept that you know these alleged scalar waves do actually have a physical force even though they can't be measured uh classically. It's possible that when nukes are released the nukes release a significant amount of longitudinal scalar waves that um for sure at this point we know about as humans but many decades ago uh you know World War II likely didn't or had vague um understanding of it. And it's possible that those waves interfere with other aspects of our uh reality that we've yet to technologically uncover. And it's possible that maybe some if there are nonhumans, it's possible that they are pretty ticked off with those with us using weapons that basically release certain type of wave functions and wave uh waves that we don't and fields that we we can't even pick up yet because to us it does these things don't exist because they can't be measured. Well, we're only as good as the measuring devices that we build. And so I think that there's a connection there that and I believe of course the radiation is terrible, too. And everything that we do know about the, you know, nuclear bombs and weapons is absolutely the the the power is terrifying. But I do think there are additional forces that are generated every time a bomb goes off. um more so with hydrogen thermonuclear bombs than anything else. That really upsets um potential nonhumans or maybe even humans in hiding that know about this type of this these type of energy fields uh that simply we haven't at the time decades ago were not measuring when we were when we tested the bombs. >> Yeah. You see that's the that's the I think the popular perspective. The power perspective is we're interfering with the aliens and their you know their mode of transportation could be one thing right if if and first of all let me just say are scalar waves gravitational waves are those synonymous >> you can you can say that there's a conf there's an overlap because you could say that these waves are um all all these longitudinal scalar waves vector and scalar potential waves they are resistant to um excuse me they have no resistance to inertia and if you were to amplify by those fields using resonance. You may realize that the the power coming from it is actually cold and not hot and then that overlaps into room temperature superc conductivity and so on and so forth. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Yeah. >> So my view is that I have a different perspective which that that's probably I think that's correct. I think there's just more than one reason. I'd love to hear what you think. >> If the aliens came down and were like, "Hey, chill out guys." like that would make sense is like, oh, the nukes are messing with spaceime the same way that the alien ships are flying around. >> But then I take that to the next level and I go, wait a minute, >> that means nukes are UFOs to some degree. They're using the same type of, you know, maybe it's different crude approximation. It's like, okay, we're figuring out transportation. We're starting with the horse and now we're moving on to our car. Now we're building a Ferrari, >> right? And that's like what we're doing with nukes, >> right? >> And before I let you opine on that, here's the thing that seems obvious to me now is of course nukes are manipulating spaceime. Like I don't know how this hasn't been more obvious in retrospect. If you ask Grock or if you ask the physicists, they'll say no, it's not it's not getting to the energy levels that are high enough. Like we have so many orders of magnitude higher >> that they have to get. >> But if you look at the concept of a thermonuclear device, >> we are detonating a fusion implosion in our thermonuclear. You could say yes in the conventional a bomb which is a release of energy, >> right? >> You're never going to have significant space-time manipulation because your energy is always becoming more and more diffuse, >> right? So if your original thing wasn't manipulating spaceime, then converting it to energy also won't manipulate spaceime. >> But spacetime manipulation is all about energy density, right? It's all about energy density. So if I take, let's just say my phone right here, right? The amount of energy I've got in this phone and I want to convert this to energy from mass. Well, if I want to increase the energy density, then I compress it down, right? The more I compress this down, the more the energy density goes up. Like that's right. So >> then when I think about, okay, well, what were they trying to do with the hydrogen bomb? Is like, oh, they were trying to create an implosive type of fusion bomb detonation. So now I'm going, okay, well now this is all that we need is instead of doing the A bomb, we just needed the H bomb and we need the compression. And if you start with enough or you compress your your atoms down enough, then theoretically you should be able to get to whatever energy densities you need, presumably get to a black hole. >> That >> I would say that I agree with most of it. The one thing that I would humbly Oh my gosh, there he is. Yes. >> Oh, brother Ashton br brother Ashton had the right solution. Sorry, man. I from now and I'll do exactly what you say. >> I'm so happy you're here, S. Thank you so much, >> bro. Bro, uh your discussion is extremely interesting. Just give me 10 minutes. Uh even at the end of the podcast, I got to give you this is no joke, a formula for time for time travel and something that has to do with breaking the Schwinger limit. You see breaking the Schwinger limit is not only important for thermonuclear devices of fourth generation as brother Ashton has been incred your your research into this area and your knowledge by the way the ripple effect you have to bring Dr. Joseph Farrell on. >> He has some exquisite ideas regarding the ripple effect and exactly what was done. >> Well, I got blocked by uh by Dark Journalist, so we might be stepping towards that direction. We'll see. But so, let's jump in. Let's I'm glad you jumped in. Let me have Dave answer what I just mentioned, and I wanted to get your opinion on this, too, S. So, just as a quick recap, essentially what I'm saying is that people that work on the fusion bomb would have figured out space-time manipulation because spacetime manipulation is all about energy density and they're working in the highest energy physics that exists and they are compressing, you know, their fusion payload, imploding their fusion payload to increase energy density. Do you first of all, so Dave, do you agree with that assessment or what is your thoughts on that? >> Well, I'm going to say first off, it's a blast. I'm so happy that S was able to make it, brother. Thank you for coming on. And I do want to say now that he now that he is here, I do want to say that what I'm about to answer with does not reflect anything that the cell does or does not reflect anything of any government. It's my personal opinion. When you asked about the nuclear fusion aspect with regards to amplifying the density, I would agree with you. However, I would add one thing to what you said, which is that in my humble opinion, there needs to be an aspect of that process in which there is a reversal of the entropy in which in in which that system behaves within. And then when that pinching effect occurs, you then may get very cold nuclear radiation instead of hot. And then you with with that bal that offset of cold and hot in a vortex-like manner, then maybe you can you can break that limit. So yes, I I'll leave it there. >> I'll take it one step further. Brother Ash, sorry to interrupt your train of thought. I know you're thinking some genial thoughts, but this is important. Breaking the Schwinger limit does something something astonishing. It destroys the arrow of time. And that's how time manipulation, especially reverse temporal excursion, can take place. I will I will try to convince you brother Ash because I know you do not believe in travel to the past but under this when you break the Schwinger limit brother everything goes because you destroy the arrow of time number one. Number two remember Stephen Hawking he takes in his chronology uh protection conjecture he allows for the hour of time not to be disturbed. That's why those things are once you break the Schwinger limit, forget about it. Anything goes. >> Travel to the past is feasible. But you must first break the Schwinger limit. Give me 10 minutes at the end of this podcast. Whenever you have time, I will give you the mathematical formalism of time travel to the past. A time machine, gentlemen. A time machine to the past. And by the way, >> [ __ ] causality. Excuse my language, but this idea of cause and effect has always bothered me. This [ __ ] grandfather paradox. Ah, [ __ ] your grandfather. No, it's not. You know what? Anything goes the moment you break the arrow of time, brother. >> So, you think you're creating new universes then? I mean, that's the only interpretation, right? Or do you have another interpretation? Many >> univer you could argue superimposed timelines within it's a it's it gets comp. I I would say in my humble opinion that um if you look for example at the the the notion of if you look if you read very very carefully what Elia Priosin had written which was that when you have entropy in a system as it fills up if you can in an engineering way which this has been shown if you can find a way to prevent the entropy within that system from growing what happens is it's been observed that there's actually more organization in the system the lower the entropy is um And I would say that would speak to the the rever the the the breaking of the time arrow. And also I would mention as well that if you look specifically at the um oh gez I sorry I just got a a brain fart. But the uh oh oh yes the grandfather paradox. There are a couple professors in the past 20 years that I believe and I I would agree with them seem to have solved the issue of that paradox which is that you could go back in time to certain particular points and then you can super what you do in that previous event will superimpose over the the the present event and so on and so forth. But anyways, um, >> so I think what you're saying there is more of the like whatever you did already h always happened like that, you know, so you could go back and because there's two ways you could do it, right? Is that one you can go back in time and you create a new timeline. Therefore, we don't have to worry about how you messed with the first timeline or have you. The other way, which is spoiler alert, the show's been out there long enough, but the show Dark, right? the show Dark as a German show. They have this closed loop time process where you can go back in time and in fact they now this is really getting spoilery. Um you can create your own universe right you can create your own self-contained universe loop as long and and I think even John Kramer talks about this is like time travels allowed so as long as the loops are closed. So >> right closed loop tempor um temporal manipulation right I I would say personally Yeah, John Kramer is a genius, brother. John Kramer is a genius. The transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics will one day not only prove extremely viable, but remember he used he really uses bow in mechanics. He truly is a great student of Bone. Bow would be incredibly proud of this man. I would love to meet him. We should all try to meet him one day. >> Arinhoff Arinhoff agreed too. Aaronhoff recently did an interview with um what's his face? Kurt Jungle and said straight up he thinks that like time is moving in two directions and then it's meeting. I'm going well that's the you know transactional interpretation right there. >> Well, think of the think of the um the one electron theory with Fineman and the the notion of of fractals, right? If you can maybe it's possible you can make a little universe because it's a fractal of a larger one. Just a thought >> and that speaks to what I think you've said and Dr. Hal Pudof has said about if you go inside of a UFO could be the different different size on the inside than it appears to be on the outside, right? Is that that would be kind of an idea of how that would work. So just to give people an example of how a closed time loop might work. Closed time loop would be a situation where like I give myself the Nobel I give myself a pri award-winning book, right? That makes me famous. I go I'm in the future. I go give younger Ashton an award-winning book or future Ashton comes back and gives younger Ashton the MH370 videos, right? And then I get older and who gave Ashton the younger Ashton the videos? I did. So I have to invent time travel, go back in time and hand myself the other book. And as long as I do that, well then the question is who who wrote the book? Who made the videos? Nobody did. Nobody get made them. But that's a closed time loop and that works as long as the loop just keeps continuing like that. So I hope that's not the case. But the reason why that scares me a little bit is that any form of that time travel being real would absolutely justify. >> He [snorts] who controls time controls everything else. >> It's possible. It's like the Schroinger's cat where you gave yourself the award but you also didn't at the same time. >> Yeah. Exactly. Yeah. or