|
APEC: Alternative Propulsion Engineering Conference
September 16, 2023 Bryan Kelly Light Pumping For An "Anti-Gravity" & Inertial Mass Reduction Effect |
|
This webpage is for Bryan Kelly's presentation "Light Pumping For An 'Anti-Gravity' & Inertial Mass Reduction Effect" for the Alternative Propulsion Engineering Conference (APEC) meeting on September 16, 2023. It was also presented at the Alien Scientist channel on Month 00, 2023. An earlier practice video version is here on YouTube and Rumble.
(Chat links.) Webpage https://www.suretyinsider.com/anti-gravity-light-inertial-mass-reduction-pumping-light-bubbles-Bryan-Kelly-APEC-Alternative-Propulsion-Engineering-Conference-altpropulsion-APEC4K.html Links Page https://www.suretyinsider.com/anti-gravity-inertial-mass-reduction-light-pumping-light-bubbles-Bryan-Kelly-APEC-Alternative-Propulsion-Engineering-Conference-altpropulsion-APEC4K-LINKS.html Hello everyone, I am Bryan Kelly, a retired engineer and attorney with a background in design, construction, start-up and testing, as well as legal issues within the energy, engineering and construction industries. I also worked in surety and fidelity bonding, including white collar matters similar to the Bernie Madoff case, like the one I had with Jeffrey Epstein's mentor, in addition to construction cases, at large financial institutions like Citigroup and AIG. The details of my background can be found on the links page I just put in the chat along with a link to the page I am reading from right now. 
The subject today is called "Light Pumping For An "Anti-Gravity" And Inertial Mass Reduction Effect". This is a concept of mine that is about ten years old now. I am giving you a bare-bones introduction today, because as you can see from the links page, I've got a lot to say and many different ways to say it. So this is just a brief and concise overview. You can read the detailed links and watch the videos posted there at your convenience.
Now to the overall concept and general principles. Most importantly, I start with the assumption that light, the full spectrum, is the best medium for us to use to cause an "anti-gravity" inertial mass reduction effect at this point, and not space-time. Light is in space-time, but it is not space-time itself. I am not dealing with space-time, the vacuum, quantum foam or anything like that. The relevant medium for this concept is also not air, and it is not water, and it is not even space itself, which is mostly just filled with light, but of course also has other things in it. The way I see it, air, water, and space are not things that have light within them so much as they are things that are within light. So, light only, and by that I mean the full spectrum, is the medium here. Secondly, and very simply put, to achieve an "anti-gravity" and inertial mass reduction effect within this medium, we will mimic the phases of matter, which in turn are caused by energy levels, which are in turn caused by light. So, we can use light to move through light by pulling it through the skins and bodies of a massive object, which will simultaneously cause the desired "anti-gravity" and inertial mass reduction effects. There is much more to it of course, but again, this is a bare bones overview. So, I can start with this falsifiable statement, one of the the first things I dared to post on Twitter back in 2016, "Light pumped through matter reduces the effect of gravity." That still holds true today of course, as contradiction of that statement would effectively amount to nullifying the phases of matter, which may be possible as there is sometimes the oddball exception, but I've never heard of that exception. We can put forth such a general rule because we know that the phases of matter are caused by their energy levels. That is, light moving "in, through, out and around", commonly referred to as "absorbed and emitted". I added "around" to those concepts, as an object or craft encased in a bubble of slippery light is going to provide us with mitigated friction, drag and inertia, in addition to the "anti-gravity" effect. We will be within things like air, water and space but always slightly separated, and not interacting directly. This bubble notion is not unlike the "warp drive" bubble concepts, as some of you may already have surmised. These "light bubbles" can then be intensified, diminished and "shaped" to facilitate relative motion with respect to other objects. 
So we will simply mimic the as-yet unfalsified natural phenomenon described as "the phases of matter." That phenomenon also generally describes what "buoyancy" is, and the "lift" of gases. Solids and liquids typically don't "lift" despite being comprised of the very same atoms and molecules. But gases do, because of the light pumping "in, through, out and around" the molecules and atoms. We will simply harness and scale this well-understood effect. Waveguides and the like can also be made to cause the same outcome, with the desired "anti-gravity"-like floating and inertial mass reduction effects.
