s_400_449.doc - stealthskater · web viewtable of contents - "s_400_449.doc"_ s-400....

Table of Contents - "S_400_449.doc"_

S-400. from Edward Halerewicz, Jr regarding Element-115 creationS-401. from Bill Hamilton regarding StealthSkater's website CDS-402. from Mike D'Agostino regarding Faraday's theory of fieldsS-403. from Mike D'Agostino regarding the "Theory of Everything"S-404. from Mike D'Agostino regarding alternate time-lines and "time loops"S-405. from Mike D'Agostino regarding microbiologist Dan BurischS-406. from Dr. Arkadiusz Jadczyk regarding microbiologist Dan BurischS-407. from Bill Hamilton regarding potential Burisch disinfoS-408. from Edward Halerewicz, Jr regarding Einstein's Unified Field TheoryS-409. from Edward Halerewicz, Jr regarding the Dan Burisch rumorsS-410. from Bill Hamilton regarding missing BJ Wolf e-mails in EaglesDisobeyS-411. from Bob King regarding "the Atantis Blueprint"S-412. from Tom Skeggs regarding sensing bad events in the immediate futureS-413. from Bill Hamilton regarding memory implants to Dan BurischS-414. from Tom Skeggs regarding NSA remote-monitoringS-415. from Tom Skeggs regarding his latest theories on MontaukS-416. from Bill Hamilton regarding disinformationS-417. from Ed Halerewicz, Jr. regarding Dr. Robert Baker's High-Frequency Gravitational WavesS-418. from Ed Halerewicz, Jr. regarding UFO claimsS-419. from Ed Halerewicz, Jr. regarding Warp Drive Propulsion Within Maxwell's EquationsS-420. from Tom Skeggs regarding HFGW propulsionS-421. from Tom Skeggs regarding Lazar's and UNITEL's designsS-422. from Edward Halerewicz, Jr. regarding exotic propulsin conceptsS-423. from Edward Halerewicz, Jr. regarding possible Mars artifactsS-424. from 'Crackajack' regarding Dan Burisch's geneologyS-425. from Ed Halerewicz regarding a Warp Drive e-book S-426. from 'Crackajack' regarding 'insider' info & dis-info S-427. from Tom Skeggs regarding remote-viewing bilocation experiences S-428. from Ed Halerewicz regarding paranormal "science"S-429. from Ed Halerewicz regarding "Theories of Everything"S-430. from "Crackajack" regarding 'insider' details on the Dan Burisch story S-431 from Tom Skeggs regarding the Montauk "Delta-T" antenna

563

S-432. from Tom Skeggs regarding an alternate timelines - UFO connectionS-433. from Tom Skeggs regarding remote-viewing warnings on the Burisch case S-434. from Ed Halerewicz regarding Bob LazarS-435. from 'Crackajack' regarding the Dan Burisch topicS-436. from Ed Halerewicz, Jr. regarding Paul Potter's UFO designsS-437. from Bob King regarding Montauk and the P-XS-438. from 'Adam' regarding the Montauk radio receiversS-439. from 'Adam' regarding the Montauk Delta-T antennaS-440. from Ed Halerewicz, Jr. regarding "growing" UFOsS-441. from Ed Halerewicz, Jr. regarding his physics insightsS-442. Ed Halerewicz, Jr. on Bill HamiltonS-443. Dr. Arkadiusz Jadczyk regarding Tom BeardenS-444. from Ed Halerewicz, Jr. regarding Peter Lynds paper on "time"S-445. Ed Halerewicz, Jr. regarding "Warp Drive"S-446. from Ed Halerewicz, Jr. regarding Metric Engineering and Exotic MatterS-447. from Tom Skeggs regarding the Montauk Project S-448. from Edward Halerewicz, Jr. regarding ZPE "virtual particles"S-449. from Edward Halerewicz, Jr. regarding modifications to his e-book

S-400. from Edward Halerewicz, Jr regarding Element-115 creation

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Mon, February 2, 2004 7:45 pm Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: Element-115 created by Russian and American scientists]

Thanks for the info! Here's more info on a more scientific site:http://www.nature.com/nsu/040202/040202-4.html

So this claim is more bonafied than the one made in early summer. I believe I forwarded some info to you on the Russians attempting to produce E-115. Looks like they might have had some success. Thanks to your message, I was able to do some digging on the preprint article of this study. I would have to wait for at least 2 labs to confirm this before E-115 could have been said to really have been created. FYI, here is a summary of the data I gathered from the pre-print:

Yuri Ts. Oganessian, et. al. ``Experiments on the Synthesis of Element-115 in the reaction {243}^Am({48}^Ca, xn)^{291-x} 115"

deduced 115 isotopes from decayed particles were:{291}^115 {283}^115 {288}^115 half life ~87ms (due to relativistic effects){287}^115 half life ~32ms (due to relativistic effects)

Proposed Decay Chain from experimental analysis 115--> 113--> 111--> 109--> 107--> 105 (note only last two elements have been named) of the deformed nuclear reaction: Am(Ca, xn)--> 115. 109 decay was not observed but suggested.

The information is very much speculative. But that's about as much that is known at this time.

564

http://www.nature.com/nsu/040202/040202-4.html

-- Edward Halerewicz, Jr. Truss Technician/Independent Researcherhttp://da_theoretical1.tripod.com/index.htmEditorial Member of JoAtPM: http://www.joatp.org

S-401. from Bill Hamilton regarding StealthSkater's website CD

From: "Bill Hamilton" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Thu, February 5, 2004 1:33 pm Subject: Re: it's like a "stamp collection" ...

> > Mark,> >> > I received your CD but haven't had time to look through it yet.> >> > Thanks,> >> > Bill Hamilton> > Executive Director> > Skywatch International Inc.> > www.skywatch-research.org> > Fiat Lux et Veritas

> Bill --> > I'm guessing you already are acquainted with nearly all of the documents and essays. They are more for the "novice".> > I'm hoping there will be something inside the huge e-mail collection that might be useful. It's kind of like a stamp collection (e-mails = "stamps"). You keep collecting them over time. Then you take it for appraisal and find there is a couple that have some value. > > -- Mark

Valuable "stamps" in some cases. Glad you saved this stuff.

Bill

S-402. from Mike D'Agostino regarding Faraday's theory of fields

From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Sun, February 8, 2004 10:26 pm

565

http://www.joatp.org/

http://da_theoretical1.tripod.com/index.htm

Subject: Re: a search on Farday's field theory ...

Hello Mark,

I have read Hyperspace by Michio Kaku. First off, Maxwell's equations in classical field theory should be look at as a byproduct of, or subset to a larger theory of Electric, magnetic and gravitational fields. Maxwell's field theories generally work well and are some what predictable within linear, transverse wave activity, Not very well in Non linear, induction field activity.

I remember reading from Bearden's web page "Chasing the Wild Dragon". In it, he discusses the original work of both Heavyside and Maxwell and reducing their original formula for simplicity sake.

Unfortunately there are still many E/M anomalies which are present in today's scope of electrical engineering understanding.

Mark, when it comes to classical field theory I remember Maxwell -- not much of Faraday -- except when talking about cages. Kaku's work is based on the mainstream and popular theoretical concepts. I myself find it difficult to buy in to the superstring theory. Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but my understanding of superstrings eliminates 'zero' from the equation in order to preserve "renormalization". The process represents the idea and concept of linear waves and fields existing. And all nonlinear activity is considered "virtual" and non existent since it has been observed to have little effect on physical matter and only subtle states of change on linear waves - fields.

I am not a mathematician. I am familiar with and have used some geometry and algebra but very little calculus. According to Maxwell, Energy density = electrostatic pressure on a plane. There are many websites which take a different position. That Maxwell's equations are only subsets, byproducts of higher planes - higher states of symmetry or higher dimensions.

In order for a theory to "float", it must be consistent and it must by able to predict and even explain E/M/G observable effects and anomalies, both linear and nonlinear. It may be easy to state that the combined uniform connection between Einstein, Maxwell, Yang-Mills and quantum physics explains "everything". But as long as our method of detection states we observe only 4% of the Universe and the other 96% is Dark Matter & Dark Energy, we understand very little.

Einstein's great contribution lead us to a better understanding of General Relativity, Special Relativity, and unleashing the atom. Maxwell gave use a method of predicting activity of transverse - linear waves and systems of potential. Yang-Mills projecting on Riemann's theories on higher dimensional topologies; hyper-sphere. In mathematics -- just as in wireless communications -- we use "transforms" such as the Fourier transform, Wavelet transform, etc. in order to manipulate the activity and interaction of sine waves for signaling and communications.

In order for a Universe or Multiversal manifold to be successful, it must posses supersymmetry at higher states of order, dimensions exceeding 3D+1T. It must be scaling invariant, probably a fractualized based on a form of golden mean ratio. The Ramanajan function would work fine. A mobius transform to experience periodic activity, change, time, particle decay.

Mark, the tensor can be visualized as a vortex which acts as a mechanism. Transform this would ensure the same localized spatial gradient and frame never intersects itself, or else you would end up with a perpetuating loop that never experiences change and repeats the same frame, or series of frames over and over again. A prison of eternity.

566

If you visualize a Mobius Strip standing on its side , then visualize wrapping and expanding on the surface area (without the twist) , you would end up with a type of toroid doughnut. The vortex structures on either pole could act as a type of transform and follow golden mean ratio scaling invariant and emerge over -or- on, interpolated with previous and future events at one now-instant zero transform, gap space.

Superstring theory would not allow such a function due to the nonexistence of a Zero - Scalar. A zero gap space or scalar would form a continuum, nested within itself and the interpolated - codified state spaces would be the byproducts of Zero Transform Activity. This of course leads to a Many Worlds Scenerio. Not Hugh Everett's interpretation but something more holistic and tied into the collectives and organisms ability to receive and act on information subjectively perceived from one of its future selfs.

I know the big push now is for superstring theory. But if Zero doesn't or can't exist in a dynamic manner, I believe it's a hard sell. At least for me. Zero = Infinty & Infinity = Zero typically ignored and repulsed by the mainstream community.

Virtual Number systems operating on a dynamic Hypro- and Hyper-Zero Transform on a double-toroid nested within each other can probably work for me. I just need to work out the details and quantified geometry with a expanded Maxwell equation which encompasses electricity as 4D bleed-off in 3D space.

If three dimensions are acted on simultaneously, it can usually be called gravity - hyper-dimensional activity. Just as gravity permeates and acts as a surface area for three D space, so to must localized "inverse gravity" pockets also exist. Although --like an objected submerged in a liquid -- if the object weighs less than the liquid. it displaces it will be ejected to the surface of the liquid. In the same manner I believe natural inverse gravity pockets may form and be naturally ejected to dimensions exceeding our 3D perception

Well, I wish I was more help. But the base theories between Einstein, Maxwell, Yang-Mills and quantum theory must be correct within and to themselves without unexplained anomalies popping up. When nonlinear conditions are just right and affecting linear matte, energy is the result. In addition we still have to explain the other 96% we don't detect in our little corner of the Universe.

Best RegardsMike

S-403. from Mike D'Agostino regarding the "Theory of Everything"

From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Mon, February 9, 2004 10:43 am Subject: Re: a search on Farday's field theory ...

Hi Mark,

When trying to put the big picture together "without" the provisions for a Zero, Gap space, aether, or scalar space as they are trying to do with superstring theory, I fail to see how in all likelihood how string theory will actually fly.

567

My understanding of string theory dictates there is no aether or Zero; i.e., everything is made up of different combinations of vibrating strings with the absence of nonlinear activity since they don't consider them real -- only "virtual". This picture puts scalar waves-fields in direct conflict with string theory. Although there are certain aspects of string theory which I believe will have some merit in a dynamic field type of theory.

Mark, the other thing to consider is that Kaku's book Hyperspace was copywritten around 1994. And as you and I both know, the scientific community is making new discoveries several times a year. It's moving in leaps and bounds now. There is a lot of new information which Kaku was not aware of at the time he wrote the book.

Example-- Raymond Chaio's experiments a link between electricity, inertia, and gravity. Every time new experiments are carried out and verified, new material must be factored into our overall theories. If one or several of the factors we are looking at are flawed -- or only partially correct -- that makes the overall conclusions in doubt -- Einstein, Maxwell, Yang-Mills, etc.

Being inconsistent is the "kiss of death" in physics. It may be the undoing of the superstring theory at some point in the future, but only time experiments and observation will tell.

-- Mike

S-404. from Mike D'Agostino regarding alternate time-lines and "time loops"

From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Wed, February 11, 2004 8:09 pm Subject: Re: alternate timelines & 'time loops'

--- [email protected] wrote:> Mike --> > The only time I read about time-loops and alternate timelines was in the SkyBooks' Montauk series. But I just gleaned more information from Dan Burisch's chat-interviews about his involvement with Majestic's ET-biology programs. It tends to reinforce some of Preston Nichols' remarks, believe-it-or-not.> > I am in the process of converting all 5 interviews to more readable Word documents. The first is at the top of the http://www.stealthskater.com/Burisch.htm page ( .../Documents/Burisch_10.doc ). Within a week I will have the rest done.> > -- Mark

Hi Mark --

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a "time loop" would be 'time' as in time-space reference frames would be connected together at some spatial location or temporal event where they connect and continue to perpetuate. So a person caught in such an enigma may continue to repeat several seconds -- or several hours or days or even months or years -- without being aware of it. That would be a temporal

568

http://www.stealthskater.com/Burisch.htm%20

singularity since through repetition the system is not dynamic, and likewise collapse back into the temporal field from which it emerged.

Alternate reality systems or many worlds would be a process by which emergent properties spring. Choice points for the observer. The observer could be a single-celled creature, dog, tree, elephant, person or coral reef. Any and all life -- at least our narrow view of what Life is.

I imagine in a properly functioning Multiversal Manifold and all the life forms in it would posses some ability to:

1) Be able or aware of information from a subjective source through intuitive processes, ESP.

2) Believe and recognize intuitive subjective information maybe coming from a future self in an alternate future.

3) The ability to act on intuitive information received. The process of creating through imagination other fractionalized choices which didn't exist in the other reality system's. This process would ensure the Universe (Multiversal Manifold) would experience all possible outcomes and still continue to be in a state of becoming and emergence. So change in the system continues.

I would guess most life forms fall in the (1) and for some (2) category. The lifeforms which master (3) would probably accelerate in their advancements.

Mark, I know I've taken a leap here in the meta-physics arena. But in order to factor consciousness in to the equation, "it must be done". This would of course mean we are only limited by our imagination and the resources we develop/discover.

Many critics would state Occam's Razor in regards to a Many Worlds scenario. I would reply that diversity in natural systems is the "rule", not the exception. If that statement is true, then the Many Worlds hypothesis would support and imagination would ensure a self-perpetuating system whose equalities are dynamic and emergence is the norm.

Best regards, feedback is welcome.-- Mike

S-405. from Mike D'Agostino regarding microbiologist Dan Burisch

From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Thu, February 12, 2004 8:02 pm Subject: Re: the last of Burisch's chats

--- [email protected] wrote:> Of the 6 that are now posted, the last one -- certainly, the "simplest" is attached (also available at http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Burisch_15.doc ). I haven't had time to add it to the .../Burisch.htm page yet.>

569

http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Burisch_15.doc%20

> Apparently this ties in a lot to do with the Mars issue. I know Al Gore was briefed during his Presidential campaign on what the latest probes found -- or "confirmed" as to what was long known. I have gotten hold of some of the text of the "Eagles Disobey" book by "BJ Wolf" who also was first-hand privy to Burisch. According to Bill Hamilton -- after BJ's site was abruptly taken down -- all remaining copies of her book at Amazon were "recalled" and she was no longer heard from. Bill said she now works for "them". I have gotten hold of some this text and will convert it to MS-Word docs shortly. And we'll see what's so darn disturbing. It must back-up some of Burisch's remarks about how we've "already been to Mars in another timeline", whatever that's supposed to mean.

Mark --

Interesting situation with BJ Wolf. The material she provides should correlate with some of the other info you have collected, depending of course on the sources.

I can imagine there is a lot of disinformation also being produced by those who failed to stop the info from surfacing, so they either can muddy the water or discredit the person as a source. Games with in games. The most important aspect is the general public has been successfully "desensitized"..

The Biology stuff on that last page went over my head.

Best Regards Mike

S-406. from Dr. Arkadiusz Jadczyk regarding microbiologist Dan Burisch

From: "Arkadiusz Jadczyk" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Fri, February 13, 2004 3:05 am Subject: Re: forwarding e-mail response regarding Dan Burisch and 'time loops'

On 12 Feb 2004 at 6:43, [email protected] wrote:

> Ark --> > You may be interested in this Bursich stuff (http://www.stealthskater.com/Burisch.htm ).

Hi,

Thanks. But I do not find anything credible there. Looks to me like well-planted disinfo.

Best wishes,ark

S-407. from Bill Hamilton regarding potential Burisch disinfo

570


From: "Bill Hamilton" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Fri, February 13, 2004 11:48 am Subject: Re: why aren't people paying more attention to this?!

> Now I know the counter-intels are adept at deceiving the enemy. Like Tom Mahood said, you have to watch the magician's "other" hand. Maybe I'm just too gullible and a "sucker" for such things, but what made me a believer in Dan's stuff is the e-book of BJ's. I'm almost done with reformatting Vol-1 and will announce its URL shortly.

I have all the volumes and BJ even printed them and bound them for me.

> I did come across that quote from "Deb" about having to take down any websites that contained such information. That happened to hers ... any clue why it hasn't happened to yours? Or even mine? Maybe there's nothing out there that it so sensitive, and it's a good way to keep tab on what we're up to?

Never "back off" unless it's to avoid gunfire.

> Unless I'm misreading something, EVERYTHING I've ever read about UFO-type technology is that it involves a physics that "our best minds cannot even conceive of" -- almost like "magic". That is saying something considering all the Wittens, Puthoffs, and Hawkings in the world. But Jack and "Ark" can't seem to get the message. If something doesn't behave in a way they can formulate, then it isn't physics as they were taught and -- worse -- it is "cargo-cult baggage crackpottery".

I don't know. Even some of what Jack says makes him sound like a crackpot. A PhD is no insurance against craziness.

> BJ's e-book preceded Dan's Internet chat-interviews. He seemed more out-going in the latter and more bitter in the former. Would I be right to assume that they "conditioned" him a little, and so his most recent public responses might have entailed some of the "obvious disinfo" (e.g., Wolf, Illuminati, etc.) that "Ark" said he spotted?

