Quantum Gravity: Difference between revisions

Line 3,378: Line 3,378:
https://t.co/H683aAOGFv
https://t.co/H683aAOGFv
|thread=
|thread=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1941522171886739479
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=I would like to talk to @MickWest and @michaelshermer and @francis_collins andĀ  @neiltyson and @seanmcarroll and @nytimes about the role of [[Prebunked Malinformation|debunking]] and [[Image Cheapening|discrediting]] professionals who do not buy into narratives that are later found to be cover stories about national interest.
|quote=
{{Tweet
|image=MarcACaputo-profile-68rPFha3.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/MarcACaputo/status/1941468205534585019
|name=Marc Caputo
|usernameurl=https://x.com/MarcACaputo
|username=MarcACaputo
|content=For the first time since JFK’s assassination nearly 62 years ago, the CIA tacitly admitted Thursday that an agent specializing in psychological warfare, George Joannides, ran an operation that came into contact with Lee Harvey Oswald before the killing.
https://www.axios.com/2025/07/05/cia-agent-oswald-kennedy-assassination
|timestamp=12:04 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
}}
|timestamp=3:38 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
Line 3,384: Line 3,404:
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=We have a COVID=Wet Market narrative.
|content=We have a COVID=Wet Market narrative.</br>
We have an Inflation and [[CPI]] narrative.
We have an Inflation and [[CPI]] narrative.</br>
We have a [[Quantum Gravity]] narrative.
We have a [[Quantum Gravity]] narrative.</br>
We have a Vaccine Narrative.
We have a Vaccine Narrative.</br>
We have ā€œAmericans suck at STEMā€.
We have ā€œAmericans suck at STEMā€.</br>
We have a ā€œSettled Scienceā€ narrative.
We have a ā€œSettled Scienceā€ narrative.</br>
We have a [[Peer Review|ā€œPeer Reviewā€]] narrative.
We have a [[Peer Review|ā€œPeer Reviewā€]] narrative.</br>
We had a [[Great Moderation|ā€œGreat Moderationā€]] narrative.
We had a [[Great Moderation|ā€œGreat Moderationā€]] narrative.</br>
We have ā€œIndependent Journalismā€.
We have ā€œIndependent Journalismā€.</br>
We have a [[Jeffrey Epstein|ā€œDisgraced Financierā€]] story.
We have a [[Jeffrey Epstein|ā€œDisgraced Financierā€]] story.</br>
We have an ā€œAerospace and UFOā€ opera.
We have an ā€œAerospace and UFOā€ opera.


It’s all one thing that cannot be named: Ā 
It’s all one thing that cannot be named: Ā 


National Interest ā€œManaged Reality.ā€
National Interest ā€œ[[Managed Reality TM|Managed Reality]].ā€
|timestamp=3:38 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
|timestamp=3:38 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
}}
}}
Line 3,407: Line 3,427:
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=We need to talk about what debunking was before it became ā€œCovert influence operationsā€, ā€œImage Cheapneingā€ā€˜and personal destruction warfare. Ā 
|content=We need to talk about what debunking was before it became ā€œCovert influence operationsā€, ā€œ[[Image Cheapening|Image Cheapneing]]ā€ā€˜and personal destruction warfare. Ā 


So let’s talk.
So let’s talk.
|timestamp=3:41 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
|timestamp=3:41 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
}}
{{Tweet
|image=MickWest-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/MickWest/status/1941533851282809276
|name=Mick West
|usernameurl=https://x.com/MickWest
|username=MickWest
|content=Are you buying into Anna Paulina Luna's narrative regarding Joannides?
Or Morley's? Posners? Ratcliffe's?
Which one do you pick, and why?
|timestamp=4:25 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
Line 3,428: Line 3,461:
Likewise here: I don’t know what happened in Dallas. What I feel confidence in is that we have been lying about telling all we know about what happened in Dallas. Ā 
Likewise here: I don’t know what happened in Dallas. What I feel confidence in is that we have been lying about telling all we know about what happened in Dallas. Ā 


Same with UFOs. What do I know? Very little. But what little I do know is that too many grownups in Govt are talking about something real. That real thing could be a fake program. Or cover for physics research. Or many things.
Same with [[UAP|UFOs]]. What do I know? Very little. But what little I do know is that too many grownups in Govt are talking about something real. That real thing could be a fake program. Or cover for physics research. Or many things.


