The Physics Behind UFO Propulsion!

[00:00:00]I want to now talk about your your physics theory because you know I find that to be fascinating.

[00:00:06]>> Uh you know there are very few people who are kind of you know coming from the hard-headed physics world >> uh who try to explain UFOs or who are even open to UFOs. So what is your physics theory if you were to describe it at a at a high level for uh not technical but interested in the substance audience.

[00:00:28]The best broad explanation that I can see as out there from physics as we know it is that UFOs understood as extraterrestrially engineered craft of some kind. They are um doing something called space-time metric engineering or essentially engineering the um structure of spaceime.

[00:00:57]and this particular object called the metric which is the central object of Einstein's theory of gravity known as general relativity the Einsteinian description of gravity and spacetime um essentially they're they're probably setting up a type of uh metric called a warp drive metric it's a particular kind that I mean the most well-known version it's was due to this guy Al Kubier Essentially it can um it's a spaceime that involves the contraction of space in front of an object and the expansion of space behind the object.

[00:01:37]And this particular combination of contraction and expansion can actually tug or pull something inside of this metric uh region [clears throat] in between in the direction of the contraction. and it doesn't require any sort of um conventional ejection mass or reaction mass of any kind. You don't need to throw something out the back. So, it's a true example of a reactionless propulsion system and it requires massive amounts of negative energy density to do >> which we don't know how to engineer.

[00:02:10]>> Yeah, we don't know how to engineer it.

[00:02:12]We only know how to engineer it in extremely small >> quantities. You have Sunny White with who can engineer the casemir effect which is this sort of >> uh almost like anti-gravity dark energy quantum black vacuum fluctuations related force >> where you have two uh non-charged but conductive plates when they're placed very close together they sort of attract in this anomalous way and then he can harness that into like a this like what is it 1.5 kilovolt or like some super low voltage chip. That's like amazing. I mean, if you can like light up anything and use that as like real electricity, that's nuts.

[00:02:53]>> Yeah.

[00:02:54]>> Um, but so yeah. So, so you're saying if [clears throat] you can then scale that to, you know, much higher levels, then maybe you can operate a UFO.

[00:03:04]>> In principle, it seems, I mean, uh, general relativity theory, Einstein's theory of gravity allows it in principle. One of the open questions still in the physics is um there's this thing called quantum fluctuations or zero point fluctuations. Basically the um the the the I guess you could say the energy associated with quantum fields in their lowest energy state. There's a question about how they would gravitate or what kind how they would influence the space-time metric. And this is an area of active research, but we don't really have a yet a consistent theory of how that would work. So, it's still an open question. And one possibility is that it might turn out that uh the way that quantum fields alter the metric, in other words, how they gravitate could destabilize. It could be such that they destabilize warp drive space times >> and make them basically unworkable.

[00:04:06]If that's the case, then it's got to be something much more exotic. It would mean that there is something fundamentally that that we're missing in our current physics. But I think but if it doesn't, then I would say this is the most likely uh >> cuz the alubi thing doesn't require any sort of break in Einstein. It's consistent with Einstein, right? It's it's within relativity and it's just if you can harness, >> you know, negative energy, negative mass some way, then you can create this sort of, you know, space-time metric engineering. Yeah.

[00:04:36]>> So, okay. Interesting. So, that would be your top candidate is that we just figure out how it's more of an engineering problem than it is a theoretical physics problem at this point.

[00:04:45]>> I mean, I would say maybe it's a combination of both just because um the theoretical understanding can also inform the engineering understanding.

[00:04:54]But but then again, we we also know that it's possible to engineer things to a very high degree of prec precision without fully understanding the physics behind the fundamental reasons why they work. So >> that's true.

[00:05:09]>> Maybe the way to make progress is just to continue experimenting and tinkering and to try to prepare larger quantities of negative energy density in the right configurations and just make a warp drive and see if it works.

[00:05:22]>> Yeah. Don't worry about the theory not being up to speed with the experiments.

[00:05:26]>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

[00:05:27]>> I maybe that's the way to go.

[00:05:28]>> Have you ever been asked to be part of the legacy UFO program?

[00:05:31]>> No. I I wish I would be. I um I even asked Hal Putoff and Eric Davis uh once.