He is much happier with his current work and is now getting some of what he has requested (instruments, software, etc...)

I know there is something going on with this man as he is surrounded by mysterious experts who have intercepted my email, recorded our indoor and outdoor conversations, etc.

> I'm hoping the e-book changes a lot of opinions. It's a lot easier-to-read in my Word-version. I have noticed that there doesn't seem to be a lot of interest in the Burisch subject on your two yGroups. That's very disheartening as it seems to be the best story that has come out so far. It ties together Sherman's "Project Preserve Destiny", the Montauk-like stargates, and even Lazar's stuff. The two most important biological questions are: (1) how does life start in a single cell, and (2) how does 'consciousness' (or a "soul") enter that organism? Burisch seems to have discovered important clues. Far-fetched, but I wonder if they couldn't make an soul-catching antenna of sorts and re-incarnate pst consciousness into new organisms?

571

Dan is now working on a model of the behavior of the Ganesh particle. In recent work, he managed to produce stem cells using a stream of Ganesh Particles. I do not have the particulars of how this was done. A new chemical molecule called Reversine can also produce stem cells from existing somatic cells.

> How does all of this reconcile with the Near-Death Experiences that > have been reported? I don't read anything about 'aliens' and the like > in those tales. Just long-lost friends and relatives.

Hmm, no alien friends on the other side … … Maybe they go back to their own homes.

Bill

S-408. from Edward Halerewicz, Jr regarding Einstein's Unified Field Theory

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Fri, February 13, 2004 4:35 pm Subject: quid pro quo

As for the E-115 news, thanks for it. Here again is something a little more "official" about it:http://www.aip.org/enews/physnews/2004/split/672-1.html

So chances are that sometime in the future it will be included on the Periodic tTable as a man-made substance. As per UNITEL, I thought I would give you some quid pro quo. I contacted Michael Miller the other day upon Larry Maurer's instance. I found that he can absorb knowledge like a sponge, but I am not quite certain the he knows everything he is talking about. He had a few interesting ideas, but quite a few of his suggestions I found to be in complete contradiction with the known laws of physics.

Just thought I would comment about two things I came upon your page on the Philadelphia Experiment. I came across what I thought was a plausible explanation for it. They were not trying to make a ship invisible to radar. That's just nonsense if you think about it. If you can see a ship -- as from the air -- radar invisibility does you no good. Secondly radar had only been recently invented at that time and by the Royal Air Force. What seems plausible was the fact that a naval yard was doing experiments on searching and avoiding mines by some radar-like technology. It would seem that this would be the most plausible and likely explanation, at least from Occam's Razor point-of-view.

The other is the "gravity room" at Los Alamos or Lawrence Livermore. I can tell from reading the article that it is completely bogus! I believe there is a place at NASA where they train astronauts in tank of water to simulate weightlessness. This may be called the zero-g room. Also NASA did do a study a few years back with magnetism and gravitation studying gravio-magnetism works as suggested by Li Nang which was, in fact, on the cover of Scientific American awhile back. I believe this urban legend is a combination of the two. A visit to the public library of where the alleged article was written should confirm that. Also when LANL comes out with news they usually also post it on their website, so that is also problematic.

572

http://www.aip.org/enews/physnews/2004/split/672-1.html

One thing that is a dead giveaway is that gravity is not an electromagnetic force and anyone who works at LANL should know this! The electromagnetic force is, however, related to nuclear force, all though different couplings and energies are involved. Hence the similarities between QED and QCD.

However, gravity is not an electromagnetic force at all. It could be stated as the collective accumulation of all known forces into a geometrical pattern, such as matter-energy-spacetime. But even Einstein knew it wasn't electromagnetic. And anyone who talks about Einstein's Unified Field Theory being correct has never read Einstein's papers on the subject. He never could get it to work!!! It was later modified by a young student who wrote to him and is now called Kalzua-Klein theory, the precursor to string theory. The fact is Einstein never had a Unified Field Theory at all. It was simply his quest as alchemy was with Newton.

-- Edward Halerewicz, Jr. Truss Technician/Independent Researcherhttp://da_theoretical1.tripod.com/index.htm

S-409. from Edward Halerewicz, Jr regarding the Dan Burisch rumors

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> Date: Sat, February 14, 2004 1:25 am To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Dan Burisch story

I only briefly scanned it. Sounded like crap, IMHO. I had biological/life sciences classes in high school. All that was brought up was basic cellular structure. In HS microbiology seemed simple to me in that using a microscope is a lot easier to work than a telescope and that it required less know how than chemistry.

And I also recognized the formula phi(5-1)/2 as the 'golden mean'. Humans can see patterns everywhere. And since the golden mean is a "magic" number, it has no significance in itself. Unless, of course, you're a mathematician. To quote Pt. Barnum "there's a sucker born every minute."

I'd prefer to stick to pure science and not speculation. And it is only those topics which I care to discuss.


S-410. from Bill Hamilton regarding missing BJ Wolf e-mails in EaglesDisobey

From: "Bill Hamilton" <[email protected]> Date: Sun, February 15, 2004 10:51 am To: [email protected]

> Bill -->

573



> I finished editing "Vol 1" of BJ's e-book into a more easily-readable Word document. It's at the newly-revamped http://www.stealthskater.com/Burisch.htm page. But when I accessed the Vol 2 - Vol 5 files at the links "white rabbit" (and others) provided -- even the zip files -- they seemed to be just excerpts from the Vol 1 I had just finished. I surfed and came across references to an "Eagles Disobey" and "Eagles Unchained" e-books that seemed to have different Volumes associated with them. But damn if I can get back to where that was. If you know of any more material that should be appended to the Volume 1, let me know.>> Well from what you said, "Michael Wolf" is an obvious no-no. The question begs why would Dan comment so much on that in those chat-interviews with DonDep? A guess one answer would be it was the result of the "reconditioning" the military did on his memory and dis-info was implanted on purpose for discredibility safe-guards. But that is an AWFUL WEAK excuse that few people would buy.>> The point of this is should I go back and edit those chats to remove such obvious disinfo? And what else in addition to Wolf is there present in those? I personally always have had a tough time swallowing such concepts as a global "Illuminati" and the like. If you think it would be worthwhile in order to "prove" the fundamentals of Dan's story, identify them for me and I'll get right on it.>> "Talk" to you later --> -- Mark

Mark,

I have copies of the other volumes on my work machine and can send you them next week.

Dan doesn't really know anything about Michael Wolf. I asked him in person. He tends to be polite. It is Don Depellier that kept bringing up Wolf.

However, Dan believes in an "Illuminati". This goes back to childhood where he witnessed some prominent people in England conducting rituals. Dan had religious training when younger and this went against the grain for him. He is a little more liberal in his current views as he has had to change them over time, but it is difficult to shake off training and indoctrination and at least one miracle healing he experienced as a youth.

Bill

S-411. from Bob King regarding "the Atantis Blueprint"

From: "Bob" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Sun, February 22, 2004 2:20 pm Subject: Re: latest on Dan Burisch -- AMAZING !

> Just finished archiving the latest interview with secluded microbiologist Dr. Dan Burisch. Fascinating stuff! The man indeed does a heart, perhaps one that is too big for his own good. But WE are the lucky recipients of that!

574

Thanks for keeping me up to date. Did you get hold of that book The Atlantis Blueprint? If not, I suggest you do so as it is relevant to much of what you have been sending me.

Regards, Bob

S-412. from Tom Skeggs regarding sensing bad events in the immediate future

From: "Thomas Skeggs"To: [email protected] Date: Tue, February 24, 2004 6:28 pm Subject: Cold Witness

Sorry I have been unable to write.

I have been distracted by a series of problems which have been growing for last few weeks. I just want to get February out of the way. I have been sensing some strong anti-American feelings for some unknown reason. It's been growing in intensity. You don't want to know what it is. I have felt this before. I was at an airshow at Duxford, on Sunday 9th Sept 2001. And that was the first day I took a flight in a plane. And I kept getting the feeling that I should get used to flying. I also had a strong feeling to watch a video of a film called "Dante's Peak" where a volcano explodes and covers a town with ash. (I could not work out what it all meant until the 11th Sept 2001). This was also the time when I built the first UHF psychotronic generator. (On my old angelfire website. The highest number of hits occurred on the 10th Sept 01. The day before 9/11. Which puzzled me at the time).

This maybe a false alarm. But I won't know for another few days. I've been pacing up and down the sea fronts. Trying to figure out what's wrong. I sense something going to end and something going to begin and other new lines will open up. But when using RV or ERV, I'm just getting noise or interference. I feel it but cannot see it. It's making me feel uneasy. Something's going down. It appears to come in waves.

Sometimes I sense something … then I don't. But it appears to grow in intensity. (This has happened before. Then the feeling suddenly stops. Like a shift in direction). Sensed a big shift a few days back.

It seems close but far away. But there is something else going down. There are 3 events (lines) which may cross in the near future. I've been up to stuff with the FTA. And I think answers will appear all at once over 3-4 day next week or so. (Between 26-29th. Peaking on the 27th & 29th). The other may have something to do with computers and history or the pass involving computers. I feel the events will expand into the beginning of March.

This feeling … what has happened in the past is that I get when something is going to happen which is going to change my view of the world. Some times it means nothing to other people. But it means a lot to me.

Looking back to what happened in Sept 01. It maybe the actual actions that some people are committed to doing is what I sense. This may explain why suddenly I sensed a shift or the feeling suddenly stops. They may change their minds). The events appear to have something to do with Briton, France, and America.

575

For some unknown reason, I keep wanting to go back to France. But my frequent visits maybe attaching unwanted attention in Briton. Last year I went to Paris twice plus New York. I went to Calais for a day trip in France. And I went to St Omer with my boss in France-twice. (I also went back for a day trip last week).

If I sense or feel anything else, I'll let you know. I'm hoping what I'm sensing is not bad news. I'll keep in touch.

All for now--Tom

P.S. 'Cold Witness' is the name of a British project to develop Over-The-Horizon Radar system at Orford Ness in Suffolk, UK (It also went under the name of 'Cobra-Mist'). The project failed when the radar was subject to a unknown source of interference they could not identify.

S-413. from Bill Hamilton regarding memory implants to Dan Burisch

From: "Bill Hamilton" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Thu, February 26, 2004 10:14 am Subject: Re: 'Orion' dis-info treatments?

I found out that a mole inside Dan's immediate environment was hooking him up with some of the more "troubled" members of the GLP board. Dan was blissfully unaware of some of their past activities. Later, he had the mole ousted and a new 'Raven' re-established a link between Dan and me. Dan no longer converses with these guys on GLP. Sometimes the postings look like they came from a keyboard in a lunatic asylum!

> I'm wondering now if Dan's remarks of religion/"Illuminati" ancient-texts and so on intermixed with his biological discourses weren't a result of the same "Orion" mind-altering treatment that Lazar claims all S4 scientists were subjected to. Somehow, this "pine" drinking would bring to mind terrible images once one "crossed the line". In Dan's case, it sounds like spouting implanted dis-info was also included. Remember that Bob said the military was amazed the treatment had no effect on him. I'm guessing that 'Rebel Robert' was doing recreational drugs on-the-side and these counteracted the effect.

Dan was drugged a number of times, but the "Illuminati" impression came from a boyhood experience he had in England when he was brought to a ritual. This scared him and impressed him. It may be they have amplified his fears through drugs.

Once, some memory-suppression drug was used on him so that he did not even recognize his own mother or BJ.

I do not disseminate the documents that detail this as I don't think this kind of stuff needs to be posted until verified.

576

> If this reasoning has merit, it should be noted repeatedly when editing Dan's interviews and essays. "An ounce of prevention is worth of pound of cure" for silencing the skeptics who are waiting to pounce on the first "wrong" word.>> I may be WAY OFF BASE here. But something struck me as odd when I was reading in that GLP thread about all the earthquakes happening around the world. Remember Tom Bearden's claims that the Challenger and USS Thresher were destroyed by scalar wave weapons? Now recall the latest Shuttle disaster. There were initial reports of a vividly colored "streak" that momentarily enveloped the Columbia during its descent. An amateur photographer even had his digital camera temporarily confiscated by NASA as they investigated these images. At the time, Bearden said that another use of a scalar weapon was used here. I'm really s-t-r-e-t-c-h-i-n-g here ... but could these "stargates" have such power? And if so, what better way for Saddam to become celebrated among terror groups than to kill the first Israeli astronaut? I never have heard any more about this, even on Tom's website. Strangely silent (especially for him!).

I know very little about the stargates except theoretical musings on them.

> I used to think that UFOs were perhaps not that complex after all. I mean, if Uhouse's stories of simulated craft are true, then it is just a matter of material science to get long-lasting capacitors. (Of course, the small on-board incredibly-powerful power-plant is another question!) This would mesh nicely with Sarfatti's latest proposals about harnessing dark energy, using headbands for thought-control navigation (a la "FireFox"), etc. But it doesn't explain the "morphing" of objects into separate ones as frequently observed. Nor does it explain reports of almost-surreal internal volumes inside these craft (I'm thinking of poor Preston Nichols' claims of "artificial reality soliton" generation.) Nor the "blinking" off-and-on into/out-of existence and traversing great distances instantaneously (such as what UNITEL's Maurer observed.)

There are more to UFOs than meets the eye. Pardon the pun. We are now developing morphing aircraft, but are these just the bottom rung of the ladder. Huge craft have been seen splitting in two with the two parts going off in different directions. I have seen craft disappear in clear blue skies! I would need some serious life extension to study the possible physics and technology that is employed by these craft. Check out:

http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/morphingmetals.html

Another technology I have been fascinated with is UFO light emission. Bright UFOs and Orbs have been seen emitting light that does not reflect from surrounding objects. This could possibly be a quantum interference phenomena or other unknown mechanism.

S-414. from Tom Skeggs regarding NSA remote-monitoring

From: "Thomas Skeggs" To: [email protected] Date: Sat, February 28, 2004 12:09 pm Subject: Remote Monitoring

Hello Mark --

577

http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/morphingmetals.html%0D

I have read about this before. Tim Refat mentions the 'Tetra system'. The only drawback with such a nation-wide network, is that it will also brain wash the very people who installed and operate the system.

The anxiety I have been feeling may have something to with more the mundane -- my job. I had a phone call today (28th Feb) and he wants to see me next week. Without a job, it looks like I screwed. The computer problem. May be to do with the quick arrival of some new firewall/anti-virus software which has proven very difficult to install.

What the NSA is up to sounds more electronic remote-influencing and remote-sensing where you read the thoughts and feelings of another person. Some remote-viewers can do this. It may have happened when I was doing Montauk. Remote-sensing can also be described as when you see the world through the eyes of another person. (like "Quantum Leap"). If you recall, I wrote that I had "viewed" a troubled teenager that was having a heated debate with a priest. And he may have set some buildings on fire. Yesterday there were reports on the news about Catholic priests abusing children. It also lead, by coincidence, to the Air Force's Rome Air Technology research lab. If they were doing iffy experiments with a old radar (like SAGE), then the Rome lab would something to do with it.

This afternoon I was working on the FTA when the word "Brookhaven" kept popping into my mind. I don't hear voices in my head. It's like when you hear a song with catchy lyrics and the lyrics keep rolling around your mind. So I did a search and remembered that Brookhaven is a national lab near New York. The search revealed a lot of data on a nearby hospital which deals with mental disorders like bipolar disorder or manic depression.

Strange!. Because from my last e-mail it appears I have been experiencing a bit of a problem with anxiety lately. Maybe its my subconscious is trying to tell me to snap out of it, and get a grip. (Or some people are thinking that I suffer from such a disorder).

I think we be jumping to the wrong conclusion by blaming it on the NSA. What purpose would it serve to deep fry my brain cells with microwaves.

P.S. The teenager, I think, was later imprisoned in a hospital near Brooklyn. I think I found the hospital. (He was moved from one hospital to another). It's on a island on the East River. He somehow escaped and crossed the Brooklyn Bridge and headed north along the East River where I lost track on him during RV sessions. I think this may happened in the 1980s. He is still at large. And it appears he does not want to be found.

I also keep getting repeated RV data on a young woman with blue eyes and long white hair who was also put in a hospital and she escaped. New York seems to be the hub or pivot-point of some kind. Their imprisonment in mental hospitals may explain the anti-American anger-I felt.

It's all very Danny Darko-like.

All for nowTom

S-415. from Tom Skeggs regarding his latest theories on Montauk

578

From: "Thomas Skeggs" To: [email protected] Date: Sun, February 29, 2004 7:19 am Subject: Re: Brookhaven and Plattsburgh

----- Original Message ----- > Hi Tom -->> Brookhaven Labs went hand-in-hand with Montauk according to the SkyBooks' version. However I lean more toward an "MK-Ultra" type R&D effort between those two facilities-- the former R&D and the latter involved the testing. I still favor the Plattsburgh AFB & Rome ATC for the Montauk "stargate" stuff.>> Are you familiar with the Columbine High School (Colorado) massacre that took place some years ago. One of the shooters-- according to conspiracist researcher John Quinn -- grew up at Plattsburgh. Check out

http://www.konformist.com/1999/colorado/rhorror1.htm . I think he's trying to make a case for implanting moles into society, and then invoking secret orders if the time is "right". In this case, Quinn seems to suggest that the government wanted to eliminate private ownership of guns; and hoped that by causing incidents such as these that the country would be so outraged as to permit passage of tougher laws.>> The Burisch stuff grows day-by-day. UFO researcher Bill Hamilton -- who has met both Burisch and Wolf personally -- is helping me. Apparently Burisch was involved in seminary training in the UK early in his career which is why Bill thinks he frequently uses the term "Illuminati". See http://www.stealthskater.com/Burisch.htm .>> Talk to you later --> -- Mark

Hello

Have you seen the film doc "Bowling for Columbine"? I think the man gets it right when you have extremes in any country. These extreme groups may try to induce stress in Society because people are more likely to consume more. Say, spend money on security or buy a better gun. In that documentary it showed how TV news programs are only interested in bad news, terrorist attacks, violent murders, kids running amok with guns, etc.

I think it really boils down to suggestion and the power of the media. Where people are expected to behave, believe, and think in a certain way. It seems if you dare to be different. You tend to open yourself up to attack. Others may tend to suggest that you are a freak or a crank, if you believe or do something out of the norm.

