I always like to pit in my head, as a thought experiment, the MFMP against the rise of Elon and ask: wtf? Seeing a New Dawn of an Old Age, I know where I stand. Thanks for this Bob. Stellar work.
Elon has done a fantastic job of monetising technology that can be achieved.
Primary science is often far more difficult and has a much lower reward.
Programming, such as things like PayPal, are 100% correct when they work. When you are trying to understand things that no one has understood, at least in the modern era, you are often going to make mistakes, and some of those will be critical.
The real skill is understanding what are actually dead ends and tracing back and trying to move forward again. Most people just have not got the patience for that. All the while, you are dealing with people that just criticise because they already "know" that everything has already been discovered. And they will attack you when you fail on one path that led to a dead end for whatever reason. They don't even care if that reason was completely outside of your control.
I have had a response from Chuck, though it was brief, and I hope to be able to engage with him further in the coming weeks.
I'm honored by your response to my rather hackneyed comment. One aspect to "endeavoring" I have gleaned from art and design is: Iterations must will out, and a certain "flawing-forward" may bring the more robust results. And Primary Science is a First Principle Space, as Elon would assert -- wherein the Simplex rules and a certain mereology about parts and wholes must gain ground. BTW, our MFMP troll (CSA) did not like Chuck's work a' tall. Thanks Bob.
These last few years have been a little weird, with the MFMP's account being shut and no explanation, and then, more recently, my wife's account has been shut as well. All she does is her own personal food business, so I think there's attacks coming from all round, which I'll take as a compliment.
Anyhow, Chuck has got back to me. He's going to review some of the materials I sent to him, and he says we can have a Zoom call later this week, so things are moving in the right direction. Let's see where he is at.
Fascinatng how Bennett's trajectory maps the classic catch-22 of revolutionary science - DOE demands proof before funding, then uses lack of funding as evidence there's no proof. The bit about requiring credentials in fields that actively denounce the innovation is particularly sharp. I've seen similar dynamics in computaional physics where gatekeeping becomes self-reinforcing, basically creating blind spots that can persist for decades until someone with enough resources just bypasses the whole system.
Yes, that's why I often need someone with enough stupidity to try and enough resources to be able to afford it, or some genuinely philanthropic people that are willing to support novel thinking.
when you look at Eric Weinstein’s talk about the ‘illegalizing’ of speech regarding certain energy related subjects, you will realize that there are entire bureaucratic secret agencies meant to steer humanity away from this technology, a lot of things begin to make sense. Thanks Bob for trying to destroy that system of secrecy!
The United States law that created that bureaucracy is of course the national security act passed in 1947.
Not just deliberate action by bureaucratic agencies, but action by proxy because of the indoctrination of the populace into belief structures and dogma around what actually is science and what is actually possible.
Hi Bob, this is about another topic. It’s about crop circles, plasma and making of C60 with plasma. They seem to do this for more then 30 years in their garage and she seems a good view to have about crop circles:
Hey Bob - Have you seen this interview and open letter?
Seeking the whole truth of September 11, 2001
An open letter to the US Government & the 9/11 truth movement from 9/11 Jersey Girl, Patricia Casazza - January 2026
Read more: https://911revision.substack.com/p/seeking-the-whole-truth-of-september
Not yet. Thanks for reminding me. I will try to get to it next week.
I always like to pit in my head, as a thought experiment, the MFMP against the rise of Elon and ask: wtf? Seeing a New Dawn of an Old Age, I know where I stand. Thanks for this Bob. Stellar work.
Elon has done a fantastic job of monetising technology that can be achieved.
Primary science is often far more difficult and has a much lower reward.
Programming, such as things like PayPal, are 100% correct when they work. When you are trying to understand things that no one has understood, at least in the modern era, you are often going to make mistakes, and some of those will be critical.
The real skill is understanding what are actually dead ends and tracing back and trying to move forward again. Most people just have not got the patience for that. All the while, you are dealing with people that just criticise because they already "know" that everything has already been discovered. And they will attack you when you fail on one path that led to a dead end for whatever reason. They don't even care if that reason was completely outside of your control.
I have had a response from Chuck, though it was brief, and I hope to be able to engage with him further in the coming weeks.
I'm honored by your response to my rather hackneyed comment. One aspect to "endeavoring" I have gleaned from art and design is: Iterations must will out, and a certain "flawing-forward" may bring the more robust results. And Primary Science is a First Principle Space, as Elon would assert -- wherein the Simplex rules and a certain mereology about parts and wholes must gain ground. BTW, our MFMP troll (CSA) did not like Chuck's work a' tall. Thanks Bob.
These last few years have been a little weird, with the MFMP's account being shut and no explanation, and then, more recently, my wife's account has been shut as well. All she does is her own personal food business, so I think there's attacks coming from all round, which I'll take as a compliment.
Anyhow, Chuck has got back to me. He's going to review some of the materials I sent to him, and he says we can have a Zoom call later this week, so things are moving in the right direction. Let's see where he is at.
Fascinatng how Bennett's trajectory maps the classic catch-22 of revolutionary science - DOE demands proof before funding, then uses lack of funding as evidence there's no proof. The bit about requiring credentials in fields that actively denounce the innovation is particularly sharp. I've seen similar dynamics in computaional physics where gatekeeping becomes self-reinforcing, basically creating blind spots that can persist for decades until someone with enough resources just bypasses the whole system.
Yes, that's why I often need someone with enough stupidity to try and enough resources to be able to afford it, or some genuinely philanthropic people that are willing to support novel thinking.
when you look at Eric Weinstein’s talk about the ‘illegalizing’ of speech regarding certain energy related subjects, you will realize that there are entire bureaucratic secret agencies meant to steer humanity away from this technology, a lot of things begin to make sense. Thanks Bob for trying to destroy that system of secrecy!
The United States law that created that bureaucracy is of course the national security act passed in 1947.
Not just deliberate action by bureaucratic agencies, but action by proxy because of the indoctrination of the populace into belief structures and dogma around what actually is science and what is actually possible.
"an æther wind of neutrinos" and “Bernoulli effect” - beautiful stuff!
These comments are the kind of clarity that you could only get from an aerospace engineer.
Hi Bob,
Thanks for the enormous work you put into all of your videos, epic!
The Book you mentioned is here
https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Mass-Theory-Compatible-Field/dp/156072157X
But the name Chuck Bennett seems to be a pseudonym for "T. M. Benson (Author)"
He also seems to have been involved in writing the book
https://www.google.se/books/edition/Fields_Waves_and_Transmission_Lines/sJSfQgAACAAJ?hl=sv
Fields, Waves and Transmission Lines
Here is other publications by "T. M. Benson"
https://inspirehep.net/literature?sort=mostrecent&size=25&page=1&q=a%20T.M.Benson.1
Maybe he was writing under pseudonym "Chuck Bennett", could he be this guy:
https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/benson.html
No, I am in contact with the real Chuck Bennett. He is alive, and hopefully later this week I'll be doing a Zoom call with him.
When you get the chance can you post the papers in your discussion thanks Bob :)
Article text posted.
I will post the text first. Expect that some time today
What timezone?...
Central European Time.
Hi Bob, this is about another topic. It’s about crop circles, plasma and making of C60 with plasma. They seem to do this for more then 30 years in their garage and she seems a good view to have about crop circles:
https://youtu.be/m-ioJ3csNsM