[00:05:38]I I said, "Well, if if I were interested in doing that, how should I go about it?

[00:05:42]And how how do they recruit people?" And >> yeah, they gave some general pointers to me about how they would work or what you would have to do.

[00:05:51]>> What were the pointers? But it was just that you would have to first apply to an aerospace corporation, one of the major ones that are, you know, implicated as one of being part of the legacy program, work work for them uh for a few years on maybe a on a more public project, get top secret SEI clearance, express interest in the legacy program, and then uh there will be like an internal call to applicants or if if if they think you're not both interested and you're capable, they'll maybe reach out to you and then >> if that's the only path, we're we're [ __ ] [laughter] cuz I mean I I think you got to >> I mean that's crazy. That doesn't make sense. But that I mean that's interesting to hear that that that was directly from Eric and Hal who I think of as you know being on the outside the closest proximity-wise to the inside as can be. they seem like they really have an understanding of the map and the frameworks and all all that sort of stuff.

[00:06:51]>> Yeah. And to some extent um a lot of my knowledge of this is I've built on their work on this like space-time metric engineering is a phrase that Hal came up with came up with. I think it's appropriate terminology and he's written papers on this. Eric Davis has also written a number of papers on warp drives and traversible wormholes and I've studied their works and then I've I'm you know trying to build on this with a new type of framework that I think can potentially describe how quantum fields gravitate and that could be used to address these questions about the feasibility of warp drives.

[00:07:25]something I've been toying with recently because I had this uh discussion with Eric Davis and Eric Weinstein >> and it was super frustrating because we we were talking to Eric Davis and we're like so did you find any theoretical physicists on the program and he was like no there none of them were theoretical physicist he was like maybe one guy Bernard he hush or something yeah >> and we were like what like no one and so >> one interpretation is like the military-industrial complex is like totally asleep at the wheel like has no idea what's going on This is like, you know, it's like crisis mode. This is crazy. It's like this cargo cult that's like super poorly run. And then on the other side of that, it's like the people who've seen these objects know that physics falls so far short of ever being able to ever crack these things open that and it's so much more consciousness related. These are like boundary condition celestial platonic objects that you know allah the holographic principle like we see that you know the 3D boundary of but they exist in some higher dimensional space and we just you know we've tried but we could like barely get in and maybe we got in after 50 years to one of them or something and then we were really confused once we got in you know like that sort of thing.

[00:08:45]Those are the only two explanations.

[00:08:47]Either super asleep at the wheel or it's not physics at all. And like and they know it's not physics and the whole and then and then you get into like are there intentional conflations being made between these like exotic physics frameworks around you know high frequency gravitational waves uh gravitational manipulation with >> solid state superconductors and biffield brown and like all these things that like are real topological physics anomalies that lead to like really cool exciting lineages of science and breakthroughs. Is that being conflated with this UFO conversation which is really just parasychological and has nothing to do with like nuts andbolt science?

[00:09:29]>> Um my impression is I mean from what I've understood for example Hal Putoff mentions that he was asked by the Bush administration the the second Bush administration to partake in some sort of a a review and to ask about like What would it take for disclosure to occur?

[00:09:51]What would be the costs and benefit uh the costs and the benefits of that? And one of the conclusions that this review team came up with is that each aerospace company wants to keep their progress or their work proprietary and they don't want to reveal their secrets to the other one. And um so there's this incentive for different aerospace corporations to just not talk to the other ones about their findings and to be extremely guarded about who they allow into the program.

[00:10:27]And so the incentive to keep these things secret and to control who can come in and who can't leads to limitations in terms of uh yeah who gets to know about what's being done actually in these or or uh who gets to work on these programs and very few people from academia even think to say oh I'm going to go into um aerospace and um show an interest in UFOs. Um >> for sure.

[00:11:04]>> But if but if if you really run that simulation, say like Lockheed has, you know, >> the Kingman craft from Arizona and it's some warehouse or whatever and it's just like no seams, no rivets, like this beautiful thing >> and you really want to make it work cuz like you have this market cap that's like, you know, good, but like you need the quarter over quarter growth. you have your shareholder meetings, you know, you have China and Russia and like you got to you got to make progress on this thing. Do you not think that at some point you'd be like, "Okay, like the tinkering hasn't really worked. The engineering's been tough.