MONTAUK

I also now believe that what happened out at Montauk was along the of MK-ULTRA at Montauk. It may also involved EDOM. But I may have got my wires crossed with time-travel experiments there. I also got images of pine trees and a chain-link fence with warning signs on it. And during my field trip to Montauk there are no pine tree woods.

579


http://www.konformist.com/1999/colorado/rhorror1.htm%20

During my field trip someone had knocked a hole in the large side entrance of the beast bunker. And it was boarded up with plywood. It looks a bit official because the large doorway was blocked with cased concrete. And it may have required air-powered demolition hammers to knock a rectangular shaped hole in the old entrance way. Why? The whole Montauk site appears to be quite overgrown. And some of it has been landscaped.

Puharich was the scientist who operated the training center for gifted kids in New York. He was also the chairman of a company based in New York. And this company shut down around 1983-84. I found another company with a similar name was founded in 1983 in Canada just across the border from Plattsburgh. I don't think Puharich was directed involved in any T2 programs. His training center was burnt down. And he fled the country, claiming the CIA wanted to take over his project.

Some time-travel work may have been carried out in upstate New York. And may have used some of those kids. For some reason.

Also with the troubled teenager at Montauk. I got some real strong RV or RS data regarding everyday family. He lived nearby Montauk in a small house. His father may have worked on the base. His father appears strict and would swear at him and his wife. I think he would knock them about a bit, too.

Preston's book may be an embellished reason of the true. For example, they have been reports of strange or preternatural events occurring within close proximity to some sage radars. This lead to a series of tests being conducted at Montauk to see what happens when you start "tweeking" with it. And find out what happens.

The troubled teenager may have been sensitive to EM radiation which drove to carry out some type of attack. (Remember I sent you some data where a UFOlogist believed some people are sensitive to EM radiation and that's why people see UFOs, ghosts, and abductions). There is some Russian data published on the electronic inducement or enhancement of psychic abilities.

About the fires, I don't know how they started. For example, if a teenager is found at the scene of crime in a distressed state, and has no recollection of the event. The police may take him to a hospital where he later was transferred to mental hospital. Which he later escaped from.

The tales of time travel are something else. It seems Preston has convinced himself he was part of it all. But was it suggestion by others which led him to arrive at the conclusion.

If it was a just a clear-cut case of arson, then why conceal the event with tales of time travel. Many people would simply dismiss anything to do with Montauk without question. I think sometimes a number of servicemen may have been killed and the event was covered up. Later when certain people took an interest in the site, a cover was produced to prevent the real truth from coming out.

That teenager I tried to search for using RV. He would be an adult. But I'm getting very little data.

The teenage woman has similar story, but I think she may have lived in California. I don't know if she is American or British Living in the US. She later drove a motorbike and was a bit of a tough customer. S he had her hair cut real short.

Another point I'd like to add. Some skeptics may suggest that the above involving the pass lives of other people using RV. Some may suggest that it's all to do with mental illness again. Where what I'm

580

witnessing is multi-or split personalities. Which I think is total crap. There is no evidence what so every of me having such a mental illness.

Oh well, I must go now. I'll be touch again soon.Tom

S-416. from Bill Hamilton regarding disinformation

From: "Bill Hamilton" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Mon, March 1, 2004 9:53 am Subject: Re: thanks for the input!

> Bill -->> ... Teah, you're right. I was trying to think up excuses to explain what I perceived to be dis-info in Dan's stories. I'm on his side -- really -- or I wouldn't be putting so much effort into archiving his material. When I bounced this off Dr. "Ark" (at the Cassiopaea site), he dismissed it right off-the-bat as 'disinfo'. (Which is strange because his wife Laura claims to be a 'channeler' for the "Cassiopeans" and Ark seems to go along.)>> I find myself coming back time-and-again to what Lazar said concerning the alien situation (http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Lazar_1.doc ): that they're weren't that many true 'alien' abductions, that there was no tie-in with cattle mutilations, that there wasn't many "magical" entry points (like the rumors at the 'Mercury' site). I can see advantages for the TPTB to portray it otherwise to cover-up germ warfare experiments etc. But of course, I'm a newbie that's struggling here and I have an open-mind.>> There are some observations that remain consistent. One is the correlation between sightings and nuclear tests. I agree with Dr. Jack on that one. There appears to be something that a nuclear event causes that affects 'them' directly. I believe that knowledge is suppressed from the public and explains the world-wide moratorium on tests today. Another is that certain people seem to be "selected" by 'them' for sightings and/or demonstrations. I really believe Larry Maurer's assertions about the 1981 sighting/demonstration. I have no doubt about that. (It was his efforts to try to back-theorize the use of the quantum laser he saw in operation that raised so much skepticism. And of course his Keely-like business practices got him in hot water. Hindsight is always 20/20, though.) Closely tied to that is that 'they' seem to know our actions ahead-of-time. I think they can do more than understand our language -- I believe if they cannot actually "read our minds", then they can manipulate 'time' somehow to know our next actions.>> It would be great to read a book that assembled all the "knowns" with the "probable" best-guesses and leave out the tentative postulates (about agendas, etc.). And in Dr. B's case, one might have to start at time-zero and go forward to some point in the future. Then start Iteration #2 and go back to some point along another time-line. Then another iteration where a timeline manipulation occurred. ... And so on to get to where we are today.>> Thanks again for the "heads-up" call. I need all the help I can get!!!>

581

http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Lazar_1.doc%20

> --Mark

Mark,

We have all struggled through trying to sort out the info, disinfo, and misinfo in order to arrive at a comprehensive picture. But it is a long and lonely process since there is little organized effort.

If we had an Headquarters and Lab with 24/7 operation with a technical and scientific team of workers, we might make some progress. But --alas -- my efforts to obtain funds for such fell on deaf ears in the past.

As for Dr. Burisch (and others), I rate them according to the probability from interviews, documents, consistency, etc. Dan Burisch rates higher than 80% probable authentic. Michael Wolf rates 0% by contrast. Lazar is about 50-60%. These are just my estimates. Corso might be another 80% probable. No 100% yet!

Bill

S-417. from Ed Halerewicz, Jr. regarding Dr. Robert Baker's High-Frequency Gravitational Waves

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> Date: Wed, March 3, 2004 7:26 pm To: [email protected] Subject: Dr. Robert Baker's High-Frequency Gravitational Waves

--- [email protected] wrote:> Hi Ed --> > I found this at http://www.gravwave.com . Apparently a Robert Baker that works for the Mitre Corporation in McLean, Virginia.>> >> "There exist three general categories of High-Frequency Gravitational Wave (HFGW) generators: electromechanical, high-temperature superconductor, and laser/plasma. We will not consider the very ... "> > It seems the UNITEL craft may have something in common with Lazar's ...> > Regards --> -- Mark

Hi to you, Mark --

Some of the points addressed by Dr. Baker were interesting but flawed. Iit seems possible that one could design a HFGW detector. But other times he made statements inconsistent with General Relativity. For example, HFGW may contain a lot of energy but it also decays exponentially with distance. That's why gravity wave detectors have failed to pick anything up on Earth. If a neutron star were nearby, that would be a different story.

582

His writings also tend to disagree with UNITEL and Lazar. I think you are getting Lazar from the microwave wavelengths and existence of gravity waves. Gravity waves are like light waves -- they can oscillate at any frequency that is not beyond the Planck scale cut-off. A microwave wavelength is not itself unique. It's just large enough to make terrestrial detectors capable of resolving weak gravitational disturbances, and was the reason for that discussion (experimental test).

Also gravity waves are not the source for gravity. Gravity exists independently. Think of an electric field. It is always there. You don't get light emision unless there is an acceleration of some source charge. The same holds with gravity except charge is replaced with mass. As per UNITEL, I think you are getting that from the high-energy superconductors. What this does is make terrestrial equipment more sensitive by cooling the system. The magnetic properties also make it easier to detect magnetic anomalies which would occur with a HFGW. This relates to the idea that a power plant could draw electrical energy away from a rotating black hole.

Another problem with GR he wrote about was neglecting Nang Li's work about scalars not be considered because they were too difficult. That shows a critical misunderstanding of what's going on. Scalar fields are stable and symmetrical. They are often called potentials. This is in fact what Newton's theory of gravity is -- a scalar field. They are easy to calculate! Vectors are harder to calculate --especially in gravitational studies -- as each particles path of movement has two vectors in the Einstein's theory.

Since gravity waves and the case of Nang Li's work involve complicated rotational motions were the reasons were why such studies were done, there are no gravitational waves in scalar field theories -- only in a highly relativistic field. He also states that normal particles such as electrons have gravity waves. He is correct but they are very weak and can be ignored. For example, if you rotated a car on an axis it will produce gravity waves. But they are weak and the wavelength is greater than the distance between the Moon and the Earth (i.e. the energy of that rotational radiation is spread out that distance).

His ideas are interesting if you are interested in producing a sensitive gravity wave detector, but very poor if you hope to generate them! The only way a HFGW could be gained from that is by patching up his misconceptions. For example, the statement that nuclear particles may be able to generate a HFGW. This neglects the fact that spacetime distorts not matter. A gravitational wave passing through Earth would alter volume locally seen from afar. But on Earth no one would notice such an effect, so the process are simply not the same! The patch would be if you could somehow simulate spacetime within a nuclear radii. Then that proposition could become reasonable, but it would also require that existence of solved quantum theory of gravity (no small challenge, I might add!), something the author doesn't address.


S-418. from Ed Halerewicz, Jr. regarding UFO claims

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Thu, March 4, 2004 5:13 pm Subject: Re: more on Baker / gravity waves / counter-arguments ...

583


No problem, Mark --

I think scientists tend to use over complicated jargon to secure their jobs, it is useful sometimes in that you can explain complicated problems with a minimum of words. But that doesn't help the "common Joe" understand what's going on in science. Now, I myself may have gone a little far with my PT Barnuum quote before. But I don't go for paranormal type stuff. I've read that Hal Puthoff has done that kind of stuff in the past. It seems a bit foolish. But if you are looking to gather information anyway you can about an enemy, I could possibly see government interest in that area.

As per Jack Sarfatti, he seems to prefer Bohm type quantum mechanics and rejects everything else. I like the Bohm interpretation, but both Bohm and Compeghagen approaches reveal interesting things that you can't get from one model. As for Puthoff's PV theory, I find it quite interesting but there is a slight flaw with it. I don't know why Jack throws such a fit. At least Puthoff's math stays consistent. It (PV) can mimic spacetime curvature to a degree in the quantum vacuum. But spacetime itself doesn't become distorted -- just the electromagnetic field. Perhaps this might be what Jack is referring to regarding the flaw.

As for Kaku, that sounds about right. I recently came across an article stating that Einstein stole ideas from Lorentz, Ponicare and a number of other scientists at the time. Well, he did use some of their ideas -- the whole scientific community at the time knew of them -- but he was the only one bright enough to put two-and-two together. Even Newton stated that: "If I seen further than anyone else, it's because I stood on the shoulder of giants." Based on scientific history, if there was no Einstein I bet Special Relativity would have been still discovered, although probably slightly modified. Although I would argue that his formulation of General Relativity was unique, if it wasn't for Einstein I doubt that we would know as much about gravity and black holes as we do today. But that is how science tends to go.

As for Dr. Baker, it seems that he has more of an understanding of industrial science rather than General Relativity although it appears that he is learning. Put him in touch with a few specialists in the field and they might produce something interesting.

Reading about the UFO subject, I came across Lazar with his "I know how these things work" statements. So I read his claims but can't find any bit of real science there. Heck, Element-115 now being produced in accelerators invalidates his claim that it must come from a star with more mass than the Sun and can't be produced on Earth. Well, that was proved incorrect last month (if a stable 115 is found and is orange-ish, then Lazars credibility goes way up. He also claimed 116 is antimatter. That was also proved false shortly ago). If he encountered alien technology, it may differ from ours. Ok, but Lazar should still understand Newtonian physics. From his interviews, I very much doubt it. One of the many statements he makes that irritates me was something like 'I don't think the intermediate vector boson exists. I think scientists like to make things up so they sound right.' Well if he was a little bit more clever, he would have known that an intermediate vector boson is simply the mathematical laws that scientists give to photons. It's a real particle. Einstein and Max Planck verified it in the photoelectric effect. I don't know what his real beat is, but his knowledge in physics is far less than what he claims.

As for myself seeing a Flying Triangle ("black triangle"), I only know this: they exist, they could be ours, or they may not be … either way, the government knows about them and are lying about there existence for whatever reason. But I'm still a scientist. I'm still skeptical. I don't say ET exist. I feel that ET probably exist somewhere as most astronomers, but that doesn't mean they could or would come to Earth. As per the FT, I can say this about them: it's not jet propulsion, it's not turbines, it's exotic …

584

but that doesn't mean that the Air Force could have built it. The SR-71 is rather old and still looks futuristic.


S-419. from Ed Halerewicz, Jr. regarding Warp Drive Propulsion Within Maxwell's Equations

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Thu, March 4, 2004 11:20 pm Subject: Re: Warp Drive Propulsion Within Maxwell's Equations

--- [email protected] wrote:> Ed --> > After Bill Hamilton seemed to take exception to my questioning Dr. Baker (a fellow UCLA alumni) at Jack's yGroup, someone else posted this referral => "Warp Drive Propulsion Within Maxwell's Equations" (http://65.108.189.168/Docs/EGMwarpdrive.pdf )

I'll probably address some of the questions you brought up in this message later as I'm running short on time. As for "The Warp Drive Propulsion" paper, I know of it. I helped to correct some of the problems with early drafts of that paper as my name appears in the 'Acknowlegements'.

Basically Todd's idea was to take to EM potentials A^u and have them superimpose. He suggested that a gradient difference between two could create a local density increase in the quantum vacuum which would simulate a density increase in local spacetime, and did playing engineering calculations from there. Essentially it's a PV model that acts like a battery between two A^u potentials (simply the currents within the PV model due work to move a ship), he and his partner agued that this energy flow in the PV might be used for propulsion. I'm somewhat skeptical of it working. However, it is justifiable in the PV representation. So it's interesting in that light although speculative.


S-420. from Tom Skeggs regarding HFGW propulsion

From: "Thomas Skeggs" To: [email protected] Date: Fri, March 5, 2004 3:44 pm Subject: Re: gravity waves

Hello, Mark

Sorry for the delay.585


http://65.108.189.168/Docs/EGMwarpdrive.pdf%20


Seeing this does remind me of what Lazar was stated. And the UNITEL device. If you use a number of high frequency generators--- say within the microwave band or higher (GHz band) and direct them at a object -- that mass according to some will emit gravity waves, or gravitons. Like UNITEL, but instead of using lasers you're using masers. If you use a heavy element, it should -- in theory-- emit strong gravity waves, capable of bending space-time in a very localized area around the elements.

Some say the Lazar craft was powered by it. But to me it was used in the drive system to warp space-time. I have also come across some papers on why mass emits gravity waves. Because the molecules which make up the element are being oscillated at high frequency, resulting in the emission of gravity waves and photons.

If the masers use periodic oscillation, this may cause the atoms which make up the molecules with the element to act like Simple Harmonic Oscillators where electrons jump from one orbit to another, emitting photons (and maybe gravity waves or gravitons).

I have been exploring for sometime with the FTA where I subject a gas to an electric field. The electric field is modulated, resulting in the atoms in gas to oscillate and emit photons. My aim is to increase power output with minimal energy use.

Regarding the tales of people working on "secret back-engineering UFO projects", I usually find enjoyable but they are extremely difficult to prove.

On the subject of Lazar's public records going missing is something I can personally relate to. When I moved out of London and into Kent, I discovered most of my files relating to my disability have been lost or stolen. Some doctors in the past made some serious mistakes regarding my disability. So it may be convenient for the files to disappear, making it nearly impossible for me to prove their mistakes.

Lazar's files may have disappeared cause his disclosure has caused him to have become an embarrassment to his government.

I write again shortly.

S-421. from Tom Skeggs regarding Lazar's and UNITEL's designs

From: "Thomas Skeggs" To: [email protected] Date: Fri, March 5, 2004 4:42 pm Subject: Craft

Hello Mark --

I forgot to add. The Lazar craft appears to consist of two major propulsion system. The central waveguide assembly. And the four cubed shaped emitters. The waveguide assembly appears to also contain some type of reactor capable of providing energy to the emitters.

The central waveguide-seems to me to produce an electromagnetic field around the craft. The waveguide is maybe a one-quarter wave antenna. Look at the docs on Walker and the faster-than-light EM waves papers. A 1/4 waveguide produces EM waves to propagate at about 1/4 wave radius from the

586

antenna at propagate backwards towards the antenna at velocities equal to or exceeding the speed-of-light. The returning waves would be blocked or slowed down by the presence of the skin of the craft. So the skin would collect an electric charge.

I'm still working out the rest of it. Sometimes when you look at something, the answers just jump off the page. I also noted the cubes in the Lazar craft appear to be wired in series with one possible power bus to the central waveguide. So the cubes may be switched on-and-off in sequence. This may result in a circular- or tube-shaped field to be emitted overall (like UNITEL's 3 laser emitters combining to produce a single tube-like distortion)..

According to Lazar, the emitters inside the cubes looked like cylinders which are gimballed mounted and can be pointed in different directions. The cylinders may just contain a large winding (of wire) with a thick circular slab of heavy element which gravitons or gravity waves are emitted from.

It's a bit like the 'Star Chamber' cylinder which was designed to bombard the person with EM radiation. (They act as the mass-or element.) The skin of the 'Star Chamber' acts as a barrier by using a thin film of negative energy density to totally isolate the interior from the outside world. Taken from the 'Many Worlds' interpretation, it creates its own relative world. And when the person thinks of being in another place, the interior space-time can be altered to match any exterior-space-time moment. That's the "spooky action-at-a-distance" or remote-viewing component which drives the whole device.

I've been off the net for the last few days. I have been spending 4 days trying to produce a GPS Test program which can read data from a handheld GPS unit. Yesterday after a few hours of programming I cracked it and produce a working test program. It can read complete data strings. Next I'm going to try and get the program to breakdown the strings so it can work out its actual location, altitude, heading and speed. This test program is actually a vital part of the FTA flight control software. And I'm finally getting that together.

If anyone stated that their design is modeled on back-engineered UFOs, you can kiss any hope of funding goodbye. But now I set my sights on completing my task to build the FTA and test it. Lazar said the craft he saw had a little American flag on it. I'm just going to write "Fuck Convention!" on my one.

I write again over the weekend.

