American Alchemy with Jesse Michels - Eric Weinstein Demands UFO Secrets From Pentagon Scientist

Starting point is 00:00:00 So you're going to create a wormhole on demand? You should be able to. That's what my research showed. So walk me through, how do I get to Alpha Century by engineering a traversable wormhole? Well, you're going to create... Eric Davis, you are kind of synonymous with UFO science. You have an amazing background at aerospace corporation,

Starting point is 00:00:23 Earth Tech, worked with NASA Lewis. Eric Weinstein, you are a math PhD from Harvard, who is dared to present. a theory of everything in physics. The alleged Roswell crash was real. There was a there, there really happening. How is it possible that something this large that involves this many people

Starting point is 00:00:42 has zero incontrovertible pieces of evidence? Do you dispute the existence of atomic weapons because you can't access it? I can't access it. Oh, you can access it. I have no idea what we just did. It is a crash retrieval, nine human intelligence, non-human technology.

Starting point is 00:00:58 How many of those? crash retrieval program people have you met? I think it's five total. There's no physics in it. It doesn't make any sense. Say again. It defies the laws of physics. We haven't made progress.

Starting point is 00:01:10 We have no physicists. How are they doing on this project decades in? This thing is not a Manhattan project, and you know what the Manhattan project would. Not one of these proposals excites me. They're boring as sin. I don't like GR. Why are you not tweaking it?

Starting point is 00:01:27 I don't have intuition. on how I could tweak it. Are there propulsion modalities that you're high conviction and that transcend chemical combustion? Yeah, it goes way beyond even advanced. Are you aware of reports that we are being... Monitor? Made to know that we do not control our space.

Starting point is 00:01:52 Yes. When you see smoke at this level, the question is, what is the nature of the fire? There are different fires. Or there's a smoke machine. Or there's a smoke meeting. Epstein was running many different programs. It wasn't even Epstein probably running.

Starting point is 00:02:06 Look, I believe we can leave. And if you believe you can leave, you have to imagine that you're being visited. Before we continue, I want to take a second to thank one of my favorite products in the world, Ketone IQ, for sponsors. today's episode. Ketone IQ is one of the very few things I use that gives me clean, sustainable energy without the crash. It's just this little shot and I take a drink and I feel like I'm on fire. No ups, no downs, no nervous system weirdness. Just clean, clear mental energy. The reason it works is pretty simple. It gives your brain's ketones, which are almost by definition its most efficient fuel source. Instead of pushing your system, it actually feeds it. In fact, your body

Starting point is 00:03:12 endogenously produces ketones. So when you drink this, it supports deep focus, long conversations, and sustained mental performance. It was originally developed through a multi-million dollar military program designed for high-stress environments where cognitive performance really matters. And today, it's used by founders, researchers, podcasters like myself, and people who need their mind to work when it counts. I always take a sip of one of these things before long podcasts. This product is also really personal for me because I've known the founders, Jeff and Michael, for over a decade. These guys are awesome, and for as long as I've known them, they've tried every supplement, biohack, and utropic under the sun. So it was a pretty good signal to me that they decided to start a

Starting point is 00:03:54 company around ketones. I use ketone IQ regularly. It's like a mental cheat code, and it's genuinely one of the cleanest energy sources I've ever found. So before we get back into the episode, please visit ketone.com for 30% off your subscription order, plus receive a free gift with your second shipment. Again, that's ketone.com slash alchemy for 30% off your order. Or you can find ketone IQ

Starting point is 00:04:19 at Target stores nationwide and get your first shot free. Seriously, this stuff works. Thanks so much to ketone IQ for sponsoring today's episode. As you know, we have a new starship. Of course, we have a healthcare center on board. Ask what my new favorite product

Starting point is 00:04:35 in it is, I Restore's Illumina Face Mask. Some billionaires are rejuvenating in underground light pods. I'm doing my own version in my living room. This mask is like a medbed for your face. It's lightweight, super convenient, cordless, and runs red, blue, and infrared light therapy all at once. The same type of technology NASA studied for skin healing in space. It's safe for your eyes too, so you don't have to sit there like a statue.

Starting point is 00:05:03 You can live your life. I wear it when I'm reading, meal prepping, or investigating life's mysteries, without feeling like I'm staring into the sun. Ten minutes of light and my skin looks and feels so good. Finding red light therapy was a revelation for me. I've definitely had a few late nights reading about magnetic pole shifts. But with this mask, I look like I actually slept. Did I? That's debatable. It's warm, wireless, convenient, and makes your skin feel super soft.

Starting point is 00:05:30 And IRestores kicking off their spring savings with some very big, discounts. Right now you can get the Elite plus Illumina Face Mask bundle at an exclusive deal when you use code Jesse at irrestore.com. That's Jesse J-E-S-S-E at irrestore.com. Please support our show and tell them we sent you. Dr. Eric Weinstein, Dr. Eric Davis, this is an absolute honor. I can't believe this is finally happening. I think often in this space when we're talking about UFOs, UFO the legacy reverse engineering programs, you have like a wave function that never sort of collapses. And you have, you know, different sides saying things that are mutually exclusive and truth, it never collapses into true or false. And I'm really excited to do this because Eric Weinstein,

Starting point is 00:06:24 you probably need no introduction when it comes to kind of a general audience. You are a math PhD from Harvard, premier cultural commentator of our generation, who is dared to present a theory of everything in physics. And then Eric Davis, you definitely need no introduction in UFO space, but to maybe a more general audience, some of whom who might have seen you in this recent Age of Disclosure movie, you are kind of synonymous with UFO science. You have an amazing background at Aerospace Corporation, Earth Tech.

Starting point is 00:07:00 You've worked with NASA Lewis. You've worked on various initiatives and exotic propulsion, directed energy. And so very excited to have you both. Today, I want to make this kind of two parts. One part is kind of establishing ground truth on Eric Davis's claims because he's formally investigated this UFO legacy reverse engineering program. So I want to figure out what those claims are for the audience. And then part two, and this is why we have.

Starting point is 00:07:30 have you here, Dr. Weinstein, is I want to figure out, and this is kind of actually a follow-up on this thing we did with Hal Putoff last time, if there is a theoretical physics component to this UFO legacy reverse engineering program, is there physics hiding in private aerospace corporations, physics you can think of as the rules of reality itself, that would be problematic to say the least if that were the case. And so I'm very excited to, to, to speak to you both. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thanks for having you. Awesome. So, Eric Davis, I want to start with you. When did you become aware of this UFO legacy reverse engineering program and how did you become aware of it and how are you so high confidence in it?

Starting point is 00:08:21 I was working at NIDS. It'd be 30 years this July. And I was the director of aerospace physics and astrophysics research at NIDS. That's National Institute for Discovery Science that Bob Bigelow founded in 1995. And I was hired in July of 96 along with Colum Kelleher and George O'Nett. And John Alexander was already there on the staff also served as a member of the Science Advisory Board.

Starting point is 00:08:50 So I worked for Air Force Research Lab after NIDS and before help put off hired me at EarthTech. Okay, so then during my work at AFRL, And during my 15 years working with Hal Putoff, we got involved with the ASAP slash A-TIP, and then later on the separate attempt called A-Tip, and then the UAP task force that Jay Stratton led. And using my security clearances, my need to know, my access, including my letter that I'm deputized by Jim Lackatsky as a representative of the Defense Intelligence Agency, I used all that leverage and authority to get into the crash retrieval program.

Starting point is 00:09:27 I couldn't get access to sea craft bodies or talk to the people, but I was able to get in to the people who handled all of that at a programmatic level and got confirmation that all of that was real, that all of it happened. And what's your conviction level in, say, Roswell, for example, like that being a real crash involving non-human biologics? It's 100%. 100%. It's 100%. And it wasn't in Roswell, New Mexico. It was on the Foster Ranch in Corona, New Mexico, which is 30 miles from Roswell. This landed at a ranch at Corona, New Mexico, and the rancher turned it over to the airport.

Starting point is 00:10:01 Army officers say the missile found sometime last week has been inspected at Roswell, New Mexico, and sent to right field, Ohio for further inspections. I had my information I got from Ed Mitchell at a science advisory board meeting about the Greer briefings on the disclosure project at the Pentagon, and then Admiral Wilson coming back and verifying that the Roswell crash, well, the Corona crash actually, really did have. It wasn't a Mughal balloon. It wasn't a raw wind radar test balloon project. It wasn't a weather balloon. It wasn't anything of that nature. It was a real craft of unknown origin that was adjudicated to be not of human origin or construct. And it crashed on the Foster Ranch in Corona, Mexico. And then there's my work with Dave Grush when I was at the Aerospace Corporation. He was at the Aerospace Corporation building in Colorado Springs because he worked for their government customer, which occupied one or two floors there. What was David Gresh doing in that capacity? He was, I think, a security contractor or advisor to a program manager. Dave was the NRO liaison officer to the UAP task force. So he took direction from Jay Stratton. Wasn't a national geospatial agency? No, I said the NRO, the National Reconnaissance office. Yeah, you said that, but I thought he was national geospatial. No, that was later. That was later. That was later. Okay, so he's the NRO

Starting point is 00:11:25 So during the UAPTF, he was the liaison officer on behalf of the NRO to the task force. Yep. Got it. So he worked with Travis Taylor, Jay Stratton. There's some other folks that don't want to be named. I know. So I just know that there's a core group of 40 people, but there is a peripheral body of 1,000 people that contributed some of their time and labor and resources than the other government agency. DOD agencies, intelligence agencies, to feed information to the task force.

Starting point is 00:12:00 A lot of people ask about kind of circular reporting when it comes to UFO, you know, testimonies. David Grush is what a lot of people, I think, are hinging their belief on because he just seems like a very kind of honest aboveboard guy. He stumbled into a lot of this stuff. How many of his witnesses, his 40 witnesses, are more of kind of the hapless engineer type that just worked on the vehicles versus people who have, you know, kind of secondhand or, you know, third hand. No, they're all firsthand. It's just that it's something that Eric and I had lots of hours and hours of conversations about two years ago. Not a single of them were a physicist.

Starting point is 00:12:41 Not a single one of these guys were physicists. They had some discipline and engineering in their profession. They were either electrical engineers, material scientists, aerospace engineers, aeromechanical, aerothermal, thermal control, fluid mechanics. Save that thought. Who wasn't a real physicist there? Nobody at the PhD level who is either an applied physicist or a theoretical physicist. Save that thought, please, because that is going to basically be the entire kind of premise for the second part of this. Do you have any questions as I'm sort of, you know?

Starting point is 00:13:12 Well, you know, look, one of the things that I dislike very strongly about the UAP world is that you spend an inordinate amount of time if you're just trying to be an honest. analytic person with the is there any actual tangible and controvertible proof and it always seems like there's somehow this tight-knit group of people who in general themselves don't have direct proof but sort of have proof one thing away and people build entire theories about you know the names of crafts and who was where and and i just have no idea as a civilian uh and a tech civilian, how to think about this because I don't want to spend our time in the is it real or not mode, because that basically wastes time. And it's also how conspirators get people not to work on conspiracy theories that could work is that you demonize and stigmatize the behavior.

Starting point is 00:14:15 So I usually would prefer in this situation to just decamp and assume the nature of all of these things. But just to be honest, and it just needs to be said once. I've been looking at this now, five years since Jesse first crammed it down my throat, and I would say I was clearly wrong about it. It's an enormous area. There's so many people who claim to have had contact with this program in one form or another. I can't believe that anyone could train an acting troupe at Brando levels of sincerity to lie to me like that. On the other hand, I've never seen anything like it where I can't get a single shred of incontrovertible proof, so many people seem to have it, but they all seem to be under some kind of an NDA where they can't

Starting point is 00:15:01 give something real. So just the first frustrating question is, how is it possible that something this large that involves this many people has zero scientifically incontrovertible pieces of evidence so that we can actually, there's no way to predicate a discussion in a way that I know that's responsible. It just completely alludes the scientific community. Yes, it's because the incontrovertible evidence is kept in the classified wrong for security reasons. Well, there you go. And again, I don't want to, I don't want to. Do you dispute the existence of atomic weapons because you can't access it?

Starting point is 00:15:34 I can't access. Oh, you can access it. Yes. Have you actually been to pick up the, I've taken up the Telenium core? No, I never kept the demon core in my basement. Oh, how about the lithium fixed fuel and the primary new. Oh, we used to do that in high school. Oh.

Starting point is 00:15:51 No, no. What I'm saying is, is that the Teller Ulaan design. is released as a highly redacted report, right? And so I have an idea from plenty of sources that this program exists. And what's more in the case of atomic weapons, physicists are not perfectly locked down. It's a high trust community,

Starting point is 00:16:13 and in general, people are willing to talk, you know, even if they shouldn't, about the role of physics and atomic weapons. I have never heard a colleague, not once at a high level in physics, give any credence to this world? In other words... Well, that's because they didn't have access.

Starting point is 00:16:33 They didn't have need to know, they didn't have a contract where they had to have access. Again, it's not a challenge in that sense, assume that there is a dividing line, but it means that in the Manhattan Project, right? We called in Feynman and Boer and Fermi and von Neumann. and put them under Robert Oppenheimer and Teller and all these cats.

Starting point is 00:16:58 And, okay. And Bethy and. And beta, right? So, but in so doing, I would say, okay, I would imagine that if this is an existential threat, that there's stuff from someplace we can't understand that moves and breaks the laws of physics and all this, we would call that in. Now, one of the great things that came out of our discussions before is you said this thing, which I repeated on Rogan because I didn't think it was classified.

Starting point is 00:17:22 You said when it comes to being technical just at this point that they don't invite in physiz. You said, you, you said that Eric, you, me, and Hal put off are the three most technical people on this. And I said, I'm not on this. Yeah, that's the problem. That's the problem. You should be in it. Okay, but that makes you Oppenheimer. And von Neumann and Feynman and Beta and Fermi is Hal, or something like that.

Starting point is 00:17:49 In other words, or the reverse. But are you and Howell our Manhattan project? No, we're not directly involved. We've been exposed to it officially for the purpose of the ASAP's goals. What is the question that I wish to ask? Can you figure out? I think what Eric's trying to ask, and I do want to actually continue along the former lines of just asking about kind of core evidence with Dr. Davis. But I think the question that Eric is trying to ask is you just mentioned that none of Grush's, you know, 40 witnesses that he, you know, handed over to the intelligence community inspector general are theoretical physicists.

Starting point is 00:18:31 Right. And so you have, you know, your physics Ph.D. HAL is an electrical engineer. Well, he's also, well, his Ph.D. was in laser physics because when you go to Stanford in the 1960s, you can't get a PhD in physics or a master's. So it's you two and then Eric, who is a, you know, math PhD at the highest level who can keep up with, you know, any physicist in the country and has his own physics theory of everything. Oh, I know. And so it's all three of you guys. But all three of you are outsiders. He's a real outsider.

Starting point is 00:19:02 You two have officially investigated this stuff. And you're saying there are no theoretical physicists on the core program. I've never seen one. I've never gotten evidence from the people, from the leadership at the airspace companies. personally interviewed with. That's so wild. I don't mean interviewed with, but who I investigated and interviewed leadership and a few with the worker bees involved.

Starting point is 00:19:25 Are there propulsion modalities that you're high conviction and that transcend chemical combustion? Yeah. It goes way beyond even advanced nuclear. Nuclear in aerospace industry is fission, fusion, and matter, antimatter annihilation. Way beyond that. I don't think we have a grasp of it. I haven't heard anybody that I've interviewed say that they have a grasp of it.

Starting point is 00:19:51 And even as recently, unfortunately, the one technical person who ended up becoming a senior VP decades later at the biggest of the legacy aerospace companies, he was a material scientist working on the crash retrieval program after getting his doctor, after earning his doctorate. and he got hired straight away to work on it for about roughly two decades. Who is this? Who is that? I'm not doing. Okay.

Starting point is 00:20:20 Yeah, no worries. So basically he's a material scientist. We've had a lot of classified and unclassified discussions. And I brought these questions up. I asked his questions. Yeah. And the answer is, no, we didn't have theoretical physicist that we could put on this. We're strictly limited in the number of people on the bigot list.

Starting point is 00:20:42 The bigot list is the list of people who have need to know and access to a particular classified program. And if you're not on that list, you don't get admitted. So this is you don't get invited. This is an unacknowledged, waived and bigoted self-special access program. It's a waived, unacknowledged special access program. Right. And so I said, so we're your physicist. What are your theoretical and applied physicist telling you?

Starting point is 00:21:04 You said, well, we don't have any. We never did. We only were allowed to keep it down to roughly a handful of people in the company to work on this. And that's it. And it's limited to engineering. There's no physics in it. It doesn't make any sense. Say again. I'm just trying to logically think about this. Okay. And, you know, it's like saying, we're having trouble performing Beethoven's fifth, and we have the finest accountants, optometrists, boxers, and cardio trainers. And you're like, well, what about violinists

Starting point is 00:21:37 and violists and anybody playing the French horn? And it's like, oh, Well, we don't do that. So, of course, you're not going to play Beethoven's Fifth. I mean, because you can't engineer your way out of a science problem. Yeah. Well, let me tell you, I think you've got a great point about talking about the Manhattan Project. This thing is not a Manhattan Project, and you know what the Manhattan Project was. We both do.

Starting point is 00:22:01 We read the books. It was multi-disciplinar. How many people? Thousands of people? Multidisciplinary people. The white badges was the very small core, but the whole thing was enormous. Yeah. You had industrial engineers, computational engineers, electrical engineers, mechanical engineers,

Starting point is 00:22:17 explosives experts, nuclear physicists and nuclear engineers. You had everybody of all the STEM disciplines there. You had to have mathematicians. And they were involved with that program to build up the fuel, design, characterization, and manufacture. But this program does it. These programs don't have that. They deliberately keep it divided up among different companies to make.

Starting point is 00:22:41 plausible deniability in case there's a leak, and they keep it very small for the reason. Okay, but it has to be centralized somewhere. The compartmentalized nature of Los Alamos and the Manhattan Project more broadly was still overseen by a small group who had universal access. That's right. And also note that the Manhattan Project people had their families living with them, too, in a closed city. That's right. That's right. So they don't have an equivalent for this in the crash retrieval program. So there's disjointed groups of people, small numbers of people. They're not allowed to know about the other people and what they're doing.

Starting point is 00:23:22 Those are the people who are in the stovepiped architecture. Right. And the central portfolio owner is a three-letter intelligence agency. So that's who is centrally in charge. It was Leslie Grove in the United States. Was Leslie the general of the Army Corps of Engineers? or was he in a different combat? I don't remember where he was seated.

Starting point is 00:23:45 But he was in charge on behalf of the Army. He ran it. He was the military boss and Oppenheimer was the civilian boss of the Manhattan Project. Do you take David Gresh at face value that Dick Cheney was the last head honcho of this sort of program? And there's not really a mob boss. The closest person we got that I was aware of was unfortunately now deceased Vice President Dick Cheney. Darth Vader himself, not shocking that he was involved in this. And essentially when he left in 2009, that was the last time that these activities really had central leadership.

Starting point is 00:24:22 I never heard that before. So that never came up in our classified and unclassified conversations. I'm not aware that Dick Cheney had any role. To speak to this three letter, the head you cited a three letter. In our discussion at Seoul in San Francisco, you directly said CIA, DS&T at one time. Glenn Gaffney, et cetera. So was the UFO program portfolio owner. So to Dr. Weinstein's question about technical rigor physicists, did you ever have the opportunity to ask anybody near the head of this apparatus why there wasn't a stronger motivation to have physicists on staff? I mean, from an early

Starting point is 00:25:01 era, why was there not that prioritization? Well, I would love to talk to the head of the crash retrieval program during that era, but he refused to talk to us. And that was, that was, that was And Gaffney? Yeah. Okay. And who is Jim Ryder? In Las Vegas, divestment of leadership by Lockheed Martin Space now deceased.

Starting point is 00:25:39 He's this Lockheed Martin Space Systems guy. He was the senior vice president of Lockheed Martin Space and Missals Company, which is also the Space Systems Company. And his dual hat job was director of the company's Advanced Technology Center. Did he also work on UFO crash retrieval initiative? Well, I don't want to say that or confirm or deny that because of the consequence to his family. One of his one of his daughters works there. Okay, got it. It could cause her issues.

Starting point is 00:26:12 Okay. So I can't get into that particular detail. Okay. Yeah, no problem. I'm so sorry. No, go for. Through your investigations, like, did you ever encounter technical intelligence that you considered high credibility that seemed like it would have had to have come?

Starting point is 00:26:27 from direct communication with NIH, or did it all seem like it could have been through passive investigation? I couldn't get to that. There's two things I couldn't get into because I didn't have access. I didn't have the right clearances. And I wasn't allowed to, let's put it this way, there are people I was working with who knew who to contact, but they wouldn't give me the contact because they were not allowed to give out the name and organizational office or program that,

Starting point is 00:26:57 individual worked at. And so they were not allowed to show that with me. So I couldn't get into the NHI issue. I couldn't get into the alien or NHI contact issue. The fact that Ryder essentially said we'd have no idea how this works, does that imply to you? They never had direct, they never had the ability to ask questions of someone with full knowledge of the technology. Did you ever make that connection? No, I think Dave Grosch was able to make that connection. I couldn't. When you're on age of disclosure and you are saying sort of confidently that Roswell had, you know, a certain number of beings, one of the beings probably survived is... That I don't know. You know, I... Okay.

Starting point is 00:27:37 That's a point of information. I have never gotten in any of my official government interviews or even unofficial off-the-record interviews is that any of these aliens ever lived. This is coming from a different avenue. And I don't recall Dave Grush telling me that that was the case. But I won't dismiss it offhand. It's just that it's not a piece of data that ever came my way after 30 years. As part of your official investigations in OSAP, you were making sure that your sources were completely uncorrelated, right? They weren't speaking to each other behind close stores.