But the debunking thing has a different energy. I appreciate all you do to explain videos and sightings that have genuinely prosaic explanations. Truly. Ā 
But the debunking thing has a different energy. I appreciate all you do to explain videos and sightings that have genuinely prosaic explanations. Truly. Ā 


What I don’t believe at all is that there is no use of UFO SAPs by the USG. I think we create SAPs and we ruin people’s lives around them when good folks can’t let go of the fact that they saw or experienced or interacted with something we know a lot about. Ā 
What I don’t believe at all is that there is no use of [[UAP=SAP|UFO SAP]]s by the USG. I think we create SAPs and we ruin people’s lives around them when good folks can’t let go of the fact that they saw or experienced or interacted with something we know a lot about. Ā 


That’s my issue. Discrediting behavior targeted on individuals to protect programs with claims of national interest.
That’s my issue. Discrediting behavior targeted on individuals to protect programs with claims of national interest.
|timestamp=5:21 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
|timestamp=5:21 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
}}
{{Tweet
|image=MickWest-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/MickWest/status/1941577460493189219
|name=Mick West
|usernameurl=https://x.com/MickWest
|username=MickWest
|content=What exactly are you suggesting with this "different energy"?
That I'm just not polite enough?
Or that I'm part of a disinformation campaign?
Because I'd argue against both of those.
Something else?
|timestamp=7:18 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
Line 3,460: Line 3,510:
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|image=MickWest-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1941597201391813079
|nameurl=https://x.com/MickWest/status/1941602678565667098
|name=Eric Weinstein
|name=Mick West
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/MickWest
|username=EricRWeinstein
|username=MickWest
|content=The heart of my war on ā€œNeo-Debunkersā€. Ā 
|content=I am not avoiding that. We should absolutely look into topics like Yankee Blue, and Grusch's claims. Ā 
Ā 
Old debunkers confined themselves to conmen and bunko artists.


The Neo debunkers don’t hesitate to go against *targets* of covert NatSec bunk &amp; disinformation campaigns.
I don't treat people like garbage. When I engage with people I do so with facts, logic, and respect. I wrote a book on doing just that. Ā 