All for nowTom

S-422. from Edward Halerewicz, Jr. regarding exotic propulsin concepts

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Fri, March 5, 2004 6:12 pm Subject: Re: Warp Drive Propulsion Within Maxwell's Equations

Well now to address the rest of your past email. As for alt sites, I tend not to go to them. Occasionally one might turn up on a search of the Net and I may end up there. But other then that, I tend to avoid them. The EM warpdrive, however, was one of the papers put out by the start-up journal that a few other researchers and I started (i.e., http:// www.joatp.org ).

587

One of the reasons for it forming was the conventional journals would look at the EM paper and go "well, it sounds interesting but it fails in GR, so we will not publish". So our journal is meant to look at outside-the-box thinking but not so much "alt". It's not replacing mainstream physics; it's just trying to push the boundaries by asking new questions. Most of the alt groups out there just try to state our current theories are wrong. But we think ours is better. I think I digressed too much on this issue all ready.

As per the "Flying Triangle" (TR-3B "Black Manta"), from your Star Trek reference I will quote something from ST II: "It's one of ours, Admiral. Reliant." "There are two possibilities: they are unable to respond or they are unwilling to respond." Simple logic. You can speculate all you want about things, but in the end you have few concrete clues. And another Spock quote from ST-VI: "even logic must give way to physics." So for the FT, it is either the government's or not. And as far as physics go, hovering doesn't violate the laws of physics.

As you may recall I said the I found that Robert Bieglow's NIDS group somewhat questionable. They did studies on the Flying Triangle. And yet they did not bother to discuss the velocity, shape, power requirements based on witness observation -- something that I did rather easily knowing relative positions and few math equations. The fact that the Nevada group did not do that even though they had equipment to do so was interesting. It's either they calculated that stuff and kept the information for themselves or really didn't care about figuring out the mystery. I dare not guess what their reasoning could be.

As for Edgar Fouche and his TR-3B "Black Manta" thesis for the 'Flying Triangle', I've come across his claim. I find it bogus. He made one claim about the properties of Mercury which was wrong. I haven't read his claim for awhile so I don't recall what the exact problem was. But there was one there. If you look closely at his statements, he also suggest that its man-made but the ideas of its systems came from ET. Anyway his claims did nothing to convince me.

Now there is something in physics called the "Woodward Effect" which can displace mass temporally so I wouldn't rule out a related propulsion system. But for an aircraft, I would rule it out. If you make a 1-ton craft seem to weight 2 lbs -- and all objects fall at the same rate in a gravitational field -- physics gives out to logic! (But also in the case you could have a big craft with a small horizontal vectoring engine because of the thrust rations.) In general, I think the FT might have a 60% of being government and 40% ET. I don't rule out ET, but I think a FT would be more useful to man than ET.

As for propellant propulsion, the best proposal I've seen to date is a recent one proposed by JPL. I believe it's called "M2P2" or something close. It’s a proposal to a have a space probe generate a magnetic field and catch solar particles and act like a solar sail. Same principle but without the need for a sheet of metal the size of Texas. And perhaps the nearly 2-km track model concept for using a magnetic ramp (similar to some superconducting trains) to lanch a craft into orbit.

As for the "Warp Drive" in general, it seems unlikely to work in its present form. It seems to be more-or-less the after effect of a process and not the process itself. General Relativity only approximates the effects and is not the cause which would require new physics if the effect was real. So I would say the physics is not there yet on that issue. It could work, but you don't know how it would. In general the FTL stuff has little justification, but GR will allow them assuming that there are new physics to be found. So those are at best guesses. Now the physics is there for near speed-of-light travel. I would relate it to a material science problem: the math will allow it, but our engineering methods won't (at least for a man-made structure; particle accelerators do it all the time).

588

So, in general, all the decent propellant propulsion ideas around -- and you can easily find articles on them -- NASA has already played with in academic exercises. Anything beyond that goes off into "no man's land". The problem with most of the propellant-less propulsion ideas is that while they can work, they are just to slow and too weak. You simply get a bigger bang out of a chemical rocket. So for the immediate future, I would say propellant propulsion is too trivial to worry about. It should provide interesting experiments and new ideas can be brought out that way. But if I were to go to the Moon, I would prefer a Saturn V to the proposals out there now!

As for electrogravitcs, the people who favor that propulsion are simply misguided. They often confuse gravitational and electrical formulas and get all mixed-up. I did find reference to electrogravtics in a physics books. However, its an EM version of Planck's length. It uses an EM constant rather than Planck's constant, and they are roughly comparable in size. It's simply a method to write gravitation in terms of only one quantity -- length. There is something related that I think might mix people up. There a little-known something called "electro-kinetics" which might be a source of confusion. And I think there may be some truth to electro-kinetics. For example, I think it would be hard to create an electric field to alter the properties of the atmosphere. But it is do-able, so you could possibly have an aircraft that could travel faster than the speed-of-sound without making a sonic boom. I wouldn't be surprised if such technology was being used presently.

As for Darlington's "Area-51", I have not read any such book. I've only seen foggy pictures of the place like everyone else. I've heard of suit by employees exposed to nuclear waste. The government's statement was "they're lying we have no base in Nevada, we don't know who put up those no trespassing signs". Honestly, how stupid do they think people are? I guess only a lawyer would buy into that logic. I would imagine most things there are pretty boring, and there are likely a few neat things there which many engineers should receive awards for.

As for a related claim, I've read Col. Corso's book The Day After Roswell. It was odd -- if he's telling it from first-person, how can he know about other people? Comes off too much like a story to me rather than a factual account. He said things like we got radiation ovens (microwaves, I guess, from ET). Note that was discovered by accident by people warming up their hands by radar stations. He also seemed to favor engineered people rather than believe FTL travel was possible. Perhaps more faith in Einstein and classical physics at that time. I think he also tried to suggest that gravity was related to magnetism and that Tesla and others wrote papers suggesting something similar. I just found that to be a "crock", quite honestly. Also many of the technologies we have now, Corso claims came from ET. Wow! So they can travel FTL and are only 50 years ahead of our technology. Then damn! we must be the smart ones. FTL travel just hasn't been a necessity of invention for us. And his claims for the laser, two scientists predicted their existence prior to WWII by the names of Bose and Einstein.

As for Area-51 and the alien junk floating around. I think it's junk. The government hiding a ET UFO would be like a group of caveman hiding a stealth fighter from the Pentagon. It's just not going to work. If they have one then they want them to have one. Just that simple.


S-423. from Edward Halerewicz, Jr. regarding possible Mars artifacts

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> 589


To: [email protected] Date: Mon, March 8, 2004 3:31 pm Subject: Re: counter-intelligence

--- [email protected] wrote:> You probably also are aware that many have considered the NIDS group a privately-contracted source of UFO dis-info, especially since John Alexander is a big part of it. He used to be in some psy-ops division of the government. I don't know how close it was to the GrillFlame and StarGate remote-viewing programs. Deb Jordan-Kauble (http://www.debshome.com ) had serious exchanges with Alexander's wife. The "word" in the alt-grapevine is that Bigelow knows the "whole story" of the cover-up but Alexander is only aware of about half of it.

Nope. I wasn't aware and frankly don't care. I scanned their reports like I would with a science journal. I just found the reports short-sided and bias. A good reason not to read a journal. That's as far as I'm going to comment on that group.

> I can't imagine pressurizing and circulating a Mercruy plasma in an aerospace vehicle. Why, the 'triangle' isn't even curved. You would think that -- if nothing else -- abrasion would wear out the sharp corners.

For any good engineer, design always follows function. If it's a stealth blimp as claimed, you wouldn't expect abrasion effects at slow speed (so why blow money on an aerofoil?). Although if it's a blimp, it doesn't use the same technology as the Goodyear model (I can't imagine the Goodyear keeping up with a commercial airliner for example). IMHO, it was either a blimp with exotic thrusting system or an altogether exotic system which does not function the way a blimp does.

> I saw a PBS-NOVA program on the Russian space program. They had their equivalent of our Saturn V. But unlike over here where von Braun could commandeer the best resources from industry and academia, the Soviet space program was second-fiddle to their ICBMs.

That doesn't surprise me. I recently typed up an article on a brief history of the space program and found inferences to a Russian Saturn V-type program (more specifically, its failure), but no real reliable information. But that can be said about a lot of things in Russian history. Sorry I missed that program.

The last PBS program I saw was Brian Green's presentation on string theory. I couldn't stand it. To make string theory sound better, he undercut Einstein. I took the position of the skeptical scientist on that program. String theory is probably right if everything we know about physics right now covers all the fundamental laws. But that is still presumptuous to me, especially considering the large gap between nuclear physics and Planck-scale physics.

> ". BJ Wolf's 'EaglesDisobey' site about reported artifacts on Mars has been "taken out-of-service" with no replies from her server-host.

As for Mars artifacts, I sincerely doubt there are any. I know that Arthur C. Clarke looked at some Mars photos and believed it showed the existence of life. The Mars rovers recently found evidence of water on the Martian surface in the past. I seen the new flyover of the "Mars Face". NASA claimed that what was seen before was just "shadows". But the newer image looked like a better version of the older, just inverted. It's possible the older one could have been inverted. Perhaps they made a mistake didn't correct and you have this wildfire effect. It also wouldn't surprise me if there was cellular life on Mars

590

in the past and possibly a few microbes today. But I doubt very much that a civilization ever existed there. Its size is more comparable to the Moon than Earth, and as such its gravity is not very likely to hold much mass. That is why its atmosphere is so thin.


S-424. from 'Crackajack' regarding Dan Burisch's geneology

From: "Crackajack"Date: Tue, March 9, 2004 11:18 pm To: [email protected] Subject: Dan Burisch's geneology

Hey Mark, how are you?

I was glad to hear from you. You'll notice in Volume-4 at GLP that we have received good data on Dan's genealogy. I was able to also verify he location of the burial plot for his biological father, James A. Catselas. Also found that he -- and many other names we were not sure of -- exist in this genealogy search engine:http://reunite.myfamily.com/search.aspx?search=firstname%3dDEBORAH%26lastname%3dburisch

I have not registered yet, so do not have the extra info.

There is also some further [MAJI] 'insider' posting going on as we speak. Something about Dan being one of 17 people who built these "machines" for a particular sinister use, but Dan had encoded his machine to disable the others. I don't know what it is referring to, but hopefully this little detail will also unfold.

We desperately need to get hold of a copy of Eagles Disobey or Eagles Unchained, in full. That would be a real bonus. One of our' Raven's was going to send us a box, but was discovered and outed. Oh well, we continue to hope.

… … …

Anyway, stay in touch, mate.

Take careCracka

S-425. from Ed Halerewicz regarding a Warp Drive e-book

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> Date: Fri, March 12, 2004 4:29 pm To: [email protected]

591

http://reunite.myfamily.com/search.aspx?search=firstname%3DDEBORAH%26lastname%3Dburisch%0D

http://reunite.myfamily.com/search.aspx?search=firstname%3DDEBORAH%26lastname%3Dburisch%0D


Subject: Warp Drive E-book

Since you ask about interstellar travel in general, I thought I would let you know about a draft E-book I just posted onto my site. The download link can be found 1/3 down this page:

http://da_theoretical1.tripod.com/wdphysics.html

The size is 604 kb. I think Jack Sarfatti somehow managed to get a copy of it a while back and talked about it in one of his groups. Talking to my co-author, he agreed to the post on my site so anyone who wants to see it can.


S-426. from 'Crackajack' regarding 'insider' info & dis-info

From: "Crackajack"Date: Fri, March 12, 2004 10:17 pm To: [email protected]

Hi, Mark --

Thank you for doing that, I really appreciate it, as would Kate.

I doubt any of us are smart enough to sort the disinfo... lol. There's just so much of it.

I have never though about the Near-Death Experience phenomena and how it relates. H mmm, interesting indeed.

The insider info has not dried up yet by the way. I had a little chat with a 'raven' just last night. Will get all this stuff to yoy eventually. Plenty of disinfo in there too, no doubt, depending on who the' raven' is. There are schools of thought who think it may even be Deb. I just don't know enough yet and hate to make assumptions like that. "Time" will tell...... lol.

Oh, did I tell you we are also trying to build a family tree? That's a "fun" task at the best of times.

Take care, and thanks again.

Kind RegardsCracka

S-427. from Tom Skeggs regarding remote-viewing bilocation experiences

From: "Thomas Skeggs" Date: Sat, March 13, 2004 12:04 pm To: [email protected]

592


http://da_theoretical1.tripod.com/wdphysics.html%0D

Hello, Mark--… … …

… But another strange thing happened on Thursday 11th, the day I planned to return to work after taking 2 months off work. I watched the news in the morning before I went to work. The breaking news report stated that a bomb had gone off in Spain. And I forgot about it. Later in the morning when I stopped for coffee., I was standing in the doorway and I kept getting a repeated image of a pool of blood and water flowing out of a drain. The pool of blood kept getting bigger. And I had the sensation of "spinning". When I stopped for coffee, it was 10.40am. When I looked at the clock, it said 11.10am. And the above only seemed to last a few seconds. And my coffee had gone cold. So I must have been in a trace-like state for about 30 minutes. In the afternoon on the radio, I heard that a number of bombs have gone off in Spain. And it was the largest terrorist attack in Europe.

Maybe my subconscious was trying to warn me in a abstract way that the attacks in Spain were more serious than I believed. I also saw the number "3" chalked on a pavement. I don't know if this relates to the number of trains attacked or it means one of three probable major attacks within the next few weeks.

Another strange thing happened on the 3rd March. During the day, I kept getting static electric shocks and my computers kept playing up. I had to keep rebooting them. In the evening, I started to feel real chilled out and like I was in two places at the same time (bilocation). But it was spontaneous I was not planning to bilocate to another location. I think I know the location. It was Griffin Park outside Los Angeles. I had experienced this around the Sept 2001. (I published my experiences on the Yahoo Tap-Ten Forum in Oct 01. It went down like a lead balloon because I believed at the time I had teleported or time-traveled. And it appears to be transbilocation.). This time I could feel a breeze blowing, and heat. And it was overcast. It may have been sunrise or sunset. I could see a group of people and candles burning inside glass jars. It was all benign. I felt nothing hostile or sinister about it. It was calming. I think I saw a group of people sitting on rags in the hills above Los Angeles with candles burning in glass jars. And they were talking to each other.

For some reason I'm getting a lot more data on Montauk during the last few weeks. Today, I've been searching the Net. Thinking of writing it up and publishing it on the my 'Stargate'-website. The image of seeing of a fence and pine trees. I don't know if it's a real location or another abstract image. Because today I found a reference to "The Pinetree Line" -- a network of radar sites along the Canadian border. Some lie north of Plattsburgh AFB like in North Bay, Pagwa. But they don't have the same AN/FPS-35 radar system as the one at Montauk AFB.

I keep getting repeated images of a large antenna-like structure within a cylindrical-shaped shaft. The interior of the device was made of wood and had an outer metal skin with thick wires wound inside. I saw men in camo gear wearing heavy work gloves, hard hats, and safety harnesses working inside the device. The interior of device appeared to be lined with plywood and a interior wooden frame like one of those [Wilheim Reich] orgone accumulators.

I think some of these cables may be water-cooled and not superconducting as some researchers suggest. I will explain later. I think I now have enough data to build a scale replica of this device.

Be in contact soonTom.

593

S-428. from Ed Halerewicz regarding paranormal "science"

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> Date: Sat, March 13, 2004 12:40 pm To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Empires of Time

--- [email protected] wrote:> … Author Peter Galison was promoting his book "Einstein'sClock & Poincare's Maps: Empires of Time". I tuned in late so I don't know is Galison was a physicist. He seemed to have a good grasp of Relativity when answering questions.

I don't know off hand if Galison is or is not a physicist although I believe I passed by that publication in a bookstore. It seemed to be more-or-less a historical perspective on the subject, so that would explain the human stories. Poincare impressed with Einstein? I think not. he made a statement like "every school child in Berlin could understand the mathematics of Relativity except the poor man who invented it". Although today, Relativity is known to be based on symmetries known as Ponicare symmetries.

The compass story doesn't surprise me too much as I came across it doing research on the magnetic fields for geology class (it did however surprise me that Einstein showed up in a geology textbook of all places). Beats me how there could be an auto-correct for it when Einstein considered the existence of Earth's magnetic field as one of the great physics mysteries of his time. In general, physicists don't tend to like mathematicians and you will see that a lot. I think superstring theory tends to be the exception.

Well, there was a famous experiment done with a ground-based atomic clock and a plane-based one that were aligned. The jet plane flew nearly all day long and time went slower for it than the ground clock. This proves a concept from Special Relativity that time slows as you speed up. For GPS, this effect takes place and must be corrected for. But there is also a small gravity component. The more massive things are, the more time slows down, too. So the further you get away from Earth, time starts to pick up and levels at a certain distance. This effect -- while very small still -- has an effect on relativistic speeds. Now one would not normal notice this, but you need to know time accurately to measure your position on Earth. So you need atomic clocks which will notice the slightest variations in time. Also satellites moving in different orbits will record time differently so you have to take all of that into account. Without those corrections, GPS would be right for a few days then slowly get inaccurate results.

> In a similar vein, Ed, IMHO you may be dismissing the "paranormal" stuff too quickly. Again, IMHO. The remote-viewing … …

Well, paranormal stuff I don't dismiss. I just don't take them too seriously as there is no real hard science. For example, the Discovery Channel did this thing where dogs were somehow able to know when their owners were returning home. That's nice but it doesn't explain how things work. So it lacks science there.

Then there is quantum physics which suggests a wave function of probability doesn't collapse until someone observes it. In science, we have no way to quantify consciousness; but yet it sneeks its ugly head in anyway. Quoting Clarke: "any sufficiently advanced technology would seem like magic". If such were true, it's too far a head of us to discuss in scientific terms. We then quickly go off into the

594

deep end of "magic". How many heads dance on the head of a pen? We're just not there yet. An example of paranormal science would be the invention of "proton-packs" as seen in Ghostbusters.


S-429. from Ed Halerewicz regarding "Theories of Everything"

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> Date: Sat, March 13, 2004 1:30 pm To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Unified Field Theory maybe not the TOE ???

--- [email protected] wrote:> Almost forgot. I know Einstein -- like all the > great physicists -- was trying to come up with a "Theory of Everything". From what I've gleaned from Kaku, it mainly arises from the Big Bang theory. At that instant, GR unites with QM and therefore there should be only one theory. Afterward the inflation, the different symmetries disentangle and QM rules the microscopic world and GR governs the Macroscopic realm.

