Karl Nell with Dr. Garry Nolan on The UAP/NHI Hilbert Problems: Defining a Way Forward

Transcript

[Music] one so I want to thank everybody for their resilience uh and staying and uh as you might expect uh this is definitely the the the cherry on top talking to Carl So yeah thank you well I should say it's it's really uh my honor to be here and and quite humbling to to share the stage with Gary and uh so I'm just thrilled to be able to talk about this and I thought that the the session today and La yesterday was just phenomenal and built on a great track record of success that Soul had last year and in conversations um in between the two sessions I had talked to Gary about this idea of maybe trying a way forward that might help synchronize the efforts of all the folks involved here and the various foundations in fact there was a sync meeting uh a couple days ago that that Soul host Ed uh with sort of that in mind and it was very encouraging so I thought um maybe I'd get a chance to chat with you all about the uh what I call that UAP Hilbert problems which in some sense are uh an intent to suggest a Way Forward on the phenomenon and so the idea uh and a lot of people probably know David Hilbert right so famous a German mathematician he uh is the the namesake for Hilbert space which was the idea of formalizing uh the ability of different trial functions to multiple Dimensions he framed 10 problems that formed the basis and direction for for theoretical mathematics for over a century and uh so we're sort of kind of suggesting the problems might align in that same vein it's interesting though uh the problems still remain there's there was actually 23 that he ultimately ended up publishing and there was a 24th that was postumus and uh over time people solved a lot of these some of them were actually solved quite quickly uh some were determined uh to be uh like insoluble some like the ringman hypothesis with prime numbers is one of the major challenges caner theorem for uh the cardinality of the Continuum was found to be like ill formed an ill formed problem and then some sort of problems about the shortest distance between two points was actually a problem so in some sense what we're saying is even Hilbert didn't quite get the problems right but it still had a benefit to kind of frame the way forward so that's sort of the idea here so uh we've got um let's see if this thing works does it work oh yeah it doesn't do it there but does it up there all right so um so this is sort of a uh the obligatory sort of campaign plan slide that basically shows the lines of effort and so the premise here is like what are we trying to accomplish and so I would submit that we're trying to accomplish the restoration of proper elected official oversight on the topic uh progress on the topic in terms of scientific advancement and this idea of controll disclosure which is a way to to mitigate the potential for catastrophic consequence and so there's sort of five phases and sort of five lines of effort that you know as a conceptual model one might consider uh Germain of the problem and so I would submit for consideration of the group that the government probably has the the best information and the most information related to the topic and so the quickest path to uccess in some sense would be let's get the government to do uh you know what we want the government to do and so that sort of line of effort a is is sort of intending to be that uh you know the political advocacy the policy development uh you know Etc so the the subsequent lines of effort you know b c d and e uh are private sector efforts uh things that are directly uh impactable by the folks in the audience and and work that probably is already started in some sense so so maybe we'll walk through some of these and frame uh some ideas on how these things might contribute to making progress so uh let's see okay yeah so I'll talk about this slide a little bit and then maybe turn it back to Gary as we walk through some of the other problem sets so this is the government line of effort so so Hilbert uh only had 24 problems and so I ended up actually having 30 here so you got to suffer through Maybe uh six more problems but U so the the first couple problems really get at uh oh one thing I should probably say is there the yeah the uh these problems sort of align with the elements of National Power and so uh the the Department of Defense kind of uses acronyms for everything so we've got an acronym for the elements of National Power like we got acronyms for everything so we've got This Acronym called dime which is a diplomatic uh information military and economic and then because that wasn't good enough uh they came up with uh like an appendage so there's internal and external sovereignty and so dime is sort of your uh you know external elements of power right dealing with other countries and then you've got uh what they call Phil so the acronyms dime Phil there's Finance intelligence law enforcement and then there's a political element so that's dimefil P so you got like eight elements of National Power so I'm I'm only giving you six here uh but we're going to get into some of the economic uh elements as we're going through so you can see from a policy standpoint and from an information standpoint the idea that uh there's got to be a control group that's uh recreated to manage this uh function so the problem is like how do you actually do that and how do you actually