APEC 11/29: Gravity, Antigravity, Alzofon & Warp Drive Bubbles 📱

Transcript

Welcome to APEC. It's November 29th and I'm your moderator, Tim Ventura. I want to thank everybody for joining us on this call along with everybody who was watching us on YouTube as well as the many other live streaming channels that we're broadcasting to. I want to apologize to everybody for having to bump this conference. We did move it a little bit.

I have been traveling. I visited Falcon space. We did do the fifth APEC anniversary. Um, and travel has definitely become more a part of things as I am visiting different labs and seeing what's going on there. It is very exciting, but again, sorry for moving things a little bit further out.

We may have a couple of more changes in the future as well. I believe our next conference is December 20th, but don't quote me on that because I don't have calendar open. So, today I am super excited. We have some really really brilliant presentations coming up. Iona Zidus is going to present a detailed walkthrough on gravity, anti-gravity and inertial control via electromagnetic means.

Uh Dr. Lucian Inescu will be discussing the anescu alafon theory and the relationship between gravity and the strong nuclear force. and Jennifer Nielsen will be discussing topological torsion drive warp bubbles, magneto hydrodnamic fluid and field coherence applications of the tuft theory. So there is a lot going on. This is pretty hardcore stuff.

But um we are also going to have presentations. We've got Drew. He is with us backstage. Uh Markal may be along as well. you know, all of the usual suspects.

I'll be doing kind of updates on what is happening in the alt propulsion community. Um, so again, if you have a moment, uh, please subscribe to our channel. We're broadcasting on StreamYard primarily through the Alt Propulsion YouTube channel. If you haven't subscribed, please do so now. Um, you can drop questions into the live chat feature.

We don't always catch them as they scroll up, but we try, you know, and we will try and ask those to presenters depending on time constraints. Um, you can also always view conference replays details and speaker info on our website at altpropulsion.com. I want to point out also that I have been adding story materials on a number of breakthrough propulsion topics. Um, so that is something I've got several of those up. I have more going up in the near future and I'm really excited.

I'm going to be putting up a new walkthrough on the Falcon Space Labs as well as some testing and again Mark Soal has been doing basically triplet state testing using a laser to pump his DNP assembly. So there is a lot going on here and it is all really really exciting. pretty much everybody doing work in this area has big new breakthroughs that they can talk about and so we're trying to just get those out there you know as as rapidly as we can. So without further ado I want to bring Ionis in. Ionis hopefully I am pronouncing that correctly sir.

Oops. Uh Ionis your your mic actually I'm just getting static on your mic. Did something change? Maybe. >> Okay, there we There we go. Now, now I can sort of hear you a little bit.

Okay. Uh, do you do you want to try and say something? Okay. I I cannot hear you. It's just static again. Do you have a >> Yeah, I can hear you now.

You're very faint. >> And there's there's definitely some there's definitely some static. Um, >> do you think it might be the headset connection? Do you have a different headset you could use or a different microphone? >> Okay, now now let's >> now. Okay, that's that's better. >> No, it's okay.

>> Okay, can you hear me? >> Yes. Okay. Yeah. Can you hear me, too? Yes. Yes.

Yes. Okay. Now you're back. It's working. It's working.

Okay. >> So, we we did just so folks know, we tested this before. So, something something changed, but you know, computers, right? So, >> let me bring up your presentation. So, I I should preface this for the audience saying you and I have been exchanging emails for like 25 years now. You were involved with the original lifter work way back in the day.

And so you had reached out to me and said, "Hey, this is something that I'm still involved in, not lifters, but like propulsion in general." And you were like, "I'd love to do a presentation on my work." And the thing I got excited about was I was like, "Okay, again, rewinding that clock 25 something years." I'm like, "That's amazing." So, it is it's an honor to finally meet you in, you know, in the the virtual flesh, so to speak, but also it's a a true priv privilege to be able to have you present this. So, let me hand things over to you. Um, there is a well, you're doing a screen share, so you can the back and forward that way. And, uh, I will I will take myself out. I'll be here in the background if you need me.

>> Okay, great. So, uh, thanks for having me, Tim. Uh, and hello everyone. I'm really excited to be here. It's my first time at age 50 attending a conference and meeting a late like-minded group of hobbyists, experimenters, engineers, physicists, and enthusiasts who share an interest in extraordinary alternative propulsion energy technologies.

Um, public speaking isn't my strong skill. So, I would like to apologize in advance, but uh let's see how it goes. Um please follow the Zenod link on the at the um left bottom side of the slide uh if you would like to to download the presentation itself and um and the walk through in case you are interested in um so um I'm originally from Greece and hold a degree in electronics. I worked for about five years as an electronic engineer in a small company in Athens and later worked for about 17 years here in Switzerland as a software system test engineer and right now I'm unfortunately unemployed. Um what has always inspired me even since childhood is a fascination with extraordinary technologies.

That same curiosity still drives me today to explore them and work with them creatively. Um [clears throat] sorry uh my journey began in a more systemic way when I bought my first PC around 1996. One of the first things I did was search online for patents, websites, online forums and papers about uh unusual technologies in alternative propulsion and energy. By around 2000 I came across with team and others through Yahoo groups. I believe there was more interest in these topics during the 90s and early 2000.

So I might be wrong. Um the theory I'm about to share starts with classical mechanics and expands to electromagnetics gravity and the consistent extension of special relativity. It also includes proposed experiments to test these ideas as well as a demonstrator demonstration I recorded back in 2009. Um over the past 20 years and even more I repeatedly explored released and later removed part of the ideas and a couple of experiments on personal websites and in papers though at the time they were based on flawed concepts and mathematics. Uh still my tuition kept telling me there was something real behind it.

Um the first slide shows the destination of this presentation actually but the real question is how do we get there? So uh the best way is to start with something familiar classical mechanics. So when we talk about propellant propulsion we are really asking whether an isolated system one not influenced by external forces can gain momentum through internal means. at to separate the idea of a reactionless drive which is impossible uh by definition from a self-contained system and isolates a system. That distinction eventually show me why the term reactionless was used through the years. In the drawing, two counter rotating uh orbiting masses um orbit along its cyclic path.

The linear inertial action and reaction according to Newton's third law always cancel out. But when one mass moves clockwise, the rest of the system gains counterclockwise angular momentum. Here we speak not about linear moment but about angular momentum. When the other mass moves counterclockwise, the system gains clockwise um sorry yes the system gains clockwise angular momentum. If both orbit symmetrically um if both orbit symmetrically the net angular inertial reaction cancels to zero.

Uh and that is I believe the the reason about um uh that is also may justify mathematically why it was called through the years as any reactionless drive. Here we speak that the the angular reaction of the system uh is u the net angular reaction of the system is goes to zero but the inertial forces still exist but they are balanced each other. They balance each other. That's the idea. Uh as a result, the isolated system expected to be propelled only by inertial angular forces since the angular inertial reaction is effectively as we just mentioned.

Um the expressions on this slide and on the next one are rigorously derived from a classical mechanics. The full derivation is included in the first section of this work. Over the years I tried many times but without success to find a rigorous online der ation that included angular components to show whether an isolated system could be propelled by internal miss most derivations relied only on Newton's third law using colinear forces as justification and often misunderstood the challenge itself as the result they completely failed to account for the role of angular components um yeah okay exactly yes um the main result of the derivation that it includes oh sorry I think I I went oh no it's number three no it's okay the main result of the derivation is that it includes tangential force or acceleration if you ask most physicists or online forums about this they will immediately respond that this is nonsense if you if your model includes tangential acceleration or force it means external forces are acting so the system is not isolated in my view this is a misunderstanding in mainstream physics. So I could be also wrong. I'm not a physicist.

I'm just an engineer. But uh yeah, I will explain later about this. [clears throat] From my perspective, an isolated system means that uh all power and force generation occur entirely within the system frame itself. Mainstream physics still resist this idea largely because of how tangential acceleration is defined in textbooks. In the force expression we see two terms um that together account for the total action force.

The first is the net cipedal force along the yaxis a ben force that sustains the orbiting motion. The second is the net tagensia force shown here along the x-axis which represents uh the real thrust force. Um okay so at first glance uh this may seem incorrect may you have may seen some YouTube videos that uh the propeller propulsion appears on the yaxis that needs to be discussed later if anyone is interested about it. Uh that is partly true and partly not as I will explain next. If angular velocity is constant um for example the phase second derivative is zero only the net centrial force remains the system simply oscalates along the y-axis around the center of mass and in outer space it would never gain momentum.

This is the case when we don't have tangential acceleration and only center pedal. Um the other illustration shows how a real uh how real thrust can be modeled in terms uh of changes in systems inertia. As long as the orbiting mass is experienced against acceleration, the system behaves as though it has reduced inertia which in turns leads to acceleration of the system as a whole. Um okay. Yes, exactly.

So now uh that the industrial drive model has been introduced, let's consider how a mechanical version could work. In this setup, two orbiting masses move in parallel planes. This arrangement lets them orbit continuously with angular velocity constant or varying controlled by phase modulation. The outcome is sustained thrust in one direction. At first, studying waves may seem unrelated to a mechanical nia drive, but if you look closer, each orbitic mass acts like a cedoidal oscalation along the y-axis.

Moving in opposite directions, they resemble two sine waves on the same line that combine into a standing wave. uh Yuri Nikolai Ivanov's work uses a simple trigonometric function and observes that the nodes can move along the x-axis along with an entrapped mass when phase modulation is applied or when angular velocity or frequency changes that observation is valid. However, uh such a system cannot produce acceleration of the whole system because the action is linear and this is my view. uh this produces a colinear reaction throughout the rest of the system consistent with Newton's third law and the conservation of medum consecutively a non-moving standing wave reflects the situation in the mechanical inertia drive where two orbiting masses move with constant angular velocity producing no real thrust along the x-axis when phase modulation or change in angular velocity is introduced the standing wave gains acceleration and its nodes shift along the x-axis mirroring the behavior of the mechanical inertial drive. Regarding the mathematical expression shown, this work derives tangential acceleration from the curved path uh followed by by the orbiting masses.

By contrast, Uniolanov's approach though based on trigonometic functions seems to assume curved paths only implicitly and deres his acceleration expression from the standing wave itself. Uh the aim here is not to compare the two theories but to acknowledge Ivanov's idea and to incorporate the concept of moving standing waves into our framework while explicitly introducing the requirement of curvature. As we will see in the following slides, we propose using moving standing waves as massless entities with confined energy that when accelerated exhibit inertial effects, an aspect not addressed in Vanov's work. Furthermore, we will show that moving standing waves are central to both the acceleration and the shielding mechanisms of the inertial warp drive which will be introduced at the end of the pres of this presentation. Uh to understand how our how our model behaves before attempting a real mechanical initial drive, you can run simulations such as the one shown here.

In this idolized case, the resulting thrust along the x-axis appears as a rectified waveform. It approaches zero but never becomes but never becomes negative. Uh compared to the net centrial force, the tangential force is about 4.6 times greater. To reach this efficiency, angular velocity must cross zero and reverse as shown by the ke dust curve curve. In practice, I have never seen this done likely because controlling large one direction acceleration is difficult.

Sustained thrust would require require repeatedly reversing the orbit. um holding constant velocity slowing to zero then switching direction that demands precise timing and not only another reason why such implementations do not exist is a common misconception which will be addressed in the next two slides I'm really awful impressation I know [laughter] anyway this simulation reflects um so we are on slide six this simulation reflects how most implementation should work though in reality they appear to fail to keep the oric masses moving the same direction one clockwise and other counter counterclockwise with reversing their motion to achieve thrust in one direction for example to the right we introduce an angular velocity offset and adjust the amplitude of the phase modulation these two parameters are tuned to maximize efficiency along the thrust axis resulting in equal magnitudes for the net centric pedal and theia forces as shown the angular velocity nearly touches zero but never becomes negative ensuring that the orbiting directions remain unchanged. Okay. So here this slide highlights the misuning in mechanicals in mechanical initial drives developed so far in my view in YouTube demonstration of these propellers systems with rotating masses thrust is usually is usually assumed along the y ais while I argue the true thrust axis should be the x-axis. The misunderstanding arises because experimenters lacked a guiding theoretical model relying only on classical mechanics and and direct observation.

To maximize thrust without reversing the orbiting masses, current designs rely on two assumptions. Thrust is directed along the Y axis while the X-axis contributions are cancelled canceled with rollers constrained to the Yaxis or any small X-axis motion intentionally suppressed as it cannot be utilized and increasing angular velocity in enhances the centripedal force which is often mistakenly referred to as ceducal force. We know that the centripal force reflects bound motion. So how do this device devices seem to accelerate? They simply exploit surface friction which breaks the actual reaction symmetry. Uh friction acts like a hysteresis that distracts the principle.

Secondly, you may have noticed that such devices accelerate briefly and then decelerate almost immediately ending with only a small final speed that doesn't match the cycle's apparate acceleration. This effect is not caused by friction. Instead, it shows that the motion is bound and the device is misuned. Put simply, such devices will never achieve sustained acceleration outer space again. according to my view.

Okay. Test one. Yes. Simulation. Yes.

Um the test shown on this slide is a proposal not exactly with extreme simulation values presented but intended to introduce what we what we later call the benchmark velocity in the validation protocol. There is a validation protocol later in the slides. uh that I'm going to present you. In practice, to qualify a device as a genuine mechanical inertia drive, it should be tested in a lubricated corridor that should achieve at least twice the velocity gain during the first cycle by the end of its translational motion along the corridor. Um I have always been interested in finding online simulations or calculations that show that uh what would be required for a mechanical inertia drive to overcome gravity but I never came across any.

Using the model I developed in my work. I decided to attempt the calculations myself by adjusting the frequency. As you see, I have set 15.91 Hz on simulation two and assuming the entire system has a mass of 1 kilogram. The results suggested that it could in principle float in midair. The challenge however lies in the mechanical integrity of the system.

The orbiting masses would need to reach acceleration about 10 times 10 times greater than gravity far beyond the current capabilities of mechanical actuator which are typically limited to around 1g. Although mechanical devices were never my main interest, I would encourage [snorts] uh experimentalists or anyone curious to try building a small mechanical inertia drive with or without microcontroller base control angular velocity to test the claim about the true thrust axis. I don't suggest this is a way to validate my own work. I honestly don't mind. But if someone succeeds in replicating the claim, according to my view again, they will have in their hands a genuine model for all types of inertial drives, including electromagnetic versions with massless entities such as confined energy from standing waves or fields.

Okay. Uh we have now worked through nine slides and arrived at the more serious material. The earlier sides were essential. They built the foundation for seeing how the model can be transformed and applied to electromagnetic devices. Here the orbiting masses are replaced by standing waves that find electromagnetic energy.

As in the inertial drive model, we have both clockwise and counterclockwave guides. In this case, I carry out some calculations to outline a relative physible construction using 2 GHz propagating microwaves with a confined energy density about 10 J per cubic meter. By applying an angular velocity shift equal to half of the base angular velocity, the system is expected to acceler accelerate along the x-axis with a force of 6.7 Newton. Um, for an isolated system with a mass of 1 kilogram, this corresponds to an acceleration of approximately 6.7 m/s squared. Another and rather unexpected result is that the corresponding energy density behaves like a massless object exhibiting inertia equivalent to 3.66 multiplied by 10 to the 4th power in kilograms but it's massless with an acceleration of about 91.5 micrometers/s squared.

Multiplying these values gives a maximum thrust that is twice the 6.7 Newton. How can that be possible? These questions also troubled me while writing this paper. Initially I thought the wave itself was responsible but I now believe that was incorrect. What actually induces acceleration and produces inertial effects transferred to the rest of the system is not the wave itself but its confined energy. Therefore, the induced inertial effects and acceleration must be calculated with respect to the confined energy.

Along the same lines, this experimental setup was believe it or not partly and even accidentally recreated back in 2009. I will talk about that in the next slide and also I show you the recordings of the experiment itself. Instead of using tooidal wave guides, this experiment uses maganese zinc ferite toidal cores with their specification shown in the table. The standing wave that forms is mainly magnetic and interacts with the the diples in the ferite core. This creates what I would call a bulk magneto polariton but I don't uh I don't expand at all you know theoretically in the paper about this as an observation just I have put it in the paper uh basically a mix of the field and dipole working together the calculated frequency comes out uh comes out to about 4.96 kohz which matches closely with what's seen on the signal generator.