In modern terms. But the goal of physics is to have a TOE, to be able to explain away everything we see in the Universe. Lord Kelvin thought he was close, but what he wasn't able to explain led to Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. What Einstein was trying to do was unify gravitation and electromagnetism. That was the alleged Unified Field Theory. It didn't work. When Quantum Mechanics came along, he left that and tried to suggest Quantum Mechanics was wrong and failed. In modern times, the TOE tries to encompass GR and QM.

> But it looks like Witten's M-theory (a calculable version of 11-D supergravity) has replaced Guth's Inflationary part of the Big Bang (where everything sprang forth from a singularity with infinite density) to the Ekpyrotic model of colliding 5-D branes in the Mutliverse. This slow collision produced our (and other) universes. Steinhardt was one of the 4 physicists who proposed the original Big Bang. And now he is on the Ekpyrotic team. >(http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/BigBang_1.doc and ...BigBang_2.doc ). Somehow 3 of the 4 known forces are confined within the universes that are created in these collisions. But gravity is thought to "leak through" the 4D spacetime and "interact" the parent 5-D infinite branes. (I'm totally lost there ...)

The full M-theory would include gravity, but it is only unified in dimension X (11 dimensions is called 'supergravity' although M-theory is anyone's guess at this time) and not the 4 dimensions of our Universe. However, because of this they believe that gravitons could travel through these extra dimensions to tie all the forces of Nature together.

> Tim said he reads the anti-grav boards all the time but he is working side-by-side with some mainstream geniuses. And so far he hasn't seen any "magic" yet and he's losing interest in the alt science area since he's seen how progress is made. That said, Dr. Jack still rakes Tim over the coals for his 'Lifter' experiments.

595

http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/BigBang_2.doc

http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/BigBang_1.doc%20%20


Lifters -- yeah, they work. But they are not generating a gravity field. As for mainstreamers, they are often slow to advance because they are cowards who enjoy job security and making a name for themselves. If they differ too much, they loose support, their name, and funding. And who wants that, right? Alt-science groups don't care as they don't have that to worry about. If they prove someone wrong, then they make a name for themselves. The problem is that there is a gap between the knowledge in the two groups which can often cloud real science.

> On black holes, one of Dr. Jack's early mentors says: "What you have been taught in school is almost certainly wrong, because classical black hole spacetimes are inconsistent with quantum mechanics," says physicist George Chapline of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

Even Stephen Hawking knows this. Everyone in the community does. That's why nearly all theoreticians are seeking out quantum theories of gravity.

> In a follow-up e-mail, Jack concedes to Dr. Chapline (http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Sarfatti_10.doc ). I

bring this up to show that maybe long-held theories like black hole singularities and the Inflationary part of the BigBang aren't "cast in concrete" after all. Maybe Hawking and others need a refresher course in the new stuff to go back and correct their mistakes???

I doubt Hawking needs a "refresher". He is more open-minded than most. He's one of the few scientist who doesn't rule out warp drives for example. The Quantum Mechanics of blackhHoles deals with EM radiation only -- not what's in the hole itself. That was not believed to be the case in early studies, so perhaps this is what is meant by the Scientific American article. I'm not a fan of SciAm as they oversimplify too many things beyond the point of usefulness.

> Regarding E=MC2 ... I thought that was originally proposed to explain the missing mass that was converted to photons during radioactive decay. Now maybe that concept of matter …

Nope, Nope … E=mc2 has a lot to due with rewriting F=ma in terms of kinetic energy and then implying a maximum speed limit of the speed-of-light c. Essentially it is a derivate of Newton's theory when imposing the conditions of the principles of Relativity. When Einstein first wrote it, he assumed it had little importance. E=mc2wasn't used to explain fission until some anomalies were noted by scientist such as Fermi doing study on the subject. In fact, you got it backwards -- it's a common confusion amongst layman. [SR formed in 1905 and the 1st atomic bomb detonated in 1947. Notice the huge time line gap? That should clear up the confusion right away]

> … as being "condensed energy" can be proven in experiments where a positron and an electron annihilate each other into 2 gamma-ray photons. But that …

That's basically just the law of Conservation of Energy for high-energy physics. No extra information required

> … still is a stretch to generalize to atoms and beyond. But I won't argue that now, just use it to hypothesize if the reverse can happen -- if matter can be "created" from energy -- how come energy (or mater) can't be created from "thought" ? One of …

596

http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Sarfatti_10.doc%20

Well, in nuclear physics collisions of nuclear particles can generate high potential energy and form matter. This happens with mesons. But the collisions are caused by high energy. One's brain releases small amounts of electrical energy. You do not radiate gamma rays. If you did, you would die and generate a rather large explosion.


S-430. from "Crackajack" regarding 'insider' details on the Dan Burisch story

From: "Crackajack"Date: Sat, March 13, 2004 7:28 pm To: [email protected]

Hi Mark --

… … …

Yes, I have a good idea of who this source is. And if I'm right, that source is in fact employed by the Maji!!!!! We were tipped off about this before the latest round of 'Raven' chats.

We knew that the discussion with Dan (and in fact BJ) about DonDep's past was a catalyst for our discontinued chats with Dan. Unfortunately, Dan was not given the full story as usual, and -- yes -- that source wanted to keep all the info to himself. The X-Conference that's coming up has a lot to do with that. The $$$ factor, unfortunately.

Although there is truth in that DonDep may have been torn to shreds by the media, should we have gone ahead? The fact is that Dan should not have been influenced about the personality of one he so much enjoyed talking to. He had been told of DonDep's background once before. The poor man is being misled once again by greedy people whom claim him to be their "friend".

Thanks for your warning, Mark,=. I have the same concerns re the latest round of 'Raven' chats. A replacement Raven just might be fact, and the attempt to "set us up" … we are very wary of.

We were given a schedule for Dan's night activities and advised of when-and-where he would be away from security. We are now being encouraged to send an op to observe Dan at this place. I wonder why? Another setup? Quite possibly. We intend to "play the game" with these guys, but not to the detriment of anybody's safety.

It's such a tangled web, Mark. Know this, though. What we are doing is not for any personal gain. Only for the truth, which we wish to share. Just need to make sure we get the proper version of the truth..... lol

Take care

RegardsCJ

597


S-431. from Tom Skeggs regarding the Montauk "Delta-T" antenna

From: "Thomas Skeggs" Date: Sat, March 20, 2004 12:07 pm To: [email protected]

Hello again --

I forgot to mention. I have updated my Stargate-website. I've started to add some of my papers on Montauk project. I'm going ti try and add lots of photos and diagrams. I have added two photos of the strange replica of the Delta-T antenna.

I think there may be two different versions of the so-called Delta T antenna. One consists of two pyramids, and another may consist of two tendrahrons. I tried to build the other version but I could not work out the cable windings cause all the cables are black. And it's difficult to work out what cable is connected to what.

I also saw references to Delta loop antennas, and these tend to fit in with second tendrahron -haped antenna. I'm just trying to work out how it wired together. The delta loop antenna consists of 3 elements of wire arranged in a triangle. Each element is equal to a certain length relating to frequency like 1/3 wavelength. The cables would also be RF aerial cable. The first version may consist of standard high-power cable.

I also noticed that these delta-T antenna may relate to what's known as the time constant. The constant is found in electrical circuits and the time constant equals the Resistance times the Capacitance.

t=RC

The modulations in the transmitters may have been passed through a resistor and capacitor. The time it takes to charge up the capacitor is usually equal to one time constant. The bottom line here is all the electrical components connected after the resistor and capacitor would be subjected to the time constant.

If you arrange wires into loops, the loops create a field. Anything within these loops will be subjected to the same time constant and would be in sync with time constant of the whole circuit. This -- I think -- Nichols was trying to point out when he said about creating an "artificial time" . 'Cause the time period is usually unequal to the time interval made up of hours, minutes, and seconds. Time for anyone entering the device would appear to flow at a different rate to the time outside.

I hope to write this up for the Stargate website and include pictures, diagrams, charts, and basic equations only -- hopefully in the near future, etc.

Well that's all for nowTom

598

S-432. from Tom Skeggs regarding an alternate timelines - UFO connection

From: "Thomas Skeggs"Date: Sun, March 21, 2004 11:30 am To: [email protected] Subject: Re: UFOs = 'alternate timeline' machines ?

from <[email protected]>> Tom -->> I sent the package off last Tuesday. It's in a medium-sized white box. I was afraid to use padded envelopes for overseas shipment of 6 CDs in jewel cases (with sharp corners). It seems like it took "forever" for you to receive the last one.>> I am leaning toward the UFO stuff being a new physics associated with "consciousness engineering" (like what you said about "just think where you want to go") with advanced psycho-reactive materials (in the hull, etc.). Just having the former won't do you any good without the latter to "make it hap'n, Capt'n!".>> It appears that these UFOs use some sort of "time travel" although it be more akin to what you have been saying concerning the Multiverse and parallel universes. This bears close resemblance to what is being discussed in the "Burisch.htm' subject, about "alternate timelines" and so on. It is even resurrecting some of the "taboo" Rife virus microscopes (and that tells me Reich's orgone can't be too far off). Project Preserve Destiny's Dan Sherman said that his ET "comms" said that they navigate by "evading time" and not by going backwards-and-forwards through it. This may be the alternate timeline stuff. I don't know.>> If true, it would explain Lazar's (and others') contentions why little progress is being made of reverse-engineering these almost "magical" craft. They may be more akin to "time machines" than to conventional flight vehicles as we know them. I suspect the limited ET-government co-op program (that was halted in 1979) was to retrofit what little they could into our existing technological base while slowly bring scientists and engineers up-to-speed on the really advanced stuff. It could well be that if 'they' are us (visiting from the "future" - alternate timeline in the Multiverse), then we haven't developed the mental capacities yet (large brains, etc.) to effect use of these technologies.>> I suspect you -- like Tesla -- are FAR ahead of your time, Tom. And the phone call your mom thought to be a "hoax" will prove to be right on the money!>> Talk to you later --> -- Mark

Hello Mark --

You wrote about time-travel & the Many Worlds theory. And how remote-viewers can get it wrong. I've been thinking about this.

"I have also hated saying and I hate saying it." That what an RVer may say is different future events within the Multiverse. 'Cause I have seen other inventors use this as an excuse to explain why their time machines don't work.

599

When I "view" a future event, I see future from a view-point. And I may see a carry-out-an- action. But what I have experienced seems to change. And sometimes rapidly. Why?. I see a future where a single action will lead to an event. But other actions by other people may influence that event causing a different future event to happen.

For example, I remote view a terrorist planting a bomb in New York metro. I get in a panic and state a bomb attack will occur in New York. Yet unknown to the police of the bomber and arrest him. So the attack never goes ahead.

But why would see the terrorist plant the bomb when he has been arrested days before the attack? Because I see the probable intent of a man carrying an action which results, in reality, to split into a world-line where he does carry it out. And that's what I may see.

Also I pointed out that future events may change. Sometimes by the hour or the day. I think it's because other peoples' actions in the present constantly effect the events in the future. When I remote-view, it's like freezing an image or stopping the clock and I only see one future event. If I remote-view later, the event may change.

This is explains why I scored so badly trying to pick up on future headlines because there were too many to see and they keep changing. You won't really know the future until it happens.

Another thing is the transbilocation events. Sometimes I have nearly lossed control and end up at the other places. (I had another one a week-or-so ago). But I hold back because they tend to occur every 3 months. And I've been worried that I may get stuck at the second location. I have been wondering if instead I should just go with it and see what happens. This has been happening since 2001. So I may give it ago.

Must go nowTom

S-433. from Tom Skeggs regarding remote-viewing warnings on the Burisch case

From: "Thomas Skeggs"Date: Thu, March 25, 2004 3:30 pm To: [email protected] Subject: Re: remote-viewing warnings on the Burisch case

from <[email protected]>> To: "Thomas Skeggs" > Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 6:46 PM> Subject: remote-viewing warnings on the Burisch case

> Tom -->> New additions to the never-ending Burisch thread on the GLP board revealed a "Controlled Remote Viewer" (whatever that means?!) decided to use her skill to check on Burisch's present status. Apparently she must have been pretty close ecause a member of Burisch's MAJI-assigned sec urity detail told her to keep her nose out. Plus Dan's "light being"

600

confronted her in the "view" much as the grey ETs are reported to be able to do to other viewers.>> One may ask that if this stuff is so above-top-secret, why would it ever make it to the Internet? Burisch once said that it was necessary to solve the impending timeline problem. (I didn't understand it.) But it has served as a magnet for real info as well as dis-info in addition to on-going battles between the 'good' and 'bad' insiders of the MAJI organization. Sometimes they will use this public forum to chatise one another instad of resorting to a private e-mail. As was done to this remote-viewer. Plus the "warning" the being gave her reminded me of your inclination no to "view" that one Soviet site.>> I will have posted all 4 Volumes of the thread by tonight (GLP_1.doc through GLP_06.doc ). I'm wondering if your and Jack's future phone-calls and events-yet-to-be-accomplished are involved in these timelines also???>> -- Mark

Hello Mark --

"Controlled Remote viewing" is another name for Technical Remote viewing(TRV). Both, I recall, may have been developed by Ingo Swann and Puthoff back in the 70s. Swann set up a company and took out a trademark on TRV which now teaches people. His company has a website (forgot the URL). CRV and TRV are the most common types of remote viewing usually by Westerners. Russia seems to favor ERV (Extended Remote Viewing) where you enter a trance-like state. But some American RVers do sometimes use ERV. Both involve RV and you usually sit at a table and draw sketches of what you see.

With that Russian location that I previously told you about, it was more of a "feeling" than being told directly to stay away. The place had a "go away & stay away" feel about. The site may have some sort of counter-remote viewing measures which deter other remote viewers from entering.

The run-in with the Matrix Intelligence Agency. And my questioning of what RACE stood for. Following that incident lead to a virus attack. And people slagging me off in the forums. The good thing is that I now know who on the forums are working for whom.

You said you're confused about why they may battle it on the forums in public. Basically there is a lot of factual info on the Internet. But, sadly, most won't be found in forums. Some RV work following up on the virus attacks is some countries' use of some people to spread dis-info knowingly or unknowingly. Some use hackers to steal info off peoples computers while others damage websites or destroy peoples computers with viruses. Some countries use ex-intel personnel and hackers who have been caught and given a second chance to work for them.

Then you some individuals who see everything a joke and wind people with false stories, contradicts, and generally shouting people down the forums.

This is why a I stay off the forums. To me, when you look at some forums you see a turf war going on as some people who post regularly see it as their forum and try put down any visitors who try and post valid info.

601

As for UFOs, I have tried to RV once-or-twice. The interiors of them will little success. I don't talk about it much. But the UFO situation is far more complex than people imagine. And its not easy to explain.

All for now.Tom

S-434. from Ed Halerewicz regarding Bob Lazar

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Sun, March 14, 2004 1:37 am Subject: Re: John Andrews and Bob Lazar

> I'm reading over some of your Lazar-related comments. First off, please don't think I'm acting as a defense attorney for Bob Lazar.

No problem. I think that you are leaning that way. As far Lazar, I think I'm in agreement with everyone on him that he's a question mark -- ahem! big question mark. If he makes further statements, I would be interested in hearing them. But at the present I don't buy his story. Tom' Mahood's site even states that a friend -- a character witness for Bob -- considers him to be a bull-shitter which doesn't help matters any. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Bob does not provide that. I found his story compelling before I took classes in physics and find his story less and less probable. Again, I'm in agreement with Tom.

> He could only vouch for the hovering craft that he saw with his own eyes and experiments where golf balls would bounce off a field generated from what he was told was an Element-115.

I find that to be "attorney" talk. I've read where Bob makes statements like that. But he also contradicts other statements: it's not anti-matter in one talk and then it is in another. Which is it? Bob can't even keep his own story straight.

> From what I learned, Lazar was working for a contractor at a Los Alamos meson physics lab. He eventually got fired for using the government's resources on his own pet projects (like his jet car which was well publicized in the local papers there). He was more of a lab technician than a physicist. Sometimes technicians can get equipment to work whereas their academic professors cannot. I could see where an PhD engineer could design an engine on paper but couldn't service one in the field. I'm guessing that Lazar fell into that category and over time thought he knew as much about physics as his superiors who were formally trained. Actually, I think his statement about certain particles being "made to exist" was that the theoretical model being postulated required their existence. Like the Higgs (if that doesn't pan out, how will they ever patch up the Standard Model???). In fact, didn't the neutrino come into existence because physicists were loathe to discard their conservation laws and were "forced" to hypothesize the existence of a practically massless particle which could not be detected?"

602

Nope, neutrinos were first predicted by Dirac long before they were discovered (he was even annoyed that his theory predicted such a particle), and they have been detected and have a small but non-zero mass.

Part of the above seems plausible and those who examined his background claim as much. For the particle issue, this is what Lazar stated:

"As far as exchange particles, still, though some of them like the zeta particle, maybe that's an actual thing, but when they're looking at transfers of energy, I think these are scapegoats for the most part. A lot of experiments that I was doing at Los Alamos essentially was along these same lines, but other exchange particles like the intermediate vector bozon, I don't believe that thing exists. I really don't. I think they're grabbing at straws and just coming up with excuses.'

By 'exchange particle', you can only assume that Lazar means a boson, a zeta is a fermion not a boson, so there is a problem right there (also a intermediate vector boson is what everyone else calls a photon!). It's not even an exchange particle!!! He basically states exchange particles are fictitious. If this were true, the Standard Model would fail horribly at describing nature as it requires force particles. Max Planck and Albert Einstein proved the existence of the photon through the photo-electric effect. Matter/wave duality forms exist in quantum mechanics have been well established, so this statement is pure bunk. [Also, if he was a tech, why claim to be a physicist working at LANL? More b.s.?]

> Lazar didn't say E-116 was antimatter. He said that under proton bombardment of this particular isotope (never identified as to how many neutrons) of ELement-115, it formed E-116 which then rapidly decayed into lower elements, in the process releasing an anti-proton. That anti-proton was directed to a target gas for the annhilation reaction (ergo, no "magnetic confinement bottle" needed to store antimatter). The massive heat produced was converted into electricity by an exotic ET thermoionic generator. Now I don't know how the nuclear kinetics of that above reaction. Maybe the unidentified target gas was chosen specifically to produce heat and not energy in the form of gamma rays, etc."

