BREAKING: New Scans Show Massive Structures Under the Pyramids | MEMBERS RELEASE

scan inside of the Great Pyramid that are undiscovered features. >> Do any of these structures that they're interpreting fly in the face of what conventional archaeology would think exists inside the pyramid? >> All of it. >> All of it. >> All of it. >> There is also electricity inside this >> fossilized lightning through these iron veins. What is creating the lack of signature here?

>> I understand. chemical and the sequence of these chemicals transforms one product into the next product into the next product. Industrial scale chemical manufacturing. If we do have tubular structures, pillars with coils wrapping around them that go a kilometer deep with a foundation underneath them, >> that's insane. That's huge. >> Correct. Yeah. And it's it's something that needs to be addressed because there's no physical way that

these could possibly have been built. >> Then I'm going with aliens, right? Like how do how do we explain that? For over 4,000 years, the pyramids of Egypt have stood as some of the most extraordinary structures ever built by human hands. The Great Pyramid of Kufu on the Giza Plateau, contains roughly 2.3 million stone blocks, some weighing as much as 70 tons, arranged with a precision that

still astonishes engineers today. The first and most obvious question everyone asks is how these insanely large, sophisticated, and astronomically aligned structures were built in ancient times before modern civil engineering. Archaeologists and historians have proposed several main theories. French architect Jean Pierre Houdan suggests that an internal ramp spiraling within the pyramid structure itself carried the blocks. This is an idea that

gained renewed interest after the scan pyramids project detected unexplained voids inside the great pyramid. Other proposals involve lever systems, counterweights, and complex lifting techniques hinted at by ancient historians like Herododus. And then of course you have the Atlantean acoustic levitation crowd. Always a good time and I can't hate on them. But the point is all of these theories have serious issues with them and are incredibly speculative. And there's another even more simple question we take for granted

and one that's probably even more interesting when it comes to the pyramids. Why were they built in the first place? The most widely accepted explanation is the royal tomb theory. Most Egyptologists believe the Great Pyramid was built for the Pharaoh Kufu around 2500 BC as part of a massiveerary complex designed to help the king ascend to the afterlife. And the pyramid of Kafra was of course built for the tomb of Pharaoh Kafra, Kufu's son. But no confirmed mummies or tombs of Kufu or

civilizations needed. And my hypothesis for the function of the great pyramid is that the hydrogen sulfide gas coming from this subterranean karst cave and tunnel system is the initial reactant in the chemical manufacturing sequence within the great pyramid. >> According to Drum, different chambers inside the pyramid could have served as reaction vessels where chemicals like zinc and acid interacted generating hydrogen through controlled reactions.

going beneath the Giza plateau, possibly including large vertical shafts and chamberlike formations extending hundreds of meters below the pyramids themselves. We are counting at the moment 4 + 4 cubes that are descending underneath and they are connecting the top so the base of the pyramid to something that is located at the bottom. So tonight on American Alchemy, we are hosting a historic roundt discussion

Without further ado, probably the two best guests I could think of to explore the birthplace of alchemy itself, ancient Egypt. Please welcome this week's American Alchemists, Jeffrey Drum and Filippo Beyond. >> Ignition sequence start. >> Now, is this possible? Nothing too unusual about that. Their existence cannot longer be denied.

says looks like these eight four plus four tubular structures with coils wrapping around them underneath uh the pyramid not only actually underneath uh the pyramids under underneath some other structures as well. So it's kind of a bombshell finding obviously it uh is also a really uh amazing meme that like took off on the internet >> and um Jeffrey uh more recently I've become a huge fan of just because he's so rigorous and I I don't know too many

people who have a stepbystep thesis as to what the pyramids actually their function is. you know, I it really it's you're kind of in a league of your own. Um, and so, uh, you know, >> I appreciate that. That's that's a huge, uh, vote of confidence. >> No, I mean it. I mean, it's you and Christopher D. And so, >> I'm excited to have you here because I think you can ask Fippo questions that I cannot. I think I probably accept a lot of things at face value. And so, I'm really excited to host this discussion. >> And, uh, thank you both for being here.

colleagues m colleagues of mine but uh someone I am uh I know that is replicating the experiment so I am very happy about this uh essentially uh I work I worked a lot of years maybe I I maybe 30 years on on radar and 20 years on radars um installed on satellites. synthetic aperture radar is an an

equipment that uh synthetizes synthetic so synthetizes a so-called integration time along the orbit in order to have aimoth resolution uh high very high aim resolution. So it is very important for civilian application and other applications. Uh today is a state-of-the-art because uh uh it requ

launch launch the satellites in the in the sky in the space. I'm sorry. and uh they they sell data. So it is it is very simple to find the synthetic virtual radar data and what we do is uh we re uh reprocess this data in order to um uh and this is the core of our method in order to retrive the um the superficial vibration of the earth. this superficial v vibration we have to

consider it we have to consider this vibration like uh the the waves that we can observe on on the border of the swimming pool. So those kind of waves contains all the information that uh it is uh that that it is uh given by the underground the underneath the underground. So we do uh like that we estimate the vibration and then we we we do uh we make we perform algorithms that

means the radio frequency in the 10 GHz in the in the 10 GHz central frequency so light to carry the information of the >> so basically you have synthetic aperture radar which is a triedand- trueue method nobody's arguing with you know synthetic aperture radar being effective you have companies like Ice Ice um you know Umbra Capella Space that work off this method. They use it for defense and commercial purposes. It's basically a higher

who you was asking I think one step level deeper questions than I could ask about this. And so I kind of want to you know just maybe defer defer to you here. Sure. As far as uh you know what what you think about these claims because on the face of them you know if we do have tubular structures pillars with coils wrapping around them that go a kilometer deep with a foundation underneath them. >> That's insane. That's huge. >> Correct. Yeah. And it's it's something that needs to be addressed. So to

chemistry with the function of the Egyptian pyramids being for industrial scale chemical manufacturing where each pyramid is producing a specific chemical and the sequence of these chemicals transforms one product into the next product into the next product. So from my perspective in interpreting and reverse engineering the function of the Egyptian pyramids, we have a known chamber configuration which inherently any hypothesis on the function of the

Egyptian pyramids has to specifically assess all of these specific components in the known configuration. So if there are new components for example a lot of people don't know that Filippo and the S team actually published their first paper back in 2020 when they scanned the great pyramid and this paper did not get a lot of attention at the time and I think a lot of people haven't gone back to look at your original research and I'll also do

my best to kind of summarize in layman's terms how the beyond protocol works in relation ation to the existing Satellite radar technology because this is a conjunction of existing satellite technology with new software that's known as the Beyond protocol that again is interpreting micro vibrations which you term as phonons as indicative of internal chambers within the structure and we'll walk through this process and

I think the impetus for this as you can see here on the screen anybody who's watching um the organizers of the SAR team's first international conference was in Malta back in June of and the organizers of the conference were familiar with my work. Armando and Filippo were familiar with my work and my wife and I, as you can see there, we had a an absolutely spectacular time in Malta. It is gorgeous there. Such a fun conference. We got to meet everybody and

Filippo and I had a really engaging sort of question and answer process going on during this conference where that was really why I was invited by the organizers of the conference to come and ask questions based on my knowledge of the existing configuration and Filippo you're the man when it comes to S technology and you are the creator of this Beyond protocol. So whether you like it or not, you're the only person that has the qualifications to answer

these questions. >> Jeffrey, ask me the question. >> Yes, an answer. We will right >> I want to say one day and then and then I'll defer to you Jeffrey um because >> because I do think it's important because a lot of people you know the information space in podcast world is not always the best and I think a lot of people might uh Google or chat GBT synthetic aperture radar and get a quick a quick debunk like oh you can't penetrate the earth with synthetic

information the entropy. >> Which is the basic of basics of information. I suggest everyone to read the mother paper of information which is the paper of Shannon and uh >> Claude Shannon >> he's the best a and uh also to to back you up there are other modalities like there's something called cold atom sensing and you know gravitometry >> which non-invasive above the surface and you are measuring subsurface stuff you

aren't measure measuring it with perfect accuracy so that's what's very important and the reason I'm so excited to have you here is because I think a lot of the first order debunks like the one I just mentioned suck and are easy their ignorance as you said I think and I don't even want to call it a debunk because it's a friendly conversation but you have thought of other kind of interesting ways to poke at uh you know >> it's just objective questions out of fascination and interest for the work and I think that's an important thing in

science is when people with different come together. >> It helps us get closer to the truth >> because diversity builds new things. >> Of course, and I will agree there are absolutely things below the Giza Plateau that we do not understand that are the impetus for the construction of the pyramids on the Giza plateau. They chose the Giza plateau for a very specific reason. There are very important

below the Giza plateau that are directly related to the function of the Egyptian pyramids. So, we'll kind of get to that at the end, but let's let's dive into this um so that everybody can just kind of hear. I'm gonna read briefly just quoting the abstract of your first paper >> just just to say I remember in the last interview that uh I made with uh Jesse when he came in Kchano where I live I said I remember that I said one thing in in the Giza uh business

let's say business there is a crucial material that is common in in every everything so it's water >> water Uh I think that water is very >> I agree. >> Yes. In this business. >> And for example um we've actually taken samples of the water in the Osiris shaft and I had that tested in conjunction with an archaeological project that I'm a member of called the Osiron 7

Archaeological Mission in conjunction with Jim Westerman to investigate the source of the water within the Osiron. So they're doing testing of the water in the Osiron and hydraological evaluation of the Osiron to try to determine a why and where the water in the reservoir comes from. And there's also intrusive water in one of the central recesses that we're also trying to determine the source of this water. I'm an official member of that archaeological project and I brought our water samples from the

Osiris shaft to have tested in conjunction with the samples from them. And the Osiris shaft is brackish water. It's not fresh water and it's not seawater. It's brackish water. So brackish water is slightly salty water. Not fresh water, not seawater. >> In Italian, it's called the Salastra. >> Yeah. Yeah. So partially salt water. So there's a very independent aquifer located directly below the Osiris shaft

that is not connected to the Nile River. So for example, the Nile is way way back from the Giza plateau and because of the high Azwan Dam, there's no more flooding of the Nile River. So the water level inside of the Osiris shaft has not fluctuated since the time of its So there's an independent aquifer located directly below the Osiris shaft and that system was designed to tap into

that aquifer at a very specific level at the bottom of the chamber which is why the chamber is still filled with water at the bottom of the Osiris shaft today. So there's pockets of independent aquifers all over the Giza plateau and there's also subterranean flowing water >> ah so there there is also sub >> moving water. Yeah. Yeah. So there's actually pumps >> that have been installed near the valley So the Kafra Valley Temple near the

Sphinx enclosure. Um, the Egyptian government has installed pumps to try and pump this water out from below the Giza Plateau. >> So, there's pumping stations at Giza where they've been pumping out this water from below the Giza Plateau, >> which is there's a reason they're doing that to try to empty the water from below the system. >> It's it's from a sense of archaeological preservation, of course, which is the main justification for everything done in Egypt. We're trying to preserve the

monuments. So, we want to remove all the >> So, they are they they they install it pumps to remove water. >> Because they already know that that there are structures Not necessarily that they know that they're structures, but it's more for the preservation of the pyramids on top >> to prevent more erosion from below >> because there is and I I'll get to this at the end of the conversation. They know for sure that there are caves and

tunnels below Giza. >> There are a lot of caves. >> A lot of caves and t which are natural geological features >> and then we will speak about this. >> Yeah, of course. Yeah. And we we agree on that, right? Um it's >> so we all agree on that. We all agree that the pyramids were likely not conventional tombs. Right. Right. So we're all like same page there and then it see it sounds like we're on the same page that water is this important thing whether it's chemical power plant or you know energy power plant but yeah what do you say >> and they we are sure also that they were

not built by the Egyptian. >> That would be my bias. What do you >> What do you think? So by built by the >> I think they were built by the civilization that lived in Egypt >> during a period known as the Saharan humid period, which is from 8,500 BC to around 5,300 BC, >> which well predates what Zahigaw like the Ministry of Culture would say. And and during that time period, the upper eastern Sahara was being transformed

from a desert into a vast area of farmland by sweeping monsoon rains. So there was tons of rain, there was tons of water, there were tons of thunderstorms, which is also directly connected to my hypothesis on the function of the pyramid structures, directly connected to thunderstorms and >> which we'll get to the power source of the pyramids and why these subterranean structures might be important for capturing and recirculating that

electrical current. And you have you have what seems to be water damage and erosion on the nose of the sphinx that people like John Anthony West talk >> Yeah. The back of the Sphinx enclosure. >> Yeah. The water the water erosion at the back of the sphinx enclosure. Yeah. That's that's the work of Robert Shock that looks at those vertical fissures on the back of the Sphinx enclosure which is indicative that the structure was built during a time period where there was significantly more rainfall. Right. So I think it was built by the Egyptians

by virtue of it being the people that were in Egypt at the time which predates. So I do think it was so I'm not in the alien camp where I think that these are extraterrestrial. I think they were built by human beings >> at the end of the last ice age >> in order to reestablish and rebuild humanity after the largest cataclysm that basically destroyed most of the planet and put human beings at risk for extinction. So they're infrastructure >> You mentioned Robert Shock, you know, he

and Graeme Hancock would say that the Sphinx itself is actually an homage to, you know, the former procession. Sure. and that you know the the the constellation Leo which was you know facing true north was what it was you know pointing towards and and that the feronic you know headdress is actually sort of retrofitted yes onto it. Would you agree with that or >> so I think the Sphinx itself is a dynastic monument that was built on an existing bedrock outcrop within the Sphinx enclosure. >> Okay. So similar to

