News
US Department of Defense documents reveal wormholes and extra dimensions research
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.
-
- A summary of the Air Force’s Project Blue Book. | Credit: US Department of Defense/US Air Force
-
- A summary of the Air Force’s Project Blue Book. | Credit: US Department of Defense/US Air Force
-
- A summary of the Air Force’s Project Blue Book. | Credit: US Department of Defense/US Air Force
-
- A summary of the Air Force’s Project Blue Book. | Credit: US Department of Defense/US Air Force
-
- A summary of the Air Force’s Project Blue Book. | Credit: US Department of Defense/US Air Force
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:Â
“…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.
Tesla plans to boost production at its Gigafactory Berlin plant in Germany following a sharp rebound in sales and demand in Europe after a softer 2025.
The plans put Tesla in a better position to compete with strengthening companies in Europe and potentially other markets; demand indicators show Tesla is much better off than in 2025.
Last year was a tough year for Tesla in terms of overall demand in Europe. The company produced over 200,000 vehicles at the German plant last year, a soft figure compared to the 375,000 vehicles Tesla lists as its current capacity at the factory.
🚨 Tesla said this morning it will ramp up production at Gigafactory Berlin to a volume of 7,500 vehicles per week.
This is a 20 percent boost in production. Tesla will hire 1,000 new employees to help with the increase.$TSLA pic.twitter.com/kravKfRO5n
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 25, 2026
Tesla’s overall European sales dropped significantly last year due to a variety of factors. However, sales are rebounding, and demand is strong once again, and only getting stronger. Tesla is now planning to bump production of Model Y vehicles at Giga Berlin upward by about 20 percent. It will also bring 1,000 new jobs to the plant.
Tesla confirmed the details of its planned production expansion in Germany this morning. It is a strategy to keep up with strengthening demand.
In Q1, Tesla saw a record 61,000 vehicles produced at Giga Berlin. European registrations rebounded sharply, with Model Y seeing 117 percent increases in March 2026 compared to last year. Germany alone saw stark increases, with a quadrupling in registrations to 9,252 units.
This trend continued in other key European markets, including France, Denmark and Sweden. Tesla registrations were up over 46 percent in some of these markets, and Model Y continued its trend as a top BEV in the market.
Demand has been recovering strongly in 2026, giving Tesla a reason to expand production efforts at the factory. These increases signal management’s confidence in sustained or growing European pull for Berlin-built vehicles.
Tesla is being sued by the family of the woman who was killed in a Texas crash involving a Model 3. The driver, who is also being sued, claimed the vehicle was operating on Autopilot mode, but Tesla executives have come out challenging that claim, stating that the driver of the vehicle overrode the system.
The lawsuit was filed by 76-year-old Martha Avila’s daughter and her husband, who allege a “design defect” involving a Tesla and a failure to warn. The suit alleges negligence against Tesla and the driver, Michael Butler.
Butler “stated he was operating with an automated driving assistance system engaged at the time of the crash,” the Harris County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement. He showed no signs of intoxication and was cooperative, the Sheriff’s Office said, according to NBC News.
Just after reports of the crash and numerous headlines that immediately blamed Tesla’s Autopilot suite, both Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Head of AI Ashok Elluswamy challenged that. Musk said the crash made “no sense” given that Tesla Autopilot and Full Self-Driving do not travel at the speeds the door cameras captured the car traveling at, which Tesla says was 73 MPH.
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
Elluswamy also revealed that Tesla data showed Butler overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100%, and that the pedal was compressed fully even after the car had crashed. Tesla has not released this data to the public, likely because it is communicating with agencies like the NHTSA on an investigation.
The suit uses a Washington Post analysis of government data that “identified at least 17 fatal incidents linked to Tesla Autopilot.”
This is far from the first time an accident has been blamed on Autopilot. A fatal crash in Texas was blamed on Autopilot several years ago, but when Tesla released data to the NTSB, which was investigating the crash, Autopilot was not available where the crash occurred, and Autosteer was never enabled, meaning the car was manually controlled at the time of the accident.