We all see this phenomenon constantly but, for the most part don't appreciate it. It is easily observable in natural archetypes such as when observing the differences between water ice, liquid water and water clouds, as well as with man-made airships and balloons, and probably to a lesser extent with butterflies, insects and birds, a slightly more speculative sidetrack that I am avoiding today, because I am only addressing the bare bones. To keep it short, sweet and hopefully effective, I am sticking to the mostly indisputable today. To debunk what I am suggesting here will take you straight back to the phases of matter themselves and how energy levels work, as well as things like basic buoyancy. Then one would have to explain away how the archetypes mentioned above exist somehow, in spite of the effect of energy levels which are in-turn caused by light. Then they would have to explain why these archetypes can not be mimicked and improved upon drastically, especially given modern material sciences and optomechanical knowledge, because that is precisely what I am now proposing. It took me a while to do it, but the arguments for this concept are now pretty-much bulletproof and new methods to improve upon these natural processes are flowing out of the science and engineering community every single day. Buoyancy, "lift" and the phases of matter are material properties that human beings can certainly improve upon and optimize. There is absolutely no reason why they can not be utilized more effectively and improved upon drastically. Yet this seemingly obvious endeavor has not been undertaken. This unfortunate state of things is also why the concept and the general principles I present to you today are not patentable or otherwise able to be monopolized. They belong to everybody. 
But what is done is one thing, and how it is done is quite another. So what I am saying is, that the open-source "anti-gravity" and inertial mass reduction process is right in your face. I am telling you in plain language exactly what that is. It is not zero point energy, but it is free energy. So I propose that we take this free energy and perfect the light-matter interaction in order to bend it to our will, as was done with "fire" and the motive power of heat in general, and which we can now extend to the entire spectrum. It is time to move beyond that narrow band of infrared upon which we so heavily rely. That is what science and engineering are for. This is how human beings progress.
So, this is where the metamaterials come in. For example, the lift of the random hydrogen gas molecules in say the Hindenburg, every single one functioning haphazardly and working against each other, could be ordered and purposed and vectored right down to the angstrom level, that is, optimized with metamaterials. Molecular and atomic approaches, aerogels, waveguides, photonic crystals, vacuum objects, topological insulators, plasmonics, quasi-crystals, sub-wavelength waveguides and maybe even some mythological magical isotope tweaking will likely all work. But these metamaterial design and fabrication efforts must be working toward a feasible, intelligible, indisputable, unfalsified general principle, and light-pumping is indeed such a principle. If we also happen to bend space-time or warp the vacuum by accident along the way to this idiot-proof sure thing, then so be it. Stranger things have happened. But in the meantime, we are going to use those metamaterials and waveguides to capture and transfer the explosive momentum of ambient mass-equivalent light. You can call it a continuous radiation pressure or even thrust from reloadable fuel until you get comfortable with the idea. But just keep on thinking about those angstrom-sized atoms or sub-wavelength waveguides capturing and exploding photons thousands of times larger than they are, in the nanometers, and how fast they can be made to do so. Also, internalize and understand the fact that the very medium you will be pumping through is also a highly efficient propellant when used correctly. Did you hear me back there, Skunkworks, or shall I repeat that? Anyway, this is how you do "propellantless", at least for the time being. We are talking about angstrom-sized nanopumps and picometer waveguide systems that are hardwired by nature to run and keep running at attosecond light speeds and higher. That's eighteen zeroes per second every second, since the Big Bang. It is not quite perpetual motion, but those numbers will work out fine for most of us. Per square inch, those angstroms are in the quadrillions by area and the quintillions by volume, or thereabouts. That is fifteen more zeroes by area working with those eighteen-zero attoseconds in an already lighter-than-air metamaterial, such as graphane, which is simply hydrogenated graphene, which is simply graphene soaked in hydrogen. These materials can fuse those nanopumps into a solid chunk of a skin comprised of automatically refueling nanorockets in the octillions, all acting as one. This kind of design will start to approach optimal energy densities which will then be compounded with femtosecond and attosecond time scales to produce paradigm-shifting efficiency. Things like that will give you radiant flux per mass density in abundance, petajoules and zettawatts, and are becoming achievable here and now. 