However, this is outside the normal range for the material since it is usually meant to work best between 20 and 200 kHz for power transformers and inductor applications. In other words, you cannot use 4.96 for power transformers and inductors. But you can use it to demonstrate such kind of effects as I will show you later. Here again we see that each bulk tooidal magneto polaron has an equivalent electromagnetic mass of about 0.4 kilogram with uh which is quite close to twice the mass of one toid the one toid if you see the if you see the u if you see the table the mass of the toid is 0.2 2 kg which corresponds to an acceleration of 0.58 m/s squared. Both values come directly from the energy density rather than from the wave parameters themselves.

When we multiply these values together, we obtain again the maximum thrust. Okay, we now arrive that could represent either a paradigm shift. We speak about an EM initial drive or primitive initial WO drive I would say or a delusion. Maybe it's nothing. Uh the background is this.

Back in 2009 while studying the work of professor Fran Aino I attempted to measure the propagation velocity of the electromagnetic waves through a maganese zinc ferite core using a very low power. My attention however drawn to the noise produced by a magneettoriction the slight expansion and contraction of the core when I placed the ferite core on the floor and applied more current without limiting the resistor. If I recall correctly, it suddenly moved with strong energetic motion in diagonal in a diagonal direction with manually increasing frequency. The ferite course apparent self-propulsion was a shocking moment unlike anything I had witnessed before. Even though the first test in the YouTube video, as you are going to see, demonstrates a reaction that is about five to 10 times weaker.

At that point, the material began to decline in its response. Fortunately, I managed to capture three different different recordings. When I shared them on the NASA spaceflight forum some years ago, they were skeptical. Some claimed it was a hawk using hidden magnets. Other suggested it was moving cables off camera or that it was simply vibration interacting with the table.

A few even said suspend it and see if it moves, which I tried but unsuccessfully. Everyone who commended focus only on the first experiment and overlook the other two. The truth is that the material is extremely sensitive to current changes at frequencies below its allowed rates. So it doesn't behave as one might expect. To see a proper response, one would need a fresh material rather than the degraded one I used.

About four years ago, I shared both a theory covering various topics uh and the experiment on YouTube. But while uh I later removed the theory, I chose to keep the experiment available as you are going to see in YouTube is about 4 years online. Um so the first experiment you will see shows the ferite core moving diagonally across the table's surface driven by friction at tag against force without changing the frequency. It's a special condition uh that was discovered accidentally achieved by periodically increasing and decreasing the frequency until the ferite appears to settle into a log state. So here we go.

I hope it will work. >> Oh. Okay. The second experiment involved a Lego car with a ferite core placed on its back. Knowing that the force was tangential and that the material had already begun to degrade, I attempted amplitude modulation using a modulation signal of 100 MHz.

The goal was to illustrate the situation, a situation similar to trying to push a car while riding inside it. Oh, when I you know it stops maybe I don't know why. Okay, it's very short anyway. And the third experiment focused on controllable rotation. Around 2009 or perhaps a year earlier, I came across the work of Yuri Kolivanov on rhythm dynamics.

I wondered whether I could demonstrate controllable clockwise and counterclockwise acceleration of a standing wave along a curved ferite path thereby supporting Ivanov's claims about moving stand waves. At that time I hadn't yet developed my own theory and it was uh mostly influenced by Aino's work which seems to contradict my observations particularly regarding the high frequencies compared to what one of his papers suggested. In this video you can see that when I increase uh the frequency the toid rotates clockwise and when I decrease it it rotates counterclockwise. Sorry. >> [cough] >> So you see here it's 5.18 kHz the signal generator um the calculated force is about 0.24 24 Newton.

For a mass of 0 kilogram, the normal force is about 1.9 Newton. With a static friction coefficient of 0.3, the force required to overcome friction is 0.58 Newton, nearly 2.4 times greater than the calculated value. Even if we take the maximum force possible force, which is about 0.488 4880 Newton. It's still it is still about 1.2 times smaller than the 0.58 Newton needed to overcome static friction. This suggests either that the static friction coefficient is less than 0.3 or that the actual force produced is greater than the calculated value although the deviation is relative small.

Even under assumed ideal conditions, it's an encouraging result suggesting that the theory is on the right track. But again, you never know. For those interested in replicating the experiment, the material cost about $ 38 to $40. If you already have an acoustic amplifier rated at 40 W RMS or higher, I used approximately 70 W RMS for a 4 ohm load. You can wind three to four turns of wire around the ferite to achieve an inductance of about 1 millhenry.

For experimentation, it is advisable to include an inline resistor of roughly 4.7 ohm and uh that can withstand about 150 W and to avoid using capacitors for resonance. The zinc the magnif. I would welcome feedback from anyone who attempts to replicate the experiment with the right laboratory setup. Other ferites or even iron cores could be tested using a pair of such materials might reproduce the initial drive model electromagnet electromagnetically and suggest a promising propell propulsion concept for space at least in its early stages. Um as a side note it is remains unclear whether anchoring the rotating core iron or ferite would transfer the generated momentum through the accelerating standing wave to the rest of the system.

This aspect of the theory hasn't yet been experimentally verified although the second experiment with the Lego car appears to support it. Okay, here we have the protocol. [clears throat] The findings of this theory allow us to establish a validation protocol to determine whether um a candidate device qualifies as a genuine inertial drive. We don't need to cover every detail here. What matters is the main criterion.

The device must produce real thrust perpendicular to the excitation. And if the device is treated as a black box, it should demonstrate at least twice the initial acquired speed by the end of a long lubricated corridor. As you may understand and as I said you know earlier the most uh mechanical at least the most mechanical they do not comply with this radiation protocol which is a very good you know um I think um uh we we could discuss it you know later or even offline with with anyone you know interested about it. So we go on this next slide. Okay.

I included a special section as an attempt not a full examination of potlenov's gravity setting experiment. My goal was to see whether I could describe the experiment using the framework I have developed so far applying certain known parameters and making a few assumptions. In the experimental setup, the rotating superconductor gradually decreases its angular velocity according to potlum's parameter values. Under those conditions, a nearby 1 kilogram mass showed the maximum weight reduction of about 2%. Uh I use 2.4% in my analysis.

What happens is this. A pulse generates circumferential supercurrens and and in the superconductor state the mary effect expels the magnetic field from the superconductor creating a poloidal like topology as illustrated. Uh the rotating poloidal magnetic field together with the induced motional electric field resembles a mechanical electromagnetic standing wave. While the disc under goes controlled deceleration, the electromagnetic the the the mechanical electromagnetic standing wave accelerates in the opposite direction transferring momentum or an inertial field into the surroundings through the accelerating confined energy. Once again we see that the confined energy behaves as if it has an effective inertia of about 3.83 83 mg with a corresponding acceleration of roughly 2.05 multiplied by 10 to the second power m/s squared.

These counter intuitive values clearly require further investigation and control experiments to confirm their validity. With the assume reduction in weight and the calculated thrust, the energy density comes out to about 2.9 J per cubic meter. After running the numbers, it looks mechanically feasible to achieve a deceleration lasting around 39.5 seconds. During that time, the system's weight would drop to about 2.4 of its original value. Another unresolved issue is how the setup generates an upward thrust or initial field once the energy is confined around the circumference.

One possible explanation is that the vortex forms when poloidal magnetic field lines couple with aimal with aimal motion. Though the exact mechanism is unclear, but suggested this effect might be explained by vortex theory, but that's not something I cover in my work. Up to this point we have seen that confined energy with standing waves when accelerated or decelerated can transfer momentum to its surrounding. Uh neutral mass may interact with with this momentum resulting in either in acceleration or in apparent reduction of weight depending on the direction of the force produced by the confined energy. This raises an important question.

Does the translation of confined energy exhibit gravitational like or inertial like field properties? In this section, I present what may be the simplest derivation of the coupling between electromagnetic gravity and inertia by equating the thrust force derived from electromagnetic parameters with an equivalent gravitational or in inertial thrust force or by equating the corresponding energy densities. We can establish a theoretical link electricity with gravity and magnetism with inertia by analogy. Setting the gravitational permitivity equal to 4 pi multiplied by the gravitational constant, we can then derive its counterparts, the inertial permeability in analogy with the magnetic permeability of electromagnetism uh in Maxwell theory. Furthermore, by defining electromagnetic mass and degrading it with the new expressions dg and di um these two have newton per kilogram or meter/s squared as the units of these two um expressions we arrive at the concept of the electrons or posetrons effective massless electromagnetic mass. Remarkably, when this electromagnetic mass is divided by plank's mass and squared as a ratio, it unexpect unexpectedly yields the fine structure constant.

I'm very awful. I think it was a bad idea to make. [laughter] [gasps] By the way, um I couldn't leave this out of the presentation since it directly relates to the link between electromagnetism and gravity. The link at the bottom titled hidden geometries in maxual situations and the force flux route to unified static fields builds on a on a work I developed a few months ago following an earlier paper titled classic unification of electromagnetics and gravity. In fact, the paper extending Maxwell sequation should have carried the unification title, but the idea only emerged later.

A physics journal reviewer of the first paper rejected it, saying he saw no connection between my proposal and Maxel's equations since I was discussing uh gravitational charges using the concept of a general gravitational potential. That comment made me think why hadn't I consider Maxwell secations from the start. So I began writing the new paper and dur during the process I discovered expression inspired by Gaus's uh field fluks the first of the fourations. In my view, if Maxwell around 1860 had introduced a force flux law, it wouldn't have described a new field, but would have allow him to replace electromagnetic constants such as electric permitivity and electric charge with gravitational permitivity and gravitational charge. The result would be the same colob force but now expressed in terms of gravitational parameters.

In that speculative framework, Maxwell could have uncovered a link between electromagnetisms and gravity even though no experiments at the time were available to confirm such a connection. This work suggests it calculates the existence of three additional emergent charges associated with the electron itself. How can that be you may ask? Uh given that the electron is treated as a single purely electric entity. Consider a spinning electrically charged metallic spherical surface. The motion of the static charges generates as a mouth current which in turn produce a magnetic field.

That magnetic field can be understood as an emergent magnetic dipole charge which disappears once the rotation stops. By analogy, gravitational and inertial charges could also arise as emergent entities created through the acceleration or deceleration of a spinning electrically charged metallic sphere. Ultimately this uh work derives through a Maxwellian approach the link between electromagnetic and gravity yielding the same electrogravity and magneetto inertia expressions shown earlier. In simple terms, changing the polarity or direction of electric or magnetic field can create or can create a a counter effect and add gravity response that opposes Earth's field lines producing a locally weaker gravity zone or even reversing them. By integrating a Lawrence like field into Maxual situations and combining it with the force flu with the force flux law, we obtain an expression resembling the law force but now describing the unified field for example of the electron in practice if we select electromagnetic constants we recover the electron's total electromagnetic field if instead we select the gravitio inertial constants we obtain its total gravitio inertial field here the gravitational field is expressed in units of kilogram per meter per meter That means you know in in if you in place of volt we have kilograms per meter the gravitational field the units uh while the gravitational displacement field is measured in meters/s squared as illustrated in the plot at a distance of 0.12 nanometer the electric field is approximately -1.13 multiplied by 10 11th power volt per meter while the gravitational displacement displacement at the same distance is - 9.81 m/s squared equivalent to uh minus 1g.

Um I chose to plote gravitational displacement rather than the gravitational field itself since its units and magnitude is more familiar and directly relatable to our everyday experience of fierce gravity. something I have written in an older paper that I didn't include or even removed in any of the papers I have released so far and this is because a reviewer was disagreeing with my proceedings and said that it was wrong and this regards the Kashmir force. I believe the second part part of the electron total field seems to have to do with the Kashmir's Kashmir force. Thus, gadum fluctuations soon didn't have any relations with the force in general. Again, according to my view, in 2004, physicist B F Ianov, it's not the same Ianov as in the beginning.

This Ivanov is from the institute for for nuclear research and nuclear energy in Bulgaria published a paper on the link between electromagnetism and gravity which he called root gravity. His work produced the same formulas using natural rather than SI units that predict the exact electric field and magnetic induction needed to generate 1G. In the discussion section of his paper, Ivanov Ivanov points out that the connection between electromagnetism and gravity could have been identified many times, eight times in fact over the past 880 years counting from 2004. His approach relies on advanced mathematics such as tensors, general relativity and WMP welld papa spac-time solutions. While my proposal use only high school level math applied to classical electronamics and maxual situations.

Okay. Um in this work I include a section on the alqa warp drive not to introduce a new metric which I'm not capable of doing but uh to examine the energy requirements using specific values and later compare them with my proposed inertial warp drive concept. For this purpose I use an energy scaling estimate expression. It is dimensionally correct though not an exact solution and I expect to remain within an order of magnitude of the true result. Importantly, it doesn't assume a specific bubble geometry.

As shown for the chosen parameter values and a bubble thickness of 1 meter, the energy requirements are enormous. As a teaser, I suggest the possibility of using electromagnetic fields to create massless inertial fields that could achieve the same goal without distorting spaceime. However, as we will see in the following slides, the electromagnetic energy we speak about the confined energy associated with massless electromagnetic mass cannot be equated to rest energy as described by Einstein's famous relation mc² which reflects the conversion of an elated mass into energy. And finally we arrive at the ultimate destination the inertial warp drive. In the this concept an inertial shielding effect is incorporated in Dominikovski metric the so-called flat spaceime through the reduction of the local propagation rate.

This effect arises from a pair of counterpropagating accelerating standing waves which essentially isolate the systems inertia from the rest of the universe. This is an assumption. Of course, the velocity of the system is determined by the net tangential velocity of the standing waves. In this framework, the system's mass is not its bare mass, but an electromagnetic mass similar to the magneto polaron concept. Put differently, the system mass doesn't exhibit ordinary inertial properties.

Instead, it reflects an electromagnetic inertia that can be controlled through time varying phase modulation. As a result, the system energy is no longer governed by Einstein's relation MC². The concept of the initial warp drive requires a broadening of special relativity which I term inertial relativity. In this framework, special relativity becomes a subset that describes relativistic motion driven by external forces. The three plots illustrated how illustrate how relativistic inertia, velocity and momentum behave in comparison with both the broadened framework and classical special relativity.

In inertial relativity, inertial can reach a minimum of zero, producing a transparency effect where the system becomes essentially undetectable. Velocity on the other hand may cross and even exceed the speed of light barrier since the final velocity depends on the amount of confined energy available per cycle. Uh finally momentum in inertial relativity rises to a maximum value before decreasing back down to zero. Um it's worth noting that when we set ns equal to one in the new relativistic inertia expression from inertial relativity we recover the formulation of Dr. Karazani an Agentinian physicist who introduced autodnamics around 1951.

Although Karazani didn't invoke inertial shielding, his approach of reducing inertial frames leads to an outcome that coincides with the inertial frame aligning with a wave field. Another important observation is that all tyon or supernumal propagation theories that treat say as a strict lower bound in both special relativity and these theories there is a discontinuity at the velocity equal to say. In contrast inertial relativity and caranis relativistic expression do not exhibit such a discontinuity. A possible technical approach. So it requires special materials is the use of surface waves similar to the ground waves employed in long wave radio communication which follow the curvature of the earth.

In this case, the inertial web drive would operate with surface standing waves. Most of their confined energy lying outside the spherical cell yet still capable of accelerating by falling the cubator of for example of a spaceship's hole. When we apply when we apply the same parameter values used for the alub alcuber warp drive to the inertial warp drive treating the bubble dimensions as a spherical cell of equal radius we uncover a working frequency of 238.8 8 kilohz which lies in the long wave radio spectrum. Because static waves can never be perfectly confined, some energy will leak in into outer space. This leakage could be used to identify the propulsion or sealing frequency or even estimate a spaceship's dimensions with a custom softwaredefined radio receiver.

I added this uh what I'm going to um to address is u uh something that I don't include in my work. I just I put it here you know as a teaser for those who would like to explore this uh as a project. So uh the idea is the following. If extraterrestrial spaceships principle as the initial war drive their propulsion and size might be detectable though as with any radio receiver distance and sensitivity remain central by directly converting the received signal without demodulation into digital data. A deeper investigation becomes possible based on the findings of this work.