>> correct. Yeah. Okay. So >> I don't I don't think the Sphinx monument as a statue is contemporary to the pyramids themselves. >> Two two separate time periods. >> Got it. Yeah. No. No. So So it sounds like we're all on the same page that the conventional archaeological explanation for what's going on is kind of primmaaccia wrong and that the goalposts are clearly moving on that. Let's say that we are sure that when I open the uh

the Great Pyramid of Giza. So this was their first public scan of the Great Pyramid before they scanned the Kafra pyramid, the the central pyramid. And I'm going to quote briefly from the abstract here and then I'll do my best to, you know, from a layman's provide an explanation for exactly what's happening here for for people who don't understand the technical stuff. So one problem with synthetic aperture radar is that given the limited penetrating effects of the electromagnetic waves inside

>> it one of the problem. >> Yes. Yeah. >> So who says that I'm sorry about >> it's okay go ahead. Yeah please. >> Who says oh who says that no it's impossible because rather can't this is the main issue. >> Correct. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So I'm just I'm just >> they're going to dealing main issues >> and and and in the paper this is in the abstract they're they're proposing one of the main problems >> and then the resolution to the problem is the implementation of your new software system.

>> So again let me just so so people can understand what's going on. So one problem with S radar is that given the limited penetrating effects of electromatic magnet waves inside of solids, the capability to in image inside distributed targets is excluded. So under these circumstances, imaging activity is only given on the surface of distributed targets. >> Absolutely. This paper describes an imaging approach based on the investigation of micromovements on the

surface of the kum kufu pyramid the great pyramid usually generated by background seismic waves. So essentially what the technology and the beyond protocol is again Filipo please correct me if I'm wrong and then agree if I have this interpretation correct. So we have existing synthetic aperture radar satellite technology >> and what you've done is developed a new >> that works in conjunction with these

existing satellites to detect micro >> On the surface of the structure which you have termed as phonons. >> Yes. And those phonons and the differences between the structure and the cavities are indications of chambers and hidden structures inside of the >> Everything is encoded on these micro movements because correct >> if you have a chamber the micro movements are like that. If you don't

have the chamber the micro movement movements are different. >> Present on the surface. >> Right. Yeah. Yeah. So again, this is the the whole revolutionary and novel approach of the Beyond Protocol is it's utilizing these surface micro vibrations to tell us what's going on on the inside of the structure. So again to clarify, there's been some discussion in the community that, you know, S technology is old and it's vetted. It is 100% s technology has been around for a long

time but what Felippo has done is developed a new approach to use these exist existing satellites >> existing data >> correct yeah to do something a little different right so we're now going to be using these micro vibrations which again they've called phonons >> is the term utilized so again if you're reading the paper if you're hearing a technical discussion when you talk about phonons you're talking about these micro vibrations that are being detected by the radar. >> I please ask you to go uh a bit up and

at the previous uh um slide please. >> On the abstract on the abstract. >> So I have some Oh, this one here. Yeah. >> And there there is is written very clear that kum kufu becomes transparent like a crystal when observed in the micro movement domain. >> Is it written there? >> Yeah. Yeah. Uh based on this novelity, we have completely reconstructed internal object observing and measuring

structure that have never been discovered before. >> The experimental result uh are estimated estimated by processing series of SAR images. So this is the SAR the SAR give you an image existing image and then we process those image by in that case it was the 2020 uh second generation Italian cosmos satellite system a week ago we uh we put in orbit a third

satellite of cosmos ket second generation so now Italy has three satellites of cosmos ket second >> it's very good >> and I'll show all of the images from this paper so people can see what you've discovered inside of the Great Pyramid and all of those diagrams. >> so this is from the Malta conference which fast forward a couple years later we're in Malta and this just gives some additional information for the people watching so they can understand when we say phonons they'll understand that those are the micro movements. >> Phons are micro movements. Correct. When

I when we when we deal with light >> light is composed by photons. >> Correct. Yeah. The vibrations of this >> At any frequency is a vibration of the matter. And the vibration of the matter is composed by phonons. >> Yeah. So in this slide here and this is where I have some questions about the process of the radar scan itself. So you >> I'm here I'm here to explain everything about this >> Yeah, of course. So the satellite is

going around the earth. >> Yes. And the the flat earth people are going to go nuts when I when I do this. >> No, there is the Pacman theory. >> So again, this >> the satellite goes >> it goes around like this. outside the Pacman theory and >> it comes back around. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Magically, right? >> So again, the satellite is going around the Earth, right? >> And you're making passes over the target object. So the satellites going around like this and you're imaging the Great

Pyramid for example. >> What is the square footage? >> The square footage >> or the square meters the the footprint on the ground. Okay. This is the correct >> Yeah. What is the size of the area? >> Of the target scan for the radar? >> 5 km times 5 km. >> Okay. So, so is this is that a standard >> or can you adjust the size? >> It depends on the so-called geometry.

>> There is a law that uh uh that is uh stand that belongs on radar. >> The more the resolution, the less the >> The more resolution, less footprint. Right. Yeah. Because the smaller the >> the more accurate dense information inside the small. It's like a light. When you focus the light footprint on this table. >> So if you focus the light, you have more information inside the footprint. Okay.

the same geometry. It means same incidence angle same incidence angle because the earth is moving >> while the satellite is >> sure yeah >> is is turning around the earth >> so you have to wait the so-called orbital uh procession orbital uh I don't remember the the name but orbital then after I will I will remember it >> that in cosmos kimed is 16 days

>> mhm Mhm. >> You you have to wait 16 days in order to observe the same target in the same >> Yeah, that that was going to be my next >> And there you can collect 15 seconds. 15 seconds. See? 15 seconds. 15 seconds. 3 months of observation persistently on the target. Yes. And you collect and you can collect n times 15 seconds of observation. Right. But one image is a sufficient statistic in order to retract

>> Okay. So that was actually my second question was are these composits? >> Of multiple passes >> and then all of them are put together >> for one image. >> Why you are speaking about multiple passages? We said that one image 15 seconds of integration. >> Yep. in order to perform the synthesis uh the synthesis of image is a sufficient statistic >> so with one 15 seconds

>> you have an image >> and that's yeah so just to clarify again I'm just I'm just curious about how the process works >> so the the data shown in the first paper >> and in the scans of the kufu pyramid >> and the pillars below >> yes That's collected from a single scan 15 seconds >> with a single synthetic a virtual rather >> 15 seconds of integration. >> Yeah. So we we'll talk about the scans

of the Osiris shaft as well. >> Also that >> and that's why you remember I went to the Giza plateau to investigate the area around the Osiris shaft. >> And this is when I was asking you about the footprint. >> The area of the scan. >> Yeah. So when you scanned the Osiris shaft, was the footprint of the area in terms of meters by meters, length by width, was that also 5 kilometers or did you make the scan area smaller?

>> We use it only one uh available uh product of synthetic vual data given by cosmos which is called spotlight 2 the civilian application of cosmos. >> Okay. And that ensures 5 kil 5 kilometers times 5 kilometers in that >> And the resolution the space resolution is submetric um nearly 1 m plus 1 m. 1 m* 1 m. >> Okay. And I'll I'll show the scan data

from the Osiris shaft. >> And the reason I'm asking about the >> is because it's a two-dimensional image. >> Tommographic line times depth. >> Correct. Okay. >> So, you're taking a 5x5 km scan >> and compressing it. >> no. You choose your the pixel that you want to invert. >> You you can choose any pixel the image maybe you ch This is the image. This is the image. Okay. You choose this pixel

and this other pixel. You you you draw a line and you extract the vertical contain. Okay. you you can go anywhere on the on the image. >> And the reason I I'll get to it when we look at the scan data. >> Because on the left side of the Osiris shaft, it's picking up something else >> I tell you this >> and that's why I was interested. Yeah. Because we're on the same Yeah. Of course. Yeah. >> Thank you for this question.

>> Of course. >> Before we get into that, can can I just say one thing? We're we're scared. the the Osiris shaft is used often as evidence by your team for at least some validation. It's not blind validation >> because we know perfectly the the >> because you know the structure and you use this same method to derive that >> Indeed, I like to show the the Grand Saso the Grand Saso laboratory because uh it's very nice in my personal >> Well, there you go. Also,

>> I have that too. So, we can show everybody the proof of concept. laborator you you see also the the interferometer that is that is on the end of the structure you see it >> and I thought I thought those proof of concepts so again it's it's proof of >> to establish the precedent and the viability of the technology >> to scan existing structures where we have a known configuration and this technology was very good at accurately

detecting the known structures within these modern facilities that were >> but also the Osiris shaft too. >> We'll talk about that. I have a question. I just have some questions >> and I I imagine the question that you want to ask me that we will arrive and but I anticipate you that any measurement technical measurement is affected by errors. Right. Right. Of course. Yeah. So if you have something and aberation >> because you are watching in a crystal that it's made of um stones no stones

you can you can have aberration on the >> So background background noise >> background noise and also aberation >> interference opberation. Yeah aberration is due by the not uh uh constant density of the matter. Sure. Uh while you are dealing with um uh vibrations, vibrations penetrates inside matter. But the matter uh vibrations are um um traits matter

>> Because the more dense the material the less vibrational signal >> the velocity changes. Correct. you have in interference. >> Sure. Yeah. Yeah. Um >> and re real quick just for the audience because I want them to kind of visualize and have context for this. Yeah. >> Why don't you answer what is the Osiris >> So the Osiris shaft is a threelevel structure located on the eastern causeway leading from the central pyramid down to the valley temple and

the Sphinx. And it's 33 meter underground triplechamber system. Not triple chamber, three different levels. You have a shaft that goes down to the primary level. You have another shaft that goes down to the secondary level where there's six housings that have some containers of different material. One's dite, one's black basaltt. And then you go down to the third level where there is four pillars. This is the area that's tapped into that subterranean aquifer. It's literally

calibrated to just tap the surface of the water in that underground aquifer. And there's another chamber uh container down in the third level. >> And and what is the Grand Saso >> Yes, the Grand Saso Laboratory is uh located in 1 1.4 kilometers below the earth starting from the aperture of the Grand Saso, the the top of the of the mountain. And it it is very huge very very big and uh uh it is

always in alive. It means that there are ventilators there are facilities electrical components inside. So it is in alive. >> What are they is this like um >> it's a physics lab. >> So it's like it's like it's like one of the national labs in the US like Los Alamos Lawrence >> what the what is the principal core of the grandaso? It is called the jerda experiment. because they are um they didn't uh find it uh still find it. The

so-called mayorana particle >> the mayorana particle is very uh important because it demonstrates that there are particles that are antiparticles of their of their self. Okay. And so in the grand sasso, the grand sasso was made purposely to demonstrate the mayorana, the existence of the mayonna particle, >> the existence of antiparticles >> that is antiparticle of him. So particle and

antiparticle are the same thing and so that's opens a lot of things. >> So like cuz now in particle theory now you have electrons and posetrons >> but what what exactly are you saying? We are dealing with sub um neutrinos. >> Oh well like like quirs and >> yes nutrinos. >> Oh you're literally nutrinos. Okay. So >> sub sub particle sub >> subatomic yeah subatomic particles and nutrinos for people that don't know uh you know are very hard to detect.