Starting point is 00:28:15 They wouldn't be able to because they were in compartmentalized programs. Yeah. And we had compartmentalized clearances ourselves. So we could only talk to them at a certain level. bubble. And even we could not get special access program clearance because the VP of Lockheed Martin, there was a VP of TRW before it got bought out by Northrop Grumman. These guys, they may know about each other, but they're not read in on each other's programs because that's what compartmentalization meant. It meant that they may know about each other through the

Starting point is 00:28:52 portfolio owner, but they're not allowed to communicate because of that compartmentalization. And so where was I going? I think I lost my train of thought. Well, tell me about George H.W. Bush, Bush 41. Well, that's separate. That's separate. Yeah, totally separate. But yeah, just wanted to ask you about your interactions with him because it seemed like from your accounting, he wasn't fully aware of the UFO crash retrieval program, but he became aware of it through some interesting gains. Well, he became Uh, Gerald Ford's CIA director. Mm-hmm. So Gerald Ford became president.

Starting point is 00:29:26 He nominated Bush, and Bush got confirmed, and he became the CIA director. So he goes into this, for his first briefing as director of the CIA. The first thing that came out of this briefer's mouth was the Holloman landing in April, 1964, Hallamon, Air Force Base in New Mexico. So he started briefing Bush on that, and Bush said, what are you talking about? I've never heard of this before. Describe what this is for the audience. So to make a long story short, three craft, UAP,

Starting point is 00:29:55 craft, UFO craft came in. One of them landed not on the runway, but on the tarmac close to a hangar. The other two took off. And a gangway came down, extended down, and down comes a humanoid-looking, very tall NHA being. He looked at Northern European descent.

Starting point is 00:30:17 So he goes and meets with them and they go into that hangar. And that hanger turned out to be the equivalent back in those days of a special access program hangar. It's all secured. They've got guards around it. That's the end of the story. So this film was made of it. And this story has circulated at various times.

Starting point is 00:30:33 The Defense Audiovisual Agency under the command of two retired generals. I think Jerry Miller was the name of one of them. I don't remember the name of the other. Jacques Ville talks about them in his book Revelations, I think it is. and he and Alan Heinek were invited to go to the DAVA and see that film, get access to the film and see it. So they got there and apparently they were not allowed to see that video because one of those two generals said that they got intercepted or somebody got in the middle of that and convinced them not to allow Belay and Heinek to see that film. You do have this fact pattern over decades of, you know, this sort of luring in of various, you know, UFO researchers and presentation of passage material, which is, you know, material that might have some truth in it, but it's also sprinkled with falsities so that, you know, the researchers can be discredited. So why now is there this line in the sand where we should trust that there is this real UFO legacy crash retrieval program going on?

Starting point is 00:31:45 I'm kind of thinking maybe it all began with Keller Hnapp and Lackatsky's first book, Skinwalkers, at the Pentagon. I think that started it off. And then Lekatsky did his first book and then second book last year. I think he's got a third one coming out. And then Lou Elizondos' book came out. And so I think this is a crescendo of things that have come together in the right time, the right place, the right people. And that's why this is happening. And if you're Stratton and your host.

Starting point is 00:32:15 because he was the guy who ran the UAPTF, the UAP task force. That's right. And so... But he also was working with Jim Lackatsky on the ASAP. He was at DIA at the time. So they have... I don't know if you knew that. I didn't know that.

Starting point is 00:32:30 He and Lackackackacki are the ones that built the OSAP program together. Yeah. So wasn't just Jim Lekowski alone. It was Jim and Jay and their support staff. There's, you know, the DIA and contractor staff that supported them. So Jay was involved. with the ASAP from the very beginning. And then we talk about ASAP, ATIP, these sorts of programs that are, you know, very small dollar

Starting point is 00:32:53 amounts, you know, vis-a-vis. $22 million. But the inflation-adjusted Manhattan Project. Yeah, Harry Reid had an intention on turning into it, turning it into a Manhattan project. He was intended, this was like just to get it started. And then the subsequent fiscal years that would follow, he was intending this to go like maybe a decade with worth a billion dollars, maybe two billion dollars worth of programatics. But you were simultaneously saying there is an underlying program that is a legacy reverse

Starting point is 00:33:24 engineering program. Yeah, that's super. This came after the fact. And that has to be. We were trying to get into the crash retrieval program. Our goal was to get after it and co-opt it into the OSAP so we could do what the goals of the OSAP wanted us to do. And I don't think that was necessarily to bring it out in the public.

Starting point is 00:33:44 domain. That was to keep it classified anyway. But our job was to get access to it because we were not convinced that there was any progress made. And as a matter of fact, the senior VP at one of the aerospace corporations who I had years worth of interviews with before and after he retired confirmed that there was no success in the reverse engineering program after eight decades. And it just didn't go anywhere. They had minus success, like they understood the materials that craft were made from. They figured out how they were constructed, but we couldn't reproduce any of it. We had no technology. We had no fabrication or manufacturing technology at the time of the crash retrieval programs when they were fully funded and fully operating to figure that out. We could just use

Starting point is 00:34:32 our SCM and transmission SCM microscopes and other advanced condensed matter state, diagnostic tools and evaluate it, look at it, look at it down into the, you know, almost nanoscale. And we could see how the materials were assembled, but we could not figure out how to reproduce that process. If we have made no progress, why aren't we more open with the scientific community? That's the security aspect of it. I'm not involved with that policy aspect. I don't have contact with the people that make the policy on that.

Starting point is 00:35:07 So I can't answer that. But you are. It's not that I don't want to. just don't know the answer. No, no, no, I get it. You're saying confidently that there are billion dollar budgets involved in the actual core UFO legacy. I don't know. I don't know that it's that much. It was on that order from my interviews with TRW and Lockheed Martin people. That was the order of magnitude of the budget expenditures that were given, not on an annual basis, but it was more like maybe over a five to 10 year period. But that,

Starting point is 00:35:40 But then the budget would go up and down, just like NASA's budget would go up and down. So the budgets would go up and they'd be flush with money, get a few more people in, get some better equipment in the lab. And then the budget gets cut and they got to go to bare minimum operation. People get laid off and whatever. I wanted to ask you, you know, there's this sort of not even lore. There is a document called the Wilson Davis memo. You get asked about it all the time. It's kind of apocryphal.

Starting point is 00:36:10 meeting that occurred between you and Admiral Thomas Wilson. That's right. The last gospel of the Bible. You are famous for your meticulous note-taking, and apparently this meeting took place in the EG and G-N-G parking lot. And it is this, you know, Admiral who is head of J-2 Joint Chiefs. He was retired at the time. He was retired at the time. He got called back into active duty for a short period of time because he had to close out a project at Area 51 that he was responsible for under his office at the DIA.

Starting point is 00:36:40 that he initiated, and it was a complicated project. He couldn't tell me because I didn't have that kind of level of access or anything like that. So all I know is he said, I'm back because I've got to go back up into that. He wouldn't say Area 51. I knew what he was talking about. He was saying he used the word back in those days, the undeclared or unacknowledged facility near the Nevada test site. And you have to go back there because they need to close out a major project he initiated when he was active duty. DIA director. And so he was willing to meet with me at the behest of two guys at the National

Starting point is 00:37:16 Nuclear Security Agency that I personally knew. John Alexander and I knew them. We were all members of the Association of Foreigner Intelligence Officers. We were forming a Las Vegas chapter in 2002. So these guys were in Las Vegas because one of them is the Director of Intelligence at the NNSA site in Vegas, in Nevada. And the other one was the Director of Counterintelligence at the NNSA. site as well. And so at least formerly, Wilson was supposed to have all military tech under his purview, under his scope. And he's expressing a lot of frustration to you, right, that he's just met with this private corporation. And this is back in 97. This is in 97. The summer of 97. And he's saying, he's saying there's this team of people in the hundreds of people and they have this

Starting point is 00:38:03 material that doesn't seem to be of human origin. And progress is sort of slow and cumbersome. But that he, for whatever reason, wasn't supervising or overseeing it, even though he should have been. It's that he, they claimed he didn't have need to know. And that's possible. Their budget came from his. In other words, their funding, I'm sorry. Their funding came from his director's budget, the budget he gets as a director. This was DIA money that he wasn't aware of.

Starting point is 00:38:34 He wasn't aware because this is a WUSAP. He hadn't been read in on it. And so when you deal with budget line items for these things, they're just innocuous budget codes that a comptroller general of the Defense Department or the military services or the U.S. government understands how to read a budget code. And then a standard plain English description is deliberately meant to be vague. So you can identify it. That way, if the budget document gets captured by espionage assets from foreign nations, foreign adversaries, they want to be. don't understand what the hell it is. So are they're going to see is something they may or may not even know how to interpret and some innocuous words. And this could be as innocuous as aerospace

Starting point is 00:39:19 technology review or, well, let's look at the ASAP, advanced aerospace weapons systems application program. It could be something similar to that or that nature. You'll see something of that nature. It doesn't say UFO, alien, off-world. It doesn't give you any clear indication as to what it It's meant for that, for that reason, is to keep our enemies off the track to be able to figure out what we're spending our money on and where. Wilson didn't know that because he didn't have any need to know. Just like a president in the United States really doesn't have any know about the crash retrieval program because mostly they have to know to ask about it. And when they ask, that's an order from him that somebody lower down needs to give him a briefing. But if he already doesn't know, he doesn't know to ask.

Starting point is 00:40:04 What happened when Jimmy Carter got briefed? I don't know what the aftermath is, but I know that Alonzo McDonald confirmed to several of us that in our group during that era, the ASAP era, that he talked to the staff that attended that briefing. He talked to Carter, and it happened. He even sent us the June. I don't remember the date in June, but I've got the document, but it's June 1970. it was an economic meeting in the National Security Council meeting rooms. But then when it came time for this classified UAP or UFO program briefing, they moved it to the Oval Office. Do you know what the nature of the meeting was? Wow, what we popularly known as Project Aquarius. And so I know that Alonzo did not dispute that that was the code name.

Starting point is 00:40:57 It might not have been, but it might have been. But he said, this was it. This is the real deal. This really happened. And by the way, I got from the Carter Library the attendee list for that date. And it shows the name of the regular meeting for the Economic Something Council because that's what Alonzo McDonald's job is at the White House. So the names of the people that attended were there.

Starting point is 00:41:21 The only thing is two names and organizations were redacted. Out of all the lists on two pages, only two got redacted. Can you send me that? I say again. Can you send me that with the redactions, obviously? Oh, I can send that. That would be amazing. So basically Alonzo confirmed that it happened.

Starting point is 00:41:36 He was then the principal staff director of the White House staff. I think that was the title back then. Before that, he was Jimmy Carter's special representative for trade, I think, to the United Nations. So he had something like an ambassador level title. Do you know anything that transpired in the meeting itself? as far as well he talked to Carter and the and the guys that are named on that list and he asked him what went what transpired Carter told him and the guys who attended told them. And they said we learned that the United States government has been in contact with aliens, UFO beings. Danny Sheehan says Carter's head was.

Starting point is 00:42:19 Oh, see, continue. What he does is when he's in a moment of stress or something that's really critical. Alonzo told us that Jimmy or President Carter has a habit. of putting his head down on his table like this and praying. This is how he prays on his desk or at a table, on a briefing table. So that's what he was doing. He was just praying.

Starting point is 00:42:40 And he was praying about the consequence of this information that he just now learned what its consequence to American society is. And maybe to the United States government and our defense of our country against an unknown potential hostile. We don't know for us. that we don't have a technology to overwhelm. Did he learn about, have we had treaties or agreements with any of these beings? That I've never heard about.

Starting point is 00:43:07 No, that never came on. Okay. I don't recall, I've seen the Aquarius document. Alonzo said it was real. People have been saying for years that that was fabricated by Bill Moore and Rick Doty. And it turns out, no, Alonzo said those guys had nothing to do with anything. That document, and by the way, I don't think you can find that document on the Internet unless you use the wayback machine now nowadays.

Starting point is 00:43:30 It used to be available as late as 2010 or 11, and then it's just gone. So Elijah read every word of Dequarius briefing, and he said, oh, yeah, that's what these guys told me that they did. The guys in the briefing got together afterwards, went to a motel, and they basically wrote down from memory what they recalled about the briefing, because they each got briefing documents.

Starting point is 00:43:58 When the briefing is orally given, they're reading through it. Then when the briefing's over, they got to give the document back to the CIA guy at the door that came out of documents because they're going to be destroyed. Where's what they wrote down from memory? Where are those documents? Well, that's the thing. Those are gone. Okay. I'll get to that.

Starting point is 00:44:13 So how do you know they're going? The White House gets a copy, permanent copy for their records. So that's in a really heavily classified part of the Carter Library, I believe, maybe. And then the CIA keeps a copy because that's their program. Okay, so these guys had eight by 14 inch, you know, legal pads, and they all meet up in a hotel, and they all start downpouring from memory what they think, what they recall of the briefing document. So they did round robin. So everybody passes their document to the next guy, so forth and so on all the way around.

Starting point is 00:44:49 And so they're going to cross-check what they remember against the other guys' notes. and they're going to keep doing this until they find, you know, they're going to disagree on what was said, on this little point of this language and this terminology and whatnot. They're going to keep doing that until they finally converge on a document that strongly resembles the briefing document that they all read. They all agree on it and they said, yeah, this is more close to what we read. And we collectively, you know, came to this convergent final version. So somebody type that up on an old-fashioned electrothermal printer. And that's what you see in the photographs that Bill Moore took of that document. Okay.

Starting point is 00:45:35 And it was set that to Senior Falcon. Senior Falcon was somebody else. I know his name. I just can't think of it. But it's in one of my investigation. Why do all these guys have bird names? I don't know. That's just the choice of an admiral at the D.E.

Starting point is 00:45:52 DIA. Okay. Nothing to do with the aviary. Aviary is more in the 1990s conspiracy era, or maybe the late 80s even. Okay. Is that? So, this is, Senior Falcon was a DIA officer who was sent to communicate with Jamie Shandar and Bill Moore. He's the one that passed undeveloped 35 millimeter film of the so-called MJ12 documents.

Starting point is 00:46:16 These are the first generation documents that were created by James Jesus Angleton's chop shot, His mole hunting document production factory. So that's the connection there, is that these documents came from the Defense Intelligence Agency. It was the Directorate of Human Intelligence Collection. And Admiral E.A. Burkholder, Edward Berkholder, was the director. And Air Force Colonel Roy Junkers was his chief of staff. So those documents came out of there. Well, this whole thing about the films, the undeveloped rolls of 35 millimeter film that would go to Bill Moore and Jamie Shander, that was what that was about.

Starting point is 00:47:01 Rick Doty was considered to be the junior falcon, but he was not a legitimate mediator of information from the DIA to Bill Moore. He was more coming out of AFOSI as a counterintelligence agent trying to throw him off the track. Let's just keep at high level, I guess. So you have Roswell and 47. You have magenta before that in Italy, but then this craft crashes there, and that gets transferred to U.S. possession. And then how many other crashes between the 30s and today? I can't give you the official number because I know that number on a classified basis. I could say it's less than 40.

Starting point is 00:47:43 Okay, less than 40. I think Hal put off set on the Joe Rogan experience somewhere, like. Like, we have between 10 and 15 crafts in our possession? He said 15. I think he said more than 10, but that's still more than 10. Okay, got it. More than 10. I'll just say less than 40.

Starting point is 00:48:00 Okay. Would you describe the majority as wreckage or intact? A mix. It's a mix. Okay. And not all of them involved recovery of N. H.I. bodies. Dr. Davis, what gives you confidence that we haven't made progress with any

Starting point is 00:48:19 of this material? I can't speak of my confidence level after my senior VP source died. Because before then, I'm highly confident because he was still connected in. He was still on active duty work up until he got retired in the early 2010s. Then he's retired after that. So he's sharing with me the information that he had all the way up until he retired. And so I'm highly confident on her percent level that what he told me is right. And as a matter of fact, he arranged for me to meet one of his coworkers on the crash retrieval program back in the 70s and 80s.

Starting point is 00:49:00 Did you meet them? Oh, yeah, it was a woman. I met her. He, my source, his wife, took me to her home, picked her up. We went into San Jose to have dinner at a German restaurant. How many of those people, crash retrieval program people have you met total? How many discounts is you? USAA auto insurance offer? Too many to say here.

Starting point is 00:49:21 Multi-vehicle discount. Safe driver discount. New vehicle discount. Storage discount. Legacy. How many discounts will you stack up? Tap the banner or visit usa.com slash auto discounts. Restrictions apply. Okay. So I think it's five total. Okay. Five total at that one at that particular company. How many have you met total in your life? It was just those two from that company and one from TRW. Okay. Wow. Did you meet many of the 40 of Dave Grush's first-hand witnesses? Say again. Did you meet many of the 40?

Starting point is 00:49:52 I didn't even know who they are, really. He never shared that with me. I see that. I have a rough guess, but believe me, don't confuse that 40. Yeah. With the 40 core people on the task force, on UAP task force. They're not. Totally different.

Starting point is 00:50:05 Yeah, they're totally different. There's no overlap. No, that makes, I would hope that there's no real. Yeah, I don't think Dave was allowed to tell me the names of those people or their organizations and where they're located because that was WSAT level. Yeah. Final question before I want to get into the second section of this discussion where I want you to drive mostly. But how did Admiral Thomas Wilson react when you, when you met him in 1997? And why, I guess why did people direct him to you and then what

Starting point is 00:50:36 transpired in the meeting? Well, I can't get into that. Okay. You can't confirm or deny that we met for the security reasons. Okay. There are legal issues still involved that or active. So because I can't reveal that in public. That wasn't meant for public consumption. And that was released from Mitchell's estate. And that was supposed to be destroyed one year after Mitchell got a copy of it as a courtesy from who generated it. And unfortunate that his kids were sloppy.

Starting point is 00:51:06 And I guess Ed was sloppy in that he didn't give any instructions on what to do with that document. minute, if he should die, but he was supposed to destroy that as far as I understand. I would be remiss if I didn't. This can be cut if it's not okay to air, but during our discussion in San Francisco, you did confirm that you wrote the Wilson Davis notes by way of a conversation about seeking legal legal counsel. Yeah, they're real, they're legit, they're 100% accurate. Okay, thank you.

Starting point is 00:51:35 But that's the typewritten version. There's a handwritten version, but that's all I can say about it. Have you ever seen a UFO? Oh, yeah. My wife and I did in Tucson, Arizona, broad daylight, a boomerang-shaped craft, below-traffic pattern altitude, looked kind of like halfway-half-way boomer boomerang, half-way, boot-heel type shape, and it was close. Have you ever seen a craft and a hanger? No. Have you ever seen any one-of-one material, so idiosyncratic, never seen before material?

Starting point is 00:52:10 No. Okay. Yeah. And the arts parts don't qualify. Okay. We don't know what the province of that is. And Hal and I were involved in the TTS meeting at the Pentagon Conference Room in August of 2024, where we read the full 90-page ORNL. That's the Office of Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Their 90-page materials analysis report on the arts parts. And there was nothing there. There was no there. There is. There's a little bit of ambiguity because here's the ambiguity. The way that material was assembled is not consistent with what we were doing in the 1940s, when magnesium became a major alloy of interest for the aerospace community. And so that's the ambiguity. But the isotope ratios or the materials it contains are Earth.

Starting point is 00:53:05 They're manufactured. Part of what I love about you is you are a walking compendium of all these. exotic, you know, experiments, physics experiments, and whenever, you know, anybody gets some sort of anomalous result, you are a great evaluator of that. And you've written a book that I will, I'll plug here, called Frontiers of Propulsion Science, where you've comprehensively reviewed a lot of these sort of more exotic, you know, propellantless propulsion sort of, you know, modalities. Have you ever seen an exotic experimental results or an experimental result that's anomalous, rather, that you believe is real and replicable and not?

Starting point is 00:53:47 No, I wish I did. I haven't. Nothing that's ever, you know, breaks the sort of standard model or, you know, anything. No, certainly not. Okay. I just think that the standard model has done an outstanding job through the avenue of condensed matter theory to come up with some pretty exotic condensed matter states, which have been, you know, theoretical curiosities decades ago.

Starting point is 00:54:07 and now we've advanced our laboratory technology and condensed matter physics so well that they're discovered. They're being discovered right now. So they're really wonderful, wonderful exotic states, insulator, topological insulators, metamaterials, all kinds of other stuff,

Starting point is 00:54:24 like majorana particles that are supposed to be, I think they're massless, aren't they? Eric. But if you have a... The majorana particles. If you have a myerana mass mechanism different from a Dirac mechanism,

Starting point is 00:54:37 mass mechanism, that's only possible if a particle is its own anti-particle. Yeah, that's right. That's right. But these are not free particles. These are quasi-particles because they are, they are, they're quasi-particles because they're created by the collective action of the electrons in the semiconductor or condensed matter system. I want to cede the floor to my former colleague, Eric Weinstein.

Starting point is 00:55:02 I appreciate you indulging all my crazy UFO questions. Just wanted to kind of establish. a ground truth around Eric Davis' past experience. One of my favorite comments on our last discussion with Hal Putoff was, now I know what a dog feels like when it watches TV. And so if, you know, this is not for the faint of mind, just so you're aware from, you know, for the audience, this will be a really fun discussion.

Starting point is 00:55:27 But, you know, I want to get into what we touched on, which is why are there no theoretical physicists on the program? And what do you think is going on? How do you think maybe what we've talked about with the observables of UFOs might dovetail with some of your theories? Okay. Well, I don't even know how to begin this. I mean, look, the first thing is that in general, I can produce too many explanations through a creative, sometimes undisciplined mind for a certain set of facts. And this is one of the only times and perhaps the only time I've ever seen a situation where I cannot

Starting point is 00:56:06 come up with a single theory of what's going on that explains all of the bizarre behavior in UFO-UAP land. Too many people who seem relatively reasonable with nearly idetic memories talking about particular names, dates, it is impossible to me that we have a theater company that has figured out how to create this space opera. And on the other hand, the lack of anything tangible, I don't. don't believe in something this old, this long, this many events, that we have absolutely nothing to go on. So let me just say from the beginning that this is the odd situation.

