Video Transcript
I spoke about China having a quantum radar. Quantum radar, guys. Now, I dug into it to try to figure out what is this quantum radar. What actually does it mean? We know that quantum is just a fancy word for manipulating the ether. That's what we've learned over the the last couple years. So I looked into it and sure enough found a war zone article that mentions that China had been working on this quantum radar since 2018. So it goes back to 2018. So for the last seven years they've been developing this quantum radar and just now they are mass prodducing it and they are marketing it as that it can detect the F-22 and our other stealth fighters and supposedly there's nothing you can hide from this quantum radar. So, in this article by the War Zone that I read, it specifies that this quantum radar is an EPR device. Yes, Zapperoo in the chat. EPR radar. That really piqued my curiosity because I wouldn't go so far as to say I'm an expert, but I read I read a scientific paper by John Kramer and I stayed at a Holiday in Express. So, it turns out that I was on Tim P explaining how quantum radar, how quantum devices can actually transmit a signal faster than light. I said that in the scientific paper by John Kramer, it mentions that you can build in a switch. You can build in a switch. So, the idea is, and this is how the quantum radar works, guys. Here you guys go. Right at the beginning of the live stream, we're getting right into how quantum radar works. In an EPR experiment, an Einstein PDSKI Rosen experiment where we're testing entanglement. We split our photon down two paths. Okay, it's actually quite simple. We split our photon down two paths, but they're still entangled together. And we send one path to our control. Our control tells us where the other what's going to happen to the other photon because they're entangled. What happens to one must have a correlation with what's going to happen to the other. Okay, still with me? So, one half goes to the control. Now, the other half of the laser or whatever it is is going to shoot out, and this is going to be the thing that they're going to use as the detection mechanism. They shoot the laser out in front of you or what have you. And what they look for is supposedly they can detect down to one photon. They can detect measurements down to one photon. This is going to be important in a second, but the idea is they're looking at the control and they're waiting for the entanglement to break. When the entanglement breaks, they can measure that instantaneously. Now, this is the dream. This is the absolute dream that you shoot one entangled particle over here and another entangled particle goes somewhere else. And when the entanglement breaks, we can tell practically instantly. How how can we tell? Because the interference pattern changes. It goes from coherent like the the two slits, it goes to being fuzzy. So depending on how the light interacts on one side, we can tell whether or not the co the interference pattern is broken. And this is how we work the switch. the switch mechanism which I described I think before basically anybody on the internet how do you communicate non-locally faster than the speed of light the way you communicate is whether or not the interference pattern is there or not there whether or not we have coherence where our double slit or in this case one slit or if we see an interference pattern depending on which one of those we get an answer to that tells us whether or not we get a one or a zero that tells whether or not we get a one or a zero. And now we have the capability of binary. It's actually that simple. So let me just reiterate this. Now the hold up, the reason why this is a challenge is because you need to be able to measure on your control. Like just imagine a screen where light is hitting it. You need to be able to tell if that photon of light that hits the screen, you need to be able to tell if that's coherent or decoherent. You need to be able to tell if it's coherent. How do you tell that? The answer, according to John Kramer, is that you need at least 10 photons. You need at least 10 photons and then you can measure with a good statistical degree of probability whether or not what kind of shape you're getting. Imagine that in our control panel, we are looking for either a star or we are looking for a circle. We're looking for one of two shapes, a star or a circle, right? Star will represent coherence. Circle represents decoherence. In order to use this radar, all they're doing is trying to determine whether or not in their control they're seeing a star or whether or not they're seeing a circle. And you can imagine there's overlap between the two pictures. So in order to figure out the answer, you have to let enough photons of light hit the control panel. Now this is huge because this is the first step towards non-local communication. In fact, if you can do this with radar, you can almost certainly communicate faster than the speed of light. Faster than the speed of light. And it's 100% possible. The issues of retrocausality are presumably solved by nature itself. Nature does not let retrocausality occur. It's pretty straightforward. So the reason why I bring this up is that China, we are broaching, we are stepping forward towards this geopolitical Mexican standoff with China. China is figuring this technology out and China has it and they're now deploying it on their planes. This is the same kind of technology that would make it so submarines are not can be detected anywhere in the ocean. Same technology. Same technology. Use these quantum radars. It can just go right through the water and it can detect anything because you point it at something and then you're looking for the decoherence to break down. It breaks down. We found something. Also, one of the benefits of this is that they've either found a way or that it just straight up bypasses the noise. So, you can imagine there's electromagnetic signals going everywhere all the time. This quantum interference device interferometer, which is really what it is, this can bypass all noise as well. So this to me represents a major provocation in the technology race and to me it was probably the biggest news story in the last week and normies will have no idea of why it's significant because they this quantum radar is just mumbo jumbo to them. They don't know what that any of that stuff means. They don't understand the significance of it. But when I read into it I went, "Holy crap, this is huge. This shows that China, no question, has this, you know, we've been calling it UFO technology, but it's nuclear technology, quantum technology. They have this technology. Absolutely. And this gives us kind of a benchmark. We can say, okay, if they've got quantum radars, they almost certainly have quantum communication devices. And the next step is directed energy weapons and plasma orbs. This would also tell me that if they just now are getting the quantum radars, they're probably a little ways off from having magical plasma orbs that can create a neutronic fusion bombs. Probably still a little ways off from that, but hard to say for sure. So, I just wanted to bring this up because I think a lot of people are looking at the next war, the next conflict. A lot of people right now, I see, are framing it as Islam is the next conflict, which certainly could be. But to me, the next war is China. The next war is China. Is that when China gets this quantum technology, we are going to something something's going to give one way or another. Either we're going to have to unify with China and they're going to have to become our ally or we're going to have to destroy China. I don't really know how to put it another way, guys. But the truth is, no two waring factions can have this technology. Otherwise, this planet's not going to last. Ultimately, something's going to give with China, and that's where I would be looking. I would be looking at China right now because them having quantum radar is a major escalation in the arms race between the United States and China. And if I'm the United States, the question that I'm asking myself is, at what point are we forced to strike? At what point do we have to strike China to prevent them from hitting that echelon of technology? Or do we not? Or do we say that, oh, we're going to make peace with China. We're going to become friendly with them while we've been adversarial for the last 15, 20 years.