They're very elusive. So and they seem to penetrate through all >> and so yes they they built the gradas laboratory in order to have a stable >> very silent environment because there is all the mountain that makes as a filter. >> It's an insulator for the detecting equipment. They built it inside of a >> Yes. And there there are there is a specific detector that is that has been built to in order to to to recognize

this my part. >> Very cool. Okay. >> Yeah. Yeah. And and I'll show that in just a second so people can see the scan of the of the lab. Sweet. >> Um so again, I'm just going to introduce >> we talked a little bit about the abstract, the development of the technology and how it was implemented in this first scan. >> Yeah. So what we're looking at here is one of the first >> Yes, this was the first one. >> Yeah. The the raw data imag

questions looking at it. >> Yeah. Because now you're you're 5 years six years removed from the first paper. And from what I understand, the satellites that you're using now are superior to the ones that you were using during this initial scan. And now you're >> is superior also. >> Yeah. And and now you're using multiple satellites where this one was only collected with a single satellite. Is that correct? >> Yes. So what are we looking at here? >> Yeah. So so basically here on the left,

>> Okay. So row data is the data that you have before the so-called fast transform. I tell you if you have a um a camera a camera like that camera and you uh make a picture with that camera >> you see the image >> Okay. If you um disassemble the camera and you and you separate the optics by the body of the camera, you can make a

photo also with using only the body of the camera. The result is that you you see a picture but you don't see the picture focused because the focusing procedure is >> so like developing developing the image. So a comparison to photography is like old cameras where you have to develop the photo. The photo is there but it requires a process to focus the image >> and in that case the process is made naturally by the lens because the lens

performs fully a transform >> okay what you are seeing. So is this image on the right is this not focused? >> It is focused. Okay. So it's the process. Yeah. But the focus and when you use the Beyond method with your software, are you taking are you using an inversion of the focused data? The raw you >> Yeah. So this is the final product >> of what you actually want to look for. >> No, that's correct. No final noisy

equipment that makes photo you have to focus this photo >> and you have to focus it before you use your Beyond method or is it after? >> So the Beyond method itself is what receives these micro vibrations. Got it. So then that that raw data that receives those micro vibrations is processed to create this focused image. So there's nothing particularly unique or proprietary about turning the focused

SAR data into an image. Is that correct? >> Yes, it's very basic. His proprietary process is just the the retrieval of the micro movements that allow this imaging to be possible. >> Okay. Right. Just to to remark the fact the beyond the protocol is composed by two steps. The first step step is called synthesis and the second step is called >> In the synthesis we retrive the >> on the pixel composing the the

theographic line that we want to invert. The second process is called analysis. The inversion which is an fast fully ado the lens of the camera >> because you see nothing. >> So again this is a good preparation for everything that you're going to face coming up because now the work is going to get even more popular >> and you're going to have more people asking questions like this that are trying to better understand. >> So moving forward so people can understand what they're looking at with the next set of focused images. Here on

the right we have the scale. >> So this is the concentration or intensity of the vibrations >> one normalizer. >> Correct. Yeah. So you see everything in blue is the normal body of the structure or the background air etc. Right. So as it goes up the scale we have more intense vibrations that are being registered by this satellite radar. Just so everybody can understand the

>> Yeah. Correct. Yeah. It just shows the intensity of the vibrations that are detected. So looking back on it, >> are you are you still confident and proud of this data? >> Or would you rather go back and try to clean it up more? >> Yes, we we can we can manage to clean it up more. Absolutely. Yes. But these results gives you a lot of information and but we we didn't use only one result. We have we had a plethora of results in order to retrive the 3D that

uh you will show. >> Yes. I have everything. Yeah. Yeah. >> Uh I have to say something about my technique that we have to when when you extract a vertical cine it is normal >> so you're saying vertical curtain >> curtain. Yes. >> Right. So like the sheet or the layer or the slice the vertical curtain. >> Yeah. Okay. Yeah. So just just in case people didn't understand vertical curtain means the slice that's being extracted from this. >> This is important that the vertical cain is not perfect.

>> Maybe if a very bright target is located you can see it. You have to move a lot the vertical cain in order to don't see it again because it's like a cone of sensitivity because every antenna has a cone of sensitivity. Yes. >> so if you are perfectly in the line of sight, okay, you will see things that are mainly uh located on the line of >> Yes. But if you have bright targets that

>> there. We have a focus at three for the for who is reading. No. >> To give the the readers a help to interpret it. >> Correct. Yeah. So, so on the far right, you can see the edge of the pyramid there with all of that yellow and red, that is the surface >> external casing of the great pyramid with all of that red and yellow very intense vibrations because it's closer to the surface. >> I like it a lot when you see it. Uh it's

it's very my my best is very it's very is very nice this result. Okay. Yeah. And we can. >> And then moving on the inside, we have one, two, and three. >> One being the area around the king's >> Two being the queen's chamber and three is the subterranean chamber. >> And here I will say that the detection of the queen's chamber >> at two. And you can see here the overlay of the queen's chamber in the center

you convert one to the other? Like what? >> So let me is this is this a failure to detect or is this a positive detection of the queen? >> So let me let me clarify. So all of these images are screenshots directly from the paper. And here on the left is a standard diagram of the Great Pyramid. This is not one of their models, which I'll show their models here in just a second, okay? Where they actually interpreted the focused scan data into new 3D models. Okay. >> So, this is a known standard diagram on

the left. >> Overlaid with the focus data. Yeah. >> And I would agree with that statement that one and three, you can see the >> Yeah. aren't super encouraging. Yeah. >> In terms of the detection in this particular slice. >> So, for example, at one, >> I don't see a clear signature there for the king's chamber. >> And down at three, if you look at the overlay of the diagram on top of it, >> it's not picking up the subterranean chamber either. >> On the far left, you can't see a glow.

measurements in order to have the >> But I guess my again super dumb question and I think I'm probably jumping ahead with it is if we fail to detect certain chambers in the pyramid, why are we high confidence in structures going a kilometer deep underneath the pyramid? >> Yes. Because in the caf research that we made a few years later than than this we uh changed the approach. So so we used very um

uh different geometries on the satellite data. So with very low uh incidence angle that means that the the layover of the of the RA images were very high. But that kind of acquisition when we use uh low incidence angle the power of the of the photons are very high is very high because you see things like that. So you have a direct interaction with the

>> That kind of um increasing of power allowed us to see deeper. And uh in that kind of configuration we were able to that to uh measure the structure that were underneath. >> Did you ever redo the great pyramid and accurately detect these chambers with the lower angle of in incidence? >> Yes, that the it was a medium angle of

>> So when you say the angle of incident, let me let me try to interpret that for the lay person. So when the satellite starts scanning >> Right. This 15 seconds of scanning time, the process starts lower as opposed to scanning up here. >> So you're scanning from lower on the >> We have >> as opposed to trying to scan from the >> I give you the answer about this. So we have to um do a bit lesson now of how data are

>> Let's say that this is the target. >> Yeah. that I want to this is 5 km times 5 km >> It's a huge area. It's a scan. >> it's very generous. I want a picture here. There we go. Okay. >> This is the satellite. >> The satellite flies on the on the on an orbit. >> Okay. A corvette orbit. So if I want a an image here in the

other uh field we say I don't want it squinted. So it means that the sense we we trace here a vertical line. We start the sensing here minus 7 plus 7 seconds 15 seconds right 7.5 like that. So here we begin acting our sensing and here we release the sensing.

We have the image but SAR is a side sensor. So we have to tilt. This is the zero Doppler back. We have to tilt on the incidence angle because it's a side looking >> and we can we can scan let's say never natural because it doesn't work. >> So from here like that to here. H from

here to here like that. So we chooed a very low incidence angle which is the angle belonging the nadier of our image and the line of sight this angle. Yeah, >> this is the incidence angle. >> Low incidence angle, high lay layover, high incidence angle, low layover

>> And that now I tell you what is the layover like that to like that. For the caf research project, we use it low incidence angle. Why? Because the photons that are transmitted here on the earth has high power. Because the probability that the photons that arise here are retransmitted into the deep space is low. So you have the scattering

um energy is higher than this that is lower. Mhm. Okay. Because we wanted to go inside because we wanted to see targets very bright because here the Doppler effect is more we are more sensitive in the Doppler effect with low incidence angle with respect to the higher incidence angle. >> Yeah. And all of the validation you've done has been at lower incidence angle.

>> Okay. And so >> CC Yes. lower lower insurance angle is is better. >> In this case, >> we wanted to see >> we were focused on the pyramid on the pyramid at the beginning in 2020 and if we if we were using low incidence angle u um data the pyramid are layover. It means that imagine the pyramid you see the pyramid the pyramid is is

on the layover. It means that you see the pyramid like that. >> The pyramid is smashed like that. And so it is difficult to >> to see details inside the pyramid. But we were interested in the in in the recent um um research that we did that we did on all the Giza plateau to see okay the pyramid I don't care about a lot about the I want to see what there is below the pyramid I don't so I don't know why I'm understanding this if you if I if I am explaining better this so

we use it principally we use it lower in angle but not everywhere so we use uh diff incident. >> Got it. And then you triangulated the truth from the different incident and and are you highly confident that if you used the same methodology on the great pyramid again with the different incident angles and triangulating them? >> We did. We did it. But but it was not uh

um to to retrive things that we did on 2020 but it was focused to see what it was deep below the the but I don't know if you know it's super clear. Did you ever try to >> redo just the pyramid itself to make sure that the accuracy on the chambers was correct? >> No. But we can >> but you can do it. Okay. So, so I'll also you haven't seen any of this yet. >> The first paper data. >> There's there's way more. Oh, yeah. >> Yeah. And they they did

>> there are a lot of results. >> Oh, yeah. Of course. And I'm going to show all that so everyone can see it. I think it's important for everyone to see >> because they did different scans that show it sometimes. >> So, we'll get to that now. We can go ahead and go ahead. So for example, this next one is this image from this same scan. It's just a a focused image. >> Yes. Yes. Okay. Something uh >> so so this one I I think we ch >> Yeah. Down below. Right. So I think we

all agree that the imaging of the king's chamber here is not great, but we do have a very promising image of the queen's chamber. Yeah. I would say that this is actually and you can even see so look at C down there on the bottom right >> you can actually see the horizontal shaft coming out of the queen's chamber is detected I would say fairly accurately so I think this is again I I kind of like to look at the positives and the negatives right objectively

and days because it is time consuming consuming the processing. You've been uh in Corsiano. I show you I showed you the computer, big computers, but you need um the best thing to do now is to um increase the the the speed. So decrease the time that I have to wait in order to obtain a tomography. Okay. And so to make it also let's say

similar real time what does it mean that this the thing that I am that I'm think this this is the procedure that I'm thinking that we will do it in the future uh I think that the future of this technique is this you have an image you have a a tomographic line but this tomographic line you can move it Mhm. >> in real time and on a monitor you will >> to see Yeah. like a CT scan

>> like where you move through the sections and see all the different layers of the things because I remember when when we we we did but also on the CF project you have at uh you you you launch a process you have to wait 15 days and I forgot what what what we are watching. It is a bit no a bit not not so not so useful for it is for research okay we did the paper we did the paper but if we want to do several scans we have to you have to

wait a lot to have the results so in my personal opinion now the thing that we are doing is this we have to reconer the software we have to use a rise of GPU a rise of GPU >> maybe we and also uh multiply the processing power also for I don't know I can say 10,000 times it means that 15 days will become 30

seconds is good passing from 15 days into 30 seconds but to do this I need investments we need uh I can't do it but in my uh in my B rupee opinion on the future of this because here the problem that that and thank you for giving me rising these problems. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> That we are having now is related to the processing time because this is only one

tomographic line. If you move uh in real time on a plethora of adashent uh tomographic lines you can see everything Mhm. And you do it real time like like when you go to the to the doctor. Yeah. >> You make a scan of your of your uh >> I don't know whether it's CT scan or MRI but where they can literally move through the different I think it's a CT scan. Yeah. Where you can literally move through the sections in real time but it's also like you said it requires

super high processing power >> and this is just the initial to do it >> of course. Yeah. >> This is 1.0. You can you can move also. >> Right. That's what I was going to say. It's not my it's not for me on on my on my I don't know. >> I think the the burning question people have now is >> what gives if if this is just one tomographic scan you have to wait 16 days. Is that the same method outside of the angle of incidence that you used for detecting the substructures below the >> same method? It's the same method.

