Undoctrinate Yourself - #55 - Dr. Joseph Farrell

Episode Date: April 26, 2026

Dr. Joseph Farrell holds a PhD in patristics from Oxford University. He's a historian, classically-trained organist, and scholar of Christianity, science, music, mythology, mathematics, and beyond. ResourcesDr. Farrell's website and membership portal: www.gizadeathstar.comDr. Farrell's books: https://gizadeathstar.com/purchase/Follow Dr. Alexis on Instagram ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@dralexisjazmyn⁠⁠: https://www.instagram.com/dralexisjaz...Follow Dr. Alexis on X @dralexisjazmyn: https://x.com/dralexisjazmynSupport the podcast on Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/c/UndoctrinateYourselfPodcast/homeJoin QuantumU:https://dralexisjazmyn.thinkific.com/courses/quantumuJoin ⁠The Incubator⁠ Book Club and Think Tank:https://dralexisjazmyn.thinkific.com/courses/theincubator

Hello everyone. Welcome back to Undoctrinate Yourself. Today I have an extremely exciting guest. I've been into this guest's work for probably the past year, kind of just completely inundated in his very, what's the word? I don't even know. I think you've written almost 40 books at this point. So there's just a lot of information to absorb. But the guest today is Dr. Joseph P. Farrell. I've been talking about him a lot on my platform recently. I'm really just very excited about his work and what it can add to my personal interests around light and electromagnetism and the interface with health, but also with our history as well and history around the world and including ancient history too, which is something that Dr. Farrell gets into quite a bit. Today we're going to be talking a little bit about

Nazi technology and the occult studies that the Nazis were interested in, and then I'm hoping that we're going to kind of lead that into a discussion around plasmas and maybe talk a bit about CERN as well, which I think is something that, you know, some people think about maybe at a high level, at a very superficial level, but I think Joseph has some very interesting thesis around what's going on there and the potential impacts on a more like galactic scale. But with that, I want to just welcome you on to the show, Dr. Farrell. It's really an honor to have you on here. And I'm a super excited to chat today. Well, thank you for having on, Alexis. Pleasure to be here. Yeah. And some of the books that I was kind of referencing in podcasts as well, just so people can be

aware, because I know they're going to want to get into your work after this conversation. You did quite a few episodes on Forum Borealis, which were incredible. Love that podcast. Also, a lot of work with Dark Journalists as well on YouTube. And then some of the books that are going to be relevant to today's conversation will include the Giza Death Star series, potentially. S. Brotherhood of the Bell, Nazi international, Secrets of the Unified Field, Demon in the Acre, Rike of the Black Sun, Roswell and the Reich, and Salser, Swasikas, and Sciop. So if anybody wants to do some deep dives after they hear our chat, those might be some good places to start. But like I said, I think, are you up to 40 books?

Or is it like 30 and counting? I think it's actually around 45. Oh, my gosh. That's incredible. And maybe offline at some point, I would love to pick your brain on your research process. and like your writing process, because I'm in the midst of writing a book proposal right now. And it's an interesting feat for sure, but it seems like you've got it down. Well, I do write quickly, and I do have a process. It's mostly the way I annotate my books.

I take my notes in the books. You know, you see the books behind me. All of my notes are actually in the books. Wow. And I have a system whereby I use subject headers and numbers at the time. top of the page where I put my notes. So when I get ready to write a book, I pull the books off the shelves. I look up what I've written down as a subject character for my footnote, plop the footnote in, and the book goes on the floor, and I'm off to the next one. So I write very

quickly. But the flip side of that is the getting ready to write process. It's what takes the time. So yeah, it's a method. But once you get it down, it goes fairly quickly. That said, you know, my warning to anyone writing a book is, is writing a book as close as men are ever going to get to childbirth. It's an involved process. Great. And for women writing books, we get to do both. You get to do both. Yes, that's right. That's right. Also, maybe I'll just mention this off the bad, is that I think we have a couple things in common. So I'm also a classical musician, but I'm not trained in the organ like you.

I'm trained in French horn. I've played for like 25 years. And also, I guess we kind of both defected to a certain extent from mainstream academics. I didn't mention this, but you completed your Ph.D. at Oxford in Petristics, which for those of the listeners who don't know is the study of the teachings of the early church fathers, correct? That's right. Yeah. And then, you know, my listeners know about my story from defecting from Princeton and all that.

But I'm really excited to chat today. I think let's maybe kick it off and you can maybe tell me where you think the best place to start is introducing the story about maybe we can start with the Nazi bell or maybe the occult Nazi studies and maybe flesh that out a little bit and kind of take it from there. Well, the Nazis are an interesting case study. In fact, I just got a book in the mail a couple days ago about somebody that absolutely pans me. I mean, just hammers me relentlessly. and from what I can tell from reading the book, it doesn't look like he read many of my books very closely at all. But the problem with the Nazis is, you know, first of all, you're dealing with an incredibly evil regime. But in the process of dealing with it,

what people miss is that they more or less throw the book out when they take power. They throw all of the scientific orthodoxies aside. You know, Einstein and so-called Jewish physics and everything else. But what that did is it forced them back on the other great German contribution to modern physics, which was quantum mechanics. And even that they kind of threw in the dustbin. So what you have is a scientific culture that is really, really willing to explore anything outside the box. And what that means is, yeah, if you,

if you can imagine a country like the United States, which Nazi Germany was technologically sophisticated, it was a world economic power, it was a world industrial power. So if you take a country like that and you throw massive amounts of resources into covert projects of every brand and stripes that you can think of like Nazi Germany did or like this country does, you're going to have a lot of failures. You're going to have a lot of kooky ideas that get dreamt up and money is poured into them. They go nowhere. It's a waste of money.

One of my favorites being the Nazi experiment with using pendulums over maps of the Atlantic Ocean trying to find British ships and convoys, you know, just kookiness. But that's a serious thing that was done. But the other thing that this means is we're not really ready to hear about the successes. And if we look at the record very carefully, the successes were rather breathtaking. I've produced in my books, for example, evidence that. that suggests that the Nazis were actually using some form of chemical laser isotope enrichment. Now, that sounds totally far-fetched, but we have to remember two things.

The physics for the laser was there in the 1930s. So why did it have to take so long before anyone invented a laser? and I suspect that this means secondly that the reason why is that the Nazis had hit upon the idea quite correctly, that this would be an absolutely super efficient way to enrich isotope for a nuclear bomb, which I think they did. And I produce evidence in my book, The Philosopher's Stone, for how they were probably using tunable, which we would have to do for laser isotope enrichment, use a tunable. chemical laser to do this.

And I produced the statements from the British recordings of the German nuclear scientists that were made after the war, the so-called farm hall transcripts as to the indications that are clearly there in the record that this

is exactly what they were doing. And incidentally, the place they were doing it at was Auschwitz. So in other words, the first thing you have to throw away in your understanding of wartime Nazi secret research is number one, they were probably very, very able to get to, and in my opinion did get to a functioning nuclear bomb during the war

because they had no moral restraints on using people to acquire those technologies. That's, we've got to get that through our thick head. one of the interesting stories it emerges from this you know this this this tremendous petri dish of experimentation that's going on is the story of the bell and i've spent you know i've spent a number of books uh Alexis talking about this project because it really is is a project that you have to reverse engineer and the reason i say that is that there is one source for the Bell story, and it's a Polish researcher by the name of Igor Vittkovsky. And I know Igor. I've corresponded with him. I've even helped him write one of his books.

And Igor published the Bell Research in Polish back in the late 1970s, just as the Warsaw Pact was beginning to unravel. It was subsequently translated in. into English in an English volume called The Truth About the Wunderwaffe, and that book is the sole source for the story of the bell. And I want to emphasize this because this is essential to the way I approach the story and the way I approach the research. Because of that fact, Nick Cook wrote his book, The Hunt for Zero Point, and popularized the Bell story in English.

So it was largely Igor Vikovsky's one book and then Nick Cook popularizing the story that the story got out there. So my approach was, all right, how do we verify this story? I can't go to Poland. I don't have the money. I don't speak Polish and all of this other stuff. So how do I verify the story? Well, there are a number of data points in the story of the bell that if you look at them carefully, give you scientific details that will permit you to go out and try and reverse engineer the thought process that the Germans may have had in their heads coming up with such a crazy project. So what's the bell? The bell is an acorn-shaped or bell-shaped device that's about 15 feet tall, according to the details in Vittkovsky's work. It's about 12 feet wide. They inserted a common,

compound, a heavy cherry red gooey liquid, according to the details in Vitkovsky's book, a gooey red liquid that they called serum 525 into this device. They rotated this serum, or whatever it was, to a inside of counter rotating cylinders. and I believe for reasons we'll get into, this is part of my reverse engineering process, that these cylinders were stacked one on top of each other, and that they were counter-rotating that way, not inside of each other. They then zapped this serum

that was being rotated with an incredibly high amount of direct current voltage. Now, why do we know that? well, because the place at which the bell was being tested in Wittkovsky's reconstruction of the story was an underground facility. And by the way, the facility exists. You can listen to Tino Fond Strachman, who's gone there and looked at it and published pictures of this facility. And they are breathtaking in their implications. What's the mainstream view of what the facility was used for? the mainstream view is that it was some sort of

it's totally nuts it was some sort of electrical power plant with a water cooling tower the problem is the germ and this is true the Germans actually did build an electrical power plant right there and the question is why well if you're dealing with electrical with direct current electricity that's the answer because direct current electricity, as you know, falls off tremendously in a very short distance.