The inertial W drive is expected uh to operate by changing the angular velocity of standing waves. This creates a frequency shift similar to FM modulation but without a carrier. While such carrierless FM isn't possible in a radio broadcasting, it's comparable to SSB single sideb AM where AM modulation without a carrier carrier is feasible. For spaceship objects with radi between 1 and 1,000 mters, the working frequency of a single standing wave for propulsion or shielding is expected to fall between 80 kohz and 80 meghertz as carrierless FM modulated signal. What I found extremely interesting is that the ter radio broadcasting band from 80 kHz to 80 MHz uses AM modulation not FM.

So if we capture signals in this band and convert them directly into digital form without first de modulating we can store this data on a PC. Then by applying softwarebased digital signal processing, we could filter out the AM content and scan for frequency shifts virtual carrier through the processing software. We could even demodulate carrierless FM signals, opening the way to detect otherwise hidden modulation patterns. It would resemble handing for ghostlike SSB FM signals which in reality they do not exist. Uh but if you know this uh spaceships use this principle as the initial warp drive there is a good chance that we could probably you know um uh receive such kinds of signals.

So uh besides the frequency shift both shielding and speed are proportional to the confini energy. This means the carrier less FM signal could reveal spinned only speeds only up to the speed of light but not beyond. For the same frequency, the final velocity may fall below or appear above light speed as shown in the work through the NS energy factor. I imagine such a detection setup could work like a non-rotating passive rad uh radar antenna that only receive signals like a typical radio. For now, this remains speculative, but I as I wrote this presentation, I became so absorbed in the idea that it struck me as an exciting and fully feasible exploration post project combining RF electronics ADC conversion PCbased singular processing software and machine learning algorithms for automatic detection.

It would be a thrilling moment if at an upcoming APEC conference someone presented equipment as also genuine not faked recordings of signals that might be coming from potential extraterrestrial spaceship sources. Such a discovery could mark a new chapter for the conference itself. So uh returning back to the presentation, the expressions linking gravity and inertia with electromagnetis allows us to calculate the required energy density. From this we can determine the energy needed for a spaceship of given dimensions to accelerate almost instantaneously within 48 microsconds from rest to 10 times the speed of light. By considering the electromagnetic volume through which the standing waves propagate, we arrive at an energy requirement that is many orders of magnitude lower than the estimate derived from the alcuber warp drive.

The inertial warp drive section concludes with an attempt to reconcile alubis energy requirements with inertial cell dynamics. Put simply, the question is what must change in the alcubary warp drive model for it to become an inertial warp drive? Instead of warping or distorting spaceime itself, the inertial warp drive applies a warping or bedding of systems inertial response achieved by influencing the local propagation rate through electromagnetic means. By multiplying and dividing with 4 pi and the square of the wave period, we can transform the energy energy estimate. Two adaptations make this possible. First, we define the velocity to time ratio as the tangential velocity of a single standing wave rather than the pair.

Second, we replace the thickness with the product of the spin of light and the wave period. This substitution allow to be reexpressed as an electromagnetic volume. While calculating the equivalent electric field strength associated with the required energy density we find that it exceeds the swinger limit the threshold at which the vacuum becomes nonlinear and begins producing electron posit pairs according to vadum electronamics. This implies a natural limit limit to acceleration roughly one/ird one/3 the speed of light per second that is equivalent to 11.6 million times Earth's gravitational acceleration. In addition, this poses an energy density limit for confined energy that must not exceed approximately 1.5 multiplied by 10 to 25th power J per cubic meter.

A big unanswer question is how the spaceship keeps moving once phase modulation for acceleration stops at constant speed. The inertial seeding both for propulsion for protecting the crew switches off because it only works during acceleration. This means separate shielding would be needed for propulsion and for inner cell as also adaptable phase waveforms uh phase waveform control based on the current acceleration and velocity of the spaceship. Here you will find the papers I have released so far uh brought to a satisfac satisfactory conclusion and which I do not plan to remove in the future. The last three were detected by physics journals.

And in the coming days, I plan to submit the new paper titled engineering the lip to initial web drive uh web drives to the MDPI aerospace a journal special issue on breakthrough propulsion for spacecraft. The this issue is guest edited by Martin Tagmar of Dresden University of Technology and Les Johnson of NASA's Space Flight Center with a submission submission deadline of June 30 June 13th uh 2026. However, publishing is costly and based on my experience and the many rejections I have already received the last 10 years, I doubt this paper will be accepted. Furthermore, I recommend a few resources that I think should be uh part of everyone's toolkit. I strongly suggest downloading the JLN labs website for offline use.

It's one of the richest collection collections of open experiments in alternative energy and propulsion technologies and it's also one of the oldest sites on the web dating back in 1997. You can also find me listed in the system G section as John Cidus dating back to around 2003 sharing my analysis about the system G. It is an antigravity device from professor Aino. You can use um Sciotech web copy or any similar tool to download the entire website while it's still online. I have already done this myself.

I also recommend the work of Professor Aino. Nearly all of his papers are experimental proposers in alternative energy and propulsion and they can be a great source of inspiration both for those already working in the field and for new enthusiasts. Thank you for your attention. That's amazing. That is amazing.

You you were selling yourself short. You're like I'm not a good presenter. You are an amazing presenter. That was amazing man. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Well, let me let me bring the guys in here. Let me bring the gang in. I'm going to take down the thing. >> Thank you very much.

Thank you, >> guys. >> Put your hands together and give [applause] Mr. Iona a giant applause. A giant applause. >> Thank you.

Thank you very much. Thank you. >> And and we had our share of bugs along the way. We had some mic noise. We got that solved.

The other thing, and folks mentioned this in chat, >> can you hear me now? Can you hear me? Yeah. Yeah, I can hear you. Um, Streamyard just did an they did an update to their platform where they where basically it broadcasts in phone view and it broadcasts in web view and it defaulted to doing both. And so some people got on that phone view stream. So next time, next conference that I set up because we're live right now.

The next one I set up, I'm just going to disable that and it will only be web view. it will only be the the landscape. So, so you know, our share of bumps along the road, but that is APEC. Nothing ever goes exactly according to plan. And this is an amazing presentation.

And then one another thing I should quickly mention is Ionis, I I challenge you. I what I want to do is create a story and a breakout video on this and put those on the alt propulsion website to help people understand it. And I want to do the same thing for Lucy and Icu's presentation which is coming up in just a minute. So thank you again sir. Thank you so much.

>> Yeah that will be great. That will be great. >> Wonderful. Okay. Well so we are we're actually 10 minutes over.

So what I'm going to do is I'm going to take everybody out but again one more time. Let's put our hands together. Mr. I own and situs an amazing walkth through and that gives a lot of people material to think of. People were actually pinging me in chat during it saying I want to read this.

I want to get more information out of this. So the you're definitely going to have some people going through this. Thank you again sir. Thank okay. Sorry about that.

Um so yeah we are we're running a little bit over Lucy and let me apologize to you. Um I'm really excited. We're we're doing really well. So, um, Lucy and Icu, you are, if I understand correctly, a professor of mathematics, right? >> Yes. Correct.

>> But I know you from countless Tesla Tech conferences and you have been a member of that community as well as an independent researcher breaking new ground in physics and mathematics and and gravity forever. I mean, going back years. And so it is truly an honor to have you present at APEC. >> Thank you so much. >> What what I want to do is I'm going to put your slideshow up and again you I mean both yourself and and Ionis are are this is the meat and potatoes of really what APEC is about.

So I want to do breakout presentations for this as well. Um >> how do I advance the slides? Uh can I do that? put Yeah, if you put your mouse over it, there should be a slide and it'll show a little drop down that'll let you select. It also has back and forward buttons. Do you see those? >> Oh, yes. Okay.

>> Okay. Wonderful. So, let me take myself out and uh take it away, sir. And thank you yet again. >> All right.

Thank you so much. So I assume I am on then. Uh thank you Tim for the invitation to present in Apac. And I wasn't sure I must say um how this um works if it's just um just a stream presentation or um discussions and you as a mediator maybe have some questions. So um my slides um um are more like a skeleton of the topics I wanted to discuss.

And um I have of course several other presentations that I can uh pull up and uh share screen and refer to those. So we might uh want to do that later on. So um um I thought that it's about time to uh step back and um have like a synoptic uh well opinion or statement of what is the status of gravity theory and gravity control technology. So um I was planning to um show I mean refer rather to some advancements which are not as well known by the various audiences um regarding gravity research and then uh maybe a little bit unexpected to um start engage the audience the readers the viewers ers, not necessarily those online right now, but um those who might read these slides later on to uh do uh to help and for for the typos here and there. Um it's very important to to to get away from the trap of doing research and development without looking what others are doing and then u many independent researchers would uh pull in different directions and we won't ensure a coherent advance in this area.

But um about this a little bit uh more later and um um still actually in connection with this there is a need to help mainstream science. um physics is uh somewhat stuck in the 1970s version of the standard model and um it's not easy to first of all it's not possible to include the various alternative uh theories um as being too separate from the standard models. So we have to start looking at how to um connect with the standard model and how to glue or [clears throat] or rather integrate our um theoretical developments in uh at least in the language of the standard model. The last part um well help with the gravity control technology. The point is um the stage by now uh shifted in the in the area of developing the technology of gravity control but that means solid state physics means uh two-dimensional materials engineering and those are areas where um those who do who who started the theories and um understood the experiments and so on do not have an expertise.

So it's clear that by now we need to form teams to develop such a such a complex extensive um subject. So um uh gravity research um and at at this point I might say uh the real breakthroughs happened with Frederick Alzafon in the 1980s and essentially has almost nothing to do with general relativity and the physics well physics of gravity prior to that uh also because uh um this breakthrough um developed or or engaged the research in uh the area of elementary particle physics. Therefore in in the turf if you want of the standard model now the standard model it's um an amazing achievements of um uh physics theory technology teamwork and all that but um they um they systematically disregard gravity as saying well it's too weak to be measured Therefore, we are not studying it on one hand. On the other hand is that's explained so beautifully by Einstein's gra general relativity. Therefore um um it's applied to cosmology to astronomy and we won't get into that area.

It's there turf. we do the lab and um particle accelerator uh developments but this is a very important point to emphasize pause a little bit if you want. Um science is very much fragmented because of the way it was developed uh by individual researchers by uh um individual types of experiments which focus on on some particular type of phenomena and and then the need of unification is obvious and progress goes in that direction. One of the fundamental of the best examples is unifying um say electricity and magnetism far maxwell and so on. Uh on the other hand um back to standard models, one in elementary particle physics and the other one in cosmology because I would rather think of general relativity as a standard model in cosmology.

those two are um very much separated and there is a a movement um so-called quantizing uh general relativity u but that's uh essentially a um a um wrong way to to try to um save u say general relativity really um and there are of course other there are many things to to be said about that but maybe not right now. So again um separation led to this u dehottomy elementary particles we have the standard model and then cosmology we have general relativity. back to the breakthrough. Um Frederick Alzafon who uh first of all was um a professional physicist uh working in a in a very um big u laboratory with um um with particle physics with nuclear physics with anyway um the analog of fmy lab but I don't remember exactly which lab he was working on at that time in the 60s. um had an intuition that gravity um has to do somehow with uh polarization of what he thought at that time is some vacuum fluctuations, positive electron pairs and the the the free energy type of um of um thinking.

um and um um he then tried to get a better understanding. I mean he also knew about UFOs and so on. Anyway, the story is uh really exciting and I encourage you to read the book written by his son uh um David Alafon. He has two sons, David and Daniel, another physicist. Anyway, so um to read his book or at least this part o of that book documenting Freder Frederick Salopan work called u um gravity control with today's technology.

I think I'm close to what the real title is. uh to learn more about um the history behind his breakthrough. Um at this point I would like to make a correction. So he uh advanced an effective theory for gravity which is not really what's going on. Uh but more uh importantly he performed the experiments which verified that by dynamical nuclear orientation u of the nuclear spin one can modify the weight of a body in uh earth's gravitational field.

Now that's the experimental part which demonstrates that the the the core idea is correct and uh that gravity is really a byproduct of nuclear structure and nuclear force and belongs to the realm of elementary particle physics as a theory. Um I uh later on in the 200 something let's say 5 10 I started to um understand clearly um that uh the quark structure with their fractional electric charge um obviously is the candidate for um for um a perturbation of uh the electrical interaction between two particles like neutrons for instance um two neutrons total charge zero um in view in this way they they're not supposed to attract each other electrically but when you consider those fractional charges. Um then um it's almost clear that changing the spin direction of each might affect how the three fractional charges or quarks of one neutron will interact with the three others of the other neutron. So um I started to write and explain this uh and coined that gravity is just the polarization of nuclear spin. And uh then um after um setting uh foundations of gravity based on the standard model of quark structure um I came across Alzafon's um work through David alopon's book confirming clearly that this is indeed the case uh through his experiments.

That's why um I decided to call this the the alopafonesco theory and you can um find the articles where I explain it uh in the Vixra archive. There are links um contained in this slide presentation and I will not u uh go over uh like a t tutorial of the corresponding theory uh in today with with uh my presentation also um compared to the previous presentation um beautiful presentation and and with a lot of mathematics. Um it's not you don't need to understand mathematics to nor general relativity to understand these basic ideas at the conceptual level that gravity is a um consequence or a byproduct of polarization of nuclear spin. and then uh just start looking at the experimental proof of this and this is exactly what Alzafon did and at this stage I would I would also emphasize this theory it's so elementary and so natural that um several others came with this uh with this connection between gravity and nuclear forest. One of them uh which I uh learned recently about is Kai Dharmmos um who h has a compilation of experiments demonstrating that gravitational constant so-called big G is material dependent and more than that uh by studying uh the correspondent dependency um one can almost immediately mediately come up with a linear um linear equation proportionality between uh gravitational force and or gravitational constant and the number of nucleons of the corresponding element.

Again, this is uh I would say at the level of a high school lab experiment. Once you have the data and you analyze it, you can come with a like a hook's law or proportionality between G and the number of uh nucleons of the corresponding chemical element. And maybe I should um show this uh at this point. Um the picture is taken from um um the interview of Sky Demos. Um take took by um Robert Sheldrake, Rupert Shel Sheldre.

I encourage you to watch that ex that interview and um get the all the information behind what I mentioned earlier in brief. So [snorts] um back to um [snorts] the fact that the theory of gravity is really simple once you understand uh that there is a quark model behind it that they have fractional electric charges and then that electric force is really just uh uh the divergence part or let's say it's the part of the force of a field which has a divergence. Um so this is explained in Sky Dharmos um uh work he has a so-called complete guide to quantum gravity. Now it's by far not complete but um well we all tend to to exaggerate a little bit but um what I also avoid is to call uh such a theory quantum gravity because the term is very much um um reserved to another type of theories which try to quantize general relativity. And I'll come back to this later on.

So there is no uh the main point here is there is no need to quantize general relativity. a theory that was um written more than 100 years ago with a language which is 200 years old differential geometry remmanian geometry and not uh um first of all use what we already have the standard model and also when writing a theory one should write it uh in quantum uh framework work from the beginning. No more continuous spacetime and um the the old languages of differential geometry and so on. Um so um again as a a quick recap uh Freddy is also of one um effective theory based on uh quantum fluctuations of the vacuum is an effective theory but it's not uh the the true origin of gravity. On the other hand, the true origin of gravity anybody can understand once learning about the quark structure which is usually um neglected um by any let's say high school um level introduction into physics and matter and they talk about electron protons, nucleus, atoms and they stop at that level without giving like another one or two lectures that these protons and neutrons do have a structure the quark structure.

So um at this point it's clear that we need also to um advocate some um um simple changes, upgrades, updates in uh the educational system. So enough of that for now. Um then again about the research on gravity there's a plethora of peer-reviewed articles relating gravity and nuclear force. So the researchers are are aware of that. Um how many articles? I would say more than hundreds.

But you need to use an AI to do the search for you. And more importantly, you have to be open to learn in parallel to developing your own theory. Um then there are many peer-reviewed articles studying nuclear spin-to-pin interactions u which are part of the standard model part of the lrangian of the standard model. So this term uh this term it's u clearly pointing towards an explanation of gravity in terms of the nuclear force. But uh these peer-review articles are written by physicists who uh work using the standard model which again uh ignores u abinio gravity is not having to do anything with with fundamental forces.