Absolutely. Yes. And has been improved in terms of uh details of the method >> mainly angle of incidence or anything >> Uh we have used different incident incident angle scanning the the bill of the earth but it's the same. >> Okay. And all the the validation that you've done at Grand Sasso Osiris >> was that with the multiple angles of incidence and the triangulating it was yes because they got sasso. Yeah,

>> it is very high. It is nearly 3,000 m. 200 2,990 m 93 I think. >> And there the layover effect is uh massive present on the S image. So I had to to to to let's say order um different images in order to choose the best one

in my for me the best one maybe other image could be also better uh in order to retrive the the laboratory to detract the the laboratory. >> So here's another different scan >> of of the king's chamber. >> Yeah. So, so when they say Zed chamber, they're referring to what's conventionally called the King's >> And this scan image looks qualitatively different than what we see here. >> It's not the same tomography, is it? >> Correct. Yeah. A different tomographic

line. So, you've gone in and taken a different vertical slice >> as I told you. >> If you have a speed, you can do it real time. So you will in real time choose the the best one to to show to the to to the customers who wants to. >> And so in my interpretation here, so you see the horizontal signatures, >> these are the granite beams >> that are part of a structure known as the relieving chamber, >> which is a structure located above. You

can see the diagram on the left. Again, this is a known archaeological diagram of the king's chamber, not a 3D model of their interpretation of the new stuff. So, these overlays are just taking known overlapping it with the tomographic data, so we can see where these things correspond. And if you look there on the right, you can actually kind of see the slope angle of the triangle at the top.

You see it kind of it picks it picks that up to a little bit on the right. >> You see that slope >> that align with the top of the chamber >> and the horizontal signatures of these granite lentil beams. >> So we do have again the red is indicating a very strong vibrational signature from inside of the structure. And I will say that this one is pretty good. Mhm. >> I was I was when I saw this originally, I was like, "Oh, this is this is >> for detection of the king's chamber."

>> But you also have to keep in mind the king's chamber is made of granite. >> So there is a qualitative difference in the material of construction that's specifically related to the quality of the detection. So, for example, the surrounding mass is all limestone, but the king's chamber is made of granite, which is maybe one of the reasons why we're getting such a good signature on this particular

tomographic line. >> Would you agree with that, Felipo? >> Absolutely. Yes. I I think that we are detecting also the so-called sarcophagus, which is not a sarcophagus Yes. that facility there. >> So, the only questions I had on this one, so the big red signature at the >> is just background interference, >> but you have a

>> the floor >> the floor. The floor. No. Of there is a >> Okay. And I'll I'll get back to that in just a second. >> Regarding the bedrock. >> Yeah. So the conventional explanation of the bedrock foundation below the great pyramid is that it stops somewhere near the grotto >> at the base of the pyramid. >> But in my opinion, the bedrock mound is actually much taller

>> than we think. >> And one of your other scans shows what may be the true level of the bedrock. And in my opinion, the king's chamber is sitting on top of a bedrock foundation within the pyramid, which is what Yeah, >> there we are detecting something that uh >> So, this is a good one. This is a promising signature. >> You know, there are some tracers >> that go outside of the limits of the

known chamber, but this is pretty good. >> Okay. So, the next one here, this is where things got really interesting for me with the first paper. So, again, we're looking at the Queen's Chamber. >> And what they have here at the bottom is a scan of the Queen's Chamber in the center of the pyramid. And it has been anecdotally reported and documented from the original excavations of the Great Pyramid that there is a shaft and chamber system located below the Queen's

>> So they excavated this. They found a pit in the Queen's chamber that was filled with rubble and dirt. They excavated down into it and they found a shaft and tunnel system and chamber system located below the queen's chamber. It is now completely covered up and sealed with modern blocks. They covered up the hole >> Again, reported anecdotally and in some of the documents regarding the original excavations. And what they're showing

here is actually the presence of a shaft system coming out of the bottom of the queen's chamber. >> So that's very promising. >> And I propose the same thing based on these archaeological reports in my book that there is an extraction shaft >> and chamber system located below the queen's chamber. So again, when I saw this back in 2020, this was very promising and encouraging for me because they are corroborating hidden structures that are now

completely covered up which may actually exist inside of the pyramid. So I was very excited when I saw this originally and they did a great model which I'll show here in just a second that shows that complete shaft and chamber system coming out of the queen's chamber. So, I wanted to highlight this as a very possible substantiation of something that was reported, you know, in the late 1800s, early 1900s when they were doing the original excavations, but has now

been completely covered up and ignored and dismissed as >> not possible. >> But they are showing that potentially >> it could exist. >> Yes. And um I just uh have to remark the fact that in this tomography we are not observing the corridors the shandy corridors there. >> there are two reasons and uh maybe they can be both of them. Uh the first one is that in order to detect those corridors,

we have to be very sure that the tomographic line goes into intercept those corridors. Okay. in that case we need speed. We need the real time facility. >> Okay. The second is that probably it's not possible because the corridor is too small. Okay. >> But I am orientated to the first to the

first one that the demographic line we used is not perfectly oriented on the corridor because the corridor is very >> Yeah. Yeah. and I'll show a vertical diagram of the alignment of the chambers so that we can all take a look at that in relation to the discussion of the tomographic line. My only other point on this one is again the subterranean chamber that's embedded in the bedrock is not detected in this scan which is a similar issue to what you had with the

Kafra project is that it's not able to detect this bedrock excavated chamber which is a an issue when you extrapolate scanning into the bedrock to detect structures a kilometer underground. I tell you a piece of corridor it is possible to to detect it because it's >> here I can do I can do it here. Yeah. So so basically what he's pointing at is sort of this line here. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> But how can you differentiate from a

scientific perspective between all of the background interference >> dealing with light? It is very >> Yeah. Because there's a lot of background interference here. >> Yes. Yes. When you are dealing with light you have a laser. The laser travels the the free space and goes to the target. You see the target very well because the light travels only the empty space and not the matter. Here the acoustics are traveling in the matter

and matter is a mess. is the matter that is underneath that is the MS not the acoustics that we are using to detect the matter >> I don't know if I am explaining well >> so the composition of the bedrock itself >> is interfering with the register of the >> okay that's that's problematic >> because especially if you're trying to >> into a kilometer of bedrock

>> you you You can do it this here. We are dealing to uh retrive information of things very small, >> very small chain, very small. >> Yeah, the passage is is small going down into the subterranean chamber. >> You can see them. But the background is composed by other targets. But Filippo, maybe can you address the basic point Jeffrey's making that the composition of the bedrock is important for the veracity or accuracy of the findings

that you get? And so if there's any issues with certain bedrock in these readings where granite is better than limestone and you're trying to go through a kilometer, >> you know, deep of what is it? Limestone. >> Bedrock. Yeah, limestone. >> Limestone bedrock. Then then how are you able to be so confident? >> But in that case we uh have detected ah this is very nice. >> In that case we have detected things that were really uh predominant with

respect to the bedrock how you say background detection. >> We will arrive to the or we are >> yeah I have everything. Okay. I included everything to make sure that people could see all of the information. >> But I think we have to do part one and part two. Yeah. Yeah. >> I I get what he's saying, which is like if you control for um the background micro vibrations being created by really like these are large mega structures and

components that because again you're scanning from a satellite from space. So there is this I mean another really interesting question is all of your cases of validation involve structures that might be below the surface of the earth but not this far below. Do you have validation that exists in the case of things I mean obviously like it's hard to go a kilometer plus deep just generally I think very you know very few mining and excavation sites have done that but do you have any validation?

>> Oh I have uh >> that's gone that deep. I did a lot of pilot tests with companies. >> And uh more than 100% successful. But >> really that's another another because here we are dealing with >> when you say when you say pilot test >> with companies. So this is used in a commercial context. >> Yes. We are moving in commercial. Yes. Absolutely. Yes. >> Got it. Okay. And this is like mining >> Okay. Then these are I assume you have

to be somewhat cheeky about this because you're under NDA or sort of thing. Okay. >> I am under NDA so I can't say more than >> But you have you have 100% success like no no one >> under 100 more. >> How do you go more than 100? >> They phone me every five minutes. >> Okay. So they're really pumped to work with you. >> Say more than this. >> I mean that's fascinating. the mining and metallurgical applications of the >> are directly applicable to the specific geology metal. There's metal ore mineral

deposits all over the Giza plateau. >> you're familiar. there's there's iron ore metal mineral deposits all over and below the Giza plateau. Yeah, >> we have chemical analysis data from these iron veins, hydrothermal mineral deposits embedded in the bedrock that are permeated with rare earth elements, gold, silver, things like platinum and

titanium have been discovered in these metal ore veins embedded in the bedrock of the Giza Plateau. So there's a direct correlation between the applications that he's describing for this technology and the investigation of the truth of what's really below the Giza plateau. >> We may differ on our interpretation about that, but we absolutely agree that there is something down there that is absolutely important to understand. I always I always I always love when I bump up against the limits of what

Felippo can say because I do feel uh confidence coming from him that there's like a lot that isn't quite open source that you know both commercially and defense-wise that he just can't really talk about. >> Sure. Yeah. And we we've talked privately about that as well. >> Yeah. No, no, it's okay. It's okay. But uh yeah, again unless you're like a great con man, which I don't I don't think you are. Yeah. And my my only questions in regard to how nice the the queen look.

what that corridor is the story of that >> But what about the grand gallery and the the but that's that's good. But we're completely missing the grand gallery and the king's chamber. >> I tell you why. >> So you have one out of three. >> Well, let him let Okay. So what? Yeah. Why is >> I tell you why we we go back into the uh the the the things that I told that I that that we were discussing

um five minutes ago in this tomographic line you don't see the grand gallery but the grand gallery is good that I don't see it because I can see the air that is inside the grand gallery it's good the the grand gallery is a tube like that correct a rectangular tube Yes, the top of the grand gallery. Then you you have the air blue and then and then I don't see nothing. I see the the the the queen's uh chamber. It's it's good like that.

You move the tomographic line, you integrate and you perform a 3D reconstruction. But to do this, we we need the computer, Jeffrey, right? We need arise of of GPUs that at the moment I don't >> what's the word you're using arise of >> an array of GPU that's what I thought it was okay sorry I'm laughing okay yeah um >> yeah yeah so you need you need more compute essentially and you need to do this be able to do this in real time >> if I have thousands of GPU we can do it

>> so how how much out of curiosity how much money would that require >> I don't I I tell you. I don't know. But >> what if there's an investor in the audience that wants to help you out? How what would is there a certain amount that would help you? >> Maybe with uh I don't know with I don't know I millions millions in the order of millions. Yes, we can we can uh we can uh have >> we will speak about the foundation that

uh uh we are standing in Malta set setting up in Malta. We have uh uh a we have rented a nice uh place where we have installed a solar power plane, power station and inside there we we would like to to set up a data center >> and there if we have uh donators we can

a mainframe with ar with an array of >> Well, we should just for humanity. Somebody should some somebody should do this not for for profit but just to for >> just to like >> the foundation works philanthropic. >> No, it's it's it's that seems like money well spent if you're you know you want to go kind of Carnegie gospel of wealth, you know, this this should be like the first on your list. So, and what you're working on too >> with the three computers that you saw in my house, we can do this.