centralize information uh on the topics such that progress can be made and so the uh the UAP disclosure Act was intending to do that with the UAP review board and uh what actually ended up getting passed technically last year is the idea of consolidating all the records at the uh the National Archive unfortunately uh the definitions were dropped so the the subject matter the content the scope of that archive is really probably continues to be a little suspect uh but so that's sort of the first two problems they still remain to be solved ultimately is what I'm saying the second one or the third one is um basically your uh finance and so the idea of the financial piece is really how do you incentivize grant money to uh maybe impact this problem so you know the academic Community can get engaged in a more aggressive way and so that's probably some reforms that are going to be required through the the National Science Foundation and then if you think about you know ultimately trying to move into the Diplomatic sphere you've got to kind of understand not only like the domestic side of the equation but you have to understand the foreign foreign policy side and so the idea of you what would it take to to understand the public and private positions of every government with respect to the topic as well as the uh the State of Affairs perhaps of any rdt ande research development test evaluation programs of uh you know of a foreign Nation so this this thing called an ni National Intel estimate that might do that and then ultimately that might lead to a an international Forum like the Reagan Gorbachev Forum or the roal Congress of religions that might ultimately end up trying to address you know sort of whole a planet issue BR something up so so that's maybe the the government line of effort uh you know uh Hilbert problems like how do we get a handle from a government standpoint but a lot of folks you know are probably more interested in what might happen uh you know both in the humanities and so we've got six problems with Humanities we've got six problems with the Natural Sciences we've got six problems with uh industry and society and then another six sort of in healthcare and so the the idea with the humanities uh number one would be like sort of administrative how do you set up an administrative structure that the academy can engage on this topic and so I mean obviously folks in the audience are going to have probably a much better idea how to do that than than I might but but as a going in position maybe you'd want to create uh Specialties Within These existing disciplines and ultimately you know endowed shares and heads of departments that would like you know sort of support the sear so that's sort of a big ask but you know the hbert problems weren't necessarily that easy to begin with so so the idea maybe would be instead of creating a degree program on UAP or or having uh you know specific set of um lectures on UAP becomes like sort of a specialty of each of the disciplines and uh let's see we on the right side so the the ethical piece is also an interesting one and you we've got like a theory of Ethics based on this you know the fundamental principle like Do no harm and do the greatest good and in some sense that seems to presuppose uh actors with equal competitive potential in terms of U their effectiveness in navigating the society and so if the the the norm is a hierarchy of being where you've got you know non-human intelligence that might be more advanced technologically more evolved uh you know in terms of uh their development it would seem that in concert with that would become a greater responsibility to protect so the idea of conservation laws driving a competition is balanced by the idea that uh you know greater um capability would would really bring a moral responsibility as well just like we've got laws of armed conflict where you know there's sort of limits on what you can do so we've got the sort of maybe the special relativity version of Ethics we need to get to the general relativity version of ethics and um so that's sort of what that's getting at but maybe I'll I'll shoot it over to Gary on the next two sort of sociology and and the history aspects you know there's this potential for ontological shock of phenomena that people aren't comfortable with and uh you know how best might we manage that so I mean um my thought about the ontological shock in history is I think somehow we have to look back into history on how it was that Humanity resolved the notion of uh non-human intelligence in our uh in our environment I mean religions have been talking about everything from angels to Demons or Spirits Etc um and I think the Common Thread that I've seen uh everything from prehistory to today is whatever this thing is that might be being represented to us uh is uh basically saying there is another but depending on your cultural framework you it represents itself in different manners depending upon the time so the I think I'm not saying that that's true I'm just saying that that appears to be a way to resolve the continuity but is is that what we will need to consider moving forward if if today what we think we see is technology is tomorrow it going to be something else so what is that going to be precisely yeah so it seem like there's examples in the past on how to navigate this and maybe we need to Avail those examples in terms of setting up a direction going forward right and it seems to