That's why we use alternating current rather than direct current. So the reason they built this power plant right there is they need dobs of voltage on this thing. In other words, they're literally zapping whatever this stuff is that they're rotating inside this machine with gigantic amounts of direct current voltage, lightning. okay so in other words let's let's stop and step back and look what we have we have this bell shape thing counter-rotating cylinders a heavy cherry red goo that's being counter-rotated and they're zapping it with high voltage electricity all right now this sounds nuts what they're doing however if you look at it is in my opinion and and for reasons i get into in the books i believe that

cherry red goo is some oxide of thorium and mercury. Why mercury? Because mercury is wonderful if you're experimenting with plasma. Thorium, I guess at thorium because if you examine the Nazi nuclear program, they're not only enriching gobs of uranium. They're also stockpiling thorium of all things in massive amounts. Why thorium? Well, I speculate in my books that one of the things that they're looking for is thorium-229 isomer, which, by the way, if you're experimenting with laser isotope enrichment, that's the perfect way and the most efficient way to enrich any isotope. Why? Because you're enriching it to, you're tuning the laser to separate out a specific frequency of isotope. And you can do that with tremendous accuracy, much more than centrifuges and cyclotrons and, you know,

all the stuff we were using in the Manhattan Project. So thorium 229 is an isomer that you could separate by this means. And why an isomer? An isomer is an isotope that has a nucleus that is an in an extremely high rate of spin. And if you suddenly stop that high rate of spin, it spits out gobs of radiation. Okay? So look what we have, if I'm correct, if my reverse engineering,

and by the way, an oxide gives it that red color. So in other words, I'm trying to reverse engineer every little detail in the story. That's what I'm trying to do. if you spin up a plasma-inducing substance that is composed of mercury and a thorium isomer oxide and then suddenly pulse it with gobs of high voltage, what could happen possibly is you are going to get some sort of distortion in the matrix of space time.

And this is what is recorded for the device. according to Wittkovsky's research, the concentration camp victims that were close by in the concentration camp supplying the slave labor for this facility, witnessed this thing at night floating above the tree lines and glowing. So in other words, it had some sort of either electromagneticly induced anti-gravity effect or it was producing an ion wind or something. but it was floating up there in the air and glowing. All right. Now, this is interesting to me because I think this is the core

of the Nazi UFO story. And the reason why I think it's the core is that every detail, as I've just indicated, every detail in the story can be reverse engineered. It is not a story depending on hairbrained blueprints of Nazi flying saucers carrying upside down panther tank turrets and fake pictures of German officers

standing on a flying saucer. It's not that. All it's doing is it's floating. It's not zipping around like a UFO. And it has to be tethered to the ground for its power supply. But nonetheless, it's still a breakthrough. So what are the Germans doing?

what's counter-rotating plasma? Well, it's a plasma differential. Why is that important? Because that's what the sun does. There's counter-rotation of plasma. There's a differential rotation in the plasma of the sun. So they're literally experimenting with a kind of plasma physics, and they're doing it in a way that to me is rather breathtakingly brilliant.

because the bell is, and Vittkovsky himself says this in his research, and he produces a picture of a plasma trap at the Warsaw Institute of Nuclear Physics, just to show you that this is a technology that's fairly conventional. But what the Nazis are doing is they're taking a standard plasma trap and they're rotating the plasma. That's the key step. It's not just the plasma. It's not just sticking it inside of a bunch of Tokomac magnets.

They're actually mechanically rotating this stuff, and then they're zapping it. And they're getting these strange results. Do you think they got that idea from the physics of their time period? Yes. Okay. Okay. Absolutely, I do. Why?

Excellent question. Boy, howdy. What an excellent question. The head of the Bell project is Walter Gerlock, okay, from the Stern-Garlock experiment that won both of those scientists, the Nobel Prize. Now, Walter Gerlock is the guy that ostensibly is head of the Nazi nuclear program. But Walter Gerlock's specialty is in things like spin, electron spin, particle spin, gravity, and so on like that. This is a very odd guy to be putting in charge of your nuclear bomb project, okay? Gerlock, as I point out in one of my books before the war,

Gerlock actually publishes a little article in the Frontferta-Algamined at 1927, a little column filler article about two inches tall. And in it, he points out that German chemists have noticed in their plasma experiments using mercury have noticed that at the end of their experiments, they get a little residue of gold. And he actually comes right out and says, this is alchemy. And by the way, we should investigate this. Now, what's that really saying?

Well, it's a typical scientist saying, give us lots of money because, hey, this is fairly significant here, and we need to investigate this. So this is a very odd duck to have in charge of your nuclear program. So what's he fascinated with during his entire physics career prior to and during World War II? Well, gravity and spin and rotating systems. After the war, what happens to him? Well, he goes back to Germany and never, ever touches the subject of gravity publicly again.

Well, that's interesting. Oh, isn't it? Isn't it just? By the way, he's one of the farm hall scientists that the British card off to farm hall, and secretly record their conversations, one of the so-called German nuclear scientists. And by the way, of all the nuclear scientists that the British took to Britain and secretly recorded,

there was only one that the Americans insisted upon coming to this country and debriefing them, and guess who that was? Dr. Walter Gerlock. So in other words, there's something about this guy that's very special. Now, I suspect it's because, of his interest in spin and rotating physical systems. And let's put the cherry on this Sunday by pointing out something else about Dr. Gerlock. Prior to the war, he's involved in a conversation

with the Austrian physicist Lenzhen and T-H-I-R-I-N-G. And Lenzza and T-H-I-R-I-N-G. And Lenzza and Turing are exchanging these correspondences with Gerelock. And what are they discussing? Well, they're discussing what happens if we put a satellite in orbit around planet Earth? This is the 1930s, okay, before anyone's done that. And they conclude on the basis of their discussion and their interest in gravity that rotating systems are going to cause satellites to drag. Now, that's a whopper. You don't find that in general relativity.

although you find it in the form of frame dragging, what that little thing is is a bit of torsion physics. So in other words, these guys are thinking way outside the box in the 1930s, and Gerlock is leading the pack, and he's the one that they decide to put in charge of all of their nuclear research, including this weird bell project,

whatever that was, that you've got going on in Silesia. So yeah, this, my point here is they were dealing with extremely radical and exotic physics ideas, and they were not afraid to invest big money and big talent into it. And the results, if Vittkovsky is correct, and I think he is, when you look at all the little details that get reverse engineered in the way I've tried to describe the Bell project, I'm fairly convinced that they did something. And it was rather extraordinary.

And it's remained off the books ever since. I mean, this is, you know, an anti-gravity technology, if mastered, would make, you know, would have a weaponization potential that would make a hydrogen bomb look like a kitchen match. So, you know, this is dangerous, dangerous stuff. And it would be classified at the very deepest level, which incidentally, I'm sorry to keep just rambling on and on here. No, please. I have questions, but I'm noting them. Well, this is such a big project

and such a big issue that it took me several books even to discuss it adequately. But one of the things that Vittkovsky points out in his research is there's one reference to the Bell project in a top secret communique that was from

Abraham Azal, the head of the actual German atomic bomb project, under, you know, the sub-project underneath all the other nuclear physics project. Abraham Azau writing to the Algamina Electricitates Gazelshop, which is the German General Electric at the time. And he's writing in behalf of a scientist by the name of Dr. Richard Kramer, who has been denounced by another scientist in the project, denounced to the Gestapo. and Azou is writing to get this guy out of the Gestapo jails and back into the project because the project is too important and Dr. Kramer is too important to the project. And he goes on to mention that the project is Kieks and Scheidant, which in German means decisive for the war.

And that's the only project in all of Nazi Germany, not the V2, not the V1, not the V1, not the jet airplanes, not the supersonic spaceplanes, not the lasers, not the death rays, not the atom bomb, not the hydrogen bomb. This is the only project in all of Nazi Germany that is said to be creaks and chident, decisive for the war. So do you think that they ran out of time before being able to employ it? Or do you think maybe they also realize it could destruct their own communities, country as well? Well, it's interesting because, again, when you delve into the study of the bell, into the story of the bell, the research facility that it was being tested at is in lower silesia, which is that little finger of Germany that stretched down over Czechoslovakia prior to the war. So lower silesia was way down toward the tip of the finger. And as the Russians are approaching, the Germans, evacuate the project. And according to the story, they, they kill 60 of the scientists involved. They execute them. That's how sensitive the project was. They did not want any of this getting

out to anybody. The documentation for the project disappears completely, as does the actual device itself. But as Vittkovsky points out, a Juncker's three-year-old. Airplane. Now, this is part of the Bell story. It's part of the Bell Lord. A Juncker's 390 was a massive six-engined aircraft that was capable of nonstop flight from Europe to South America. And by, in other words, it's an extraordinarily long range heavy lift airplane. In addition to that, it was also one of the first planes in the world that was capable of in-flight refueling. So, you know, extend that range if you want it to. but he points out that the general that the SS general that was in charge of all of this secret research actually got a hold of one of these Juncker's 390 aircraft and managed to have it requisition for his personal use and Vittkovsky speculates that the project documentation and the actual bell device itself may have been flown out of Nazi Germany on that aircraft to God knows where personally I think it went to Argentina

other people think that that Kamler and the Bell came to this country after the war you know there's there's arguments to be made in both cases but yeah the bell the bell is a huge part of the story I think of the black projects world in this country after the war so to answer the other part of your question

they were not able to perfect this device as any sort of useful weapons platform or aerodynamic platform or anti-gravity propulsion or anything like that. It was a prototypical exotic technology that still had a lot of work to be done on it at the end of the war. I tend to think that given the way that the Nazis were acting at the end of the war and the way that they were deliberately trying to divide up the spoils of who got what, I think what they did in my reading is they made sure that the United States and the West, but principally the United States,

got the big-name public science figures like Werner von Braun and Artur Rudolph and Hubert's Strughold to kind of jumpstart the American Space and Missile Program after the war. If you look at what the Soviet Union got, they made sure that the Soviet Union got all the Middle Eschlin managers and draftsmen and people that could reconstruct the paper trail. So in other words, the United States got the brains. the Soviet Union got the people to reconstruct all of that stuff,

which meant that they're creating a stalemate very deliberately, but they themselves, the Nazis themselves, kept all of the really exotic good stuff to themselves. And that's why I think it went to Argentina, where they continued to work on it. Because as I point out in some of my other books, the Nazi international, the principal one, there are very odd nuclear projects going on under Nazi scientists in Juan Perron's Argentina.

And he spills the beans and gives a press conference and makes this big announcement being Juan Perron that, yeah, you know, Argentinian scientists have cracked the secret of nuclear fusion and we could have a hydrogen bomb any day. you know, in 1953, and we haven't even detonated our hydrogen bomb yet. So, yeah, this was the big announcement. And the Nazi scientists involved in that was denounced in the world press and by other scientists, including German scientists, for being a fraud and a Montevac. But that, of course, is not all the story.

