Connect with us

News

US Department of Defense documents reveal wormholes and extra dimensions research

Published

on

As part of a US Department of Defense (DoD) project named the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program (AATIP), the US government funded research involving wormholes and extra dimensions, according to documents released Wednesday in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) filed in August 2018. A communication addressed to Senators John McCain and Jack Reed, then-chair of the Senate Committee on Armed Services, provided a list of 38 research papers produced under the program, the titles of which indicated several surprising topics. The research disclosed indicates that the government is just as interested in the application of fantastic sounding technologies as science fiction creators and aficionados.

UPDATE: The correspondence to Senators McCain and Reed was first released to former Deputy Director in the UK’s Directorate of Defense Security, Nick Pope, by the US Defense Intelligence Agency’s Office of Corporate Communications on January 16, 2018. An article published in The Guardian in October last year written by Mr. Pope described his interest in the paper’s release after noting a DIA briefing on AATIP given to a Congressional committee in April according to the Congressional Record. The FOIA request was sought and obtained separately from Mr. Pope’s efforts.

Some of the titles of the publications produced with AATIP funding included:

  • Invisibility Cloaking, by Dr. Ulf Leonhardt of Univ. of St. Andrews
  • Traversable Wormholes, Stargates, and Negative Energy, by Dr. Eric Davis of EarthTech International
  • High-Frequency Gravitational Wave Communications, by Dr. Robert Baker, GravWave
  • Antigravity for Aerospace Applications, Dr. Eric Davis, EarthTech International
  • Concepts for Extracting Energy from the Quantum Vacuum, Dr. Eric Davis, EarthTech International
  • An Introduction to the Statistical Drake Equation, Dr. Claudio Maccone, International Academy of Astronautics
  • Space-Communication Implications of Quantum Entanglement and Nonlocality, Dr. J. Cramer, Univ. of Washington

The research indicated may seem unusual for a government program, but AATIP’s $22 million dollar purpose, the existence of which was first reported by the New York Times in 2017, was to investigate foreign advanced aerospace weapons threats. Thus, studies into technologies that have years of development to go before having direct applications would be within the scope of the investigation.

The invisibility cloaking, for example, is based on optical illusions achieved through light manipulation which a foreign entity could utilize in some fashion, and a quick Google search of the report’s author, Dr. Ulf Leonhardt, will lead you to his TED Talk explaining the technology. EarthTech International, the institute responsible for some of the more fictional-sounding technology research, is an organization dedicated to exploring theories and topics as they may apply to develop innovative propulsion and energy sources, most of the members of which have PhDs and backgrounds in theoretical and experimental physics. In other words, the topics are well known in the science community, and the DoD is interested in knowing if there are security threats involving their applicability.

Advertisement

The background of AATIP is perhaps a bit more interesting to the conspiracy-minded than the research topics provided to Congress. The program began in 2007 and supposedly ended in 2012, although that claim is disputed by the program’s DoD participants. Its initiator was former Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, whose longtime interest in space phenomena is well known in the UFO community. Robert Bigelow – the same man whose Bigelow Aerospace company has successfully installed an expandable module on the International Space Station in 2016 – received a majority of AATIP’s funding to study UFO reports. Bigelow is also well-known in the UFO community for his belief in alien Earth visitation. AATIP isn’t the first known expenditure by the US government on unusual technology – the Air Force’s Project Blue Book (1952-1969) investigated similar phenomena and is currently the subject of a History Channel dramatization by the same name.

UPDATE: Mr. Pope, whose background includes a post at the UK Ministry of Defense’s Secretariat (Air Staff) division where he mirrored the type of work done by Project Blue Book, has provided Teslarati with further context for the revealed AATIP research: 

…I’ve been quoted in various media articles discussing the letter I obtained, but wanted to address the main question I’ve been asked, concerning what this new revelation tells us about the true nature of AATIP. The letter describes the AATIP program as being one looking at next-generation aerospace threats. That’s been the way the DOD and DIA have spun this story from day one. Skeptics of some of the more exotic claims made about AATIP say this isn’t spin at all, but an accurate description of the program. Fair enough, but people should also bear in mind that Harry Reid described the program in similar terms in his June 24, 2009 letter to William Lynn III, and Reid has been very clear that yes, AATIP looked at UAP [Unidentified Aerial Phenomena]…People won’t get a definitive answer…unless and until further AATIP paperwork is released.”  – Nick Pope, January 2, 2019

The FOIA request revealing the AATIP research papers was filed by Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists’ Project on Government Secrecy, a group dedicated to promoting public access to national security information. It regularly makes FOIA requests for the public’s benefit within this realm and also publishes government documents otherwise undisclosed or hard-to-find related to public or intelligence policy. A visit to the group’s website will provide links to their work through multiple presidential administrations and resource links for anyone interested in delving further into government secrets.