me that there's a role for actually the discipline of Sociology to sort of map out the potential likelihood of uh the idea of like false Authority syndrome or you know um stagnation of initiative you know the War of the World sort of Hysteria like what what is the real probability of any of those kind of occurring and how one might mitigate those as being significant and ultimately the idea here is solving some of these problems even theoretically and having a serious conversation about them ultimately might feed back into lowering the threshold for the government to come forward with information because essentially there's sort of six reasons for you know possible for non-disclosure the national security reasons pretty well understood everybody sort of appreciates that but there's this just this idea there's lack of a plan like once you announce non-human intelligence all of a sudden there's thousands of questions like what are you going to do about that right okay well what would you do it it well exactly right so so in some sense in some sense like it's not a government problem right right it's which which is really kind of the point of of these problems here which is most of these issues dealing with the plan are addressable in in the in the private sector right so like if there's a sociological issue like let's solve that in in the in the sociological disciplines if there's like an ethical issue right if there's a economic issue which we'll get into ultimately well I think you know pivoting off of that what Riz was talking about earlier you know I when I was sitting listening to what RZ was talking about um you might say well why are you preparing for something that we don't even know is going to happen yet uh and yet if you don't have that preparation right that's also going back to this morning with Matt Pines if there's the 1% chance of complete societal disruption uh not just monetary or governmental um then isn't it the purpose of academics to have uh some of these hypotheses set up and at least potential War gamed out answers for them uh and so um to me at least you know preparing for that uh and having these kinds of discussions and making it safe to have this kind of a discussion is really what the purpose of all of this is about precisely precisely so like this next one the history one is like you know if nhi exists has it interacted with Humanity over time right so it's sort of an open question it's this the classic Chariots of the Gods sort of scenario while you know I wouldn't necessarily endorse any of the uh you know the use cases in that book the question still presents itself if nhi exists and uh whether we count it in the future or we whether we encounter it uh in the present you'd want want to know has there been interaction in the past and so it would I think behoove uh you know historians and uh cultural Anthropologist to sort of look into that because that's something we'd want to understand to understand our own Human Condition well what kind of discontinuities would you expect to see um that would represent something in the past well so it's interesting to sort of throw out like sort of this interesting hypothetical they uh they recently there's this idea of out of place artifacts right you probably about and so there's uh pre-dynastic Egyptian vases that date to like 3,000 BC and um flender Petri actually found these uh and uh they've kind of hoarded in zoar's pyramid like so dates to like third fourth Dynasty and they've got like 10,000 of them in there and uh they've got some of these in the Egyptian Museum and they're they're the ones that I'm talking about they're made out of granite and shist corundum which is like one level below or diamond in the hardness well they they they've been around for years flingers Petri found them in the 1890s they finally decided to mensurate one like with lasers strain gauges you know and uh they determined that the uh profile is accurate within a thousandth of an inch of a mathematically uh mathematical equation so like you can't make this object by hand it was it round it couldn't be accomplished on a lathe right but the um diameters correspond to a closed form algorithm oh okay right and uh the futures of the Vay the fillets the rounds it has handles on it uh you know you've got to have like a three Axis or for axis like milling machine to make this and it's made out of granite they've got others that are shist so they're very brittle they got some out of corundum so nobody really knows how this is made the egyptologists basically say that it made they made it with grounding powder and and uh you know on a potter's wheel or something but it's it's impossible to make this object in that way so that doesn't mean it's nhi obviously but it means that like the scientific Community hasn't engaged with that object and there's either like an entire material culture associated with that that is lost like the antii mechanism you know uh had we not found that nobody would believe that they could make that right so that I think what we're saying here in this history uh you know problem is uh some of these things deserve a relook and to understand where we came from U we probably need to do that well I think it comes to the whole data off the curve problem is that um you know all the discoveries that were ever made really of any significance and many of the Nobel prizes that are given out are always uh things that were off the curve uh and