So now I'm curious, do you think if there was any inspiration for the bell or other kind of secret projects around like ancient Egypt, because I know you've talked about Hess growing up in Alexandria and being inspired a lot and like a lot of occult inspirations and referencing to ancient texts within the Nazi upper echelons. Do you think is there any, you know, is there any evidence, let's say, that ancient Egypt would have had a similar technology related to maybe plasmas or torsic physics or et cetera?

Well, just on the suburbia. to plasma that again that's another excellent and complicated question so i let's pick it apart just with plasma alone i think it's probable that if you look at the emergence of plasma physics in the 1930s you know the the head the the the brain behind the emergence of plasma physics is a swedish physicist by the name of dr hana solf vein by the way another Nobel laureate for his work in plasma physics. So it's certainly in the air at that time.

The word plasma itself applied to this weird electromagnetic state of matter that is actually the fourth state of matter. You know, solids, liquids, gases, plasmas. The interesting thing about plasma is it constitutes 99%

of all matter in the universe. The solids, liquids, and gases that we are dealing with in our physics is the physics of the 1%. Okay. So if some of this sounds hairbrain wild, I'm sorry, but I can't help it. It is literally this wild. But the interesting thing about plasmas is the American chemist, Irving Longmer, is the guy that first took the word plasma from biology and applied it to this electromagnetic phenomenon. that physicists were dealing with.

Why? Because to him, it looked alive. And by the way, this was also kind of the conclusion that David Bowman, very famous American quantum physicist

that was involved in plasmas during the Manhattan Project, this was the conclusion that he came to, and he quit working with plasmas. Because he didn't want to mess with them. You know, he thought, oh, my words, I'm fiddling around with something alive,

which they may or may not be, but the fact that you have these scientists kind of wondering what the heck is going on here with these dang things. So that is one of the little inputs and perhaps into the Nazi

mentality. The other thing that I think is playing around in their head is, again, Walter Gerlock and this whole I, you know, think of, think of the 1930s as a bunch of physicists that are afraid to challenge Einstein. Okay, and relativity. So they, they mumble and murmur amongst themselves. And, you know, Gerlach, I think is probably one of these murmurs.

Herbert Ives in this country, another one, Nicola Tesla yet a third. You know, Tesla hated Einstein's theory. But if you look at what these, these physicists are all looking at. at, well, number one, they're looking at plasmas, and number two, they're looking at rotating systems, vorticular systems. And to me, that's where you really get, perhaps, the, the influence inside of Nazi Germany. Because certainly you have a whole wing of the SS that's looking at ancient systems, like Egyptian systems, and they're trying to figure out, is,

there a teaching or concept in all of this occult lore that we can bring up to speed with modern science and weaponize? In fact, Heinrich Himmler, the head of the SS, set up a department in the SS that's called the Annen Arabidienst. And in the decree that he signs, establishing this Department of the SS, he makes it clear that the SS is to investigate all possible realms of ancient lore, doctrine, belief, archaeological sites, and so on for their potential military application. If people look up the on and air, it's like described by Wikipedia as a pseudoscientific initiative, which is kind of funny. Well, yeah, a lot of it was pseudo-scientific. you know that that's the problem when you're when you're dealing with this stuff you're going to have you're

going to have wrong turns dead leads you're going to go down mixed bag yeah but the possibilities for a a wild leap ahead are also there so you know i the way i rationalize it Alexis let's say you're walter gerlock you're you know Nazi Germany and one of the premier physicists in the world and you're trying to sell all this research to a Nazi hierarchy that hasn't got a scientific clue in their head. Okay, so what do you do? How do you sell this to them? And I put this in my book, Secrets of the Unified Field.

What is a swastika? It's a rotational vector diagram. And it's a zero-sum vector diagram. If you take all those vectors, They cancel out. They cancel out. It's a zero-sum vector. All right.

Now, if you, so in other words, folks, what I'm telling you, and I know that Alexis understands, so what I'm saying is take the arms of the swastika and the inner arms make arrows that all converge on the center and the outer arms make arrows that are all twisting in a single direction. So in the mathematical physics that's describing this device, you have a zero-reiber. vector and therefore a no translation vector and you're taught by by modern mathematical physics to discount that zero vector however if you're dealing with a different kind of vector calculus called quaternian analysis that zero sum vector still has an enfolded internal structure of force and stress. Note the word stress. So if you're Walter Gerlock trying to sell all of this to a Heinrich

Himmler or a Hermann Gerring or somebody like that, all you have to do is, Herr Reichsfeu. My physics is right there on the armband on your sleeve, and you explain it to them. Oh, yeah, well, that sounds good. You know, hey, we've got the corporate logo, or we've got the patent already, you know, it's copyrighted, we own it. So, you know, this is really, I think, quite literally kind of a simplistic way of putting the thinking that's going on inside of the Third Reich. How much intentionality went into choosing the swastika? I mean, as far as you understand. Well, I think it's very deliberate, at least insofar as the historical precedent for it,

because you'd have the connection of the Tula Gazelle shop, that ultra-secret occult, secret society that I think and many people think was kind of the the ideological matrix behind the birth of the Nazi party because they used the swastika as as their society symbol and they would also greet each other as you know a brother in the society with the words he Heil and Zeke hail and victory so you know that eventually becomes Zeke Kyle So I think it's there to a certain extent in the, again, in this massive occult's physical, cultural stew that's being, you know, stirred together in the 1920s and 1930s inside of Germany. And, you know, it's a natural symbol. I think, you know, my reading of it is, yeah, somebody like a Gerlock is going to be thinking this way already.

and he's going to look at the symbol as a vector diagram, which, you know, I think it is. So I think perhaps the real question is, was the symbol, pardon me, was the symbol meant to be that in ancient times? In other words, are we looking at a relic, perhaps, of a very high-loss science?

That's the key question. Because it's used in ancient Eastern cultures. I don't remember which one exactly, but yeah. Yeah. Oh, the Vedic culture is full of it. You know, and the Navajo in this country used it. Wow. So, you know, it's a fairly widespread symbol.

And again, it's a symbol of divine fortune in those cultures of goodwill or good fortune and so on and so forth. Well, the question is why? Yeah. You know, is there a physical or scientific reason why that symbol was chosen to be that? I think perhaps, yeah. if you again if you look at it as a zero-sum vector diagram what what you're dealing with now is is a physics of stress in the medium and that's yeah that's a big oom because i feel like that's kind of the nature of reality at the fundamental level is like it's like it's polarity really which is stress right it's like a

yes yeah yeah it's you know scalar so-called scalar physics that people talk about all the time well a scalar is simply a magnitude of force that's not a translation vector. That's all it is. So in other words, it's the physics of stress. And, you know, you can have, as I point out in my books, you can have several different kinds of zero-sum vectors that are a field. You know, take a hexagon and make each of the outer arms of a hexagon a vector force in a rotating field, and then take that same diagram and reduce the number of vectors

that are rotating to four instead of six. Are they the same thing just because the zero vector replaces them all? No, they're not. So in other words, it's that internal structure of stress that this physics is interested in. And if you're taught to ignore all of that internal stress and throw it away because it issues in no translation vector like modern physics does, you're going to dead end. Wow. That's a wow. And I feel like it also points to like the importance

or like the fundamental nature of geometry and shaping reality. Bingo, absolutely, absolutely. You know, Einstein told us this in general relativity. Well, why shouldn't that be true of everything even on the quantum scale? Yeah. So this, you know, this is where all of this is tending.

I think because of all of these factors and including the factor of, okay, we're throwing everything outside, we're throwing the box aside, and we're going to just think outside the box. The other thing that's playing a role in the bell, and I should mention this because this is quite important, the other thing is the so-called Kamlerstap itself, the Kamler staff. Hans Komler was the SS General

that by the war's end was in charge of all. And I mean literally all of Nazi Germany's secret projects research. And when he was in charge of it, he began to be in charge of some aspects of it,

you know, very early on. And the first thing he did, Alexis, was he absolutely freed all of the scientists and technicians that were under his command absolutely freed them from adherence to Nazi Party ideology in their scientific research. In other words, what he said was, go to it, boys, brainstorm.

And then he did something else. He established a journal where they could circulate their top secret scientific papers and ideas with each other. So in other words, he abolished all of that compartmentalized information and segmented compartments and projects and said, go to it, brainstorm. And the third thing he did then was he started to map out the technology trees,

the necessary steps in a technology tree to get from here to there. So in other words, what are you looking at? You're looking at the Nazi version. of DARPA. You're looking at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. Or like you like to say the diabolically apocalyptic research. Well, I didn't say that. That was one of my website members.

I love it. I love it too. And I told him, I said, I'm stealing that if you don't want it. And he said, go for it. So, no, the guy that actually came up with that, his name is Jonathan. I'm not going to give out his last name. But he came. He came up with it.

Yeah, I love it. I think it fits the agency perfectly well. Well, that's what Kamler did. He created a Nazi version of DARPA. And in fact, I will go so far as to say, when you look at Kamler and where he likely ends up, I think the whole Kamler stop is the model that the United States used when it created DARPA. There's no doubt in my mind. There's a direct conceptual connection at the minimum. That makes perfect sense.

I'm also thinking about historically, and maybe this could even go back to ancient cultures as well, that military objectives and conflict seem to be the primary catalyst for scientific innovation and technological innovation in a very striking way, like things that we take for granted, too, the internet, the highway system, telecommunications, Everything is military technology first and arguably never stops being military tech either. Right. Yeah. Which, you know, is obviously the case in the Nazi example as well.

Oh, yeah. Absolutely. Absolutely. You know, auto bonds. You know, limited to access highways. Well, why did Hitler come up with that idea? Well, they're a nice way to move lots of troops very quickly from one end of Germany to the other. So, yeah, I agree.

And certainly, certainly when you look at all the weird projects, let me give you a famous example of this militarization of technology. As most people know, in 1936, Germany had and held the Olympics in Berlin. And, you know, you can go online and see Hitler opening up the ceremonies for the Olympics. What most people don't know is what they're watching are television broadcasts. of the Olympics that the Germans broadcast on television in 1936 in Berlin. There were little television sort of theaters and stores. You could go if you were in Berlin and watch the Olympics on television. And there were these big television cameras.