like I I wrote the book but who wrote the book right that I gave back to I never wrote it so who gave me that book like >> and if I can mention to what brother Sal said um the like the ruling of time I I'm paraphrasing here but the very famous quote that Oenheimer liked to quote which was I am death the destroyer of worlds I've come across some research recently that suggests the original translation was actually I am time the destroyer of worlds >> oh my god oh my god there's a great American poet that says time is The fire in which we burn. >> I Yes. Yes. >> And this is an old hermetic idea. >> Yes. >> Very important. We do not brother Ash, brother Rossi, we do not understand the nature of time. I truly believe time is a type of energy field which prevents everything from happening at once. >> I agree. It is not your idea for example of a just a physical interpretation of the the ruling of clocks >> and since we are on the topic of time I know I said at the end of the pod but I'm I'm rolling here and the juices are flowing just let me give you this okay we already discussed part of it but I will recap >> for your followers and your subscribers both of yous you guys are great by the way and you Ash Both brother and Rossi and I agree. You are formidable. I would hate to piss you off ever. So disregard that ever from happening. That's a solemn promise. Brother, you're my brother. Just like brother Rossi, you you two are my blood brothers. Anybody that goes against the trio, the triarchy of greatness, [ __ ] them. Now, okay, let me go back to uh this is reverse temporal excursion. the idea of the possibility of going back in time and not just sending communication back. Now, we're talking about physically physically affecting the temporal structure. It it involves the breaking of the Schwinglement. Why? That is the only way you could circumvent the great Stephven Hawking. His chronology uh protection uh conjecture is based on the old time. The only thing that can destroy the arrow of time is the breaking of the Schwinger limit. >> This formalism is based on it. The whole idea starts simple. Again, Arkins razor simplicity and minimalism. Time is on the order of one divided by frequency. Again, the great Nicholas Tesla said everything is energy, frequency, and vibration. And by the way, brother Ash said this like two parts ago. I'm I'm I'm I'm I'm plagiarizing a bit. Sorry. No, I'm about to say time is on the order of one divided by frequency. It could be frequency of spin or frequency of of vibration against the mathematics is similar. With one my well I wouldn't say minor um um exception but remember in um in spin you you deal with a radius of spin and in vibration you deal with the amplitude of vibration. That's the main other than that the mathematics seems to be very similar between spin and vibration up to a point. Now the what is important is again time is on the order of one divided by frequency. Take the chain rule. You do the chain rule on this simple again you differentiate with respect let's call it a quantum of time for you know a ddt of some sort. that ddt is really a a delta toao if you like to think of it as a quantum of time. I I just like this idea that matter may be confined energy frozen within a quantum of time >> bound within fluctuating fields of energy. >> Maybe all of reality has is a room temperature superconducting state to some extent. >> Microscopic quantum coherence. It's a microscopic quantum phenomena. But again time [clears throat] is on the order of one divided by frequency. You take the chain rule of that based on a a DDT simple um this is simple differential calculus we're talking about first year of undergrad >> you take uh the chain rule based on that will give you a a constant most likely it's going to be dimensionous so let's call it tao subs times the delta of frequency divided by frequency squared. You see how it's dimensionally inconsistent. Again, time being on the order of one divided by frequency. Check the dimensions. Always check the dimensions. The first thing you do, that's the first thing they teach us in engineering. If a formula does not give correct units, no good. Start all over again. Now, so again, minus deltat t. So out of the channel comes this minus delta t. So the whole idea is that is it part of the mathematical formulism is it again the great draq believed in the beauty of true mathematics. He believed in mathematical physics that the ability of mathematics to influence physics but physics must also influence the mathematics. Hence the second step. So the first step you get from the chain rule of the simple um um time is on the order of one divided by frequency. From the chain rule you get minus delta t equals um a dimensionalist constant say to subs times delta frequency divided by frequency squared >> dimensionally consistent. Check it for yourselves also your followers. Now what I'm about to say about ta of s will require your followers to do a little mathematics and again use your ability to think engineering here. How would you make this happen? How would you break the shoing limit and affect this quote unquote miraculous phenomena of reverse temporal excursion? Again this minus delta t speaks to the reverse template excursion. This house of s is equal to 10 to the 25 times epsilon0 divided by sigma subs^ squar close parenthesis open parenthesis one ratio r subs divided by r sub omega. It's as simple as that, gentlemen. Now, your followers and your subscribers should look into what is this ratio. I'll leave it up to them. What is this ratio? Based on everything we've talked about and we've talked about about this uh time is on the order of one divided by frequency several occasions, but this is the equation. This is the mathematical formalism of reverse temporal excursion. Study this equation. It's simple. Extremely simple. Again, >> what's the implications of the equation? [clears throat] >> Say it one more time and then give us the >> either tell us what it means or give us the implication because it's too many numbers for me to do in my head >> again. Again I will I will recap the equation one more time and I will say it distinctly >> minus delta t >> change in time >> equals what >> equals this touse of s to s which is a dimensionist constant. Okay, constant >> times delta omega / omega squar close parenthesis change >> the star of s the star of s equals 10 to the 25 and I will tell you what the 10^ the 25 is we've discussed it already 10 the 25 times ah rather rosy epsilon0 divided by sigma subs 2 close parenthesis open parenthesis This is the ratio R sub S / R sub omega close parenthesis. Gentlemen, this is the mathematical formalism of reverse temporal excursion. We have a time machine to the past because the Schwinger limit by breaking the Schwinger limit the arrow of time is destroyed. Hence Steven Oring idea of the chronology protection conjecture no longer applies. Now 10^ the 25 represents jewles per meter cubed >> and hence it will give you an idea about one more thing I will say that epsilon zero you know it well Ashton >> Dave is like >> it's the electrical performity of free space that sigma subs is the surface charge density >> your followers and subscribers should figure out of what it's essential doc I bet you Dr. Barasi over there knows. All right. I bet you Dr. Forbes knows as well, dude. We're all doctors. That's it. I have the ability to do that. So, there you go. You all You're both PhDs. Oh [ __ ] Let me go back just one more. Sure. I'm here I'm here as an engineer of the United States Navy and I work for the United States Space Force as um as well. But these ideas, these these um wild ideas are my own and do not represent neither the opinions nor the statements of the United States Navy nor the United States Space Force. So hopefully they refer to that disclaimer. Okay, brother Ashen, you can ask anything you want. >> Well, now we've got everybody here. Now it's time. Is this uh a thermonuclear weapon that we are witnessing in this video? Since since this is your you're a free you're not you know you're here on your own accord giving your own personal opinions. Nobody here is giving any official opinions based on any militaries. But I've got to say I think this is a thermonuclear weapon. Although I think I would say it's a con unconventional fourth generation thermonuclear weapon. The reason why I say that is that plasma is technically not uh a fish detonator. It would be a non-fish detonator. I believe I've learned a lot about thermonuclear weapons, by the way. And we're looking at this triangle formation, which is consistent with pulse shaping, which is like wave shaping. You need all your waves to converge at the right pinnacle moment, at the right pinnacle location at the exact same time. And I can't stop thinking about it because one of the other things in thermonuclear weapons is uh computers. Computers. One of the first things I ever mentioned about these was like AI and like how we might these these orbs all this stuff might must have like super advanced computers going on as well. And turns out when we first developed computer was also based on nukes. Like I mean sure they probably had the idea of computers before that but that's what we were using them for in the early stages. And John Kramer John Kramer admitted that one of the things that they use quantum computers for is nuclear calculations. So let's start with uh let's start with S since Sal just jumped in. S what do you think man? [clears throat] Do you think that this is a thermonuclear weapon? You think that's a fourth generation thermuclear? I hope we also speak about directed electronic warfare devices which I believe China employed one right before presi met with President uh Trump and it's from one of the things President Trump actually said on Air Force One to the press that I deduced that when he said bad fuel issues exposed directly to more more electric engine technology which is used on modern jets. One of them was a jet fighter. fixed wing. The other one was a HILO. So, rotary. It's the perfect statement basically saying we have a directed electronic warfare device that can disable and basically destroy your both rotary and fixed wing aircraft. >> Hence, be careful with Taiwan dot dot dot. This was a message. I truly believe that. So, again, just like that was a directed electronic warfare device. I truly believe that. Remember, we're talking about China here. We're talking about the Misho satellite. We're talking about quantum communications. We're talking about the ability to have, as you well know, >> Dr. Ashton Forbes right there. You well know that they have quantum radar. You do you know that quantum radar is truly the brainchild of a great a great great mind Marco Lanzagorta of Naval Research Laboratory circa the year 2000 he came um up with this idea of quantum radar they thought of it like sci-fi they give him minimal money to play around with it meanwhile the Chinese took all the pamphlets translated it to Chinese and what in 20 years they have quantum radar so the ability to render all stealth aircraft that we know of obsolete. >> Yeah. The quantum radar thing is honestly mind-blowing to see that. Like they it had been talked about five or six years ago, I think, as China was going to work on it. And the new news recently was that now they're mass-producing it for all their fighter jets. >> That's unbelievable. >> And I mean, quantum radar, when you even look at it, says it uses EPR device. Literally says it uses an EPR device. Not only that, it's resistant to all manner of electromagnetic jamming. So why we would have to invent to take care of the EPR paradox and gentlemen little light bulbs are lighting all around. I hope our our best and brightest are are are working on this as I speak is a Q jammer, a quantum jammer, something that affects >> I've been wondering too >> cuz Okay, so you kind of danced around the question, but you did say that you think that it might be >> it's a directed it's a directed weapon, sir. Absolutely. I agree with you 100%. This is but I believe they took it a step further. It it I think that they used the ideas beyond behind the fourth generation thermonuclear device and coupled it with autonomous AI units room temperature superconductivity possibly the existence already of AGI. I don't know what else to call these. I mean maybe not AGI but something extremely close something that has the ability uh these let's call them AI agents for now possibly SAB AGI but they're definitely autonomous remember the last sequence when they compress the space-time continum at a quantum level energy density again speaking of energy density that 10 to the 25 is jewles per meter cub which is necessary is the energy density in order to bring break the swinger limit 10 to the 25 jew per meter cube. You understand what these three freaking orbs are able to deposit in that small area. What are these? Of course, they would have to be based on something thermonuclear in origin, but it's far above that. There is it's like a hybrid device. What? This could be hybrid technology, gentlemen. >> It makes you wonder because like I think they figured this out in the 60s. We signed the partial nuclear testban treaty in 1963 right after the Ripple project. Like