Kathleen Marden and Denise Stoner

[mike]

From this year

Experimental Null test of a Mach Effect Thruster
Authors:Heidi Fearn, James F. Woodward
(Submitted on 25 Jan 2013)

Abstract: The Mach Effect Thruster (MET) is a device which utilizes fluctuations in the rest masses of accelerating objects (capacitor stacks, in which internal energy changes take place) to produce a steady linear thrust. The theory has been given in detail elsewhere [1, 2] and references therein, so here we discuss only an experiment. We show how to obtain thrust using a heavy reaction mass at one end of our capacitor stack and a lighter end cap on the other. Then we show how this thrust can be eliminated by having two heavy masses at either end of the stack with a central mounting bracket. We show the same capacitor stack being used as a thruster and then eliminate the thrust by arranging equal brass masses on either end, so that essentially the capacitor stack is trying to push in both directions at once. This arrangement in theory would only allow for a small oscillation but no net thrust. We find the thrust does indeed disappear in the experiment, as predicted. The device (in thruster mode) could in principle be used for propulsion [1, 2]. Experimental apparatus based on a very sensitive thrust balance is briefly described. The experimental protocol employed to search for expected Mach effects is laid out, and the results of this experimental investigation are described.​

​

[1301.6178] Experimental Null test of a Mach Effect Thruster

Full paper

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1301/1301.6178.pdf


Faculty Author on the Science of Deep Space Travel

 

[Randall]

Experimental Null test of a Mach Effect Thruster

That reminds me of the stuff Tesla was allegedly working on. I distinctly recall a capacitor like disk shaped device that was said to have the ability to float off the ground, but it had to be powered by an outside source due to high current requirements. So there were these diagrams with a sort of volleyball pole and wire attachment. Kinda makes you wonder if someone didn't pick up on that and make it work ... or is it just more science culture mythology?

 

[mike]

When Einstein told Planck of his intent to mount a major attack on gravity early in the decade of the teens, Planck warned him off the project. Planck told Einstein that the problem was too difficult, perhaps insoluble, and even if he succeeded, no one would much care because gravity was so inconsequential in the world of everyday phenomena. Einstein, of course, ignored Planck's advice. Guided by his version of the Equivalence principle and what he later called Mach's principle, he also ignored the standard techniques of field theory of his day. Rather than construct his field theory of gravity as a force field in a flat background spacetime, he opted for the distortion of spacetime itself and the non-Euclidean geometry that entails as his representation of the field.

It is easy now to look back and recognize his signal achievement: GRT. But even now, most do not appreciate the fundamentally radical nature of Einstein's approach. If you look at the history of gravitation in the ensuing century, much of it is a story of people trying to recast GRT into the formalism of standard field theory where the field is something that exists in a flat spacetime background and is communicated by gravitons. That's what it is, for example, in string theory. String theory is just the most well known of these efforts. GRT, however, is "background independent"; it cannot meaningfully be cast in a flat background spacetime. This property of GRT is pivotal in the matter of wormhole tech. It is the property that makes wormholes real physical structures worth trying to build.

The point of this is that if Einstein had not lived and been the iconoclast he was, the odds are that we today would not be talking about black holes and wormholes as real geometric structures of spacetime. Instead, we would be talking about the usual sorts of schemes advanced in discussions of deep space transport: electric propulsion, nuclear propulsion, and so on. Radical speculation would likely center on hypothetical methods to reduce the inertia of massive objects, the goal being to render them with no inertia, so they could be accelerated to the speed of light with little or no energy. That is, the discussion would be like that before Kip Thorne did his classic work on wormholes.

You sometimes hear people say that it may take thousands, if not millions, of years of development for us to figure out how to do wormhole tech. Perhaps, but probably not. The key enabling ideas are those of Einstein and Thorne. Clever aliens, if they did not have an Einstein and a Thorne, may well have taken far longer to figure out wormhole tech than, hopefully, we will. We have been fabulously lucky to have had Einstein, who recognized gravity as fundamentally different from the other forces of nature, and Thorne, who had the courage to address the issue of traversable wormholes, putting his career at serious risk.

Faculty Author on the Science of Deep Space Travel

 

[boomerang]

This seems also reminiscent of work done by T. Townsend Brown. The so called Biefeld-Brown effect is now officially dismissed as no more than ionic wind. Which seems odd since so much research has been invested in variations of it.