so it I think it just merits I I don't think it I mean again it's this whole threshold of how much time and effort you put into an anomaly versus all of the other things that could be done um and so it's it's one of those things you put on the Shelf until the point in time comes when it's like somebody realizes ah now I see it but there's also opportunity space there too right so it's sort of a trait like maybe it's a risky Endeavor but it also is maybe career enhancing if you're successful career destroying correct right as the case may be yeah all right uh let's see how about religious studies so I was privileged to be on a talk with Dani Pula uh at a recent conference and we talked a little bit about how the the Orthodox face Traditions are very dissimilar but the more esoteric versions have some similarity and you know through this sort of initiatic experience and so one wonders as a lot of experiencers report like Altered States Of Consciousness and you know near-death experience like encounters uh you know was there any interaction in the past in terms of of religion and you know what would that mean you know have nhi interacted in that way and that become public and what would that mean ultimately for government disclosure right so there's maybe a linkage there well you could imagine the you know the uh legs of uh if certain legs of certain religions get pulled out from underneath them there would be considerable uh accusations of heathenism right right and so this is the potential for also the societal disruption aspect and so you know it remains to seeing any if any of that's true but as a responsible policy maker you'd have to probably entertain that so so this is a problem that like would be great to definiely resolve it perhaps in the negative but but I you know I I I want to challenge this whole notion of Hysteria that you know I I think unfortunately for most of the world's population um they're too busy putting uh bread on the table uh and so so to the extent that uh it would be news for a certain cycle or period of time I I don't think it would change uh people's need to continue to put bread on the table you know if if if anything um they will say well I don't have time to deal with that right now so that to me is a sort of a buffer in the system right right right well uh in the next phas I think in uh uh the two slides from now we're going to get into the economic impact and we probably should discuss maybe if that's got a ramification as well but uh why don't we go to the Natural Sciences so uh Avi had talked about this uh and Darry you did too in a previous discussion like this whole data collection and data citability is isue you there there's a lot of uh let's say data out there but is the quality of the data sufficient to be usable and is the uh is the accessibility of that data and the development of large language models you know effect efficacious enough to to draw anything out in terms of evidence right and so maybe you'd like to kind of comment further on that yeah I mean one of the things that I'm excited about with data and I can speak to it from my cancer biology background um you know we've been producing uh and my laboratory has been you know responsible in a let's say it even a negative way of producing so much data that we can't make meaning of it um and then suddenly we have the whole Corpus of uh the scientific literature at our disposal um and if you context the question in just the right way and in some of my talks I literally say it's a is actually a Zen Buddhist saying that the more perfect the question the more easily obtainable is the answer answer um it's almost like an information space problem uh and uh by by being able to context the question uh with raw data literally raw data uh simply comma delimited suddenly out of the morass of the statistical relationships in the large language models arises the answers uh that and put into context uh that I wish my best graduate students or postdoc could accomplish and it has to do with these things called Chain of Thought uh and we basically create like the a scientist who thinks like this is how a scientist thinks here's how a scientist postulates here's how a scientist develops questions and so using that kind of an approach I could imagine now coming uh to the data collection that for instance Jonathan is producing uh and collecting it out of either the raw data from the Galileo project or putting that together with the contextual information in the literature and saying okay find the pattern and give me the answer uh because you know just as a little as as two years ago um and I've had these many conversations with jacqu valet about it he he would say the artificial intelligence is is garbage in garbage out well it turns out that garbage in with AI can actually clean up uh and become uh signal out of apparent noise cuz there is relationships within that data and so that's what I think is an opportunity in data collection is that data collection with metadata correlations will allow you with these contextualizations to AR arise bring out the relationships you didn't even know were there as Jonathan showed a couple of examples of this afternoon and and you've kind of thrown out a challenge problem several times which is like what's the best evidence and what's the best data and you know aggregating all of that so other Scholars and researchers can use it can jump start the whole process right in a way hopefully