So um at this stage it's clear that we have all the material needed theoretical to establish gravity part of the standard model. In fact the theory is already developed there but nobody calls it uh or related to gravity. So um um regarding uh this uh uh anomalous gravitational constant findings um most of uh research relating or in connection with gravity mainstream research also uh using general relativity um tends to to consider that there is such a thing as the gravitational constant. Um it turns out that again there are plethora of experiments and articles which document that the measured gravitational constant is by far not within the experimental errors. But these articles are again again like implicitly ignored and nobody um really pauses for a moment and um and questions if the theory we're developing it's really um scientifically correct.

I mean since so many articles document that it's not a constant then uh at some point we should stop claiming that that it is. Now um why it's not a constant? Because gravity is an average of polarization of nuclear spin corresponding to the divergence part of the hydrogen atom uh unified field at this uh point. Um I I would like to mention that in the previous talk it was mentioned well um gravity's u permitivity um coefficient indeed that's what it is. Uh so um first of all the proton is not a a separate entity from the electron. This is how we um develop the theories.

Theory of the electron on one side, theory of the proton on the other side. But um no particle whether electron or proton or neutron first of all comes just with an electric charge or with a magnetic moment. All particles come with both um aspects. We show clearly that the field whatever field that is has a divergence part and a and a curl part. Of course this is uh well known in mathematics any field can be decomposed in such uh two parts with divergence and with curl only that's called Helhold's theorem but uh it's not just the math it's the the physics nowadays that any particle will al with or without electric charge And by the way, um, no matter particle doesn't have electric charge.

The neutron is not neutral. And now if you, um, might think, well, what about photons? But those are bzons, those are a totally different thing. So um, all matter particles, fian have electric and magnetic charge. Now um what's called magnetic charge is not what you expect in the Maxwell's equations. Um the electric field and magnetic field B are really curvatures are forces.

They're not really the sources underlying those forces. They're not the sources of those. So there is such a thing as a a magnetic charge and it's it's called and it's quantized and it's called the fluxon and uh it's u at [snorts] the level of the electromagnetic vector potential really without going into details coming back to uh this uh level. The hydrogen atom is a is a unity of quantum object of unity of matter and the electron is not a separated thing from the proton. Um so there is a much more um at length explanation of this unification of electron and quarks where the electron is really the fourth quark and the uh usual quarks are really spaceike quarks three of them which uh these explanations or this uh unification is uh uh explained in my articles available on Vixra and so on.

Um learning at the top level about this u advancements unifications gives a uh much better um perspective in which direction to develop um the current theories. So and it doesn't take much time. I mean learning about this unification of electron and quarks could take two three hours of reading. So back to um the gravitational constant. Dozens of articles report the experimental determination of gravitational constant does not fit the standard value of u and uh standard deviation corresponding to the measurement errors.

So I said uh community, those interested readers, viewers and so on, those uh some of those of course are just uh enjoying um um learning from presentations if you want. But on the other hand, writing a report, it's a a lot of um um a lot of fun and um gives much more satisfaction. At this point, I would say think of uh watching Zumba or or work or Zumba um dance and not trying it yourself. It's it's really the same thing or watching how others are training in the gym and just watching. So, I'll state it as a homework.

write a report uh or article documenting these sources and articles. Uh for example, even uh Sky Dermos articles are not really uh enough um let's say um not polish but structured to become some articles you might want to use as a reference to direct towards the original sources of experiments which document that um gravitational constant is ma uh material dependent. Um so as a partial conclusion for now gravity is an electric type of force due to the spin polarization of nucleons and averaging to a weak force from the strong nuclear force in the quark model of the standard model. I want to emphasize again that um this has this is so clear that uh it's just a matter of um um bringing it to a larger public at this point. Um there was an attempt I mean not attempt a very uh solid um development um of the theory by Abdul Salam and and collaborators and I recall that Salam uh was one of the a co-author of the electroeak theory And in the uh what do you call like 70s or 80s he um formulated a strong gravity theory um explaining gravity as a as a byproduct of nuclear force.

So this was already done in the maybe 70s. But how is it possible for such a um breakthrough to be completely ignored or or forgotten? Um well that's a different story. So strong gravity is really um the technical um theory um uh technical theory developed u on on top of the strong of the standard model which uh I would would probably have to look into more detail to how it can be connected with the intuitive picture which everybody gets that gravity is really um nuclear spin polarization effect. The problem um with incorporating that um direction of research is that it's probably it's probably formulated in terms of um uh differential geometry gauge theory language which is um I would say not outdated but um not no longer necessary to formulate the theory of gravity as a polarization of nuclear spin. So let's retain this uh early um theoretical development by Salam of strong gravity and go back to uh the alopon um core finding uh which is the experimental uh result dynamically change uh polarizing the nuclear spin results in a change in the weight.

Now um if you look at the whole story with uh which is as I said explained by David Alafon in the book um this is a very solid example of applying the scientific method. First you start with observation which gives you some ideas of what's going on. Then you formulate a theory and then you you verify it experimentally. Um the observation part is u kind of um cheating a little bit because Alafon used some uh data available from um from air force chasing a UFO and so on. So again, I'll let you read the the full story in the book by David also um mentioning this kind of um observation which is really cheating.

Looking at what how others did did control gravity uh is very difficult to sell in scientific publications. So that somehow um has to be um omitted and we have to uh do the work ourselves and develop the theory and and redo the experiments at this point. Um um Mark and at Falcon Labs um is working and doing um I mean it's working a lot in in trying to replicate alopon experiments. So that's a a good source of um of information regarding uh that level of development. But um taking into account that this is already well uh taken care of the origin of gravity uh the experimental uh proof.

uh I thought it's it's uh time to go beyond the experimental stage to what I call the technological phase of implementation. So I started to learn about u um advanced materials, solid state physics and so on and u um presented some uh key points to be investigated by the engineers who u who design and manufacture new materials and how this connects with uh uh controlling gravity. This is uh explained in a presentation um roam so Romania conference on advanced materials 24. Then um there are many more um detailed explanations in the Tesla extra conference 2025. So I encourage I mean if you're interested there you have it and um back to this important point how how you may choose to help and this uh involves not just the readers and viewers but also the researchers um to learn a a little bit more what it's already known and then uh continue this cycle of research and development and then disseminating and teaching and then uh helping others which is uh what's called service to the profession and as a professor uh by now I I realized how important is to uh mix all these things teaching well uh teaching research and service and I usually think research teaching and service but it depends on the uh on a case by case um interest and and so on.

So let's uh um take a look at research and development the mainstream versus independent research at this point as a general culture if we're doing science um I would say that the book by Thomas Kun u the structures of scientific revolutions um is a must but uh not to read because um it took me quite like um a week or so uh to read it uh browsing and so on extracting the essentials and if you're interested in just a brief synopsis there is a recent present presentation to a history of science meeting that I uh went and presented where we see some key ideas. Uh among which are the following science parad paradigms evolve similar to biological species and have a lot in common with politics and I'll leave it at that. But with the with the the what do we take from it is that we need to uh collaborate. We need to establish uh groups of researchers having uh common um goals and supporting uh essentially the the same theory which starts to resemble resemble uh to how political parties are. um what's the function of a political party and so on.

So too much fragmentation of research into independent researchers going in various directions um will not have a the same impact as if as in the case where we try to build teams working on a certain direction certain theory. Well, at this point, um, I should of course recognize that, uh, we love to do research and, um, being so much fun, we kind of like to be left alone and do our, um, developments and it's natural, and there's nothing wrong with that. But again, is it possible to engage a little bit of service to the profession? Well, we'll see. So, on the other hand, uh developing a theory which is uh almost u completely detached from a a mainstream uh scientific theory like the standard model or or general relativity has a lot of drawbacks and um to advance science overall one needs to do a research and development which is compliant with some mainstream science. So uh bottom line um I feel like I'm preaching here but um from just research and development to go to learn research develop and disseminate then teach and service and uh of course uh refining um such um denominations is something we we see going on in in various directions.

So it's it's normal to to to see more complex structure and including in in how our activity is structured. Then of course I have some suggestions for research and development that would help uh and here is my apologies. So studying such exciting topics and novel approaches is tempting. Yes it is because it is the journey not just the destination. So we all understand that each of us with our own journey but there is a need to collaborate and contribute to other researchers work to achieve a consistent new theory rather than scattered author dependent formulation etc etc.

Um and let's come back to some more technical u material. Um developing um um the theory of gravity in in um balance or in in consistency with the standard model of elementary particle physics. that would u upgrade and and and mark a new um level of this standard model which is stagnating significantly since the 1970s after the Higs boson was was found and so on and u um at the same time If broadening the um range of phenomena, one one considers in order to compensate the the separation of theories due to separation of experimental approaches. Then one should u learn a little bit more in in neighboring sciences. For example, the physicist to learn more chemistry and biology.

And I would say mathematics is u comes later on when you really need to implement it in a formal way. And um although some u mathematical frameworks can help from the beginning to know how to think about the corresponding unifications. It doesn't have to be mathematics doesn't have to come first. It's not equation that matters. And I I recall hearing uh um Mikoku saying I want to know the equation which rules the universe.

No, it's not the equation that matters but rather top down principles and what's usually called the conceptual interface of a theory. And speaking of principles, uh, Pythagoreans u well got it more than or 2,000 years ago. Number rules the universe. So Zeno u with the indivisibility of uh infinite indivisibility of action of motion already got the idea of quantum of action and and so on much more to be said that the ancients had quite important ideas and um if you want philosophical um understanding of how the universe works. So it's not equation um what is needed u and it's already done um in um considerable amounts um by um by my research in the articles I already uh made available I'd say published but not peer-reviewed um is a conceptual reformulating the conceptual foundations of the standard model.

And here I just included a few important ones. First of all, there is no such thing as space-time continuum, not a continuum. And these space and time are not really physical um concepts but rather um emergent and mathematically formulated um concepts. what establishes clearly in the uh science of of the 21st century is the use of the network model. It's so everywhere that um it's somehow amazing that uh we're not um uh learning from this lesson to um downplay the idea of space and time.

uh then upgrading the role of FM diagrams um and um higher version of quark line diagrams. Um one should look at the developments in quantum computing and quantum computing hardware where where you see clearly that we are building uh some networks which process quantum information. Um and this of course reflects that in nature um because we are essentially copying and looking how nature does it and then we try to replicate it in ourselves. So nature um is just uh uh networks and communication and uh nothing to do with a space and time. Space comes from our habit of measuring um distances between objects, geometry, ancient geometry, ukidian and so on.

Of course you want to know when you buy a couch you measure the door will it fit through the door and so on. So it's so practically oriented uh that it's ingrained u very deeply in our minds and we think that space is something real. No, it is not time also. Um, clocks are made exactly to create time and Einstein said well uh the illusion of time. So he had also an understanding of this uh but uh we don't have enough time here nor the purpose of this talk is to mention this but if you're interested go to articles and um read about how the space and time emerges from the quantum computing flow of who said pant everything flows.

There's only the change. So how does stability of objects and and what we think reality is stable emerges from the flow? I um preliminary explained it in in one of those articles. Uh another misconception um starting with um 50s 1950s is that quarks are particles. No, quarks are not particles but rather uh principal directions of of the field of an at hydrogen atom. Um think of pictorially that there are like uh three uh tornadoes um emerging from say a proton or neutron and the problem is the electron is a fourth quark but um at the present time it's not clear how to take those three u tornadoes to close them and and generate a a a reasonable technical uh model of the hydrogen atom which also um upgrades the orbital electronic orbitals models already in use.

um what is clear is the so-called um h vibration is essential for that and again I give some hints in here and there in some articles but [clears throat] bottom line uh with other technicalities and the need for um peer-reviewed new model of the hydrogen atom we can retain the natural almost obvious fact that quarks are not particles are directions. They have a spin of those tornadoes. Spin is everywhere in in quantum physics as associated with helicity and all that. Then another important unification of atomic and nuclear is uh this important um >> [clears throat] >> um new breakthrough that the electron is really a fourth generator which is timelike. uh what it really generates is the quantum phase like a clock uh attached to the atom.

A clock that uh it's almost obvious is what Einstein said about any uh coordinate system. You have to have a clock and you have to synchronize to such coordinate systems reference frames in order to make sense of the idea of time. So um um this quantum phase it's really a u proper relativistic quantum order parameter which is also intuitively explained by Fman in his QED book saying that any particle carries like a tiny clock with which measures um time and uh it's related to the quantum phase by the formula exponential of ei omega t. So, so this is this was already understood in the 70s the the relation between quantum phase and time. But now um it became quite clear almost obvious that um there is no such thing as a linear time and um the the only order parameter.

It's a proper order parameter. Each particle has it. Each uh matter particle has it and it's uh abstractly uh called quantum phase. Then um an intuitive image is that u the universe looks three-dimensional because of those three quark directions. But then there's no fourth dimension as a time dimension but rather that each u matter particle has a vibration u aspect periodic change which you could call it vibration which justifies again an intuition of another famous um researcher Tesla who said if you want to understand the universe look in terms of vibration and energy.

These are lessons who should not be forgotten. And when developing a theory, one should look at what these uh giants said before us and not not uh disregard that. So um what about the technological um um advancements or rather what's the uh technological level for the research in gravity control um and here I'll just uh point to the highlights I point to the stages is um first of them again 1970s without um the let's say perfect uh we need to perfect the methodology of nuclear spin polarization um that's also referred to as dynamical spin polarization in theory of alopafhone and his experiments. It's quite widely used in nuclear magnetic resonance measuring chemical shifts and analyzing uh materials uh also in magnetic resonance imaging. So we have not just the technology but the whole uh um infrastructure is so well developed except nobody thought it might connect with gravity in some way.

Um then there is the other uh parts um higher temperature means um uh separation decoherence gases brownian motion and so on. So uh you want to avoid such phenomena because then you cannot align the spins really. So then you need to include uh what aligns the spin. First of all is rotation uh which um anybody who played with a gyro clearly understands. If you want to maintain an axis then you have to spin the object.

Then the second is super conductivity. So if you want to have a a phenomenon without friction and uh the coherence loss of properties and so on. Uh then uh one has to lower the temperature at the level of supra conductibility. Then look at the papers by Tashmar work by Pollet Ning Lee and so on. But then there is the next level which is uh really new.

Um there are lots of achievements in quantum computing hardware and two material science and design. Quantum computing uh reached the level of manipulating individual nuclear spin which means we can orient the spins nuclear spins one by one. Now that technology exists. So how can we use it in connection with gravity control and then learn about uh uh this u two-dimensional nanomaterials which have amazing properties precisely because they are already polarized in two dimensions. So you have coalent bonds in two dimensions and then the third one is automatically polarized perpendicularly to the corresponding surface.

So I think uh um I gave you uh uh the uh cenotic uh view of what is the status of gravity gravity control and gravity theory and control and technology and um it involves a lot of learning of what is already uh documented and published in articles and then try to help developing this new uh this uh this direction from the level it is already. So with this uh I'll just uh leave this slide on and feel free to share the PowerPoint presentation. I think it's about time to stop. Tim, what do you what do you think about that? >> Yeah. Well, we're we are running a little bit behind.

I didn't want to cut you off, but we do have we do have Jenny, but um yeah, I think >> I really appreciate Yeah, I saw the message. Okay, >> you know what? And I I I am so overjoyed to finally have you on APEC and presenting about this material. And again, one of the things that I want to do is create some breakouts for this and I I'll try and do that over the next week. I've got film footage I'm working through for other things as well. So, there's there's a lot there, but the work that you're presenting on is is like brand new to this community unless people have been following you and I know a lot of people do follow you from your past work, right? But for APAC, it's new.

So, thank you so much. Um, >> sure. Thank you again. >> Yeah. This opportunity.

Let me let me bring everybody in. I'll take out the slideshow. And guys, put your hands together and give Dr. Lucian [applause] >> an enormous applause. Enormous applause.