Biefeld–Brown effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thomas Townsend Brown - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

United States gravity control propulsion research - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[mike]

And so we get to wormholes

We may discover some new laws of physics that could change the rules," said Richard Gott, an astrophysicist at Princeton University.


Jumping Through
Relativity theory does not allow for travel into the past. But such travel could possibly be achieved using Einstein-Rosen bridges, better known as wormholes.

The theoretical shortcuts through space and time connect two distant points in space, like a worm tunnel through an apple.

Kip Thorne, a gravitational theorist at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, showed in 1988 that these tunnels could be kept open by an exotic form of matter known as Casimir energy.

This energy, which has been measured in a laboratory, is a sort of quantum vacuum. Weighing less than zero, Casimir energy would have an anti-gravitational effect, keeping the wormhole's walls apart.

Are Wormholes Tunnels for Time Travel?

Since the 1930’s, physicists have speculated about the existence of "wormholes" in the fabric of space. Wormholes are hypothetical areas of warped spacetime with great energy that can create tunnels through spacetime. if traversable would allow a traveler to quickly move through great distances in space and also travel through time. The difficulty lies in keeping the wormhole open while the traveler makes his journey: If the opening snaps shut, he will never survive to emerge at the other end.

For years, scientists believed that the transit was physically impossible. But recent research, especially by the U.S. physicist Kip Thorne, suggests that it could be done using exotic materials capable of withstanding the immense forces involved

Wormhole Time Travel

In one of the wildest developments in serious science for decades, researchers from California to Moscow have recently been investigating the possibility of time travel. They are not, as yet, building TARDIS lookalikes in their laboratories; but they have realised that according to the equations of Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity (the best theory of time and space we have), there is nothing in the laws of physics to prevent time travel. It may be extremely difficult to put into practice; but it is not impossible.

Just as 200 years ago there was nothing in the laws of physics to prevent heavier than air flight, although back then it was unable to be put into practise........

To simply the idea.

Lets say i take the hose of the vacuum cleaner, and run it from the lounge into one of the spare bedrooms, lets designate the lounge "the present" and the spare room "the past"

I shrink myself down and travel down the hose from the present to the past, turn around and walk back.

Ive effectively gone backwards, and from the perspective of the spare room end forwards in time.
Now suppose i designate another spare room "the future" and from this "place" i repeat the process, running a vacuum cleaner hose from it to the lounge.

I can now walk down the first hose to the past, and return to the present, and then walk down the other to the future and return again to the present.

It seems these wormholes might exist as part of the natural universe via quantum foam

Time travel through wormholes is theoretically possible under the known laws of physics, and quantum foam may be one piece of that puzzle. What is this foam? How could it work? We have to delve into the tiny world of quantum mechanics for some answers.

What does this have to do with wormholes? It is within quantum foam that wormholes are theoretically believed to exist. They can move in and out of existence, connecting different places and times. Since they are so incredibly small, humans couldn't use them for time travel. Some theoretical physicists, though, are exploring the concept of a wormhole time machine -- the idea being that a wormhole might be ensnared and expanded until it could become a transit for time travelers [source: Hawking].
This is still in the hypothetical stages, of course. However, a scientist at the University of Maryland believes he can create a substance in a laboratory that mimics quantum foam [source: Technology Review]. This kind of study may help move quantum foam from a theoretical entity to a known quantity.

Big Question: Does quantum foam hold the keys to time travel? : Discovery Channel

Can you imagine what a game changer being able to exploit this would be ?

Dr Who's TARDIS becomes a real device, you can travel both axis of the universe, distance and duration, be anywhere/anywhen.

Our whole view of the universe would be changed, we would no longer be bound up by linear time, just as heaver than air flight technology means we are no longer bound to the ground........

 

[mike]

All you need is a wormhole, the Large Hadron Collider or a rocket that goes really, really fast

Hello. My name is Stephen Hawking. Physicist, cosmologist and something of a dreamer. Although I cannot move and I have to speak through a computer, in my mind I am free. Free to explore the universe and ask the big questions, such as: is time travel possible? Can we open a portal to the past or find a shortcut to the future? Can we ultimately use the laws of nature to become masters of time itself?