[00:11:38]>> Let's get a head hunter to find some theoretical physicists. Let's create a short list of the theoretical physicists that would be open-minded to this in the first place or qualified to work on this. Let's show them the goods." You know, do you not think that that would happen at some point?

[00:11:56]Perhaps at some point, but they might be extremely few, highly selected, and if they were there in society, they would definitely not be able to say anything publicly, and they might even be one of the people say, "This is all [ __ ] and it's none of it's real." Um I think I vaguely remember some people suggesting that Edward Teller maybe was one of the [gasps] maybe one of the physicists who if he if there is this legacy program he would be >> he was on it if there is a UFO legacy program for sure.

[00:12:29]>> Yeah. So then that would be an instance of this of extremely few people are selected people that can have shown a track record of trustworthiness with secrets even smaller secrets for example and I didn't know if you know this but there's a project sign or grudge document >> from pre-blue book >> in the late 40s and Edward Teller's name is on it where he's engaging in a real UFO review.

[00:12:55]>> So that's fascinating. You have that and then you have the fact that he got Bob Lazar his job with EG which I think you can almost definitively say at this point there's too much data there >> to dismiss. Um, and then you have the fact that he was, you know, friendly with Thomas Towns and Brown and was shown uh kind of a demo of his uh fan precipitator experiment and said, "I have no idea how this works." And freaks out >> and then gets um this guy Floyd Odlam who's the majority or one of the biggest shareholders in Northrup pre- merger with Grumman to invest in Towns and Brown and just thing after thing after thing.

[00:13:30]>> It's like and he was Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, and he was very obviously deeply associated with, you know, Lawrence Liverour lab. He just had to have known something. And then he's there's even a letter where he's talking about John Alexander. John Alexander is like, you know, synonymous with, you know, UFO research on the government side for the last 70 years.

[00:13:52]>> Like that guy has as much of a history or top of the pyramid understanding as anybody again in the kind of public world.

[00:13:59]And uh there's a letter where Teller is like commending John Alexander saying like, you know, this guy has made all these important updates in non-lethal warfare.

[00:14:09]>> Mhm.

[00:14:10]>> And so like that's a wild connection.

[00:14:12]Yeah, that's really interesting. So yeah, I I think Teller >> would be somebody who would have been on Legacy, you know, back in the day.

[00:14:19]>> Yeah. But but you know may maybe to your point about um it's just something so far beyond any of our theories and models of the world that there's just no point in trying to bring in I don't know Ed Whitten from Princeton Institute for Advanced Study because it's just there's no reason to think that anything he knows about string theory or physics could help. Um, if if we gave Galileo, I don't know, uh, an iPhone and we asked him to explain how it works based on just the limited principles of physics that he understood, he would get absolutely nowhere despite being the greatest living physicist of his time or even to Newton, he would get absolutely nowhere with that. Um, >> yeah. Well, you'd have an interface. You could play around with the interface.

[00:15:08]Maybe that and >> yeah, but would you be able to know how it works? Like, you know, probably not in your lifetime.

[00:15:14]>> Yeah, the knowledge base at that time.

[00:15:17]>> Yeah, he would look at it under a microscope. He wouldn't recognize what he's uh seeing. He wouldn't know anything about solid state physics, quant basic quantum mechanics, electricity, magnetism.

[00:15:27]There's just too much cumulative knowledge. And so, and they might not even be able to turn it on if it was like, let's say it was battery was dead.

[00:15:35]H. So maybe these people in this, you know, uh, presumed legacy program, they've just assessed that there's nothing in the cutting edge of theoretical physics research that seems like it could be useful at all to actually getting these things to work.

[00:15:53]And that might just be another reason why they don't even bother to try.

[00:15:57]That's my best guess. I mean, I But it's as always, you can't really say until you're, you know, >> Yeah.

[00:16:03]>> involved with these people. Yeah. Well, Max, this has been a blast, man. Uh, a lot of fun. I feel like it's been like a comprehensive overview of all the hard-headed evidence around anomalies on the moon, Mars with the space program, and anybody who's earnestly looking at this stuff should should seriously look at your work because it's seriously done in in good faith. It's done rigorously, and I don't really see a lot of clear and easy debunks, you know, for it. I guess I I'll end on a final question here, which is you have all of this data now.