And again, a giant thank you, sir. It was absolutely wonderful having you on. I would love to drag you back into our program in the future. And uh so since we are a little bit over time, what I'm going to do right now is take everybody out and except for Jenny and Jenny Nielsen, thank you so much and I am so sorry about the delay. We're we we've just been pushing things a little bit behind.

So Oh, Jenny, I I can't hear you. Your mic is not Jenny. Your mic is It's on, but it is not connected. So, if you go down now, if you go down to the bottom bar, you should have a little mic with an arrow button, and that'll let you change your settings. Or if you click the gear button, try the gear button, you may have to select a different mic.

If you if you click settings, it'll have the mic and the speakers. It looks like you're okay. Nope. Okay. And Jenny, can you hear me? Okay.

There we go. Okay, you're you're back. Your mic is not So again, C, can you try and click the gear button? Yeah. And no stress. No stress.

Technical bugs are part of the APAC program and have been for five years. >> There we go. >> Can you hear me now? Okay. Yeah, I >> I can. Yes.

Yes. >> I >> think that you should be able to hear me now. >> Yeah. No, you sir. >> All right.

Awesome. Fantastic. Okay. It's great to [laughter] be here. >> Yeah.

Jenny, thank you so much. And thank you for the short notice. Also, we we had Robert Francis Jr. was going to do a presentation on magnet drop experiments. >> Great to see the previous speaker a little bit.

>> Okay. >> Oh, man. Well, maybe come back and uh give more. >> Yeah, let me take myself out and and your bandwidth is a little low, but but you're doing okay and so I'm going to take myself out and uh take it away, ma'am. >> All right.

Thank you so much, Tim. Okay, so I'm Jenny Nielsen. I'm a PhD candidate at the University of Kansas. I'm actually double ABD in physics and philosophy. I'm a I have a master of science and physics.

I have a master of arts and philosophy. I have a bachelor of science in physics and math sumocad from the lad from the university of uh Missouri Kansas City. Uh that's me. Uh I have a topological unified field theory on bill papers that you can read. Uh and that's me.

Um happy gratitude day weekend everybody at APEC. Um, so I'm here today to talk about topological tors and bubble physics. If every you might have seen uh if everyone's seen how put off an age of disclosure, you might have seen him talking about warp bubble UAP physics. You might have seen Jack Sarbotti talk about torsion in his recent talks and uh you may have seen uh lots of different approaches to alubier drives and such. Um uh so uh what is a warp bubble? So basically the idea is that you warp spaceime around an object and then you can uh do things that you couldn't normally do and then feasibly the people in the craft uh wouldn't be impacted in the same way as the spaceime around it.

So they could be zipping and zapping and doing all kinds of crazy stuff in our world, but where they are, everything's fine and they're not experiencing anything strange. So that's sort of the idea of how you could do a warp bubble and then uh control a ship with this warp bubble. You could go different places discomfort. So that's the idea of a warp bubble. Um but actually I'm going to start in 1964 with this weird experiment with a guy named James Edwin Barger.

Um, a long t long story short, a long time ago back in like 2012, I was probably a little bit goofy, staying up really late working on some plasma physics, and somehow I found this weird paper by James Edwin Burgerer, and I got the heebie-jebies because for some reason it resembled what I thought maybe a UAP uh, system would look like. And I didn't really think that he was like doing UAP physics, but I I just got the vibe that holy crap, I'm looking at something very Philadelphia experimentish. And so I saved the paper and then I lost the paper and I just found it a few days ago again. Uh so it's a cavitation paper. It's called Thresholds of Acoustic Cavitation uh by James Earger.

April 1964. an office of Naval Research privately distributed paper. >> I'm not sure if the paper was ever formally classified. I think I'm in a Faraday cage in this building. So, [laughter] uh I'm not sure if the paper was ever formally classified, but it was like a privately distributed paper.

It's kind of hard to find except on millill sites on the deep web, but you know, not super classified or anything you can find it. Um, okay. Um, but anyway, it's a thresholds of cavitation experiment. What's cavitation? Uh, cavitation is what happens when a liquid, you know, water is locally pulled apart by pressure waves. Whoa.

By, uh, pressure waves so violently that it forms vapor pockets or voids. So basically you have water, you put pressure on it and it starts separating and forming bubble pockets inside the water. So think of rapid pressure drops that can cause cavitation. Liquid can't hold itself together. Microbubbles form and collapse.

Enormous energy release. So there it's like an ultra fast shock structure and you get wild symmetry patterns. It's similar to simatic shapes that you're used to seeing in water. and vessel functions are causing these cool fancy shapes under simatics but cavitation is a slightly different um uh mechanism I guess causing the thing I mean it is a different mechanism but I'm trying to think of the right word but anyway in everyday life cavitation occurs behind boat propellers in ultrasonic cleaners and collapsing bubble jets and high-speed flows and acoustic cavitation is like the most common kind that just means cavitation caused by sound waves so the Barger experiment um in 1964 before Barker performed one of the earliest splash photography experiments that studied this. I have this is a modern uh PZO electric uh image here from a recent test, but it's similar to what he was doing.

Uh so he had a pointlike transducer emit a single high pressure acoustic pulse into water. The medium uh had a compressive front followed by um basically things just got condensed. The the rarification triggers the formation of a spherical a simple spherical bubble boundary evolves smoothly and so usually you get one shock front but they got weird stuff. So they got a central bright flash reason a set of nested discrete shells propagating outward. Not two shells, not five, but 20.

And this wasn't expected. And they weren't evenly spaced either. And they fell into three cluster regimes of different shape and types of um uh shells with different spacing laws. And none of this looks like conventional physic. Uh, so, um, I think it's still cutting me off here with the [laughter] Faraday.

Um, so why were 20 shells not expected? Let's see. Reason one, placet. That's the standard way of modeling this this kind of uh water behavior. A violent pressure spike outward and that's it. So you don't get repeated discrete shocks.

You don't get the quantized shells that almost looks kind of quantum. You don't get modes locking together. You don't get interference structures. This quantum type behavior is really odd. And the funny thing is is like you can apply quantum modes of water to try to understand this stuff and it still doesn't make sense.

Um you can apply bessel functions to understand this thing and it still doesn't make sense. uh you can apply nonlinear behavior navier stokes uh acoustic standing waves just you can do any kind of classical physics any kind of quantum physics we've got it never makes sense but and so yeah this is just the same kind of thing so Nav your stokes doesn't produce it nothing does it but there's a topological explanation now if the internal state of the water includes a geometric or phaselike degree of freedom The collapse event would release discrete modes. So you get d mu d um v uh vi rt that would produce spherical pulses with quantized radi limited spectral range about 20 modes in this shape and a natural grouping into spacing regime. So a quantized torsion or phase mode it's actually omega not five or whatever a phase mode cascade provides a direct interpretation of barker's observed shells or actually maybe five I'm just like having a bad day on my Greek letters. So anyway, what barker saw you know this is what he got but tot says you're going to get this thing to x to the mu equals uh approximately oh wait excuse me exists on s1 so the field couples to torsion through the projected s1 fiber of the bundle during cavitation collapse the internal phase is not smooth it gets gradients and defects when the bubble collapses these gradients discharge as quantized torsion ien modes so iigen modes is basically um like uh harmonic frequencies is in my in my theory on belt traumi modes of the of the hot vibration.

So if you put a flow over the hot vibration uh the flow uh has harmonics and the harmonics have in values which produce modes and anyway this is the hidden variable not classical fluid mechanics does not have. So this is why in my opinion this is happening. This is the only explanation I've come up with and I've looked at this thing on and off now and then for about oh my god about 22 no 12 years. So the key prediction only the first 20 modes fit a 1 to three cm water shell and I know and I know this is kind of boring but we're going to get to the cool stuff in a few minutes. So in a spherical medium of radius r the torsion phase modes obey this delta uh second order delta thing times this thing times you know the the that yield spherical values then but to ft modifies this with a torsion coupling cut off you take the absolute value of the delta thing uh minus delta toao not minus less than delta tow and then you get that approximately to one over l it's not l whatever torion and then using measured energy No, it is Lionicities [laughter] in cavitation markers geometry.

Um uh I never memorized all the Greek letters. I I I do on and off and then I forget them. Anyway, this cutoff arises because the S1 fiber curvature projects only a finite set of harmonics into 4D. I got to remember to do that. So why the shells group into three regimes? So the 20 modes divide naturally into low-end regime long wavelength torsion pulses wide shell spacing mid-end regime resonant modes nearly even spacing and then high-end regime like this uh close to curvature cut off compressed.

So this is exactly the distribution that Barger got and I think that since it matches identically that this is another cool experimental quasi like retrodiction of toft. So, it's like I I didn't ever think that TFT would actually solve this. I wasn't thinking about this when I uh developed TUFT, but hey, TFT explains to me anyway in who uh so the the clustering corresponds to uh the three different coupling strengths in the dispersion law where alpha and beta keeps the first term, no clustering. So, so basically like you it's an expanded version of the classical acoustic um dispersion law and uh really uh pretty that we get this and kind of special. So rally placet gives single shock and ripples but toft gives us the the cavitation that we actually see.

And since this is an unsolved mystery that we just solved, this is another verification that to probably is the right theory. But you know, we need more we need more data. We need more verification. We need more peer review. We need more validation.

More people replicating this stuff. But but but but this is a good sign. Anyway, but let's go sci-fi. So, in TFT space-time manifold, the total manifold is S9. Uh, you know, me and Martin Cup, we argue back and forth like whether this means that there are extra dimensions or whatever.

And he he would rather do everything on a little Clifford Taurus or whatever so that you only stay within 40. I say screw that. I like higher D. But hierarchy, I'm holding my cell phone up to try to escape the paradic age. Uh but hierarchy doesn't mean necessar like we're uh literally like I mean I think we are flatlanders but you don't have to think of it like that.

You can just think of it as extra mathematical tracking indexes. You can think about it like that if you are uncomfortable with the idea that we're just flatlanders in a higher D world. I'm pretty sure we are flatlanders in a higher D world. It makes sense to me. Why wouldn't we be? like why wouldn't there be extra levels of this world that we don't perceive? So I'm not so the spacetime manifold with base CP4 that's just the four dimensional really eight dimensional complex projective space it's four dimensional in the sense that it has four complex dimensions but those hold two dimensions each because they have a real and a complex number in each and then fibers S1 B E to the generating U1 EM and temporal twist.

So yeah, that's the my theory that we've talked about before then. So world lines are fionic paths. Well, it's really any particle path as embedded in R to the S9 knotted length to form vortex atoms. It's really embedded in C, but whatever. Um anyway, torsion you get this torsion lovely equation.

I'm not going to bother saying that out loud. But in TFT, the fiber induced contortion K equals 2 * the regular T where T is the nei for form T equals this beautiful thing modulo exact forms linking EM torsion to the gravitational. Basically, if you do enough with EM, you can kick up gravitational torsion because in my theory, gravity has torsion because basically every field has a twist and the twist generates torsion. And you have to have twist because there are all kinds of effects like aironaf bomb and uh charge quantization and all kinds of things that only really will turn up in your theory if you add twist to the single field. Otherwise you have to chop it up into little micro fields and patch on algebbras and do all kinds of things that break up the unity.

And why would you do that? you want one field anymore if you do that anyway. Um, okay. I'm going to practice my yoga here. So, uh, the cavitation experiment analogy, you get sonoluminescence or vortex Uh so basically okay why is this let's see if I open the door if I get okay so um anyway here we go so assume a spherical Um, hold on. I'm waiting for this thing to load.

Uh, why isn't it going back? So, >> well, Jenny, hold hold on just a sec. if it's okay. Hold on. >> Let me let me stop your camera. Okay.

>> Or actually, can you stop your camera? >> And that'll free up some bandwidth. It's It's not preferable, but >> UAP, well, take a UAP and Okay, sorry. You're you're still having issues. Jenny, can try stopping your camera. Leave your mic on, but stop the camera.

And that should free up some bandwidth for you. Jenny, you're you're you've muted yourself. Jenny, you you've muted yourself. Okay, Jenny, there we go. Try stopping your camera.

Try stopping your camera. Turn your camera off. >> Oh. Oh. Can you hear me now? >> Yes.

Turn your camera off. >> I can try to turn the camera. >> It It just says stop. >> Okay. >> Yeah.

>> Okay. And then I can try. Should I try to proceed with No. >> Yeah. Yeah.

No, you're you're good. You're good. You're good. >> Have you guys been able to hear anything I've been saying? Um, you're you've been cutting in a hear? >> You've been cutting in and out, but this should help. >> This should help.

Okay. >> Okay. Fantastic. Okay. So, uh, so basically what I've been working on is taking this barger thing and thinking about what's happening there.

And if torsion is coupling to the sound waves and coup in water, this implies that there's something happening in water that couples to torsion, which means presumably there might be a way to kick up torsion using water. And uh if we use EM, presumably we could kick it up even more. And so that's that's kind of where I'm thinking about this. And so I'm kind of taking on a sci-fi application. I'm not necessarily saying aliens are really doing this, but maybe aliens are really doing this.

I'm not saying it's aliens, but it's aliens. Anyway, so EM torsion coupling. So, it's stronger than acoustic, which is just a little bit perturbative because EM directly modulates the S1 fiberphase uh theta and that induces global topological defects. That means like aoff balm like phases in the bundle but also other things because cooft isn't limited to just that. So the cavitation experiment analogy somolinence or vortex excitation in fluids or cavitation in fluids excuse me translates to creating topological voids regions of zero linking and the world line bundle based but it's literal space-time cavitation pumping torsion to unlink local world lines forming a spirit spherical a spherical outer defect that warps the 4D projection around your UFO or UAP since we're cool now and we call them UAPs.

So, this is how we would create a bubble warp drive like what Hal thinks the UFOs are using. Sort of like what Jack thinks the UFOs are using, although Jack is probably using a slightly different mathematical formula than I am to generate this thing. So, assume a spherical UAP core radius R one. I need to catch up with Jack on how he's doing it right now. So radius R equ= 1M modeled as S3 in the S9 embedding.

So I have a I have a 9D world. The 9D world um we're embedded in the 9D world. I'm agnostic as to whether we're flatlanders although I kind of personally believe we are. Um but like as a scientist I just believe it's like you can use these things as indexes to track are real. it as a person with a water shell thickness of you know delta equals 0.1 millime meters for dialectric containment and cavitation mediation not millimeters meters so the water acts as a classical proxy for bundle density high permitivity and that will enhance the em fiber coupling fiber just meaning like a u a chunk of spaceime essentially they the spacetime comes in these fiberlike chunks in my theory so the classical proxy for bundle density use em induction not acoustics to couple the torsion via the fibers churn simon's three form that's just the twist where where a is the connection uh lifted to the s9 bundle so that's those are just ways of talking about topology but basically you're kicking up enm to do so to vibrate the um the cavity that's filled with water the the shell and then you create cavitation in there.

But also what's happening is you're coupling torsion and this is just kind of weird and like I when I was thinking about this I like why would we do it this way but we're going to get into that a little bit later. Anyway, embed the sphere as a hot fibr but s2 is the real way of looking at it the real number way representing a stable solon linking number lk equals 1 mass m you know basically just these are these are ways of thinking about these things mathematically but essentially you're just thinking about the sphere you're vibrating it you inject seed torsion via a central coil you apply a rotating em field B equals this thing and then you couple to the fiber phase as that thing and then you complexify it for the hop twist you You're just looking at the wave. It's it's complexified because waves are complexified. You don't have to think more the hop twist. It's just that it is a hop twist because that's how fields fields all look like hop twists.

If you really think about it like we call we think of these fields like the heart field, everyone calls it a tooid, but it's really and the hop vibration is this thing that I I don't know if I even have a picture of the hop in here. I hope I do. math torsion density is this thing. Uh then that creates an unlinking and then you get a cavity. So you create so basically you're creating a change in space-time structure.

So you surround your core. This is just kind of that. So that was the math. But what you've done is you've surrounded the core of your UFO with deionized water shell to minimize conductivity loss. Water's molecular dipoles align with DEM fringes proxying a dialectric bundle sheath that stabilizes the defect.