I've got a picture of a couple of them in some of my books that were ringed around the Templehof Stadium field there in Berlin, you know, to televise the the Olympic games. Big, huge, clunky television cameras. I point that out because it was the American inventor of television, Philo Farnsworth, who sold license agreements to the Nazis so that they could televise the Olympics. And he actually came to Nazi Germany from the United States to help them get all of this set up. Now, Farnsworth is an interesting part of the story.

We'll get back to him. Anyway, by the end of the war, now I want people really to latch on to this because this is huge. This is huge. By the end of the war, the Germans were successful in taking those monstrously big gigantic television cameras and reducing their size to something about the size of a shoe box. Wow. Yeah, that's a wow. and the reason they did that was to put those television cameras

in their television guided missiles and I have a picture of one of the tests at March of 1945 test of one of these television guided missiles and what's it doing? Remember all of those films during the Iraq War Desert Storm when we went into Iraq

and we were shown on television by General Schwarzkoff of Iraqi bunker or tank or aircraft being taken out by precision guided weapons. That's what this little film of one of these television guided missiles in 1945 hitting a ship shows you. Now, what do you have to do to do that kind of reduction? You have to have, how to put it, integrated circuits, transistors, extremely small vacuum tubes.

and on and on we could go. So just in that aspect of things alone, we're being told that they made gigantic leaps in technology in the 12 years of the Third Reich's existence. And by the way, transistors, he didn't need the Roswell crash for that, folks. Some people do posit that, don't they? Yeah, they do.

Well, it's coming. And this is why I'm emphasizing all of this. you know, they invent all of this and, and kooky explanations for where it's coming from. It's coming from Nazi Germany. Wow. Yeah. Well, that's a while. I'm just, yeah, I'm thinking about all the potential technology and insights that could have

come from there that we just kind of take for granted. Or even I'm thinking about still to this day, the recent assassination of the MIT scientists working on free energy and how this is a repeating pattern of people working on this topic, getting axed, and how this also kind of goes back to Nazi Germany. to a certain extent. He was working on plasmas. And what was he working on? He was working on means of predicting random behavior, stochastic behavior in plasma more efficiently in order to control it for hot thermal fusion. In other words, he was working on the essential step for hot fusion to work. And by the way, I just did a blog on this. If you crack or act,

actually have a blog coming up on this. If you crack that problem in thermal hot fusion, that gives you theoretically the ability to play around with any hot fusion plasma, including that little yellow ball shining down on me right now. Weaponize that. Huge implications. Yeah, huge, huge. Do you think those discoveries have already been made and are just being suppressed?

Or do you think it's like, we're actually not there yet scientifically, and the powers that be don't want that information to be discovered independently of their own secret projects? It's the latter. I think, I think, you know, it's the old Morgan problem with Tesla. We can't let you build your wireless power transmission system because I can't meter it. Right.

Well, no, that's the public explanation that everyone thinks of, that they killed it because they were going to make any money off of them. No, no, no, no. People forget that Tesla, after Morgan pulled the funding, Tesla wrote a series of articles in the New York Times that pointed out how his wireless power system could be weaponized. Right. So what Morgan is really afraid of is this is a, once you understand the engineering and physics behind it, it's a very, very simple system to engineer.

So if you're Mr. Morgan or Mr. Western banker, what do you have? You have a proliferation problem. It would be equivalent to John Doe putting together an atom bomb in his garage. That's the problem they've got. It has nothing to do with metering it and making money from it. They want to keep it suppressed because they can't let it out of the box because it's simple. Yep. What do you need to put into place before you do let it out of the box?

A global surveillance system. That's what I was just going to ask you, like what are the criteria needed in order to let the cat out of the bag? And yeah, I think they're working hard on that. Smart satellites and digital ID. you know, the digital money where it's just a corporate coupon, you know, Catherine Fitz. Yeah, Catherine Fitz calls it the beast system, and I agree with her. That's what it is.

That's exactly what it is. So, yeah, I think with people like Dr. Lerro, you're likely looking at, you know, taking somebody out that, you know, is following the science and making the logical conclusions. And we can't, you know, we can't have that getting out in public just yet because we're not ready for it. It's so silly how it's being marketed as, oh, an old rivalry from school gone wrong. Oh, no. No, you know, the old rival from school, if there's, if there's anything to that, he's probably just another convenient patsy. Yes.

That's been mind manipulated into doing this. And, you know, and MK Ultra, you know, Sirhan. Sirhan, Manchurian candidate sort of individual. That's all it is. Totally. Totally, in my opinion. I'm also thinking about the serum 525 you were talking about. You mentioned thorium.

I think from my understanding, and maybe you have more insights on this, thorium is a much more efficient source of nuclear energy than uranium. But the reason that uranium has been prioritized is because it can also be weaponized more easily. Is that correct? Yes, absolutely. That's correct. The reason that thorium, I think, was selected for the serum, however, was thorium-229 isomer. I never finished my explanation of it.

Now that I think about it. And isomer, as I indicated, has a nucleus that's in a high state of spin. If you suddenly put on the brakes and stop that spin, it releases enormous amounts of energy. Every isomer has a threshold at which that will occur. Thorium 229 isomers threshold is very low. It doesn't take much to get it to do that. So in other words, if you're spinning it up in a oxide plasma and then suddenly zapping it with gobs of direct current electricity,

you get a massive release of electromagnetic force. So I suspect there are all sorts of reasons they were playing around with that idea. Energy, explosions, propulsion, you know, you name it. They were focused and zeroed in on a kind of unified technology that had several possible branches of application. And that's why they poured so much money and talent into that project because it could go in so many different ways. By the way, where did they get the money for all these projects? Nazi Germany's financial system is truly a thing of wonder. When you look at it, essentially what the Nazis did was they used Lincoln Greenbacks.

They used a debt-free fiat money that went under a variety of names. they were called either labor treasury certificates that were denominated in Reichs Marx. Sometimes they were called Fader notes after the economists that told Hitler this is the way to go. And it's interesting that when the Germans go onto that system, the other bankers of Europe and the United States, they cut Germany off from foreign trade. So when Germany, when Nazi Germany is conducting, trade negotiations with other countries, what do they do? Well, they're doing, they did exactly

what the BRICS countries are doing now. They negotiate in Reichs-Marks directly or in the currency of that country, and then they negotiate direct martyr swaps. And they bypass the central banking system completely. So, you know, another reason these folks have to be taken out really fast. That makes sense. Kind of like Venezuela and Iran. Kind of like Venezuela, Libya, you know, Lincoln, you know, anybody that starts down that path, we can't have them around. So, yeah, that's what they did. Pardon me, the, the interesting thing is it worked for a while, but like all countries that try that experiment, they eventually inflate their currency so badly. Right.

It becomes nearly worthless by the end of the war. So, yeah, this is how they did. it. They realized, I think, too, early on that there's an inherent link between any system of currency and the physics systems of energy that the currency is based on. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. That's interesting. Well, if you stop and think about it, every currency since ancient Babylon has been based on a closed system of energy. If you all of a sudden make energy cheap and abundant,

or let's go further, if you, let's even go beyond fusion, let's go all the way to zero point energy. If you tap into the Derox C, if you tap into the zero point energy and have an open system of energy, what's your current? currency.

What does that? We have no experience in human history of what that kind of financial system looks like. None. Inherently, that system will never be inflationary. Can't be because the currency is not based on a limited supply of energy per unit of currency. So we have no experience with this. I suspect that this is the other thing that has the power elite scared

because they don't know how to run a financial system like that. And then finally, of course, if you are basing an energy system off the zero point energy directly, you know, we're way beyond fusion here, folks. I want people to understand that. if you have that capability and you weaponize it again like i say that would make a hydrogen bomb look like a kitchen match you you are literally now talking in terms of of a weaponization potential that can blow up planets or stars and possibly things much bigger uh it's it's off the charts off the hurts. Yeah, it seems like a very hard problem, especially for elites that are very used to doing

things a certain way and ruling in a certain way that is not going to be able to like endure over the very long term. It seems like this is kind of inevitable at some point, like this production towards. Yes. Yeah, fusion. It is. For energy. Yeah. And in my opinion, we've been here before. Right. That's why I want to ask you about as well. Yeah, we've been here before. I think, you know, I think we're living inside of a solar system that is showing all the signs of having had a major war fought inside of it in very ancient times. Look at Mars. Mars, I think, is, and I'm going to quote Graham Hancock here because I think he's absolutely right, you know, that he says Mars was murdered. Well, okay, if it was murdered, then that implies an actual technology that did it.

How do you take out an entire planet? And haven't you mentioned before that you believe the asteroid belt could be the remains of an exploded planet as well? It's not me. That's the ancient 19th century theory. Okay. Because there is a law in astronomy called the Tidious Boda law. that predicts orbits of planets based on the planetary harmonics. Right.

Okay. And that law predicted there should have been a planet in the orbit of the asteroid belt, and there is none. So the 19th century astronomers were looking for it. When they found the first asteroid, it became clear to them. The planet had blown up. Mm-hmm. When they found the second one, there we are.

Guess what they called that planet? What? Krypton. Oh, interesting. Ah, now the plot's thick. Yeah, now the plot. Yeah, that's exactly what they called it. Yeah, I, I, you know, there is a modern astronomer, Dr. Tom Van Flaner, who was the U.S. Naval Observatory astronomer for a number of years that revived that theory. He wrote a whole book on it that I talk about in my book, The Cosmic War, because I think absolutely he is correct.

that that's what we're looking at. We're looking at an exploded planet. But the interesting thing when you read his book is, again, I talk about this in the cosmic war, when you read his book, Dark Matter, Missing Planets and New Comets, that's the title of the book. He proposes a number of models or vehicles

as to why a planet would have exploded. Now, obviously, it's not an everyday occurrence. We've been around on this planet for what, four billion years and it's doing just fine. Thank you very much. So we're all the other planets. So he proposes a number of models.