His actual quote was:

"Apparently, the 115 under bombardment with protons lets out an anti-matter particle. This anti-matter particle will react with any matter whatsoever, which I imagine there is some target system inside the reactor. This, in turn, releases heat, and somewhere within that system there is a one-hundred-percent-efficient thermionic generator, essentially a heat-to-electrical generator."

Why does 116 generate anti-matter? This is a violation of CPT theorem. Why doesn't 115? This is in contrast to theory, so why is this not explained? This whole assertion doesn't seem to make any sense. Even if there was a thermionic energy converter, it would loose some energy through this process. You can't get around the laws of Therymodynamics.

Also he mentions a "particle accelerator" is used to bombard Element 115 to form 116 and its size is roughly 4.5 meters. The small radius would mean it would eat up a lot of energy to accelerate the particles to high speed. Where does this energy come from? It can't be from the reactor as it would imply it's a perpetual motion machine. This problem doesn't even seem to exist to him (if he was a physicist at LANL he should have noted this right away). The size of the accelerator would put a limit on acceleration and hence not be able to cause a fusion bonding energy with Element-115. Since 116

603

has been produced in a Lab and decayed and does not produce anti-matter, this shows that this statement is more bunk.

> Too many things he said were obviously wrong.

The burden of proof lies with him -- not me! I shouldn't have to bend over backgrounds to buy into his claims. They should be self-evident!

Attached is a picture from an EG&G trailer, showing the work EG&G really does as opposed to what Lazar claims. This pic was from a documentary on atomic testing called atomic journe's which can be found at http://www.vce.com.

Here's a report on his claims I tend to agree with:http://paul.rutgers.edu/~mcgrew/ufo/to-be-merged/lazar.physics


S-435. from 'Crackajack' regarding the Dan Burisch topic

From: 'Crackajack'Date: Tue, March 30, 2004 7:50 pm To: [email protected] (more) Cc: robert.b

>From: [email protected]>To: [email protected]>CC: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]>Subject: my forum habits>Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 16:47:44 -0500 (EST)>

604


http://paul.rutgers.edu/~mcgrew/ufo/to-be-merged/lazar.physics%0D

http://www.vce.com/

>CJ / Kate / Harry / Rob -->> I'm not much of a "forum/chat" person. I usually only go to those places to search for info rather than to actively participate. I actually came across the GLP board when I did a search for any data on Dr. Burisch other than what I could find at Bill's and BJ's sites.>> If you try to pass a message to me via one of those "threads", I can't guarantee that I will ever see it ... or at least view it in the short run. The best way to get in touch with me is by this e-mail addy.>> All of you now have what I do. I'm sure the truth is in here somewhere but it will take a lot smarter person than me to extract it. I trust that all of you were able to view the video .mpg files (on the other 5 CDs) ok?>>-- Mark

Understood, Mark.

Thanks so much for the information. Kate added some extra data which I appreciate too. :)

I guess that we are openly trying to get something moving on the thread, awareness wise. There are new faces there now, with new enthusiasm. As a group, we may be able to get a groundswell moving. It was fantastic to hear that your package and Harry's card got through. I just hope they got to the doc. You can be guaranteed that TPTB would be scanning through all info before it got to him.

I made a cheeky bump last night as 'Kether'. This was a name referred to by a 'Raven' when he showed us an alleged short letter from Dan to this character. 'Kether' could also be called No. 1. It is a Hebrew term for the all of everything, the consciousness of the conscious, etc. Maybe this is Cheney?

There is much organisation still to do, of the data we have been presented. e.g.: Family tree, org charts, timeline of events, "the 12" etc. etc.

I might try to do a bit more this weekend. I will also see what chats you and Kate do not have (raven wise) and forward them on to you.

Good luck all, in the good search for the truth!!

Kind RegardsCJ

S-436. from Ed Halerewicz, Jr. regarding Paul Potter's UFO designs

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Thu, April 1, 2004 7:55 pm Subject: Re: blueprints for metric engineering ??

--- [email protected] wrote:

605

> Ed --> > If you have a moment, browse the top 2 documents on the left of http://ufophysics.com and give me your take of whether this is hypothetical or possibly true. He makes reference of Hal's stuff and former KSC employee Clark McClelland. I never heard of Betty Luca (or Andresson) or her story. But the "vacuum propeller" ties in with what Dr. Jack has been preaching all along with Cornet's stuff. And riding a "beam of light" by projecting a distortion in front reminds me of UNITEL. The reference to crystals reminds me of what Montauk's Nichols said he saw as a Eaton-AIL radar engineer.> > It looks complicated to me, so if true then I guess I could see why progress would be slow. (I'm in the process of converting the .htm pages to Word .docs)> > -- Mark

I'm in the middle of writing a paper for a geology class at the moment. As such I only briefly overlooked the site you mentioned. Off-the-bat it is hypothetical and not fact. But perhaps to your surprise, I have to say that it is in the realm of possibility. At least the first document. The second doesn't quite "jive" with me.

As for the beam travel, it sort of ties in to UNITEL except the UNITEL vehicle trades places with the rear laser beam to the front portion through what is known as 'quantum teleportation'. It would be much to iffy for current science to do because it would require the solving of a lot of complex quantum mechanics equations. However, it would still be a possibility in principle. One problem is the statement than an EM beam will "speed up". That won't happen it pretty much moves at the speed-of-light. However, a helix magnetic field can accelerate particles to high speed (in fact proto-stars do a good job of this). Perhaps this was what the author (Paul E. Potter) intended.

The article claimed that Puthoff got the idea for his article from an astronaut. I do not know if that is true. However, Puthoff after reading one of my papers emailed me and notified me of the publication of his paper, so I would say that Hal is a pretty open-minded guy. His PV model suggests that if you could increase vacuum energy, you would in fact create a higher gravitational potential. So if the beam were "tuned" to quantum variations of the classical field (not the classical field itself however), it could be possible. A higher gravitational potential above a craft could cancel out the Earth's below in principle, but it is sill a long way from being considered conclusive. The plasma beam propulsion method -- if valid -- would suggest that the craft in question has the same quantum mechanical properties of the beam in question and in effect is dragged along with the beam.

As for the second crystal lens article, I don't think such an effect could propel a craft. It would be like firing an energy beam. A magnetic field without moving large amounts of mass is simply going to produce low thrust. Although it has been suggested in a number of scientific articles that certain crystals can store magnetic energy due to limitation imposed on electron movement.

Also, out of curiosity, do you know of Potter's background. His name sounds familiar. Pehaps I'm just thinking of Andrew Potter from UNITEL. As for Bruce Cornet, I actually learned of him doing some digging on Flying Triangles. I like how he presented his information, like a good scientist. I don't really agree with all of his interpretations. But the evidence he presented was quite good, and that's the important thing anyways. On that note, Cornet -- I think -- made mention of a vortex similar to that of the show "Sliders" that didn't make since to me from a gravitational perspective. However, tied to a potential beam that can act with the PV, seems at least in principle to make sense.

606


S-437. from Bob King regarding Montauk and the P-X

From: "Bob" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Tue, April 13, 2004 7:28 pm Subject: Philly etc.

> I first came across UK-based inventor/remote-viewer Tom Skeggs and his 'Star Chamber' plans for projecting a fully visible and interacting holographic image of a remote-viewer (see http://www.stealthskater.com/PX.htm#StarChamber ).

Had a look at this and it is a load of rubbish. I have already given you the truth about the Philly Exp.

> Since then, Tom has revealed that his RV sessions have included the Montauk Project. He recently toured the site to judge the accuracy of his "viewings". Some recent investigations into (many versions of) the Delta-T -- as well as the different radio receivers alleged by Preston -- are archived at http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Skeggs_09.doc . (As always, the host site URL is referenced at the beginning of each archived document. Be sure to check out Tom's progress on his capacitive-discharge aerospace flight test article at his FTA site.)

As for Montauk, I know very little about the place but for a while I was in touch with someone called Anne who lived close by and often used to go for a walk in the area which is a national park!! I asked her to get a soil sample and have it analysed. I have no idea what happened but have never heard from her since and suspect she was either imprisoned or shot. She herself was interested in the project and was willing to try anything.

I don't think there will ever be and end to the speculation about these projects. Not sure if I told you, but the 'Eldridge' which was supposedly sold to Greece was returned last year to be scrapped and some shipping experts had a good look over her before they scrapped the ship. They came to the conclusion that is it was never the Eldridge but a sister ship.

Regards, Bob

S-438. from 'Adam' regarding the Montauk radio receivers

From: "A.D.A.M." <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Wed, April 14, 2004 1:06 am Subject: Some old information re: Montauk

607

http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Skeggs_09.doc%20

http://www.stealthskater.com/PX.htm#StarChamber%20


Hello. I just read your post on Valentine's board(http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Skeggs_09.doc ). I know

a little about the FRR-24 receivers that Preston Nichols describes in the Montauk series books. The FRR-24 was a "diversity" receiver. That means it's built on the idea of combining multiple receivers in one group to eliminate signal fade or to allow them to receive multiple signals (not necessarily the same kind of signal) at the same time. I went and visited Preston a few years ago. I got to see the FRR-24 receivers (he has three sets of them that I saw). Each receiver is housed in 8-foot high equipment rack. Very impressive. I am enclosing some files of a FRR-24 that was built by National Radio that went for sale on eBay.

The SP-600-JX17 Super Pro (built by Hammerlund) was more then likely the receiver type they would have used by Preston's description. The JX17 denotes special options (diversity receiver, product detector, extended coverage, etc.). It was available with an outboard SSB (single side band) adaptor also.

The more modern receiver that the FRR-24 seems to be equivalent to is the FRR-224. I've seen one. I was comparing it to the FRR-24 and it seem to be a modern day version of its older counter part (diversity, SSB, AM, ISB, etc.) I saw that receiver in Preston's shop also.

The Delta-T antenna in the picture that is described as used at Montauk -- wasn't. It was on top of Preston's shop in East Islip (see page 202 in "Montauk Revisited"). I saw the remains of it when I was at Preston's shop. A storm tore it off the shop's roof.

That's all for now. If I find anything else laying around, I'll let you know. And no, I was not ever involved with the Philadelphia Experiment or Montauk Project. I just decided to go and check out a few things for myself. I have a lot of this archived; but due to my current computer upgrade (Windows 2000 is a little fussy), a lot of it will probably stay archived for a while.

Be Safe, Be Well, Always.Jay

S-439. from 'Adam' regarding the Montauk Delta-T antenna

From: "A.D.A.M." <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Wed, April 14, 2004 10:04 pm Subject: you're welcome

I forgot to give you the links to few Delta-T antennas I have built. These are not public links and I don't want them archived/published.

Then why show you? Because I think everybody should question the information and draw their own conclusions. I built them before I met Preston, and compared notes with him when I went to visit him. It was all derived from the info in the Montauk series books. For my own curiosity/edification, that's all. I don't need the attention/spotlight put on me. I have taken my research in a different direction as of two years ago.

608

http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Skeggs_09.doc%20

BTW, I seemed to recognize Preston from somewhere and he said the same thing. We both agreed that it was not anything to do with Montauk or any thing on Long Island. We just couldn't put our fingers on it. We both felt that we had worked together and were good friends at one time.

Here's two non-public links:XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (my 7ft Delta-T, and my inverted Delta-T, and my small

Delta-T)XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (my small Delta-T showing a rotating magnetic field)

And just for fun, here is my public website: http://web.a-znet.com/~peruny/

It's no mistake, the link works. Everything is "hidden" in plain sight....

Have fun, Be Safe, Be Well,Jay

S-440. from Ed Halerewicz, Jr. regarding "growing" UFOs

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Thu, April 15, 2004 10:34 pm Subject: Re: 'growing' machines rather than 'building' them ?

--- [email protected] wrote:> Ed --> > I know the following is not "your cup of tea". I totally agree with you that life would be a lot simpler if everything could be explained by today's GM and QM equations and standard engineering theorems. >> But this is what's going to be going down at the upcoming X-Conference in DC. It's strange that Bill has suddenly announced his retirement from being the Director of Skywatcher-International at the same time that Dan Burish announced his. hmmm...> > Saw the attached (http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Hamilton_05.doc) at Bill's site. If true, it partially explains why some of the UFO technology is WAY AHEAD of our technology.> > But it still doesn't explain the separation and combination of different craft into one (or more) (most notable example is Bentwaters and one of the Puerto Rican incidents). I have no basis for saying this, but the only explanation I can fathom is the one I archived from Tom Bearden about creating/manipulating matter from thought forms. Note that this is a whole lot more than a FireFox-type navigation.> > I lean toward the alleged past ET-government co-op program -- with the ETs in charge -- as a interim means of introducing SOME of their technology into our existing methodologies. It would probably be as much of a challenge to them as to us as our (primitive) stuff would be unfamiliar to them. (The program supposedly came to an abrupt halt in 1979 when a guard refused to empty his gun's cartridges while an experimental field was being generated.)

609

http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Hamilton_05.doc

http://web.a-znet.com/~peruny/

Mark,

I assume "GM" was meant to be 'GR'; otherwise I'm a bit of a loss. As per ET in general, I feel that it is likely than an ET civilization exists somewhere; and given shear astronomical numbers, perhaps one-or-two could have found Earth and observe it from time-to-time. Even given that, I think they would find us to primitive to interact. Perhaps the only reason to study us is to see how they once were.

As for growing structures in space, it's not far-fetched. NASA has done that in microgravity. There is one device that can generate solid objects of varying shape with the use of soundwaves (although rather simple, still very interesting).

As for Burisch, try looking at old UFO tales from the 50s. They were claims of people from Venus -- Venus of all places! -- a place that can melt lead on its surface. Just because it seems credible doesn't make it true. With all things being equal, I don't know if his story is true or not. But it's certainly not going to affect my daily life, that's for sure! I'm also at a loss why you sent this because as you put it "it's not my cup of tea". Was there something you were looking for?


S-441. from Ed Halerewicz, Jr. regarding his physics insights

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Fri, April 16, 2004 8:02 pm Subject: Re: you're OK in my book, Ed!

--- [email protected] wrote:> Hi Ed --> > If I seemed "surprised" that you were taking a geology class -- I didn't mean it to be -- I guess it's because I really don't know anything about you. Some time ago Larry was trying to get Fred Alan Wolf to do the "math" for him to quiet some critics. Fred -- alias "Have Brains Will Travel" -- wasn't so much on the UNITEL bandwagon that he was willing to waive/reduce his customary $250/hr consulting fee.> > Then out-of-the-blue Andrew Potter forwards me correspondence between Larry and someone named 'Ed Halerewicz, Jr.' who was doing a math analysis of UNITEL's precepts. I just assumed Larry found another physicist that was more sympathetic to the cause. I also assumed -- by the great quality of your analyses -- that you were a PhD. I did a Google search and found where you co-authored a paper at Cornell. I thought maybe that's where you were working. Then you later corrected me about the "Dr." part so I assumed you were a grad student. Which may work to Larry's advantage because -- from what I have read and observed -- aggressive young minds are more likely to challenge the 'status quo' than their older tutors.>

610


> A lot of mainstreamers take a "I'll believe it when I see it" approach to UFOs (and the paranormal in general). A few years ago I revisited my old college physics professor at West Virginia University -- Richard Treat, who is now Professor Emeritus of that department. I think he wanted to avoid meeting with me as -- Sarfatti put the idea in my head, he remembers using a textbook of Treat's when he was at Cal State -- he might have been involved with some "black projects" and my line-of-questioning would make him "uncomfortable". Anyway, concerning UFOs Dr. Treat made a remark like "well, have one land and let me examine it and then I'll give you my opinion". Yeah .. like a UFO is really going to go out of its way to land just to satisfy his skepticism! Dr. Treat seemed more interested in the girl who accompanied me. She was one of the top models at my former studio (also the Hawaiian-Tropic Bikini winner for the State). But Kim was getting her Masters degree in math from WVU and I wanted her to witness such a meeting .> > "A closed mind accomplishes nothing". It could be he was giving me an answer just to discourage me from asking more questions. In view of your seeming disbelief about UFOs, I was 'surprised' myself to learn of your -- "off-the-record" -- past sighting. If I "read" you correctly, it would appear that you're saying there probably are such craft -- as well as phenomena such as ESP and remote-viewing -- but because there is no hard mathematical science to describe such things, you're really not interested in them. Sort of like sweeping them under the rug, relegating them to "virtual phenomena".> > Which is fine. Your choice. At least you seem open-minded enough not to dismiss them just because you don't understand based upon what you've been taught so far. You're right, believing in something doesn't mean it's true. Look at the thousands of religions in the world -- they all can't be right. But the flip side is equally valid: just because you don't understand something doesn't mean it can't/doesn't exist.> > In Darlington's book, Tom Mahood posed many theories to explain Bob Lazar. Each of them had its drawbacks. Now it seems that Tom has dismissed the subject completely. He must have had several quantum leaps in discovering new evidence that he didn't have during the years he and Darlington were exchanging e-mails before the book got published. Tom dismisses the S4 hypotheses. But -- whoops! oh-oh ... -- in the book, Tom's remote-viewer friend (Tom believes in RV because it was demonstrated for him to his satisfaction) saw the 9 Papoose Mountain hangers that Lazar had claimed only they were now empty. Major discrepancy here, Tom. You can't have it both ways!> > Don't get me wrong. I like Tom and miss his e-mails. He evaded some of my questions and I'm guessing he's involved in some sort of break-through propulsion research. It could be he downplayed the Lazar thing to throw people off. (BTW, www.boblazar.com is slated to make a grand reopening April 23.) Tom did allude to the craft that has long been rumored to be at Dreamland. TV journalist George Knapp -- who was "dogging" Burisch in the past at Las Vegas because he was skeptical -- said everybody in Vegas were well aware of these reports of a craft but it wasn't until Bob Lazar that the nation was informed. Mark Farmer -- another of the Groom Lake "Interceptors" in Darlington's book -- confirmed the rumors of a single craft being tested. He said he kept trying to dismiss it as "alien" but increasingly could not. Tom ventured that it might be stored at an Area-19 which was the former site of a DOE particle beam facility.> > I lean toward the simpler rather than the more complex regarding these reports. I feel there probably is a recovered alien craft that's being tested (not all these multiple types). I don't feel there are that many alien abductions (more likely MK-Ultra memory plants) and zero

611

cattle mutilations (probably a cover-up for germ warfare experiments). Also maybe one-or-two "captive" J-Rods rather than all these different types. Once some legitimate info surfaces that is "sensitive", a discrediting effort has to be conducted and that usually involves massive embellishment like they did with the Philadelphia Experiment and Montauk Project. The trick is to gather a bunch of conservative-but-fair-minded researchers that are adept at extracting basic facts from all the (I want to believe!) fiction.> > I figure there are some truths about the Burisch story or else I wouldn't be getting so many of these military hits and -- for the first time ever -- files are disappearing off of my website. And Datarealm is a major-league host! I think Tom even had a site with them at one time. When I republished my web with some new additions, I saw where files were being added that I never deleted. I have never seen that before. But less being more likely than greater, I'm guessing the "sensitive" facts about Burisch concern his germ warfare experiences than ETs, timelines, etc. That's where the ideal cover of UFOs would be useful if he suddenly developed a guilty conscience and was starting to whistle-blow.> > I am comfortable with the possibility that much of this ET-technology may be so far ahead of ours that it would appear as "magic" (as many alleged 'insiders' have reported). So in that sense, Sarfatti is right when he says "it's not physics as I've been taught". Right on, Jack! For once you hit it right on the button! … … …

Well … maybe "surprised" that I was in a geology class when I write physics papers? It's more-or-less because those damn college entrance exams test you on what you don't know and not what you do know! So college-wise, I've I only had classes in classical physics. All the advanced physics I know I taught myself. And so I take classes like geology to still do physical science, even though college boards put up walls for the very things I'm actually interested in (they want "assimilators", not free-thinkers). Regarding the Cornel paper that I wrote that while I was at school at Lincoln Land Community College, I knew a post-grad from Cornel who liked my paper and posted on my behalf. But more-or-less I'm just an "average joe" working a dead-end job and taking part-time classes. I know the guy at Cornel thought I was a genius because of my insights -- especially without "formal" training -- even though I don't really see why. My best guess is -- as a friend told me -- that I understand the concepts of physics pretty readily. The math just tends to take me a long while, and well that gets back to why I take physical science classes and not ones on -- say -- quantum theory.

