Wormholes Can Be Accelerated Like Particles in Colliders

Video Transcript

Similarly, if you send an electric charge through, if you send a positive charge through, this end becomes positively charged. This end becomes negatively charged. If you send angular momentum through, the angular momentum have to similarly work out the anything that's conserved has to be locally conserved at the end of a wormhole. Uh, and that creates problems for the wouldbe wormhole traveler, but it also represents a certain way of manipulating wormhole ends if you look at look at it in the right way. Um, so suppose you wanted to uh charge a wormhole. Well, you could in principle do it by just sending an electric current through it so that the electric current circulates. >> Oh, did we get iced here? Did we uh let me take a look what's going on here? Did we lose some bandwidth? Okay, we're going to keep going here. But so he's saying now that once we've understood that the mass moving through the wormhole actually impact the wormhole's mouth. He's saying we can use this from an engineering perspective. He was talking about how you can potentially control the time dilation effect. This is where I think we talk about putting the plane in superp position. Like some of you are like, "Hey, could the plane appear 5 years later?" In theory, I think we could engineer something like that. And I think that's what he's alluding to right here. He's saying that we might be able to use this this idea that the the the mass appearing impacts the wormhole mouth to our benefit. Maybe even to control the time dilation effect >> the wormhole like this and this end becomes positive and this the other end becomes negative. So it looks rather like a a capacitor with a positive plate and a negative plate and like a capacitor. >> I'm sorry I'm pausing a lot but there you go. That's the answer right there. Right. That's that's your magnetic wormhole. Magnetism might not even be a thing. It might just be electric charge and magnetism is a byproduct of electric charge in a fivedimensional ether. You're looking at the schematic right there. Drop your charge through your wormhole and you've connected two points in space and time. That's what the orbs are doing. Chat, you don't believe in wormholes? That's why my name is Ashen 4 orbs. That's why I'm going to have to change my name to Ashen 6 orbs because we have to have symmetry. There has to be conservation. So, if you want those orbs to cancel out, they have to be exactly equal on both sides. In fact, they might even have to be spinning the opposite of one another just like entanglement on both sides. Then when they converge, it's like replacing them. This is this seems weird, but this is how physics works. Physics is all about conservation. And what's crazy is that knowing this, you can actually reverse engineer how the orbs and MH370 videos are working. It's kind of crazy to see but I'm reading scientific papers now where are they are they learning stuff from this content from the videos etc because you know or are they just you know find converging on the same information >> eventually the current would stop when the borho builds up enough electric charge in order to repel the charges are trying to come in and so you would have to if you want to get a a [clears throat] big charge you have to use a ve you would have to use a very high voltage in order to do it >> they've got to be charging up they've got to be charging ing up in the MH370 videos chat. He's saying, "Okay, you're going to make this circuit here. You can see the little diagram. You're going to make this circuit. What's our circuit? Our circuit is the three orbs spinning around the plane on one side and then our three orbs or one orb, whatever it is, on the other side. So, we're going to make a circuit between them. And when is that wormhole going to open up? That worm is going to open up when the voltage gets high enough to basically rip through between them. When the voltage gets strong enough, just like lightning, why does lightning all of a sudden strike? The voltage builds up until it can break through the barrier of the air, which is a which is an insulator. When it's strong enough, suddenly, same way our magnetic wormholes working, those orbs have to be charging up. And when they converge, voltage gets strong enough that boom, for a split second, and it only has to be a split second. It breaches our reality, however you want to think of it, dimension, and tunnels to the other location. Or you could simply go to an electron accelerator and shoot a beam of electrons through it from Stanford or something and charge it up to a mini GEV or if you if you were so inclined. I will assume that transversible wormholes exist and are valid as valid solutions of general relativity. There is a certain segment of the general relativity community that is is rather disturbed by the fact that all these things like warp drives and wormholes and so forth have been appearing in the in the literature and would like to sort of construct a barbed wire fence across the middle of general relativity with a forbidden region and an allowed region. The the uh weak energy condition you heard about yesterday and various other things are sort of examples of that. and they think that when uh we have a proper theory of quantum quantum gravity that all of these these ugly solutions will disappear leaving pure ones behind. Uh [clears throat] um and so I'm I'm going to assume assume that they're wrong. >> All these people out there are just they don't want to talk about warp drives and wormholes. They're saying, "Guys, just believe me, bro. We just need Bro, please, bro. One more collider, bro. Please. This collider will be the last one. I promise, bro. This one's going to be the biggest. It's going to be 10 times bigger than large collider. we'll prove the gravities based on the strings and the theories and what have you. And here you got John Kramer going, "Yeah, those people are all going to be wrong there." If he talks, even John Kramer with his background, if he goes to talks to like PhD physicists that are teaching academic physicists, they're not going to give him the time a day. And he can't be like, "Hey