There are many, many ways to look at this concept, mostly all describing the same thing, from Newton and "forces" to Einstein's description of the "mass-equivalence" of light, to floating iridescent hummingbirds to tales of the UAP themselves, allegedly. That is why there is a link to the links above, and why this presentation has to be short and sweet and packed with things like falsifiable but unfalsified statements, indisputable statements and mind-numbingly large, small and fast numbers, until people get the general idea of what I am talking about. Then we can get into all the subtleties, which certainly do exist, but are not dispositive of the overall undeniable efficacy here. So basically, I am all but telling you the way it is, not suggesting it. Nature is what it is, that's the way it is, and it has been here the whole time.
"The science" is already there, going back to at least the Greeks anyway, and almost certainly further. The math seems to be lagging right now though, just as it was for the Montgolfier Brothers, the Wright Brothers, and the early Chinese rocket scientists. As with them, the equations will have to play catch-up here, as usual. Sometimes we lose sight of the fact that reality exists independently of the many eccentric methods, ideas and concepts that are contrived and concocted to characterize it. That said, I will go on to suggest that equations around supercavitating bubbles in fluids within variable gravitational fields might be one way to describe this. Or, it might be done with optomechanical force studies for light-matter interactions in a gravitational field. But right now, there is not even a consensus on photon mass for thrust, despite photons being the drivers of most of it, or barely even the notion of fields of light in air or water where the force of gravity within is diminished, that I have ever seen. Nor have I ever seen a model for a point of mass deterministically controlling its own light bubble in a gravitational field. Perhaps something like that exists, or should exist, for supercavitating hypersonics and submarines, but I doubt it. Is such a region of curved space less curved in that instance? Are the tensors and the cones any different under such conditions? Are the gravitons no longer as coherently aligned? I happen to think so, but that is inconsequential. Because I don't think anyone has ever thought about some of these things, mathematically. Why would they? But again, right now, as far as I am concerned, that is their problem, not ours. 
I don't know why this scenario isn't already on paper, and barely care right now. I am here to float away at will, and shoot off at the speed-of-light in my own cozy little light bubble using the absolutely obvious characteristics of nature. How that is documented later is of secondary importance, but despite my apparent hubris, I will be glad to help with the bookkeeping, please just spell my name correctly.
I also would like to ask somebody more mathematically proficient than myself to explain how the mass of a light-entangling, and by "entangling" I mean in the plain meaning of the word not in the spooky action with "Alice and Bob" sense, how the mass of a light-entangling object, over time, losing its mass-equivalence at a rate greater than the local gravitational field's acceleration requires to be effective, may be likened to a snapshot of negative mass. I would think that there might be some math already done out there by now, but I tend to doubt it. Or perhaps we can update the rocket equation, make it continuous, put the rocket in a mitigated gravitational field of its own making and wrap a slippery light bubble around it to reduce drag, friction and inertial mass. How do we rewrite F=ma for a body in motion when a major component of that body is not mass but mass-equivalence? The thing with this is, this concept can be described six ways to Sunday and back. But apparently since that hasn't been done conclusively to date, this novel concept, which is simply mimicking what already exists in nature, will have to bring that about. So, yes, the current lack of comprehensive mathematical descriptions is a weakness here. But that is not an obstacle, merely a historical footnote, because the phases stand unfalsified and archetypes exist. The notion of optimization, which would involve the engineering of metamaterials in this case, has proven worthwhile over and over again throughout history, and this concept is fresh fertile ground. You can see all this with your own eyes, whether you appreciate it yet or not. That the math is once again lagging innovation is merely a secondary concern. It often does. Not always, but often. 
Fortunately, that gives other people something to do. One upside to this weakness is, it will also cause people to realize that although this concept has yet to be described mathematically to everyone's satisfaction, including my own, it is also impossible to debunk mathematically, because nature is what it is no matter what has or has not been written or "published" about it.