And when you read this serious scientists proposing these models, you can sympathize with what he's really struggling with. Because, okay, maybe there was a natural reaction. at the core of the planet that went super critical and cabloy it blew up. That's his first proposal. Well, natural reactors do exist. We've got them here on planet Earth in Africa. There are real natural reactors, but they don't blow up.

Okay, that's the problem. Well, that's not such a good idea. So the next proposal is, well, maybe there was a bunch of matter and antimatter in the core of the planet that were somehow managed to be isolated and contained. And they came into contact with each other and we had the typical matter, anti-matter annihilation reaction and Kablui, the planet blew up. But of course, being the scientist that he is, he knows that there is in science the matter, antimatter, anisotropy.

There's not a lot of antimatter around and it gets into touch with matter and it blows up and therefore you can't really stockpile a lot. Okay, so that's problem number two. And you can just see what he's really struggling, I guess, and then he finally gets down to, okay, maybe it was a technological accident. Maybe something went wrong and it blew up. And then having come reluctantly to that conclusion, he then adds one final little phrase,

and I actually quote this, because you can just see he does not want to go there, or maybe it was the result of deliberate action or a war. Right. Now, the problem with that, of course, is, yeah, human lore and legend is full of cosmic wars from the Greeks and the Romans to the Mayans to the Vedas to the Bible, you name it, everybody, has some version of a war of the gods.

And in the Babylonian version of it, what do you also have? You have an exploded planet. I talk about that in the third of the original Giza Death Star trilogy. We're going to have to explain. explain Giza Death Star to the people who don't know. Well, my hypothesis quite literally is that the Great Pyramid was built as a weapon and as a weapon of mass destruction. Now, again, that sounds bonkers.

I mean, you know, this is another one of my wild, crazy speculation ideas. But I do have reasons for advancing the idea, not the least of which is the ancient text, some of them seem to suggest this. Well, okay, let's take that. as arguendum, you know, like a lawyer would, and say, well, if that's the case, then what would be necessary for that to be true? And once we find out what that is, can we find perhaps indications that that might be present in the Great Pyramid? Answer, yes. This would also be in alignment with the idea that conflict can result in high technology, right? It's kind of this pattern that we see.

Right, exactly. Exactly. So, you know, I, you know, I think we've been here before. We've been at this particular point of scientific and technological achievement, and, you know, we turned it on ourselves and blew ourselves up and we've crawled back up here ever slowly since, but we've been here before. Where the asteroid belt is or where Krypton may have been, is that a habitable region? I don't know enough about like the location of that relative to other planets, but. Technically, yes, but barely. Okay. But if you look, for example, of planets that are technically not in the habitable region, like Jupiter, there are many scientists that believe that their moons might have been habitable or could be habitable or geoengineerable. The interesting thing about the asteroid belt, and particularly when you consider this exploded planet hypothesis,

in relationship to Mars, what I think is very possible is that Mars may have been a satellite of that planet and that that planet was water-bearing. The reason why is if you look at Mars without the eyes of modern scientific orthodoxy, once again, we're throwing that out. If you look at Mars, one whole hemisphere of Mars looks like it was suddenly,

and Graham Hancock, I think, does the best job of bringing this out in his book on Mars, that one whole hemisphere of Mars was suddenly and massively concussed by a massive shockwave of water that literally scoured the planet, stripped the atmosphere of the planet away, stripped the planet of its ocean, almost completely stripped it from its magnetic magnetosphere. And if that's the case, then the best evidence in the solar system for a planetary-wide version of the biblical flood is Mars. Oh. Ah. Okay.

Wow. So that would be a very old story. That would be a very old story. Now, I love Robert Temple because he pointed this out in his book, The Serious Mystery. The Zulu tribe, I think it is, of South Africa, has as part of their tribal lore that they came to this planet from Mars. And here's what I really like about it. It's just so crazy. But, you know, this is either the wildest of Hollywood.

would be movie coincidences, or this is a little something to put on the radar and try to figure out what does this mean shorn of the glasses of academic orthodoxy of what we think happened way back when, because the Zulus maintained what we got here on a Merkaba, which is their word for a ship. Now, that doesn't sound all that significant until you realize that the Hebrew word, Merakaba, is also the word for a ship. Whoa. Yeah. Hebrews, Zulus.

You know, how does that work? You know, on and on we could go. Mars also has that scar, the Valet Marinaris, you know, that gigantic Grand Canyon-like feature that runs along the equator of one whole hemisphere of the entire planet. What is it? It's a real.

it's the thing that is caused by massive electromagnetic discharge like a huge bolt of lightning just ran along the equator of the planet you know on and on we could go didn't somebody find an isotope of I don't remember what element on Mars that is usually characteristic of atomic bombs I think is xenon 123 or something like that. The man who found it is someone I know personally or have met personally.

His name is Dr. John Brandenberg. Dr. Brandenberg was involved with Richard Hoagland's early Mars project. Dr. Brandenberg also worked in American Black projects on Plasma. Oh, my goodness. And recently wrote a book about how he thinks Mars was actually murdered by a gigantic fusion bomb that was made. So, yeah, he's in the same camp, more or less as we are. But he had to get permission before he wrote his book on the murder of Mars with a fusion bomb.

Permission from who? The government. Oh, my goodness. Now, ain't this fun? Yeah, it just really makes you wonder how much information. is suppressed and like how much more evolved or developed we could be if that information was democratized in a way. But I mean, also the point remains that it could also be dangerous, like you mentioned. Oh, it's very, very dangerous. This is why it's been kept under wraps for so

long. So I don't have, you know, I don't have any beef with with them for the secrecy over these things because these things are extraordinarily dangerous. But by the same token, it's a clear indicate, in other words, if we're thinking of it, I mean, let's be honest here, if we're able to think of all of this, so are they. And if they're thinking of it and they're in charge

of the national security, they're not going to be playing fast and loose with it. They are going to incorporate these thoughts into their policy decisions, into the technologies that they pursue and so on and so forth. They've got to. For the very simple reason that whoever blew up Mars and that planet might still be out there. It's that simple. It's that simple. So, I mean, in that case,

the surveillance state is doing us a favor. No, I don't think it's doing us a favor. I'm just It's just necessary in their thinking. Yeah, yeah. It's just, you know, look at what they're trying to do now with UFOs. They've now basically given up after 50 years of independent euphologists and so on, saying UFOs are real, they really exist. And some of them are probably a technology. And some of those are probably not ours. Okay.

After 50 years of battling with these people, the government is now finally admitting, yeah, some of us, the technology. And yeah, they're real and some of us not ours. After 50 years. And we're getting articles in the New York Times and we're getting congressional hearings as if this is all suddenly acceptable news. After 50 years. You know, I'm waiting for them to come out and say, yeah, the magic bullet theory really wasn't true. And Kennedy was really shot back on and on. But at least we're making a little progress. Well, actually, speaking of UFOs, I wanted to circle back to that because I think it kind of relates to our plasma story a little bit and the fact that when we were testing the atom bombs and everything, like near Los Alamos, right? I think there was

a lot of UFO sightings around that time and maybe we can discuss that a little bit about why that might be. Sure. All right. Well, let's let's be honest. Where were the first UFO sightings during modern times? Where did they happen? This is part of the story. They happened in the Balkans in northern Europe. Remember the ghost rockets in 1946? Now, why were they there? 46. And then they show up in New Mexico when?

47. Now, the Trinity test was in 45, July of 1945. They show up if you believe the UFO explanation of Roswell, which, incidentally, I don't. But if you do believe that, or the other UFOs that are showing up in the area in 1947, those may be true. That's a two-year window, right?

So let's assume it took whoever, two years to get from wherever to New Mexico to find out what are those little monkeys doing now, okay? So 1946, take two years off of that, and what do you have? You have 1944 and UFOs over the Baltic. What are they doing? Well, they're probably thinking, what are those monkeys doing? Because... That's when you thought the Nazis were testing their bomb, right?

Their bomb in October of 1944. And by the way, it's not me saying that. Because when Bill Clinton was president, he declassified a lot of documents from World War II. And one of them was the so-called Zinser affidavit that was sworn out by a German pilot in 1946 to his America. captors. You got to read that little affidavit because it's a jawdrop. It's in my book, Reich of the Black Sun. It's a jaw dropper because what he's describing is a nuclear test,

complete with mushroom cloud, and here comes the kicker, two kickers, actually. Number one, all of the electronic equipment in his aircraft are malfunctioning. The electromagnetic pulse. Number two, he's described. the colors that he's seeing in the cloud. Now, an atomic mushroom cloud is different from the mushroom cloud of a conditional explosion in one significant way, and that is that the nuclear material that's rising in the cloud continues to burn and combust. That's the key.

So in other words, in 1946, a German pilot is describing an atomic test before it's popularly well known what an atomic test even looks like. And he's maintaining it occurred in 1944 in the Baltic. Mm-hmm. In the Baltic. Yeah. So in other words, to me, it looks like, okay, if somebody is visiting this planet, they're checking up on atomic bombs.

Why two years? Well, my suspicion is, and I talk about this in my book, The Grid of the Gods, my suspicion is that a nuclear detonation momentarily affects the lattice structure of space-time locally itself and therefore it sends out a pressure wave, a longitudinal wave in that lattice structure of the physical medium itself, in the ether, so to speak. and that that is therefore detectable if you have the technology and know to look for it.

It's like the interplanetary version of seismology. Okay, it's listening for earthquakes because you're monitoring those pressure waves in the planet. That's what I think is going on. So you set off a nuclear detonation and you're going to create those pressure waves. The other thing, I think, and I know I'm just babbling on and on.