that's citable and you could actually build you know papers and subsequent research off of you know I and I think what you know again AI showed with the ability let's say to collect 500,000 or 500 million data points is you know just as little as last year people would say well that's nice but I don't have the terabytes to deal with it uh to hold it and yet almost all of human knowledge uh can be now distilled with these large language models down to just a few terabytes which is just remarkable to think about um and uh so to me having that much data is no longer a problem uh now it's just you have the compute resources to uh to ask questions of it but the flip side of that is just as I said before if you don't have the right question you'll never find the right answer and so that's what I think is that's what I think we need to challenge ourselves for is what kind of data do we really want to have how much cleaning of the data do we need to do and then what would be the questions that we ask of it to help it give us uh an answer like is there a discontinuity in the historical record uh that would you know do or I get asked this question a lot uh you know is there a hybrid program and as a geneticist my answer is even if there was it would be so sophisticated you'd never see it in the data because it's just too complicated to expect to find that so don't ask me right right well in some sense too like the sort of the statistical analysis that says you know what's the you we hear about UFO waves and UAP waves like where's the canonical data set that shows that we we've there's a lot of let's say anecdotal information and certainly witness testimony that a correlation between UAP and nuclear sites but where's the definitive data set that shows that right so what's the temporal geospatial geopolitical even Celestial GE geophysical kind of correlations right does it correlate with Earth lights does it correlate with you know politics does it correlate with you know troop movements like what does it correlate to you know and I think what that calls into a need for is is there going to be eventually a database of databases because you know even at the meeting in the last couple of days I've had people say we're collecting this on experience or we're collecting this uh type of data or this kind of data and I hear the same data sets being collected in four or five different places um and so that's repetitive action that doesn't need to be done but you know in one hand you'd hope that those databases validate each other uh and they're at best you would hope that they're synergistic right right so sort of moving down sort of the problem list there's sort of the hard science you know physics Material Science you talked about biology a little bit but so if we like think about material science uh you know Richard feeman sort of talked about this idea of room at the bottom right and it seems like you know technolog is finally getting to the point where we can you should explain what the what what he meant by that oh right so he he was pretty much saying like that uh there's opportunity to engineer at the molecular level we can actually there's there's more opportunity space in terms of science Material Science and Technology at the molecular level than at the like the macr structural level and it seems like we're finally getting to the stage where that's sort of viable like we've been doing that in semiconductor for decades we we've done that obviously in in genomics but as this becomes more widely possible the barriers to these disciplines seem to be eroding and the possibility of creating a material infrastructure that's really you know engineered and so the the idea of program programable matter and um information and Material Science start to merge some more advanced civilization may have already gotten to that stage so I think the Hilbert the true Hilbert problem here in Material Science is you know there's Form and Function so form defines the function so we don't yet know how to make certain kinds of materials I can put the atoms there let's say but I don't necessarily have the ability to make the atomic structure bonds that are required to create the the necessary structure to carry out the function um and so Hilbert problem here is and so this is sort of like a a challenge to material scientists at large is how do you create abono the positioning of two atoms and then a bond uh at a macro level in a material in 3D you can't just like print them like clay dots or like even the more advanced uh printing of 3D materials today we're still centering stuff U melting it onto itself or PR memorizing it onto itself so how do we how do we how do we make a superconductor which anybody you seen some of those zey like structures uh that look like these beautiful 3D objects how are you going to print that and if we're dealing with materials as some people claim exist uh from such objects where they seem to be made almost as if they were instantiated out of the quantum foam um at desire how what kind of technology is required to accomplish that and and yeah I don't I don't have a materializer yet but what would be the steps along the way to get to the materializer right and so you'd essentially have uh the ability to analyze and then maybe ultimately replicate well and and that's what's interesting again about the large language models and um deep here is in the audience who who has uh been part of the of the