Advertisement

Accidental computer geek, fascinated by most history and the multiplanetary future on its way. Quite keen on the democratization of space. | It's pronounced day-sha, but I answer to almost any variation thereof.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla confirms Full Self-Driving still isn’t garnering interest from lagging competitors

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla executive Sendil Palani confirmed in a post on social media platform X that Full Self-Driving, despite being the most robust driver assistance program in the United States, still isn’t garnering any interest from lagging competitors.

Tesla has said on several occasions in the past that it has had discussions with a competing carmaker to license its Full Self-Driving suite. While it never confirmed which company it was, many pointed toward Ford as the one Tesla was holding dialogue with.

At the time, Ford CEO Jim Farley and Tesla CEO Elon Musk had a very cordial relationship.

Despite Tesla’s confirmation, which occurred during both the Q2 2023 and Q1 2024 Earnings Calls, no deal was ever reached. Whichever “major OEM” Tesla had talked to did not see the benefit. Even now, Tesla has not found that dance partner, despite leading every company in the U.S. in self-driving efforts by a considerable margin.

Advertisement

Elon Musk says Tesla Robotaxi launch will force companies to license Full Self-Driving

Palani seemed to confirm that Tesla still has not found any company that is remotely interested in licensing FSD, as he said on X that “despite our best efforts to share the technology,” the company has found that it “has not been proven to be easy.”

Advertisement

The question came just after one Tesla fan on X asked whether Tesla would continue manufacturing vehicles.

Because Tesla continues to expand its lineup of Model Y, it has plans to build the Cybercab, and there is still an immediate need for passenger vehicles, there is no question that the company plans to continue scaling its production.

However, Palani’s response is interesting, especially considering that it was in response to the question of whether Tesla would keep building cars.

Perhaps if Tesla could license Full Self-Driving to enough companies for the right price, it could simply sell the suite to car companies that are building vehicles, eliminating the need for Tesla to build its own.

Advertisement

While it seems like a reach because of Tesla’s considerable fan base, which is one of the most loyal in the automotive industry, the company could eventually bail on manufacturing and gain an incredible valuation by simply unlocking self-driving for other manufacturers.

The big question regarding why Tesla can’t find another company to license FSD is simply, “Why?”

Do they think they can solve it themselves? Do they not find FSD as valuable or effective? Many of these same companies didn’t bat an eye when Tesla started developing EVs, only to find themselves years behind. This could be a continuing trend.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla exec pleads for federal framework of autonomy to U.S. Senate Committee

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla executive Lars Moravy appeared today in front of the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee to highlight the importance of modernizing autonomy standards by establishing a federal framework that would reward innovation and keep the country on pace with foreign rivals.

Moravy, who is Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering, strongly advocated for Congress to enact a national framework for autonomous vehicle development and deployment, replacing the current patchwork of state-by-state rules.

These rules have slowed progress and kept companies fighting tooth-and-nail with local legislators to operate self-driving projects in controlled areas.

Tesla already has a complete Robotaxi model, and it doesn’t depend on passenger count

Advertisement

Moravy said the new federal framework was essential for the U.S. to “maintain its position in global technological development and grow its advanced manufacturing capabilities.

He also said in a warning to the committee that outdated regulations and approval processes would “inhibit the industry’s ability to innovate,” which could potentially lead to falling behind China.

Being part of the company leading the charge in terms of autonomous vehicle development in the U.S., Moravy highlighted Tesla’s prowess through the development of the Full Self-Driving platform. Tesla vehicles with FSD engaged average 5.1 million miles before a major collision, which outpaces that of the human driver average of roughly 699,000 miles.

Moravy also highlighted the widely cited NHTSA statistic that states that roughly 94 percent of crashes stem from human error, positioning autonomous vehicles as a path to dramatically reduce fatalities and injuries.