[00:16:34]>> A lot of the data, you know, points to almost things maybe happening live on the moon right now, >> and then you obviously have structures that seem sort of more ancient when it comes to both the moon and Mars, >> right? So, have you gone to the like theory layer or like the you know what is the what is the analysis of all of the data >> and do you have like a a place where you net out on alien life and its current existence or past existence?

[00:17:03]>> I think the abundance so I I look at this as a cumulative case. Maybe no one particular anomaly say on the moon or Mars is definitive.

[00:17:13]It's a probabilistic cumulative case.

[00:17:15]You add up all these particular lines of evidence and you ask in light of all of this evidence combined, what is the most probable explanation? Is it that it's all just paridolia natural geology that's just like fooling us or um or is there an intelligent cause explanation of some kind or another? And I think that the inference to the best explanation of this cumulative data is that there was a past extraterrestrial presence of some kind or another on the moon and on Mars in the solar system more broadly. And we have some pretty strong evidence that there have even been um craft of some kind or probe of some kind sent to the solar system. Here I'm referring to STS48, STS80, the two space shuttle cases that I mentioned earlier. Probably the fast walkers that the DSP.

[00:18:11]>> So do you think those are probes or do you think those are live? You know, they're beings that are sentient on the inside that represent, you know, some other civilization.

[00:18:19]>> I I don't know for sure, but my best guess would be that probes probably of some kind if at least if they're doing something really exotic in terms of their propulsive capabilities. But it could be something much more exotic than that. Um, so I keep an open mind about that. But what I'm trying what I would like to do just for the scientific community is to lay out these anomalies, explain in detail why the sort of remotely plausible geological or natural explanations don't make sense.

[00:18:51]That's all you need to do to then say, okay, there must be an intelligent cause explanation. And if it's an intelligent cause explanation, it's not from humans.

[00:19:01]So you're only left with one possibility, which is an extraterrestrial in origin broadly construed. Well, you do a very good job of kind of logically walking someone down that road. Um, and you're reminding me when we were talking about, you know, probes. I think there's a former NASA guy named Stephen Dick who's part of Aviopobe's Galileo project who talks about uh this as sort of some sort of AI layer like protective layer of Earth and there's another guy I think named Patrick Jackson who has like a sphere network theory. So >> yeah, I think I think the right thing to do is definitely to leave all options on the table. It's it's so hard to say and so hard to sense make around this.

[00:19:38]Again, going back to the top of our conversation, if the parasychology stuff is at all real, uh, all things are possible.

[00:19:46]>> I agree.

[00:19:46]>> Um, but, uh, I really appreciate this uh, conversation, Max, and uh, yeah, hopefully we can run it back at some point.

[00:19:52]>> Yeah, it would be great. It was a great honor. I'm big fan [music] of your works.

[00:19:55]>> It was my honor, man. Awesome. All right, cool. All righty.

[00:20:00][music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] >> I want to take a moment. oment to thank one of today's sponsors, Ziotics. I've been using their pre-alcohol product for years, and when the opportunity came up to work with them, I jumped at it because it's one of the few things I actually drink before a night out with friends when it's time to celebrate a special event. And that little decision I make before I go out changes everything. Ziotics pre-alcohol probiotic drink is the world's first genetically engineered probiotic. It was invented by PhD scientists to specifically tackle rough mornings after drinking. Here's how it works. When you drink, alcohol gets converted into a toxic byproduct in the gut. It's a buildup of this byproduct, not dehydration that's to blame for the rough days after drinking. Pre-alcohol produces an enzyme to break this byproduct down. Just remember to make pre-alcohol your first drink of the night. Of course, drink responsibly and you'll feel your best tomorrow. I have Ziotics before my first drink of the night and I wake up feeling totally normal the next morning. As you'll know, if you're older than say the age of 28 or 29 is not usual. So, go to ziotics.com/jesse to learn more and get 15% off your first order when you use Jesse at checkout. Z Biotics is also backed with a 100% money back guarantee. So, if you're unsatisfied for any reason, they'll refund your money, no questions asked.

[00:22:05]Remember to head to ziotics.com/jesse and use the code jesse at checkout for 15% off.