man, if I told you what I worked on in black projects, you would your pants because you wouldn't want to live in this reality anymore." But he can't say that because he can't because he got all the NDAs. Can you imagine? I would be so triggered. This is probably why they don't bring me in. >> Secondly, that wormholes can be fished out of the quantum vacuum and made any size all the way down to the plunk length. So you don't have to make enormous wormholes. You can make things that are really quite small. Uh thirdly, the [clears throat] wormholes can be easily stabilized. uh one of the uh I guess the the person who wrote the book on wormholes if you imagine literally is Matt Bisser who uh the American journal American Institute of Physics published his book called Lorencian wormholes and uh he pointed out that there is another solution to uh in [clears throat] general relativity called a cosmic string and cosmic strings can have negative string tension and if you combine a wormhole with a cosmic string of negative string tension you ought to get a stable object and so if you're fishing things under the quantum vacuum more like you're more likely to fix fish a stable some thing out of the palm vacuum than an unstable one. And so you might be able to fish out a wormhole which has already been stabilized. >> So what's he saying here? He's saying that wormholes are definitely possible. They're not off limits. They are valid mathematical solutions to relativity. This is something that's got to be drilled into people's heads. People out there really think that wormholes are science fiction. They're mathematical solutions. So far, everything about general relativity has been pretty much proven right. So if you think that that's right, gravity's real, then at least it's on the table. Also, scale invariant. They can be any size. Wormhorm can be tiny or they can be large. This has got to be the key. Anybody that wants to come up with a unification theory, scale and variance must be at the center of it. You have to believe that whatever you can make that's small can be made to be very big as well. To me that's an essential thing. So he's saying scale and variance. And then lastly they are easily stabilized. Easily stabilized. Matt Visser shows that it's the negative energy that we need for a worml is very small. One of the things that the Bible taught me chat already taught me so much only been a week. The negative energy requirement for a wormhole is much easier than the negative energy requirement for a warp drive. It's actually a negligibly small amount. And you can imagine why because we only need one brief flash of energy. Time doesn't even matter to us. That [snorts] thing's going to disappear in an less than an instant and it's going to reappear. So all we need is just one little blip as opposed to some consistent constant flow of energy. Um finally u I assume that wormholes can be be manipulated charged uh changed in size uh given momentum given charge and so forth from either end. So if you have one end of the laboratory, you have complete control of the wormhole, even what's going on on the other end. Okay, so those are my assumptions. >> So [snorts] there he just said too is that somebody asked how are they going to control it? He's going to get to that right here. You can also control it. You can shoot the wormhole where you want it to go. >> Okay. Now, [clears throat] the reason we're most of us are here is we would really like to find a better way of getting to the stars. um and and u most of the ways that have been suggested even if these uh M mo M drives and so forth actually work would require a really long time to get there and what I want to point out today is that there that given these assumptions on wormholes there's a way of getting there really fast okay um [clears throat] uh the Einstein and Rosen speculated that charged particles were actually tiny wormhole mouth mouth mouths and their speculation was wrong but it raises an interesting question about whether given that a hypothetical existence of a stable microscopic charged wormhole mouth. They could be treated like ordinary particles and accelerated with electromagnetic fields. >> And the answer is yes. You could you could certainly do that because because they would have all the properties of a of a fundamental particle. That's basically what where Einstein and Rosen were coming from. And in particular, a microscopic wormhole mouth, if you give it the same charge to mass ratio as a proton, should behave like a proton in an accelerator. You want to be able to put it in a a conventional particle accelerator uh like a vandagramraphph or a cyclron or a synchron and accelerate it and give it the same velocity and the same lorren factor the same mass increase factor that that you would get if you accelerate a proton the same way. chat getting goosebumps again. Are the orbs a particle accelerator? He's saying right here is that you should if you He's basically saying if you were to create a wormhole, it's going to look like a particle, a scaled up particle. Because in theory, this concept is scale invariant, meaning it can be very tiny or very large. So, it should look like how a particle is going to look here. To me, that's crazy because that's what it looks like with MH370 is they converge on the plane. It almost looks like it becomes a particle and then it just vanishes and it gets sucked away and it's not there anymore. It's just it's too on the money. And then the whole concept of positive and minus charge pulling things together. I mean, that's clearly what's happening in the videos. because he's saying like you would just need a particle accelerator and you particle accelerate your particle. So the orbs could be acting like a particle accelerator encompassing the plane turning it into a particle and then accelerating it towards the destination being attracted by the counteracting forces and the vector that they're shooting the plane at. And on top of this, they probably also need to understand the universe's rest frame, the absolute rest frame, the primordial rest frame to understand the contextual difference between this location over here and this location over here. I'm just two