Time travel was once considered scientific heresy. I used to avoid talking about it for fear of being labelled a crank. But these days I'm not so cautious. In fact, I'm more like the people who built Stonehenge. I'm obsessed by time. If I had a time machine I'd visit Marilyn Monroe in her prime or drop in on Galileo as he turned his telescope to the heavens. Perhaps I'd even travel to the end of the universe to find out how our whole cosmic story ends.
To see how this might be possible, we need to look at time as physicists do - at the fourth dimension. It's not as hard as it sounds. Every attentive schoolchild knows that all physical objects, even me in my chair, exist in three dimensions. Everything has a width and a height and a length.
But there is another kind of length, a length in time. While a human may survive for 80 years, the stones at Stonehenge, for instance, have stood around for thousands of years. And the solar system will last for billions of years. Everything has a length in time as well as space. Travelling in time means travelling through this fourth dimension.
To see what that means, let's imagine we're doing a bit of normal, everyday car travel. Drive in a straight line and you're travelling in one dimension. Turn right or left and you add the second dimension. Drive up or down a twisty mountain road and that adds height, so that's travelling in all three dimensions. But how on Earth do we travel in time? How do we find a path through the fourth dimension?
Let's indulge in a little science fiction for a moment. Time travel movies often feature a vast, energy-hungry machine. The machine creates a path through the fourth dimension, a tunnel through time. A time traveller, a brave, perhaps foolhardy individual, prepared for who knows what, steps into the time tunnel and emerges who knows when. The concept may be far-fetched, and the reality may be very different from this, but the idea itself is not so crazy.
Physicists have been thinking about tunnels in time too, but we come at it from a different angle. We wonder if portals to the past or the future could ever be possible within the laws of nature. As it turns out, we think they are. What's more, we've even given them a name: wormholes. The truth is that wormholes are all around us, only they're too small to see. Wormholes are very tiny. They occur in nooks and crannies in space and time.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1269288/STEPHEN-HAWKING-How-build-time-machine.html#ixzz2VVwZWrfz
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

[Jeff Davis]

No it doesnt, by that logic heavier than air flight was "impossible" in 1895

The reality is heavier than air flight has always been possible, but it wasnt actually done until the wright bros did it.

Because we are not doing it, doesnt make the feat "impossible"
I cant play the drums, that doesnt by extension make drum playing impossible.

Just because humans havent yet found a way to acheive IT, doesnt by extension make IT impossible

Given the mathmatics of Dr White and Alcubierre show its mathmatically possible, the fact we dont have it is more likely the result of our technological infancy, rather than it being "impossible"


White–Juday warp-field interferometer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




Impossible/impractical/implausible/plausible/possible

On that scale we are well clear of "impossible"

Are you stating that IT is currently possible? Or are you stating that via our current best understanding humanity finds it presently impossible to accomplish IT? That's a rhetorical question.

EVERYTHING imaginable is hypothetically possible Mike. ANYTHING is fully considerable based upon our best scientific methodology. This does not render the hypothetical as being science, nor does it imply that it's automatically plausible just because we are scientifically considering the notion itself. There is no logic in your premise here.

Likening IT to doing anything we are presently familiar with is a straw man. For instance when you state that you don't know how to play drums and therefore we cannot state that IT is presently impossible is ultimately nonsensical. Millions of people play the drums presently so we know that it's humanly possible. That much is not in question. We do not however know that IT is possible because no one has accomplished as much. I am surprised that you went to so much trouble to avoid admitting that IT is currently impossible for humanity. It's kind of obvious, we are either doing IT or not presently.

Impossible does not automatically mean never, nor do we find it solely applicable to the future indefinite. It's the current status of IT though, plain and simple. Science never sleeps however and is constantly open to revision in the form of proof.

It's completely plausible that an ET will be elected president in the United States next go around too, I cannot deny as much. Precisely, what is not plausible?

 

[gheron]

I was struck by the discussion of cave diving. This activity has the potential for:

1. Causing psychological stress. Especially fear.
2. Sensory deprivation (Lilly Tank).
3. Inner ear/sinus effects. In my personal experiences these seem to be linked to altered states of consciousness (or possibly the other way around) with similar characteristic to the abduction experience.

1 and 2 of course can also cause altered states.

 

[kanakaris]

So, a two-year old goes through the wall, and remembers a hooded alien that holds her hand..? It's only believeable if aliens are actually gods with supernatural powers. If they are, fine, they can judge me in time, until then, bleehhhh!

Quoted loosely:
'We followed the implant down my arm, I had it for a while, then after a while it just disappeared'. But, '.. we didn't have time to get anything done about it bla bla..' . And then she goes: 'It was like a little baby!' (EDIT: Sorry, she said BB, as in airgun, thnx Loren).