it's like, oh, and John Knuckles brags about, yeah, we found how to make super high yield, super high gain, clean fusion bombs, but we never tested it. Never did it after the Ripple project at least. and now we're banning everybody else from doing it. And then it makes you wonder, okay, well that was 1963 and now what have we done for 60 years? If [clears throat] we basis if I could jump in quickly to add to what brother S said if we have for example we have a direct energy weapon here and in the example here's the plane for instance it's possible the technology they are using is set up such that again in between that the the uh em the emitter and the plane if you actually took electromagnetic measuring equipment you would not get any electric or magnetic current readings. However, what happens to the plane, the result of what occurs in the plane is electromagnetic. So the transfer of the energy is perhaps occurring at a different level or layer of reality, but the actual effect is still electromagnetic in the result of what happens to the plane. It's so again, this is what makes this so uh interesting but also dangerous because you can't detect classically any of the electromagnetic fields as the waves would be traveling. >> Yeah. And that's the big thing about these quantum devices, right, that use the air and hop bomb effect is there's no classic electromagnetic signal to detect. And the same reason why you can't jam the radar either is that there's nothing to get there. >> And if I could ask one more thing, I wanted to ask brother S. Um I'm sort of leading the witness here, brother, but do you think uh uh room temperature superconductivity is crucial to the uh different types of uh energies and uh you could say technologies you were discussing? Uh quite possibly, but I believe it it could be an effect thereof. There's something greater that generates. >> Got you. Got you. >> And I believe that brother Ash and you and I have all talked about this non-stop. Basically, you drive a nonequilibrium plasma, a nonlinear medium far from equilibrium while still while still inducing an um an energy flux within it, which means what? The engineering of the preosene effect. >> Can I say s I want to say something and I'm going to say just one sentence and then I'm going to stop. Uh um privately I've been looking at this the slooh rate in high voltage transients. >> Oh. Oh my god, Charles Proteius Steinman. Speaking of which, >> brother Ash, we got to talk about the plasma disruption fusion weapon that's really based on the plasma compression fusion device >> with a little added let's call it let's call it a Z pinch with a fusion twist. >> You get my favorite words and sorry very quickly s your work >> like a drink. We should have that drink. >> [laughter] >> S brother your your work s on high voltage transients is uh is incredible by the way thank you >> it's not mine brother I I I I'm trust me we're talking about Tesla combined with Gabriel Cron combined with Charles Brousia Steinmets >> right >> those last two are amazing gentlemen some of their works you cannot find >> I know >> and there's a book by Cron that is like $5,000 but you can find it. >> But if you wanted to buy it, you couldn't find it. So anyway, >> all these books like if you want some of these people's textbooks like you got a lot of them aren't available on the internet. >> Gabriel Cron's model for space for a space-time metric was very interesting. He viewed the space-time metric as one big um uh circuit, >> one big system. But that's why he did his rotating electrical machinery. Gentlemen, the Nobel Prize um 2025, the one uh um on microscopic quantum tunneling, >> they actually use they use um look at the circuit that actually use they use an inductor and a capacitor in series. >> Hence the vibration vibration on the order of 1 / LC. >> Oh, okay. didn't come back. >> I'm sorry, brother Sal. I thought I thought we weren't going to say. Okay. So, yeah. No, it's an LC circuit. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> I mean, if you just look at what a cubit is, I mean, a cubit is just Joseph and junction. It's just two Joseph's junctions forming a squid or a Joseph Junction forming a squid and then connected to a capacitor with a pulse current through it. Like, wait, what? That's all. When I figured that out, I'm like, wait, >> here's another simplicity and minimalism. All the greats have based their ideas on Akam's razor. >> If it's too complex, [ __ ] it. It won't work. [laughter] >> Right. I agree. If I can mention, Ashton, this is for you and your your audience. I want to mention I know brother Sal knows all about this, but if you took um for example, we know about Joseph's and junctions. You have a superconductor, an insulator, then another superconductor. Okay. There's another uh phenomena you can invoke that combines the squid phenomena with the aeronoff bomb effect. is simple. If you take a superconductor and then a normal piece of metal instead of an insulator and then another superconductor beside it, you actually get aeronof boom phase modulation effects just by pulsing the the junctions with voltage. >> Really? >> Yeah. Which has some very profound implications. Uh yeah, >> I don't want to go on too many side tangents here, but I have been talking with uh Randall Mills as well. I find brilliant light power to be really interesting. He's got this hydrino theory that's very analogist to negative energy and like lowering the hydrogen state below the ground state. >> Yeah. >> Um and he sent me a paper. He sent me like a bunch of papers after I was messaging him. >> Well, we know that there's been production of hydro anomalous hydrogen in low energy nuclear reaction experiments. They can't >> Yeah. He talked about low energy nuclear reaction and the common theme I've seen is vibration amongst all these things. And I mean S just mentioned the equations for time and and relationship to frequency as well. >> Not just not just vibration, brother Ash. This is key. Accelerated vibration. Again, you drive your system far from equilibrium. This is key. You drive a nonlinear system far from equilibrium >> with with with if I could say quickly with pulseed high voltage transients. Um, and yeah, I'll I'll I'll maybe I'll say something about that in a moment because I know it's on the internet already, but I I'm I'm just going to think about it for a second, but please carry on. >> Well, let me because I Let's go back. Let's Let's lower our our level down now. So, we're not super in the math physics for every because I know there's just normal people that are watching too. Let's go back talk about the orbs for a second because >> AI definitely in my opinion. I think the only question is are we dealing with a you know AGI or is it more of like what S was talking about intelligence right but like you you look at how these orbs are flying around >> and it's got to it's got to have complex math going on for 3D vectoring through the sky even if without that equations like the whole thing about reaching the shrer limit and the whole thing for why people don't think nukes can manipulate spacetime is that we need this huge amplification of energy. Massive amplification energy. The math must be perfect, right? Like we need the orbs to be perfectly equilateral when they're converging on each other. And it can't be off at all. If it's off by even a little bit, then the amplification doesn't work correctly, right? Like it needs to be and that's what all the physics and stuff around uh thermonuclear weapons is all about. It's all about figuring that out and using these super powerful computers. So to me it seems really obvious that we must have really advanced secret computers potentially to the idea even to the level of them being almost sentient. I even wonder and I don't really think this is a high probability but I think there's some chance that we have like a defense system that's like AI already. Well, if I could say quickly, you know, Ken Schers predicted in the early 2000s, he wrote a paper that he predicted in the future he foresees the ability to create an electrical circuit purely with uh a plasma Bose Einstein common and photons, nothing else and vibration. No, no, no actual solid wires or anything. >> Yep. And that's what I think that the orbs are doing. I think they're creating a quantum circuit. They're creating a circuit, but they're doing it, you know, with the plane. in the planes the null point. And I guess my bigger concern though is that I more and more I talk to you guys more and more I research I think I mean if that's a thermonuclear weapon like what's really even happening like what's even happening in a wormhole? Like are they are the people inside being annihilated? Are they being heated up or does like the space-time manipulation supersede the heating up of the plane? Could that come out in one piece? Is it coming out in multiple pieces? What do you guys talking about? I would have to perform the experiment in order to find out. Remember that experiment trumps theory every time. >> Well, you know what's scary about that is I sit there and I go, are they testing this out? Like, are they is this an experiment? Like, of course, you don't have to experiment on a civilian airliner, but like imagine it's collateral damage anyway. Imagine you're going to run an OP on a plane anyway, and you're going to hit it with a missile, and you're like, you know what? Let's just hit it with our super spaceime manipulation weapon and just see what happens. Like do you think there's a possibility that that could be in play? >> Brother, I have a feeling, sorry, brother Russ before it's a quick interruption, but it's something based on brother Ash said, I have a feeling these computers may be hybrid biological based, not just silica. We're not talking about silica sanctions here. We're talking about possibly neuron based sensions. >> You think it might be that advanced where there's already biological >> 100% 100%. This may not be silica based. It could be a hybrid thing. Yeah. Yeah. >> Well, you know what's weird about that is that some of those dirds or I think it's one of the dirds talks about maybe it's not the durs but somehow pud off relating how many like drones a human mind can control at once. >> Wow. >> That one really bugs me because it's the one paper that sticks out from the >> It was the the brain machine interface one. >> Yeah, the brain machine interface one. We know that Don Phillips, he was he he's passed away now, but he was Don Phillips was former uh Air Force, CIA, Lockheed, Skunkworks, the whole thing. He openly said in the in the early 2000s that I believe the company is now defunct, but it was called Light City International LLC. He claimed at least that at the time they were already working on Craft in the 80s with that they could control with their thoughts. That's what he claimed at least. Um >> yeah, it's hard for me to believe it, but I, you know, at the same time, why not? I mean, if I if I'm saying that an AI is controlling the orbs and getting them to spin perfectly like that, then what's the difference between that or like a a hybrid human biological or just even maybe human? You believe in remote viewing? You believe in psychic powers? I mean, >> right. No, to to your point, he he claimed it. I wasn't there. I can't say for sure, but he that's what he claimed at least. >> Yeah. So, Don So, I just want to recap a couple things that we've been talking about. One is Don Phillips. Uh there's a video out there where he's talking about seeing three like orbs spinning around and then coalesque. He says his words and then disappear >> at room late >> at Right Patterson >> or Right Pat. Sorry. >> Yeah. And then the other thing we were mentioning, S was mentioning a recent incident. I I posted about it on Twitter from a couple weeks ago where two U I think a helicopter and a plane both crashed within like 30 minutes of one another in the South China Sea and Trump the excuse that was given was bad fuel like what what does that mean? How many how many planes got the bad fuel? How did we figure out that it was bad fuel so quickly? >> Well, if I could say quickly, it's kind of like when the >> It was a show of strength, brother. It was a show of strength right before trade deal. It was a coupra by one of the greatest diplomats of all time. >> And if she of China >> Yes. Yes. And if I can mention as well, I'm not saying that I know this for a fact, but I speculate that when you look, for example, I think it was earlier this year or last year when the former uh supreme leader of Iran when his helicopter mysteriously crashed. >> Oh yeah. The timing of that seemed to me like someone was sending them a message, but again, I don't have the facts. So, just my speculation. >> Yeah. The hard part with this is like, and I'm I'm curious opinion, especially on this is like why I'm careful about sharing some of this stuff is like you when you know what's possible, it's pretty easy to be like, hm, that helicopter going down when there was two other helicopters and there was like no bad weather just randomly going down. That's pretty crazy. Or I mean, this incident too, I got to agree with S like a bad excuse >> and and for just planes like military planes just go down like >> but bad fuel speaks to more electric issues, >> right? >> Which is what they use in their engines, >> right? Right. >> I mean hard and I think this is where um >> and affect an an electric engine, a direct bike >> and this is where this is where we'd be careful, right? I put it in a satellite in a polar orbit and I have a constellation of these six of them to be more exact. But anyway, all right. >> And this is where we have to be careful though because I mean we talk about physics and science that is in my opinion highly credible and >> maybe sorry. Maybe the satellites are in a rosette geometry. Who knows? >> Oh. Oh my god. Yeah. >> But this is where Tom Bearden got in trouble, right? Because he starts talking about making earthquakes. Oops. Oops. >> [laughter] >> Well, we know there was a newspaper article uh back in the 1930s that I can pull up after the show if you want to show to your audience Ash if you want in which there was speculation in New York City that Tesla was Nicola Tesla at the time was making the ground shake in all over the all >> with a mechanical oscillator brother right >> which shows you which shows you we do not truly understand our physics he did it with a simple pressurdriven mechanical oscillator >> you know the article I'm talking about. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> And and he had to break the damn thing. He had to take a hammer to it because the building was about to go down anyway. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. No, I Yeah. >> Geopolitics then. Let's get controversial here. So, what are your guys takes on the Iran situation? And the reason I bring this up is we've been talking about nukes and we recently uh dro our B2 I think it was our B2s uh flew over there to Iran. They shot some bunker bombs that can shoot through the ground and and get to the bunkers underneath and destroyed their facilities. And at the same time, the MSAD executed nine or assassinated nine nuclear Iranian nuclear scientists while they were sleeping simultaneously using supposedly some type of experimental weapon. I mean, that's just reported. We don't know. And I'll tell you guys my view first because I've been getting a lot of very controversial over this is that if we're right, everything we're talking about, if we're right about like anything we're discussing here, then nobody else can have this. I mean, especially if we're talking about manipulating time. Especially if we're talking about manipulating time. I think those engineers, those nuclear engineers, they were probably talking about more stuff like what we're talking about in their free time. Not really about how to make an a bomb, which is like, you know, something from 1940s. So I think it becomes a very difficult question to ask is where's the line in national security and committing violent acts admittedly to protect potentially time manipulation technology, free energy technology at a bare minimum. >> Well, if I hydrogen bombs, right? >> Sure. If if I could say very quickly just forgive me, s I always want you to speak first. I apologize. >> No, go ahead. Sorry. No, please. >> Sorry. Just before it leaves my mind. I know that back in the I think it was the 1960s or 70s or maybe before there was the on something called the antbi situation where it was the first time Israel took their soldiers to go rescue some other Israelis and I think Netanyahu's brother was on there on that that mission or something like that. Long story short, um there was a news there's a newspaper article that I have that I can send to you as well, Ashton, in which there was an inventor out of Toronto, Canada, who was using mechanical oscillation to essentially what he didn't mean to do this, but he was uh experimenting with uh LC circuits and mechanical oscillations in his basement. And the article says that he was visited by some other scientists and the time on their watches was speeding up unexplainably. And so long story short, it was stated in that paper that the Israeli government had heard about this gentleman. They bought the device off of him and then allegedly they one of the Israeli officials had hinted that that rescue mission used that that device to some extent. And this is all on on paper from the uh Toronto Toronto Star newspaper that I can send you a copy of. And this was back in the 60s or 70s. So it makes you wonder if they had rudimentary understandings back then, what have they built it up to now? In terms of your question about grand geopolitics, I'm still observing from the perspective of a chess board and I don't even claim to know all the pieces on the board. So that's it's hard it's hard for me to say this or that. It's it's difficult. I see someone gets taken, you know, a leader gets taken out. I look, okay, what's the consequences? What's what caused that? What's next? What's you know it's not good that people die but you know it's I can't control it so that's the best way I view it. H what about you s >> I'm under the opices of the Hatch Act which makes it easy you know because I can always use that excuse but put it this way gentlemen when it comes to these kind of ideas in my opinion keep them to paper and pen don't attempt certain experiments because I'll tell you right off the bat if you can affect such physics to happen what is to say that detectors of such effects do not exist already. >> Well, if I can mention very quickly, I'm going to say something here that is very possibly controversial, but to it's the best I think it's the best place to say it, and I encourage uh your audience, Ashton, to research this. So, I'm speaking to Ashton's audience directly here. I'm I'm going to say a few names, and they're controversial names, but just stick with me here. There was a gentleman many years ago who came out as an alleged uh uh uh Area 51 worker uh who was a bio alleged microbiologist by the name of Dr. Dan Burrish. Now you can say what you want about he who he worked with these gray aliens. You could say true or false. Sure. However, he gave a presentation in 2007 or 8 at Caltech in which he was looking at um longitudinal biopotonics and different types of uh uh out you know breakthrough microbiological processes. Long story short, um he had discussed how essentially he was studying a certain type of material that was close to uh Area 51 where UFOs were seen hovering above the sand. And because the where he went to go pick up the rocks from uh it was not government property. So he was allowed to pick up the rocks. There was nothing secret there. He starts examining the rocks that the UFOs were seen to levitate on top of. And these rocks are just, you know, rocks from the from from Las Vegas. He starts examining them and in his Caltech presentation he shows the rocks are made of rosette structures at their core. Rosette geometries. this sort of, you know, quote unquote uh flower of life stuff that the the new age people talk about. Now, you might think this is crazy and sure, but bear with me here. If you go look at how Dr. Hal Pudof's vector and scalar potential communication patent, he mentions that in order for the emitters and the receivers >> to to work, the Joseph's injunctions must be put in a rosette structure. That's all I'm saying. You can think what you want about what Dan Burrish claimed about working with aliens or whatever, but if you look at his Caltech presentation, he emphasizes the recurrence of rosette structures in these strange rocks that UFOs used to levitate over. And then you connect that 15 years later with Dr. Pudof claiming that your junctions must be in a rosette structure. I don't know. Maybe there's something there, maybe there isn't. That's all I'm saying. >> Facetime structure, gentlemen. What speaks to it? The super force. If you can get the super force to act a dimensions higher than say the plank scale, can you imagine what you could do? >> I'm 100% that this is the force of unification. And I'm 100% sure that NHI uses the super force. They do not use our modalities of transport. They use the super force at But anyway, let's get back to the politics. And one thing I must say, >> we're going to >> when it comes to our enemies, if we can prevent the mass murder of our own people, I say anything goes, brother. Any >> That's a scary scary rationalization, though, because when you use that rationalization, you can basically justify anything. You can justify zapping a Boeing trip 7 out of the sky or even much worse than that. But that may just be the human that may just be the human condition. I mean that just may be the world that we live in. You know, whoever has the biggest stick is the one who gets to control the planet. I guess to your point, I want to really briefly mentioned you just mentioned the geometry being a significant factor in maybe this vortex motion that was also seen in Paul Tibido's um graphine. >> Yes. >> Capacitor chip. >> Yes. >> He made it was the same thing. He even specifically called out. He said if you don't make these paths opposite directions in this, you know, circle. >> Oh, when he was saying when the dodes were opposing. Yeah. >> Yeah. They have to be opposing. If they're if they're in the same direction, it just doesn't work at all. Which I just think is such a fundamental >> what's up with this direction thing cuz that speaks to the Hayasaka Takuchi experiment. remember >> December 89 PRL >> there's this experiment that basically they they they spun a gyroscope and brother Rossi will contain uh let me just introduce the idea Hayasakauchi experiment circa I think it was published in physical review letters December 89 >> they were able to get weight reduction in a spinning gyroscope they only took it to about 13,000 RPM if I remember. So we're not talking about 100,000 RPM, we're talking about 13,000 RPM. But um as brother Rossi will talk further, there were certain experiments that followed from prestigious universities, gentlemen. Some of them they published in PRL, some of them in nature there, I think but basically null and void. No, no such thing. Forget about it. But it's interesting because this weight reduction would only happen in one particular direction. Rather rasi to you. >> Okay. So two things I'd like to mention very quickly. I'd like to just very quickly uh finish on the Paul Tibido the opposing directions of the diodes. Again, that may very well speak to the concept of 0 point energy where you have the two fields collapsing to zero and some type of phenomena within the crystalline lattice of the graphine is interacting with the local environment perhaps or the quantum vacuum or the ether. Now, the Tak Hayasaka Takayuchi experiment, I'm I'm very glad s you brought that up. I didn't want to bring it up at first because I didn't know >> HT is that cool. There was this goes back to our quick chat uh Ashton about the gyroscopes. And so basically there was two researchers studied that in a in a vacuum chamber ultra high vacuum chamber they rotated a gyroscope on the I believe it was in the uh clockwise direction I believe and they found that under certain conditions and I want to mention they weren't just spinning a gyroscope they were doing a couple other things to the gyroscope. They were a couple other things that people It's electrically driven and speaking to that I must um >> once you're done >> let me come in. >> Sure. Sure. >> There's something that I found in that in an AIAA paper that I sent to brother Ash and you and I think brother Ash already has published it along with the room temperature superc conductivity. This one is just about the the hybrid aerospace undersea craft. I discussed the physics the possible physics behind this. Okay, it's all you sir. I'll shut up. And so they they spun Hayasak and Takayushi they spun this gyroscope clockwise in an ultra high vacuum chamber. They oscillated it. They applied certain electrical parameters to it and they found a weight reduction that they could not explain explain and they ruled out artifacts because they turned the whole thing upside down to make sure that it wasn't magnetic forces, Lorent forces, all of that was ruled out. Now mo about five or six other universities around the world one of them was even a Chinese Japanese or Chinese they tried to replicate it but they did not they all claimed null results meaning they found no results but here's what's interesting none of them followed the experiment to a tea some of them replicated the experiment in uh too low of a vacuum chamber others did not use electrodes others did not oscillate it there was very different things and then they all just said oh well it doesn't work that's not how it's supposed to work. You're supposed to follow the experiment to a tea and then try other things to maybe see if you can get other effects. And what were they noticing from all of this? The gyroscope would lose its own weight, >> the mass reduction. >> Yeah, I'm just reading about it right now. I just had AI pull it up, but yeah, they had uh there was weight reduction that was being >> and there was a certain there was a certain woman um out of Huntsville uh uh whose out of respect I will not name that I know you followed intensively who always cited that paper in her in her private notes as her um foundational uh Yes. Yes. >> I know about that. >> Let