arbitrary locations. All this these guys figured out. When I think about it, when I think about the orbs spinning around the plane and I'm imagining what John Kramer is saying here, I'm just going how far ahead is Loheed Martin. It's starting to get comical at this point. Loheed Martin starting to get so far ahead you start to wonder if they're an alien civilization >> to play with or say a bunch of them. Well, here are here is a zoo of of accelerators. Uh, this one is the tan of vandagramraph that we have at the University of Washington. It will accelerate photons to 19.35 me. Um, down the coast from us as a machine that I've done a lot of physics with over the years, the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory 88 in cyclron. It will produce 55 me protons. Another machine I've used is the Michigan State K500 cyclron which will produce. just straight up humble bragging about how he's been at all like the most powerful particle accelerators except for he throws some shade at CERN because he hasn't been at the CERN before. >> Heavy Iron Collider at Brook Haven which will produce protons that have 125,000 me. Uh, another machine that I done physics with is before Brook Haven was the CERN SPS, which will produce 450,000 me protons. And the CERN LHC, which I've never used, but I uh uh but is even more energetic. Will produce 7 million me protons. >> In terms of velocities, >> you never got that surgery, did you? Too bad, John Kramer. Sorry. Not guess you weren't as good as you thought. You didn't get to use the LHC. Sorry, bro. velocities coming out of a tan of vandagramraph is about 20% of the velocity of light. Uh the uh from the lbl cyclron is 32% the velocity of light and from the cern LHC is 0.9999999991% the speed of light [laughter] um not percent but fraction of the speed of light. Um the [clears throat] and this is one minus beta. This is how much how close they are to the speed of light. So you're going part two parts in 10 the minus5 two parts two parts in 10 to the six two parts in 10 to the 9. [clears throat] There's not once you get going this fast there's not much point in talking about the velocity because the velocity is essentially the velocity of light and the thing that really counts is the relativistic mass increase factor. Now this is the factor in special relativity that makes the mass get bigger the distances get smaller and time slow down. Okay, all of those things are controlled by the same factor which we call gamma. And uh Vandagramraph will give you >> you're about to learn how the sons work. You guys here, you're if you learn nothing tonight, learn what the gamma factor is. I can just tell from the context what the gamma factor is. The gamma factor is the time dilation factor. The gamma factor is the time dilation factor. So from now on, I will be calling our time weapons where we change the dial of time on our enemies gamma weapon because we're going to change the gamma factor. You're just basically turning them to an old man or you're just sending them into the future. Bye. >> So what does that mean in terms of wormholes? Uh well, [clears throat] if we took if we go to the LHC with our little little flask of wormholes and put them wormhole mouths and put them into the LHC and accelerate them, we should be able to get wormholes traveling at the speed wormhole mouths traveling almost at the speed of light that we can point in various directions at stars and they will have a gamma factor of 7 7,445. Uh therefore [clears throat] uh the uh and that will be their lorren velocity. Now what does that mean in terms of the wormhole itself? Well, there's a there's a quantity in relativity called proper time. And proper time is basically if you go from this point to that point, you want to know how time it takes. You simply take a clock with you and you walk from point A to point B with your clock and see what the time reading is. And >> [clears throat] >> um in uh relativity, the proper time is equal to the observer external observer time divided by gamma. And remember, gamma is like 7,000 for the things we're talking about. What that means is if you if you have this wormhole mouth and you look through it to see what's going on at the other end, uh you will see things that are slowed down by uh by that factor. So if you send your uh and so the the time through the wormhole viewer goes like t prime which is c over gamma uh and [clears throat] uh to the external viewer watching the wormhole travel it's traveling essentially at the speed of light which is uh equal [clears throat] equal to c but through the wormhole mouth what you would see in terms of scenery going by looks like you're traveling at a speed which is gamma times the speed of light so you would be traveling at 7,000 times the speed of light. >> So there you go. He just said it. So, how does this work? So, it works actually multiple ways and it can work on our benefit. Um, maybe that's what the UFOs are, too. Maybe Palmer Lucky is right. Maybe the UFOs we're seeing were people doing this. This is like sending people out to the airlock. Proper time. What this means, though, is that we can shoot our wormhole at almost the speed of light at an object that's really far away. And from a proper from our time perspective, it will get there way faster than what we would expect. Like he said, 7,000 times faster than the speed of light. So you start to realize relativity is what allows us to cheat. We're just doing math, Einstein's general relativity, and we're going, "Wait a minute, that star is a thousand light years away, but we can get there in 50 years." You're like, "Wait, what? Shouldn't it take a thousand years at the speed of light?" No, because we can cheat relativity. I mean, this is these are the kinds of revolutionary ideas that are breakthrough technology, right? like this pushes the paradigm forward. And sadly, you only hear about it on my channel and other channels like Demystify Science, who actually interviewed John Kramer a year ago. You don't hear about this on other science and physics communicators channels and he explained why. John Kramer explained why. Because there is a big group of physicists that simply do not believe in physics and science.