Subj: Conversations with a Time Traveler
Date: 4/20/00 11:39:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time

Now isn't this interesting...

In that "Conversations with a Time Traveler" you posted a month or two ago,
she said that exploding atom-bombs caused a lot more damage than we know
(something about vortexes). She also said that time doesn't really exist
outside Earth.

Well, both concepts seem to be confirmed in a *fascinating* lecture given in
1961 by Wilbert Smith. He was some sort of government UFO-investigator
involved in something called PROJECT MAGNET. According to Steven Greer's
CSETI website: "Wilbert Smith is, of course, the author of a letter that was
inadvertently de-classified which described the UFO matter in the U.S. as
carrying a classification higher than the Hydrogen Bomb. He was also a friend
of Col. Corso."

Here is a relevant excerpt from that lecture. The full text is at:
http://www.cseti.org/position/addition/wilbert_smith.htm

------------------------------

(Wilbert referred to aliens as the "people from topside").

"There's one other little point that I would like to make in connection with
these regions of reduced binding. That is, that the people from topside told
us that we make them when we set off a nuclear explosion. We make two of
them. We make one of them in the vicinity of the nuclear explosion and one on
the opposite side of the planet.

Any of you who have ever seen pictures or facsimiles of a nuclear explosion
have probably noticed that there is a column which is approximately of
uniform diameter extending upwards from the region of the explosion and that
is capped by a big mushroom-shaped cloud.

That shape, that fact itself should have been sufficient warning to us that
we were producing a very serious gravitational disturbance.

I’ll show you what happens. (Draws on board.) That circle represents the
earth. Out from the earth is emanating, for the sake of simplicity, lets call
it a gravitational field. We have a nuclear explosion takes place at some
point. A nuclear explosion means that there is a sudden change of matter to
energy, in other words we have a (static)… which is large. Now it is not
difficult to tell that if you have such a disturbance occurring in a
gravitational field, there will be projected outwards a gravity wave which
will be projected in the direction of the gravity field and with the velocity
which is inversely proportional to strength of the gravitational field.

Therefore if the explosion itself, if the conversion of mass to energy lasts
over a period of time which would permit the expanding material to move out a
hundred feet this way and a hundred feet this way, we would have a region 200
feet in diameter in which mass was being converted to energy and which would
be a virtual sort of a gravity wave that would travel straight up, thereby
producing the column that we see supporting the mushroom cloud.

What we don’t see is that penetrating downwards through the centre of the
planet there is a similar gravity wave which comes to a focal point down here
and in this region, from approximately here on down, we have approximately
the same mass all the way around so that the gravitational field in here is
very low. So the velocity becomes very high and flares out this way, so that
it comes out on the far side of the earth as a diverging cone.

Now these things don’t go away. We literally punch a hole in the field
structure of the earth; a little round cylindrical hole on this side and big
conical-shaped hole on the other side. They stay there for a long time.
They’re vortices and it takes them quite a while to dissipate. We don’t know
how long, but we have gone back to places such as Issoudun three months later
and we have found that the vortex has gone. Now maybe it has moved away, we
believe that that is what happens because we actually caught one of them
moving, or maybe it dissipates, or maybe both.

But we did find one out over the North Atlantic that drifted—ah—was picked up
first by a friend of mine who is an RCAF pilot who had the instrument with
him, they located it on a reconnaissance flight just to the south and west of
Iceland. And then again on a flight out about a week later, it was about half
way between Iceland and Newfoundland and considerably weaker. At least that
is the impression they got from the instrument indication.

So that apparently they do move around and I presume they do fade out. We
haven’t incidentally located any in the last year or so. I presume it’s
because we have not been exploding any bombs lately. Now this is a bit of a
review of our activity in Ottawa—what we have been doing and why we have been
doing it.

Q: Why have nuclear tests been stopped?

Wilbert: I can only guess at why they have been curtailed. I saw a picture I
know was never released to the public, showing a very large nuclear explosion
at Bikini. This picture showed a large fireball which I think must have been
well over 100 miles in diameter and projecting out from it were what looked
like solar prominences, great tongues of activity. Now these tongues looked
to me from the scale of the picture, about 25-50 miles. They were quite
comparable in size to the big fireball. Now my guess is that these tongues
were in fact chain reactions taking place in the earth’s atmosphere. Now what
mechanism was involved I can only guess. I’m not a nuclear physicist, I only
know that this picture was considered by those knowledgeable to be very
significant and very worrisome. I think another reason, possibly, for the
curtailment of the tests has been rising public opinion. It would be highly
undesirable to go any further into the business of nuclear weapons than we
have gone, possibly we have gone too far already."




Elsewhere, Wilbert spoke of what the "people topside" had to say about time:

"For one thing they told us that the velocity of light was not a constant. As
a matter of fact they seemed to be rather pointed in their statements that
light doesn’t travel, it is. And we told them that from our point of view it
appeared to travel with a certain definite velocity of 186,000 miles per
second.

They said that’s the way it looks to you because you are looking at it from a
region having certain conditions, certain influences, but they said if you
were to go away from this region you would find that a different set of
circumstances prevailed.

Another thing they told us cast a great deal of doubt on our ideas of time.
They told us that time wasn’t at all what we thought it was, namely what
might be marked off with the ticking of a clock, that time was, in fact, a
field function, the result of there being a universe. That is, something
which was derived from the basic primordial concepts which brought this
universe into being, and that it differed as you went from one part of the
universe to the other.

Also it could be altered, sometimes by natural means, sometimes by
intelligently-controlled means in various parts of the universe. So that in
any given interval, which incidentally is what our clocks mark off, our
intervals, not chunks of time, in these intervals we can have all sorts of
lengths of time.

In other words if one of you checks your clock with me and finds that they
are synchronised and I climb into a flying saucer and take a little trip out
well clear of this earth and I watch my clock and, say, come back in three
hours time, and we again compare clocks, maybe your clock says I’ve been gone
an hour, my clock says I’ve been gone three hours. Both clocks are strictly
correct.

You’ve experienced an hour in the time that hand went around once; in that
same interval I experienced three hours—and they were three real hours, not
an illusion. The theory of relativity talks about this dilation.

But this leads to a paradox and I think that anyone who is at all
mathematically inclined and has taken the trouble to look at the relativistic
time paradox is probably disturbed by it."