And while sufficient archetypes already exist, this concept is indeed testable as well. I started experimenting with balloons and mirrors early on and did it for years, but for this crowd a basic metamaterial might be necessary, starting with perhaps a homemade, street corner, bootleg graphane or equivalent. Think of it this way, all you will be doing is taking something lighter-than-air like graphene and making it even lighter than lighter-than-air by adding hydrogen to it for a hydrogenated graphene, known as graphane. Then you gradually learn to control its inertia-mitigating "anti-gravity" properties. You dope it to turn left. You decorate it to turn right. Whatever it takes. Then you optimize it. Then you start building around it. Instead of a mirror deterministically reflecting the sun on to a balloon, maybe Mark Sokol chasing a piece of street graphane through the back alleys of North Jersey with Jeremiah's Magic Wand might be the stunt that finally opens the world's eyes. Or, as I suggested to certain well-known TTSA members repeatedly on Twitter years ago, put the material in a chamber and just fiddle around with different electromagnetic fields, temperatures, visible light, microwaves, terahertz, x-rays, radio waves, sound or whatever frequencies you have handy to see what effects and controls it. Ultimately, we will build around these malleable material properties of "lift" and buoyancy, which are caused by light, and optimize them until we are pumping light at a rate approaching the speed-of-light. It may seem very silly and funny for a while, with the Magic Wand, like it was for me and the balloons, but ultimately this can not "not work". I'll say that again, this time for Raytheon, Northrup, Rockwell and the DOE in the back, ultimately this can not "not work". At some point, it is just simple common sense, but I realize and acknowledge that a few performative hoops may be desirable here. But no, it is not as awe-inspiring as "warp drive", but bullet-proof and idiot-proof will just have to do for now. 
So, take a quick look later at what I call the "Philly Flyer", linked right here on the page, for an idea of what that might look like at first. Maybe before we get The Magic Wand out, something along these lines might inspire the experimentalists. But we can talk about all that stuff later. This is a bare bones overview and is not intended to be a deep dive into waveguide and metamaterial technology.
Okay, getting away from the prototypes and back to the archetypes, I would expound for just a moment on the UAPs and UFOs themselves. I have personally never seen one, but some of you have, and we have all heard the stories and people familiar to us all claim to have seen the compelling data. I tend to generally believe these accounts, because they describe multispectral signatures and light-pumping behavior that is precisely as I would expect them to be, with the so-called glowing auras of cold light. To me, The Five Observables should be called The Five Utterly Predictables. I have a webpage on precisely that topic in fact, but since we are bare bones here today and that is a huge distraction, I will say nothing further about it now. You can find that link later and read it to see why I occasionally can not help but scoff at AARO and AATIP and TTSA and all the infotainment limited hangout, slow-roller types. The UAPs are, in all likelihood, pumping the full-spectrum of light within a medium of light just like a Virginia-class submarine pumps water, but doing so far more efficiently. I don't expect anybody listening right now to buy that line wholesale, except the ones that already do but won't say so. But, at some point I predict that all of you will see that this stuff could not be more obvious. As for inertia, inertia means very little when the surfaces of your weightless craft are not directly touching atmospheres, be they gaseous or liquid, but are instead encased in a nice slippery light bubble. There is a bit more to it in my opinion, but that gets into spin-2 gravitons and why spin-1 photons cut right through them, which is the kind of thing I am skipping in this bare bones overview. Similarly, gravity means little-to-nothing to mass when the mass is losing mass-equivalence at a rate greater than the local gravitational field's acceleration requires. In space, you would just aim the thing at the nearest star and start pulling light through the mass and pumping it back out at a rate approaching the speed-of-light. The craft will be pulling and pumping light, "in, through, out, and around" while maintaining its own little protective and slippery bubble or cavity. I got ten bucks that says that is what most of these alleged UFOs and so-called "Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena" are doing, but we will just have to wait and see. 
Okay, so the bottom line here is that this stuff is actually simple and idiot-proof. It boils down to a recognition of the need to optimize an analogue of the phases of matter for a certain purpose, commonly called "buoyancy" or perhaps now "anti-gravity". Human beings have been changing material properties since before the cave was invented, so why stop now? This milestone, "anti-gravity" and inertial mass reduction, is one that we have not yet fully addressed with even the most basic tools and easiest concepts at our disposal, but only with notions that while ambitious, are not yet feasible. So let's just admit that much, get over the embarrassment of letting the accomplishments of the Montgolfier Brothers and their progenitors languish, and get on with it. Building around the inertial and gravitational mitigation properties of the light-matter interaction is a natural step. It just got waylaid for a while in favor of force and thrust. Instead of using brute force explosions to overcome gravity, we will use the benefit of higher energy levels to free ourselves from gravity and inertia in a more subtle, elegant and effective manner. This approach involves harnessing and using ambient energy in real time, and is not unlike solar power in that respect. Make no mistake, this is the "hard tech" play of the century waiting to happen ladies and gentlemen, if I do say so myself. And I won't even mention the "green energy" aspect of it, because I shouldn't have to. I may sound a little underwhelmed about this sometimes, but I am fully aware of those facts, and just a little bit fatigued by them. The free energy is all around us, in every photon, right down to the visible light and temperature in the environment wherever you may be enjoying this presentation. This "free energy" includes the entire terahertz spectrum by the way, which is another distraction I'll save for later, but all that is, is the temperature range found everywhere in the universe between negative four hundred fifty-nine and positive three hundred thirty-four degrees Fahrenheit. So, if you want "anti-gravity", inertial mass reduction and "free energy", first realize that you are in fact, sitting in it. I am here to tell you how to capture it and use it.