“Application of the accelerator pedal was found to be as high as 98.8 percent,” the NTSB said in their findings. The highest recorded speed in the five seconds leading up to the impact was 67 miles per hour. The area where the crash occurred is residential, and Texas State laws… pic.twitter.com/XGD97NHVZ2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 18, 2026
More information on the accident will be released as Tesla works with agencies to find the cause of the crash. From personal experience, it is hard to imagine Tesla Autopilot or FSD operating in this manner. It drives sometimes too cautiously in residential areas in parking lots, at least in my experience. Speeding happens, but at this rate in this type of area, it is hard to believe.
We look forward to more details being released with time.
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has awarded the 2025-2026 Tesla Cybertruck crew cab pickup its highest honor: Top Safety Pick+. This marks the Cybertruck as the only full-size pickup to achieve this distinction in recent evaluations.
The award applies specifically to vehicles built after April 2025, following structural upgrades including front underbody reinforcements and footwell modifications.
These changes enabled strong performance in updated crash tests. The Cybertruck earned “Good” ratings in the small overlap front (driver and passenger sides), updated moderate overlap front, and updated side tests—core requirements for the Top Safety Pick+ designation.
It also secured acceptable or good headlights across trims and a “Good” rating for its standard front crash prevention system in pedestrian scenarios, along with acceptable or good performance in vehicle-to-vehicle testing.
The Cybertruck avoided every single pedestrian collision, including:
- Daytime child crossing
- Nightitime adult crossing
- Night parallel adult
In IIHS pedestrian front crash prevention tests, @Cybertruck avoided every single collision – daytime, nighttime & different angles
It was also the only pickup to earn Top Safety Pick+ (highest award) in 2026https://t.co/BNPqT9TbsW pic.twitter.com/M6nwDisBFK
— Tesla (@Tesla) June 24, 2026
In the large pickup category, competitors such as the Toyota Tundra received only a standard Top Safety Pick, while the Ford F-150 and Ram 1500 did not qualify for either award. This positions the Cybertruck as a standout in occupant protection and crash avoidance among its peers.
Credit: IIHS
Ironically, the same vehicle celebrated for superior U.S. safety performance remains banned from public roads in the United Kingdom and much of Europe. Regulators there cite the Cybertruck’s sharp external edges and highly rigid stainless-steel construction as failing pedestrian-protection standards. European and UK rules require rounded surfaces on protruding parts to minimize injury risk in collisions with vulnerable road users.
Critics also point to the truck’s substantial weight and unyielding body structure, which some argue could transfer more force to other vehicles or pedestrians rather than absorbing it.
Tesla’s engineering philosophy underpins the Cybertruck’s strong IIHS results. The vehicle features a distinctive stainless-steel exoskeleton made from ultra-hard 30X cold-rolled stainless steel. This provides exceptional structural rigidity and a robust safety cage that resists deformation in side impacts and rollovers.
Engineers designed integrated load paths to channel crash forces away from the occupant compartment while allowing controlled energy absorption in key zones. Post-April 2025 refinements to the front underbody further optimized performance in overlap crashes.
Complementing the passive structure is Tesla’s advanced active safety suite, including the standard Collision Avoidance Assist system with automatic emergency braking. This contributed directly to the vehicle’s strong front crash prevention scores. The skateboard platform and low center of gravity also enhance stability and handling, reducing the likelihood of certain crashes.
The IIHS recognition highlights how Tesla’s combination of high-strength materials, structural innovation, and software-driven safety systems can deliver top-tier protection in rigorous testing. While global regulatory differences on design and pedestrian interaction continue to limit the Cybertruck’s availability outside North America, its U.S. safety credentials set a new benchmark for full-size pickups.
Tesla plans production boost at Giga Berlin following rebound in Europe
Tesla and driver sued by family of woman killed in Texas crash: what we know