Starting point is 00:56:48 One of the reasons nobody from my world wants to get involved with it is that it just makes you look foolish from the point of view of a scientist. Well, they can't get involved unless they're working on a contract. Well, just the sky is a big place. And I disagree. You said that you've. One of the top government scientists, I can't think of his name. You would know who it is.

Starting point is 00:57:17 Gosh, he was a physicist. And I just helped put off to him. And he had a lot of clearances into the Manhattan Project, the post-Manhattan project, a lot of other high-technology projects throughout areas of the DoD. And so he was. was a academician and he had clearances, a colleague of mine up at Baylor also has DOD classifications, and he's working on classified stuff that you're not familiar with, you've never heard of,

Starting point is 00:57:48 you won't get access to it. If you have a contract that requires a clearance, you will get access to something you don't know about in the public domain. I understand that there's a lot of stuff that's classified. We have an entire system of national labs. There's no question about it. Oh, yeah.

Starting point is 00:58:04 I'm talking about, look at the level of ground truth, right? Our two primary theories are the standard model and general relativity. Both of them are relevant here as limitations on what we can understand of the world we see. And if somebody has access to theories beyond those two, and they predicate manufacturing on it, and then we get the gifts of that manufacturing, just assuming that that story is correct, we should be seeing some very weird stuff that is not explicable as if Newton was looking at Lorentz contraction.

Starting point is 00:58:42 I would say, what the heck is that? And so I'm just going to begin with things that make me hugely uncomfortable. And again, it's not as a digger. It's like, I just can't figure this out. So we toss off these humanoid aliens, like aliens that are tetrapods, literally. tetrapod body plans. We have arachnids, we have insects,

Starting point is 00:59:08 we have cephalpods, we have all sorts of intelligent life that doesn't follow a tetrapod body plan. The odd of a humanoid evolving through convergent evolution somewhere else

Starting point is 00:59:23 of a humanoid is vanishingly small. But it's not zero. Yeah, but it's preposter. But Occam's razor wouldn't be that these beings would be from elsewhere. They would be that they would be derivative of humans. Or look, you can tell me some other story. Like, these things aren't even really the beings that the real beings have constructed these things to interact with us, not to make us uncomfortable. Okay. I understand that. Do you believe that? That's possible.

Starting point is 00:59:55 Okay. All right. But any biologist hearing the story is just going to have the same reaction. Like, Tetrapods? This sounds like it came out of a, you know, Buck Rogers thing where you had to, it was too hard to hire an actor to behave as if they had a completely different body plan. So all aliens from the golden age of cinema or silent movies, whatever,

Starting point is 01:00:20 were going to be tetrapods if they were playing an alien. So that, first of all, really bugs me, is that I don't want to hear about that with no mention of it is stunning that there are two eyes, a mouth, a head, and it walks the same way we do. I mean, even if you look at like a, I don't know, a camel's legs, you know, where we have a knee, it has an ankle or, you know, something like that. So that's the first part, and that's just the biological. The next part is, I was very interested looking through some of your physics papers.

Starting point is 01:01:00 you seem to live in a world that I really honestly didn't know existed. So I learned something from that. It's sort of like national security physics. National security physics. Yeah, that's not like a real thing. But if I look at a lot of your papers, they're focused on bizarre, how would I put it, bizarre physics that accepts the standard model in general relativity

Starting point is 01:01:28 is ground truth predicated on some sort of engine. engineering desire. Now, I'm just looking at, for my, per my book, I was looking at the physics of what's possible with anti-gravity, gravitational weight propulsion or rockets. Within what? Within what framework? Say good. Within GRR? Yeah.

Starting point is 01:01:49 So GR with or without positivity constraints or how are you, how are you, um, let's slow it down. First of all, I don't understand if these things are here from out of town, if they're not co-resident with us here on Earth, they're not here using the standard model in general relativity, I don't think. I mean, it's not impossible, but. But I'm not doing UFO physics. I'm doing propulsion physics for interstellar flight. I'm not looking at this from a UFO perspective. I'm doing this as part of another way of my work. So maybe you can make this. Or drive, wormholes, things like that. Okay. Yeah. I'm not doing this because of UFOs. I'm just saying, hey, if this is valid to any degree and we could expect maybe or pray maybe that in the future we can engineer these things,

Starting point is 01:02:42 this could be how UFOs move because we're trying to develop this physics for exploitation as a technology for future interstellar and interstellar missions. So this is hugely important for me just to understand the context. If I understand it, and please correct me if I'm wrong because I don't want to push anything that isn't true. I think what you're saying is assume a proof of concept that something can voyage at an interstellar level with intention. Mm-hmm. Okay. Assuming that one piece of information, attempt to figure out how that could be done as best you can with the tools we have. Yes.

Starting point is 01:03:22 Okay. So then you and I completely polarize, I think, and again, that could be wrong, on one issue. I would not be wasting my time. Again, that's judgmental. I would feel that I was wasting my time if I was trying to do this with GR, with general relativity. I might have an Alcubieri warp drive,

Starting point is 01:03:43 but I'd think, how much energy do I need to warp space in this particular way? Right? Or, well, I could fall into a spinning black hole and, you know, maybe I could try to figure how this would be traversable and non-catastrophic. And I could imagine using, all of the exotica of GR, well, I'll just, I'll bet everything on time dilation, and it'll be

Starting point is 01:04:07 really expensive to go there and home, but I can still get there using Lawrence's conversion factors. None of that has any appeal to me. Clearly, it's had a great appeal to you, which is fine. We can polarize that. Surely, you don't think... isn't it much more plausible that if Kraft were true, and we accept that as our premise, that it's basically proof that GR isn't the last world, that general relativity is a constricting framework and that there's something beyond it that has general relativity as an effective theory. I agree with that. And they're using that.

Starting point is 01:04:49 I agree with that. Okay. So that makes this mysterious, which is why are you using GR? Because that's the only tool I have that I know of from my graduate education. and my research interest. And so I don't, I don't have the liberty to, I'm not a pure theoretical physicist. I'm more of like one foot theory, one foot applied. Okay.

Starting point is 01:05:11 So let's, let's take that. If I had access to anything that seemingly was breaking GR, general relativity, I'd be dreaming about things related to general relativity because we know that we don't like general relativity at a deep level. It's got a terrible variable in it. which is called the metric, where it's easy to fall into things that are not metrics from the space of metrics.

Starting point is 01:05:39 Things, it just doesn't behave well in terms of quantization. We know that we have got these two kinks in space time called the initial singularity, which we associate with the Big Bang, and the Schwartzschilder Black Hole singularity that we associate with collapsed stars. And I don't like GR.

Starting point is 01:06:02 I mean, I love it from the point of view of Einstein having pulled it off, but it's 110 years past its sell-by date. And why are you not tweaking it? I don't have intuition on how I could tweak it. And I would rather somebody smarter than me do that. I would like to have somebody who tweaks it, and I could look at it and say,

Starting point is 01:06:30 hey, it either does or does not predict a potential, propulsion mode that could get us where we want to go across interstellar distances without the consequence of G over C to the fourth. This episode is brought to you by Ultima Replenisher. Health is all about balance, like a salad with fries. So why not have balance in your hydration? With six essential electrolytes and no junk, Ultima provides balanced hydration you can enjoy every day.

Starting point is 01:06:59 That means no sugar, calories, or carbs, and it's not loaded with sodium. Just delicious plant-based flavors you'll actually look forward to drinking. Shop Ultima on Amazon or in-store at Target and Whole Foods Market. So how do I interpret? There are a lot of people who are interested in gravity. Yeah. And there are none of them on this program? Say that again.

Starting point is 01:07:31 Other people are interested in gravity. Let me start from a different place. There is this 1971 Australian document that I became aware of where the Australian intelligence officer, Harry, do you remember his last? Harry Turner, who is head of their nuclear division, starts writing down. Here's what we surmise about our friends, the Yanks, and their efforts in this area. Okay. And he names, I don't know, six universities in the Institute for Advanced Study, MIT, Purdue, Indiana.

Starting point is 01:08:05 I forget what the complete list is. And he names like Arnowitz, Desser, Dyson, Oppenheimer. And it sounds like the Manhattan Project for Gravity. Okay. And this is broadly consistent with this story that I've been, I think I first did it on Rogan in episode 1945, which they gave me the Trinity date. I love that. Which is that we have this bizarre thing called the Golden

Starting point is 01:08:37 the age of general relativity. Yeah. Which makes absolutely no sense. And it's a story about two people, Agnew Bainson and Roger Babson, who appear to be in the language of the intelligence. And again, I'm not a guy who thinks he's seen a bunch of Jason Bourne movies so he can talk to lingo, but they appear to be what I've been told are cutouts. And they're both fitted with stories, it seems, about why they need to contribute to

Starting point is 01:09:05 anti-gravity. and they find two physicists to work through, one named Bryce DeWitt, so Agnew Baineson and John Wheeler find Bryce DeWitt and set him up at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill at the Institute of Field Physics. Right. And then the other one, Roger Babson, out of New Boston, New Hampshire, seems to be somehow linked up with a guy named Louis Witten,

Starting point is 01:09:31 who's a gravitational physicist out of Johns Hopkins for his Ph.D. and found something that sounds like Bell Labs that nobody's ever heard of called the Research Institute of Advanced Study, or R-I-A-S, and it held Sheldon Glashow within it. It has Rudolph Kalman within it. It has Solomon Lefschitz, the topologist, comes out of retirement to work inside of the Martin. And we always talk about Lockheed,

Starting point is 01:10:00 but we don't talk about Glenell Martin that became Martin Marietta that became Lockheed Martin. So it's the Martin that really matters. Correct. And you and I talked about that years past. I read the documents or the websites you sent to me, and I'm already familiar with elements of that. Okay.

Starting point is 01:10:17 I've got old newspaper clips. All right. So we've got 18 talent. We've got Sheldon Glashar, Rudolph Kalman, Solomon Lefschitz, Deser Arnawitt, Dyson. This begins to feel like, you know, the boys are back in ten. Yeah, this is physics firepower.

Starting point is 01:10:34 Yeah, right. And then the trail just seems to go cold in the beginning of the 1970s. Correct. So. And I could never reconcile that. I noticed that back in graduate school during the 80s. And I went to an APS meeting. That's the American Physical Society.

Starting point is 01:10:58 So I went to an APS meeting with my dissertation supervisor. And I ran into, they have like a booth for the APS, you know, all the books they sell, the Physics Today magazine. Well, that was published by somebody else, actually. But they have all that for members, for members of services and benefits. And so they got this advertising booth in the commercial exhibit part of the conference. And they had the APS historian. And I brought that up with the historian like, what, 1984?

Starting point is 01:11:32 and Bob Forward was still at the Hughes Research Labs in Malibu. He's the one that motivated me to ask that question because he had been looking at anti-gravity when he was at Hughes. And this is before he got his PhD in general activity under Joseph Weber at University of Maryland in the late 50s. And the APS historian had no answer for me as to where this disconnect between the, yeah, what happened to anti-gravity research? What happened to this golden age of GR?

Starting point is 01:12:09 He said something the effect of similar, what you said. It disappeared in the 70s, but he never saw what happened. All of a sudden, roughly the early 80s, now we have super string theory coming up. No, there's an interregone. So we have this golden age of general relativity. Things culminate in the standard model, 73, 74 in particle theory, there is a period where there are two great ideas in physics, supersymmetry and grand unification, which dominate during the 70s. Then there's a pre-string-like

Starting point is 01:12:48 craze for something called n-equals 8 supergravity. And n-equals eight supergravity was the candidate theory. It's too unique to be wrong, theory of everything. And then right up until 19, where we get the Green Shorts anomaly cancellation at Ed Witten, Lewis Witten's son, directs the entire field to put its energies on one bet. And this is where the phrase, the only game in town, which are you know, Tojit, T-O-G-I-T, the only game in town. And Tojit takes over physics where if you say anything that isn't string during this period right after 1984, it's a blood bet.

Starting point is 01:13:31 And basically, Feynman is upset about it, Glashow's upset about it. Weinberg basically pleads no contest and says, I'm voting with my feet, I'm going to go do this cosmology in Texas. And years later, we get this very weird meeting about AI, not related to physics, between Mark Andreessen and Ben Horowitz. And they're sat down and told, do not invest. in AI startups. AI startups are not going to be allowed to be a thing.

Starting point is 01:14:06 We're going to have two or three AI companies, and we're going to cocoon them as part of the federal government. And Andreessen and Horvitz are sitting there, and Horowitz says, I think they say, well, how are you going to restrict this? You can't do it at the technology level because it's just math and you can't classify math. Yeah.

Starting point is 01:14:25 So Ben basically said, look, it doesn't make sense because to regulate AI at the technology level, you're regulating math. and of course we're not going to do that. Like, that doesn't make any sense. And you'll recall that what they said was, no, actually. We can classify math. We can classify math.

Starting point is 01:14:39 And literally, this is verbatim. This is, this is, we did, we classified a whole entire areas of physics in the nuclear era and made them state secrets of the, like, theoretical. Physics, yeah. Science of physics. Okay. Now, quantum gravity, if you look and you do a Google Ngram search, There is basically no hits on quantum gravity until around 1972.

Starting point is 01:15:05 And it comes out of nowhere, and we're backfitted with a story where I can get almost any physicist of today to repeat the phrase that quantum gravity is the Holy Grail of theoretical physics. It's a fictitious history. I remember that's when Folling, Davies, Ford, and that group started publishing their paper. on semi-classical quantum gravity. Well, but my point is, the physicists do not know their own history, just the way most academicians believe that peer review goes back to the founding of the Royal Society, and it's very clear that it comes from about 1965 to 1975. Okay.

Starting point is 01:15:51 So what we've done is we've erased institutional memory of the physicist's origin story from the physics community, and this issue of quantum gravity. gravity looks like a cock-blocking mechanism, that it basically binds to the receptor of a physicist's mind, and it causes them not to make progress. And so we're 42 years into an unquestionable, it feels like a mass psychosis. Yeah, we've had all these different approaches that never work to quantize gravity. Right. So you have what appears to be a mass delusion, not that it wouldn't be a good theory.

Starting point is 01:16:30 I believe that gravity has to be harmonized with the quantum. I'm not disputing the quantum. Yeah, there's no question. But the idea that Einstein must be beaten, taken to the ground, and forced to submit to the quantum has not been productive. Correct. And I agree. Okay.

Starting point is 01:16:48 But after 42 years of failure, you would imagine we would hold at least one, two, or 10 conferences saying, what do we have wrong? Why are we not trying to make progress? And you don't see that. Well, that's the mirror to your thing that there are no physicists on the program. In other words, this is an effect that is so dumb, it is so pathologically stupid, so unfathomably wasteful. Why would you not question your own lack of progress? You know, in fact, Leonard Susskin, one of the fathers of modern string theory,

Starting point is 01:17:21 was on a show of a sister podcast, Kurt Jiamungle's Theories of Everything. or maybe it was with Lawrence Krauss, and he says, we have to go back to the beginning. We have to question absolutely. We've got this wrong. If we don't go back to the foundations, and I'm just thinking like, finally, it's breaking. He says the foundations of string theory.

Starting point is 01:17:47 I said, oh, string theory has failed, so what we need to do is not question the string assumption, but we have to go back to the foundations of string theory and fix string theory. I mean, it's an infinite sequence. So one of the questions that I have is, is physics just, are we not getting the obvious? Somebody figured out that physics is just too dangerous to do in a university setting. It seems that way to me.

Starting point is 01:18:14 It seems that way to me. Because you see, now we're a joke. That's right. But in 1979, 77, you had these two stricand effect problems. You got a guy named John Aristotle Phillips, who was a junior at Princeton, who chose Freeman Dyson for his advisor for his junior thesis. And he said, look, I'm the Princeton mascot. I'm not really very good at physics.

Starting point is 01:18:43 Can we use the fact that I'm not really good at physics to do something novel? And Dyson said, like what? He said, well, I want to design an atomic weapon, and I want you to tell me whether my design would work using my limited understanding of physics. And Dyson said, as long as I give you no information, I simply do that. tell you whether it would work or not, you do it all 100% you're on, you're on. So he submitted his junior thesis. Dyson took one look at it and said, yeah,

Starting point is 01:19:09 this will work. They removed page 20, and I believe it is not found in the Princeton Library with all of the other junior thesis. Oh, really? You'd never heard this story? I've not heard that story before. That's news. Okay. Well, that's very interesting. Very, very, very telling.

Starting point is 01:19:30 John Aristotle Phillips is the guy who is in the center of that. There's another guy named Howard Morland who worked that name. Who worked that name. And he had the assignment, see if you can figure out with no knowledge of physics, the Teller Ulam design for the hydrogen bomb. And he did it. And he did it because all of the information had been sharded and discarded and declassified, he basically put the pieces of the broken coffee cup back together

Starting point is 01:20:06 by being meticulous. So it was an archaeology and reassembly. It was a reverse engineering program from the shredder of theoretical physics. Yeah, I agree with that. That sounds like it. Okay. Well, that violates restricted data, which is this bizarre doctrine that comes from the 54 and 46 atomic energy acts. And the government. government wanted to use prior injunction against him because he had no right to free speech in this area. And I think what they found was we can't stop him because we declassified all the information he used. So that gave the government a huge problem, which is that it was creating a stricand effect and calling attention to the fact that there are no nuclear secrets. I mean,

Starting point is 01:20:54 there are probably many, but the core ideas are not the gating function. Yeah, that's right. Shortly after that, we get string theory and we become kind of incapable. Right? It's like the glass bead game or something that amuses people at a very high level. Like, we're turning the best physicists into chess players because nobody ever blew something up with a rook. Right. And I guess my question to you is, are these two sides of the same coin that we don't make progress beyond the standard model and general relativity and we don't have any physicists on the UFO. WAP claimed crash retrieval program. I've always thought that. The answer is yes to that question.

Starting point is 01:21:40 Do you have any interaction with the Jasons? No, never. You know who they are? They change. They're not always the same group. No, I've never met any of them. I know who. At the time I knew who was in the Jasons,

Starting point is 01:21:56 I didn't know any of the people on the committee. Do you want to describe what they're supposed to be? They're supposed to solve problems that the DOD gives them. And it's supposed to be comprised of high-level physicists, mathematicians. Yeah, engineers too, yeah. Yeah, yeah. So there's specific government problems, problem. Yeah, problems they need a solution for, so they give a contract to the Jasons to study a particular thread of problems over summer.

Starting point is 01:22:22 These are academic missions, so they're off from school for the summer. And they devote their time and energy to solving this problem, produce a report, turn it in, they collect the money, they're done. one of the things that I think is really interesting is that there are a tiny number of people at a very high level in the foundations of theoretical physics. Correct. And I think most people don't understand what some of these people are. If I show you a violinist who's a soloist, there's no possibility you can convince yourself that that guy knows nothing or that anybody could do that.

Starting point is 01:23:03 Like you see something that's so astounding, only a tiny few can do it. I believe that the same thing is true about theoretical physics and pure mathematics, that once you're in the game, you realize what a tiny number of people are at the highest level in this game. And it's just very vertical and there's no mercy. Oh, that's true.

Starting point is 01:23:26 Okay. So here's- I've known that all the way since I was in middle school. I read enough of physics literature when I was was a kid, I realized that. So here's my question. If I look at those people, there's so few a number, I could track all of them. And you pretty much know, not exactly, but by their PhD, you have a 75% chance that you've identified deep talent.

Starting point is 01:23:52 Yeah. So, you know, one of the things I've said to Jesse is if you wanted to figure out that the NSA was there while it was still no such agency, you'd look at number theory PhD. and you'd ask, what zip codes do number theory PhDs live in when they don't get an academic job that's visible? And you find that they're clustered around Fort Mead. Yeah. Okay, do the same thing for this. Imagine that what you need is you need general relativity,

Starting point is 01:24:21 the differential geometry that goes underneath it. So let's call that Ramanian geometry. The standard model, the differential geometry that goes underneath that, we'll call Erisman geometry. and what modern geometric field theory, you know, TQFT's conformal field theories on up, shouldn't we be able to figure out if there is a program that's actually working on this

Starting point is 01:24:46 where it's located by virtue of the fact that there's almost nobody in this game and we can track their physical movements? In other words, we would have figured out that there was an awful lot of physics firepower at a boys' school in New Mexico. That's very interesting. So like a little detective search.

Starting point is 01:25:06 I mean, my point is that this is the bottleneck. And in the current vogue of saying, you know, the lone genius theory is wrong, then that wouldn't work. But the lone genius theory is clearly right. I mean, it's just obviously right. It's a sciop to say it isn't. So my claim is I know a great deal of those people. like personally.

Starting point is 01:25:31 Okay. I see no indication that they know about any such program. And the only exception I can find is that there's one black hole that you go into and you don't come out of called Renaissance Technologies that hires in these exact specialties. It's got a level of profitability that doesn't really make sense based on what I know about markets. Hmm.

Starting point is 01:25:58 And it's got a secure campus. It's right next to Brookhaven National. laboratory, and it has the resources of SUNY Stony Brook. And Sunni-Stony-Brook has a math and a physics presence that is far above its rating as a State University of New York campus, even as a flagship. I wasn't aware of that. That's in Long Island, correct? Correct. I mean, I think most people didn't realize that Cien Yang was the world's greatest living theoretical physicist until very recently. I mean, he was like 104.