She seems remarkably carefree with the details and how all these crazy events affects her life and nervous system.

At around 80 minutes onwards, their personal experience sounds like someone picked the funny mushrooms before cooking dinner. It's super spaced out, 70ies style. At min. 88 she's very tolerant of Gene's question if perhaps they were dealing with something different than UFOs and such.

Forgetting the jokes for a while, I do wonder if something happened to her in childhood, perhaps being among strangers, or something, which left an imprint she can't really get to. She remembers seeing 'many different faces' and other things that could be interpreted in various ways.

When she describes her daughter's faith in her mother's stories, it's like her daughter is schooled to carry the torch of mama's exceptional alien encounters. I kinda feel sick at this point, it sounds a bit cult-like.

She sounds looney describing the MRI scan experiences, where doctors morphed into aliens. Just my opinion. Either she's looney or she'll spin anything.

I can't figure out if I think she's a fraud or a nut, or a victim of traumatic childhood experiences who tried to fix her problems on her own, via an alternative route. But there's a cynical dispassionate tinge to her accounts which makes me think she's exploiting something.

At 114, others need a camera in their bedroom etc., I didn't hear the lady hold having any video? Maybe she just likes being exceptional.

When she talks about not being 'a victim', it sounds like advice that is akin to coaching and therapy. I don't know where the mental starts, where the fraud or or where the innocent confusion begins or ends. No evidence.

Oh, she's trying to put up cameras but they always fail. Whatever. They could write a whole book but didn't manage to get a camera working. They should fix or record that first, then they wouldn't need to waste time writing the book.

No critical questions except one by one of those damn 'sceptics', smooth seas all the way. No mention of the documented effects of sleep paralysis etc, except in a derogatory tone. If it wasn't documented, I could understand it, but it's undeniably relevant and probably quite frequent. You could do people who don't know about it a real favor by giving one or two examples of the effects. Oh well..

Very well said.Nice story , these abductions but ZERO evidence.When i hear things like 'floating through the wall' i know enough.The Hill's , Travis Walton , Pascagoula : yes , most others : no.

 

[Burnt State]

Very well said.Nice story , these abductions but ZERO evidence.When i hear things like 'floating through the wall' i know enough.The Hill's , Travis Walton , Pascagoula : yes , most others : no.

What is it about those three that make you say yes? Are there specific commonalities they share or is it about the power of these unique and celebrated narratives that historically tell us that they are real by sheer repetition? My doubts about these cases decrease as you go down the list, but I remain suspicious af all. I'm interested in hearing about why people at have more conviction over these specific tales of Alien Abduction. There are as fantastic as the Stoner story, albeit hers, as presented is far more 'holey' than the others.

 

[kanakaris]

I can imagine aliens doing with earthlings what we do with animals : take them for study and placing them back , like in these three cases .Very crude mechanical operations.But no way by levitate them through walls in a ship that nobody sees.

 

[Burnt State]

I can imagine aliens doing with earthlings what we do with animals : take them for study and placing them back , like in these three cases .Very crude mechanical operations.But no way by levitate them through walls in a ship that nobody sees.

There is the floating, mechanical eye in the Pascagoula case and the aliens supposedly floated out of the ship towards Hickson and Parker.

 

[mike]

Are you stating that IT is currently possible? Or are you stating that via our current best understanding humanity finds it presently impossible to accomplish IT? That's a rhetorical question.

EVERYTHING imaginable is hypothetically possible Mike. ANYTHING is fully considerable based upon our best scientific methodology. This does not render the hypothetical as being science, nor does it imply that it's automatically plausible just because we are scientifically considering the notion itself. There is no logic in your premise here.

Likening IT to doing anything we are presently familiar with is a straw man. For instance when you state that you don't know how to play drums and therefore we cannot state that IT is presently impossible is ultimately nonsensical. Millions of people play the drums presently so we know that it's humanly possible. That much is not in question. We do not however know that IT is possible because no one has accomplished as much. I am surprised that you went to so much trouble to avoid admitting that IT is currently impossible for humanity. It's kind of obvious, we are either doing IT or not presently.

Impossible does not automatically mean never, nor do we find it solely applicable to the future indefinite. It's the current status of IT though, plain and simple. Science never sleeps however and is constantly open to revision in the form of proof.