So you induce shell cavitation using radial EM wave guides toidal antennas they're really hop antennas at a shell binder which generate standing waves the two ft coupling EM field lifts to bundle connection [laughter] really just what what this is really saying is that the M field is working on the bundle and the connection is just a way of looking at the the twist and the the way that thing turns where shell permitivity amplifies torsion flux the shell this uh shell is the cord. It's justical topology. What basically it's saying it's separating what's going on in the core of the UAP to what's going on in this shell and the shell is going to interact with spaceime in a unique way. So the EM pump to torsion which is stronger than acoustic uh this is all fancy language but essentially what ends up happening is you get warp activation and propulsion. So when uh the torsion is over the two pi the core shell boundary forms a topological a linking defect where worldline shortcut via the fiber projection contracting effect of 40 distances giving an alcubier like bubble without negative energy and you get this warp factor.

The really interesting thing and I didn't run it is that you don't really need a lot of em to do this. You don't really need as much as you might think. Um and I need to run that. How much em you need but anyway induced line element you get this where contortion is this shrinks rail d6 god6 you get contraction asymmetric torsion pump yielding thrust from linking momentum you get the idea boom because it has a warp bubble now anyway uh these are the core equations of how to get your effective metric your thrust your torsion for form your fiber phase and yada yada. Um what's interesting is we have noticed that these weird UAP things turn up off the southern California coast in water and in other areas with water.

Um, my brother and mother and dad used to watch this eagle cam on Catalina Bay. And one day they saw one of these weird metallic balls come out of the water behind the eagle cam and they all shaked and I heard them from the other room and they're like, "Jenny, Jenny, come." And I come and of course it's gone. Like, of course it's gone when Jenny comes because I'm the scientist and I could have explained it. But it's like the singing frog. They have the paranormal experiences and I'm not there.

But [laughter] but anyway, um my brother's like, "You would have finally believed me that [laughter] but guess or whatever his sister's name is." But um so uh where did they Yeah. So um but yeah, I'm kind of open-minded, especially now after I've learned a lot more physics. So, so if the aliens are visiting Earth, what would they do to refuel? If they're if they don't need plasma, maybe they would just go and dive under the water. And like we talk about like there could be alien civilizations under the water. I think it's more likely that they would be visitors from other worlds and they would just need water.

But, you know, whatever. It's possible they could live underwater, too. But I just I I just like it would be very weird if we were sharing the world with other creatures. Anyway, why water is the perfect alien medium for creatures who want to visit. It's a high dip pole moment.

Strong em coupling thing and the U1 gay is this way. Dipolar molecules amplified in bubbles. Most fluids cannot form perfectly symmetric uh collapses. You know the cavitations. Water can.

No need for high temperatures or plasma. Plasmas are chaotic. Cavitation wants coherence. So water gives stable density, predictable response, smooth radial collapse. Water is essentially a room temperature space-time lens.

That's weird, but that it kind of works that way. And also water water's cool, right? Life came from water. Let the waters bring forth life, evolution, all that jazz. So, water might be cooler than we thought. Um, what the Barger experiment really demonstrates, Barger's 20 shells show that a spherical collapse does not produce a single shock, but a discrete spectral cascade.

This is how you explain it. The collapse mode dumps. You get inner shells, middle shells, outer shells. It's a topological event. Aliens don't care about the fluid specifically.

They want a torion cascade. Um, let me see what happened here. I'm I'm freezing. Uh, the goal is to exceed the threshold because that topologically reidentifies the S1 fiber over the two sphere. That's actually al condition.

So, you know, you don't you're not only getting a warp bubble, you can also go a bit further and get a a wormhole. It's kind of almost equivalent in TFT. So you get a barker style cavitation U1 pumping and let's talk about how these paces fit. A EM U1 pumping provides phase bias in the fiber. The fiber phase directly does d= a plus f not deta varying em field around the spherical craft radial er tangential b theta t does two things.

So it pre-twists the S1 fiber. The field creates a global phase gradient around the sphere. Delta theta is not zero. This is like winding up the fiber and it sets the sign of the torsion. So you can control what the torsion is doing the EM field.

Hold on more detail than this. But I just really started exploring this. Um, I can't see my slides. One second. I will be able to again soon.

I I know what's going on. Uh, they're too small. I'm making them bigger. Whoa. Okay, I went back [laughter] too far.

Um, so we set the side of the torsion. The EM field biases the clap. So all torsion modes add constructively. Without EM pumping, the 20 barger modes partially cancel. But with AM pumping, they coherently add.

So we get more torsion and more torsion and more torsion until we have done something to the space-time field. That is really cool. Um the cavitation collapse supplies a torsion spike. Now the aliens trigger a torsion collapse. They generate a perfect spherical acoustic impulse from inside the water shell.

A bubble nucleus. It expands and collapses violently. Water being polar magnifies this because EM field modifies dipole alignment. Dipole alignment changes the phase stiffness. Phase stiff intensifies torsion curvature.

This is analogous to tightening a drum head before striking it. So the combined effect a topological torsion burst. When the cavitation collapse happens inside an EM prepared water shell, it produces coherent torsion modes, constructive phase summation, spherically symmetric torsion wave fronts. The sum amplitude is this thing. And I keep seeing this thing that says slide 19.

So I can't read my own slide. Come on gang. Let me read it. Not you this slide. Think I'm a bob.

So you get this constructive interference. You flip the S1 fiber andification on the sphere. You get a wormhole for it. Does it have to be water? Nah. But water is the best option because water is high dialectric constant stronger EMphase coupling.

Water is strong cohesion, clean cavitation collapse. Water is stable at normal torsion. No plasma chaos. Water is self-healing. Bubble collapse geometry stays perfect.

You could use ammonia, ionic fluids, plasma, but water gives the best topological coherence. Plasma kind of messes up the coherence a little. You could let's Is this it? I No. Uh and I can't read I the slide here because of how my screen the chat I've also been doing some collaborations. Mark uh Soal has bought a snow globe to start thinking about what's going on in the um cavitation experiments.

I don't know if a snow globe will work, but it's a fun place to start. And you can kind of see what's going on with the glitter [laughter] um when you vibrate it. So if spherical water shell plus EMU uncoupling plus cavitation collapse equals artificially induced topological torsion burst, artificially induced, whatever, it's natural. The torsion burst exceeds the geometric threshold. Flips the S1 fiber identifications.

Yields a temporary wormhole throat. This is low energy, high precision. I need to go through the jewels. I'm sorry I didn't do that today. Not brute force.

Aliens would pick this method because it's stable. It's cheap. Requires no exotic matter. Your exotic matter is lit. Let's do it maybe.

Any questions? This is my topic and I apologize that I don't have the actual jewels uh worked out today. >> So, Jenny, you're you're all set. Was that your That's everything. You jump right into all any questions. So, I wanted to make sure.

>> I've also been doing line with uh Dan. >> Can you hear me? Jenny. >> Okay. >> Yeah, I can. You're cutting it out a little bit.

>> Yeah. >> Yeah. I I your connection it's better. It is better, but you you're still cutting out a little bit. Yeah.

That is so awesome. Thank you so much. Let So what what I want to do is and again I'm trying to kind of work around your connection because I think it's going to fade out again. Um so in this case actually it's 255 so I'm going to bring everybody >> and I can come back and do a more detailed >> Yeah. If you'd like to I would love to have you back.

Um and we'll just maybe we can test next time we you know we could test a different location. to see if your bandwidth works better. So, okay. Well, let's let's do this before anything else, guys. Let's all put our hands together and give a giant applause to Jenny Lorraine Nielsen.

And so, just to mention it, I am on a lot of female lists and Jenny has been getting a lot of attention for her work lately. Positive attention, great feedback. And so I am I'm really really pleased, Jenny, that you were able to present today. Um, again, my apologies for the tech issues. It's been managed chaos as always, but >> it's it's my Yeah, >> I would love to have you back though.

Yeah, >> I should have stayed at home >> and trying to go to, >> you know, it it happens. It happens. And I think it's aggravated by technology changing so rapidly that what works for everybody on [laughter] day one doesn't work on day two. So >> okay well I think in terms of presentations I think that was pretty much it. So um >> I have something for Jenny.

Actually this is an experiment based on her talk that we were >> Does anybody have any quick questions? Um, Jenny, I actually have the uh the snow globe set up over here. >> Set up. >> All right. Yay. >> Okay.

Okay. Good. >> Yay. [laughter] >> Mark here. I'll spotlight you.

>> I'm echoing. I'm echoing. Sorry. Hold on. >> Oops.

That's not the spotlight button. >> Yes. So, um, Jenny, uh, and I had a call earlier this week and, uh, we were talking about different ways of, uh, creating basically finding the iigen modes within a sphere of water and use the cavitation to create some sort of warm field effect. I don't know if with the cavitation collapses, you would see something happen. Um, so essentially what she was describing was a snow globe.

Um, and she wanted it to made out of crystal and uh quartz or whatever. But I just found a uh snow globe available on Amazon. And I stuck it on top of a large microphone over here that we had or speaker actually that we had from another sound experiment. We're actually got objects to move and I was just setting this up um as she was talking. So far I haven't been able to find the resonant frequency.

So we'll have to come back to this a little later. I think it's probably way up there, but it's it's really really loud. I was actually wearing hearing protection before like this in order to uh protect myself as we were um you know trying to find that uh that correct resonant frequency. Basically what you do is you would um you want the frequency of sound in water where um you create standing modes inside the shell. So it would be a um the wavelength of this snow globe which is around 95 millimeters in diameter uh internally I'm assuming based off of my guesstimation of thickness of the glass.

Outside it's 98. So maybe it's 94 or something like that. That would put the resonant frequency way up at like 16 kilhertz or something like that according to GBT which sounds about right. Um, the problem is is the audio amplifier I have over here doesn't really put out that much power at that level. At least I can't I can barely even hear that level.

Uh, my my uh audio uh ability goes up to like 163. So, um yeah, we're going to play around with this and hopefully the uh goal would be to get scanning nodes of the um uh of of the uh the snow or the glitter that's in there and um see if by just using sound frequencies uh which are just pressure waves, we'd be able to um move objects around. And that would be a proof of concept uh that we could probably use with electromagnetic uh systems in the future. But um yeah, it's it's a great start for this uh experiment. >> Actually, Mark, that's really that's really brilliant.

That's a really brilliant idea. I was just thinking about that. I'm like, what would happen if you put different You said you get your standing waves, right? >> Yeah. >> Okay, there's Jenny. Okay, >> Jenny.

>> Yeah, it's really funny. I was talking to Mark and he like ordered this thing within like 30 seconds of me describing it. Suddenly he's like, "Look at this. I'm going to get this book." And I was like, "Oh yes, grab them." I like it. >> Yeah.

What's the point of procrastinating? There was only one available. >> No, I I I think that would be really interesting. It would be really interesting to see. Yeah. I was just thinking about like we've had so many presenters talk about scalar waves and this lets you do a 3D scalar wave.

I should have been talking on my phone and broadcasting the presentation on my computer. That's what I'll do in this situation next time. >> Oh, splitting the bandwidth. Splitting them. I get it.

>> That would have worked better. Can't load the presentation on my phone. It just doesn't give me that option. I don't know why. Maybe there's a way, but I couldn't convince it to.

But yeah, >> it's okay. Yeah. I >> again, Jen, thank you so much for Thank you so much for being here. We we >> Darren or anybody else >> did you have any questions? >> Did anybody else have any questions? >> Yeah, if you could send me that uh line element for that alubier like um solution that you came >> Yeah, for sure. I'll say I my uh I'll send you the slides the whole slide deck.

In fact, I think I sent you the slide deck already. I think you're on my email list that I sent the slide deck to already. Any other anything else? >> I I I think I I am all I am all set. If you guys don't have any questions, uh let me see. And so actually someone in chat was asking, let me see.

Oh, John Brandenberg said hydrosine or 100% hydrogen peroxide. Scrolling up a little bit. Plasmas have to be kept at high pressure to get the same effects. Yeah, that's true. That's true.

>> Yeah. And then someone's asking how the internal pressure of the snow globe will impact the pressure waves or will it? >> Yeah. Yeah. Also, I'm wondering if the glitter will change things too. The glitter might impact the way cavitation [clears throat] happens, which is frustrating, but um there are all kinds of things to consider.

>> Also, your medium is like the excuse me, not the medium, the glass, like how leaky your glass is. The reason I like quartz is it doesn't leak. But then on the other hand, uh, quartz is more expensive. >> Wait, but I just realized that this would put us on track for a cheesy holiday theme coming up for December. >> Yeah, >> it goes great for Christmas.

Like, look at that. >> Yeah, that's very Christmas theme. >> Sort of science. >> Yes, it is. It totally is.

Snow globe science. Oh my god. Okay, Mark, we got to get on this. We can do this. >> Okay.

Well, yeah, we're actually we're in lab update time, so I'm This may qualify as a lab update. >> Yay. All right. Yeah. So, when is the lab up when is the next lab talk >> when we talk shop? >> Oh, the the open mic the next open mic.

Um, yeah. So, well, before Yeah, before we go further, let me officially say we are in lab updates, so we don't have to act proper now. We just can't swear too much to get kicked off YouTube. Uh, >> okay. >> So, let me see.

Oh, the next open mic is next week because I bumped it forward to travel. >> And I I have I have amazing footage for Mark. Mark did one hell of a walkthrough on the DMP and he did some test stuff, too. He's got he's got a really big cool laser that he's doing triplet electron stuff with. And [snorts] so I was able to get good footage.

The the walkth through makes sense. The other part I'm going to have to trim it a little bit because it was a long test and there were periods where not that much made sense. But >> oh Mark Mark lasers might be helpful too. Like I've talked about EM but lasers are EM. So lasers might be better >> for like pumping with lasers.

Yeah, >> we want laser. [laughter] Sorry. Um ball or no? >> Um you're you're asking like for a >> Oh, the snow globe >> are doing something vibrating. >> It's probably lowend ultrasound. >> Yeah.

Yeah. >> No, Dan Dan's asking if it's quartz though. >> I have no idea. I have no idea. >> We don't know.

We don't know what it is. It's just glass. Cool snow globe. >> It's a cool snow globe. >> What a snow or what a quartz one would do given that it's a PZO electric and if that would change anything.

Probably not. But >> oh, it says electric is better. >> It says that it's made in glass and it was designed in Vermont and handmade in China. >> Okay. box.

>> Well, there you go. Yeah, I'm not sure what it would change for this. Quartz might be a little stiffer than glass, but then for for what you're doing, it probably wouldn't matter. Then the other another thing, this goes back to some of my stuff years ago, quartz will pass ultraviolet and glass will not. And so when I was doing UV testing on lifters, >> you had actually the for any for any Well, I I don't know if I should say this out loud, but >> [snorts] >> um one of the best I I believe it's sodium vapor lamp, I think.

Don't quote me on that. Um it is a massive UV source, but it comes with two the bulb has two casings. The outer casing is glass and it blocks the UV intentionally. They don't want to hurt people's eyes. They put it, they use them as outdoor lights, the old school outdoor lights.

And so you take those, you wrap them in a handkerchief, crack the outer case, >> and the quartz on the inside passes UV, and you can ionize air like crazy. It I mean, it'll ionize everything around it. >> That's cool. >> Yeah, I have one of those. I have like a 1000 watt rig and I use Teflon as a reflector.

That was based off of Tin's suggestion. >> Yeah, they're they're dirt cheap. I mean, they've been making them for a hundred years. They're dirt cheap. >> We're going to have a UAP one of these days.

You know, we're going to do it. >> You mean we're going to build one or we're going to be visited by one? >> Uh, maybe both and or either, but I think I think we'll have the the war bubble one of these days with one of these methods. I think we will. Maybe sooner rather than later. Well, I'm not sure if you're familiar too much with um the the team you knew like um the actual how the momentum flow of um of a war bubble is, but it's actually really close to uh some of your to like some of the toidal activity going on with a hot vibration that not a lot of people realize or even have thought about.

So you're you're one of the first people that kind of even gets so that should be explored more especially in terms of like actually that that's something I've been looking in Pis he talks about um counteraction it I'm digressing I kind of think >> you're not digressing Dan that's interesting gravity is a twist yes yes I agree hit it right frequently that's true it will burst and we don't want it to burn >> waiting the button love it love marks too. [laughter] >> We will we do good things more good things are going to happen soon. Yeah, holiday magic will help. How the grand pop vibration. >> That That's your That's your fallback plan.