me come in quickly. the AIAA paper AIA 2017-5343. You already put it. It It's It's just called the hybrid aerospace undersea craft. It's based, you know, on the PUA. this craft using an inertial mass reduction device. But it describes it describes the Hayasaka Takuchi experiment and gives a possible explanation for what happened because s no okay everybody looked at the mathematical formalism and nobody questioned >> right >> the dimensionless constant that was there. >> Yep. That constant I show in the paper is the fauler fo it not fauler it's f o k it was sounds like it f o k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k k e r a dash plank. >> Yeah. >> Thermal equilibration rate >> for what? A cold plasma gentleman. A non-thermal plasma. >> Now imagine for example, Ashton, that you take that spinning gyroscope in that setup and you find a way to connect a room temperature superconductor to it. So all the electrical current is now cold >> and maybe certain phenomena will begin to occur at higher energy levels. >> Wow. Well, so I mean I've already been convinced for a while, but that probably helps other people. It sounds like I know what I'm going to be reviewing tomorrow on my live stream. So probably going to be that scientific paper actually. I didn't realize that Amy had been referencing it and that it was referenced in the um >> her father did her father did as well. Her father referenced it often as well. By the way, her father just happened to be colleagues with John Slow, the founder of Helium Fusion. Like, what the hell? How is that a thing? Like, I'm just rand How did I even find that? Oh, because I was looking up John Slow. So, I'm like, "Okay, who are the founders of this Helium Fusion that's doing a neutronic plasmoid fusion stuff?" And I start I look at his papers. I'm like, "Okay, what papers has he written?" He's like, "Top contributors Richard Escridge." Like, what? Yeah. Yeah. Turns out they were both working on plasma fusion propulsion in the 90s and 2000s with NASA. Like >> also there's something that a lot of people don't know about too which is there's something an old experiment done by Einstein called the Einstein deas effect which was they found mac what they claimed were macroscopic quantum phenomena when they took an iron core and they coiled it a certain way and they noticed when they charged the coils the core would begin to spin as well. And so I'm just looking quickly for a a reference here because there's a sentence from that paper I want to mention. Um so just give me a minute or two if if >> Yeah, sure. And there's um two other things and I want to talk about some other kind of things that are happening in the world. But um last political thing would be do you think that um that Israel helped us build this technology? I can tell you we shared it with America, but I can't share it with you. [laughter] Okay. The most advanced offensive weapons on the planet. Things that none of the superpowers have developed by Israel shared with America. >> So, uh, how do I make that go away? Um, oh, I think I one sec. Where? Oh, here it is. Um, so that >> there were three of them, Ashton. There were three of them. I will start with this. It's a little story, but trust me, the names will amaze you. >> There were three of them. >> D, in my opinion, direct line of secession going all the way to the Jason. >> Yeah, that was my next thing. >> Van Vanaba Bush, John Trump. >> Yep. >> Edward Teller, the lynchpin of everything and all. And Edward Teller was also the one in 19 >> and he was linked to what particular nation I'm ask anyway. >> Well, I can if I can >> we some of the greatest scientists of this earth are Jewish now. There are a lot of [ __ ] anti-sem Oh, I'm sorry. Did I say I'm sorry. You know, there are a lot of people out there that have a problem with that. They call it Jewish science blah blah blah. >> Tough man. Einstein, >> Powley, Ta, Fineman. Must I go on? Gross. Keep on naming the man. >> Just like in the in the Oen in the Oenheimer movie. In the Oppenheimer. >> Absolutely. Oppenheimer movie. Oppenheimer said that uh one of the reasons he felt they could get ahead was because when Einstein went to Hitler with the ideas of quantum experiments, Hitler dismissed it. >> That's crazy. That's called Jewish science. >> He called it Jewish Jewishience. He called it Jewish physics. Yeah. He said, "I don't want to be involved." >> And he took this uh this [ __ ] Nazi called Jordan something. Supposedly he won the Nobel Prize or something. But anyway, yeah, that's it's a old um Anyway. Yeah. So you guys think for sure then that I mean does that is that part of the reason why we have this relationship with Israel is because they help develop super weapons for us that can manipulate space time. >> I think >> some of the greatest brains in physics happen to be Jewish. >> I think >> I don't know if you want to make the correlation. >> I think it's a multitude of reasons they're so intertwinely connected cultural uh so on and so forth. But I think yeah there's a there's a deep connection there for sure. I did find what I wanted to say very quickly if I can. This is from uh let me read here. So I'll send you this paper Ashton if you would like. Uh this is as a matter of fact on the NASA website from uh Richard Eskridge. And I'm just going to read one sentence here. He referred to he referenced the Einstein de experiment. But he said um uh one second. If the mass of the nucleus nucleionic diameter and spin of the nucleus is known, then an effective moment of inertia can be calculated for the nucleus. If we are if we are willing to suspend our disbelief regarding the actuality of atomic spin. What does that mean? This suspension of disbelief is required because the calculated surface velocity of the nucleus can easily exceed the speed of light due to the high spin rate. >> Oh >> yeah. So yeah, the problem is nothing should be able to go faster than the speed of light, but the spin rate would allow it to be able to go fast. >> And then he he references the Einstein deos paper. I'll put both the paper. actual spin on a small and or vibration. Oh [ __ ] >> That's what they were getting. But that's why I believe >> Excuse my language. Yeah. >> No, no problem. I don't mean to be a conspiracy theorist, but this is why I believe the Einstein de Haz experiment was not really emphasized in academia after World War II. I I only heard of it because of Mr. Richard Esrich. I didn't hear of it before that. >> Wow. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. If you could post a link to that or uh send it to me later so I can post it, that would be great. >> Sure. Sure. And and brother Ash story just one one huge favor when you go over that stuff tomorrow also uh look at the hawk paper the first one you discussed the second one in its entirety the room temperature superc conductor and god bless you for doing it because nobody else cares about my work except you and brother Rossi anyway maybe one day >> can I mention something about the room temperature sure I want you to know that I took for fun the other night I took the exact description from Sal's great patent on the room temperature superconductor and I put well I put it I put it in uh chat GPT and I put it in gro those two now to be fair I don't have the professional versions but I put it in and I said is there any other experiment that you can find on the internet in which uh something like this was done they couldn't find anything similar they couldn't find any to in with with the room temperature super no one said insulator this layer that I the AI I at least said to me they couldn't find anything. >> Huh. Well, so let me change topics slightly. Not really though, but um because it kind of does go back to Teller and I think I don't Which Bush did you mention? >> Vanover Vanover Bush. He was >> he was the first of uh >> he was the first. I believe he was Manchester one if you believe in that thing. You know, he he was the first. I believe his sp went to John Trump. That's why he was sent to do the Tesla paper and he John Trump you gotta look into this guy that >> John Trump has John Trump >> well John Trump is also very close with John Vandergraph the inventor of the machine and we know the Vandagramraph machine later >> and it makes sense the third one in the sequence would be Edward Tullah because he's involved with everything >> and we know that John John Vandergraph we know that he created the Vandagramraph machine which started the motivation for particle accelerator I Tell us started the Jason's brother. I think started the >> Jason. I agree. And also there's a paper from 1976 or 1978 by Edward Teller where he says in the title rotating crystals, rotating capacitors. He says it right there, but in the opening statement he says we I'm paraphrasing here, but he says we have spent so much time looking for all these new particles that we've we've basically lost what's been right in front of us. >> He said it in his opening statement. I think what happened I think what happened is that in the Abomb we had a re-evaluation of how secrecy works because too much stuff leaked out. Too much stuff leaked out. We had to have a dramatic recalibration of how we do weapon secrecy. And I think we took it to its extreme. I think we said we are never going to let people figure out the next advancement beyond the A- bomb which happened to be Hbomb clean Hbombs fourth generation nukes. now basically making catered customized thermonuclear weapons that can manipulate spacetime. I think we saw that and we built a culture. We built a literal culture of secrecy, a culture of secrecy where the the good old boys club, the people that you just mentioned and I totally believe Edward Teller started the Jasons because >> let me like uh >> he was in everything and he was also very political. >> Yeah. And the JSONs, if you're not sure what the JSONs are, guys, the JSON is a group of academics, but that are also like connect and their connection is just like the Manhattan project. It's like >> and the list is classified. The list is classified. >> The members are not known. >> Yeah, they're not known. And you can find some of them. I've looked. It's it's not easy. So this secret group that are basically, if you believe Gary Stevenson, they're all basically professors. >> Yeah. And we were able to figure out like what happens because Gary Stevenson told a story to Tim Ventura about his friend Robert MLB Baker who won a lifetime achievement award for gravitational waves in 2011 in the early 2000s. He got written up by Ron Pandalfi of the CIA and >> was a little too close to China for comfort just a little. >> Yeah. So I'll I'll I'll reiterate it. Yeah. So, the way the story goes is that he said a little bit too much to China about gravitational waves. And so, they put it on the agenda to determine whether or not Robert MLB Baker broke national security by talking a little bit too much about China about gravitational. They they shut the report down by saying that he was using the inverse Gerschenstein effect, which was not true, but anyways. Yeah. >> Yeah. So, and what happened was weird. So they basically give him a slap on the wrist cuz gravitational manipulation I think we all agree is definitely real. We're describing it and how we do it here. Absolutely. >> So we know it's real. So why didn't they go crack down on it when they could have? Well, they get this they do this technicality where they go, well the effect, you know, the Gersinstein effect only comes into play at these super high voltages. So whatever he was talking about was too minimal to like actually be significant. That's what they did. And this is weird because I started digging. >> Sorry. They based that interpretation off of the inverse Gershinstein effect, not the the forward moving. Yeah. Yeah. >> Oh, that was why. So, here's another little anecdote for you guys because and this is the reason why I totally believe Edward Teller started this and what have you, is that >> also wasn't just Robert MLB Baker. I mean, I'm sure that like these, you know, it's all classified so we don't know who's been written up over the years, >> but Lel Wood actually got written up by the Jason as well. Loel Wood was one of the thermonuclear weapon designers that worked with John Knuckles and he had the exact same thing happen to him. Tell you something about him. He was the Fritz Wiki. He was the Fritz Wiki of the engineering world. He was one of the most like genius people you can believe. But he was nasty as [ __ ] >> That's what I hear. >> You got to be careful. Anyway. Yeah. >> Well, so here's the thing. So anyway, he goes to China and he says a little bit too much and so then they write him up as well and it turns out it was the like the wave equations were the thing that they were upset about with him which you could imagine is like getting your waves to converge or what have you. So he gets out of it because he gets off on a technicality too. Turns out they find some scientific paper that has the equations in it or something and so therefore like now it's oh well there was a scientific paper that was public so now you're you're fine. But it hurt him and it hurt his reputation. >> Yeah. Go ahead. >> Sure. If I could say very quickly, Edward