I'm trying to... No, this is great. Well, I'm trying to convey the ideas for people's minds that if you stop and think about this, all of these ideas are interconnected, and it really is just very basic thinking that connects them. Because the other thing I think nuclear bombs do, if they are affecting a pressure wave in the physical medium

in the lattice work of space time. Then by the same token, that lattice work will be transduced into the reaction when they're set off so that the local geometry will enter the yield of the reaction. Follow me? So that means depending where, please hear me now, folks, because there are a lot of people

that get this wrong. That means that depending on where and when on the surface of the planet, you detonate a nuclear bomb, the yield is going to be slightly different because the amount of energy transduced from outside sources into that yield are going to vary. So in other words, if you design a bomb

to have 15 megatons yield, when you actually set it off, depending on the time, the place that you do it, the yield is going to vary slightly. Now, this has morphed into a, an idea on the internet and in some people's minds that nuclear bombs can only be set off

at certain places and at certain times otherwise they won't work at all. Not true. But they are, and here comes the key point, they are harmonic oscillators. They will resonate with the local geometry and that's

why when a nation joins the nuclear club and competently predicts, oh, we're expecting a yield of between this and that, and then all of a sudden they get a reaction that doesn't fit in with the prediction. Part of the reason why, part of the reason, not just engineering failure, but part of the reason is this geometric transducing effect. So they continue their nuclear test because they're trying to learn the laws

of how our design yield is affected by the local geometry of when we set it off. That's why they do it. Interesting. And the Nazis were testing in the mountains, you said? They tested, according to the revisionist research, they tested two devices. One was a kind of a standard bomb test on the island of Regan in the Baltic. That test was actually, if you look at the sources I cite in my books, that test was also witnessed by an Italian officer, a Luigi Ramirez. is his name

that Mussolini had sent to observe the test. And I think the reason why is that Italy played a role in the bomb design and manufacture because let's dismantle that allied legend

a little bit more. Enrico Fermi is the guy that built the first nuclear reactor in the squash court stadium in Chicago. Now, where did he get the plans to do that? Well, he was professor of physics at the University of Milan.

And the University of Milan had the patent for that atomic pile. So in other words, fascist Italy knew how to build an atomic pile. They took out the patent for it, okay? Plus, there's another important thing about fascist Italy, unlike Nazi Germany. Italy was successful in graphite moderators. Oh, oh, oh, there's a whopper. There's a whopper. So in other words, yeah, if you're really pressing this,

the little details of the Allied post-war legend that, you know, we were the competent ones and those fascists over there were a bunch of idiots, it's beginning to fray around the edges, okay? If nothing more. But if you look at, I forget where I was going before I got off on that. Oh, you were mentioning the two places that the Nazis tested. Oh, the other place, yes, was in the mountains, in the Hartz Mountains at the old troop parade ground of Ordrouf in Germany. That is a particularly problematical test because it took place allegedly in March of 1945.

just as the war is creaking to a halt. The test may have been witnessed or observed by Hitler himself, who was in that area at that time. The problematical nature of the test is that it was supposedly of a device, according to the accounts, that weighed no more than 100 grams. Now, yeah, and this is, that's a gallant. ball, at best, a golf ball size of plutonium. Now, if it is true, huge underlining is on the word if here, if it is true, it means that they had

been radically successful, not only in enriching isotope, but in enriching it to extreme purity. And if it was indeed a ball of plutonium rather than uranium, this means yet again that they were successful in constructing a reactor to make the plutonium.

If not, if it was uranium, then they had enriched it to about 99% purity and squeezed it all down into a nice little ball. So in other words, everything about that test is problematical. Now, my own suspicion is Nazis being Nazis and Germans being Germans,

that they decided, well, how do we get the most bang for the buck? Okay, well, simple. Put a little deuterium or tritium in the center of that critical mass. Boost the fiction. Or boost the fission. So in other words, they were already thinking, in my opinion, the next second generation of atomic weapons because what was that? Well, it's boosted fission weapons.

And of course, once you get to boosted fission, then why even bother boosting the fission at all? Let's just make that fusion reaction the centerpiece of the show and use the A-bomb to set it off. So in other words, I think they had a clearly mapped understanding of the generational stages of nuclear weapons when they started this program. Again, I go back to the commerce stop. What was he tasking his people to do?

Map out the technology trees and the basic steps of what we need to do and how to get from here to there. And that's what they were doing. So they may have tested some sort of boosted fish and device at the order of parade ground, or it may have been a test of a weapon that was not nuclear at all, but some tremendously powerful explosive of a very different sort. No one knows.

No one knows. And remind me, for the atom bomb, when it's set off, does it produce a plasma? Oh, yes, absolutely. Right. Because I feel like I remember you talking about the notion that when you're setting off these bombs and creating plasmas, if plasmas are indeed alive, that perhaps it attracts plasmas, other plasmas to it. Sure.

If the plasma, I have a book out called The Demon in the Acre, okay? I don't know if you've read it or seen it. Yes. You have it? Yes. Well, in that book, I have a picture of the Trinity Test, Fireball, at exactly a quarter of a second after the detonation of the bomb. And what you see is a ball. It's got little fingers, little things.

little things coming out of the ball toward the ground. It's got one very large area that looks almost vacant. And this is something important to understand about plasma. They have regions within them, and those regions, incidentally, are separated by membranes. Well, yeah. Now, once we say that, you can take that picture of that fireball,

and if you don't know that it's the fireball from the Trinity test, you might think or come to the conclusion that you're looking at a picture of a biological cell being taken through a microscope because that's what it looks like. A cell. That's what it looks like. So if it's alive, if plasmas are alive and you're lighting off these things and they have a lifespan of what, a few milliseconds are, you know, if they're alive, are they going to cry out,

electromagnetically, well, probably, probably somebody else of the same sort of species. And again, you know, I'm putting quotation marks around everything because it's such a wild hypothesis. But if other plasmas are listening, are they going to investigate? Well, probably like a herd of elephants. If you've got one elephant bleeding, the other elephants are going to come and try and find out what the heck is going on. So, yeah, that is a possibility, too.

So, you know, this goes in so many directions. But this idea that the fireball from the Trinity test, there's another picture in that book that I hope people, if they get it, will latch on to because there are pictures of the plasma filaments in the universe. When you look at these pictures, and I do this in the book, I set that picture next to a picture of neurons and synapses in a brain. And if you look at the plasma filaments and you look at the neurons and synapses, they're almost identical in terms of what they look like.

So in other words, is Irving Longmere, the American chemist that lifted the word plasma from biology and plopped it onto this electromagnetic phenomenon, we're looking at more evidence of the kind of thinking that may have been going on in his head when he did that. Is there a connection between this biology and that physics? I strongly suspect that there is. Has to be. And the other thing that comes up when we talk about this, too, that I've heard you speak on as well,

is the fact that these plasma beings, for lack of a better word, could actually be what is perceived as angels and demons. Sure, of course. Of course. What, you know, what is a plasma? Let's take one very first. famous example of plasmas and that's ball lightning you know the stories around ball night ball lightning are just plain weird there's just no other way to describe it because you know there

are there are stories and i remember i think it was france in the 18th century where this ball lightning orb came down through the chimney into the living room and of this family that was sitting there doing what, I don't know, but they were fairly well to do, and they had, you know, they had some rugs on the floor and things. And this orb kind of went and followed the pattern of the rug, like it was examining the pattern. Or in cases of some other plasma,

or ball lightning plasma, you have behavior that suggests that it was trying to respond to the humans talking around it. So in other words, there are indications that this stuff is acting at least sentient, if not intelligent.

I could go further, but, you know, it's not the first time, you know, it's not the first time that these stories have occurred. So again, I think at least

if you're going to be open-minded about it, you have to, you have to accept the idea that you, you might be dealing, number one, with a life form, and number two, with, in some cases, the possibility of an intelligent life form.

You know, we're just learning things now about octopuses that are just wild. And, you know, that is a very strange creature, and it's a very intelligent and emotional creature, as we're finding out. So, you know, why not plasma? So, you know, the lore about angels and demons is old, and again, it seems to be fairly worldwide, that there are these entities that are forms of life radically different from ours in that they don't have a material corporeal body like we do. And yet they seem to be alive.

So why not? I don't know. Mm-hmm. And I guess that would kind of explain the some what perceived, at least interdimensional aspect to them because they can seem to pop in and out of our reality, but maybe it's there all the time. I mean, I think this goes back to the kind of the idea of the ether, right? And if that's like a continuous field that spans our entire universe, I mean, travel would become pretty easy if you could leverage that, especially if you're doing it from another dimension. Well, I am a believer in the idea of an ether in the sense that I think that you're dealing

you are dealing with a field in the physical in the physics sense but I think it's actually an information field rather than than a material or electromagnetic one I think it's information and the reason why I think that is if you if you get right down to it what are particles in quantum mechanics there are packets of mathematical information that's what they are you know in other words there's there's really nothing material about them in the conventional sense so yeah i i i think that you know and the reason i think that again is you get you get kind of indications of that way of thinking about physics in those ancient texts you have the egyptian idea of mott you know this field of whatever that everything exists in

or in the in the Bhagavad Gita, you've got a very interesting triad of the field, the knower, and the known. Yeah, that's, you know, I forget where it occurs, but it's in the Bhagavad Gita. Would that be like the Akashic record as well? Yeah, yeah, it could very well be, you know. I think, I honestly think that there are,

that there are physical physics or science-based things that these metaphors in the occult are trying to convey and that they're trying to convey in the most sophisticated language available to them at the time and as we progress scientifically, it becomes more and more clear as to what they may have really been trying to get it. You know, think of that classic by Heritin Fondacant and George de Santayana, Hamlet's Mill, if you've ever read that book. You've got two very famous scholars writing a book about what is the real meaning behind all of these ancient weird myths. And when you get right down to it, these myths are trying to tell you something scientific. rather than something mythological. That's what I think is taking place.

Well, that also makes me think of something that I wanted to talk with you about. I think it's really important and basically differentiating between the way that we as modern humans are trained to think and how ancient cultures and people in these cultures may have thought. And that is like the concept of analogical thinking that you've brought up on another podcast. I would love to get into that a little bit because I think it's something, as you said, that once you start doing it, it really changes how you see the world and how you interface with it. So if you want to chat about that a little bit. Well, that's interesting that you've latched on to that because years ago when I was in graduate school,

I listened to a series of lectures by Leonard Bernstein called The Unanswered Question. There were lectures that he had given at Harvard. And I tell the people on my website and anybody else who will listen to me, listen to those lectures. Listen to them. Because they are, number one, they are absolute. masterpieces of the grand old academic tradition as it should be and the ability to lecture in it, not just be a teacher, but to be a professor, to profess a discipline, to profess a subject. In other words, not not not dumbing things down for the audience.