Starting point is 01:26:37 But that's where he was. He was at the State University of New York at Stony Brook. I didn't know that. Wow. So my question is, can we figure out whether or not there's a grown-up effort? Because I don't think it's really easily possible to reverse engineer these things when your science is lagging. Like, GR is the problem.

Starting point is 01:27:02 The standard model is the problem. Oh, I agree with that. Absolutely. And yet your papers... Well, my papers are separate from that. That's the whole point. It has nothing to do with UFOs. It has to do with marketing propulsion physics program.

Starting point is 01:27:14 I'm just contributing my knowledge. Those designs aren't going to work. Well, I didn't know that then, but I'm at a point where I know that it's difficult, well, it's going to be beyond difficult to engineer warp drives and wormholes. Well, this is what... I'm very glad we're having this. Configuration. I took one look at this stuff, and I took one look at this stuff, and I

Starting point is 01:27:34 just said, why is he wasting his time? It's interest me. It's what I love. And I haven't been able to figure out any way to jump off that track and get on a track to an alternative version that could lead to something as revolutionary as transmedium propulsion that UAP demonstrate. Okay. So at a bare minimum, bare minimum, we would say GR and the standard model, but I already

Starting point is 01:28:02 know that even at the bare minimum. That's probably not even touching the truth. Right. I think what's happening is, is I think the UAPCraft are manipulating the information domain because I think that there's a subquantum domain of information. People talk about Shannon. I'm talking about Fisher information

Starting point is 01:28:23 that Roy Frieden at the University of Arizona did a lot of research for 25 years on, published two books through Cambridge University Press on Fisher information, was able to use that to derive. all the major theories and principles of physics, including the Wheeler-Dowit equation, from that being observed and the observer. So it's all based on the observer, which is quite a quantum statement. So I'd have to dig it up out of my phone to be able to read to you the two key out terms

Starting point is 01:28:55 of Fisher information from which physics drives. New scientists did an article on it, which was just brilliant. It was doing the... Yeah, I'm not following you. Late 60s, but late 90s, sorry. So look, right now there's a vogue. If physics doesn't work, we can talk about quantum information and information theory because computers have money.

Starting point is 01:29:15 And so it's a way for us to try to get money from people who know computers by making physics, like information is the basic layer of the world. So I've watched that push for a change of variables, just like let's make black holes the new harmonic oscillator, the test object that we push everything on to. I really don't find that highly compelling. Like, we basically have quarks, leptons, force particles, Higgs. We have this arena called space time.

Starting point is 01:29:45 It's all a model. The model is extremely good, but we don't live there. We don't live in space time. No, I know that. Okay. It's not lines, curves, points, and manifolds. It's a physical space. No, but it may be a manifold.

Starting point is 01:30:00 I'm not saying that it isn't. I'm saying that you know because of the defects in these theories, that you're looking at an effective theory and you're trying to figure out what the parent theory is. Do you have any guesses about that? That goes back to some ruminations I've had based on quantum entanglement networks. People in Quantum Magazine had talked about the work they were doing on quantum entanglements and tensor networks

Starting point is 01:30:30 where they were able to show in a model how the Big Bang is actually an unfolding or an emerging of space time and elementary particles in the interaction forces from entanglement networks. And I just don't know how long that has, how far that has gotten as a theoretical development. But I know that the initial stage of work that was done in the mid-2010s was pretty promising. I just haven't heard, haven't found any publications to show. or inform me on where they've gotten with it. Let's talk about getting a craft across interstellar distances. You've got some kind of, and I want to be clear that I think propulsion may even be misleading, but there's something like, is there a method of conveyance, let's call it conveyance?

Starting point is 01:31:26 Second of all, there's an energy requirement. Of course. And what I'm looking at, I hate to interrupt you, but what I'm looking at is, something that bypasses GR, because GR is difficult to use. Well, let's talk about that in one second. Where we can get around that whole energy requirement that shuts down the ability to engineer and build wormholes or warp drives. We've got to come up for something that gets out of that whole, GR. You're grooved towards this toolkit that's pushed in front of us, right?

Starting point is 01:31:55 Like entanglement is a real thing, but we talk about it, in my opinion, sometimes too much. I think another thing like that is black holes, wormholes. Again, real things, but at some level, we don't know whether the black hole in the sky and the black hole in the model of the same black hole. Yeah. And all of these things that we can do lead nowhere, right? We've been around the traffic circle a million times, and by the third time you've seen the same 7-Eleven, you're starting to think something's wrong. Let's talk about GR as a problem. So in the standard equation in GR, we've got really three terms.

Starting point is 01:32:38 We've got the Einstein curvature term. We've got the dark energy cosmological constant term. Lambda. Lambda times the metric Gmuneu. And this constant times the stress energy tensor for everything else. A couple constant. Yes. DESE in Arizona has thrown some cold water on the idea that Lambda is a good model.

Starting point is 01:33:05 for dark energy because it appears that it's not constant. I've heard that. Yeah. I've seen some news about that coming out. Was it just theoretical or was there hints of it from observations? That's what I'm saying. Dark energy spectroscopic instrument or DESE seems to be recording. It's showing that it's more, it's actually not.

Starting point is 01:33:27 Variable. Yeah, it's time dependent. So it's dynamical as opposed to static being a constant energy. Which sounds like a vev, a vacuumic. expectation value so that people always make this mistake. You know, what is the temperature of the room? And they say 71 degrees. You say, well, in which corner?

Starting point is 01:33:45 And then the person thinks, oh, well, I'm sure it varies between the floor and the ceiling and where you are close to the window. And that idea that a thing is mostly constant, but with fluctuations, is the promotion of a simple number like Lambda to field content, something that can vary. Now, there's a thing called Love Locks Theorem. Oh, I'm familiar with that. He was a mathematician at the University of Arizona. Yeah.

Starting point is 01:34:13 I went to school until I knew him. So tell me about Love Locks theorem and variable dark energy. Oh, gosh, I can't even think of Love Locks theorem, but I know what you're talking about. Why don't you go ahead? Well, so the way I remember, and again, this is, I wasn't preparing to do this. Because keep in mind, it's been 40 years since I had tensor calculus. Using Lovelock's manuscript for his... Would vodka help?

Starting point is 01:34:38 Yeah. I think what it says is that when it comes to geometry, there are only two tensors you can make that have this property of being divergence-free that are not dependent on anything else. In other words, it's a two-dimensional space. And one of them is the Einstein curvature tensor, which is divergence-free by property of taking an automatic equation that has to be satisfied, called the Bianchi Adela.

Starting point is 01:35:14 And turning it into a different equation that says that the theory is not bothered by how you put coordinates on a system. Correct. That sounds familiar. So that's the idea of the R-MU minus one-half scalar times G-Munu, the Einstein curvature tensor is perpendicular to the space of transformations of coordinates. Yeah. It's like, what, the intrinsic curvature? It looks like intrinsic curvature, right? Well, it's the remand curvature with the vile curvature thrown away and a trace reversal of this one piece of the, you've got ten components of reachy curvature, and one component can be broken out and had a minus sign put in front of it.

Starting point is 01:36:01 Right. That object has an automatic difference. equation. The other one that has the same automatic differential equation is lambda times the metric, because if you try to differentiate the metric, that's always going to be zero by virtue of the fact that a metric is constant in its own Levitivita connection. But by the product rule, if you put a lambda in front of it, then the derivative of lambda is zero times the metric plus lambda times the derivative of the metric, which is zero for that same reason. Correct.

Starting point is 01:36:34 Those are the only two simple tensors that have this property. So if you lose Lovelock's theorem, sorry, if you have Lovelock's theorem and you lose the constancy of dark energy, you're starting to actually put general relativity into some peril. That's very interesting. I hadn't thought about that. Okay. Depends how you conceive of general relativity. Yeah.

Starting point is 01:36:58 But to continue with this, I don't believe. that you can engineer these craft within general relativity or standard model in any way other than formally. So the Alcubieri warp drive is a formal solution to the problem because it leaves unaddressed how the weakest possible of all forces gravity could be employed at this completely different level to, you know, sandwiched face time on top of itself. I don't think the generation ships make any sense, 800 years. Oh, I agree with you. Okay.

Starting point is 01:37:43 I don't believe that the time dilation makes any sense. It's too expensive because everybody's dead when you get back. It's the planet of the apes scenario. Yeah, I don't. I don't believe in traversable wormholes and black holes and all this kind of. Well, black holes aren't traversable, but there are wormholes with no singularities and that are traversable. Okay.

Starting point is 01:38:09 In principle. Yes, but I've also heard weirder stuff involving somebody trying to use the black hole information paradox to get. Oh, I think that's just people have stretched

Starting point is 01:38:22 an analogy too far. Okay, but my claim is there's a huge suite of not really that inventive ideas. In other words, we're going to accept the science that we have as if we can't do

Starting point is 01:38:36 better science. And then we're going to come up with completely implausible ways of using it. And we're going to say those are the leading candidates. Dr. Davis, you should push back if you think traversable wormholes that biological material can go through is a real feasible thing. You mean biological materials going through a world? Yeah. I don't see anything that prevents it. Okay.

Starting point is 01:39:00 So you're going to create a wormhole on demand to get where you need to go? You should be able to. That's what my research showed. There's nothing that I would think that could stop you other than that G over C to the fourth power issue. That really gets inverted when you put it over to the curvature side of the equation. Then the properties of the matter, it's going to be C to the fourth over G. So it's going to be a gigantic number multiplying the curvature of space time.

Starting point is 01:39:32 That matter source creates. So walk me through, how do I get to Alpha Century? by engineering a traversable wormhole? Well, you're going to create the mouth or the throat. Well, that's a good point because even Kip Thorne couldn't describe it. But the best idea is, and this is Thorns, I did not mind, and I don't endorse it. You create a mouth right at your departure point in space, and you're going to need another spaceship to carry the throat to the destination point. And that's what Kip Thorne came with.

Starting point is 01:40:09 came up with, I'm thinking when you're creating the throat, that's where all the physics occurs anyway. It's not at the mouth, the exit entrance mouth, it's in the throat. So when you're creating that throat, that should automatically do the connection, the hyperspace tunnel connection between two points, two distant points, Earth and Sirius, or our Star, Soul, and Serious, as examples, or Earth and Alpha Centauri, one of the planets over there. I just know that it does not give you recipe for navigating for being able to target your destination. There are no navigational control laws built into general activity. All you could do is built the wormhole and you know you could do the studies of a geodesic that goes through it,

Starting point is 01:40:58 representing either a photon or a piece of matter, and you can represent that, you know it's going to come out the other side. But how you aim it and navigate to another star using it, that's not in general activity. You can't pull that out. You can't pull that information out. Unless there's more work that needs to be done that nobody has thought of doing. So, again. But I think you can make a wormhole on demand if, assuming you have the negative energy density available to shape it. Not one of these proposals excites me.

Starting point is 01:41:33 They're boring as sin. I'm sorry to say it. You're talking about people. raised on sci-fi who want to be scientific. And by wanting to be scientific, they don't want to go beyond the two frontier theories that we have. And they've also said, I don't want to be uncreative. So the idea is, how do we come up with a wildly implausible story based on stuff that is solid? And at least with some of the other crazy stuff, I have a feeling at least they're trying to do new physics so that the implausibility goes down, but

Starting point is 01:42:11 the speculative nature of the physics goes up. I think it would be much better to balance those two. Can we talk about one of these weird things? Have you looked at this extended electrodynamics that no one in my world has ever heard of? I've seen elements of it. I've seen a paper here and there on that extended electrodynamics.

Starting point is 01:42:30 What do you see that as being? I don't know what they're trying to get out with it. That's my conclusion. I don't know what they're trying to extend, where it's going. A little context for the obvious. This is a term that gets thrown around constantly in UFO discussions. You have, even going back to the 90s, Ben Rich, saying there was some math in Maxwell's

Starting point is 01:42:53 equations that was a little off, you know, that sort of thing is this recurring sort of theme. And then you have people now saying that it's a more faithful adherence to the, you know, more expanded Maxwell equations versus the heavy side kind of simplification of vector calculus that is extended electrodynamics. Other people say, Heavyside is the update that makes the extended electrodynamics. No one seems to come up

Starting point is 01:43:19 with some sort of Lagrangian. You've pointed out some real inconsistencies with the, you know, gauge invariance. And, but I believe Hal putoff, who you have a long work history with and, you know, as a long colleague,

Starting point is 01:43:31 he has some interesting work in extended electrodynamics, right? Oh, I never worked in it. I don't know that Hal has. Okay. The only extended electrodynamics I know of is the Lagrangian that you're going to have for high-energy electromagnetic systems,

Starting point is 01:43:43 and that would be the Bourne-Enfeld-Legrongian, I believe it is. Okay, well, you're going back to Yang-Mell's theory in the Aean case. It's just the non-linear version of Maxwell's equations that you're going to get out of a Lagrangian that you can formulate, and it will reduce to Maxwell's equations in the low-energy regime.

Starting point is 01:44:02 So extended. I don't know what they're extending. That's the thing. I've looked at these, and I'm trying to figure out what's an extension. Here's one thing that I've seen. The Faraday tensor made up of the electric and magnetic fields is naturally a degree two object. It's not naturally about vector fields.

Starting point is 01:44:19 That only works if you take a particular slice of space in space time where you shouldn't do that, because that breaks Lorentzhen variance. And then you say, okay, in a three-dimensional world, every two-tensor is dual to a three-minus two tensor or a one tensor or a one-tensor or a, a vector field, and then you plot out these lines in the E and B fields as if they're vector field. It's naturally a degree two object. So Maxwell's equations reduced to two sets of equations, one of which is just true automatically when it's phrased geometrically.

Starting point is 01:44:56 So if you take D-A-star, some operator, based on A, the gauge potential, the connection. It's really the vector and scalar. the four potential. Yeah. DA star, that is the adjoint of that derivative, which is itself a derivative, applied to the Faraday tensor, brings it down a degree from two to one. Right. And you say that thing is equal to the current J, which is a degree one object.

Starting point is 01:45:26 Yeah. But DA of F.A, which takes a degree two object, one degree up to a degree three object, is guaranteed to be zero for the same thing. that makes the Einstein tensor divergence free. The Bianchi identity is an abstract, guaranteed differential equation that comes out of the geometric construction

Starting point is 01:45:48 of curvature. So you throw one of these two equations away because it's guaranteed by geometry. The boundary of the boundary is zero. In essence. So DA of F.A. equals zero represents two of the four Maxwell equation, and you throw it away, and then you're left with the in-humidgenious ones.

Starting point is 01:46:13 And that's just D-A-star of F-A equals J. One of the things I've seen in this world looks to me like D-A-star equals A. The idea is that the gauge potential is a degree-1 object, and so you take D-A-star of a degree-2 object, and that's set equal to a degree-1 object A, and that doesn't work to somebody who thinks in physics terms because on one side of the equation is what we would call a gauge invariant object, something with symmetry. And on the other side, there's an object that picks up an affine shift, meaning it isn't gauge invariant.

Starting point is 01:46:56 Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I see what you're talking. So you can't rotate both sides of the equation in the same way at once. Therefore, it's not a legitimate equation, even though. they're both degree. So is this what extended electrodynamics is a tent? Well, I don't

Starting point is 01:47:10 know because, to be entirely honest, the extended, look, I have had to wrap my head around the fact that we have three bizarre groups of people trying to do physics at least. There's a crackpot group, which writes in red crayon, and

Starting point is 01:47:25 they just don't, they're nowhere close to the target. There's a professional community, which has gone somewhat insane, but still remembers how to do physics from first and second year graduate intro classes, even if they're researching toy models, and they've never seen a quark or a leptone in their research in the last decade. And then there's this intermediate group, which I just didn't know existed, which I will

Starting point is 01:47:52 call fringe physics. And fringe physics is in general, people with sort of like an electrical engineering background, they know calculus, they, they know integrals, they're often technically quite good, and they get an idea that, you know, gravitation looks a lot like electromagneticism. I wonder if I can contribute something, but they don't have a sense of like all the things that can go wrong. Yes.

Starting point is 01:48:21 I think I know about that. So they tinker, but sometimes a tinkerer can stumble on something. So for example, you could easily imagine somebody of stumbling on the bone, on the Aronoff-Bome effect, which is one of these hidden features of the world. So our colleague, Sabina Hassenfelder, has a video not too long ago

Starting point is 01:48:44 where she took something that I've only thought about and heard about as physics folklore. So there's only three ways to hide new physics. It's kind of an interesting idea. The first way is that that can be so energetic that you can't afford to see it. So maybe there are particles out there when we can't create enough energy

Starting point is 01:49:01 to get one of these particles to pop out of the vacuum. second thing is that something is so weakly coupled you can barely detect it so there are lots of neutrinos everywhere but they're so hard to get to interact with anything that you don't know that they're there and then the third thing is the really interesting one for UFO land sometimes there's a configuration that you would never think to put things in like let's get the current up to this we'll spin something around we'll evacuate a tube we'll put the following rare compounds that have these particular things, and maybe we'll see an effect that is normally hidden, amplified to the point where it becomes absolutely clear. You know, like the Kazimir effect, you needed to know that you had to put two plates

Starting point is 01:49:44 very close together for something to happen. Yeah. So that's sort of what we're looking for. We're looking for, is there any new thing that we could do that doesn't require too much energy? there's not so weakly couple that we can barely detect it, but that can be coaxed to show itself the way the Aronoff-Bome effect could have been discovered by an experimenter

Starting point is 01:50:07 passing a beam of electrons around an insulated solenoid and noticing, oh my God, it seems to be able to detect the current. I believe in a podcast with Anna Brady Estevez, how put off openly discussed this idea of extended electrodynamics and him even working with

Starting point is 01:50:28 Josephson Junctions and this idea of vector and scalar potential. So this idea of extended electrodynamics is that the, you know, Lorentz gauges, you know, arbitrarily set to zero and the derivatives of the, you know, vector and scalar potentials, you know, should not, you know, necessarily equal zero. And so theoretically, in terms of implications for the audience, instead of having this transverse herzene wave, which is going to, you know, propagate at one over R squared, you're going to get electrons pairing off in all sorts of situations. You're going to get this kind of rapid attenuation of the signal. You might have other sort of more exotic configurations of, you know, parallel like, you know, wave propagation in a magnetic field or not even

Starting point is 01:51:13 the existence of an, you know, an e-field or whatever with an electromagnetic wave. And I believe Hal has openly discussed this with Anna Brady Estevez on this, you know, its former National Science Foundation for a record. on her podcast. I didn't see the video of that. Okay. Okay. Okay. I never knew there was a video until I think she mentioned it to me last year. So you hear a lot of this stuff in UFO world like, you know, extended electrodynamics and then even possible experimental inroads towards that. And do you know anything about that sort of thing or no? Okay. There are a couple of names that came out of that podcast, Dr. Lewis DeSharo and Dr. Larry Forsley that would be of interest to Dr.

Starting point is 01:51:55 And I know, Larry. Yeah. Yeah. Well, so one of the things that comes out of my work is that we may have the gauge potential that you would put into such an equation wrong. And the thought is the following. Every gauge potential, every connection has a disease when you gauge, transform it.

Starting point is 01:52:23 And this disease, if the gauge transformation is called G, it would look like G inverse DG, where D attacks G, so you differentiate the transformation, and then you use the G inverse to pull it back to the origin of the leak. Okay. That term has no reference to the connection or the gauge potential, A. In other words, it's G inverse DG. Yeah. But G inverse AG is perfectly gauge invariant if you put it into a Lagrangian.

Starting point is 01:52:57 So in other words, there's a part that works beautifully, and there's the part that spoils the party. But the part that spoils the party has no dependence on A whatsoever. Uh-huh. So if you had two separate potentials, A and B, you'd get G inverse A-G plus G-inverse D-G, and G. and G inverse B, G plus G inverse DG. So the diseases are the same. You take a difference between them and the two diseases kill each other and go away,

Starting point is 01:53:32 and you have two terms left over, G inverse A, G, and G inverse BG added together. So one possibility is that even though this community says a bunch of stuff that makes me very uncomfortable, is that you could have a tinkering community that is actually stumbling to things that everyone else is too sophisticated to look for, just the way when we thought it was the E and the B fields, nobody was looking for the holonomy effect, which is a

Starting point is 01:54:02 classical effect that's discovered quantum mechanically. So the embarrassment of finding the Aronoff-Bome effect in the late 50s when we thought we knew everything there was to know about electromagnetism is the greatest proof we have that a theory that is supposedly completely picked over and totally explored may have basic things that we have wrong about it

Starting point is 01:54:29 well into our sophisticated old age. Yeah, basically up until that point, nobody realized or even gave thought that the four-vector potential was a physical field. Well, it isn't in a certain sense. It's a quick, so I give this example that if you know a professional model, they're expected to have a set of things that are called polaroids. They're just shots of that model in various standard poses so that somebody who wants to hire that model can say, this is what this person looks like without makeup and without fancy clothes, right? Those different polaroids are what we would call, I don't know, they're sort of avatars of the same underlying human.

Starting point is 01:55:14 And so if somebody says, I want to hire that person in three-quarter profile, you say, well, no, you hire the person, that's just the particular shot of the person. The electromagnetic potential is an equivalence class, equivalent to give me all of the polaroids to represent the one model. Okay. So the big problem comes out when you single out one polaroid, you say, no, no, that's the field. because what that is is that's a particular representation of that field, but they're all representations of the same underlying field. Okay, yeah. So that's the problem that needed to get so.

Starting point is 01:55:52 So we don't have anybody in academia that's pursuing extended electrodynamics? I don't know. No, we do. There's a guy named Lee Hively in Colorado Springs, and he has a colleague named Woodside, who I believe is in Austin. Australia. And then there's another guy, I think, Strobel or Low Bowl or something. So there's a couple, there are a few of these guys, and they've written a paper about extended electrodynamic.