Teller, I believe it was on the Dick Cavet Show. I could be wrong, but he said in 1991, he was trying to leave the hints where he could. So he emphasized on that show. He said he goes, "I want to emphasize the discovery of a groundbreaking new material." He said high temperature superconductors. Because around 1990 is when they announced it, I think. But the second thing was that Edward Teller had also said he goes, "I believe that we are driving classification far too much in this country." And he gave an example. He said that a lot of American scientists and engineers did not believe that directed energy weapons were possible. He said this on the show in 1991. And basically the Russians were openly talking about it, he said. And then he goes, "We had to give security clearances to our scientists in America for me to bring them into the into a meeting room to show them the equations." He said, and he goes, "The reason I'm upset about this," you could tell he was passionate, is because he said, "The Soviets are openly discussing it." He said, >> "Yeah." >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> That's the thing, right, is that that's what we're seeing happen right now. I think this is a good segue to the next topic. So, not only is it this JSON group that's been writing people up and it's all related to, you know, um, nuclear weapons. Oh, one more thing I want to say as well is that um I also found scientific paper by Knuckles and and Wood in addition to one more person that they were proposing that nuclear weapons might be used to test relativity that we could literally produce gravitational waves with thermonuclear weapons. When I saw that paper, I just went what? How are people not putting two and two together here guys? Like and then you've got Edward Teller talking about, you know, that secrecy has gone too far. A lot of people have been saying that even Hal Pudof kind of mentions is like, well, we let secrecy go super far and maybe now we can let some of this stuff come out. So, let's talk a little bit about disclosure then, right? >> Oh, boy. You mean immaculate constipation? I'm kidding. >> Yeah. I'm gonna [laughter] first I want to start with three Atlas because everybody is [laughter] three Atlas. I can't this this makes me crash out more than most topics do because I can't get over how silly an idea it is that the aliens are flying around on a rock when we've got quantum mechanics. We're literally able to change the arrow of time according to Salvatore Price. Why does Avi Lo >> refuse to believe gravitational waves? Like the guy must just hate gravitational waves more than anything because I would think that any physicist that understands gravitational waves knows that the aliens are never flying around on a space rock. But go ahead. What are what are your opinions on Atlas 3II? >> He must have hated the uh uh Misner Wheeler and Thor the uh Abby was the greatest book of all time because I was right there. I mean, one of them actually Yeah, one of the three actually got the Nobel Prize for it. So, I don't know what I I >> What's his deal? What do you guys think is obvious? >> I think I think you know he wrote some interesting book and and he is after all Harvard University professor extremely intelligent extremely well-versed in the mathematical formulism of astrophysics. Certain things are driven toward achieving certain objectives. >> I don't think we need to bring the aliens into this at all. Again, manmade tech, gentlemen. Man-made tech. >> Anyway, >> what about you, Dave? What do you think? Honestly, I'll just come right out and say it and I've said it to people on my my Patreon Zoom calls. I I'm personally I'm indifferent about it. I'm close to people that have other feelings about it. I honestly quite frankly I at this point I don't really care because for me it's very simple. If I wake up in the morning and something's in the sky or whatever it is, okay, I'll deal with it when it happens. Until then, I'm interested in the science that I can control. So, I don't personally I'm indifferent. I don't I mean do I think a lobe has seen things that he cannot talk about in the sk in the lower earth orbit and even near earth or and far orbit absolutely um but that's in terms of the atlas itself I don't get myself excited for it I even when I see an article I don't even click on it to be honest with you um that's just me but >> no I agree I I think that it's it's kind of silly to me it's regressive thinking it's like they would aliens would be less more less advanced than we are to flying around on rocks. I mean, the only thing that gets me excited about that is like maybe there's some bacteria or something in there, some ancient bacteria that whatever that we can unfreeze and what have you. But >> well, you look, for example, at what they're saying with this official narrative about three Atlas about what could it be? Maybe this, maybe that, and the the questions never end. But then you have someone like uh former Lockheed engineer Boyd Bushman on his deathbed saying that you have craft coming in and out all the time to Earth. So, >> but but from a Trojan horse point of view, >> right, >> if you had a special weapon, not necessarily that you need an armada for, even though there's great quality and quantity, >> right, >> as the man of steel once said, the one that's born December 18th, by the way. >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. [laughter] Now, now, now, now there's no need for a swarm of drones and, you know, all you need is a Trojan horse to come >> depositing a special weapon, >> right? >> A weapon that brother Ashton has been describing for quite a while now, >> but of what one such intensity is to basically rupture the earth apart. Is it possible? Plasma disruption fusion weapon speaks to that physics. Yes, it's possible. If I can say very quickly from a a critical thinking perspective, we have to consider that I'm not saying this is what something's coming. This is just my opinion, but we have to consider possibilities like the fact that it's very possible. People always talk about, you know, nuclear bombs being launched and everything like that, but what if what if uh whether it's done to us or whether it's done to our enemies or whatever, what if, for example, you have a country, right? And then you have some uh you know, intelligence agents. They go into that country and they go to a a building or a warehouse and they put just the outer shell of a nuclear bomb there. There's nothing in it. But then from a satellite or from a directed energy weapon, they send out a longitudinal scalar wave pulse that then simulates the effects of a nuke and then they use social media to get everyone ex uh uh distraught and distressed when really it was just a little EMP that just turned off your electronics. So, we have to think about, you know, what's what are they trying to control with uh and we have to use our critical thinking is what I would say. >> Yeah. And it would before all of this, it would have been really easy for them to put like make something look like an alien invasion or I mean people are thinking space rocks are aliens. So, if there's some orbs come flying around in triangle formations, everyone's gonna be thinking as aliens with no question. But, you know, the stock that's going up in my opinion, especially after this conversation, is future human stock. is that instead of your Trojan horse and instead of take the same idea, but instead of this blue beam scenario, >> right? >> Imagine all it would take to change the course of history is to send a time machine back in time and give it to people of the past, right? >> And if you do that, just just sending a message is enough. You don't even have to transmit yourself to the past. Just tell people like imagine that. >> Oh boy. you know, somebody transmitted back to Tesla energy, frequency, vibration, and then that became his whole life, right? That would change the whole course of human history, right? And something that simple >> could could lead to that. So the idea of future humans is the one that I think is the most interesting, especially if retrocausality is possible. If retrocausality is possible, then I think the answer to the alien question is it's us. It's us from the future. It would have to be. I mean, that makes more sense than little green men to me. I I don't mean to uh push any partic I don't mean to push any particular narrative or anything of the type, but since you brought up that theorem Ashton, I will say that putting all the the the spectacles aside, if you will, I know that that was something that Dr. Dan Burish claimed that these grays were in fact humans from the future and they were entering points in our past to give us certain technology to then alter an outcome. Again, not saying I believe it or disbelieve it. It's just interesting that um he claimed that. So it it's very I don't rule that out at all. >> What's scary is AI and even machine intelligence could calculate every possible outcome and predict what those outcomes are going to be and then predict what you sending a message back in time would do to shape and change those outcomes as well. That's the part that scares me the most is that and then that's just with the technology that we can already foresee let alone technology that we don't even have the capability for seeing right now. >> Right. Right. >> So let's flip over then and talk about age of disclosure. So, finally, I guess they got a deal done after like a year and a half. Joe Joe Rogan's seen this this documentary for like over a year now. >> Um, and I guess it's going to be on Amazon Prime. I think they're going to make people pay for it, though. I don't think you can even watch it for free. So, wow. >> Um, but what are you guys thoughts on some of this? I think the only thing that's intriguing to me about it, well, first of all, I like to watch Hal Pudof and I think in the interview he even mentions um in the trailer that just dropped, he mentions the idea that aliens or whatever non-human intelligence is using nuclear technology, energy sources, potentially the propulsion. So, I'm interested to see anything by Hal Pudof talking about the science and he's always very very vague about the alien stuff. >> You want to know my honest opinion? I'll just say it right now because I I feel it's appropriate. The gentleman in the middle of our screen right now, he he if his inventions came to light, that whole crew, that whole set of individ W Davis working for Dr. Harold Putoff said there is nothing there. >> What in the alien front you mean? >> No, he said in your thing. Yeah. Yeah. >> That's exactly what he told to Stratton. Yeah, they're all CIA. >> They're all CIA Stratton. Listen to Jay Stratton. >> Yeah, but the problem is that is that Thomas Kir McConnell had to listen to Stratton. He was the oni dude. So >> I in other words, when it comes to the movie, I think that you know, for example, even when Matthew Borland talked about the the the true values, the energy source, I'm I'm really not trying to put him on a pedestal here, but but I naturally I am. I do believe that Sal's inventions are the remedies to most of the world's problems literally and that's why >> answer you okay man >> that's I believe it's brother you know why I believe it and you know why I know it actually um but that's why I believe that if Sal's inventions were to be experimented on and the experiments were filmed and so on I believe that this entire narrative on the disclosure side would there would be no movie there would be nothing because his inventions provided those answers >> that's my give >> me great honor brothers you Ray has none. Yeah, go ahead, sir. >> I'm most interested in seeing though is uh Marco Rubio. He's kind of a new addition to these docu Everybody else has basically been in this documentary like five times already. >> Have you ever looked at him very carefully? He appears as a very pensive man, a man who thinks before he speaks. >> My opinion on him, I think exactly that. I think that he's a thinker. I think he's very smart, but I'm I think I think he doesn't want to rock the boat. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think he for sure what brother Sal said, he is for sure a thinker. You could look at the way the media asks him questions. He thinks like a lot of these guys don't. He you could tell his brain is running and he's so I I I do have respect for Mr. Rubio. I do. I like him now. I'm I'm unashamedly like him now. We've gone from little Marco where he used to drink the water bottle and had that awkward interview where he's like drinking the water bottle like 50,000. >> It's because he's passionate. He's passionate about his ideas and people always misinterpret it anyway >> and I think he knows the truth. I mean he's national security adviser to the president right now. He's the secretary of state >> as national security adviser. They definitely should tell him. >> Yeah. >> I hope I mean he's talking about the UFO stuff so I think he knows but I think he's also smart enough >> to play the game, right? He's smart enough to play the game. He's not going to come out and start blabbing about what he knows. The question the question also we have to ask maybe is is it possible that under Teller and those guys from that era is it possible that they slowly uh developed a system where the with under Kissinger and those guys that >> oh that right that future secretary of defenses could still get read in on these programs but not like they used to be read in. Right. We have to ask ourselves is it possible >> does anybody know the relationship between Kissinger and Teller? Were they close? I know that I know that Edward Teller said that he admired Lawrence Rockefeller. I don't know about Kissinger. >> Well, that's what >> that's what I want to know the most about, you know, like I I like all aspects of this investigation. Like I love the science. I love the true crime stuff, but I also like to just learn how systems work. Like I want to know like there obviously had to be some succession plan to tell her, right? Absolutely. Oh yeah. >> Like and all this information is very compartmentalized. Like we lost the recipe for fog bank, right? We lost it. >> Is who took who took it from? >> Exactly. That's the qu that's what I want to know. I want to know who took it and I could see I could envision a scenario where they figure out thermonuclear weapons or manipulating spaceime and they write it into the peds. They write it into the presidential executive action documents so that it supersedes any future president. And so now Marco Rubio and Donald Trump come in and they can see the peeds and they're like, "Shit, we got to deal with this. We got to not talk about space-time manipulation. We got super nukes. We got [ __ ] that nobody even knows about, right?" I [clears throat] could totally see a scenario like that where they do that because they also learn from their mistakes and they go, "We can't lose this information because we didn't have somebody else come in because they were trying to keep it super compartmentalized." And then what if there's a ripple effect in some instances where just by revealing the information incriminates the scientists that worked on it? >> Yeah, that's a big problem. The legality of it is a big problem. This is what Dr. Steven Greer and I spoke about a lot which is he says, "Well, these are illegal." And I go, "I think it's technically legal." The problem is the public won't think it's legal, right? When you come out say, "We've had infinite energy technologies and fusion technologies and by the way, we just had to hide it for national security." Like Go ahead. >> Oh, sure. I'll say something that it to that point which is that I in in many levels I I do fundamentally agree with what Greer is saying on the big picture aspect. Uh however there was a leaked document between uh some uh someone named John Estridge and an anonymous contractor and this I believe that it's it's it's real just my opinion and if it is real we have to realize that this contractor who worked on these programs was telling Mr. Estrich. Basically, you have to understand you can't just go and raid these facilities because a lot of people working in the facilities don't want to leave. They like it. They like the way that it's set up. Not everybody, but some of them are. And even imagine you're a good person. You're just an engineer working in these programs. You're 5 10 years away from retirement. And then if you you hear all these things, you don't want that problem. Some of them are willing to speak up and God bless them. But other ones, I understand, don't want to be saved from it. They just want to do their thing and that's it. And that's the that's the problem. The problem in my opinion is getting enough people to say yes, we want this to to go into the be brought into the light. >> And this is the reason why I think this is the answer to the question because it's the same deal as politics. >> It's like libertarians, I want there to be no government, right? We want we want to get rid of all this. We want to get rid of personal income taxes, but at the end of the day, that's not how the world works. The world is not idealistic. The world is pragmatic. Well, >> okay. So, let me just finish this thought is that the same thing is also true >> of like this science, this technology, this suppression of all of this as well. Is that people think, "Oh, well, we could just reveal this and then everything will come collapsing." No, it's because it's all baked in. The system is set up this way. You can't just flip the whole system on its on its head, right? And that's never going to work because people are incentivized into the system >> and go ahead. >> Oh, sorry. Sorry. What? I'm sorry, man. I don't mean to keep cutting you off. >> Oh, you're good. >> There have been people, let me just give another example. People will say, "Well, what if we go outside the system?" And there have been there have been people that, you know, they they get, you know, 5, 10, $20,000, they make a device in their garage and it does what it what it says it does. But here's the thing, the system, academia or the government, they never acknowledge it because just by acknowledging it means that you have to acknowledge new physics and it means that it's real. So the other side of that is working outside of the system and basically having people like you and your audience, Ashton, realizing this is a a spiritual and a mental war, not a technological war. The technology's been there. It's just taking a new perspective on it and then realizing, oh crap, we've been gaslit in many different ways. So that thank you. That was my >> This is And this gets to my This actually rolls into my last topic, which is I think there is another way. I think there is another way which is okay I've been trying to catch up and figure out okay this is what they had 10 years ago where where they have now and what technology is now leaking out to the public and you know what I've kind of coalesed on what I've converged on a neutronic fusion I've looked at trialpha energy helium fusion and I have a feeling commonwealth fusion which is funded by Bill Gates and a bunch of other palenteer people I have a feeling they're going to switch over to a neutronic at some point as well >> how about a neutronic fusion usion powering AGI. How about a war of ideas, gentlemen? How about their AGI fighting ours so we don't have to >> I don't want to say too much, but I've I've been talking to people and yes, I I have been pushing that idea that our AI data centers are going to be powered by a neutronic fusion. But here's the answer then is that my opinion of fusion I want to get your guys' opinion as well is that they're going to give us a nerfed version of it because assuming that we can amplify energy to the level where we can make a black hole that means we have access to unlimited our coefficient of performance can just be in like the thousands right if we were to engineer like a black hole that's stable just like actually this is literally what Lowel Wood wanted to do the equation the equation changed it doesn't have a cop in it anymore >> and >> [laughter] >> infinite COP. >> Only No, no. What Sal is saying is that interestingly over the past 50 years, we don't measure in COP as much like we used to. >> Yeah. The only thing that measures COP modern in modern homes I believe is a heat pump. >> Yeah, >> I think I could >> almost on the way out. Yeah. So, so my thought was my thought is that here's what we can do is that we if we can push the public towards these breakthrough technologies that you know I've spoken to some very let's just say intelligent business people about this and nobody understands a neutron fusion they all ask me the same question why is that going to be the one why is this going to be the one that's going to work compared to the other ones I mean how do you really answer that question >> boron 11 boron 11 it's 11. Yes, >> there are people that still think the second law of thermo applies, but anyways. >> Yeah, and that's the thing. >> It's like freaking dutyium for the the plasma compression fusion device, but the plasma compression fusion device, that paper also mentioned boron 11, [laughter] >> did it? Yeah. >> Yes. So, >> my first reference I can find, I mean, the references go further back, but the one that really blew my mind was the JNF 2005 where they were talking about all the alternative fusion fuels and they talk about helium 3 boron >> there's a way there's a way to generate high frequency gravitational waves with boron and plasma vortexes >> really >> there's a possibly >> well you know was also crazy Dave to your to that interview with the interview with Eric Davis the crazy part was we started talking about lithium first of all how is he mispronouncing >> the lithium 6 in castle bravo generated the almost twice yield >> at the the >> I wish I could speak like him. But >> at the you're saying at the the the the university announcement. >> It was the lithium 6. >> The lithium 6 the univer the the the university announcement. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I remember. [laughter] >> Well, so that was interesting because he brought that up. He goes, "Oh, what's the third autronic fuel?" He goes, "Lithium." And then he says, "That's also used in thermonuclear weapons." And I go, "Oh, wow." And now I'm wondering and I did a little bit of research. Turns out like there's I I don't understand all the chemistry or whatever, but they said there's reasons why they don't use lithium in the autronic fusion, but I seriously have to wonder about that. Why are we doing helium 3 and why is there boron 11 but no discussion of of lithium in >> because what if what if both from a nuclear perspective and even from an electromagnetic perspective whether we're talking about mass reduction or cop or whatever what if it's what if one of the reasons this is so threatening to the system is that it's not using any new material or new technology it is using a um a certain type of amalgamation or combination of known technologies that's the other >> what if there's No magic in the magic. >> Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. It's just a different perspective on the engineer. Yes. Yes. >> And you know what's weird too is that this is what I keep thinking about Brilliant Light Power is that they literally he's using lithium in his reactions as well when he's doing it. So I I'm sitting there wondering like he may not be doing the exact thing. He might not even know what he's doing. >> I'll give you if I can give one last example. There was a a a problem that is yet to be solved publicly that had to deal with the homopolar motor in the 1800s. The homopolar motor and basically sound knows what I'm getting. Yes. And it has to do with this N the letter N versus M. The letter M hypothes moving lines hypothesis. Back then the the concept of the ether was going in and out in and out. And people were debating are there moving lines of force around the setup in the homopolar motor or are there not? The reason this was a problem was because when they took, for example, uh two magnets in between and they they took a a a conductor, metal conductor, and they put two magnets in between it like a sandwich and they spun it with their hand. They noticed that a voltage was created when technically there shouldn't be because voltages are created by relative differentials, but all of this was spinning at the same time. >> Was it in one particular direction only? >> Yes, it was. Now, right, the reason I want to bring all this up is because publicly we still haven't solved that problem and yet we we're going on to other things. This is why I I praise Sal when he says you have to go back to the basics because that's where this stuff is is is lying in my opinion is is hidden. >> So, how long do you guys think until we have fusion energy? What do you how do you guys think it's going to play out? >> Definitely won't come from ether. Ether just eats money. Give me some billions. Give me some billions. Oh. Oh. Oh, I'm hungry. Give me another 50. Come on. >> There's a video. There's a good video by a guy that uh was hating on Helion Fusion that was like helion they've never proven that it works. They got this contract with Microsoft, but it's Ether that's IDER is going to be the one that really figures it out. They're the one I'm just sitting there going this person I already know like who they voted for. I already know how many shots they got in during COVID, right? Like I'm just going wow like >> brother they're not even using repco superconductors they're not using the rare earth berium copper oxide the ybc they're not using even uh what MIT is because now MIT has realized the whole idea is really that beta factor that um the I believe it was a magnetic pressure divided by the plasma pressure it has to do with how compact you make your reactor. Remember the Poseidon? Remember the Burvestnik? These Russian these new Russian weapons. Dude, do you really think they use Dude, what kind of close cycle thermonuclear reactor can fit on a [ __ ] unmanned torpedo that's about 20 m by 2 meters? >> Yeah. >> Anyway, I'll leave it there. >> No, it's it's it's it Yeah, absolutely. And that's the other Yeah. Yep. that I think there's been also a systemically a major divergence from people looking into things like spark gap. >> President Trump's direction, >> right? Right. >> Is essential. >> Yep. He's done a good