That's what that's what teachers do. Yep. They are wonderful from that standpoint of view alone. But the key to what he does is he's attempting to teach the basics of music theory to people who are not musicians via linguistics by drawing analogies to language. And the first three lectures in that series particularly are important. I would say even the fourth lecture because in the fourth lecture he not only uses language, he uses the tropes of, of classical. classical rhetoric to show people what's going on

in musical structure. You know, kiosmus, zugma, simile, metaphor, all of these things that you and I take for granted in everyday speech are going on in music all the time. You just have to recognize the pattern and get yourself out of the one-dimensional pheamer bone and the nasal septum

dimensionality of modern American popular music. Get your head out of that swamp and in Dubai. and you will understand what's going on. Anyway, when I was watching those, Alexis, back in grad school, it occurred to me that what he's talking about really

is that the entire cosmos is analogical. That thought itself must always be analogical. So I began to experiment with trying to notate analogy in a kind of calculus with a formal notation. And people that have been on my website know I talk about this all the time. I've got notes over here. And I finally decided that the best way to try and to notate an analogical calculus, and by the way, I think that's what Leibniz was really after,

was topologically. Because topology is about mapping. you move from one context to another. So let's look what happens in an analogy because it's directly related to what happens when you use inductive reasoning, which is not the same thing, and it's also directly related to what happens

in deductive reasoning. So in other words, they all exhibit the same form when you notate them formally, but they are going to differ as to where you locate certain things. So let's look at an analogy. I just said that Bernstein is teaching music with language.

So he's moving from a linguistic context to a musical context, and he's focusing on a particular form or structure. So let's just keep that in mind. We've got a thing that we're focused on in a context that we are mapping from that context to a new context. What happens when you do that? the first thing that happens is you lose an increment of what it is you're focusing on when you move to the new context and you gain an increment of what you're focusing on

from that new context itself so there's a loss and there's a gain and by the way these are not quantizable please note that so in other words you're symbolizing increments that are not quantized Take that physics. So you could say that this is the process at work in translation. I deal with text all the time, and I can tell you, every translator knows this happens. You lose a certain bit of meaning or a certain subtle thing from the context or language you're moving from, but you're also gaining a little bit of information from the context you're moving too. and that's the part people don't often get.

But it happens. So in other words, we're mapping from context to context. That's analogy. Now what happens if you do that again? You go from a context here to this context and then the new context to yet another context and to yet another. What happens at the end of N iterations

of moving from context to context? Well, the original form may have long, much of its original signal. Like a game of telephone. Like a game of telephone. Or if you're using groups, I call that the serial. It's like a serial circuit in electricity.

Okay, the loss and gain is going to be significant. However, if you do all those contexts with groups of people and assemble the results together, you're not getting that same loss. It's not a game of telephone. In fact, what you're getting is a massive increase of information

with very little signal loss. That's the secret of the scribes right there, folks. Wow. Not the game of telephone. All right. Now let's say we are moving from, we've noticed a bunch of parallel ideas or instances of an event.

And we're moving from all of those iterations of that idea to a generalized statement of the idea itself. What's that? So in other words, we're drawing an analogy again, right? But this time we're moving from a lot of context to no context.

Applicable in all contexts. That's induction, isn't it? So in other words, the form of the rule, if you were to specify this formally on the page, the form of the rule is going to look more or less the same. It's just where you put that null or that no context is going to tell you what kind of reasoning you're dealing with.

By the same token, if you move from the general statement to particular iterations, what are you doing? You're deducing. So in other words, what I'm telling you is if you approach things this way, deductive and inductive thinking are special subsets of analogy. They're special subsets of analogical thinking.

and they're all related, they're all interconnected. Once you get to that point, what you're really saying is that the universe itself is analogically constructed and therefore requires an analogizer,

an observer who's doing the analog, performing the analogies. So in other words, you are you're literally in an intelligent design universe but it's an intelligent design that is moving and not rigid because it's conforming

not to the things to produce but to certain laws. It's in like co-creation. Yes. Yeah. This is the old Logi-Spermati key of the Stoics. This is the old rational seminal reasons of the Stoics. But now you're giving it you're giving it a precision.

And this is, if you, if you listen to those Leonard Bernstein lectures, this is really kind of where he's driving the whole thing. Because he's clearly, by the end of the lectures, he's clearly taking you in a cosmological direction. Wow. Yeah, brilliant man,

you know, whatever you may say about his music or, you know, his personality or whatever. He was a very brilliant man. So, yeah, I think, in my own writings, I call this the topological metaphor of the medium,

because in my books I do annotate it, and people will read my books and see that I have disclosed some of the annotation of this kind of analogical calculus, and topology is the language I used to do it. You'll see examples of it in the books, but it's a fairly simple idea. what the formal notation to me does, and I haven't played around with it in years and years now,

but what the formal notation does, at least for me, is it indicates the degree to which things can be symbolized and wants symbolized, talked about, and even manipulated. And, you know, it even gets to the point, I borrow, since Bernstein is using linguistics, he refers a lot to the theories of Noam Chomsky. So when I watched the Bernstein lectures back in grad school, the next thing I did is I went out and bought Chomsky's linguistic books

and sat down and read them, you know, aspects of the theory of syntax and stuff like that. But it was fascinating reading to me because, yeah, you know, you could see this analogical thinking popping out all over the page. And what really got me was the degree to which grammar and ordinary language was capable of in-depth detailed symbolic notation. It was breathtaking to me. I even went so far as when I was in seminary, I actually put in a kind of symbolic notation the definition of one of the dogmas of this. church from one of the ecumenical councils in a symbolic notation just to see it could it be done well yeah it can and it still makes sense so so yeah i think i think it's a rather um breathtaking idea but i

you know i i i live and and and write my books that way you know people ask how do you string all these things together in your books. Well, I'm using this. I'm literally using this to write the books. So people will comment, oh, I noticed in one book and then you mentioned it again in the other book. I'm doing that for a reason. I'm trying to get you to map from that one context to the other and see that this idea over here now appears over here. Okay. Where over here it's doing this. Over here, it's doing that. Right. Well, I feel like our conversation today is also been like that, like with plows popping up everywhere and like everything that kind of comes together. Bingo. Yeah, bingo. And when you're talking about using

symbolic notation in analogical thinking, are you, is this like mathematical notation or what are the symbols being used? I'll show you. Cool. These are my notes to myself. Amazing. Okay. Notes toward the foundations of the formal principles of intercontextual analysis. All right. That's the title of my notes to myself. All right. So let's find a page of notes here that will show up on the computer screen adequately. Okay. Question.

What are the topological properties of a coupled harmonic oscillator? I don't know if you can see any of that. I can. Okay. Yeah. There's nothing but Boolean topological notation. Okay. Okay.

Yeah. It's kind of a combination between the two. There are mappings. You can see the arrows. Yep. There are mappings. Those little dots, I borrow from Chomsky, linguistic notation, those little dots to either side of an expression simply are designed to mean in the context of.

You could adopt a different less clumsy notation convention. for any of this, you know, put a subscripted prefix to an expression as a contextual notation. You can do any number of things. But I'm kind of trying to follow Leibniz's clue here

because Leipness was the other great inventor of the calculus along with Newton. But what people don't realize is if you try to do calculus with Newton's notation, you'd end up throwing the eraser and the chalk at the chalkboard and giving up in disgust because the notation is awful.

Leibniz chose the notation for the calculus because there was an aptness to the symbols themselves to what he was trying to get at. So in other words, that big elongated S that you always see in an integral calculus equation. Why the elongated S? Because it means the sum of. and then you have the little expressions at the bottom of the S and the little expressions at the top. The sum of this from that to that, that's all it means. Okay.

It's not a big mystery. Okay. So there has to be some level of like intuitiveness to the symbols. Bingo. Have utility. Bingo. It's not arbitrary. It's not arbitrary.

The symbols are not chosen arbitrarily, not at all. So you'll have noticed in that notation. the symbol that pops out the most is the empty null hyperset. Yep. Okay, there's a reason for that because everything starts with a no thing. That's true. That's true. Everything goes from zero outward.

It's like a vector from zero. It's not a zero. It's not a zero. It's a plenum. It's a plenum with a knot through it. Yes. And honestly, like, when I learned about analogical thinking from you,

but also just kind of studying and doing some introspection. I got kind of very frustrated about the way that I was taught math and the way that most people are taught mathematics and grade school and in college. And it's kind of like, I actually had this realization first when I was talking with some PhDs in math at Princeton when I was still finishing up grad school. And I learned that they thought about everything fundamentally different than I did.

And the way that I was taught to do math was like very plug-and-chug, like grind through it and very left brain. And what I realized from them is that it was highly right brain creatively oriented and not left brain, the opposite. Listen, listen, for those of you who are having math phobia, there's a wonderful little book by a British mathematician called Calculus Made Easy. And his name is Sylvainus Thompson. And the reason I recommend this to people is because the guy writes with the sense of humor. And one of the first things he tells you is that don't be, don't be scared by the word differential. Because all it really means is, is a little bit of the word differential just means a little bit of whatever that little bit may be.

That's all it means. And he proceeds to give you, you know, the first lessons in differential calculus. it was right off the bat. No algebra, just the very first thing you're doing is differentiating. It's a wonderful little book because the whole thing is very right brain.

It's not all just memorize the quadratic formula and be able to do factorizations, all of that. Totally, totally. That's not conducive to be. I feel like that's a way to traumatize people away from doing math, basically.

Exactly. Exactly. Yeah, you know, the problem that most people have is, is particularly with physics, is they don't realize all those equations they're doing is drawing pictures. Yes. That's all they're doing. That's true. That's all they're doing. Yeah, it is.

It's true. And I always actually wanted in, you know, my own education to have calculus and physics taught as one thing. And also maybe through the lens of linguistics because math is a language too, right? Right? So if you learn the language, you can very easily then translate that language. Oh, that's truer than most people know. Every correctly shaped equation, every single one can be translated into a grammatically correct sentence. All the equation is is a set of symbols to tell you how to set up the sentence. That's all they are. the reason we're using the symbols is if we write out the equation with normal English words,

it takes a long time. That's all. And it becomes a universal language as well. Bingo. Yeah. Bingo. Bingo. Amazing.