Starting point is 01:56:20 So another thing that really confuses me is I saw a bizarre video from 1991, which Joe Rogan pointed me to with this guy Bob Lazar seemingly talking nonsense. Yes. Do you recall what he says about the fact that you do this engineering with gravity wave A and gravity wave B? He, no, not entirely. It's been so long. He doesn't know what he's talking about because he was a radiation health monitor for Kimbermire Company, and they were a logistic service company, servicing Los Alamos National Lab in Area 51.

Starting point is 01:57:06 He never had security clearance, he never graduated, never, he dropped. out of his first year of college, et cetera, et cetera. He's not a physicist. Well, I know that. Yeah. I know. So I don't remember, but all I know is he claims Element 115 created anti-matter, which somehow had something to do with creating gravitational waves in the propulsion system.

Starting point is 01:57:26 Did you hear the Jeffrey Epstein tape with Steve Bannon? No. Jeffrey Epstein didn't know what he was talking about either. No, I'm not familiar. But you can tell that Jeffrey Epstein was talking to people who knew what they talked, what they were talking about and he's this garbled version of this. Let's assume the same thing for Bob Lazar.

Starting point is 01:57:46 Let's assume that he was janitorial staff and that he just happened to be in a sensitive location and that he's saying something because it sounds to me like total garbage. Okay? Yeah, yeah. Okay. He says this thing, which is crazy.

Starting point is 01:57:59 He says there's gravity wave A and gravity wave B and you most likely think of gravity as gravity wave B. That's the long range stuff with stars and planets. He says, but gravity wave A is different, and you associated with the strong nuclear force. So, of course, like, I'm just, I want to throw up in my mouth, right? And he says this thing about QCD, quantum chromodynamics of the strong nuclear force is what gravity wave A is all about. And so the idea is going to be that somehow, if you could actually understand that what was

Starting point is 01:58:35 going on in QCD had to do with gravity, you would understand that that that's the the source of strength with the ability to actually do something with space and time. So it seems totally stupid, but let me just point out the following thing. There are only two Lagrangians or actions that I know of that give an Euler-Legrange equation with the curvature appearing without a derivative in front of it. One of them is the Einstein-Hilbert action, which when differentiated gives you the Ricci curvature minus the scalar curvature over two times the metric. The other one is a thing called the churn simons function.

Starting point is 01:59:18 Yeah, it's been your... Churn Simons action. The churn simon's action comes from something called the transgression of the Pontriagin class in the churnvey representation. That is part of QCD. In other words, the normal Yang Mills-Lograngian, we would represent as F inner product F, norm square of F, where F is the field string. From the topology of what is geometry and topology for physics,

Starting point is 01:59:52 and I can't remember who the author of that book was, but I've seen that. But only in dimension four, you can form a different quantity, where you take F inner product star F, where star is the Hodge star or complementarity operator. And that thing generates the Pontchriagin class, which when transgressed gives you the churned Simons, which gives you the Lagrangian that is closest to general relativity. Interesting. I haven't seen that. Well, because nobody's talked about it ever. Yeah. Okay.

Starting point is 02:00:27 So I think this is the first time I'm ever mentioning it in public. So the thought that I had is assume that Bob Lazar is an unreliable narrator and that he was hanging around water coolers and he was. hearing crazy stuff and that it's a mix of bullshit and something. Is it possible, Eric, that what he's talking about is that the theta term from QCD is what he's calling stupidly Gravity Wave A, which no person I've ever heard of has ever used that terminology. I wouldn't think he'd be consciously aware of that. I don't know if it's possible.

Starting point is 02:01:07 It's too, I can't rely on anything he says. because of his history. Dr. Davis, just to play devil's advocate with Bob Lazare, you were saying there's this longstanding UFO legacy crash retrieval program. You have one guy who's come out publicly and has not changed his story since 89. We didn't really know too much about the existence of Area 51, definitely not S4. He's never been there. But how would he know about, you know, Janet Airlines, a flight there?

Starting point is 02:01:36 And he worked at the unclassified logistic support facility over. on McCarron over on Sunset Boulevard next to, not Sunset Boulevard, Sunset Drive next to McCarron Airport. There's a row of light industrial buildings along Sunset Road. And McCarran is right across the street. So Kimber Meyer was there, EG Special Projects was like next door. So he didn't go because he didn't have clearances. His job was just a radiation health badge monitor. So people that get on the Janet flight to go to Area 15.

Starting point is 02:02:10 He gives them their radiation badges. When they come home from work, they get off that janet flight. They got to give them back, give those badges back to him. And his job is to check those badges every day to make sure that they're working. He's not theoretical physicist, but he does have engineering chops. Like he runs currently United Nuclear. He literally put a jet engine on the tobacco Honda. Yeah, I know.

Starting point is 02:02:31 That's just a tinkery. He's a hobbyist. He's also been twice convicted of felonies, including. Yeah, this isn't, guys. He's in that case. I have no interest in Bob Lazard, the person. The key question is, if he was proximate to information that he garbled, is it possible to take the garbled message and associate QCD with two sectors, a Yang-Mills sector and a Pontriagin sector, and that the Chernve representation of the Pontriagin sector inside of QCD associated with a theta term, can lead to something which has Einstein-like properties, which is that that differentiate- That would be remarkable. That would be remarkable.

Starting point is 02:03:09 That would be absolutely remarkable. The vacuum energy of QCD's appendice. So the thing that I'm, so let's get into vacuum energy and zero point of what the source of energy is for all of these things. I'm very turned off by certain attempts to mine. Like, if you look at the Heisenberg uncertainty relations, one of the great innovations in our time is that they've been associated to the symplectic form on phase space in, ordinarily classical Hamiltonian dynamics. In other words, you take the space of configurations of a mug on a table, then you add the momentum so that doubles the space its size to go from configuration space

Starting point is 02:03:55 to phase space, position to position and momentum. On that space, there's a guaranteed object called the symplectic form that comes just out of the math. the big innovation was to say, you know, that thing is actually at the base of a different structure called a line bundle. And it's the curvature tensor for this line bundle with a connection whose sections form the Hilbert space in quantization. Effectively, in a certain sense. Do you mean fiber bundle? Well, yeah, it's a line bundle, exactly.

Starting point is 02:04:30 That that line bundle, it's L2 sections properly taken, pull. There's a whole rigamarole. Right. Sort of self-quantize the manifold. In other words, that the classical mechanics leads naturally to the quantum theory when you realize it's not an isolated degree two object, but a degree two object that comes as the curvature of something else that we had not thought to study. If you try to, if that's the source of the Heisenberg uncertainty relations, that's a curvature

Starting point is 02:05:01 you can't get rid of. so if you try to mine it, I don't really see how you extract from something that can't be lessened. On the other hand, were you to try to tap into the dark energy, if that is in fact a vev, a vacuum expectation value, rather than a hard constant, could that be used as a on-demand power source? Sure could be.

Starting point is 02:05:29 Do you work on that at all? No, but I looked at people, who've set me their ruminations on that idea. And it looked pretty intelligent, but it wasn't very well developed, in my opinion. So I think that would be a great direction to go, and I like where you're going here. I'm just trying to be constructive.

Starting point is 02:05:46 Let me try another one on you. I like where you're going. I think you pointed out some stuff I'm not aware of, other than the dark energy aspect, which I'm already aware of, which need to be followed up on. Imagine for the moment that you embed what we currently call space time

Starting point is 02:06:02 in its space of all pointwise Lorentzian metrics. So every way you could possibly have of measuring length and angle through a series of three rulers, one watch, and six protractors. That's a 14-dimensional object that I work with on a daily basis that I call the observers. We don't have to get too far into this. But the point that I want to make is the following. There are ways of traveling through time and space,

Starting point is 02:06:31 and I want to say also that time really should always be times because the number of actual temporal dimensions we currently think is one, but it doesn't need to be one. I agree. Okay. We talk a lot about entanglement. We talk a lot about wormholes. We don't talk about pinch to zoom.

Starting point is 02:06:51 We don't talk about what? Pinch to zoom. Imagine that you pointed at a star that you wanted to visit. And imagine that you could find some way of traveling in 10 transverse dimensions. Okay. where what you're doing is growing the ruler in the direction between you and that star. Now, once the ruler says one foot, you need the energy to walk one foot, not the energy to walk four light years. Right.

Starting point is 02:07:24 And then you have to put the ruler back, so you have to shrink the ruler to grow the distance after you've grown the ruler to shrink the distance. Okay. So the idea is that this is something like pinch to zoom, which doesn't work on an ordinary table, but if this was a smart, table, it would be a what's called a multi-touch gesture. Have you thought about whether multi-touch gestures like pinch to zoom or another one that I call shear to tilt might be built into the object that we confuse for space time? It sounds plausible. I like that. I've seen hints of something like that and some books I've read back in the 90s, very small hints of it. And I thought there was something to it that I just didn't follow up on. Yeah, I would say that makes sense. That makes sense to me.

Starting point is 02:08:14 Yeah. That's very interesting idea. Do you think much about dark chemistry? About which? Dark chemistry. Dark chemistry. Like chemistry with dark matter. No, I don't. I see. I haven't seen anybody used that phrase before. supposedly dark matter doesn't interact with regular matter, especially at the electromagnetic force level. Well, that's what we mean largely by dark, right? Yeah, because you can't see it. There's no luminosity involved.

Starting point is 02:08:54 No exchange of photons that we can visibly see and collect a spectrum for. Well, we sort of have three long-range carriers. We have light, we have gravity, and we have neutrinos that we know about. But let me ask you about a weird phrase that I keep hearing that I don't understand. I keep hearing about interdimensional beings, which causes me to want to throw up in my mouth. People, I think that's colloquial. Do you know what they're... Interdimensional means you're going between dimensions, so I don't understand the word interdimensional

Starting point is 02:09:25 beings. I think it's really beings that could transverse other dimensions or traverse other dimension. Does it mean something technical that's being that interdimensional? Again, let's... We moved through three spatial dimensions, so that makes us interdimensional already. Okay. And we moved through time allegedly in one direction. So David Grush, I believe, used this phrase in a hearing.

Starting point is 02:09:49 And they talked about holography. Yeah, Dave's not a physicist. I understand that. So what I'm trying to look, again, the point isn't to say whether somebody knows what they're talking about, but to say, assume that somebody does, assume that the plumber comes to you and says, wow, I was just out of some crazy. base and I don't even know what these words mean, but here's what I heard. Right? So very often I'm just trying to, I'm not, I don't care about.

Starting point is 02:10:14 Yeah, I think he's heard that from his briefings given to, from the briefings given to him on the crash retrieval program. I just, you know, he can't tell me that level of information at the classified level because I'm not cleared for it. So are you? He can verbally on a superficial level discuss it in the open, but I don't know what he, if he's, it sounds like he's garbage. stuff at time. And if we had an adversary that was aware of multiple temporal dimensions where we're only aware of one. So we have an arrow of time and they would have multiple like a right-hand rule of time.

Starting point is 02:10:51 It would be a, have you thought much about the threat assessment as to what capabilities a... No, nobody does threat assessments like that, but I would say that is something worth having a threat assessment done on. And have you, are you aware of reports that we are being, I wouldn't say menaced, but monitored? Made to know that we do not control our space. Yes.

Starting point is 02:11:26 Do you find that highly credible? Yes. What percentage? 100, because it was definitive. That was told to me definitively, not speculatively. It was, we know this to be true. So I've been told the same thing by multiple parties who are not related, all of whom seem like credible people. Yet nobody seems to have direct firsthand.

Starting point is 02:11:50 Yeah. Even I can't get into that level. I mean, Harry Reid tried to get a special access program and he failed because Deputy Secretary of Defense William Lynn denied it. And that was because Harry Reid did it the wrong way. He did it the wrong way. And that's why it got denied. If we did it the proper way, which I'm trained on in the security apparatus, we would have been more successful. Do you remember Dick Feynman's book of stories like Shirley, you're joking, and what do you care what other people think?

Starting point is 02:12:19 Oh, yeah. It's been long time since. Do you remember a story called Any Questions in which he goes to Buffalo, New York? Because as a physics professor at Cornell, he has to teach in an aerospace company? Yeah, vaguely. So he gets beat up or something in a washroom over a girl, I forget what. Do you have a sense what Richard Feynman was doing with all of this? Because he also has another weird story where he's got patents for nuclear submarines,

Starting point is 02:12:52 nuclear planes, nuclear shopping, I don't know what. Are aerospace companies something that we don't understand where people actually did basic physics research, not material science, not something that's plain or rocket or drone adjacent, but where people were doing actual frontier research in fundamental physics? No, they wouldn't do that, not in that. So they wouldn't use it as a shell? No, they do applied physics research. They're developing technical solutions to the government customers request

Starting point is 02:13:32 to answer the government customers need for a solution to some problem. So it doesn't go to fundamental physics like should we worry about these type of quarks versus those type of quarks? No, no, no. They're looking at a physics that could be applied to the engineering of a technological solution for the government customer. That's what the aerospace industry does. Oh, I understand what it's supposed to do.

Starting point is 02:13:55 What I'm trying to say is, is it a system of containers and you can put anything in a container? I mean, in other words, you could imagine that if a container was secure, you could put a drug laundering, you know, money laundering drug operation inside of it. We wouldn't think, oh, that's what you'd expect to find it. That's right, yeah. That it's like something crawled into that shell. My question is, is it possible that theoretical physics was sort of relocated into aerospace companies? Because this is a partially...

Starting point is 02:14:28 I wouldn't say no to that. That's possible. That's possible. When we spoke to Hal put off, he said definitively, he said, you know, I don't, not sure about fundamental physics being tied up in aerospace corporations, but he goes topological physics, like, probably. And he said it would seem to me that physics generally is held in these aerospace companies. And, you know, that was very major sort of blood boil.

Starting point is 02:14:54 Well, I worked for the aerospace corporation for four and a half years. I was one of only a dozen. or so physicists with PhDs in the company. In L. Sagina? In 4,000 employees. Which location? I was at Huntsville, Alabama. Okay.

Starting point is 02:15:14 Because I was supporting the NASA Space Nuclear Propulsion Program Office. So I was only one of maybe a dozen, maybe two. I don't think it was more than two, but definitely within two dozen PhD physicists in the whole country, in the whole company. And I'll have to tell you that not a single one, a few of them. us were doing any physics. We were doing engineering work. And how many of you were trained in frontier theory? Frontier theory.

Starting point is 02:15:41 What do you mean? Standard model in GR. Oh. How far back from the front lines were you guys? I knew those guys and none of them were. Some of them were trained in astrodynamics, so they know general relativity and Newtonian mechanics. I'm the only one I know of who's been trained on the standard model in GR. I didn't know any of those other guys.

Starting point is 02:16:01 is that work. There's one guy at Blue Origin who went to my university, got his PhD in general relativity theory. This University of Arizona at Tucson? Two years after I got my doctorate. And he's working as an engineer at Blue Origin. Okay. Last question. I can't wrap my head around this. If I was facing an incursion in my airspace claiming craft that defy the laws of physics, and I didn't have a single top physicist on my team, I would expect to be fired instantly. Oh, sure, but that's not how they think. They don't think in terms of that.

Starting point is 02:16:39 They're thinking in terms of their bottom line, and their bottom line will not involve a theoretical physicist. They might have... Sorry. What? You have craft, the claim. They're engineers. I know.

Starting point is 02:16:52 They're engineers. Okay, but if you... They're not thinking in terms of fundamental physics or something beyond the standard model or something beyond general. They're thinking... How are they doing on this... project decades in, the supposed project, how are they doing on it? What's their level of success?

Starting point is 02:17:07 All I know is as of my knowledge. If you're failing at something that requires new physics, you say defy the laws of physics, we can't make progress and we have no physicists. Right. That's because they don't have. David, this can't, Eric, this can't add up. It's a two-line proof. It defies the laws of physics. We haven't made progress. We have no physicists. If something defies the laws of physics, who do you call? I know, you ask any of us, any of us, write down 15 names of who you call if you had a craft that defied the laws of physics. Wait a second. Twelve of those names, ten of those names would be the same on everybody's list. Okay. The final thing I would say is if Hal Putoff was telling us that some physics is held,

Starting point is 02:17:57 whether it's even if it's just experimental physics, you have a bunch of people over the last 70 years, the foremost in my mind, Townsend Brown, and, you know, this Ningley at University of Alabama Huntsville, saying that they're getting little weight reduction effects, gravitational shielding. That's wrong. They didn't. They were incompetent. There is no weight reduction. So simultaneously, Howell's thing of there being. Two chapters in my book on the Townsend Brown effect. But there's the lead electrostatic scientist from NASA at Gabe Kennedy just left to start a private propellantless propulsion company, and he says it's derivative of Townsend Brown's effect. Those older papers and that older subject matter is probably valid for most of the point. It's unfair to say that it's not.

Starting point is 02:18:43 However, without a theory back then to describe it, it was hard for them to miniaturize it, to optimize it, all of those things you want to do to make it a useful force. His name's Charles Bueller. Talking junk science. Even though he's the electricist. Yeah. And then the physics chair, who is the lead of Ningley's department, left to join her company, Larry Smalley. Yeah, but she was wrong and so was he. Okay. Okay. And they made off with $400,000 in Army research lab money and didn't produce a producible for it. They didn't deliver anything for that money. So the topological physics effects. Have you talked to Travis Taylor? He knew all of. He knew England.

Starting point is 02:19:21 So the topological. She's a rotten, terrible physicist. So the physics that are held in private aerospace, we. just have to sort of guess. Like, we, there's, there's no sense of what any of this stuff is, but they're also not putting any theoretical physicists, you know, like Eric's colleagues on any of this stuff. Like, it just feels sort of. Here's the thing. The government is going to tell the aerospace company, we, okay, this is hypothetical, but this is how it works according to my two industry sources. Okay, the government says, here's a craft. We, we, want to know how it works. The industry contractors say, okay, and they think in terms of

Starting point is 02:20:04 engineering, we're going to, we're not, they're not going to do fundamental physics. They're not, they might have experimental physics. It's not out of the realm to have an experimental physical. But they're not theoretical guys. So they'll have to know some theory, but they're mostly experimental. You've given no. Hang on, hang on. So, so they get the tasking that they've got to take a part of craft and they've got to figure out how it's made and how it's work. That's how it works. That's it. That's the tasking. So that leaves out any need for a theoretical physicists. They don't know that they would agree. Wait, wait, that made absolutely zero sense. That's how they operate. No, no, no, no. You said, but because of that, that's why they don't,

Starting point is 02:20:46 no, you absolutely need a theoretical physicist if you're going to take apart a device. I don't disagree, but that's how they operate. That's what the program manager and the government says. So the program manager and the company is going to say, okay, here's our solution to that problem. So here's our bid. They get a sole source contract. No, there's no bid. It's the sole source contract. So they get the sole source contract and they've already laid out what the tasking is to be done on that contract. And the tasking is to be done that needs to be done is the engineering to take this thing apart piece by piece, reverse engineer it, put it back together again and try to figure out if they can make it work or not and understand how that happens. And that's all they do.

Starting point is 02:21:28 They don't have tasking to hire a theoretical physicist to sit there and start thinking about the standard model, beyond the standard model. They don't go there. They don't go there. These are engineering companies. They're not universities. And they don't even, aren't even allowed to talk to universities about this because of the compartmentalization is horrible. Sorry, if an iPhone fell into the hands of a villager in some far-flung developing country, the odds of a cobbler or a carpenter figuring out how an iPhone worked is negligible. Exactly. Okay.

Starting point is 02:22:09 Exactly. So the same thing is true. On your engineering, I mean, look, the Manhattan Project was an engineering project. There was a deliverable, it was a device. But they had to have physicists for both projects. You're not giving me any understanding of why there were physicists in one and not the other. Wouldn't the same, even if you had a wrong, sorry. It just doesn't make sense to it, Eric.

Starting point is 02:22:34 That's just what all the evidence goes down to, comes down to, I should say. I haven't met as, well, I asked my sort, my senior VP, said, oh, we didn't have any physicists. They had Bernie Heisch working in that company. He is a physicist. He's an astrophysicist. He was a Max Planck Institute fellow. He was a fellow of that company. And he did astrophysics work because that company built spacecraft for NASA.

Starting point is 02:23:00 But an alternate hypothesis is that this is a dummy program masking something. And the last thing you would want ever on such a program is a physicist. Because the physicist is going to tear right through this thing and say, there is no byfield brown effect here. Let me show you. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So my, my, my claim is that avoidance of physicists might be necessary to keep a dummy program going, just the way the presence of physicists was necessary to get a deliverable for Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Starting point is 02:23:38 Interesting. Okay. I just done another note, the five people I knew of at that one legacy company, two of whom I met with and dined with and one of whom I met with routinely through the ASAP and after. So the woman was a mathematician, but she worked as a chief of security. There we go. The other one was a material scientist. Okay.

Starting point is 02:24:03 That's a discipline in engineering. The other three were engineers. One of them was involved with the development of the F-117 fighter. And I don't know what the other guy's roles were, but they were all engineers. what they were described to me, and I said, no, physicist. He said, no, not really. It's insane. Both of you guys, what do you hope for the next year or two of disclosure?

Starting point is 02:24:24 I mean, I think it's clear that you think the brain dead way in which this is run without theoretical physicists. I would like to meet adults on this project who are not grooved into thinking that we can just repeat things that never made any sense into the future as if they make sense. The idea that we are being visited by crafts that, dominate our airspace that we cannot understand, do not know their origin, that defy the laws of physics, and we avoid the one specialty that could help us at all costs and that this makes sense to anyone, is it is a fairy tale that should not be, I think that a mentally retarded golden retriever

Starting point is 02:25:04 should not repeat this fair. Dr. Davis, what do you hope for over the next few years? Well, I'm actually, what's the word? I don't want to say I'm looking for a negative term here, and I'm not enthusiastic. Well, it's not enthusiastic. That's not the word. I think the presidential emergency action directives are so strict. They were instituted in the Eisenhower White House administration.