>> Yeah. Yeah. So, so but but but what do you what what do you say Jeffrey to >> and they are also expensive? Yeah, those >> Got it. Yeah, there you go. Okay, that's established. Uh uh Jeffrey, what do you say to uh Filippo's point that the Grand Gallery is actually detected? It's just one vertical slice and you see you do see the air. >> Yeah, I'll get to that in just a second. >> You see that the Grand Gallery >> is blue because you have air inside of the Grand Gallery. Yeah. >> So I guess he's saying here inside of

the grand >> inside. Okay. >> So the other things I wanted to point out here. So this signature above. >> And this big signature here. That's the big void. >> The big void. >> Yes. And you have detected the big void >> Yes. Yes. That's the big void. And we'll get to that in a comparison between the location of the big void >> suggested by the Muan team >> and the position that has been detected by the S team. It's slightly different. >> in my personal opinion that is the big

void because it's located >> or the big one here >> the the big one there. >> The big one. Yeah. >> Okay. So the Muan team is saying that it's located directly above the grand gallery. the position of the big void that they're actually going to be excavating into the Great Pyramid in 2026 to investigate the Big Void. So, an actual exploration is coming up to get a chance to see what's in there. Um, so again, I I'm just objectively looking at these things. I do agree there's a

fantastic signature here and we talked about this too, Filippo, at the Malta conference that it's a different in the slice. If you move the slice, you might be able to better better detect it. So another thing here is tag 17 and 18. >> That's fantastic in my son which is very >> Um I have it again in a slide. Okay. So let's look at the position. So here is the configuration of the great pyramid and this is the vertical

>> of the chambers. So you can see if you were to scan the tomographic line at the far left of the king's chamber. >> You would only pick up the king's chamber and not pick up any of the other >> If you scan on the far right of the king's chamber, >> you should pick up all of the components because everything would be aligned in the same tomographic slice. >> Yep. You cannot detect the king's chamber without also picking up the

grand gallery, queen's chamber, >> multiple. Correct. Correct. Yeah. >> There's also the array of GPUs. >> Sure. But there's this is this is kind of an an explanation for why that may be the case is the different slices that break it down. >> Could have been on the left. You you may do a slice down the middle that picks up the king's chamber and the queen's here and here, but it doesn't pick up the grand gallery. Y >> So, this is an explanation for why we

get register of certain chambers with different tomographic lines because we're just slicing down the middle and the slice doesn't always land on all three simultaneously. Okay. So, the next one here is the discovery of this new passage. >> Right on the northern side of the Great Pyramid. They just drilled. >> I have to I have to say this. We discover it for the first for the first >> So, that uh >> That's amazing. Is that true? So, what were So, let me explain what we have here. So, we have tag 17 and tag 18

>> which is showing this little passage >> That's the cord. >> Yep. Yep. Right here. And it starts right here under the chevrons, which is where they found this passage. And we have an overlay of the chevrons and the new passage that was discovered. >> My only issue on this >> is that the signature actually starts out here. >> Yeah. Those are multiple reflections of the radar. >> So reflections of the radar. >> Mult multiple reflection. The

interaction of the electromagnetic waves from the the floor of the pyramid and the pyramid can give you multiple reflection. It's normal and that multiple reflections are affects also the tomographic line. >> Okay. So you're saying reflections of the radar >> can create signatures that would appear >> to the signature of an actual chamber. not can be mitigated only having multiple scans and so you can average your results and you see it absolutely

>> Okay. I'm I'm with you. Yeah. All right. >> It's simple that the best signature you have you have it on the chevron the chevron and you are detecting the chevron. Look. >> Yeah. Yeah. Here. >> Why am I saying you multiple? Because you have the pyramid, then you have the chevron like that and you have the other the and then you have such multipart of the radar. >> Are you saying that tag 18 wasn't even known by conventional? >> No, no, it was it was known. The chevrons are are visible on the >> 17 was not known.

>> They recently And what is tag 17? >> It's just it's a dead end shaft. You can see the overlay of it here. >> Yeah. So they they recently >> that's remarkable that he he discovered it basically through the is that before >> they detected it. Yeah. This was this was detected by the team in 2020 and they recently went inside of this with a microscopic camera. They drilled in below the chevron to look into this dead end. It's a dead end shaft on the northern side of the Great Pyramid. >> That's impressive. And if you go to the

result and you if you switch off the over the overlay, >> you can detect also the the top of the corridor and the floor of the corridor. There are two lines. >> Yeah. The top here and the bottom here. >> And you can measure also. And if you compare the measurements with the video because they scan it are the same. And then you see that is 9 m longer. I don't remember but it's 9 9 m long. There is

something a piece of stone that goes. But here you can see what there is over that piece of stone which which is I I tell you here >> this one. >> And I I am waiting somebody that is discovering that anti- camera. >> Anti camera. Anti-chamber. What? >> Anti-cham. It's a chamber. I call it anti camera. It's a chamber. >> Okay. And that chamber goes directly to the grand gallery. >> Okay. And then allows you in my for me

also to go naturally to the big void. That is the real the real position of the big void is that one. >> Jeffrey, the future will will give what what can what yeah to give you making a claim. That's I love it. >> Um so Matt Bell. >> Yeah. from the Limitless podcast >> is involved in financing of the development of robotics to investigate the shafts in the Queen's Chamber. >> They're going to be sending a robot up

the northern shaft to drill in the comparable feature known as Gatenbrinks Door, which was investigated in the southern shaft. They're going to be drilling through a new piece with a new robot on the northern side. And they're also collaborating on the investigation of the Big Void. So, they will be hopefully it's been approved, but everything keeps getting pushed back and pushed back and pushed back and pushed back as things happen in Egypt supposedly on the table for 2026 that

they're actually going to be drilling into and investigating the big void. >> That's remarkable. And I think, you know, it sounds like Felippo is making a prediction there. I also think I do think it's amazing that tag 17 this corridor deadend shaft he's sort of you know you know they made a claim there and they found it. >> Yeah. So this was 2020. This was before the the recent >> I believe this was detected with the Muan scans the Muan scanning. So the Muan group. Yes. The scan pyramids

project is the sanctioned and approved scanning team that they have used for these projects. >> They really only collaborate with this scan pyramids team. >> You know, we were just talking off camera about how much we're both enjoying this conversation. so many >> and a lot of people have have misinterpreted my questioning of the data as disbelief or an attempt to debunk but that's not really the case at

all and they just they don't understand that we have an existing relationship >> it is it is true that we it's good that we discuss about the results because the results is not like a religion no it is something that uh no we can discuss >> I love that yeah first the fact that you're saying it's not a sacred cow or a third rail, it's just a thing you can talk about and you know you can criticize and you can defend and you know it's all good. That's a beautiful thing that commitment to the kind of you know Socratic process. But I was also

Jeffrey and I were talking I think a lot of these discussions go into like it's like it's always framed as adversarial. It's always it's always you know um skeptic and debunker versus you know person making some bold claim and then the person the skeptic doesn't even look at the assertions and make first principles arguments. It turns into this kind of it devolves into ad homonyms and you get into these highle heristics of probabilistically this thing can't be true or whatever. And what I love about

this conversation is, and then we can get out of the meta and get back into the first principle, but it it it's that you are really just asking questions that I think everybody wants to know that are at the first principles level, and they're they're reasonable >> I'm captivated by this process. Again, when I found this in 2022, I was like, this is super important. Whether it's true or it's not, it's the development of new technology and an approach that could eventually be implemented into

something very significant, which is the purpose of all the videos that I've made about this. Have prefaced it with saying this is the type of technology we need. We're on the precipice of a greater understanding using unique methodology to understand the structures that's going to get us to the deeper >> Yes. And Filippo, you said during the conversation that it's still in the initial stages and there's improvements that can be made with the technology, further investigations that need to >> We need hardware. We need a lot of hardware. Hardware and power. C can I

ask one thing actually before we get back into this which is um speaking of skeptics I did watch Flint Dibble's video about you and I found a lot of it to be a little ridiculous but there were certain points he made which I think >> we can now if you remember the >> I do remember I remember one one point which I found very val well one of the points was like it's too hot to build that deep it's too hot to build artificial structure okay >> so that felt reasonable and we can get to that >> it is connected to the the the heat is

connected to um our research project that the third part of the of this research going in C2 but we will discuss at the end of this uh conversation sorry a little teaser there interrupt no so yeah let's let's definitely circle back on that and then the second one which I think relates more to this discussion we were just you know having around the commercial use cases of this technology >> is he said you let your patents expire Is that true? >> Yes. By initial patent at the moment is expired. Absolutely. Yes. Uh maybe we

can recover this uh in United States we give you a grace period in order to recover this patent. Uh maybe we will do it. But I am uh I have submitted a second patent which I can't disclose the okay the things but I have submit a second patent that deals is connected to the first patent and um uh uh gives huge noveity but I can't speak about this

>> would fair yeah you definitely should yeah no don't telegraph your IP I think the question I would have is if the first patent is in some way related to the second patent and I it might be a gateway if I'm a scientist and I figure out what's going on in the first patent which you have telegraphed it is in the >> I read it >> it helps me figure out the second patent why wouldn't you also try to maintain the first patent and just >> keep enforcing it >> yes uh but I tell you Jesse the question

of patent or in the commercial or in the philanthropic. I want to work on the philanthropic and also in the commercial because I like to to work with my technique is for me is very exciting. But yes, the patent will give you the rights to be only the alone to only me um give me the rights to commercialize uh exclusively this technique. Okay. But the important thing is also the

technology that is behind the the the software. No, the software is uh crucial in this uh in this in this deal. So, >> Got it. >> Yes. Pardon? No, pardon. But you you need the software. >> Okay. Yeah. And and and and I that's a good answer because you speak to most people in fields of aerospace or kind of hard science and they'll always say patents are barely enforcable. uh there it's really it's really about trade secrets and it's about knowing how to do something that no one else is going to

figure out. It's not really about the patent. So uh I appreciate you know it's not is not so important but um and now we have a second patent the technology and the technology is made by hardware and software. >> Yeah. It's it's funny. It's like, you know, I don't know why. Why would he go out and make a YouTube video and just in this shrill way start like, you know, yelling at you instead of just be like, "Hey, Filippo, like my name's Flint."

Like, you know, like, "Why did you let your patents expire?" Because that that answer I you know, you have a reasonable response there. So, I don't know. It's interesting. But, um, Jeffrey, I think you should continue with your kind of first principles questioning. Well, I think this is why this conversation is working because like we're friends, like we've met before and we've spent personal time together. The important thing for me, as I've shown in this presentation, is that if we do have novel structures, it's critical that they can be interpreted into a

functional hypothesis. For example, the shaft system below the queen's chamber, it's been reported in archaeological documents, and you should have a model that interprets that into the function of the structure, which I've shown it's part of the extraction shaft system that was used to remove the product solution from the Great Pyramid. So I have done that in my work is entertain these ideas although speculative at this point because we haven't done actual

archaeological excavations to prove any of this yet. I've taken it and incorporated it in a hypothetical working model where these new structures actually fit with what I've proposed. For example, the big void it's in a perfect location for a heat exchanger. >> Right? Anytime you have exothermic reactions within a structure or an operating chemical manufacturing apparatus, you want a mechanism that can remove some of that thermal energy from

the system. And the big void, although it's shown by the Muan team in a little bit different position, located above the Grand Gallery, is the ideal position for a heat exchanger that would remove some of that thermal energy from the reaction in the Grand Gallery, >> which we can get into much deeper depth. You know, whether which one comes out first, we don't know quite yet, but we'll get into much more depth on the function of the Great Pyramid and how this new void, it's definitely real, right? We've detected it with the Muan

scanning. You've you found it already and they're 100% going to go in there and and >> feeling which is the exact shape of the where it is exactly me a meter on the left a meter on the on the right but there is a big void it is. >> So that's actually a good transition. >> But it's very probable. >> So you know we've talked about the initial scans here on the left is the first of the 3D models. So before what we had is an overlay of the processed

focus data on top of existing archaeological diagrams. >> What we have now are the new 3D models >> Filippo can you explain how these 3D models were developed? Who made these and how were they created? >> The 3D model was done by the authors of the paper. So uh it was done by Colorado and me >> right. So basically what they've done is take the focused data and interpreted it