It's completely plausible that an ET will be elected president in the United States next go around too, I cannot deny as much. Precisely, what is not plausible?

Not sure i can make it any clearer than i did.

Interstellar travel is either possible or its not.

If its possible its always been and always will be possible.

Whether or not humanity currently has the technology to do so is irrelevant, just as not having the technology for heavier than air flight 300 years ago did not change the fact that it was possible was always possible and would always be possible to fly.

Not being able to do a thing is not the same as that thing being impossible to do.

Not being able to fly from london to New York 300 years ago, didnt mean it was impossible to do so, there was nothing in the laws of physics that made a transatlantic flight 300 years ago "impossible"

Its two different questions and two different answers

"Were we flying from London to New York 300 years ago ?" the answer is no
"Was it possible to fly from London to New York 300 years ago ?" the answer is yes it was possible

The principles and physics of flight did not change, the difference was only in our technical ability, but not having a current ability to do a thing, does not equal that thing being impossible.

Your premise seems to be if we cant do it, then it cant be done. History has proven that wrong so many times i cant believe anyone would still think in those terms

Given general relativity doesnt have any objections to IT, given the equations show its mathmatically possible, given we have a long history of what seem to be structured craft using technology in advance of our own, i have to answer the question

Is Interstellar travel possible or impossible ?, in the affirmative.

To claim an absolute that its impossible is absurd imo, the physics and math say its possible, i cant find a shred of evidence to back the premise its impossible.

I'm sorry guys, but science now CLEARLY points to the probable fact that UFOs are NOT spaceships that bring sight seeing aliens from other planets located in outer space.

Care to cite the sources for such an absolute claim ?

 

[mike]

But if you take in to consideration the rapid pace of technological advancement, things look brighter. The Wright brothers’ first feeble flights advanced to a man on the moon in just 50 years. In less than 100 years, we can travel 1,000 times faster. If this rule holds true for the next hundred years, we will be able to travel to the nearest stars with relative ease.
Predicting this future, however, is not easy. We simply lack even the basic theories to travel at above light speed making the engineering of an interstellar drive even further away. There are however, some interesting ideas on the drawing board that are within current theoretical limits.


Read more at: http://phys.org/news8817.html#jCp

Despite these daunting challenges there are still several suggestions and ideas floating around. One would be to leap frog through time and space. Two circumstances that we know of that would make this possible are worm holes and warp drive. In both instances we would travel through a kind of cosmic short cut circumventing space time. The best part is that current physics says it is possible. We just need to work out the specifics and do further research to see if it bears out in reality.

Read more: [URL='http://www.universetoday.com/52779/interstellar-travel/#ixzz2VliWPLWt[/QUOTE']http://www.universetoday.com/52779/interstellar-travel/#ixzz2VliWPLWt[/URL]

current physics says it is possible..........

Just as 300 years ago the physics of heavier than air flight meant it was possible too

 

[mike]

Louis Crane, professor of mathematics at K-State, will use a $135,247 grant from The Foundational Questions Institute to complete an interpretation he helped create of a model for quantum gravity, the BC model.
"I want to find a final theory that unifies the two branches of theoretical physics -- quantum gravity and general relativity -- for a quantum theory of gravity," Crane said. "I hope this will tell us about black holes and where we came from."
Crane said his interpretation would be applied to small black holes to see how their formation, radiation and interaction with matter differs from the semiclassical predictions.
Crane also wants to take his research one more step: to see how it might be used for possible interstellar space travel in the future.
"This information will be used to study the feasibility of using small artificial black holes as sources of energy and as propulsion methods for starships," he said. "Nobody seems to have looked at this. While it is something for far in the future, I'm pleased to get the chance to explore the possibility."


Read more at: http://phys.org/news74525714.html#jCphttp://phys.org/news74525714.html#jCp

http://phys.org/news74525714.html#jCp

To quote willy the bard

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

 

[Jimi H.]

Indeed, the ETH is not anti-scientific, and that counts for something in a field rife with super-natural speculations. Improbable, perhaps, because the universe is so vast and the Earth so small, but not impossible in a technical sense, thus it is scientifically sound.

What is unscientific is to champion the unproven reality of super-natural beings who break all the rules of physics.

In short, the ETH is the only theory that works for me, scientifically. It is technically possible and we cannot disprove it. We can disprove that people can walk through walls etc.