Like >> that's how I'm getting to Mars. Holiday magic. Wait until Christmas to build it. >> Yes. Yes.

Epic. Okay, guys. I guess uh is everybody done asking questions? Dan, we need to reconvene on this this what you've noticed about UAP as pop. I'm really curious as to what you've noticed and I bet you have >> to, you know, I don't want to take much of these guys time because we're we'll talk in the future. >> Yeah.

>> Yeah. Yeah. The the community building that's happening and that's that's not me and that's not even really APAC. It's just folks working online, collaborating, getting to know each other. >> Tim, you did do this.

You know, you did this. No, it's it's not it's it's organically evolving. The community building is amazing. >> Yeah, it's it is good. It is good.

>> Jenny, John Brandenburg has a question. Is okay >> gravity a twist? >> Yes, gravity is uh twisted torsion on the S1 fiber, which is also where EM lives. So, yeah, it's it's kind of cool. uh tor gravity is actually also you can also see part of gravity as an eight knot on the same thing but that's like the resonant mode on the thing but and then uh and em is uh uh god what is the the the the kind of loop the electron is a much simpler loop on the same thing >> all the I do I do like the connection to torsion that seems like that was the direction Einstein was going and >> yeah and cartoon and uh >> and Jack, we all love Jack. Um and uh I think uh I think that that the groups that have been looking at this behind closed doors have been stagnating for a while too because we didn't understand torsion.

So I think this hop thing will help. Yeah, [laughter] I think it's >> open community is such a better way to do things than hiding and like looking at little parts behind closed doors and then having one person look at the part and like what is going like that just not how science works. So this open communication is just better >> tortion definitely does help with just even just canonical warp drive like there was a paper in that and I think like 2008 I'd have to I have to pull it up to tell you the author and I can give you guys the DIY from there but exactly about do they basically just plug the cubby air drive into Einstein Carton equations uh and just by having the torsion there changed some of the dynamics a little bit and made it more in the worst possible case scenario being a provier. So I think I think what once we start applying you know into some of these more complex ones like tailor and stuff I think that I think you'll end up getting like something that's pretty usable with tech that's more near-term than people realize. >> That's exciting.

That's exciting. Yeah. I I and I think that it's actually a lot easier to kick up torsion than I mean it's small. It's a small effect but you can kick it up. And that's the truth about a lot of quantumish effects is that like they start small, but if you find the right parametric oscillator, you can increase the effect by just interacting with it constructively.

And so I actually Jack and I recently did a paper, we're still working on it at the draft, um although we're getting closer, uh about how the brain, there are quantum effects in the brain just because you have all these little chemicals that are interacting in ways that create little microcoherent effects almost certainly. And then but because you have all these nonlinear um oscillators in the brain, uh some of these are going to find resonant modes with the uh effects just by random chance and then those are going to pair off and certain quantum modes are going to get amplified and >> kicked up just by random and then you're going to have quantum effects. And so that's pretty cool. And uh some of this stuff in the deep UAP X-Files literature implies that maybe the aliens are communicating with like a sententient material in the UAP craft and that interacts with space time and their brain is coherent and the material communicates with the brain and like it gets pretty wild. But maybe some of it's plausible and maybe the aliens are doing something like wearing a headband and it's like more like a neural link that's not necessarily like a chip.

It might be like something that's reading your brain waves and then picking them up and talking to a material which interacts with the spaceime field, you know, and it's all very kind of sci-fi, but you know, you can get there. [laughter] >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It's speaking of Jack's work, I just saw talk about synchronicities. I I did an interview.

This is a little bit off topic, but it kind of kind of ties back into the folic condensates maybe. >> Yeah. So, the the the question was in terms of seeing the future and and tell you know clairvoyance or not clairvoyance but communicating with others. My question was okay that seems like a quantum explanation but how are you entangled with those other organisms? And >> and I I had talked to Adam Curry. I did an interview with him.

He's not a PhD, but he is very well-versed in that area >> and he had said relevance is more important than time or distance for psychic events. He said it's relevance is I mean based on based on very large rigorous studies. I I asked him I said based on these studies in humans and in animals and plants I said what is the most important factor he said it's not time it's not distance it's relevance and and that got me thinking I was like okay relevance I was like so we don't have >> a good mechanism for entanglement >> and we do have this re I was like what if that's self-entanglement with the future >> and that would go to the frolic condensate Or as you mentioned parallel resonators in the brain, right? Because >> they can be entangled with themselves in the future, >> right? Yeah. You could have self-entanglement. Yeah.

You entanglement isn't is in time as well. And you don't even need entanglement like you you not the non-local coherent field exists across all time and all space just on its own. You don't even have to think about it being entangled with anything. I guess self-entangled is another way of looking at it, but like it's just this thing that's there and it's already connected to every point in time, every point in space. So you're just and the relevance makes sense because it's just a way of thinking about a co like a um >> a correlation.

You can think of relevance as a way of thinking about correlation. So yeah, and you know, another thing about the psychic thing, and I know that like when you talk about psychic stuff, you get banned from conferences and things, at least if you're Brian Josephson, but uh like telepathy uh isn't as weird as you might think. You can't code things with entanglement, but you can share states. So, you wouldn't necessarily be in a code with someone or exchanging words, but you might be experiencing the same thing at the same time. And then part of your brain might be able to classically translate that into a code in your own head, even though you're not exchanging the code with the other person.

So you might get a different word for the same experience, but you might be sharing the same experience because the experience is more likely a state like a a field state rather than a code if that makes sense. >> Yeah, that makes sense. That makes sense. It so that you what you're saying there that could be super low bandwidth. It shares just enough so that you can experience the same thing and then you create the words for it.

>> So yeah, it's not a word. Let me ask >> let me ask Drew really quick. Drew, do you have any do you have a lab update you want to do? Okay. Is it Jenny? Is it okay? Let's segue over to Drew before before he starts with me. >> Yeah.

>> Evening. Um just setting up uh some graphics. It's been a really busy couple of weeks down here. >> Yeah. Yeah.

Are And you're doing okay though, right? Like busy but good busy. >> Yeah, just super super busy working on manufacturing and um just all kinds of around the edges and I pretty much nailed down the design for the one Newton um thruster. >> So now I'm just kind of kicking around different things and um different ways to demonstrate it. Uh we've gone to well I'll show you in the update. Um, seems I save this file.

Close that. And um, can I um I don't know. Can I uh >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. Go for it.

Share your screen. >> Um, yeah. >> And and we will come back to we'll come back to Jenny's stuff. Jenny, let me apologize for cutting you off. I didn't mean to.

I just I realized >> at all. I'm just >> getting ahead of ourselves. >> Um, yeah. So, let me uh I'm going to do that. Maybe this button.

They don't say what they are. >> Yeah. So, again, it's it's if you click the plus button and then you do share screen. I think that's what you normally do >> there. Uh let me see.

>> Working on it. Almost there. Technology hates me. >> There we go. There we go, sir.

>> Yes. Okay. Wonderful. Uh >> Okay. Well, uh, we'll start with No, we'll start with this one.

Okay. Um, I I don't have a picture of the test rig, but you just This is the uh horizontal pendulum test rig, and there's a there's a a series of uh test articles in there. It's like 179 and and then I burned up 179, so I had to switch over to 180. but they're identical. So, um, what this is is it's basically showing that when you turn on the power, it starts generating thrust because this one's designed to pull in a direction so that real thrust is shown downward.

And then when you turn off the power, which is here, um, this is power off because it's just zero voltage. It just kind of hovers and hangs out and goes back to whatever the pre-drift, the thermal free drift of the system is. Then you turn back on the power and makes more thrust. Then you turn off the power and it just kind of goes back into drifty mode. Um, basically it's making I switched over to doing micronuts per thousand seconds because it's a better it's a better overall way to compare stuff.

But the short of it is it's doing around 500 micronuts per thousand seconds. um it will do this pretty much forever up to uh I don't know 50 or 60 millimeters worth of uh loading. But the only important really thing out of this is it's in vacuum in this green line up here. You see the green line? It's uh over here green pressure to so it's uh you know somewhere around 8 * 10us 6 to so keep that in mind that you're seeing thrust on a very calibrated very sophisticated uh horizontal pendulum. And then here's the same basic plate only now we're at atmospheric pressure.

So basically I vented the chamber and gave it 24 hours to stabilize and it all comes to you know happiness and then basically turn on the power and the tricky part about this is you have to turn on a whole lot less power because you're out in open air and things short out. It's a whole bad day. But anyhow you turn on the power makes thrust turn off the power stops making thrust. So now we have the same plate in high vacuum doing magical things in atmospheric pressure doing lesser magical things. Um it's about half as much because the field is about half as strong.

Um because if you turn it up any higher it burns it up and then you know you're sad. Um, and then the really cool thing is, um, this is the same plate taken out of the chamber and put on a US solid digital scale. And because there was, you know, some issues with the wipe opening the door and um screwing up the test, um had to do it in two pieces. But basically the same plate over the course of 6 hours put on uh negative what are 60 70 809 189 mg of negative thrust. So it literally pulled upwards 89 milligrams worth of magic.

And so um I think it was Fineman that said if you can't prove something five ways it ain't real or something like that. Well, here are three distinct tests very different completely different um scenarios that show the same basic phenomenon happening. So, it's got two more to go which I already have done those. Um so, I thought that was pretty cool. That's the stator where we are.

So, now I can do demonstrations of our um impulse drive um out in the open air. I have since replaced the cardboard tubes with something a little less cardboard tube looking, but uh it's working fine. So, that's what's going on down here in sunny Florida. Questions? >> Well, thank you, Drew. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, man. And I am I'm hoping I'm working on we're working on in chat. I'm hoping to plan a trip down there to get more super high def photos and video of your stuff as well.

So, if you're open to it and and you have sourdough bread >> and we may be able to get Mark come down now. You could have a sourdough bake off. >> Sourdough bake off. So, >> hey Joel, welcome man. >> Doesn't stand a chance in a bake off.

>> Yeah. And and I still have I have Lucy in here also if he wants to hop back in. >> Keep talking New Jersey. Keep talking. He has his Oh, I can put >> Sure.

>> Yeah. Well, it's up to you, sir. You You don't You don't have to be here, but if you want to. Yeah. It's just lab updates.

I think Mark, do you have a lab update other than Scaler Snow Globe? [laughter] >> Jenny, you approve that name? >> The Scaler Snow Globes. >> Scaler Snow Globe. >> I approve the Scaler Snow Globe. >> Well, and and Mark Mark also has the Jewish space laser. Mark, you ought to turn that thing over so that the glass is in contact with the speaker.

>> Yeah, [snorts] but then you can't see it. >> Okay, I will tell you that, buddy. >> It also kind of blocks all the air from going through this. You might be right. This might be the better way to do it.

>> See what's happening. Yeah, I I would say for my stuff, one of the biggest one of the biggest changes this year is I'm using AI for a lot of stuff. And if you feed it papers, it's really good. It kind of constrains the hallucinations a little bit. It's like >> Yeah.

Like I'll give it transcripts and I'll give it papers and I'll be like, "Okay, write something based on what's in this." >> Yeah. >> And and if you give it enough, it can do really great work. And the advantage is like a lot of people have a myself included, a lot of people struggle with scientific papers. So if you can create a story, it lets them kind of tiptoe into the idea. >> So >> yeah, hopefully we can get some good things happening.

>> Yeah. >> Joel, you were talking about twisting. You were talking about him theory and torsion, right? >> He twisted. What is that? What is that? I've never heard of this. Tell me.

>> Um I'm I'm not sure if you're aware. I'm working in the framework of Bokeatim who was a German physicist living from the So he worked from um 1940s to um 2001. um quite under the radar of most people and outside of the academic system which kind of banished him early on because his ideas were um way too big and too fast for for the time and maybe still are. But um I was very interested in your presentation especially. I I watched your last presentation as well and today I understood a little bit more about it and I also had a talk with Daniel Davis about your work and it convinced me that I I need to have a another deep look at your 180 page document which is uh quite time consuming to really get into right but definitely [cough and clears throat] I think it's going to be worth the time.

>> Do you have any >> Yeah. Do you have any material I have time that I could look at? >> Yes, I I definitely could send you some. We we get some English translations uh um um now. So >> yeah, >> the main work is in is in German. So that was the problem for for for a long time.

It was only in a very complicated German language um and deductically very poor written up. But we're getting some English translations now. So that's um I [clears throat] would definitely and we should get in contact sometime because I think um so one of my main questions would be everything in your theory is is based on smooth uh manifolds, right? >> Yeah. Uh smooth bundles. >> Smooth bundles.

Yes. Okay. [clears throat] Because like the the one of the main things in in him theory in which really Oh, did she just drop? Thanks. All right. Oh yeah.

Okay, there she just re-entered. Yeah. Oops. Hold on. There we go.

>> Smooth bundles is the last thing I said and that's the last thing I heard. >> Okay. Yeah, no problem. Yeah. So, one of the main things that Batim did is take the quantization to the maximum.

He quantized everything, even his base base, right? So, he has a mitron is called the mitron. it is just the smallest surface area and that's where everything happens on. So his framework um works in six uh later 8 and 12 dimensions and it's based on uh on a metronis. So meaning that you have a smallest surface area connecting all of this um each dimension with each dimension has a a metron that is like the the cross surface on on which stuff happens and um so I >> I'm I'm also like I'm I'm developing the idea to to look if um what you're doing is kind of a smooth limit and if you could um especially because you also get a mass spectrum right from from his works and you getting a mass spectrum. It's very fascinating.

So I I want to do >> I want to do some uh comparing of the integers in the formulas >> and I have some other ideas about uh how to compare and study both frameworks >> and and see if if if you can enrich one another if they are already some some >> I think I think they're quite different actually. So which is even more exciting. It is not just the same theory. Yeah. two very different theories and I think there's the possibility to learn from each other for it.

>> Yeah, that is exciting and my theory has a discrete level because there are discrete patterns that come off of um um rotations and other aspects. So like it would be interesting to see if what he's getting could be compared to what I'm getting and if like maybe they reduce to one another in some way. >> Yes, that is that's one of the questions. But yeah >> um so from my intuition right now I do think that they are very >> um >> they have a very different background mathematically from where they originate. So I think that you cannot just convert them into each other but that they have to stand for their own.

But that's even more exciting because then you have two theories, not just one theory which is has two expressions, right? >> So um yes, but we we definitely we have to get uh in touch in a in a real talk and I might I might write something up first and and you can read a little bit up on it and we we need to talk further on it. >> But yeah, it was a very great uh presentation even though the audio cut out a little bit sometimes but um no problem. >> All right. Yeah, I'm sorry about that. I I think I have a solution for the next time if this happens.

>> And I also have to say I think it's very exciting stuff with all the presentations today and uh over the last months uh we are getting some real theoretical breakthroughs or at least people claiming uh to have them and of course if people claim that they have to back it up uh with something um but to to me it looks Yeah, Mark, you're you're pointing at it. We're really trying to back it up directly. And this is what's so amazing about APE, right? Having the connections to people like Mark and and other labs here uh that actually like in real time try to prove or disprove your claims which is um exactly how physics should be done and uh I'm loving it. Great. >> It's wonderful.

Okay, >> I'm take >> what? >> What? Sorry, Mark. What? >> What's the name of the snow globe again? The I globe. >> Scalar snow globe >> or the scalar scope globe. The scalar igen globe. >> The scalar snow globe.

>> The iigen mode. By the way, Jenny is all of the uh possible resonances. >> Yeah, the ien globe. >> The iigen globe. Oh, that's a cool idea.

>> That's almost German. >> Should we should What's globe in German? Joel knows. What's globe in German? >> Globus. Globos. >> There you go.

>> That's great. Yeah, >> I'm gonna print out a label and put it on right now. >> That's scala. >> Scalar. Scala in German.

Scalar. >> Escalar. You know, I I was doing some research about going to like the AIAA conference or some of the more traditional conferences, but then I realized if they ever see what we do here, they'll never let me in. [laughter] So, >> we're too cool. We're too cool if it's cool.

>> That's That's one way to describe it. That's one way to Yeah, that's not how they would describe it, but that's one way. >> That's okay. Okay. Okay, I got to get out of here because they're going to kick me out of this room.