Starting point is 02:25:36 So Eisenhower instituted that. And that's been carried forward on many different topics, but specifically Jim Semiband and I know that they were instituted. for this topic that we've been discussing. So I am not hope, I guess that's the word I'm looking for. I'm not hopeful that there will be meaningful disclosure because of the presidential emergency action directives. And I'm also not hopeful because I don't think that this topic has risen to a level of urgency in the White House as the Epstein files have. And the retribution that Trump wants to execute against his political enemies.

Starting point is 02:26:14 Those are at the top. He's got his economic agenda. He's got his foreign policy agenda, tariffs and all that. Disclosure of UAPs at this level, it's just not rising to the top. That's your prognosis, but your hope is that we get full transparency outside of national security trade secrets. I can get the keys to the door with how. And we can walk in and we can talk to people and say, where the fuck are your physicists? or we can say we're going to volunteer our time, or you can pass to work for you.

Starting point is 02:26:48 I would love for both of us with Hal and some others to be able to go in and take a look at the hardware, see it ourselves. I've heard physical descriptions from Jim Lekatsky. Who said that he breached the hull and walked inside of a UFO. Yeah. And you believe him. Yeah, because there's no reason not to. You told us because you were allowed to tell us that our government has a UFO in its possession,

Starting point is 02:27:10 and has been able to access the inside of it, right? Yes. I mean, when you work with people like that, we know that we're not trained to lie and make up bullshit. Just for the sake of lying and making up bullshit. No, we are people with clearances. We are responsible people. Jim Likovsky was a missiles engineer, I believe he was.

Starting point is 02:27:32 And there are other missiles engineers I knew who worked at the DIA back in the 80s and, no, back in, yeah, 80s, 90s. in 2000s until they retired. So there's a lot of engineers in the DIA, not too many physicists that I ever ran across. So anyway, it'd be nice. But so my point is, Jim Likaski wouldn't say that just,

Starting point is 02:27:52 just to pull it out of the air and throw people off. He's telling you the truth. That was during his time. This is exactly the truth, and this is exactly what he experienced working at the DIA. At some point, I don't know whether this happened during the Osset because he certainly didn't tell us.

Starting point is 02:28:07 All of us in the Ossap, Kelleher, Bigelow, put off, Vali, myself, we never heard this come from Kasky before. Was this at Lockheed or when he stuck inside the crack? No, no. I don't know where it was. It's just that he said, yeah, he didn't say in his book. I don't know if you read the book or not. I haven't read the book. Okay. So he didn't say where he went into that craft or who had it, but I have a general idea based on conversations I've had with Jay Stratton. But the point being is that he was able to get it,

Starting point is 02:28:35 touch it. I also know four-star general from the Clinton administration who was able to go there, uses authority as power to go see the program and get inside, talk to the program, employees and leadership, touch the craft, look inside the crowd. So that's two. And then there's Admiral Wilson who said, I tried to get into the program. I met the program manager, the corporate security chief, the legal counsel, and the chief scientist. And they told me, after a lot of resistance and arguing, they finally said, this is what you're looking for. It is a crash retrieval, nine human intelligence, human technology, off world, but we can't let you in because you don't have a need to know beyond that.

Starting point is 02:29:17 Yeah. You know, it's like, oh, but that's how it works. I mean, that really does work that way. The head of the NRO doesn't know what the hell a lot of the stuff that's going on beneath them because there are Wosaps or Saps or hidden SCIs. He doesn't have a need to know unless there's a reason that he has to, and then they have to brief him. On that mind-blowing but also a baffling note, and I am glad we end.

Starting point is 02:29:40 in a sort of a, you know, collegial way, we share mutual hope that we can, we can, you know, bash down the doors. And I love this guy's mind. I love the way he was going in the last hour or so. Yeah. This is, uh, this has really opened my mind a lot more, my eyes on some things I want to start looking at now.

Starting point is 02:29:56 Thank you for that. Thanks, Doc. Thank you, sir. That was an interesting conversation. Wasn't it? Yeah. What's your, I don't know, do you have kind of a gestalt sense coming away from that as far as an update, where you were before the conversation, where you are now?

Starting point is 02:30:15 So, first of all, it's interesting to see somebody who believes in aliens and craft in some deep level and doesn't believe in going beyond the theories that are blessed with holy water by the physics community. And so, you know, I take general relativity and standard model quite seriously, but he takes it almost as a constraint. So I think one of the things I didn't understand is that the physics output seems almost recreational, and it seems like what is the closest you could get to science fiction using known science? Right?

Starting point is 02:31:00 Yeah. And the idea is that it's all extremely implausible, vague scenario. Like if we could come up with huge amounts of matter and energy, then we could do this Alcubieri space-time solution. Or, you know, maybe we could engineer an Einstein Rosen bridge. You know, and like, again, I heard somebody say this thing about maybe the black hole information paradox is a key that because it doesn't fully make sense, that that's where the technology is.

Starting point is 02:31:36 or you should use quantum gravity as a guide. Maybe you go into a black hole and you somehow get shot out someplace at a speed that you couldn't imagine otherwise. Whatever these things are, this is garbage. I hate to say it that way, but it's not that he's, maybe he's doing the best that you can do, assuming general relativity in the standard model, trying to reproduce something that clearly goes beyond it if it exists at all.

Starting point is 02:32:03 Another thing is that I was sort of surprised that he wasn't nearly as read in at a primary level so that he's able to talk because he didn't actually make primary contact with this. Well, that's the thing we were just commenting on off camera, which is this funny dynamic of everybody seems to be circling around this program and nobody seems to be in the program. It's a little like the Epstein list or something. Yeah. Which is not at all, you know, we'll stop the analogy there. But it is this weird thing where it's like, you know, no one's gone to the island, but like, you know, or not me rather, but everybody else has or whatever. And these are, everybody's, everybody's, everybody's, this weird thing where everybody's this Mr. Smith goes to Washington character who stumbled into this in this sort of hapless way.

Starting point is 02:32:56 and they have no idea how the thing actually sort of functions and works and that allows them to talk about. Or even if there's a thing as described at all. I mean, I'm convinced that there's a thing and it has a boundary and it has some structure and there's some money in it, whatever. But I don't know that what's inside that container is what is indicated on its surface to the extent that anyone is, you know, can even see the boundary. Yeah, well, that's a question is like, you know, does the tip of the iceberg look like, is it actually an iceberg? And are we looking at a tip of the iceberg where you can say we have a crash retrieval reverse engineering program, but that's actually some sort of intelligent sleight of hand. And in fact, the body or a structure that is underneath, you know,

Starting point is 02:33:48 submerged in the water is obfuscated and that changes everything. Yeah, it's like you have a kelp forest, which has a top which looks like an iceberg. You know, something like that. I was just trying to figure out the right analogy. Well, there isn't a good one. There isn't a good one. Yeah. Yeah.

Starting point is 02:34:06 And you have unreliable narrators to contend with as well. And you have unprepared ontologies to contend with as well. So you have these voices giving you information. You are Eric Davis in this situation. You have these witnesses or these sources giving you information. But they are a filter unto themselves. They're an ontology filter. and they're a reliability filter.

Starting point is 02:34:27 How much can you totally bank on what they're saying and use it to build a model for whatever is hiding in this boundary? So one of the questions that we were discussing is if you believe in the legacy program, and I think all three of us are in a position where we've talked to too many different people with different backgrounds that are talking about us something in common, and, you know, in my worst fear, it's the jackalope,

Starting point is 02:34:58 where everybody sort of believes the jackalopes are real because there's an industry around a myth. But assuming this thing is real, because I can't imagine how you would fake it. What is real is a program with a boundary. So there's something where you're inside the program, and there's something where you're outside the program, and people have to go back in and out,

Starting point is 02:35:20 unless you imagine that there's a secret facility which you enter once and you never leave, just physically. This means almost certainly this thing is hidden in plain sight. I don't mean to say that there may not be deep underground facilities on our bases. I don't mean to say that, but people have to go home. Right. Right? And you have to have plumbers and you have to have housekeeping staff.

Starting point is 02:35:50 I don't understand how this thing exists. Well, on that note, you attempted at some instantiation of at least the theoretical physics component of the whatever we're calling that, this UAP legacy program at Renaissance Technologies. And I thought it was interesting that in 2022, NASA had this, you know, UFO review panel. 16 researchers will spend the next nine months studying the UFOs. They will use unclassified data in their research and release a report to the public next year. And this follows the Pentagon's announcement in July that it would create an office to track reports of UAPs or UFOs.

Starting point is 02:36:41 And they were seeing, you know, if there's anything to all this stuff, and they were looking into it in an official capacity. And the person overseeing that panel is this guy, David Spurgel. Of course, Jim Simon started Renaissance technologies, and Spurgel was head of his foundation. So I find that to be very interesting overlap. So there's this concept in Washington of steady hands. And steady hands, I never really found all the different meanings for it. But one meaning for it was, who can we trust when the pressure gets insanely high to do what we expect needs to be done, which may involve obfuscating, lying, evading, prudifying,

Starting point is 02:37:25 all of the things that don't have to do with disclosure. The world of steady hands is often a very small world, so they reuse the same. You'll notice that the same people in Washington, D.C., somehow show up on eight different issues. They're like, because the government knows that they can trust that person in a crisis, not to buckle. They've sort of given their life for the team.

Starting point is 02:37:52 Would Fauci be sort of analogous? Sure, right? The idea that you're going to stand up to Rand Paul in an open hearing, and you're not going to call for your mommy, and you're not going to say, okay, I admit it there was a whole thing, and we screwed up and I feel terrible, whatever. And so maybe the idea is we're dealing with the steady hands phenomena, that you need people to deny the obvious.

Starting point is 02:38:22 You need people to spend credibility. And there are very few people who want to do that job. One other connection I was thinking of speaking of, you know, the intersection between institutions that are well respected that nobody can deny have power in the country, like the Jasons, which, you know, they meet in Santa Barbara, it's the elite of the elite when it comes to military industrial complex, and specifically figuring out kind of its frontier physics,

Starting point is 02:38:54 but it's also weaponization, you know, and so you have that committee that you brought up, and then you have the UFO world, which seems kind of more quacky on the face of it. And you have this guy Ron Pandolfi, who seems to be a part of the Jason Advisory Committee, but also seems to show up in UFO world, constantly. And so I think it's really interesting as a heuristic to look at the intersection between quacky UFO world and more institutional, undeniable military industrial complex. Well, that was why the golden age of general relativity was such an important thing to mine, because that was the last major moment where the lunatic quacks and the super respectable people

Starting point is 02:39:44 we're seeing each other after hours for cocktails, right? And, you know, there's a different version of this maybe where David Kaiser, I think, wrote this book, How the Hippies Saved Physics about what gets done at Esselin, you know, with entanglement and bell inequalities and all that kind of stuff. So I think that there's this weird way in which the quack world and the respectable world are always intermingled, and we don't really admit to this. I've called the passion for, let's say, string theoretic physics and other official mass delusions, Knarks, which is crank spelled backwards. A Knark is a crank inside of the institutions who would be ridiculed for their

Starting point is 02:40:40 belief structure, but for the fact that they are upholding the institution. Right? And so we have a, and by the way, the mass delusion isn't the string theory might be interesting. It's that 42 years in, you're still not seeing this. What do we have wrong? Does anyone else have an idea? There is no conference that brings together the critics and the proponents to try to get to ground truth. Well, you have an idea about, you mean, you mentioned this in the interview. You said, you know, we have been beating Einstein to death, trying to kind of quantize. gravity, you have an idea about gauging gravity and how, you know, maybe we fell into the kind of quantum gravity cul-de-sac when we could have thought about gravity in this other context. Well, so this is a very strange point. So I just turned 60. And... Happy birthday. Thank you very much. What I realize about myself is that I am the youngest person to see the transition between old style physics and the string physics in terms of the community. So I got to college in 1982.

Starting point is 02:41:53 I started going to seminars essentially immediately, which was unusual. And I was 16 at the time. So that was my claim to saying that that's why I'm the youngest. Things change in 84. So there's really only 82, 83. And I happened by complete accident to be at the first lecture of Ed Witten on string theory at the University of Pennsylvania. in 1983, which I didn't know until very recently that my memory actually is because I fell by accident into the beginning. They changed the entire culture of theoretical physics, and there's

Starting point is 02:42:26 nothing they can do to hide it. If you go back to research articles before 1984, you see an entirely different culture of inquiry as to what are the problems of physics, what might we try to do to solve them. And quantum gravity was just thrust down everybody's throat as the Holy Grail from 1984 to 87. And by the time of 87, everybody had accepted this. So what you did is you retconned a story where nobody mentions the phrase quantum gravity until 1972. And you say, well, that's always been the Holy Grail ever since gravity in general. general relativity in 1915 and the quantum, let's say by 1928 when you have quantum electrodynamics, we're both realized to have this kind of incompatibility. So if the incompatibility

Starting point is 02:43:21 between the two is real, but it's not really quantum gravity, what is it? So what I said was most people don't realize that due to work of Jim Simons and Cien Yang, which got written up as Wu Yang as if Simons was Wu, we know that underneath the standard model is a classical geometric structure. And we don't talk about the classical differential geometric nature of the standard model. And that is the subject of the Wu Yang dictionary. So that unearthing of a geometric origin for the particles and fields that are not gravity, but all of the quantum fields,

Starting point is 02:44:07 is a very important clue. That geometry has a property, which is that it is gauged, which means that you can keep yourself from being fooled that many different versions, you know that problem with the elephant, with the blind men going around, and it's all one elephant.

Starting point is 02:44:27 And the blind men aren't wandering around the elephant stupidly. They're just staying in one place. So a gauge orbit would be, let's get all of the information from all of these people and decide that it's one elephant, and they're just looking at it from different perspectives. So it's kind of a unity of knowledge. General relativity can't be gauged.

Starting point is 02:44:47 Now, there's a lie that says, well, that it's a type of gauge theory because there's a different kind of symmetry, which has nothing to do with gauging called a general coordinate invariance or diphtomorphism invariants. So we make up a story to pretend that Einstein's theory can be gauged, and it can't.

Starting point is 02:45:07 And so now you have this weird question. Why did Edwitten tell us that the incompatibility between this, the standard model and general relativity, was that one was fully quantum and the other never quite grew up and that we had to grow up general relativity? So general relativity and standard model have two separate attributes. Einstein could do two things that the standard model cannot. These things are called contraction,

Starting point is 02:45:33 where you take two indices on either side of a separating barrier, called a tensor product, and you get them to mate and tear off. So he contracted the Riemannian curvature to get the Ritchie curvature. He contracted that to get scalar curvature, he spun the scalar curvature around 180 degrees, plugged it back into the formula, and got rid of this vile curvature. Whatever that operation was,

Starting point is 02:45:57 that was the central idea of general relativity. There is no ability to take the full curvature tensors that occur in the standard model and break them up into components. You can't do this contraction game. And the other thing Einstein had that the standard model didn't is that there's a central reference object called the Levitivita connection, and there's no analog for that in the connections that give us photons and W and Z particles and gluons.

Starting point is 02:46:26 So in the case of the standard model, you've got, if my arm here is spacetime, and this is the data of the particles, the data of the particles can move around without moving space time. In general relativity, if you think about this as the X, Y plane, moving the X axis affects the Y axes. The incompatibility between the advantages of those two different pictures, gauge equivalence in the case of the standard model, and contraction and a specified Leve Javita connection, that difference gives two sets of advantages to two different theories. Now, my work, the reason it's called geometric unity, nobody

Starting point is 02:47:14 ever asks that question, really, is that I said, are there any places where you get to use the advantages of both systems? And the answer turns out to be, well, certainly in general, it won't work. But for some completely absurdly narrow class of theories, you get all the benefits of both systems. And then you check the particle table of the standard model, and you're exactly in that freak class. So, like, how can you not devote your life to that fact? I just don't even understand it. So that thing is having to do with the fact that we didn't gauge gravity properly.

Starting point is 02:47:55 And there's old work about this with Einstein and Cartan, with McDowell and Mansouri, with a bunch of other people who've had versions of this idea. But it all got blown away by quantum. on gravity. Do you think that was by design or emergent? It sounds insane to say by design. But let me give you something that is insane, although modern people won't see it as such. It is insane to spend 42 years under the spell of a group of people you call leaders who've

Starting point is 02:48:33 stagnated a field. In general, you have to ask the question, why is no one allowed to say, what is going on with David Gross, Lenny Sussk, and Edward Whitten, Andy Strominger. Why are these people still our leading physicists? I mean, this program failed. It's not the first failed program. We had a program associated with Reggie called the Reggie Calculus that was supposed to do great things and didn't work. There was a guy named Jeff Chu, who had a bootstrap program and the S-Matrix thing that didn't work.

Starting point is 02:49:13 we've had lots of ideas that don't work, and it's part of the game. And it's not a question of these are bad people, but they failed scientifically. We can't say that. We can't say that we are slavishly devoted to making sure that we don't offend our leaders, and we're going to insult everyone else. And literally, we're just going to professionally insult everyone who's been saying for 42 years, this is not sensible. You saw what happened with Eric.

Starting point is 02:49:42 I sort of had to say, you know, none of these ideas are remotely plausible that you're exploring. It wasn't personal, wasn't mean. He sort of said, yeah, I know that now. But you can kind of tell at the beginning none of this is going to work. And so both in string theory

Starting point is 02:50:00 and in what he's doing, which is accepting that craft exists and are retrieved and can do miraculous things and the constraints are he takes for himself. I'm not going to challenge the standard model or general relativity. What's the closest I can get to science fiction from known science fact?

Starting point is 02:50:19 And the answer is you're a million miles away, buddy. There's no, you're not even, you're not in the right zip code. Is your sense that there is a vital core that does have either geometric unity or some frameworks that are closer to ontological truth than general relativity in quantum field theory, you know.

Starting point is 02:50:40 You can't ask me because my feeling is I wouldn't have spent the same 42 years on geometric unity if I wasn't pretty confident that this is right. Okay, so then the question would be, do you think that somebody else or some other entity on the inside of all of this? Because what's interesting is you have a similar thing going on in UFO world as what seemed to go on with Epstein, where you have this. bizarre telephone game of terms being you have like in UFO world it's like extended electrodynamics and all these like weird frameworks that nobody knows how to define and then

Starting point is 02:51:19 you read those Epstein emails and he's like boost your physics he's like you know time is actually just a function of the vibration of cesium atoms and he's infiltrating the math department at Harvard and somehow has a lot of sway with these people and is speaking like a person who was maybe told some real stuff? This is the thing that's very hard to convey because particularly academics and PhDs don't want to be conned, like at all costs. My feeling is this is an extremely dumb way

Starting point is 02:51:52 to go through life. You're going to be conned for sure. Try to figure out who's saying something interesting by listening. And in my estimation, Epstein was saying, interesting things to me that didn't originate from his mind. It's like they've hired an actor to play a hedge fund manager. I only met him once. It was probably for about an hour or so. But he was an absolutely terrifying person to encounter.

Starting point is 02:52:27 It would be surprising to me if I was alone in that I immediately had the suspicion that I was looking at somebody who had been constructed rather than something that had organically arisen within the financial community. It was like somebody who'd learned a phrase in a foreign language and he was repeating it as best he could. I don't think people really have a clear idea of how crazy that interview he gives to Bannon or the media training he was doing. He gets like eight things wrong in a row and people said, well, Eric, you were wrong.

Starting point is 02:52:59 He clearly is a much better spoken, much more informed person. So he founded the Santa Fe Institute in 1990 to 93, when it was founded in 1984 by other people. So bizarre. Or this was around the time that Murray Gelman was naming quarks from a poem when quarks were named many years earlier. Says he was a good Wall Street trader because he had calculators. We had Texas instruments back then.

Starting point is 02:53:28 Okay, so this is what I saw with, like, Bob Lazar, you know. Eric latched onto the fact that Lazare is lying. Okay, so fine, he's lying. It doesn't mean it's uninteresting. Not only is it not uninteresting, but I think it's simultaneously, it's a little strange to say, I know that there is a long-term legacy UFO reverse engineering program than the one guy that comes out where I think a lot of his stuff checks, to be honest. And I think you can easily character assassinate the person by saying, you know, he's involved in XYZ,

Starting point is 02:54:04 but a lot of his details check. My point is, assume that he's schizophrenic, assume that he's got delusions of grandeur. I don't know. I, I'd never had the thought before that the topological instanton sector of QCD based on the Pontiagin class could be transgressed to a churn Simon and churn Simon is as close to Einstein Hilbert. And I only had that because I was just so sickened by what Lazare was saying is. if he's talking, I'm going to explain the world to you, kids, and he starts talking garbage. When did you hear that and have this idea about the theta sector and then look at it?

Starting point is 02:54:47 It's an interesting question. Joe Rogan, who's, you know, a friend wanted me to sit down with Bob Lazar. And, you know, I sat down with Terrence Howard, and I have a great deal of fun with Terrence. And Terrence and I get on, although sometimes he threatens me, and I hate that. But Terrence, you know, I was praised, in the one or two areas where Terrence was doing something really new, and in general, I had to pour cold water on most everything else, he said. And, you know, that's the price of

Starting point is 02:55:17 being taken seriously by somebody like me. In the case of Bob Lazard, Joe once said, let's sit down. Now, I didn't, I wouldn't have done the Terrence episode if I didn't have something to say, which Terrence, which is positive, which is Terrence found one remarkable thing, at least. He just did. So with one remarkable thing, I'm willing to do it. Otherwise, it's a character assassination. I did not want to sit down with Bob Lazar and do a character assassination. Just characterologically, I don't like going after human beings.