Well, Dr. Farrell, I think we've covered a lot of ground. This conversation has really, I feel like it came full circle in a way. I'm going to definitely link to any resources you think are relevant. I'm definitely going to actually use that Calculus Made Easy book because I'm currently teaching a course where it's basically like a condensed version of an undergraduate degree in science. And so I'm going to be having math and calculus lectures coming up in a couple months. And I think that's going to be a great resource. Sylvainas Thompson, folks. It sounds like a wonderful, wonderful little book.

I have so many people in my program that were scared to join because they're like, I was never good at math and science. And I'm like, I feel so bad. I know, right? It's the way it's taught. It's not the content, really. Right. You know, if you, if you want a noodle baking subject, it's not math or calculus or physics. It's music theory.

I, you know, my senior year in high school, I got senioritis. Relatable. Yeah. So I decided, you know, I was given the option of, okay, you can either take calculus or music theory. And, of course, having senioritis, I thought, oh, well, music theory. That'll be easy. Wrong.

Were you already an organist at the time? Oh, yeah. I've been playing organ since I was six. But that was a whole new game. Let me tell you. But, you know, I loved it. I'm glad I did it. It was one of those happy, fortunate accidents.

but because it really it really brought things home with with a vengeance to me that all that math and so on and so forth you know you're in the in the real flows of music theory when you when you have to start thinking in terms of figured bass rather than chords you know and all of that stuff that they they pass off as music theory now uh-uh no no and i mean we didn't talk about music in depth today but that's also kind of an analogy for other aspects of life too that can be at that level. Oh yes. Absolutely. Absolutely. You don't get, you don't get any closer to, well, I point out in my book Thrice Great Hermitica and the Janus age that the music theory technical terms of the 18th century, in other words, if you're a Johann

Sebastian Bach or a Wolfgang Mozart and you're learning music theory from Padre Martini in Italy, and the terms that he's going to use are all borrowed from alchemy. Wow. So in other words, the emphasis is on transmutation and permutation of something very basic. It's pattern music. And that also explains why the music from that time period affects the physiology differently than modern music. Yeah. Yep.

Yeah. Yeah. It's hardwired into the processes of the mind. And the best composers of it, you know, just take it to the nth degree. And again, Bernstein brings that out so well in those lectures. Just phenomenal lectures. I listen to them once every year, you know, all the way through. Wow.

Yeah, that sounds like an incredible resource. And with regards to music, to help people start thinking a bit differently, you mentioned Bach, but is there anybody else that you would recommend people listen to to? Well, I'm a thoroughly 18th century guy with a couple of 19th century exceptions. I think the music of the 18th century, you know, Bach to Haydn, Mozart, early Beethoven, Handel, Scarlatti, Duvaldi, you know, that whole monopoly of composers. I think that that is the high plateau for that particular art because the cosmology behind it is radically different

than the cosmology that obtained in music in the 19th century. It's radically different. And it's not a cosmology of self-expression. It is not. And that's what makes it so enduring. Right, because it's more universal. It's more universal. you know, the composers at that time were,

and my organ teacher did this to me when I was studying organ with him, they would take a theme of a master, and you were supposed to develop it in an entirely different way. So in other words, you know, you've got their idea of hammering away in your head, and yet you're forcing yourself to do something very different with it. So in other words, it's tradition, but it's creativeness within that tradition.

You are not reduced to having to be original all the time. Right. Well, creativity inherently requires structure of some sort. Otherwise, it's just an infinite potential of what you could choose. It makes sense. But remember what happens in music when you have that quest for absolute originality at the end of the 19th century. What happens to music?

You get Arnold Schoenberg. I was going to say, Schoenberg, your most mortal enemy. Well, no, I'm very serious about that because Thomas Maugh, the famous German novelist, wrote a book, fictionalized book about his friend, Arnold Schrenberg, fictionalizing Schrenberg's life. And it's an amazing piece because while he was friends of Schrenberg, it's very clear what he thought about the quote-unquote music. And in that book, the novel's called Dr. Faustus. It's a retelling of the Faust myth from the standpoint of music and this German composer. there is a famous chapter in that novel,

which if you don't read the novel, just read that chapter because the devil appears to this composer. And the offer he makes him is, I've got an offer you can't refuse. I can give you absolute one-time-only, unique originality.

And how does he do it? He gives him the key to making truly awful and ugly music. The catch. Guaranteed. Yeah, the catch. Wow. So-called, you got to read it. You just have to read it.

Thomas Mount, Dr. Faustus. I even have, for people interested, I have a webinar in my members area on my website about that novel and about that chapter and what the devil is really offering him and what happens to so-called classical music as a result. There's a reason people listen to Aba, the Beatles, Duran, Duran, or what have you, and more than they listen to modern classical music. Why? Because the modern popular music is the only music continuing that harmonic tradition

that classical music used to have. It's the only one. And I feel like that's also reflected in just the eglification of modernity in general. Bingo, exactly. It's all design. I have a book about the ugliness and modernity. My book, Microwcosm and Medium, is about that in part, because that was all very definitely in operation.

Right. Very definitely. Totally. And it's all, it boils down to utility versus like expression. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely.

Which we also saw on the Eastern Block, of course. I was in Prague over the summer and I saw some of the relics of the Soviet Union there and awful. awful doesn't begin to describe it that's why i also cringe here when we see like all these apartment complexes going up this is like so communist so ugly just a scar on the land yes it is absolutely and it's meant to be that way it's meant to reduce humanity to the collective to the hive you know germany a few years ago this just floors me there used to be this temple to i forget it was called New Soviet Man or something in Berlin that had been built during the Cold War era. It was just an awful, awful hideous structure.

The Germans tore it down and they rebuilt the building that used to be on that site. And you know what the building was? And they rebuilt it the whole facade of that old building exactly. And by the way, they crowdfunded it. Wow. What was it? It was the old Statschlaas. It was the Kaiser's palace.

Wow. They rebuilt it on exactly the same site and crowdfunded it. Just as a kind of thumb your nose in the general direction of modernity. I thought, well, you know, more power to them, you know. We need more about it. Yeah, we need a little bit more beauty in our lives enough with the ugliness already. Totally. So much.

Yeah, I mean, how many people experience awe on a day-to-day basis even? Like, this should be the commonplace. But that actually related my work as well because I'm very interested in the impact of light on biology. And I talk a lot about light pollution at night, blocking us from being able to observe the cosmos and how that's for our ancestors was a nightly source of awe and inspiration. Yeah, yeah, I agree. I agree. Aw is almost, we're almost bereft of it in the modern era. And it's, you know, I, I, there are pieces of music that bring tears to my eyes that you can hear the music of the spheres in it. And if you don't get, if you don't get that feeling, you're not understanding the music.

You know, I'm, I'm just, I'm just that way. And we don't, we don't teach, we don't, we don't teach people the, the craft of music anymore. And it is a craft. It's not just an art. It's a craft. It's something that you can learn to do and do well if you know how to use certain techniques. But anyway. Absolutely.

And I mean, anywhere you go in public, there's always music playing in the background, right? That's kind of like subtly programming you without your consent. I am so fed up with the modern American because we are an ugly people. We are truly one of the ugliest people. people on the planet. I have no interest in listening to the pounding jungle beat through subloavers driving down the highway. Stick a bone, a femur bone in your nose, put on a loin cloth and move back to the jungle if that's the crap you want to inflict on everybody else. Yeah, it's very. You have, if you have no time for a Bachfug or a Beethoven string quartet

or, you know, any of the music that will challenge your mind, then, you know, you're, you're, you're just a one-dimensional creature. I'm sorry. That's why I'm stuck in the 18th century. That to me was our high musical culture. It hasn't been equaled since. With a few exceptions in the 19th century, but few and far between even there.

It's the culture I can't stand. You know, a friend of mine is an artist, and he has shared some things that just have me floored. He has shared some paintings of early Picasso. Have you ever seen those? I don't think so. Go look at Picasso

before he became famous and a cubist. The man could paint. Wow. And they are beautiful. And then he turned to ugliness. Made a deal with the devil. He made that deal with the devil.

Yeah. He did. It's just, it's astonishing to me. the shift is clear and dramatic and immediate. It's just unreal. People get unhinged and go for that crap. And I just can't do it. Anyway.

Yeah. It's a sci-op like many other things that we have to endure. But we have the choice to create and express and enjoy beauty in our lives. So we should do that. Listen to some Bach. Go read some incredible. incredible books that Dr. Farrell has written. Go join his site,

Giza Deathstar.com. You can become a member. He does, you do vid chats like once or twice a month? I do them twice a month. There are a few things in the members area, a few webinars and papers and so on and so forth. But there are some vid chats that are the main attraction in the members area. And I have to tell people, we discuss everything.

No holds bar. As a no-holds-barred group of people, I got to tell you, we have everybody and everything, and I think it's one of the most fascinating little online communities there is. And we're not, we don't discuss it in sound bites. I don't know how else to put it. As it should be. Yeah, I joined a few months ago, and I've been going through like the repository of the calls, and it's incredible.

It seems like a very bright, intelligent, and curious community, open mind. Oh, wow. Wonderful. Yeah. They keep you hopping. We're just having our first mid-chat this Friday, and I've only had four questions. And they're all, you know, okay. It's going to be one of those things where I have to tap dance my way through like I have to do on so many occasions.

Hadn't thought of that one. Don't know what I think about it. I love it. Yeah. I mean, that's what we need to, the way we need to be thinking. kind of throw out the box like what I'm talking about earlier. Just have conversations, you know,

over card games and solve the world's problems. I mean, the current bumper crop of idiots we've got running things, it's certainly not going to do any better, so go for it. That's right. Amen. I love it. Thank you so much for your time. I don't even know what time it is. I feel like we went

quite some time. This was a real treat and pleasure, and I'll include links to the resources that we talked about in the show notes. And I just want to thank you so much for your time and just hopefully we can do it again sometime sure thanks for having me on Alexis shoot me a link when you get posted and i'll post it on my website sounds great thank you all right thank you bye bye bye