Well, regarding the UFO, I take Arthur C. Clarke's stance "If you haven't seen a UFO, you're either very unobservant, or you live in a very cloudy area." I can almost guarantee that if you look up at clear skies for a period of a year, you will at least see one thing that doesn't seem quite right. I have seen satellites pass the sky on several occasions. A very small number appeared to make right-angle turns. Possibly they're either hit space junk or maybe they just weren't satellites. Either way, no useful information can be inferred from them. There are other times like when I once saw a light from the sky backlight some trees. It was green. Now some may jump to the conclusion it was ET. To a more down-to-earth person like me, nope … it was just an asteroid. The green color suggested that it had some copper content. Who knows what a Ufologist would say?! The Flying Triangle thing was the only one that I can say that there was something to infer. Either the Air Force has technology NASA would be jealous of, or ET really does have an interest in Earth. Either conclusion would seem ridiculous to a skeptic, but it's got to be one of the above. And regarding your fighter pilot friend's comment, that doesn't surprise me too much either. A retired member of the Armed Services once suggested something like that to me, that unofficially there are some things that can't be explained away but aren't perceived as a real threat.

612

On ET, I think it's possible they could have visited Earth but I doubt anything like what most ufologists claim. I like the old Fox show -- "Third Rock from the Sun" -- where Dr. Albright (sp?) stated that no alien could come to Earth and look like a human (the whole premise behind the show!). I, however, think that could be a possibility. We can fool some animal species on Earth with decoys, although if you talked to an ET trying to mimic a human you might be able to figure it out. I don't think something like that is very likely; however, I wouldn't rule it out as a possibility.

But in general I don't care much about those possibilities. If we want to improve things as a race, it is something we must do. We must try to allow our science to catch up to these possibilities rather than try to use these possibilities to pervert science. I think the best way to prove ET exist -- without them landing at the White House lawn -- is to go to them. That would end the debate. It would kill arguments like "they can't come here" because we ourselves went to them.. And if we go there, you no longer have to speculate. You will get your answers. That's why propulsion concepts interested me. We can "go where no man has gone before" and learn about what's really out there.

As for Tom, I have not contacted him and have no plans to do so at the moment. Perhaps if I had a question I wanted to run by him. But I don't foresee anything like that at the moment. As for Lazar's website update, I would like to see it. I like to see how he deals with new scientific findings (would he incorporate them, reject them, ignore them). With the Alcubierre Warp Drive, the discovery or real 115, how will Lazar react? Will he bury himself or add something to give some credibility to his story? To me, that would be the final proof of fraud or not (or as you suggested, someone retelling a story that he believes to be correct, but added b.s. too). If it's a paysite, then it would strongly indicate that he's simply a profiteer. Time will tell.


S-442. Ed Halerewicz, Jr. on Bill Hamilton

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Sat, April 17, 2004 1:11 pm Subject: Re: Bill Hamilton's comments

--- [email protected] wrote:> > I don't know, maybe I'm an "ET reject". I've never seen one ... and dammit! I'm on their side. Oh, why is always ME?!!!> > I had 2 unnerving experiences in the past. When I was 14, I was helping my father refinish a basement into a family rec room. We were nailing studding to the concrete/cinderblock walls to put up paneling. Studs are 2x4, so the gap between the concrete wall and panel is ~ 4". I was installing some electrical outlets in a finished panel wall when I heard I heavy breathing coming from the 4"-wide space behind it. Not an animal-type breathing but a human or "entity". Face-level, too. How can anything squeeze into a 4" space? This was in the daytime too as light was coming through the ground-level windows. So no spooky-at-night stuff here. Plus I was a cocky teenager. It seemed to increase rapidly in volume. I

613


spooked and ran upstairs for my dad. He was a WWII combat veteran and didn't scare easy. I didn't either but it unnerved me so badly. He ordered me to stay upstairs -- I can't figure that one out -- and he ran down to investigate. To this day, Ed, I almost believe he knew or suspected what "it" was. But he never told me.> > The other time I took a scuba diving charter on a Miami sports shop boat. Yep, Bermuda Triangle country! The owners were lobster hunting and they let me and another paying customer buddy-up for scuba diving. I think there were 3 men with their wives. I figure me and this other guy just paid for the gas. The day drug on. After we docked, the owner profusely apologized for what appeared to be an altercation with another boat during the trip. I can't remember anything about that! I'm sure I didn't fall asleep or black out. I was the mile record-holder at my high school. To this day I don't know what happened.> > In the past few years I have seen tv shows and read magazines that I never would have before. Just happened to be at the right place and right time. e.g., the only time I ever read Astronomy magazine was when I saw it had a cover story "What Happened Before the Big Bang?" by Michio Kaku. I have never read that magazine before or since. Coincidence? Like when I happened to watch DATELINE and catch Corso's interview? I never watch those national news documentary shows. Why that day? Same thing with remote-viewer David Morehouse. That began my serious effort into learning more about these subjects.> > You have served a role here too, Ed. You must be a Ramanujan-type child prodigy to have mastered physics so well at your hand. I'm grateful that Larry found you for UNITEL's sake. I just hope he's not so stubborn as to "bit the hand that feeds him".> > My brother-in-law was awakened once by some sort of bright light in his bedroom doorway. He doesn't seem to want to talk about it much. I don't know if he can't remember or if it's fear. I think my sister experienced it too. I remember him saying he couldn't move. I don't know if it was out of fear or fascination. I kid them about being selected for future alien abduction and they don't appreciate it.> > One of the things that interested me in the Dalnegorsk, Russia UFO incident (the "Russian Roswell") was that the subsequent UFOs that were seen searching for their crashed probe were illuminating the terrain with a light that had no beam nor source. Internationally-known UFO researcher Bill Hamilton commented on this too (see the attached document Hamilton_Emails.doc). He said it appears 'they' have an ability to cause objects to radiate rather than "reflect". If true, what would be a physics conjecture for that?> > Jack Sarfatti frequently quotes Bruce Maccabee and Bruce Cornet. Geologist Dr. Cornet has had a colorful experience with UFOs and personal abductions. He says he has experienced being moved through solid walls (see http://www.monmouth.com/~bcornet/ ). This sounds like what a lot of so-called abductees have reported, sometimes in a "blue light". Once I received a strange route to a Grants Chronicle website describing a "new physics" which involved "density-shifting" and morphing (http://www.grantchronicles.com ; also http://www.stealthskater.com/Science.htm#Phase_Shifting ). I replied to the sender but never got a response. Disinfo? I asked Sarfatti about it and he labeled it pseudo-science cult garbage and anointed me with his notorious "CIA symbol" (Crackpot Identification Agency).> > Well, since Sarfatti is always talking about Cornet as if he is some sort of "god", how does he explain Cornet's and the ETs being moved through solid walls and levitated etc. In physics terms. Jack can't have it both ways. How would you explain it IF you look at this as

614

http://www.stealthskater.com/Science.htm#Phase_Shifting%20

http://www.grantchronicles.com/

http://www.monmouth.com/~bcornet/%20

a mind experiment and not take it seriously? What could enable such a phenomena to take place?> > I have noticed a lot of well-known researcher indeed trying to capitalize on their works. "Chica" Bruce raked me over-the-coals for insinuating that she was trying to profit too much from her book on Phil Schneider and the Philadelphia Experiment ("get over it, dude!"). Even Bill Hamilton has pulled most of the Burisch-related material off his website and has claimed the ownership rights to several interviews. I never got the feeling that Lazar was trying to overly-profit from his disclosures the way a lot of these other people -- like Linda Moulton Howe -- are doing. He had the model thing. But most of his video sales probably went to Gene Huff's Tri-Dot company. I got a lot of info from Lazar's transcripts for free. If he's trying to make a profit, he sure went about it the wrong way.> > Tell me what you think of Bill's comments in the attached doc. He works for UCLA as a programmer. I don't know if he teaches classes. His Skywatch-International stuff has been going on for years. Strangely he has recently announced his retirement from it. Some at the GLP board think he is MAJI-friendly (he says he knows some of those guys) and may be in the process of being "brought into the fold" a la Burisch and BJ.

Ok Mark,

I'll just address the physics. Bill's email doc file basically just wasted my time.

But first, "beams going through walls". Personally, I feel that stories of passing through walls are make-believe. But you also have to realize that (a) atoms are mostly empty space, so if you arrange them right you could pass (actually canceling out the EM fields of molecular bonds is all you have to do as that is the force that stops your hand from going through a wall, not actual physical contact with it), although I would think this is beyond or technology. (b)Scientists, however, have suspended ("floated") frogs in a magnetic field, so a beam levitation field is possible with today's science (its been done!). Getting through walls, I however, see as problem. You could possibly treat a wall as a quantum tunneling barrier, but you would have to alter the quantum vacuum (probably similar to what UNITEL Proposes).

On UNITEL, I told Larry I was no longer interested if he couldn't provide me with useful physics data, or physics speculation. He offered Mike Miller to patch that up, after my phone contact with Mike I have not heard from either Larry or Mike.

"Phase-Shifting": well, the great Grant Chronicle site looks like someone trying to explain UFO physics using Newtonian Mechanics, and in MHO does a better job of trying to explain the physics at hand than Lazar. But you can clearly see that it does not go beyond Newtonian concepts. The gravity equation offered is bunk; at best it could be argued as imputing a cosmological constant into Newton's Law of gravity (Now real scientists have done something similar to probe the possibility of extra dimensions (i.e., "submilimeter gravity"), but the scale should be short-range and not long-ranged). The "Phase Shifting" concept however has merit. I wrote an article at JoAPM about this. Einstein's theory says the speed of light is constant for a particular background vacuum. If you could alter the properties of the background by an inverse PV field, then travel faster than our local value for 'c' becomes possible.

As for lighting issues, there are so many possibilities. The first is using light that we can't see. For example, take a red laser shine and it at the ground. Then look only through the blue lens of 3D glasses. You can't see the laser light because you can no longer see that frequency. Radiating light and not reflecting does not make much of any since when light reflects it radiates EM energy, which is light!

615

http://www.joatp.org/

Radiating light without a light bulb is possible. The best example is a fluorescent light, there is no filament, it’s the motion of the gas ions that creates the light. It is also possible to introduce an electric field on to a magnetic field to produce light. After all, light is just an EM effect. Since you have a chemistry background, the next possibly should almost seem obvious. Light is emitted by electrons jumping to higher state and returning to the original position (laser light is caused by meta-state of those levels). The motion of an electron around its orbit is given in terms of an magnetic moment. Increase the moment and you introduce a meta-stable state and light will radiate. No mystery science here!


S-443. from. Dr. Arkadiusz Jadzyk regarding Tom Bearden

From: "Arkadiusz Jadczyk" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Thu, April 22, 2004 9:28 am Subject: Re: rethinking 'what is Time?'

> There was a KeelyNet post that suggested that Peter Lynds' theory of time may be a *key* to Tom Bearden's hypotheses.

a) ***************************************************************From: Andrei Khrennikov Subject: Re: ?

> Dorogoi, Arkadiusz!>>Concerning "Peter Lynds": somebody (maybe some my "friend"?!) have used my name, I think "Peter Lynds" does not exist at all. See

http://www.phy.cuhk.edu.hk/course/phy2002/forum/messages/339.html

*****************************************************************(b) From: Myron EvansDate: 4/6/2004

> Yes, I agree completely with Bob Flower. I think that ZPE should be given low priority or quietly forgotten by the AAIAS Board. I have an over generous nature and was trying to give Bearden some support by constructing theories out of his endless verbiage. I was duped into thinking that a US Patent meant something. Obviously not. This was before the revelation that Bearden had faked a Ph. D. Thesis and had admitted it. This was all done behind my back so I became disgusted with the man. >

> As mentioned by Jim Bell, this fake Ph.D. Thesis is the kiss of death for Bearden and anyone who is associated with him.

>

616

http://www.phy.cuhk.edu.hk/course/phy2002/forum/messages/339.html


> On top of this comes the cruel deception of terminal cancer sufferers by medical quackery, the cruel deception of the general public by secret weapons scaremongering, and the gross corruption of science.

>> All of this makes me very angry, and when bona fide scientists can't stand up to Bearden I get

even angrier. >> So I have reshuffled the AAIAS Board and invited people to replace Bearden's followers. One

of these, David Clements, emerged from the murky woodwork recently, and another John Shelburne, has infiltrated the U.S. Navy.

****************

Best,ark

S-444. from Ed Halerewicz, Jr. regarding Peter Lynds' paper on "time"

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Thu, April 22, 2004 6:17 pm Subject: Re: a news release on Lynds' paper

--- [email protected] wrote:> I found a news article regarding Peter Lynds' breakthrough paper on understanding time. I don't personally understand it, but others say it reinforces what Tom Bearden has been saying all along about the time domain. One of the journal reviewers compared it to Einstein's Special Relativity paper in its boldness. It is attached (Lynds_01.doc) as well as archived at http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Lynds_01.doc .

> Also, from a recent Bearden correspondence (http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/032504.htm ):

>> >> "... ... In the West, we have not yet even deciphered the fundamental nature of mind. Most western physical scientists are prone to think we are "meat computers" and that the "brain" contains the "mind". It does not, but only acts as a special and very necessary "coupler" and "tuner".>> >> In psychoenergetics, mind and mind operations are completely electromagnetic, but the electrodynamics operations are over on the time axis rather than in 3-space. Most Westerners never even notice that mind operations and physical operations occur at the same TIME (occupy the same time domain), but the mind operations do not exist in 3-space while the physical operations do. One cannot observe physical phenomena in the 4-space it occurs in, because one never observes the time aspect. And one cannot observe mental phenomena in 3-space, because it does not occur therein.>>

617

http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/032504.htm%20

http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Lynds_01.doc%20

>> Hence to deal with mind and mind operations, one cannot use the classical EM theory or electrical engineering at all, because they have nothing to say about how one dynamically structures time into operations and functions of what we call "mind phenomena".>> >> Also, since all minds and mind operations occupy time, and no piece of time is devoid of them, then the 4-space universe is totally alive, in the most rigorous sense of the word, because time is totally alive with mind and mind operations. When the Creator created life, it was not created just in "3-space" where we observe, but in 4-space, including in and on that time axis that we do not and cannot observe.>> >> But if one leaves CEM and EE, and goes to quantum field theory (QFT), there is indeed a fourth photon which is time-polarized (it is called a "scalar" photon). The scalar photon is nonobservable (nothing of time is observable, a priori, since observation is a d/dt operator totally stripping away and destroying the time dimension and its content, and leaving only a frozen 3-space snapshot of an ongoing 4-space interaction. So all observation is 3-spatial. That's why we cannot and do not instrumentally measure and observe mind operations. The mental image of a horse does not photograph in 3-space with normal optical cameras. A physical horse does. ... ...> > ... ... ... ... {more at URL} ... ... ..."

> > Also, from http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/033104.htm :>

>> " ... ... Unfortunately, the only mind engineering I’ve tried to decipher and follow is the psychoenergetics developed by the former Soviet Union (under the KGB/FSS), and since 1997 really finalized and tested. The ability to directly engineer a mind and its operations from scratch – i.e., create a living entity – has been achieved and now is much developed.>> >> All mind operations are on the time axis, and mind is totally electromagnetic but over on that axis. So one must utilize time-polarized photons and resulting time-polarized waves from quantum field theory – these time-polarized photons are also known as “scalar” photons. Neither the longitudinal photon nor the scalar photon is individually observable, but the combination is observable as the instantaneous scalar potential (common voltage). In short, common voltage is an assemblage of such wavepairs, part of which are over on the time-axis. It follows that, by properly shaping and structuring these internal waves that comprise voltage, then voltage can be produced that has a rather magnificent internal structure, capable of directly affecting and even directly engineering mindstuff. It also follows that time is already totally alive, since all minds (and all that have ever been) are there. >>>> The very concept of directly making and engineering minds as living entities is so alien to the West, that Western scientists cannot even tolerate the concept!. So one has to use some special statement to allow a penetration of that mindset. I sometimes use the statement that when the Creator created life, also created simultaneously was the PROCESS for creating or engineering life. It is that process that is still here, and which psychoenergetics aims to directly engineer. With nearly a half century of intense effort on it now, that science has born fruition.

618

http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/033104.htm%20

>> >> Interestingly, our own fellows are now one step BELOW the more primary psychoenergetics, and still in the “material forces” arena. But they are also beginning to directly engineer life forms and systems at that level. It’s already being discussed point blank in the orthodox scientific literature, but from that perspective – much behind where the psychoenergetics scientists have already arrived. ... ... ...>> > ... ... ... ... {more at URL} ... ... ..."