Starting point is 02:55:49 I go after institutions. Well, he would say he's not a, he would say these are frameworks that were given to him. No, but he said that he was at MIT, let's say, in the physics department. So immediately, the problem is, is that whenever you get to real academic physics, the world shrinks to a tiny number of people. And I don't think that the outside world either appreciates one of two things about frontier physics. One, it's a tiny world because it's so difficult. And two, how vertical it is in terms of human ability.

Starting point is 02:56:25 Did he say he was in the physics department, though? I don't think he... I don't think so. I think Joe told me. There's a statement somewhere where he said he had physics at MIT and Caltech. Going back to the early 90s, that was part of the early... I think it was just MIT, but I think my read on it is that MIT is university-affiliated research center, U-Ark, and they do spooky shit. Well, Draper, for example, in Lincoln Labs.

Starting point is 02:56:55 Right. MIT-Lincoln Labs. Yeah, are different sorts of entities. Exactly. You know, so the issue is, are you at MIT or are you really at Draper or Lincoln? Yeah. If you're talking to somebody from MIT and Lincoln Labs, you're not talking to MIT faculty. I don't know, but my sense is he was put there to work on something defense related. Again.

Starting point is 02:57:24 So like more like functional, not high level theoretical, but. So you're asking me the question, how did I come to think about this thing from Bob Lazar? Yeah, when did gravity? So in order for me to sit down with Bob Lazar, according to my own rules for I don't hunt human beings in general, unless they hunt me or unless there's no other option. I hunt institutions that are failing. I don't hunt people.

Starting point is 02:57:54 I just don't like the ethos. So in order for me to come on with Bob Lazar, I would have to find one thing credible in what he's saying. So I went over it, and I tried to say. I try to say, is there any way of making this make sense? And originally, I couldn't do it. I couldn't figure out this gravity wave A, gravity wave B, because he and I would get into it,

Starting point is 02:58:13 and it would be a very short, brutal, you know, it would be Ascreen versus Musfidol. I don't want to do that. And then I found that, and that was the thing that was going to allow me to sit down with Bob Lazar. You could be saying something. The problem is I don't think he'd be able to hang with that idea

Starting point is 02:58:33 you present. It's a formal possibility. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I also don't think he would try as an author of the material, to your point. He would convey these are frameworks provided to me elsewhere. He wouldn't try to take technical ownership of gravity A and gravity B. Well, the other thing is that I would say that even mathematicians and physicists really get this wrong. And the person who didn't get it wrong, bizarrely was Jeff Epstein, which means that he's talking to somebody.

Starting point is 02:58:59 In general, we do a bad job of counting. the degree of a differential equation. So if differential equations are how we tell how the world develops, the standard way of figuring out the degree of a differential equation is saying, take the fields that are in it and count the maximum number of derivatives that are taken of those fields before you get to the equations. And that would say that the Einstein field equations are second order, and the Maxwell's equations are second order.

Starting point is 02:59:33 there's a different thing you can do, which is you can say, okay, in fundamental force law, first spot the curvature tensor, and then tell me how many derivatives I take of the curvature tensor. In that case, those are no longer the same. Einstein's theory would be zero-with order in that way of writing it, and Yang-Mills theory would be first order, because you take one differential in Yang-Mil's theory, you take zero difference, you just do linear algebra, to the curvature tensor in general relativity. So I don't think most people realize the extent to which the churn Simons and Einstein

Starting point is 03:00:14 Hilbert are basically playing very similar roles in the two theories. One of them is Ramanian, one of them is Erismanian. And the key features, they're both zero with order in the curvature when you take the Ola-Ly-Ly-Lagrondge equation, which is very hard to do. that thing, that property means that there's a very strong tie, which is more broadly accepted between Chern-Simon's, which currently lives only in dimension three in its most strict sense, and Einstein-Hilbert, which can live in any dimension. So, you know, look, there's a hope.

Starting point is 03:00:56 I just don't think that most people think about geometric physics in this way. Well, interesting connection. Churn Simons is named after who and who? S.S. Churn and Jim Simons. And that takes us back possibly to Renaissance technologies, what has the largest concentration of differential geometers in the U.S.? Well, that's, so look, I more or less accused Jim Simons of this shortly before he died. And I told him.

Starting point is 03:01:31 I mean, it was very collegial and very positive. but I said, you do realize that you have the closest Lagrangian to Einstein-Hilbert. We don't usually talk about Simons versus Einstein. What did he say? Well, then we have this completely bizarre interchange. So he wants me to tell him more. So I explain that essentially, in dimension three, your object, which is actually a transgression,

Starting point is 03:02:00 misinterpreted as an action or a Lagrangian, has the closest thing to the characteristics of the Einstein-Hilbert action, which is the integral of the scalar curvature integrated over the spacetime manifold. And I said, in dimension three, you don't have any vile curvature to get rid of the way Einstein had to get rid of the vile curvature and discard it as he filleted the rest of the remand curvature tensor. And you don't have the gauge benefit of, of your action, you churn Simons, in the Einsteinian case.

Starting point is 03:02:37 But otherwise, they're extraordinarily similar. Did you know that they're both inside of a parent theory? And the parent theory combines Einstein, Hilbert, and churned Simons, and new stuff. And that's what Geometric Unity does. Geometric Unity gauges gravity effectively. and gives you contraction. So you're both contracting and gauging, which you're not supposed to be able to do

Starting point is 03:03:11 under most circumstances. And I said, you're going to have a role in life that is much closer to Albert Einstein's when this is all done. Not that you're making an Einsteinian discovery, but the thing that will replace Einstein will also explain the work that you did.

Starting point is 03:03:30 And he said, this is unbelievably, fascinating you have to come to state university of stonybrook to the simon center for geometry and physics and spend a year and teach us this well so i said okay um i'm moved but i'd like nothing better i said you're just going to have to understand that i have a family and i have a son who's finishing his last year of of high school so i'm going to need a little bit of help with the heavy lifting of relocating the family for a summer for a year at a time when we can't afford a lot of tumult and he looked at me and he said okay well do you have any idea where you get the money

Starting point is 03:04:16 isn't he worth 20 billion dollars plus what at that time yes that's crazy and i i looked at him i couldn't parse it it just doesn't add up so strange. Did you, I mean, you just didn't want to grobble at that point and you kind of, I'm not going to grovel. Yeah. And that's so crazy. Did you get the vibe that he was genuinely hearing about this technical detail for the first time? This is the first of two meetings that sound like this. The first time I had a meeting with him, I spent three hours with him going over a gauge theory of modern economics. Now, he happens to be married to an economist. He obviously works in the markets.

Starting point is 03:05:09 And gauge theory, just so it's not thought to be intimidating or too cool for school, is really just differential calculus done correctly. And unfortunately, we call it gauge theory, and we only teach people who are very high up in pure mathematics or theoretical physics. Nobody else learns gauge theory. We should teach gauge theory in high school. It's just, it's an indispensable way of looking at the world, and it's just differential calculus done right.

Starting point is 03:05:37 So in economic theory, there was a thing called a marginal revolution, which Tyler Cowan borrowed for the name of his blog. And that was the penetration of the differential calculus into economics. So what I did, together with Pia Malani, was to show that modern neoclassical economics is a self-evident gauge theory at multiple levels. and that was not taken well by the Harvard Economics Department, particularly by one man named Dale Jorgensen, who was the chairman of the department, and basically went nuts trying to make sure that my wife was unemployable. And the reason that he did that is that he was tasked by senators Bob Packwood

Starting point is 03:06:26 and Daniel Patrick Moynihan with pretending there was a 1.1% overstatement in the consumer price index to transfer a trillion dollars because all tax receipts and all social security payments are indexed. So tax brackets and you can raise taxes and slash benefits both at the same time by making a technical adjustment in inflation. You'll notice that many of us are experiencing inflation that's not fully reflected in our statistics. So there was a crime going on which the Boskin Commission was committing against the American people by putting in a 1.1% overstatement in the CPI by hand at the same moment that Malani and myself were showing the economics as a gauge theory and there's a completely different way of looking at this and Jorgensen didn't want any

Starting point is 03:07:24 competition. So anyway, I talked to Jim. Jim said, look, this is amazing. I've never thought about this, but you're right about bundle theory and derivatives and projection operators. I said, well, you have to have to ask your question. Your returns are so off the chart. You have to have some explanation for why you're able to do this much of a better job. And I said, are you using this? Your wife is an economist. You're a differential geometry. You're in the same situation I am. Did you get here first? And he took a drag on a cigarette. It was a very very, very important. long pause, he said, Eric, if you knew how he actually made money, you'd be so disappointed. What do you think he meant by that?

Starting point is 03:08:18 You can imagine. I have no idea, but there's certainly, look, so far as I know, I'm the first person, because I come from a math physics background to say, I'm not really positive that this thing is just a hedge fund. The returns are too impressive. You know, they're like North Korean returns. And then the dear leader, you know, ascended to the mountain top and wrote the seven most beautiful symphonies before descending on a winged unicorn. It's like in the early 2000s, I didn't believe the following four funds. Bernie Madoff, Renaissance Technologies, D.E. Shaw and Jeff Epstein. Why D.E. Shaw?

Starting point is 03:09:00 It was a strange thing that I knew people who worked there. They were so highly compartmentalized that they basically had the sense of they had no idea how the whole thing. worked. And so it had, as you know, there is a very strange property of government secrecy, which is the only thing people really trust is compartmentalization and stovepiping. The general belief is that people will always talk and you have to have the people sharded with enough granularity that nobody can put together what's actually going on. Do you think, because, I mean, Brookhaven National Labs is the site of Cosmetron, which is the largest particle accelerator in the U.S.

Starting point is 03:09:43 It is. Do you know that? No, I didn't. Yeah. I thought formula would have been. No, it's interesting. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So they're doing, you know, they have a particle accelerator that's, you know, pretty powerful up there. They have Stony Brook, which, you know, is definitely punching above its weight class when it comes to physics, which has some interesting also. Particularly mathematics. Particularly mathematics. Also some interesting architecture up there as well that you've noted. And then you have this fund, which seems to get 30% year over year, no matter what, you know, up years, down years.

Starting point is 03:10:17 You know, it's just always sort of, you know, performing at the same clip. And I guess my question would be, do you think this was sort of a slush fund for secret science? I think it's not irresponsible. You know my thing about responsible conspiracy theorizing, which is that you go back in the history of actual conspiracies and you say, your new thought about a conspiracy should be within a standard deviation or two of something that's known to exist.

Starting point is 03:10:50 So if you take Los Alamos as a good example, you have a protected campus and compound, you have top math physics talent, you have duplicitous filings, for example, they didn't want people to know that plutonium and uranium were the two main radioactive elements that they were focused on so that I believe Harold Uri may have been

Starting point is 03:11:19 sent to promote others. They didn't want people realizing that it was as easy as it turned out to be. So there was a lot of disinformation scientifically because you had to explain why you have all of this focus on chain reactions and then suddenly interest just stops. Okay. So my claim is that if you believe that Los Alamos exists, and if you believe that the Rad Lab exists, the radiation laboratory at MIT, and you believe a bunch of these things, it is not hard.

Starting point is 03:11:55 Oh, and you believe, like, dummy companies and shell companies, like Southern Air Transport or Air America, you know, that's not the problem. The secret squirrels in Washington, D.C., don't want smart Americans turning this into a parlor game. So they've decided that, okay, we're going to spread one idea, which is that everybody who speculates about the secret world is a loser.

Starting point is 03:12:23 There's only one reason to speculate about the secret world is that you're fucking stupid. Right? And I really despise this. So what I said was entirely responsible. If you were trying to call the National Security Agency no such agency back in the day, that would be bad because I would say, tell me where number theorists go who don't get academic jobs

Starting point is 03:12:49 and let's map the zip codes. Oh, look, there's this little cluster. I don't know, Maryland or Delaware, wherever it is, you know. And you'd find Fort Meade. Okay, well, there's a cluster in Renaissance technologies. Yes. You know, so are you actually, I'm not telling you what's in it or not.

Starting point is 03:13:09 I'm telling you, if somebody told me tomorrow, there is a Manhattan 3.0, and it's about gravity and UAPs and post-Einstein and engineering, where is its brain trust with 95% confidence, I would tell you it's Renaissance Technologies. On the other hand, if you asked, is there such a program, I don't know that my confidence would be so high. If there is a secret program, I'm pretty sure it's Renaissance Technologies. Some percentage times 95% or something. Well, that's the thing. It might be, it might well not be, but, you know, if you asked me, hey, tell me,

Starting point is 03:13:54 what are Feynman-Beta John von Neumann doing at a boarding school, or at a boys' school in the New Mexico wilderness? I'd say, that's a really strange place to find those guys. It's an odd concentration of the country. country's top physicists. Oh, well, they're investing in secondary education for young men because they have self-image issues. Oh, okay.

Starting point is 03:14:23 Exactly. Well, you also, you know, you've noted that, or this isn't even something you've noted. This is something, you know, in the age of disclosure or, and by the way, this movie came out and you have DNI-level people. You have James Clapper. You have Brennan. Wait, wait, wait, one second. I just want to say this thing.

Starting point is 03:14:40 Yeah. I don't want to speculate. against Renaissance technologies if they're just really good traitors. In other words, I'm not trying to bring darkness to their door. But if we're going to play this cat and mouse game about what's true and what's real, and I'll just get very pointed about it, do not mess with your expert class, right? The current strategy of dealing with the expert class who's not read in

Starting point is 03:15:12 to whatever this is, is to just pretend that we're all incapable thinkers, that we've got some personal problem that we're working at. I want to terminate that program with extreme prejudice. You do not go after your expert class because you were dumb enough not to read them in, and then they figured out something of what you were doing? Yeah, I don't know, I don't know the specifics,

Starting point is 03:15:40 but I'm not stupid. Well, the other issue with the way things have gone, If we take Eric Davis at face value on there being no physicists in this vital secret core program. How did you react to the Jesse? Let me turn it around. It's crazy. I mean, it's outrageous. It's if that is the case, it's extremely irresponsible.

Starting point is 03:16:05 And it's not being run well at all. It makes no sense. Why would you be operating within a boundary that has been set historically? you have, you know, every century or two centuries, you have an overturning of our physical model of reality. And if you're telling me that you were getting slag, discs, you know, whatever it is, material that you are saying, you know, with 100% confidence is not ours

Starting point is 03:16:34 because it's been atomically bonded or has isotope ratios with heavy elements or any of the stuff that we're hearing before Congress, a lot of these guys saying. And then you were saying, but we're operating within the bounds of the constraints that we've set on ourselves in this century. No make a dissent, though.

Starting point is 03:16:53 It makes no sense. I'm following my contract. It's like, that's just nonsense. No, no, no. And everybody repeats this as if they're, I mean, it's like if you gave the excuse, well, no, because it's Wednesday every week. And everybody said that.

Starting point is 03:17:10 You sort of get a nerd to it. But then you realize, yes, there's a Wednesday, They had nothing to do with anything. You have to be highly disagreeable to basically say, you know, Eric, what you just said, no offense, makes no sense at all. And what's so weird about it is I'm cynical. I think national security runs the day on all this stuff. And so once something makes sense from a national security standpoint, it just happens.

Starting point is 03:17:35 And so if this were this grave national security issue where you think you might be able to do anything with any of this material. Obviously, you'd put your best and brightest on it. Obviously, the stove piping of it would be an immediate, urgent issue that you would figure out. Or you'd put the best and the brightest on top of the soap pipe system, which is what we did at Los Alamos. The white badges. Look, man, we have cowboys still. You're tracing physics.

Starting point is 03:18:08 Yeah. You're castrating the people who can do this work. Well, that's the other thing, which I think is even worse than the program being dysfunctional is you have this narrative of in UFO world of, you know, restricted data and all of this stuff getting relegated to, you know, your Lockheed to Northropes and aerospace contractors because if they retrieve a thing, it's born secret under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. And this is, you know, it's sort of DOE jurisdiction. right? Then you end up with, you know, 1980s, 1990s world where, you know, not only is that, you know, whatever program is going on there seems to be sort of inert and neutered and not particularly impressive, all the stuff we're talking about right now. But you end up in a world where DOE security is so lax that Epstein can move. to Zoro Ranch with the explicit intent of being near retired Los Alamos physicists so he can

Starting point is 03:19:22 gain knowledge. You saw that clip I broke out. I broke it out for a reason. Nobody around me. They're going right through that clip. So why did I buy a ranch in New Mexico 1993? So that gives you some sense. So I would have funded it in 1990.

Starting point is 03:19:40 Los Alamos, which was the high energy lab up in New Mexico, was losing all its scientists. And Los Alamos, it was where Oppenheimer were the, a lot of the nuclear weapons, the bomb. That's what a Manhattan Project. Manhattan Project was, yes, yes. Yes, sir.

Starting point is 03:19:56 Las Alamos, and you bought your property out in New Mexico to be near that? Yes, because the scientists were going to be, they cut the funding for high energy physics. Look, I'm just going to be more forthcoming. I have had a thankless job of saying the strength theorists are horrible, get them more money. People wonder, like, it doesn't make any sense. And now I'm going to spell it out because Epstein said the thing that I was trying to, I was trying to be strowsying about it and sort of speak so that it's not evident. He was listening. At the end of the Cold War, you fucked over your physicists. Who thought this up? How dumb are you? How dumb are is the United States of America?

Starting point is 03:20:43 I just don't grasp it. On October 30th, 1993, President Clinton signed into law the death blow to the superconducting supercollider. You have all of these deadly ninjas running around. Tell me something. Who are the first people the Israelis killed in Iran when they went in? Nuclear scientists?

Starting point is 03:21:04 Yeah, physicists. The Iranian Leon Liedermans. Yeah. Now, I was not happy about that. You know, my feeling is don't shoot us with the piano players. But the Israelis made a decision that the first thing you do is kill your scientists. The thing here is, if you look at the scientists, they look like a joke. They're playing around with toy models lying about all the progress they're making.

Starting point is 03:21:33 And my claim is that until you pay these people, until you stop making them afraid, until you remove your hands from around their throats with their grants and their respectability, you're not going to get any physics. So the alternate interpretation of this, and I hate to say it, is that somebody soft-sonseted the world's most vital intellectual community, which is frontier theoretical physicists. And basically these people are now kind of almost buffoonish.

Starting point is 03:22:05 The Epstein thing is a giant tangle. And I'm just going to say more, because I said it before this last tranche. Epstein was running many different programs. It wasn't even Epstein probably running it. So call the name of the organization or the project or whatever you want to call it, Jeffrey Epstein. But that does not mean that it was Jeffrey Epstein. He was not a policymaker.

Starting point is 03:22:30 I don't know who he was. And one of the things about responsible conspiracy theorizing is that you don't constantly answer the question, well, if not X, then what? Why? No. I don't know. Get used to I don't know. There's a lot of I don't know in the story. story. I don't think he was running the Jeffrey Epstein special access project or whatever it was.

Starting point is 03:22:54 If it was in the U.S. government, it would be a special access. Clearly. Yeah. Somebody was running that thing. They hired the wrong actor because he wasn't that great of a friend end. Many different things were going through it at the same time. So that plane of his is not the Lolita Express. It's the plane that belonged to the project. And it varied different people for different purposes. And that island is not pedophile island. That island may have had a tremendous amount of pedophilia and horrific things going on, but it's simply a container for whatever was going on through this project.

Starting point is 03:23:33 So now you have the question about to what extent were the scientists implicated, to what extent was Jeffrey Epstein doing one thing saying he was doing another. So let me, the Department of Energy has counterintelligence, assets and directives. You're not supposed to let a super rich guy with no ostensible means of achieving his fortune by an enormous ranch, a stone's throw from Los Alamos, with the intention of talking to high energy and weapons

Starting point is 03:24:14 physicists at the end of the Cold War as they lose their funding. Who blew this? and who blew the fact that in the entire released information this is the first thing I found you know I was looking for this which is the guy set up listening posts he had another listening post called

Starting point is 03:24:37 one Brattle Square where is that it's in Cambridge Massachusetts 02138 so let me explain let me spell this out for the kids at home. The analog of Los Alamos is the Harvard Math Department. The analog of nuclear and theoretical physics and high-energy physics is number theory. The benefits of

Starting point is 03:25:15 knowing about this, in New Mexico, it's weapons. In Cambridge, Massachusetts, it might be cryptography. In New Mexico, you work with Murray Gelman. in Cambridge, Massachusetts, you work with Martin Nowak. Your base of operations in New Mexico is called Zorro Ranch. In Cambridge, Massachusetts, it's called Office 610 at one Brattle Square. I have no idea what we just did. But whoever is supposed to be smart enough to protect our crown jewels has to recognize that just because the thinking is that he was

Starting point is 03:26:07 is going to make a baby manufacturing facility at Zorro Ranch and that he was doing evolutionary dynamics at Harvard. I see no reason to think that those aren't cover stories. Well, what you just articulated, I think only a specific milieu of people could even strategize for, like clearly Epstein himself wasn't making that calculation. Listen to what Bannon asked Epstein. He said, so wait a minute, you bought this ranch,

Starting point is 03:26:37 and he founded the Santa Fe Institute? Yeah, around 9093. Okay, who founded the Santa Fe Institute? Not Jeffrey Epstein. What year was it founded? 1984? Then he says Murray Galmon at the time that he founded, that Jeffrey Epstein founded the Santa Fe Institute,

Starting point is 03:27:00 founded fund, I'm not sure. He didn't give money, but he's not behind the Santa Fe Institute. He says, Murray Galmon was working out the word for Quarks around them. Quarks were named much, much earlier. He has no idea what he's talking about. Right, so there's some telephone game at play. Yeah, and he says, you know, Quarks had a certain, they had color, they had flavor, they had a charm.