But take care, guys. >> Okay. Well, Jenny, thank you so much for presenting. I mean it. That's so cool.

>> All right, take care. I'll see you soon. Probably next week. >> Okay. [snorts] Well, yeah.

Again, I mean, we've done lab updates. We can just do open discussion if you guys want, whatever you guys want to discuss. It's it's only 3:30. It's a little slow because it's November. I think that's part of it.

But um and actually I have a lot of folks who want to present stuff like staggered out through December and then January. And then my podcast channel I'm I'm scheduled myself into oblivion there, too. But [snorts] >> cool coming on your podcast. >> Well, here let me let me put Ionis on. Let me put Ionus back on.

And Curtis is here. He may be hiding though. His camera is off. I don't know if Curtis has an update or not, but >> so maybe I have a um maybe logistical question. >> Um there is a calendar on the website, right? >> Because I I wanted to ask if um >> there was a calendar on the website.

I took that down because it had links and people were using it to spam. So So yeah. Now, so our next one, let me let me look. I I will take a look now. I don't have a great solution for that because because again people were using that as this tool to spam us.

Um, >> okay. That's bad. But it would be really great to have um a visual thing to see all the upcoming um dates, right? You have the conference, you have open mic, then there's also the the other group. >> So, all the dates in advance would be nice to to to have in an overview. >> Um, okay.

So, let me see. Our next open mic is next week. So, Saturday, December 6th is open mic. That's at 4 pm Pacific. And then on December 20th, that is the webinar.

So, so December 20th is our next webinar. And I have, in fact, I could, if you'd like, I can bring up I I'm not going to share it on the screen because has emails and stuff, but uh let me see. APEC conference presentations. This is always really tentative. I had two folks change this week, which is totally cool.

But um so again, Robert Francis Jr. has been like diligently digging in to uh the Boyd Bushman magnet drop tests and and he actually the the challenge he ran into was he is using a 30 frame camera but he has access to 120 frame camera but he just couldn't get that ready in time. So we had to bump that back. So I'm hoping that he can present on December 20th. I'm going to write a note in there.

Um, and then uh Hugh Dezy and I have been playing video tag. I think he's got his sound and stuff fixed. I tried to connect with him last night. I will try again this evening. Um, so that is also a possibility.

Uh, oops. Okay. And then let me see. So Ron Evans Oh, and I think Ron is actually pushing back later. So that might be early spring.

I have to check on that. Uh Curtis has a unified field theory and I'm really excited about that because Curtis has dug really deep in in several different areas and so the challenge for him has just he he's it's a lot to work with and he's juggling a bunch right now. So hopefully December 20th for Curtis. Then Arrestus Lozanocus has um isotope tests for ET samples. And then Nathan Inan has quantum linearized general relativity and applications to propulsion.

And so that's that's December. And then in January uh Giovani Cambria has negative energy and Casmer plate experiments. George Egley has LENR gravity and fundamental physics. And Larry Davenport has his overdue TT flame flamejet anniversary presentation. So, and I let me I'll put Handbach on here as well.

I'll uh let's see Janu January hopefully. >> U Drew, somebody has a question about stacking layers if there's diminishing returns or it just adds up. Um, okay. Stacking is the I don't know if y'all ever saw the the great chart. See the trough of sorrow.

This is this is the design and manufacturing chart of horribleness. Okay. Uh, let's see. I'm down here in the trough of sorrow. This is where stacking lives.

When I first started stacking thrusters, um, they were 6 in apart and they worked great. Then I put them close to each other and they killed each other. Then I spent five years figuring out why they killed each other. And now I have them at zero stack thickness, so they're literally direct contact. and they're back to making the same amount of thrust they were making um back when they were 6 in apart.

So yes, bringing them anywhere near each other is a very very bad thing and puts you in the trough of sorrow where you live for many years of unhappiness. So that's the answer to that. >> That was important enough to laminate it. Thanks for sharing. Yes, that everyone should have this in their work area.

This is the this is it experimenting and pivoting and and then it starts working. Well, this is a very this is like a logarithmic line here. Okay, this is years of sorrow. The trough of sorrow is years of general misery. So, [cough and clears throat] hope I answered your question.

to find out exactly how to stack them. You show up here in sunny sunny Florida, join the team, sign the NBA, and you know, contribute to the overall awesomeness. >> I'd like to hear, >> excuse me. >> Oh, sorry. >> Hey, Curtis.

>> I I was thrown in. I didn't know I was unmuted. Go ahead. >> Oh, John wants a large number hypothesis talk. So, uh Tim, that's for you.

I guess >> the large number hypothesis. >> Yeah, that's from John Brandenberg. Todd Diato is asking, "Hey Todd, welcome back. Long time. What has really been accomplished in 2025?" That's a good question.

I got my uh the alafon setup got a lot more complex and uh we saw some results similar to the Xband in uh Sband and uh we're working towards making a triplet state system with uh helium cooling. I removed the vacuum system and moved toward a helium recycling chiller system. Um yeah, the setup got a lot more complex and we're moving away from uh uh from metals for now and just doing uh dialectrics. You know, I'm going to send I'm going to send Mr. Brandenburgg and Mr.

Desiato a link studio link there. Okay. >> So, sorry you were saying >> talking to me. >> Yeah. Did I interrupt you, Drew? >> Oh, no.

I was just looking at the comments here. It says somebody's somebody's like in their eighth year of doing whatever it is they're doing. >> 23rd. >> I should, you know, Ionis, you can Ionus, you can jump in anytime also for open discussion. It's it's just >> Yeah, it's just open disc.

We we try to not interrupt too much, but go for it, man. >> Yes, no problem. Okay. If if I if I need to, uh, we'll do it today. Thank you.

>> Okay. Yeah. Let me see. Todd said he can't make it, but that's okay. >> Tim, I just want to mention something.

You know, I I listen to all this theoretical >> and I won't use the word babble because I know that this is off to the other people, but I listen to all this theoretical talk and discussion and all this stuff. Okay. Um, what is somebody ever going to be able to take out a piece of paper and draw me a sketch and say, "Hey, could you build this?" Because if you build this thing, it it has a shot at working. Okay. Until you can actually do something with all of this wonderful theory.

Somebody can somebody explain to me again what's the point of it. >> I think you know I I Drew I think it's a mixture. I I I mean you have some folks that are just doing theory and and they're not even looking at applied theory and then you have other folks that are kind of like okay I have an idea. How do we apply this? And so I I totally identify with what you're saying. I think it's like stages.

Some people start with theory and they're approaching it from that. And then there are other people who like like with yourself and and Charlie Beller, right? Like you guys really started with the effect and you're like, "Hey, we have something. Let's figure out the theory behind it." So >> if I may contribute to this, >> right? Um in my presentation I was explaining exactly this. We are in the technological phase of achieving gravitational um control gravity control technology. So um if you're interested look at my articles and presentations especially on rocom many conference on advanced materials where I explain how to what research needs to be done to build two-dimensional materials which are anizotropic in gravitational field.

So the theory is clear. So is this what you were talking about? >> I already got I already got stuff that can free float. So how do we how do we get to the next stage? I need somebody to build me a warp bubble thing. >> No, >> that's the impulse engine. I just think >> you have the material which flows then we build the UFOs and uh we don't warp to a different star but we colonize the solar system.

So that's the next step. >> Yeah, I [snorts] know. I got that part. How do you do the, you know, y'all are talking about this warp bubbles and gravity bubbles and all that other nonsense. >> Are talking about a new transportation technology which is based on anti-gravity controlling gravity and that's what it needs.

The war bubble that's uh yet um far away. >> You say control about propulsion system simply provides acceleration. >> No. Uh no, that's where you don't understand the gravity cuz if you reverse the direction of the spin that you're pulled towards other sources of gravity. So you you travel for free.

You don't need inertia. You don't need to expel anything. So >> yeah. What happens if you're far away from the Earth? What if you're sitting out in the middle of nowhere and there's nothing to push off of? >> It's the rest of the galaxies. you you fall towards the rest of the galaxy.

How how is it not clear? >> Because it's not you're you're >> okay >> one over r 2 makes it a long way away from the nearest rest of the galaxy piece of >> they have all the other planets. It's like okay. So >> yeah, you also have one over r 2. >> Yeah. I think what you're pointing out to is something >> not attracted by earth.

You're attracted by sun. You're attracted by Jupiter. You go wherever you want. It's like skiing on a on a gravitational >> gravitational effect of of Jupiter on a spaceship would be like the weight of a knat. So ain't Jupiter ain't pulling you nowhere >> and you are repelling from Earth at the beginning.

>> Okay. Okay. So, let's say you get away from Earth and you're still way away from Jupiter >> and you're going to you're reversing the direction of gravity. So, >> well, what Lucian is talking about is uh in the alopon theory, it's possible to increase gravity as well as decrease gravity. So if you point uh if you resonate the craft in a way that it increases gravity on one side and decreases it on the other, you'll get pulled toward whatever is there on the other side.

>> What if there's nothing there to get pulled towards? >> Something there. >> Yeah. >> But it might just be farther away and then you have to crank it up a bit. Um somebody was asking about Tom Voluone not having a real degree. I haven't graduated high school.

Um his books are great. Buy Tom Voluone's books. Um that that really does not qualify or disqualify anyone from knowing what they're talking about in here. Um Drew, did you go to school for uh anti-gravity research or warp drives? >> No, I did not. But um that I read that balloon guy stuff.

I like his stuff. >> They they don't even have school for that. There is no school. >> That's my point. There is no school for this stuff.

>> I gotta tell you the the second half of my team, Char Dr. Charles is about as sharp as they come. Okay? Literally, he's got every credential you could you've ever heard of. Literally, he's published everything. >> And he's got missions on the moon right now.

And there is nothing that comes out of his mouth that's useful to building anything. I mean, he don't get me wrong, he's he's he's set up the physics and and he's got equations and all this other stuff and this is a running argument I have with him for, you know, eight or nine years now. There's never anything that comes out of his mouth that's useful to me. It just drives me crazy. So I think >> a lot of time in college >> Drew I think your question >> I've got degrees in in aerospace and and uh uh in uh space propulsion freaking worthless >> I think your question really mixes in with um the question from chat what was really achieved in 2025 right so the question can be interpreted as can you really show us something physical Now where is um where's the real prize that uh maybe a lot of people really thought that this year would be a breakthrough year um and I think on the theoretical side it has really been a breakthrough year there was um a lot of really good um minds have come together a lot of really good papers have been written or are aren't being written right now right Curtis um hopefully uh uh soon to be seen for everybody um and like tools have been built for for example the W factory um tool and in which you can can plot and work on on metrics and stuff.

Um so I think uh really a lot has come together this year and uh the direct translation into something real might take some more years but the the the groundwork is is laid down here was was too small to read it Drew what what was written >> 2.67 2.63 63 times Earth unity. That means I have a I have pumped enough magic into a piece of plastic to make it lift 2.6 times its own body weight. >> Yes, >> I think that's pretty good thing. >> So that's that's an that's an amazing thing. And uh what you're doing is um so in my point of view that is the real novel propulsion system that has come out this year, right? But at some point at some point um I think we all want to go a step even beyond that kind of technology.

We want to go um um to to a real warp drive um >> system hurry up and figure it out. >> Well, so actually take time, but we did some really good steps this year. If >> if I could redirect for just a sec, Drew, I I wanted to ask you you sent me some photos. You were trying to get one that would lift off vertically and I remember in the photos you'd said that it was your plate was not it wasn't strong enough so it was kind of draping. >> Have you thought about hanging it and doing a deflection test? >> I did.

>> Oh, okay. >> It it generated the it generated the same. This is basically what I do when I do a horizontal pendulum. >> Yeah. >> I just take the hanging thing and hook it directly to a load cell.

>> Do do you have video of that that you could put up for us? Um, I have video of that and no, I cannot put it up to you. >> Okay. Okay. >> Yeah. But what he's saying is it's attached to a load cell, so it's not a visual movement.

It's just squiggly lines on a screen from >> Oh, okay. Okay. I The movement would be cool, but that's just >> Yeah, everybody says that, but it's um the problem is that the system that's inside the chamber weighs about a kilogram. It's got the power supply and the and the and the the frame and all the stuff that's already in there in order to make the magic happen. Um, and then the individual plates weigh about a gram, gram and a half, something like that.

Two grams. But you got to have all that other crap in there in order to make the thing work. Well, >> yeah, >> by the time you do the math, you know, I only have the thing's only, you know, whatever it is, it's only uh 12 in long. So you do the math in the small angle theory and it works out to be about third of a millimeter of travel maybe maybe half a millimeter. It's real tough difficult to look at something that takes about a 100,000 seconds to move a third of a millimeter.

It's a real tricky thing to show. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It's what you're doing is is dec.

It's more complex than it looks. Right. That's why I went to open air testing. So now I can put my um stack of thrusters on the little scale and press the button, zero the scale, and watch it pull upwards. >> So, and one thing I >> last What's the last time you saw something pull upwards on a scale? >> Yeah.

One one thing I want to point out to folks watching is the reason that you're able to do open air and and have it work fairly well is because you've dropped your voltages way down. And so other people have struggled, right? Cuz I I've worked with lifters and stuff like that. When you when you're running them at like 30,000 volts or something, 25 30,000 volts, you've got ion flow everywhere. So in your case, you have dropped your voltages way down below the point where you get a lot of ion effects. So, >> right, air breaks down in general around 3,000 volts, 3500, something in that zone.

Um, if you have a sharp object at about 3500 volts, you're going to see you turn the lights out, you're going to see little purple little purple streamers coming off of it. You get anywhere near ground, it'll start ozoning and and you know, sinking the room up. Um, I operate somewhere around 5,000 volts now and uh I'm at about uh two orders of magnitude above the breakdown of air. So I'm still operating at a ridiculously high breakdown field. Um well above air, but you know I've chased that gremlin for years and I can now run an open air stack that pulls against gravity.

But um the one thing I wanted to mention is not only do you have to come up with a way to make a test work, you know, you like dream a test up and then you build a test and then you do whatever it takes to get the test to work and then you figure out a way to demonstrate the test. But you rapidly run into the other side of the real world and that is manufacturability. Um I know everybody has heard of TRL, technical readiness level. Hopefully, you've heard of technical readiness level. If you haven't, go look it up at NASA.

Um, but there's also manufacturing readiness level, MRL, and when you run your test and you actually make something work, your MRL is usually like one, which is I just took a piece of paper out and I've listed all of the problems it's going to be to make the thing. And to go from one to two, that's a that thing's a logarithmic scale. It is insanely difficult to get to MRL level four or five, which is I have a real plan on how I'm going to make a thousand of whatever these things are. I don't know how to do it yet, but I have a real plan. That's what I've been spending this last year doing is getting my MRL level up to about five, which is about the TRL level of my of uh my hardware.

Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. There there's there's a ton going on right now. There's a ton experimental and then theoretical research and and again my my bent is like I I I love using AI to dig through it because I I feel like as as that gets better and better, we're finding hidden gems, you know.

So, there's a lot going on right now. Well, guys, I think we we are at the top of the hour. It's just about four. I mean, we could keep going for a while or we could close things down for today if you want. It's up to you guys.

>> I'm going to cut out, Tim. >> Okay. >> Should we should we should we wrap up shop for the day then, gentlemen? >> If Curtis is not coming back to give an update on his paper. I don't know. I wanted to ask him when it's when it's coming out now.

But >> so he's Curtis is going to be doing next month. It'll be next month. >> He's going to present next month. So, yeah, the paper should be out in the meantime. >> I'm I'm really looking forward to that.

Okay. Okay. Well, guys, thank you. Thank you all. Give yourselves an enormous hand.

This has been one heck of an event. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. So, yeah, I will I'm going to take everybody out and this has been APEC for November 29th, 2025. And we have another one coming up on December 20th.

If you attend, if you're on our email mailing list, um we have an open mic, which is kind of the open discussion that's not recorded. That is coming up next Saturday at 400 p.m. Pacific time. But for the the structured AP pack that we have right now, December 20th is the next one. That is the next Streamyard version.

I want to thank everybody for joining us. Thank you to our presenters for amazing breakthrough frontier science. I am super super excited. 2025 has been one heck of a year and it just keeps getting better and better.