A real debunker *HAS* to go against NatSec bunk &amp; disinformation.
You're waving around a straw man.
|timestamp=8:37 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
|timestamp=8:58 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1941598927872291060
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=@SamHendren89 @MickWest @michaelshermer @Francis_Collins @neiltyson @nytimes Yes. And?
|timestamp=8:43 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
}}
}}
{{Tweet
{{Tweet
Line 3,528: Line 3,567:
Wanna debunk the cover stories? If so I’ll join ya.
Wanna debunk the cover stories? If so I’ll join ya.
|timestamp=9:58 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
|timestamp=9:58 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
}}
{{Tweet
|image=MickWest-profile.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/MickWest/status/1941577460493189219
|name=Mick West
|usernameurl=https://x.com/MickWest
|username=MickWest
|content="Do you believe that the U.S. may have created ā€œCraft?ā€ Like deliberate mock ups in hangars. "
I don't think it's impossible. I'm not sure WHY they would do it. Maybe to confuse the Russians into thinking we have advanced tech.
"I do. I think it is likely that some of our people had *real* run ins with fake craft."
Entirely possible, at least in hangers.
"Do you believe that there are *real* stories from our top people and ordinaryĀ  about fake aerial events? Like where we know what people saw and we tell them it was nothing. Like a seagull. Or a contrail. Or Venus. Or a Mylar balloon."
Probably, to a degree, to cover up secret test flights of new tech. We know this happened with the U2. The degree of how much was invented and how much is just allowing organic stories to grow is unclear.
"I do. And that is where I part company with you often. Not because you are mean. But because I don’t want this done to our own people, and I have never seen you aggressively go after this. If I am wrong, you have my apology in advance. Happy to make it."
Aggressively go after what? The military saying things that are not true in order to keep secret stuff secret? Some people getting hurt? Sure, ideally that wouldn't happen. But also ideally, we'd have universal health care, the lack of which ruins many more lives than hyper-rare UFO-themed cover-ups. Yes, I'd prefer less lying and fucking with people, but forgive me if I don't get too excited about such a minor (albeit very interesting) issue.
"Do you believe that the U.S. maintained a secret zero insignia airforce that operated by descending on citizens collecting information and destroying and confiscating equipment and data and physically intimidated US citizens in large empty western states without identifying itself?"
I have no idea. Probably in the past, back when the cold war and nuke secrets were a big deal. There's the singular Bennewitz case 40 years ago (driven insane, or already part-way there?). But now? I really don't see it.
"I do. And it is so unbelievable that I didn’t think this was possible until friends reported it happened to them. I believe that this had to do with the CIA office of ā€œGlobal Accessā€."
What happened to them? Vague stories are not helpful.
"Do you believe that @pmarca and @bhorowitz were told that entire areas of theoretical physics were taken off line by the Biden Whitehouse, while we have been in 52 year denied stagnation in Standard Model Physics? "
No. I'd like to see some evidence of this.
"I do. And there has been bizarre lack of interest for any major news desk to get to the bottom of this claim. "
It's because it's a cool but implausible-sounding story with no evidence.
"Do you believe that there was a giant secret anti-gravity program, attached to UAP, with many of the worlds top physicists within it? And that it was funded by two IC cutouts Babson and Bahnson?
I do. It was called the ā€œGolden Age of General Relativity.ā€"
Sure, but the question is if they actually found anything. I'm not seeing any evidence of this. The stagnation of Standard Model Physics might simply be because the reality of physics is rather boring and incapable of actually giving us anti-gravity flying cars and starships. I've seen all the public UFO evidence, and indirectly heard about the secret stuff, and there's no strong case for gravity drives.
"Do you believe that UFOs were cover for aerospace…and that aerospace was cover for physics?"
The former, but again perhaps more "let it happen" than "make it happen"
"And that top physics people were in and out of Aerospace where they had no particular reason to be other than secret research.
I do. Like RIAS in Baltimore. And Feynman’s adventures in Buffalo. And L Witten at Wright Patt. Etc etc."
Basic research is essentially speculative, especially in a practical setting. Stick a Feynman in the research department, and good things might happen. Worth a shot. It does not mean they are pushing the bounds of physics.
"I’m fed up with being lied to Mick. I have a PhD in this area which is strangely unusable. No one is doing real fundamental research anywhere in physics Mick. Or haven’t you noticed that this changed in 40+ years. It’s like a medieval philosophy cult now."
So you keep saying. But there have been lots of advances. It's sad they haven't solved gravity or anything revolutionary. But I don't think revolutions in science can simply be guaranteed with bigger and more focused funding. You ascribe this lack of progress to a conspiracy, but maybe it's just because they haven't found anything.
"This is all touching physics. Not Bokeh. Not Mylar. This is largely about the magic and power of a science that mysteriously stalled and cannot be restarted no matter how cheap and easy it would be to do it. "
Well, get Peter to do it then. If it's so easy, why doesn't he just put you in charge, solve gravity, and get to trillionaire?
"This (above) is a lot about post Manhattan Project public physics bullshit. Not seagulls.
Some of it is material science. Some
of it is nukes. But gravity is in this game. And who knows what else. And quantum gravity is the nonsense we can’t question. The likely cover story if you will."
There are plenty of people questioning quantum gravity. It's a model that seems to work, but has no real empirical evidence. It does not stop people trying other models.
"I don’t care about . I care about gaslighting PhD level mathematicians and physicists. The children of Teller (Particle Theory), Ulam (Geometry), and Einstein (Gravity). All of whom were central to the Bomb.
Wanna debunk the cover stories? If so I’ll join ya."
You're going to have to give me some actual evidence that this is a deliberate cover story. Because I'm unconvinced.
|timestamp=10:30 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
}}
}}
|timestamp=11:56 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
|timestamp=11:56 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
}}
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1941597201391813079
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=The heart of my war on ā€œNeo-Debunkersā€.
Old debunkers confined themselves to conmen and bunko artists.
The Neo debunkers don’t hesitate to go against *targets* of covert NatSec bunk &amp; disinformation campaigns.
A real debunker *HAS* to go against NatSec bunk &amp; disinformation.
|quote=
{{Tweet
|image=Eric profile picture.jpg
|nameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein/status/1941593330988781917
|name=Eric Weinstein
|usernameurl=https://x.com/EricRWeinstein
|username=EricRWeinstein
|content=I think you are avoiding the reality that at a minimum, our government(s) is/are almost certainly faking a UFO/NHI presence from time to time. That we have UFO/NHI SAPs that we deny. That UFO/NHI is used as cover for aerospace at a minimum. That we do harm to our own people by pretending that everything has a prosaic explanation.
And that you are not debunking the govt bunk (at a minimum).
My issue is treating our own people like garbage. I despise gaslighting our own people. And the energy you bring is that we don’t need to go to that layer.
Again: I’m the only guy in UFO space who has seen nothing conclusive about NHI. I’m with you on that.
But I do think there was a secret serious physics research program that was affiliated with this UFO anti-gravity stuff. I think Roger Babson and Agnew Bahnson were likely CIA or IC cutouts. I think this is all bound up in the ā€œGolden Age of General Relativityā€.
And I wish you would stop pretending it’s all innocent mistakes, coincidences, people making silly claims. A lot of it is. Sure.
But after you strip that off, a lot of what’s left is toxic NatSec gaslighting. And if you can’t face that I’d prefer you stop. Because you then hurt the people who got gaslit.
|timestamp=8:21 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
|media1=Operation-Overlord-GvHs17VWYAAUr2D.jpg
}}
|timestamp=8:37 PM Ā· Jul 5, 2025
}}
}}