generative Loop of analyze determined function predict with computational models what the next thing should be and sort of creating an evolutionary Loop of of materials generation so what's missing in that Loop is actually the knowledge of what reality is and what the function is we're we're sort of doing a loop on function and we're we're creating methods and which are really cake cake recipes for what the next function is and we test that but we don't actually have a test yet for what the reality is did we make what we thought we made uh and so analytic techniques are required for that as well not just determining where the atoms are but determining what the structure of the bonds are in the material that we thought we made so that's sort of a good segue to the next sort of set which is going the wrong direction there we go uh for industry and society and uh some of the problems that that kind of Might revolve around how to um operationalize this in an economic sense but you know first off like you've we've sort of started the conversation you've got a lot of organizations both in the public and private sector and the nonprofit sector that are sort of interested in the topic how do you best synchronize those efforts well I you know I'm I'm going to go back and we we touched on this to what Riz was talking about is that you you know and and actually you and I had this discussion around the UAP uh um disclosure Act of and the eminent domain uh question right um you know and and so the the point was does supposed material stay private for good reason because of security or does it go into the public domain or is there some middle ground right so actually if we're going to sort of talk about that um maybe we kind of refer back to the amendment right so so folks that that might be familiar or had read the uh UAP disclosure act there was a section in there that basically said the government is going to exercise imminent domain over technology of Unknown Origin and biological evidence of uh non-human intelligence and so a lot of people sort of question why that was in there since imminent domain is actually like inherent into in sovereignty itself and this has actually been litigated in the 19th century so the fact that you have a sovereign like uh the federal government or even sovereign state eminent domain is an element of that and so people would say well this is sort of controversial if the government already has the authority you know like why even include that in that in that um you know in that uh law because it just creates another contention and so I think the reason it was included was essentially so the board that was being created that was publicly accountable uh would have unfettered access to the material in a legal sense so just because the government has or might be able to get material uh you want it to go to the board because the board is accountable to Congress so that was sort of the first piece uh the second piece is you know the lore sort of talks about material being moved into uh the private sector perhaps to keep it Out Of Reach of elected officials elected oversight and so perhaps over decades the uh the ownership status sort of became fungible like one might argue if uh all government material was uh subject to the board then the material would be commercial or if one argued that you know the commercial company uh you know has to have oversight to its executive board then they'd argue it's government right so the imminent domain was included also to remove any doubt of the fungibility of the material well and and my our discussion not argument to you was that there is that middle ground of public private partnership that there would be ways to take some of the materials let's say suppos it alleged although tomorrow it'll be in the Daily Mail that you know I said something different um that there's that middle ground where you could create the kind of of investment opportunity where and RZ talked about some of it but you know my my idea was that you basically pay to get in uh and then the intellectual property that might arise from it you get to bid on it coming back out and using it but that it's it's it's done in enough of a classified and semi- classified way or public way that you can uh bring in the interest of academics and create that virtuous cycle uh that I think we're wanting to see or that you would want to see around any development to any technology whether it's UAP related or not right right so well part of the concept of emminent domain to sort of kind of you know hit the bad mitt ball back over to your side would be to say that uh compensation is required yes right and so sort of the compensation process that um you know might be under consideration was sort of a six six stage process right and so the so the first idea would be to Grant a grace period so you've got this board you've got this material and I would argue like the the the proof of this phenomena is sort of resonant in the center gravity of the material by the way like as a segue here you know there's been uh you know witness reports you know from the 50s the 40s even war war II there's been some photographs there are quite a bit of government documents that have been foed there's some videos now you know we've got little sensor data like in the aggregate it's like quite a lot but you know people still always ask like where's the proof right so so in some sense uh you know the material is going to