>> No. No. No. Electromagnetics are photons, light. >> Cosmic rates are particles >> that are very small that penetrates >> Like I think I associate cosmic rays with neutrons. Is that roughly? And the the neutron is very big or cosmic >> is very big. >> It's very big. Newton is like a bullet that it's very big and it is the principle of >> so what particles would you associate with cosmic

neutron neutron >> is a big bullet >> big one >> that is uh uh the principal actor of the fion in nuclear energy production reaction okay because the neutron goes to another atom that uh split splits the atom of uranium. It splits and generates other trinons that goes to split other atoms. And so

the chain reaction is activated after a so-called critical mass okay of uranium 235 that has been enriched at least from up to 90%. H it depends of the application in the civilian application. So uh in ci in civilian so um uh power plants atomic power plants not nuclear

atomic power plants are uh 20 20 25 28% of enrichment uh no for maybe less 15% enrichment I don't remember exactly the the number uh and then uh or you can go also in 90% for other kind of application huons are smaller. So they penetrate the the the huge mass of the of the pyramid. But

because you have to do you have to focus the rod data there. You have to do an FFT in order to retrieve the the tomographic slice that belongs between the tomographic line is is due by the detectors that are be that are in the in the chamber and what you see is the a vertical cain that starts from the detector to the end of the pyramid. That's the the your your tomography only >> Yeah. And in six months, I don't know

in this paper is only a top-down view because that's the way the detectors are looking right. So they're looking up >> but because they don't know how to do it because you can I don't I don't say anything now because you can do also tomography with that. They don't know how to do it. >> Okay. because you can do but I don't I I don't say things that then they they can >> Yeah. And that's why I incorporated this because I wanted to hear your professional interpretation and opinion on this accepted technology and the

of the central pyramid compared to the new s scanning I'm not I'm again I'm not an expert in the technology that's why I would defer to Fippo to answer the >> You you went in the detail about this paper because you are now explaining me how how we can read their data their results that is important. >> Yeah. And again, I I I wanted to be as transparent as possible in the conversation where I present all of the

see you are watching here the sum of all the vertical layers composing the pyramid. The layers. The layers. Yeah. Vertical layers. >> No, vertically. No, sorry. Horizontal. Vertically. The vertically sum of all the horizontal liars that the sensitivity probably a cone sensitivity. Yes. The detectors are watching. >> Correct. And they also mentioned this in the other paper. The cone of detection is mentioned in the paper regarding the

in the moon domain. With photoggramometry they can let's say with an approximation that twice the approximation of the position of the big void because they are not sure because you have a base of difference of difference in viewing in the moon uh domain. >> Yeah. So the view angle of the Muan detectors, you can see here that the one placed inside the uh the queen's chamber

is looking up >> and then they have the second detector on the northern face so that it's looking up in this direction and then into the structure so that they can do a comparison between what's detected on scanner A and scanner B to to come up with a composite image of the location of this new void. Mhm. >> So again, I thought this was important to include and this is the data. >> So A is the signature on all four of these of the king's chamber.

>> B is the location of the Grand Gallery. And here is the detection of the new >> So they're showing it. Again, this is not very reassuring either. Look what I >> Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. I I I'm sorry, Jeffrey, but my results are better than this. >> Well, no. I Filippo, that's why I put this in here was for the exact reason. >> We say >> you said that during the presentation

and I still have no idea what I tell you. I will translate. But to all the Italians is if his wine is good. >> So that's why I >> sarder tomography over muons all day. Muan detection. >> Yeah. Okay. >> So that's why I put this in here. It's for the lay person, right? who's looking at Filippo's data and they're saying, "I

can't understand anything of what I'm seeing here. It just looks like a bunch of mess." >> If you look at this, >> this looks like a bunch of mess, too. >> Right. And you really have to have an expert at that particular scanning technology do a detailed assessment of what we're actually looking at here. >> but this the reason I put this in is is this is the the data >> that they have used to justify the archaeological excavations that will occur to investigate the big void. This

is what it looks like. >> Oh yeah. I mean >> it's like what the hell are we looking >> Big void. >> Yeah. I mean it's like so when I I I pulled this up after I did Danny's shows because we were talking Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. Exactly. No, it looks like abstract. It looks like a nice album cover to me. Yeah, because I wanted to see I'm a stickler for looking at the raw data. I don't like looking at the models. I don't like, you know, I want to see the actual show me what the scans show. Like we were talking about with the labyrinth in Harara scan.

>> Show me the actual scan. Well, this was a I mean, I don't want to get too off of course, but we'll bring this up in our one-on-one, but you you you mentioned to me right before the podcast. I was like, "What about the >> 40 meter long tic tacshaped object in the labyrinth and underneath Hara?" And you were like, "That was only written about in a blog post." And I to be honest, I'm a fan of Ben Van Kirkwick. So that was the first time I had heard and he was kind of pouring a little cold water on your stuff as if that was less tested than a tic tac shaped object. But

>> this feels more legit to me if that's from a blog post. >> Interesting to see the reaction of the >> and people on cuz we're all in this community of alternative ancient >> And the reaction of some people again has been complete rejection immediately. Some people love it 100% no objections. But there's nobody that's really taking a middle ground on this and asking honest objective questions. It's like that's I'm kind of honored to be in the position to be here to have this conversation because I've invested a lot

of time >> in trying to understand this. >> I've read the papers. I've looked at the conventional scanning stuff. I've investigated the Muon data and this is super important to my overall work is making sure that we really understand what's going on here. >> Love it. >> Let's keep going. It's just been weird to see the reactions of people in the community where you're they're either debunking it or they're on board 100%. And there's nobody that's really >> well it's just ego. You like your identity gets wrapped up in a position and then you pre- crystallize knowledge

and it it you you end up engaging in bad thinking instead of being like oh damn I don't want that to be true but it just the facts seem like it's true you know >> if I can Yes. If I can add something >> I may say this. >> If a mutual collaboration between the scam pyramid project and maybe our research team will be possible, I think

things will go better. So muons plus >> mass a mass starrmography plus mass muon maybe things will be >> Sure. Sure. >> Well I think it would also be a way because muons are more tried and true and accepted in a conventional scientific sense that for them that would be like oh this pattern matches you know like what we are deriving from the muon detection. I think where it gets tough is, you know, trying to get a

kilometer deep with the muhans. I think >> But once Yes, it's Yes, that's true. Because you have to go one kilometer >> Yeah. You can't do that. Loc, install the detector and then you see what there >> Yeah. And for that you need the Ministry of Culture to let you go down there and do that >> with a collaboration, not the separation, a collaboration. So I work with you, you work with me. We share what we have. We share our knowledge and our gaps. >> Love it.

>> And so sharing knowledge and gaps, I think things will work better, >> In my personal opinion. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, so my next question here and as we'll see in just a moment, the S >> has detected some features that go around the king's chamber. >> Filipo, you >> So that is the king's chamber. >> Yeah. Here a >> they say that A is the king's chamber. >> Correct. Okay. >> And as I'll show you, you know what I'm talking about. The features that go around the king's chamber.

>> So, why do you think that they haven't shown that >> when you're picking it up on your data? And I'll I'll fast forward a little bit here. This 3D diagram. >> So, here is the big void. >> You're showing it more transverse. >> Transverse like that. Yes. >> They're depicting as more longitudinal. Their their scans show it north to >> Yours is showing it east to west. >> And you're detecting these features that are possibly connected into the big void

that go around >> the king's chamber. This is the king's chamber here at the center. >> You said the king. >> The top of the king's chamber. The top of the king. >> Correct. Yeah. And then >> Okay. So, >> and then you have this feature here. >> Yeah. We can also overlap the results of the moon with the death. >> Right. Right. Yeah. We can put it one >> So my question is >> why is nothing like that shown here when you are detecting it on your data? I

don't know why because they are not able to detect things Jeffrey in that results I'm a scientist so I am very used to read the mess >> information inside things that >> there I'm I'm seeing nothing there >> can I can I ask it differently >> I'm sorry yeah but I I I'm I'm a no I agree I don't this is this is very difficult to read can I ask it differently are are there other examples

of things where muan detection fell short as far as predicting a structure uh that we know existed. We know the structure existed. Muons fell short. >> There's another comparison coming up here in just a moment of the scan results where it's not showing something that the S team. So again, there's there hasn't been much competition in the archaeological space where we're comparing these different technologies. So now we're in a unique position where there is a competitor technology to the

muon scanning where we're saying okay this is showing this this isn't showing it sometimes this you know so there's >> but I mean in any archaeological or scientific context like cuz that would be really helpful because if it's like muons never miss then I'm like okay you got a false positive on the sardopler demography if it's like but there are a few times where muons do miss in these other cases I do think that's illustrated yeah And again, I would love to see some control. Yeah. So, we have king's chamber here, and I can move the >> Oh, that's the king's chamber.

>> King's This is the king's chamber. A and this is the grand gallery here. And what Filippo's team is detecting is a structure that goes around the king's chamber here. And but I think as I saw in in those results in these horizontal pictures more pictures which I repeat is the sum of all the horizontal layers that I tell here publicly the research team of moon team there is a method to

discriminate different liars right they are not apply >> to pull slices >> they're just looking at the composite >> the sum the composite Correct. You can you can do it. >> They can do it. >> Maybe I can move. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Go for it. >> So this this is the top of the Zed. >> Yeah. So it's looking down at the top of the pyramid. Correct. >> Okay. This is the let's say is the king's chamber. >> Correct. A is the king's chamber in the

these images. Yeah. >> Then this is something related to the >> Correct. B. The arrow pointing to B is the Grand Gallery. Correct. >> On the other hand, they they are detecting the queens the the the the king's chamber >> on another view angle which yes >> OB obviously B this is the angle. >> Okay. So we have two different view angles. This geometry and this geometry.

Very good. And also other geometries. this and also this. The important thing that I am observing that here you have two things. This and this. >> Yeah, that's that's the new void. >> And this. >> Here you have only this. Why? Here you have only this and here you have this and this. Which is the

Because their orientation seems similar. >> there is written on the >> Yeah. Yeah. Here. >> Because I tell you what is uh they are confusing something that >> So here here are the explanations of the >> Okay. And this this breaks down the whole graph. And then here on this side are sort of the uh >> oh yes the reflectivity. Okay. Yeah. Can

we go to the previous slide please Jeffrey? Okay. It can be that this is the grand gallery top roof and this is the grand gallery floor and they are in Italy we say >> taking cuts contraasi >> t taking what do you mean >> no no don't say taking >> no don't say it don't say it things to other things they are

>> it is possible that this is the floor of the Grand Gallery because are parallel same shape and this is the roof of the of the Grand Gallery because it's very high the Grand Gallery. >> Of course. Yes. In my personal opinion and look Jeffrey this is the Grand Gallery. This because it it has a shape a rectangular shape. Maybe maybe look this or this. They have

to do other measurements. This is not the grand gallery. This is the top roof and the and the bottom of the same structure. So the grand >> Okay. So >> So are you saying they might have misinterpreted? Yes. There was interesting. That's fascinating. Well, >> why I have to build a big void parallel. They say the big void is parallel to the Gangari. Why? Why I have to go I I have to I have to I have to build an inclined uh so-called big void and we are

detecting the big void where they are detecting the real big void. >> So let me clarify. >> their results are suggesting that the big void is not parallel but it's directly above. You see this area with the positive. So this is where they're picking up the signature of the big void >> interpretating the the the photoggramometry that that they are >> So that's why I included this is because I wanted to get your opinion >> on these results and compare them again.

what what he's showing on his team is an east to west transverse big void >> that's located more down here >> and and parallel because the the the floor and the roof are parallel like >> What the what the Muan team is suggesting that the big void is here >> and inclined >> directly above with the same angle as the grand gallery. They've basically described it as a copy >> of the Grand Gallery directly above it.