I just scanned the article you provided. I don't have much time to respond because I have class soon. I found interesting the reviewer's comments. When my own papers get rejected for publication, it's always because of a typographical or grammar error. Never once did I get a response that I don't understand calculus. The article sounds interesting although I never heard of this Lynds guy. But it sounds to support Einstein's idea that time is only an illusion. It also suggest quantum mechanics is weird, not because of quanta but because our understanding of time was wrong. Very interesting in that it could gap differences in relativity and quantum mechanics by looking at a fundamental but unsolved issue like time. So the Special Relativity significance is probably accurate.

Regarding Bearden … sorry, but I think "scalar photons" are a joke.


S-445. fromEd Halerewicz, Jr. regarding "Warp Drive"

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Thu, April 22, 2004 8:25 pm Subject: Re: Dr. Jacczyk's response re. Lynds & Bearden

--- [email protected] wrote:>> 'Ark' is a close colleague of Sarfatti's. I think I told you that before. He has dogged Bearden for years but in a milder way (he layed-off when Tom was recuperating from a heart attack) than Jack engaged Larry. The Bearden reviewers in the Andersen_03.doc had different interpretations of scalar waves than Tom. But in his defense, they seemed to imply that he was on to something that couldn't be adequately explained by GR and QM. The Lynds' thesis seem to bolster Tom's concept of the temporal domain and why it was "unobservable" for the most part.> > But I'm as confused as I ever was after reading Ark's latest. So many experts that have nothing in common other than zero inventions or working devices. I think this is what Sheldon was referring to on Brian Greene's NOVA program, that the new breed of theorists are content with just developing mathematical philosophies-religions. Maybe that's why I subconsciously veer toward engineering types like Bearden and Baker as I am tired of reading all these theories that seem to go nowhere.

619


> > BTW, Ed, I am slowly reading the draft copy of your s & Hoiland's 'GD Warp Drives & Beyond'. I particularly enjoy the parts where you guys allude to the remaining problems and mysteries. Other authors such as Jack say all the mysteries are over and they have it all down cold -- it's just an engineering challenge to exploit the physical mechanisms they have formulated. At least you and Paul were more humble. And I can fellow the math in your paper in at least a superficial level. It's a little more developed than Kaku's "Hyperspace", but the "birds' eye" view serves to reinforce the text. I can better understand Kaku's comments that any physicist "worth his salt" was raiding used bookstores since the 80s for books on topology, etc.

Hiya again,

Well, it's nice to hear your comments about the "GMD Warp Drive text". We wanted anyone who was curious to be able to follow the text while reserving the equations for the experts. It also helps I think to show the reader how we know what we know and that it's not just smoke and mirrors. Of course, there are always " mysteries". It seems the "older timer"s seem to think everything is solved like "dear" old Lord Kelvin.

Funny that you should mention Brian Greene. I just saw some book review of his on C-Span recently. And I did catch that Nova special. Boy, was it awful! I do not like this Brian Green guy one bit. He comes off way too arrogant. In the Nova special he made inaccurate claims about Einstein to drive his points. In my eyes, that's a poor scientist. Given me Michio Kaku any day!!!!!

As for myself, I'm not an engineer so I do not really require a device. I would only do so if I wanted to build something. Well I'm not an inventor … not my thing. But on the other-hand, I do require physical evidence, experimental results -- something to prove a concept -- and not pure theory. Heck, half the other scientists stated the same thing on the Nova program. I think these pure theory chasers are not too much different than mathematicians who see 'magic numbers' everywhere. That's nice but -- gee -- can't you do anything with it?

It would surprise me if someone stumbled onto something that didn't quite agree with GR and QM. I mean if they were right, there would all ready be a quantum theory of gravity all ready! I tend to take that there is a kind of "aether" out there (Not Bearden's type though) that mixes aspects of QM and string theory but still has a missing ingredient. At this time on that particular topic, I think the best research in that area has been done by Russian researchers.


S-446. from Ed Halerewicz, Jr. regarding Metric Engineering and Exotic Matter

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Mon, April 26, 2004 10:31 pm Subject: Re: I'm making progress

620


--- [email protected] wrote:> I'm up to Chapter 7 now. It seems that one of your basic premises is that there is nothing "magic" about metric engineering when analyzed with GR and QM. That it is more of an engineering challenge. Right?> > I'm thought there was a "universal" metric engineering theory. But apparently each prominent physicist has their own model (e.g., Sarfatti vs. Puthoff). Jack bases some of his stuff on Modanese physics. Mahood told me that he was quite familiar with Modanese but not to worry too much about it because it fails certain key physics tests. I'm sure Jack would respond that its uniqueness circumvents such historical cross-checks.> > Tom echoed your sentiment that 'exotic matter' is not as far off as most people think. Tom Skeggs uses exotic matter in his 'Star Chamber' design. I am clueless as to what exotic matter is. Don't know if it's an element (if so, what is its atomic number?) or a subatomic particle like a quark. I get the feeling it doesn't exist naturally but is artificially created (like a short-lived intermediate product in a chemical reaction).

Well, Chapter 7 was to assert that there is nothing special about "scalar fields". I think a lot of kooks out there just use that term just to try to sound like they know what they are talking about. Metric engineering from GR is not hard from a math perspective. The Warp Drive equation works. It's just un-"physical"; and there lies the problem. As for "metric engineering", there is only one kind. Using General Relativity, the paths just happen to diverge when each scientist tries to figure out how to bend the principles of relativity.

"Exotic Matter" would be like the "Dark Energy" that cosmologist talk about except it would be so dense that you could hold in it your hand. Citing a wormhole, exotic matter would generate a type of EM field called "ghost radiation" which would prevent normal EM waves from interacting with Dark Energy. So that begs the question of what is wormhole matter? An initial rotating black hole whose graviomagnetic energy is greater than its rest mass energy that forces the existence of a ring singularity. In principle it could be imagined as a portion of matter that has effectively increased to a higher coupling strength of gravitation so that it becomes out-of-phase with normal spacetime. A bit drawn out, but basically Exotic matter would hold a region of Dark Energy and block out normal EM fields.


S-447. from Tom Skeggs regarding the Montauk Project

From: "Thomas Skeggs"To: [email protected] Date: Sat, April 24, 2004 4:21 pm Subject: Montauk

Hello Mark

Briefly on Montauk. I still think the Montauk Camp Hero AFB was used something to do with MK-ULTRA or EDOM. And it all went pear-shaped. My repeated remote-viewing images are of a teenager on the rampage. I had new images of people locking themselves in a room and they had old metal

621


ammo boxes. They opened the boxes to reveal pistols. Two old revolvers (like Smith & Wessons and two old Colt 45 automatic pistols). The base was in darkness. And they were getting in a bit of a panic over something.

The alleged time-travel stuff may have happened at another location. The RV images seem not to much what is on the surface.

The webpages on the radio receivers was the result of going over Preston's books again. I think he may not have taken part in actual time-travel experiments but is aware of a true story which is using to sell books. Someone on the Internet that Preston mentions an interview with some senior Air Force officers in Montauk. I followed this up with some ERV and RV work. The Air Force doesn't know what really happened at Montauk. That's why they interviewed Preston. The Air Force has seized actual materials from Montauk and maybe somewhere else. But they don't know how to get "it" working. No one will talk about it. Which is puzzling. The materials are in storage around America in military warehouses. Flown in by Hercules transport planes.

I dug up some more info on the computers and radar tower. But I haven't had the time to download them yet. Sadly I stated earlier that the model Delta-T I had made got smashed by accident. So I may have to build a new one.

The more I investigate the more confused, I get. It seem like the story being sold by Preston and Co. Yet if I press the details I collected, people say I'm incorrect because it doesn't tally with any other data.

It seems you are having the same problem with seeking evidence for the existence of UFOs.

I hope to find time to share some info on UFOs in the next day-or-so.

All for now Tom

S-448. from Edward Halerewicz, Jr. regarding ZPE "virtual particles"

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Sat, April 24, 2004 5:53 pm Subject: Re: 'virtual' particles ... they're either real or they're not

--- [email protected] wrote:> Once I asked 'Ark' about the size of a black hole. He responded with some vague answer about "size" has no real meaning when describing such a phenomenon. I read a Time/Life article giving the radius of the event horizon for different masses of black holes. Maybe that is separate from what he was thinking. Anyway, he concluded with "black hole physics are still incomplete today". According to that article by George Chapline -- one of Sarfatti's mentors -- not only is it incomplete, but it is very wrong! "Throw out everything you were ever taught about black holes in school."> > Upon reflecting on what you told me regarding the neutrino being predicted by physicists and what my physics teacher in college said about it, I think what the latter meant was that it can't be detected directly the way we can other subatomic particles. (Remember,

622

this was back in the 70s.) It can be "indirectly" detected by observing interactions of other particles in collider experiments. Because physicists are loathe to abandon their conservation laws, the energies displayed by these particles must come from somewhere. Ergo, the theorized neutrino. Am I rationalizing correctly?> > In Chapter 5 of your Warp Drive paper, you talk about the ZPE "quantum foam". I remember reading (Kaku) that Einstein long wondered if the vacuum of space was truly devoid of anything. Then along came this quantum fluctuations thing and physicists like Feynman calculated that a "beaker-full" of the vacuum contain enough potential energy to vaporize all of the Earth's oceans. I have a problem visualizing that. And these "virtual" particles. Either it's real or it's not. Even it exists for an instant, that has to make it real before it decays or disappears. Anytime anti-matter annihilates matter, there is an enormous energy release (E=mc2) which dwarfs our fusion and fission bombs. If these particles are constantly annihilating each other, we shouldn't even be alive here now exchanging e-mails. Plus where is all this energy coming from? After they annihilate each other, I assume energy is released. Then there are no more particles. Unless there is a "white hole" somewhere that replenishing the particles from the Multiverse.> > After Casimir predicted the force, another physicist 10 years later measured it in his lab and the amount of movement in the plates was calculated to be in line with what Casimir had predicted from theory. So I guess there is something to it. I just am too entrenched with Newtonian physics to be able to grasp the concept. Also, the Planck constants for length, time, etc. are suppose to be the smallest increments allowed by Quantum Theory. Is the value for time somewhere around 10-43 sec? (Now, I don't know how that "squares" with Lynds' stuff. But save that for another time.) So these "virtual" particles can't be "virtual" (make-believe) as they have to exist for at least one unit of Planck time. Ergo, there should be zillions of antimatter-matter explosions in each cm3 of the Universe. Unless the energy from such reactions is somehow diverted back into the quantum foam. Sort of like superconductivity where the energy is never created nor destroyed.

No -- virtual particles ARE really "virtual". They exist, but only have a small probability to exist. Feynman's calculation is simply based on the assumption that all the virtual particles possible for a given region decide all to show up at the same place and time.

Think of an electric field. The further you get away from it, the less energy it has. It does not stop at some finite point, but simply gets weaker. Now if it overlaps with another field, there is the probability that a photon will appear in the middle of the space virtually out of nowhere. The problem is that the photon in question is real. It cannot exist at all the places at once but has a probability of popping up anywhere in that field region. Increase the amount of fields per region of space and you get more photons popping up. But they still exist as a virtual potential that exist everywhere in that space (so you have "Schroediger's Cat" principle in action, the photon is everywhere until it is observed by something somehow and then becomes real). You only run into the anti-matter problem if the field density of space is high -- say in the +2*9.11 MeV range -- to produce an electron-positron pair. In this case 2 gamma-ray photons are appearing everywhere in this field at different times. In this case they can (a)ignore each other; (b) find one another and destroy one another; or (c) interact with normal matter and destroy themselves that way. Since the field density remains the same -- as well as normal matter -- the overall energy is conserved. Just think of field density region where a real photon can appear in that field virtually anywhere (even if a beam of light couldn't). When seen, it disappears and goes somewhere else in the field. That's a virtual particle!

623

The size of a black is always dependent upon mass. It exists when the escape velocity for a given mass is equal to the speed-of-light. For the Earth this would be a few centimeters, and for the Sun about a kilometer. Of course the escape velocity for these objects are much less! Ark's point just sounds b.s. Einstein's theory of gravity has predicted evidence of gravitational radiation from neutron star pairs, which means Einstein's theory is right about gravity. The only way a black hole wouldn't form if a body has over 3 times the mass of the Sun is if something was interfering with the gravitational force!

As for neutrinos, today we know they exist photo multipliers have shown their interactions within water molecules. But the history went something like this. E=mc^2 says we should get this much nuclear energy from the Sun. But we don't, which means some of its energy must be in the form of a high-velocity light-weight mass by conservation of energy. That is the experimental end. However, if you take Dirac's equation for the fermion in Quantum Field Theory and give a particle zero mass, you get what is known as the Weyl-Dirac equation which describes a neutrino. So they were theorized somewhat earlier than experiments were able to catch up with theory. A neutrino is also charge-less. This is something that could be confirmed with experiment. If it was charged, a magnetic field one cause neutrinos to go in a direction in respect to charge. But they don't. So since mass was lost in the system with certain nuclear reactions and there was no preferred direction of travel, the 'neutrino' was the best fit for the data.

Planck Length and Planck Time are simply a quantization of the constants c, G, and h-bar to give values of length and time. If you applied that to the recent Peter Lynds' theory, the slowest rate at which any motion could be detected is 10-43 seconds (that is, a clock-hand could not move slower than 10-43 s). Below that, space and time would become completely meaningless. And from Lynds, the Planck Length 10-33 cm would be the greatest accuracy in which you could measure an object's position. And the most accurate possible velocity cannot be below something like (10-33 cm/10-43s) = 10-10 cm/s, which would suggest it would be impossible to measure velocity within the particles of an atom's nucleus.


S-449. from Edward Halerewicz, Jr. regarding modifications to his e-book

From: "Edward Halerewicz, Jr." <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Sat, May 1, 2004 5:05 pm Subject: Re: suggested corrections

--- [email protected] wrote:> Hi Ed --> > Well, I finally finished converting your "Warp Drive > & Beyond" from .pdf to .doc format so I could correct some grammatical errors. In the process, I found myself so "consumed" with the nitty-gritty checking that I lost track of what you & Paul were trying to convey in many places.>

624


> I think the "gist" is that it replaces the sci-fi "magic" usually associated with such topics with hard science gleaned from General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. As you had earlier alluded to with your "no blue smoke & mirrors" analogy.> > I had read about such things as "Clifford Algebra", "Weak Energy Condition", "exotic matter" etc. before. But yours is the ONLY work that I have seen explain why these tools are necessary and where they fit in (maybe this is common knowledge among physicists and I just live in a "layman's shell" ... LOL).> > I'm going to have to make multiple passes to "clean it up". What I've done so far (iteration #1) can be accessed at http://www.stealthskater.com/Science.htm#Halerewicz .> > GR and QM are "battle-tested". That doesn't mean, however, that they are the last definitive word. You can have many models producing the same exact results in a given regime. The damning thing about superstring and M-brane theories is no hint of these extra dimensions has yet been seen. But they are excellent "models" nevertheless. For some reason, I can't help but shake the feeling that the Universe is not as "complicated" as these models make it out to be. I'm waiting to see in Lynds' new concept of time allows for some of Bearden-type scalar theories to be "quantitized". I have a better time visualizing the 3-D universe with the unobservable scalar time domain than an 10/11/12-D one. But I freely concede my own shortcomings.> > I would like to see a separate chapter on how others have used extrapolations of basic Warp Drive theory for their own models (Baker, Puthoff, Sarfatti, Maurer, Todd, etc.) and your & Paul's review of those.> > Regarding "wormholes", I always they were too small (Planck length) to allow any "shortcuts" plus the Hawking radiation was so severe at the entrances that entry would (1) kill all biological specimens and (2) close the wormhole. That's where UNITEL's MQT is so appealing. You don't need wormholes. But if MQT is akin to quantum entanglement, then it appears the ZPE field makes a clone/copy of a photon, destroys the original, and then duplicates at some other spot. (Maybe Lynds' time concept would help here.) I would be scared to try to duplicate biological&consciousness qualities.> > -- Mark

Hi,

I've seen that GravityWarpDrive site before and wasn't too impressed with it. BobLazar.com has had no updates -- despite its recent advertisements -- and I suspect that it never will. Well, yes … replace the sci-fi garbage with real science and FTL travel will scare away most scientists and they refuse to talk about it. The aim of the e-book was to remove the sci-fi to show that there is a real science to it after all. Physicists know about "Clifford Algebras", the "WEC", etc. but don't bother to explain when talking about certain subjects as it would be redundant to them. The problem is that the general public hears about them and think they are somehow "magical" and elusive. " Scalar fields - unobservable time" -- actually with excusing all the bastardations of them, time would be considered a longitudinal propagation that differs from the relativistic speed-of-light interpretation. It is -- however -- not absent.

As for Puthoff, he has all ready been briefly mentioned in he e-book. Todd I am in regular communication with so I understand where he comes from. Actually Sarfatti and Toddy have been

625

http://www.stealthskater.com/Science.htm#Halerewicz%20

exchanging messages recently where Sarfatii has mentioned limitations to his ZPE vacuum propeller concept (so it's not quite put together as often claimed in his public messages). Regarding (UNITEL) Maurer's idea, at this point I tend to think of as a good idea but fundamentally flawed. I, however, have a colleague who uses a similar idea of stepping through extra dimensions for FTL travel, and has published 2 papers in the Journal of General Relativity & Gravitation on the subject. Although I somewhat skeptical, the math is good. But he misses physical evidence to support his ideas.

Well, what you thought about wormholes was pretty much correct from a mainstream perspective. That if they existed, it could only be through quantum pressures. So they would be near the Planck Length. A person couldn't cross it. However, Hawking radiation is in itself not dangerous for a large body as its of same magnitude as the ambient temperature of deep space. Hawking radiation only becomes dangerous in the case of what Stephen Hawking calls an "evaporating black hole" (that is where a black hole has lost enough of its mass from quantum leaks that it creates a short-lived "white hole" and destroys itself).


<= previous E-mails 350-399 next E-mails 450-499 =>

if on the Internet, press <BACK> on your browser to return to the previous page (or go to www.stealthskater.com)

else if accessing these files from the CD in a MS-Word session, simply <CLOSE> this file's window-session; the previous window-session should still remain 'active'

626