To quote myself, if I may, "Large numbers of little things, doing little things quickly and repeatedly, add up to very big things." In this case, the underappreciated scales and numbers in nature are far more relevant to solving this problem than are equations, at least for right now. And we will be using time as a tool here, letting things just do what they do naturally at the very high speeds they do them at. When you set things up to do what they would be doing anyway, but so that they are doing them optimally for a purpose, that is how words like "propellantless" and "perpetual motion" leave the fiction and fantasy realm to become real life. There are zeroes upon zeroes of bulletproof, idiot-proof, yocto-quadrillion zepto-quintillions just sitting out there waiting to be used. Those tiny little things in such large numbers and such high speeds and in such small spaces compound and add up, as anyone who has ever worked around nuclear energy, as I have, can tell you.
So, there is no excuse why "anti-gravity" inertial mass reduction can not be achieved, starting now, with us. The technologies are already out there, but they are unguided, unpurposed, ignored, forgotten and/or under-purposed. I am here to get the ball rolling in the right direction by first focusing people on intelligible, feasible and achievable concepts, and then developing them. When you are stuck with a difficult situation in life, so that you have to repeatedly re-frame a problem and it seems to be going nowhere, sometimes you will stumble upon a much easier solution than the ones you have been trying over and over again to no avail. Sometimes it can be shockingly simple, as anyone who has ever "tried unplugging it and then plugging it back in" can attest. This is one of those times. Normally, I would call myself a simpleton here and joke about how it takes a simpleton to find the simplest solution, but not this time. Instead, once again I will assert that this light-pumping concept is the way to go now, to make the most progress in the least time with the knowledge and resources we already have. People should keep working on the warp drives, gravity generation and quantum inertia and whatever else, but again I would assert that this almost-mindless, overlooked simplicity is undoubtedly the best path to pursue vigorously, and that is just the base reality for now. And it can only succeed. Period. This outcome will happen eventually anyway, with or without us here and now. But why not us, and why not now? 
At the risk of sounding defensive, the logic behind this concept can not be seriously questioned. The physics is already there, anyone can see it. With the energy levels and phases, it is what it is. So, you can either accept that and start working toward the future or not. The math is mostly there, and things become pretty obvious when considering the undeniable effectiveness and the possibilities of cascading scales of time and photonic momentum. This reality is almost indisputable, despite the fact that the concept is perhaps lacking its best and most concise description with mathematical symbols. Perhaps ironically, the engineering and fabrication technologies are both further along than those aspects, because there are people unknowingly doing bits and pieces of this work all around the world right now in academic laboratories and fledgling industries. The basic materials for a lot this are already out there, but their use has not been correctly purposed, let alone optimized. It is up to us, in this tin foil hat affinity group, to start to make that happen.
In closing, I realize that I may not have explained this to everyone's liking as yet, and that is understandable. On the other hand, there is very little chance that this notion can fail. One way or another, it will happen eventually anyway, even if it is only a step toward bigger and better things. So, now it is your turn out there. I will gladly take questions now, or anytime on "X", formerly known as Twitter or in my YouTube and Rumble channel comments, where other people might benefit from our interaction. Additionally, I plan on doing more shows like this, perhaps joining a few subject-matter groups and further expanding my small YouTube and Rumble channels until all of this becomes painfully obvious. After ten years, I consistently bore myself by thinking about this too much, as it can get repetitive and tedious, but I rarely get tired of discussing it. And the future is wide open. In the meantime, thank you very much for this opportunity to speak, Jeremy/Tim/Bernie. I'm ready for questions, but first, I am going to... 
January 2023 |