>> So, there's just a difference between these two things. >> And and we haven't verified in either. >> The the only way to figure it out is to go in there. >> Which they're going to do. And we're going to see exactly what's what. can't wait hopefully in 2026 >> because because if you go in there and you figure out who's right muon or sard doppler tomography that lends a lot of credence to the substructure readings of sardler tomography if you find a positive result. >> Now the thing is the Egyptian ministry

of antiquities >> believes in this so much >> that they are willing to do the excavations based on this data. So to me that is staggering. >> What's your take? >> Because when I look at this I have the same reaction as Filippo. Oh really? Is >> how could you possibly say with any certainty that what you're detecting here is real bas you know it's the same >> how how big is the community of experts

that know how to read mu? >> Well that's the whole thing too right? That's why we're having a conversation with an expert because the community in ancient alternative history, >> we are not experts in radar. My question is when it comes to reading muon scans, uh, that seems like a expertise or specialty. Have you been have you read a lot of these and are you good at that? Or are are there people out there that are good at that? You're just basing their misinterpretation off your result. >> Yes. I in this moment is the first time

thanks to Jeffrey that explaining me how to read the data this >> okay okay got it so we are in front of of results based on these results they are doing ex drilling they are they are >> should we should we show this to somebody who's read a lot of muon scans and be like >> so I will say that in the paper like you guys did they also presented all of the mathematical analysis of the data But I didn't put that in here because it's it's way beyond any of our

is a question of of geometry. >> Please uh please please look >> if you watch the dimension of the king's chamber and the top of the Z A. So the distance the horizontal distance of that. So these things should actually be connecting, you know, this should be connected into this. >> So So that's an that's an error. >> Well, it also depends on again like he's saying, it's a composite of horizontal

>> The only part of the grand gallery that connects into the king's chamber is on the top layer. >> As you go down in the structure, the integration between the king's chamber, anti-chamber, and grand gallery, there is no more connection between the two. So basically what Filippo is pointing at here is this signature and this signature here and he's saying that instead of this secondary signature being reflective of a new chamber, >> it's actually part of the Grand Gallery

where where this is the top of the chamber and this is the lower portion of the chamber. >> got it. Yeah. >> Okay. So I I just I wanted to show what the existing technology was so that the lay person can see the difference between the two what the data looks like and see how much of a it's a difficult process to understand what is going on with any of this stuff. So, >> if you are not an expert in that particular scanning technology,

>> well, we should send this to people who are good at reading Muan scans. But you're saying, Jeff, we know that they do get that disconnection wrong. That little point, we know for sure. >> Well, again, as as Filippo said, it could be a byproduct. The same way with S technology where where it doesn't pick up all of the chambers because of the particular slice, right? This may not be vertical slices but horizontal layers where they're not picking the layer where the >> sum the vertical sum of all the layers.

>> So it should have it if it's a sum of top to bottom >> it should integrate all of that into one and it should show that cuz the king's chamber connects into the anti-chamber which connects into the top of the grand gallery. So if this is actually and you can kind of see it here. So, so why are they missing that ant? >> So, so let me let me show it here. So, here they actually do kind of show you could see what would be the anti-chamber >> The king's chamber here and this is the grand gallery.

>> This would be the anti-chamber and this is the king's chamber. And that's accurate to the configuration. So, in this one they actually do show >> where is the big void there. >> So, this doesn't show necessarily the big void. To me it's not visible in this >> but uh >> this is the mathematical detection of it >> It is possible to read results of the analysis of shintilation. It is another >> So this explanation down at the bottom gets way deep into the technical weeds

it would take a in-depth discussion with an expert to understand what's >> simulated data. No, no. Those are simulated data. Simulated data. >> Simulated data. >> No, no, no. Simulated data are similar. It's not real. It's a simulated is a simulation that simulated data. >> So, you're saying this is a simulation. So, it says simulation that corrected >> See, it's not real. The real one is the we have that that,

>> Yeah. So is there a process like you said with your data of focusing? So is that what they're doing here is focusing and correcting the image? >> That's a numbers are synthetic numbers are not real measurements. >> So it's not real. >> It's just to to show the the processing that are doing. It's not real data. >> Okay. And again, there's I only picked

the data images for this presentation because I just wanted to compare and contrast the raw data from your team in comparison to the raw data from the Muan >> Who knows which one of these is right? And again, we're having a conversation with an expert on S technology. The next person we should have in this round table is an expert on muon technology so that we could all understand exactly >> not like friendly if he was today now

here maybe we could explain one to each other our results >> and I I do have the whole paper but I would have to close this and then it would be a huge tangent for us to look at the math >> presented on the paper. So there's a whole paper about this if anybody wants to do a deep dive into muon technology. They wrote a deep paper the same as with your first paper that includes all the mathematics in the scan processing. So to TLDDR here is that you have some exactly discrepancies between the muon

reading and the sard Doppler tomography reading and uh in some definitely tried and true method muon detection in in many cases and then at least in the case of that one kind of culde-sac shaft we you know tried and true as well. So my only point with this is from the perspective of the Egyptian Ministry of Antiquities, which is the sanctioned body for investigating the structures, >> they used this to find the shaft that we just saw that your team also found, and they're using this data to justify the

excavations into the Big Void. So this is one of the first times that they're going to do a major excavation into the Great Pyramid. So there's only been a few other instances where they've actually drilled into the structure. So that's a major project to be approved by the Ministry of Antiquities. They don't do that lightly, right? It's a big decision when they decide to excavate into the structure. So they do believe in this enough for them to justify this project. But again, who can make sense

of what's what on either one of these things? You really have to have an expert Allah Filippo here or an expert on the Muan technology to really explain exactly what's going on. >> So next I really want to get to the because again this could turn into a six-hour long discussion and we'll be here for the rest of the night. >> No, we we move it fast. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. So I can skip through this. The reason I wanted to show this section of the paper is because the SAR team is finding other structures like tag one here on the right is the data shown in

tag one here in the model. So this feature here that goes down into the >> Then there's this step like feature here >> probably. Probably probably >> again. Yeah. So, so they're interpreting this data over here on the right. >> Into a model to show their interpretation of what this signature actually is. >> So, that's all I'm trying to show here >> is the presentation and the development

of the model itself. Yep. >> So, you'll see these different tags, tag one, tag seven, and tag four. Tag seven is this transverse east to west beam like feature and then you have these step-like features here. Um I actually proposed in my video a while back in So there have been researchers that have proposed that there was a system of locks, hydraulic locks that were used to move blocks up into the pyramids. So an

interesting interpretation for some of these features could be construction related features that are still encased in the body of the pyramid that are remnants of the construction process like water locks where they were using water locks to float these stones on rafts up into the pyramid body. So again, it's it's important for any researcher who's analyzing these things to be able to have an interpretation of the function. That's kind of my job in this investigation is when I see stuff

like this, I either have to assess it from the perspective of the operation of the structure or possible vestigages of the construction process. And it would make sense even if it was like the internal ramp for example, you would have remnants of that internal ramp inside of the structure. If it was water locks, you would also have remnants of the vestigages of the water lock system encased in the final structure. So this is just showing some of the things that the S team discovered inside of the

Great Pyramid that are new undiscovered >> So we have data on the right and model on the left. >> Again, this is just going through showing these linear features here. >> And the different tags that are represented in the model here. So tag number two is the feature on the other side. So you have one here and then two over here. >> Same thing. >> Ah yeah. Yeah. This you see it very >> Yeah. Here we go into some more where

>> there the grand gallery. You see it >> here. Yeah. Yeah. So I was going to point that out here. So this is the grand gallery >> and you see also the that the the superior part of the grand gallery you go up there there are futures that are connected to do the king's child >> the anti chamber yeah the anti chamber >> this is very clear you see it >> yeah so again this is I'm just showing to everybody who hasn't seen this yet

the raw data >> on the right and the extreme extrapolation of the raw data into the 3D model. >> So they're just interpreting the features that they see here into this >> Can I ask you a question? Yes. >> Do any of these structures that they're interpreting from the raw data >> fly in the face of what conventional archaeology would think exists inside the pyramid? >> All of it. >> All of it. >> Okay. All of this is the only known

vetted chambers of the Great Pyramid. >> King's Chamber, Queen's Chamber, Grand Gallery, and Subterranean Chamber. You have four chambers connected by a system of shafts. We're obviously going to get way deeper into um your theory in our solo episode, but >> does any of this comport with the functionality that you think? I've integrated all of this into a functional hypothesis. So I have Filippo, I've entertained all of these speculative

features in a model of my hypothesis for how the structure works. >> For example, the heat exchanger system that goes around the king's chamber and above the Grand Gallery, the extraction shaft connected into the queen's chamber, which is that shaft leading out of it. And I also have a hypothesis for how these again I have a number of different interpretations for what these vertical features below the pyramids might be. I've not publicly yet, but I

do have an interpretation on what those could be. Reason I haven't come out publicly yet is because I think there's still more investigation that needs to be done to verify the configuration of the structure. So again >> we have more >> yes there it is a bit confusing that >> it's very confusing some of the basic confusion around the pyramids it's perennial debate in question is how they were built >> and you have people like I think Jean Pierre Houdin and France who say that

there's something about like you know internally like the blocks get pulled up or something could any of these structures deal with how the pyramid was >> well that's what I was saying is Yeah. >> For example, in the in the model, >> you know, these could be remnants or vestigages of a water lock system >> that were used to move blocks up into the pyramid. >> It it certainly could be. Um my only issue with this >> is the extrapolation from the data into

the model. >> Yeah, sure. >> That is uh um uh things that we discussed previously. Those are two tomographic lines. No, if if we had the chance the chance to see the video belonging two tomographic lines, things could be perfect because you are watching something dynamically and you recognize very well the structures. So for example,

>> in this one on the top right, >> there's so much going on with this over >> A lot of uh false alarm. Yeah, >> false alarms. >> I'm aware that >> you have false alarm, but it is only one. You have other others, >> right? Yeah. So, so we you agree that in all of this raw data, it's very difficult to say with any certainty >> based on all of the interference and background data that the model itself.

So, the data is clearly picking up >> It's difficult for me to be on board with the model given what I can see and >> What would you say to that, Fippo? Is the level of intricacy given the fact you want to go back one slide? >> Yeah. Yeah. just just g given like how in detail and intricate the model is the 3D model that you guys have derived and then also given what you just said which is there's a lot of noise in the raw reading do do you really think you can

stand behind that 3D model >> yes absolutely yes >> why and why is >> because we we have uh interpreted really a lot of results >> on all on a table So >> so you're basically saying you're like a pro at removing the noise like you know what's noise you can delineate the noise because you said there's a lot of noise >> It's not is not there is not there is a so-called striped vertical strip noise

and we have removed it now in the new tomography that kind of noise. So >> there is not any more >> present. Well, then to me it's like the Muon scans where I'm like I don't know either one, right? You could be looking at looking at both of them. And I think Filipo's point about a synergy between the two technologies where you're merging the two techniques is probably the best course of action for really getting closer to the truth. >> Yes. Because you are detecting things and then you use another method another a complete other method to to try and

detect the same thing. >> Yeah. So, so for example, Filippo, you said that the scan happens once and it's 15 seconds and inside of the structure, >> there are going to be micro vibrations that are happening just based on the geology and the the, you know, seismic movements or anything. Yeah.

micro movements. >> Yeah. So, so these these images aren't necessarily even background noise, but it could be just foundational elements of the pyramid with tiny little shifts of the block or the slight movement of the earth producing these micro vibrations that are producing a signature that's picked up on the surface. So it's the difficult thing and this is his job because he's the expert is differentiating between background noise, normal vibrations within the

structure and actual chambers. So that's critical in really understanding this data is the differentiation between each and trying to separate out which is >> and but you feel you feel confident in your ability to absolutely differentiate. I have to say this also everything we put that we we insert in the 3D model we we analyzed a lot of results so we are I'm I can say sure but very

confident that probably things that we insert in the 3D model are the reality are effective uh there. >> So, let's go to the final 3D model. >> Which we have. So, this is another good >> Look how nice. >> So, again, this this is the queen's chamber here. >> And we have the shaft coming out of the queen's chamber. >> Look that the red signature here

>> and also below the below there is >> Yes. Or here. >> Yeah. Yeah. So again, it's he's the expert in interpreting what the actual data is showing and this is the model that they've created from this >> Can I just say that the 3D model looks absolutely wild like it looks like a an advanced contraption. It does not look like uh you know something that was we would normally associate with being >> in a storm