Starting point is 03:27:28 He says, nobody knows what these things mean. Okay, yes, SU3 flavor was a failed scheme for lumping the up, down, and, Strange Quarks into a multiplicate in complex three-dimensional space. Charm and Strange are the names of second generation quarks. QCD, we very well understand what a lot of it means, because in part, it has this property of asymptotic freedom, so that it becomes a free theory. It's the only theory we have that's physical that extrapolates all the way to the plank level. This guy had no idea what he's talking about. He didn't have an idea what he was

Starting point is 03:28:16 talking about in currency trading. And yet he knew to infiltrate Harvard's math department. Or somebody did. That's what I'm saying. Somebody behind him knew that clearly because what you just articulated about particle theory and number theory and those two places. But nobody's thinking number theory because the emphasis is on the program on evolutionary dynamics. Martin Nowak doesn't know anything about number theory. My claim is that who started the program in evolutionary dynamics? There's a different guy named Dick Gross, who was a number theorist. Hmm.

Starting point is 03:28:56 And Harvard references an imaginative proposal by Benedict Gross and Jeffrey Epstein. Oh, so his initial contact was a number theorist. How interesting. So strange. And then he's, you know, he's funding. Joyito in this, you know, Bitcoin initiative. Well, that's about crypto. I'm just saying, look, I don't know what happened,

Starting point is 03:29:26 but I hate saying it this way. Are there no smart people? Like, a hundred of my friends in mathematics and physics should be on this thing. And they've got everyone scared that to utter the words that are obvious to any one of us, like, why were all of these? super smart people hanging on Jeffrey Epstein's every word. So weird. Well, no, it's not weird.

Starting point is 03:29:58 Have you ever noticed how interesting astrology becomes when it's explained to you by a woman in a really low-cut dress? Right? Suddenly, it's like, Virgo? I never knew that. Wow. Retrograde. That makes everything make sense. When rich people around you, has much the same effect.

Starting point is 03:30:19 people blow smoke up rich people's backsides all the time that is so insightful that's what all these people were doing we're all starved for funding because the van of our bush arrangement has been welched upon and so you've got all of these

Starting point is 03:30:39 starving ninjas who have skills that are pretty advanced and dangerous fawning over this crazy guy because he's got an island and a jet. Where do you think, moving on to higher ground, where do you think all this UFO stuff goes? Because you have more official disclosures

Starting point is 03:31:05 at a very high level going on than ever. You have rumors of Trump saying things. You hear smatterings of people, at least peripheral to the admin, pretty interested in the, the issue, Donald Trump Jr. interviewed Ross Colthart last year, you know, who's a UFO investigator of journalist. Do you remember how Trump wanted to get to the bottom of the Epstein files? Yep.

Starting point is 03:31:33 You could forgive me for wondering what happened to that zeal. Do you think the same thing will apply to secret physics UFOs? This is what people don't understand about Washington, D.C. You have all sorts of people who don't understand what Washington, D.C. is or how it works, who outside of the Beltway form beliefs about what they're going to do once they get to Washington. And they change almost instantly. Well, it's like the drain, the swamp guy turns out met his wife through Epstein. You know, it's this thing where I think in that world, everyone got tagged. And so maybe this is the the same thing that goes on with the UFO stuff.

Starting point is 03:32:20 I don't know. But like... There's something that will cause you not to want to reveal things. Right. Like it's somehow Trump gets implicated in the UFO thing in some weird way or... Or it's insanely lucrative to control instead of to disclose. Sure, it could be that. Yeah.

Starting point is 03:32:38 Or maybe the idea is that whatever this information is, assume it's the cover story for a weapon system that is easy to create a weapon system that is easy to create and completely dangerous. I keep giving the example of a thing that doesn't exist. The thing that doesn't exist is an energy beam that can be focused on the opposite side of the planet at any particular latitude and longitude that you give it. So you point a mythological gun into the ground

Starting point is 03:33:13 in a particular direction, you calculate the effect of the Earth on the beam that you, and then you vaporizes. You have somebody's cell phone coordinate, and suddenly that person is no more. This is like a scalar weapon in the UFOology. I'm not going to talk garbage stuff. Just to say, imagine that this existed. Right?

Starting point is 03:33:33 So you know that you can transmit energy and hurt something, and you know that you can transmit neutrinos through an entire planet and they'll go through. You just don't know how to recombine neutrinos on the other side. Right? So, you know, it's theoretically, I don't want to get into it, just trying to say, imagine you have some imagination. You say, if I can have a beam of neutrinos, because I can direct a charge particle, and then I get a decay, and that gives me the momentum in this particular direction. Now can I refocus the neutrinos and get them to convert on the other side, particular, is there any way to induce that?

Starting point is 03:34:08 That's a theoretical idea. I don't see any way of doing it. But what if you had such a weapon, and it was easy? Now you'd say, okay, are you telling me that everyone on Earth can build their own and just point it and vaporize stuff? Right? That'd be terrifying. What if you could unhook the true vacuum of the Higgs field and get some kind of vacuum to cable? Like, we don't know whether hidden in physics are powers so vast that anybody who sees what could happen keeps their mouth shut.

Starting point is 03:34:46 We just don't know. Now, the one thing that I believe, and again, you guys don't have to believe it, but I believe that if geometric unity is as rich as I say it, it doesn't even have to be correct, just has to be rich. It is inconceivable to me that there is no interest in it from the very people who funded my education. The Office of Naval Research funded my graduate education and the National Science Fair. Foundation funded my postdoctoral position. And I believe I was put on a Department of Energy grant, which is very unusual for a mathematician, because Isidore Singer had one.

Starting point is 03:35:36 None of those people have any interest whatsoever in what I'm saying, which is fascinating, because even if it's wrong, I wouldn't take the chance. It's a studied level of disinterest that doesn't really add up. Like I can tell you lots of people whose theory are almost certainly wrong. If I were the government, I would want to keep tabs on every last one of the competent people.

Starting point is 03:36:00 It doesn't matter whether they're wrong. They're just dangerous. What if they're right? Do you have a mental model on why this stuff is coming out more now? Post-2017, this New York Times article. Well, the things are breaking. There was a regime that is breaking. Like, I was thinking about posting an interview

Starting point is 03:36:21 between Brian Green and Ed Witten that was done recently without editorial. Just to indicate how crazy the level of string theorist madness is, because it's, you know, this phrase in Latin, Recipso-Loclokwit, or the thing speaks for itself. I don't have to throw pot shots at it. The claim that, you know, string theory is about to figure it all out, is a joke in and of itself.

Starting point is 03:36:55 So imagine that that was the cock-blocking mechanism to keep people from doing, you know, dangerous physics work, as per Andresen and Horowitz. It's expiring. And I think that a lot of things are happening right now because the old order that was set up to manage all this is two generations, three generations out from the architects. We have these genius administrators like Vannevar,

Starting point is 03:37:24 Bush. And they set up these structures, and the structures worked pretty well. But then they didn't pass the knowledge of what the structures were and how all these tacit understandings and cryptic arrangements worked so that the modern people who've inherited the structures basically don't even understand what they're for. You know, I talked to the provost of a UC University, major research University. He had no idea how the laws had been changed to secretly benefit universities for doing particular kinds of work. So very often what happens is that the architects die and they leave a zombie. We seem to be in a zombie era. It's a little cargo cult. And then you probably have people at the top freaking out saying we need to get in front of this and actually reorganize as our multipolar nuclear world gets

Starting point is 03:38:17 more and more hot. But how strange that you can't talk to your own top people? Yeah, it's weird. And as it pertains to legacy program, the people of the top panicking might also be disappearing, such that awareness of the problem could be dying. Well, I'm explaining modern UFO disclosure through this idea of, you know, national security

Starting point is 03:38:42 that we would actually try to get this stuff out. But yeah, it is this weird cloak and down. tongue and cheek sort of like it's not over at all it's still like like even you know you mentioned this sort of you know theoretical directed energy weapon where you could take anybody out remotely in this perfectly precise way across the world I don't know if you caught this part of the age of disclosure Eric Davis says in 1989 we should have brought this up with him 1989 the Soviets engaged in a UFO crash retrieval where they were able to derive a derivative erected energy weapon from this particular craft.

Starting point is 03:39:21 And that's a fascinating claim, right? Like, I don't know what to make of that. You know, how do you know that, A, B, so you are saying some of this stuff is functional and it works its way into weapons that we now know, you know, the Department of War are scaling up publicly. And so, like, this whole idea that we haven't made any progress is actually kind of bogus, but it's being used in these extremely dystopian ways. Okay, but let me just ask.

Starting point is 03:39:54 How do we reconcile the fact that all three of us have talked to so many people, which can't all be lying about what they're saying? It's just, I see no world in which that's possible. And nobody has any firsthand incontrovertible stuff that would make this done deal. It does weirdly feel like the Epstein thing. you know how is it that there is either a lot of people are implicated that are publicly appearing around this topic who are talking about it and they're implicated but they don't want to say they're implicated or the tip of the iceberg doesn't look like the rest of the iceberg and intentional vagueness is being used with words like crash retrieval and biologics and i don't err on that side of things given how just how high up the people are saying this stuff how overwhelming uh The circumstantial evidence seems to be. It's overwhelming.

Starting point is 03:40:52 It's overwhelming. But you have to think probabilistically. And I always try to, you know, put a healthy check on people who are hardcore in UFO world who are sure about discrete, you know, org charts in the reverse engineering problem. Like, how can you be sure of anything? You know, I think you have to think probabilistically about all this stuff. This is not the most imaginative solution. But another alternative to reconcile that fact is that some of them are lying. and they are firsthand.

Starting point is 03:41:21 Well, that's what I was just saying. Because that's the red line, maybe. I think they're telling stories that are like more than one about what could be going on so that we don't. Yeah, let's do it. So that we don't get committed to one. Yeah. Excellent idea. So I think the taking everything at face value story is that there is this decades long UFO crash retrieval and reverse engineering program.

Starting point is 03:41:46 It probably existed prior to 1933, but it became. formally instantiated in the 33 magenta crash in Italy. This is all hypothetical in the magenta crash in Italy. And then that was transferred to the U.S. under FDR. You had Roswell in 47. You had Trinity in 48. You have these sort of sequential nuclear-related UFO crashes. You have the Office of Global Access under the CIA in the early 2000s under Doug

Starting point is 03:42:14 Wolf doing rapid response, you know, retrievals all over the world. And this kind of convoluted org chart structure where the Lockheeds and Northropes are the tip of the, you know, kind of the fingertips and, you know, CIA, you know, science and technology and DOE and, you know, DOD are kind of at the top. And so you could, you could have that entire narrative and just take that at face value. I think another possibility would be something like aerial phenomena show up around nuclear weapons and energy grids. And that is this clear pattern. It's global. It's ubiquitous. It exists in the U.S., but it also exists totally outside the U.S.

Starting point is 03:43:06 Those aerial phenomena also seem to be provoked by weird high-energy physics experiments. So lasers, high-energy lasers, you know, high-voltage experimentation, particle accelerators, things of that nature seem to attract this weird aerial phenomena. We don't really know what the aerial phenomena is. We actually have some prosaic, you know, human, terrestrial physics breakthroughs that have led to novel propulsion modalities from some of these kind of, you know, topological physics anomalies that we figured out. mid-century, and we actually do have propulsion based on them. So we have, you know, real craft that seem like they fly like UFOs, but we're running this tech protection thing by intentionally conflating this aerial phenomena that is very, you know, bizarre and worthy of scientific inquiry, but we just don't understand. We are conflating that with just this, you know, kind of more

Starting point is 03:44:06 exotic, black, you know, not reverse engineering program, but a craft program that is human craft. So that would be number two. And then number three is like Mick West territory or something where it's like, you know, there is no aerial phenomena around nuclear sites. You know, there are no anomalies there. All of the topological physics, you know, Befield Brown, Ningli stuff is all BS, you know, all conventional physics models, you know, are going to run the world forever. And, you know, this is all a sciop. Like, it's literally all like, you know, this crazy sort of, you know, government lunacy thing. I don't know.

Starting point is 03:44:50 Would you guys say there's an option four or five that you'd like to add? Hard to say. So one possibility is, let's imagine, let's imagine that the atomic weapons were not developed. during war, but during peace time inside of a national lab, it would be a question about should we reveal that this is possible, right? There would be a huge debate as to how to do work on this thing and whether we should reveal it to the world or should reserve it as a zero-day exploit. So that would be option four? I guess, your taxonomy. Is that option agnostic of where the

Starting point is 03:45:41 technology came from. Well, so imagine, for example, that the government figured out something in physics that isn't the whole thing. But it's powerful enough to do one or two things that haven't been done before, and we wanted that in reserve. You can imagine that the entire system would say, would you please stop digging? We want to keep the zero-day exploit. It's a matter of national security. Don't make us reveal this. That thing, though, would need to, to be neatly adjacent to UFO crash retrievals. They would need to intersect. I don't want to talk about crash retrievals until I've been to one.

Starting point is 03:46:19 But you know what I'm saying? No, I don't know what a crashed retrieval is. What I'm saying is if that's being used as passage material for some other secret weapons program, the two probably need to surface level look alike somewhat for that to be an effective cover. So that's the thing, right? So you remember when we attacked Iran, we sent one squadron of B-2 bombers in one direction, one another. That was my principle, an example of whenever we do something cool, we do something fake. So invasion of the Operation Overlord in D-Day and the beaches of Normandy was cool.

Starting point is 03:47:01 And Operation Bodyguard and Fortitude were fake because we never actually invaded Norway, as we said we were going to do. this could be the fake program to something super cool. And another aspect of this, if we're going to just talk about crazy stupid theories, is there's a strategy with, I think, like malarial mosquitoes or where you release a bunch of sterilized males into the world. And sterilized males effectively mate with the females,

Starting point is 03:47:37 but leave no offspring. and it's a way of controlling mosquitoes. One possibility is that one of the reasons we kicked all of the Americans out of our physics programs and science programs is that we wanted to sterilize the world so that it didn't catch up to us what we'd already done. It's a crazy idea, but why else should you be, you know, having 27% of your PhDs granted to Chinese nationals? in sensitive areas.

Starting point is 03:48:10 It just doesn't make any sense. So one possibility is that we use string theory to sterilize India. Let's say there are lots of Indian string theorists and they're not making any progress and they're extremely arrogant about string theory. You know, these are crazy ideas. Another possibility, as somebody once said to me,

Starting point is 03:48:28 or as somebody said to me relatively recently, you know, Eric, you don't need to rely on the government. You can just go up and look for yourself. keep idea being that you just need to get adjacent to sensitive places and you'll see these things everywhere. Like this isn't that big of a deal. They're always there. Well, that's what I always find so frustrating is for the, you know, the Mick West option,

Starting point is 03:48:54 the McWest scenario, the super skeptic thing. You spend like a few days on this or literally, like you probably walk around one of these sites or something. You go to the bar near one of them. something's going on. The amount of smoke without fire is insane. No, no, no. The question is, when you see smoke at this level,

Starting point is 03:49:14 the question is, what is the nature of the fire? That's right. There are different fires. Or there's a smoke machine. Or there's a smoke machine. Right, right. Like, in other words. Or there's a really good spoofing technology

Starting point is 03:49:25 that we're all not aware of or something. Well, exactly. And so, you know, my feeling, unfortunately, is that the UFO world is so polluted that I just don't want to deal with it at all. Look, I believe we can leave. And if you believe you can leave, you have to imagine that you're being visited.

Starting point is 03:49:54 So it makes sense for me that I'm being visited. I can't understand why they keep interacting with governments and nobody can get good footage and we don't have more. But on the other hand, I would have to say that the Epstein story was, pretty contained. And you were seen as a little kind of crazy

Starting point is 03:50:19 if you created a worldview out of the upseat? Like the Pizza Gate people seemed ridiculous four or five years ago? No, no, no. They didn't. Pizza Gate

Starting point is 03:50:33 looked to me like an amalgam. Something real, something fake. Like, for example, the particular pizza parlor and the guy who shot up the roof and all that, you know, it was perfect. Don't be like the guy who brings a gun into a pizza parlor

Starting point is 03:50:53 and shoots the roof thinking that he's tracking pedophiles. Also, what does he really mean pedophile? Do we even think about this? Is there such a clamoring to do horrible things to children and that these people are natural leaders of the world? Well, now we're getting into weird territory because not only would, was pedophilia, which alone is just disgusting, discussed in the context of Epstein.

Starting point is 03:51:22 But like weird like conditioning rituals and things to like dissociate. Is it weird at all? This is normal. You see, it used to be that homosexuality could play the role of pedophilia. that two gay guys would be so terrified of having their secret revealed that they'd be willing to do almost anything to avoid that revelation. It's a stain that can be used, weaponized. Well, but I would say utilized.

Starting point is 03:52:05 Like hazing rituals, it's easy to see them as brutal, but that's not the function they serve. It's like people don't understand what the mob is. the mob is a contract enforcement service for enterprises that cannot use the courts. It's not violent because it's recreationally violent. It's not violent because these people love violence. The idea is you have to enforce a drug contract or a loan sharking contract, you know, or a gambling. Somebody has to pay up.

Starting point is 03:52:36 So the notion would be pedophilia was used as an enforcement system. Pedophilia is trust. Right. And nobody wants to say that, but that's what I think it is. You force people in that circle to commit these crimes. How do I know I can trust person A? It's always a question. Do we come from the same ethnic group?

Starting point is 03:52:57 That's not trust. That's black, that's low trust. No. It's black male. No. It's consequence. It's shared consequence. And the key point is shared consequence is a resource and ritual and all of these things are used

Starting point is 03:53:12 to direct that resource. What you're seeing in the Epstein world is a high trust network. I think it's, yeah, I guess it's an enforcement network. It's like a, you know, made man mafia system. Correct. There's an email from the girlfriend

Starting point is 03:53:29 that alleges that he got in deeper than he meant to. He was told to do this. He didn't really mean any of it. It just came out in the latest trench and it speaks to this notion of an enforcement campaign and enforcement infrastructure.

Starting point is 03:53:43 But my claim is that in general, most of us are unfamiliar with how effective silent systems work. If you think about the Volachi papers and how the mob lost Omerta and the innovation of the RICO acts and all that kind of stuff, that was about, I think that the rule was that you killed every informant up to second cousins. Jesus Christ. Yeah, like completely. over the top and insane. But that's how it worked. And what was the way that these people referred to each other as men of honor? Honor is the proxy system. Of course I'm going to honor you and you're going to honor me because it's too dangerous. It's too dangerous to contemplate anything else.

Starting point is 03:54:35 My guess is that right now there's no one that can be hung out to drive because the first person who gets hung out to drug you. So Bill Clinton saying, of course, I'd love to talk to Congress, bring them on. It's crazy. Well, why is that? I don't think he wants to talk to Congress. What I think he wants to do is to say, if you make me the fall guy,

Starting point is 03:54:54 think about what you're saying. It's a little shot across the bow. I think it's got a lot to say. Trump's dump of these documents was three million shots across the bow. Yeah, I think so too. Also, we should note, this was probably the sanitized version

Starting point is 03:55:12 of these documents. No, no, no. This isn't even the sanitized version of this documents. They've also set up the idea of, okay, well, these three million of the last year are going to ever go about the other three million. So then what is everybody going to do? They're going to chant. We want the other three million. Okay, okay, fine, fine. We'll give you the last of them. And you just fell into the trap. Who said there were six million documents? Right. Tell me something. If this guy ran a hedge fund, that was a multi-billion dollar currency trading hedge fund, How many documents does a hedge fund throw off just due to compliance? Right. Nobody's making any sense at all. What you're seeing is a bunch of deeply grooved people not thinking for themselves. And they're happy to repeat the heterodox version of the script that they're handed. But it's not the heterodox who are writing that.

Starting point is 03:56:13 It's really crazy. Well, I'm officially demoralized. and depressed. Don't do that, Jesse. No, I appreciate, I mean, sometimes, you know, the truth sucks, and you're a very incisive thinker, and you have a way of elucidating things. Sometimes they're dark truths and realities that others don't.

Starting point is 03:56:34 So I really appreciate your brain. But can we just finish it positive? Yeah, let's do it. Yeah, how do we do that? Well, if you don't mind, imagine that we throw off this UFO yoke. And imagine that we just pushed on one, one particular place, which is Eric Davis saying, we have things that defy the laws of physics and no physicists. Imagine that the UFO community got really smart instead of doing what it always does and said,

Starting point is 03:57:05 we're going to push on this one thing. How can you be threatened by craft that do not obey the laws of physics and make sure that the one type of person who could possibly, possibly help with this is to be found nowhere on the scene. Right? So the opportunity is that if Tulsi Gabbert or J.D. Vance or any one of these people sees this and says, I could change that tomorrow. I could snap my fingers and get an allocation of several million dollars and I could get a few theoretical physicists. It would change absolutely everything because one of the top theories has to be that the reason you can't have a theoretical physicist on this is that there are no graph

Starting point is 03:57:52 that defy the laws of physics. I hope they put that to the test because Eric Davis is actually on record as part of James Fox's last movie saying, if you give me blanket immunity, I will say everything I know. And so I hope that they are able to just, you know, dress these people down nicely. But we could in a better world that we're not that far from. push to have the one group of people who could crack this case for us, the detectives of our choice, inserted. They were trained on our dollars. They're supported on our dollars. We have an arrangement with them. It's basically like not calling Delta Force when you've got a hostage rescue

Starting point is 03:58:35 situation. Can I up the ante? Yeah. An interdisciplinary symposium where maybe the physicists are at the top, they're hanging out, but you also might have some other people. Don't bring in the mushrooms in the consciousness. Let's just do theoretical physics and leave the rest for Burning Man. Fair enough. Well, to be continued, that's its whole other debate we can have or whatever, but I agree with the Burning Man issue. Okay. Well, thank you, Eric. This was awesome. Jack, appreciate you. It's a lot of fun. I think this is going to be a historic episode. Thanks, Jets. All right. Cool.

American Alchemy with Jesse Michels - Eric Weinstein Demands UFO Secrets From Pentagon Scientist

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.