be the center of gravity of the uh evidentiary path uh you know if it exists and if the government has it so so what you would want to do is essentially manage that process through control disclosure with this board that would have oversight ultimately of Congress so you want the board to have the the material and so you would Grant a grace period with the let's say the controlling authorities as this first step and the six step process uh you know where you're not going to make any change but the governments are going to sort of get a handle on what they're going to do right but you know what the push back is from Twitter is I can't wait that long I want it tomorrow Carl tell everything yeah well right right so that gets into the catastrophic disclosure Gary right no I'd be I'd be perfectly happy with that I I want to know whether to go back to my lab and do cancer research or whether I do this which is seem seemingly more interesting at times well well so let's like run through like the the other five steps right so so there's this sort of grace period where you know like we're hoping that the controlling authorities are going to volunteer the material in a classified setting to the board right and they may have ideas on where to go looking for it right so um they're going to give them maybe a year to kind of like figure out what they're going to do so the second part is okay um you know you ought to get like a finder feed for it and you ought to get compensated for um you know the expenses uh in securing it and in um you know in analyzing it and you know this actually Bears a lot of resemblance to um the law of the sea in terms of Marine Salvage right so the idea of like if you find like a a vessel at a drifted sea uh you can't just keep it for yourself right you got to like bring it into port and then the owner kind of gives you a finder fee right and sort of to reduce piracy but also sort of incentivize the reintroduction of the cargo back into the streams of Commerce right so you don't want privacy piracy but you want you want the material returned and so this problem actually Bears a lot of resemblance to that because what we're talking about in in the Schumer amendment is specifically non-human technology like it's designed defined as non-human so the owner is like non-human intelligence so so so let me let me stop you there for it's because it's interesting the so somebody claims that they've got something and they bring it to you but it's non-functional it's a piece of broken something how do you prove that what you had was that rather than an airplane part right well like HOA of course right so the amendment basically says that the board's got to adjudicate that Beyond Reasonable Doubt like the standard in the amendment is reasonable doubt but so how's the board going to do that well if the you know controlling Authority brings it Forward under the statute then they're presuming that it is non-human intelligence so they wouldn't brought it Forward right if the government claiming that then that would have to be demonstrated and they probably come to experts to do that demonstration so there's got to be a chain of custody there's got to be form Andor function uh and proof because who's going to invest in it if there's not that associated with it and and so there has to be laws and things set up for that so that's that's kind of a Hilbert problem is that it becomes it goes back to politics and then it flips back to you know and I and I think we all know that politics is can be driven by economics I don't mean bribery no well well you want policy to incentivize like societally positive behavior right and that's got to be informed so just to run through like sort of the other like three components of like this sort of six-phase plan then you're going to allow the finder of the material to retain any intellectual property that occurred before imminent domain was exercised before this legislation had it been passed so so there's sort of incentive for that and then uh the potential to get a grant to continue the research MH and then maybe that IP would be co-owned with the government I mean right and then finally uh you know the kind of the implicit idea was you want to make this material available to a wider group like bring in a larger Brain Trust because apparently uh like one might argue as people have that's it's been sequestered away it's not benefiting Society so you'd make it available to a Consortium that might be cons compe ly selected right a Consortium of like the best and the brightest to work on it and know by the way the the original controlling Authority might be competitive to participate in the Consortium yeah so that's maybe uh you know one way of doing that and then you might move from that sort of Consortium stage to more of a uh regulated reintroduction of this you know outside the secure Enclave to benefit society and I want to make sure that we reiterate as we're talking about this again because this has been a long conversation this is in the context of War gaming out ideas it's not because anybody up here knows one thing or the other that is or is not true but it's a it's sort of a a late night over the bar drink conversation right that's precisely to the Daily Mail right right right but but in some sense like just entertaining this conversation in a serious way makes available to the government policy options that it might not otherwise have right I mean yes it's the