Advertisement

Skeptics sometimes point to cybersecurity concerns within self-driving vehicles, which was something that was highlighted during the Senate Commerce Committee hearing, but Moravy said, “No one has ever been able to take over control of our vehicles.”

Advertisement

This level of security is thanks to a core-embedded central layer, which is inaccessible from external connections. Additionally, Tesla utilizes a dual cryptographic signature from two separate individuals, keeping security high.

Moravy also dove into Tesla’s commitment to inclusive mobility by stating, “We are committed with our future products and Robotaxis to provide accessible transportation to everyone.” This has been a major point of optimism for AVs because it could help the disabled, physically incapable, the elderly, and the blind have consistent transportation.

Overall, Moravy’s testimony blended urgency about geopolitical competition, especially China, with concrete safety statistics and a vision of the advantages autonomy could bring for everyone, not only in the U.S., but around the world, as well.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla Model Y lineup expansion signals an uncomfortable reality for consumers

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla launched a new configuration of the Model Y this week, bringing more complexity to its lineup of the vehicle and adding a new, lower entry point for those who require an All-Wheel-Drive car.

However, the broadening of the Model Y lineup in the United States could signal a somewhat uncomfortable reality for Tesla fans and car buyers, who have been vocal about their desire for a larger, full-size SUV.

Tesla has essentially moved in the opposite direction through its closure of the Model X and its continuing expansion of a vehicle that fits the bill for many, but not all.

Tesla brings closure to Model Y moniker with launch of new trim level

Advertisement

While CEO Elon Musk has said that there is the potential for the Model Y L, a longer wheelbase configuration of the vehicle, to enter the U.S. market late this year, it is not a guarantee.

Instead, Tesla has prioritized the need to develop vehicles and trim levels that cater to the future rollout of the Robotaxi ride-hailing service and a fully autonomous future.

But the company could be missing out on a massive opportunity, as SUVs are a widely popular body style in the U.S., especially for families, as the tighter confines of compact SUVs do not support the needs of a large family.

Although there are other companies out there that manufacture this body style, many are interested in sticking with Tesla because of the excellent self-driving platform, expansive charging infrastructure, and software performance the vehicles offer.

Advertisement

Additionally, the lack of variety from an aesthetic and feature standpoint has caused a bit of monotony throughout the Model Y lineup. Although Premium options are available, those three configurations only differ in terms of range and performance, at least for the most part, and the differences are not substantial.

Minor Expansions of the Model Y Fail to Address Family Needs for Space

Offering similar trim levels with slight differences to cater to each consumer’s needs is important. However, these vehicles keep a constant: cargo space and seating capacity.

Larger families need something that would compete with vehicles like the Chevrolet Tahoe, Ford Expedition, or Cadillac Escalade, and while the Model X was its largest offering, that is going away.

Tesla could fix this issue partially with the rollout of the Model Y L in the U.S., but only if it plans to continue offering various Model Y vehicles and expanding on its offerings with that car specifically. There have been hints toward a Cyber-inspired SUV in the past, but those hints do not seem to be a drastic focus of the company, given its autonomy mission.

Advertisement

Tesla appears to be mulling a Cyber SUV design

Model Y Expansion Doesn’t Boost Performance, Value, or Space

You can throw all the different badges, powertrains, and range ratings on the same vehicle, it does not mean it’s going to sell better. The Model Y was already the best-selling vehicle in the world on several occasions. Adding more configurations seems to be milking it.

The true need of people, especially now that the Model X is going away, is going to be space. What vehicle fits the bill of a growing family, or one that has already outgrown the Model Y?

Not Expanding the Lineup with a New Vehicle Could Be a Missed Opportunity

The U.S. is the world’s largest market for three-row SUVs, yet Tesla’s focus on tweaking the existing Model Y ignores this. This could potentially result in the Osborne Effect, as sales of current models without capturing new customers who need more seating and versatility.

Advertisement

Expansions of the current Model Y offerings risk adding production complexity without addressing core demands, and given that the Model Y L is already being produced in China, it seems like it would be a reasonable decision to build a similar line in Texas.

Listening to consumers means introducing either the Model Y L here, or bringing a new, modern design to the lineup in the form of a full-size SUV.

Continue Reading