job. They that >> we are starting to get clo that gap is closing, gentlemen. >> Yeah. >> China's catching up and and Trump even said this. trying you know I think that what we're seeing happen is there was a huge new investment in fusion they had five new quantum data centers or I don't know if they're quantum data center but uh research facilities research centers were opened up at the labs as well we're seeing this and I think it's happening because China's catching up we spoke earlier and said you know part of it is that we will probably reveal it when you know Russia or China shows off their technology and then we'll say oh yeah we had that too right like >> well you notice a lot of these facilities and these companies whether whether they're government or private. You notice a lot of them, and I'm not saying this is bad or good, but I'm just saying notice how a lot of them, even during their promotional videos that they put online, they don't actually tell you how the system's working. They don't actually explain to you what's going on. They they use the word quantum like a lot. And there's nothing wrong with that, but they don't actually explain what's occurring, how it's occurring, and and so on and so forth. Yeah. You know, one last thought which is the other thing that when I ask, you know, very smart people that are connected to some of these businesses and things is that I ask them, what do you think's going to power all these data centers that we're building? You know what their answer is? The answer is nuclear. >> And I kind of laugh at that because I go, that's kind of just like a buzzword, right? Like when you say nuclear, it means a lot of different things. Nuclear just has to do with the atom. Are we splitting the atom? Are we fusing things together? And this goes to S's point, which is that one of the other things that happened is that we're going to build new small modular nuclear reactors that are mobile portable compact that can power our military bases overseas for three >> beta that beta goes as R cubed R being the characteristic say uh length scale of your whatever device. >> Doesn't that mean factor increases significantly? Isn't that what that means? beta. The beta is directly uh related uh to the idea that you get more energy out than you put in. >> And it's possible parametric resonance can help amplify that. Yeah. >> And you don't need the in the the ignition condition. Now, the plasma compression fusion device just does it cuz it's super cool. [laughter] >> Well, this is why if I I'll mention quickly, this is why I know that there was a lot of investigation into spark gaps many years ago. uh spark gaps that would lead to plasma and so on and fusion and what have you that was that we know um I think Ken shoulders looked into and and that was quietly uh sort of hushed to the side. Yeah. >> Yeah. And that was this is the last thought that I think is just really huge is that when I listened to uh David Kirkley who's the CEO of Helian Fusion >> he mentioned specifically they don't need ignition. I mean that I spoke to some of these intelligent you know uh people that are out there and I told them the re part of the reason why a neutronic is so big is one direct energy conversion you're converting it directly to electricity not to heat and I told them ba high beta value is super big but the other big one is we don't need ignition to get over unity to get you know Q factor greater than one that is >> but it's nice to be self- sustaining that is why ignition comes in >> yeah I mean ignition's still great for a self-sustaining reaction You can produce an electrical engineering system that still produces >> over gentlemen. >> I >> I think that's what they have. >> You think that's what Poseidon is Russians? Russia's thing. >> Yeah. >> Well, think about it like this, Ashton. Right. We talked about cop, >> the underwater thing that can go one kilometer down, >> basically sit there for years, and then here comes your nice >> Yep. carrier group and all of a sudden this implosion that just sucks in the whole [ __ ] fleet and you're like >> [ __ ] 30 seconds pass where the [ __ ] did it go? >> Y anyway, god forbid. God forbid. Anyway, >> one thing I wanted to mention on a more rudimentary level, Ashton, for you and your audience, was that if you look, for example, at why COP, coefficient of performance measurement was ushered out. We know for example that if we look at a heat pump, we know that that's still used to measure the heat inside of a heat pump. Now if we think of the quantum vacuum or the ether as having all of these magnetic fluctuations, what if our electrical setup treats the magnetic fields as heat pumps or magnetic heat magnetic pumps if you will? Then maybe >> definitely how we should be thinking about it. I mean, right, >> the and this was this was another this is probably the best unlabbed Charles Chase video that's out there. By the way, this guy is a Blocky Martin senior fellow engineer that built a compact fusion reactor. His YouTube channel has less than a thousand subscribers. >> I know. I Yeah, >> the videos had like 20 views before I started watching them and showing them. But my favorite one's the guy Yorichiro, I forget his last name, but he does two. One is about like three electrical charges like orbs and how they interact with one another. But the second part is about breaking the laws of thermodynamics using relativity where he's like if I have something moving super fast away from another object you can actually cause cold to flow to hot as opposed to hot to flow to cold which would speak to like a negotropic type of event occurring. >> There goes the second law. >> Yeah, >> there goes the second law. And that's what I just thought was beautiful because as if you guys have watched my streams, one of the things that I've been talking about is the nuclearp pumped relativistic free electron laser using plasma mirrors basically to amplify energy. And this was something those guys worked on. All those nuclear engineers worked on way back when. >> I'll say something if I can very quickly. Whether it's with semiconductors or with larger scale systems, in my opinion, it's all about the free electrons, not the bounded ones. The free electrons. Yes. Which speaks to what? A nonneutral Yes. >> called plasma, >> right? Yes. >> Cuz they keep on saying, "Oh, inconsequential. Nothing to see here." Really? We shall see. >> Right. Right. >> Yeah. >> Speaking of which, I found I watched a pretty interesting uh video where a guy was making uh it was like plasma photonics or something essentially. Um, I don't know if I'm using that terminology right, but what I thought was interesting about is that he said that plas metal could almost be considered a plasma due to how free the electrons are in a metal. And I just thought that was interesting because there's a lot of connection between like spinning mercury and anti-gravitational effects going all the way back to the Nazis. And I also like to think about things like we always think about everything in the way that we perceive the world, right? Like one thing, >> don't forget the vanas goes all the way 6,000 years of the apparata the Ramayana. Yeah. >> Yep. >> Yeah. So, we think about it in the way we perceive the world, but it's like what is really the difference between a plasma and a metal, right? Like we would think of two completely different things, but if you really boil it down to the atoms and the electrons, >> you can say that it doesn't really have a crystal lice. The other one does, but >> what's to say that one is can be M. Anyway, I'll leave. >> Yep. I know where you're going. Yep. >> I bet I better shut up. I keep on, you know, I walk a very fine line at that EQ. Anyway, >> yeah. Well, we've seen what's happened with the JSON. So, S, don't get yourself in trouble. Neither of you actually. >> Well, guys, we've gone over a two hours has been a great conversation. Um, let's I just want to like give you guys each a couple minutes to just either plug anything that you want to or maybe tell us about either an interesting video or scientific paper, anything that you've been watching recently. Go >> ahead. You go first, brother Rossi, please. >> Oh, jeez. Okay. Well, um well, first off, thank you Ashton for for having me as always. It's a it's a pleasure to be here and I was super excited when of course Brother S was able to make it and uh uh Brother S, I got to if I I will say I got to have obviously my show is not as big as Ashton's, but I got to have you on my show at some point, but uh and then bring and then bring Ashton back too. Um but I just want to say just, you know, keep what you're keep up what you're doing with the science. I've been checking the comments in the live stream. A lot of people seem to be putting the pieces together. Um I just the only thing I would emphasize to people is because I know this subject tends to get so exciting and then we all get scatterbrain because we get so excited about all these different ideas. My humble advice to be uh would be for people in the in the chat or in general just pick on pick one or two projects and focus focus focus and never neglect never neglect simplicity. Um and yeah just look at just look at old electrical engineering approaches and and try and take a different perspective on uh things that for example I'll I'll give direct terms uh things like uh uh displacement current or parasitic capacitance consider that maybe it's not that's not what it is and that that I'll leave it there. Thank you, >> brother Rossi. Man, you what can I say? You are the man. Dr. Rossy, Dr. Forbes, let me just say, Ashton, I'm incredibly proud of you, brother. I for real. I mean, and that's why between you and I, this uh professor [ __ ] whatever [ __ ] you know, I forget his name. Anyway, that [ __ ] he should go to [ __ ] hell and stay there. But anyway, listen, you have become formidable from every point of view. You have become formidable. This idea of blending politics with physics and I think you also have every now and then you you inject your your own philosophy into it. So politics, physics, philosophy again the triarchy. I think this is going to make your part not only great but unique uniqueness. Ashton, this is what you have in Hard Truths podcast also all your parts. You have first of all, you have this formidable quality of being able to make things simple. >> Because I'll tell you right off the bat, I wish there were [ __ ] Nobel Prize physicists that could make something simple instead of [ __ ] taking half an hour to say something that you have to say in just two minutes >> and make it make sense. So, bravo my brother. Bravo. >> You have greatness. So, that's all I got to say. Yeah. >> Oh, I appreciate it guys. And make sure you guys are following these guys. My true opinion for you guys and for all the audience as well is actually that I've gotten more and more blackpilled actually by a lot of this stuff. Like it's actually to the point where and we spoke about a lot of these topics, but like I look at it and I go, man, >> we are a primitive civilization. We are not even close to ready for what's coming, you know? And I think that the people, the gatekeepers are aware of that. They're aware of that and they're like, "Man, we don't know if we're gonna make it through this, right? But we're gonna roll these dice anyway." So, >> between you and I, brother, >> I hope I pray we have Armadas out there, intergalactic, whatever. >> Between you and I, I pray for that >> because right now we're dealing with kinder, maybe even prek kindergarten physics. >> Yeah. >> But everybody's acting like >> I'm the best. Anyway, >> sorry. you go ahead and sorry I I won't interrupt anymore. Promise at least for now. [laughter] >> Okay. Well, that's all guys. Thank you guys very much. This has been an amazing hard truth podcast guys. Thank you so much. US Navy engineer Salvatore Pais uh DoD defense contractor uh or I don't know if you're necessarily defense cont. We'll just call you engineer contractor Dave Rossi. You guys are the best. Thank you guys so much for uh come being on here tonight guys. Uh have a great day. Appreciate you guys. I'm just going to do a quick shout out here to all the donations. Troy, wow, with these huge donations. I saw them. Thank you very much, sir, for these huge donations. Appreciate it so much. Tracy Scott, >> speak to your greatness, brother. It speaks to your greatness. >> Thank you, Tracy Scott. And thank you, Zapperoo, for all those donations, guys. Oh, and CFS. Thank you guys for that. We love it. Uh, guys, we'll try to do this again. I know you guys enjoyed it. I hope you guys got something out of this. I know that I enjoyed it. Maybe, maybe just a thought. Maybe a Christmas special or something. >> One day, brothers, we got to get together. We got to do this in a real studio. Maybe one day, brother Ash, I foresee him being better, not better, bigger than Rogan one day. >> Look what he does. He's going to have his studio and it's going to be Forbes everywhere. And you know, you should have this demon like with horns and stuff, you know, demon. [laughter] By the way, >> that guy's a nut case. Anyway, I I'll just leave it there. I'll just leave it there. >> You guys have a great day. Later, guys.