whole idea of thinking through the problem and then saying okay well here's something that maybe a paper could be written about a white paper or what have you that could be pointed to because this when the Senate staffers you know I mean so for instance I've been called by Senate staffers about Havana syndrome quite a bit uh given my past um work uh in the area and they're like hey can you write us a white paper on this because we hadn't heard about this and it hadn't been anything out there so and only because I'd been involved with it was I able to write something like that and it ended up influencing policy precisely and you know how would you in incentivize like collaboration on this topic in terms of um also how like the monetary reward or compensation would flow and so for instance like you know if you actually had this exoic material right and uh so the upside would be tremendous but even in a Consortium of uh you know companies that are working on it there might be that desire to stove pipe so the first thing I would do frankly I mean as much as the economics is important is I would incentivize the science because the the science is you can incentivize with money all you want but that's only going to get necessarily greedy scientists at the table uh and I would rather that somehow is is brought out that there are there are principles Within These objects that are dozens of Technology revolutions ahead of us and that any one of those revolutions would be as big as the transist was uh and so we don't have to worry about what the long-term function of the object is but that if we find within it a principle that could excite a whole new uh generation of scientists that would be sufficient to have brought the stuff out of the warehouse in the first place right right so should we talk about uh in the last couple minutes the uh healthc care aspect do we want to do that um the uh sort of this kind of teas off on the experiencer aspect of the thing and so the idea of like wellness and uh Health sort of comes into play in terms of potentially the ontological or psychological impacts that might come from interaction but also if there's sort of a public Revelation there could be societal impacts as well and so you know in a sociological sense that sort of theoretical but in the sort of prophylactic and pH you know and uh you know Medical healthc Care side um you know would you have any comments on that well I mean the medical aspect I mean that's what got me involved in the first place for those of you who don't know I mean when I got the knock on my door to say can you help us with these patients it wasn't because I was in I had any interest necessarily in in UAP or UFO it was because they wanted access to the technology that my lab had developed around blood research uh and so um I think where that led to you know basically us seeing the first of the Havana syndrome patients I think um basically informed me about uh the other kinds of trauma that either our uh um defense Personnel or intelligence Personnel were going through and the experiencer side now I I I get criticized for not wanting to talk about experiencers it's not because I not it's just I'm not a psychiatrist and I I don't have the qualifications to to cover it but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be discussed and we've had plenty of experiencer groups here but so my nextdoor neighbor at one point was the chair of Psychiatry at Stanford and when I first started bringing this subject matter up I could and was like a first dinner over at their house I could just sort of see her moving back in the chair um uh but but until she started hearing more and more of the of the uh work that was being done in the area and she realized that it could be contexted around a mental health problem it didn't mean that she had to agree with what it was that we was seeing but like John Mack she came to understand that this was a problem that was being experienced across a large group of people and therefore it was probably part part of her Department's uh you know uh patient uh subset anyway so she needed to deal with it right right and I just sort of salute you for being a leader in that area it's a very brave thing to do than so but there's a you know I think there's a thank you I mean there's a A Step Beyond the mental health and then and that's the the bodily Health uh and you know if if people have come in contact with field structures that supposedly these craft might allegedly make um what do we learn about the field structures and what it does to humanity I mean who do we have to put dogs in in space in these objects like we did previously or chimpanzees before we use them or what kind of test bed systems do you use and and and what I mean I do my lab does a lot of animal research and I don't like it one little bit but um um it has to be done instead of making a mistake so you know I I I think that is something that I would want to understand a little bit about with any of these Technologies what's the safety profile precisely yeah I mean technology of Unknown Origin is probably technology of unknown ramification yeah and so you know that would have to be kept in mind as any policy might be developed yeah well thanks for sharing this time with you Gary and I appreciate your thoughts on the the different hilber problems yeah and thank you so we've got 54 seconds left for a question no thank you very much everybody [Music] [Music]