 

[Jeff Davis]

Indeed, the ETH is not anti-scientific, and that counts for something in a field rife with super-natural speculations. Improbable, perhaps, because the universe is so vast and the Earth so small, but not impossible in a technical sense, thus it is scientifically sound.

What is unscientific is to champion the unproven reality of super-natural beings who break all the rules of physics.

In short, the ETH is the only theory that works for me, scientifically. It is technically possible and we cannot disprove it. We can disprove that people can walk through walls etc.

but yet again we find consensus establishing scientific principle rather than trial and error. That's not science, it's "popular science".

IMO, ET is not scientific, albeit we can consider as much quite scientifically. It speculatively possible, although for us IT is currently impossible, it may be possible one day. Again, anything may be considered by science. That does not make that "something" scientific. It makes those considering as much scientific or not however. Science is a means until that which it tests becomes law. At that point IMO, IT could be addressed as a science or be considered scientific. Until then all we can do is scientifically specualte about it much like those who are well versed in String Theory do concerning it's relative implications.

 

[Stagger Lee]

As far as a lack of the number of Abduction claims in Eruope,- could it be possible the US govt DOES have some type of deal/exchange program with the creatures who operate these craft? As far as scrambling fighter jets to chase off any craft lingering in air space above populated areas- could this all be for show? We have many reports of jets chasing off craft, without trying to shoot one down (not that we have the tech to actually bring one down) Could it be our military's way of warning these craft occupants that they are visible to the locals. "Conduct your biological agenda, but you have to do a better job cloaking your craft, as not to scare the locals creating a scenario similiar to the broadcast of "War of the Worlds" And while radio has become obsolete since the internet/cell phone communication revolution.. can you imagine the panic with something like a "War of the Worlds" with todays viral info.

 

[Jeff Davis]

As far as a lack of the number of Abduction claims in Eruope,- could it be possible the US govt DOES have some type of deal/exchange program with the creatures who operate these craft? As far as scrambling fighter jets to chase off any craft lingering in air space above populated areas- could this all be for show? We have many reports of jets chasing off craft, without trying to shoot one down (not that we have the tech to actually bring one down) Could it be our military's way of warning these craft occupants that they are visible to the locals. "Conduct your biological agenda, but you have to do a better job cloaking your craft, as not to scare the locals creating a scenario similiar to the broadcast of "War of the Worlds" And while radio has become obsolete since the internet/cell phone communication revolution.. can you imagine the panic with something like a "War of the Worlds" with todays viral info.

I don't know, but anything is possible. I tend to be one of those that do not believe that the government is in cahoots with the aliens. Why? Well, considering their (the aliens) supposed technological capabilities (read: control time & human awareness, pass through solid matter, etc) I am not too certain we would have leg up enough to set up such an arrangement with them. Then again...as I said...who knows. Maybe we caused the crash in Roswell inadvertently and have some form of a natural deterrent or outright weapon that can stop them in a heart beat.

Here's another thought. Maybe the aliens are us inadvertently. Imagine this scenario.

What if in the future we (humanity) do manage to technologically produce time travel? What if we find that only unmanned time travel is possible? Could future humanity have engineered the Greys to do their precision time traveler bidding for them? Could Greys be a living computer program yielding artificial consciousness that result from mankind's future need to genetically correct some sort of past human vulnerability that nearly wipes us out thousands of years post singularity? Or are Greys some type of artificial/biological construct that serves as being a remote consciousness extension of future mankind itself? Are these Greys literally humanity's technologically proposed evolutionary segue to practical omnipresence within all of spacetime?

Imagine living remote cameras that have the ability to have their consciousness programmed so that matter reacts to it as predictably as it does with our own. I know it's all BS, but it's fascinating BS nonetheless.

 

[Randall]

In short, the ETH is the only theory that works for me, scientifically. It is technically possible and we cannot disprove it. We can disprove that people can walk through walls etc.

At one time we could easily disprove that people could fly, then along came Yves Rossy. I knew an electrician once who was a solid old country no-nonsense kind of guy who told me about an incident at a shipyard where some guys were welding a huge steel plate with a high energy arc welder, and for some reason the welder's arm slipped toward the plate with the electric line attached to it and it seemed that for a moment his arm went through the plate in a ghost like manner and people on the other side even saw it. Sure it's anecdotal, but solid matter is mostly space and the electron layer is the outer boundary between atoms, so who knows for sure that interposition of matter isn't possible with right technology?