>> 4,000 years ago, let alone you know 10,000 years ago. >> Yeah. Yeah. It's crazy. >> So, the model is wild. >> Wild. Yeah. >> And I again, my only caveat to the model is like I don't see how you get to the model from the data. >> But it's your job as the creator of the software and the developer of the project to take the raw data and turn it into something that the people can understand because only one result with a c can I ask you a question? When you

measured the Grand Sasso laboratory, >> go back to that other image. Are you getting that level of granularity with it? Are you getting these instruments and all that stuff? When you see the Grand Sasa Laboratory, are you getting >> that level of when I say granularity, that level of specificity? >> I tell you, yes. >> So, I I want to show you, and this is an important part of the conversation. >> The proof of concept. So it's nice but we also have like tons of

mess this all in one. >> Why? Because I have to integrate also in the in the vertical dimension of this tomogram. If I integrate like that, >> I I will have uh absolutely less false alarms. But they are not false alarms. They are true alarms because the the soil the the ground it is a mess. So you the the result is the reality. Okay. So because why uh

because um the sound does not propagate into the free space but only but it it is propagating inside the matter and the matter is complicated. So look, you have the uh that mess that I don't know. >> No, no, no. I I understand. Um but again from a from a person who my entire body of work and anybody who's interested in the function of the Egyptian pyramids

>> if there is a new novel approach to detecting internal chambers >> we want to see consistency of the detection of the known structures which in here we do have a great signature. >> Down here. >> Mhm. The Queen's Chamber in this one doesn't have a great signature. Okay. >> We have background data here. >> That's a problem of the layover of the of of the R. Yes, that's a problem. >> It's it's obscuring the view of any

signature from the King's Chamber or the Grand Gallery. >> But I guess Filippo, would you know that that's a problem from the layover of the technique? Would you know that if you didn't know the structure? Would you be able to say >> see that's the yes >> really you say that that the pattern matches that's obvious >> I know very well the yeah fair enough >> if I a report that's the layover and then those are real structures >> and then the queen's chamber like in other cases >> you don't have only one but you have a

plethor of results so you are able to track track into the the demographic dimension the uh different targets >> and you're sure you just missed the queen's chamber because it was too >> Okay. And you've missed >> it is small but in that particular slice you don't have it >> because you you maybe I don't remember now this case but because we we did a lot of study I don't remember the case but probably >> we we did not align the demographic slice on the on the on the stream. Okay.

>> And that's good. >> Yeah. Yeah. And and again, what I found really compelling about this one is the signature of this tag here. >> Ah, yes. >> Going down from from the queen's chamber >> down here into tag 15 which is represented by this blue line here. >> Listen that is in that is interest. >> So this has again been reported in the archaeological excavation that there is something like this below the queen's >> And did you know >> it's covered up now. Filippo, did you

have any context on that in the historical record before you made this >> That's really crazy. That's pretty cool. So that that again, you know, again, I I have some >> No, I'm I am listening this this story. >> So there's there's some there's some >> there's some positive things about it and there's also some questions and some negatives where we don't get a conclusive answer. So my objective with this is try to parse through what we can see and what we can't see to try to make

a conclusive determination about what structures are actually there. And this is an instance where the anecdotal archaeological reports substantiate the idea of there being a shaft and chamber system below the queen's chamber which is certainly looks like there is something coming down from the queen's chamber here. So this is again when I initially looked at this paper four or five years ago this was the part that I found most compelling the the shaft system below the queen's chamber. So now

I think we can move on. Um this was another interesting one for >> this interesting look. So we were talking about this here >> and I know this >> right. So this large >> don't don't care about that. >> So you don't Well, let me ask a question real quick. >> This is the zed. Look how nice it is. >> So this is the zed look and this is the grand gallery. >> Yeah. This I like it a lot. I like a lot this thing here. Uh this is the Z. It is very clear. Look how nice it is. These are not simulated data is a real

data. This is the grand gallery and probably we are detecting I I don't know if we are detecting also the big void but some somewhere here has to be but maybe in this tomographic line we don't see it but we see clear very very nicely the grand gallery that is this and the zed and also the struct the square structure that is surrounding the zed which is this look Brook Jeffrey this.

>> Yeah. Yeah. There's there's the slide of that in the next one. >> And um the grand gallery is here like that. We should see also the big void. But I have to retrive the original tomography the high resolution. But here we are not seeing the big void. >> So you have it labeled there at tag 19. >> So in this one >> big void. Yes. You have it labeled over >> Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes, I'm sorry. Uh, thank you, Jeff. Thank you for this.

>> please help. >> are my results, but I did it six years ago. No, so I don't remember exactly the how it how how we managed to >> So, my question about this one was this >> No, it's it's my job. >> Do you think so? We know that the >> is built on a mound of bedrock. >> No, that's not >> Could this possibly be a signature of

the bedrock? >> No, that's the sign signature of the >> So, it is something that uh the the the radar returns is so strong that you retrive uh you retrive that signature also in the vibrations. Okay. It is something. It is something that I I can explain it to you uh scientifically. Yeah, if you want. But >> no, no, I just I just I I need >> There wasn't any explanation for what

this was in the paper. So I wanted to ask you >> an aberration due by layover is well known to me. >> Okay. But inside the aberration inside things you can see very clear the the um the grand gallery the zed and other facilities and also the big void tag 19 >> Yeah. Okay. That's a panoramic view of

what we are uh dealing. Look there. We just need I think you Filippo to create known standard conventions for what is layover noise and what is you know empty space and what is you know physical material of XYZ density. I think all of that needs to be laid out in some sort of taxonomy by you >> so that the open scientific community can kind of corroborate and check your >> Yes. But I thank Jeffrey that

invite and you also uh Jesse and Jeffrey you invite me here and we are and I am g giving you additional explanation of of our technique. Okay. >> Yeah. So today we spoke about the incident angle how to see deeper how to see only the pyramid the layover. No that's because of the layover. Okay. It's a false learn, but we know it. It's there. Okay. We don't consider it >> because we are rather experts. Okay. Um

it's it's not. >> Would an average radar expert be able to tell between layover and you know >> an average rather expert? Yes. Can distinguish the the layover and the forest shortening and the shadowing that are the three main issues of radar. But uh in the Doppler tomography domain, you have to connect these things and so read >> read this problem. >> So you have to create new like conventions for kind of digesting this

stuff and processing it. >> So I just wanted to show these last diagrams, the final diagrams. >> So the top view of the big void >> connected into this square structure around the king's chamber. I suggest you to grab this image and overlap overlap this image on the moon scanning results. >> do it and then let me know. You will see also the big void like that.

>> Interesting. So again, the the the comparison of what we were looking at is that they're showing it's a north to south orientation. >> Yeah. Here he's showing it as a more of an east to west orientation connected into these other structures around the king's chamber. >> Then we have kind of the final >> Very good. Look you you see >> with measurements >> with measurements. >> So they they took >> now you you you are. >> So what they did here is they took the data and they measured all of the data.

>> Yeah. And they interpreted the specific measurements of the signatures that were received by the radar. >> And they incorporated the measurements and all of the unique features into a complete model that incorporates all of the new features. So we have the big void here. We have this chamber system and shaft system that goes around the king's chamber. Here we have this shaft system below the queen's chamber. and a possible connection point

as Filippo mentioned between the newly discovered feature on the northern face that connects into the Grand Gallery. So this is a complete reconstruction including measurements that were taken from the raw data and put into the >> So now let's go >> to the new paper. >> New the new paper. the new paper we established a foundation of the first >> and I think have done probably an overly indepth analysis >> but I think it's important that we have the discussion so there there's one

there's one main question I have about the new paper at this point everybody's already I'm going to assume everyone's already seen the the raw data images so we're gonna this is the scanning >> of the kafra pyramid the central pyramid >> and this is the data that they are of potential new structures located above the existing chambers inside of the central pyramid. >> And I'll I'll show you a diagram here in a moment that compares the known

chambers to what we have here. >> And this is their reconstruction of these vertical pillars. I know everybody's seen that at this point. >> So, let's get to the proof of concepts. >> That were presented during the Malta >> Yeah. So these were scans of modern structures that are intended as proof of >> that this technology can read the micro vibration surface signatures of internal >> Yes. The in terms of signal processing

information you penetrate. >> Yeah. So my main question so we here we have the Carlin tunnel >> and this is the scan. >> The scan look. >> Okay. So, Filipo, >> can you explain? >> So, the qualitative image here. >> Same thing with the Grand Sasso. >> This is the raw the processed data >> the tunnel here. >> These are all the scaring

>> and this is the the grand sasso the physics laboratory. So here here we have the configuration of the laboratory and here on the left >> is the >> real measurement data. >> Real not simulated real. >> Right. Okay. >> Can you explain why this >> looks completely different from this? >> What is the difference between what is going on here in the proof of concept? >> This is a signal processing procedure. uh there uh we are uh dealing with

something let's called wide and a wide area the gas so we speak >> wide array and uh the focusing procedure of the phonons are different so we use something different that we can see b very wide I can say you the details but the details are that there The focusing process is done to see okay I want to see wider okay focus wider

and there we are observing the grandaso because it's big the grandas it's big >> okay so what is the footprint again >> so we said that when you were scanning the pyramids >> you have a 5k by 5 km footprint area of the scan >> the footprint of potential tomographic lights Okay. If you want to scan the demographic line, you put it on the >> Sure. Sure. When you scan the Grand >> is it the same 5 km by 5 km?

>> The same. >> So, it's the same footprint. >> If the focusing technique, >> for this scan, >> produced this quality of an image. Why are we using this? Yeah. >> To image inside of the pyramid. Can you explain the technical reason? Yes. Why? Because I thought the these were not inside the pyramid. Under the pyramid. >> Well, both. >> Right. So, this is a scan of what's inside of the pyramid. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> And this is a completely different type

of signature than what is shown here. It's a good question because >> So, there's a very big difference between these two things. >> Y. So can you explain what the difference is between the process and the end result? >> The first thing is this that this is black and white look and the other one is another kind of colors you see red and blue red and >> So it is a a different representation. So again we have here the tunnel blue

white blue okay and there you see is red and blue >> in the case of the grand saso I used a different processing technique. It was like an experiment. Why here I am seeing it in a different color? Because here I attempt to do different approaches of different tomographic lines like that because I wanted to mitigate the noise

in the in the vertical direction of the tomographic line like So to average pixel by pixel the noise and uh we see that the results the results are very good. >> But I spent at least 2 months of processing time. >> Okay. Why didn't you do the same thing? >> That's why that that's why it's not something that you can do it every day

because I went to my friend like can I can I use your computers? Okay. Yes. But I can use his computer forever. No, >> but it sounds like that's a superior >> So why would >> It's a superior technique. Yes. >> So why wouldn't you use that on the most important finding? >> Because I didn't have the computers. I am poor. >> Oh no. >> I have the computer instruments. I have my instruments. I have >> But you have to understand how to to like random person in the audience. They're thinking like Filippo, why don't

you use your friend's computer? >> Yeah. because so for example this this proof of concept >> also wasn't presented in conjunction with the original paper either. >> So this is new from the Malta conference which was in 2024. >> this proof of concept is newer compared to their original scans in 2020. >> So to me this is far more convincing than anything that we've seen thus far with the original scans. There is the the the labor.

>> How much would it cost you to do the equivalent of this but for the coffer pyramid substructure? >> My project in the future is to do it real time. I just I want to do it real >> How much would that cost you? >> I don't know a lot. >> But I can't see you. I don't know. >> But yeah, >> millions. Let's say millions. How how much of the validation I do think it's important because it it you're saying that the processing was slightly different here versus so when you're citing this as validation how many of

the other examples like the Osiris shaft or other things >> did you use this kind of more rapid thinly slice technique >> everything that you are that you have all of them black and white >> yeah I have all of them okay >> right so so again it >> from my perspective somebody who is super focused on discovering the true configuration of these structures. >> Why would we even publish the initial results if the capability existed to do

something superior that could eliminate all of the background noise and confusion? So in your first paper you made the statement transparent like a >> Those images from the first paper are not transparent like a crystal. >> I'm not I don't agree. This >> is this is transparent like a crystal. So why would we not use this? Is good. This is really good. This is way better, Filippo. I know. >> And that's why this is like super

important. When I was watching this in Malta, I didn't want to get into too indepth of a convers. But when I was looking at this, I was like >> this is actually something that very much resonates with me as being a very powerful technology. what you showed in the first paper the differentiation between background noise and layover and >> first paper it the the word says the first paper it is it was the initial uh of our research so

>> going back in time six or seven we we began two years before the the paper so in 201 nearly 10 years now 8 years Yeah. So the software was the initial software, >> right? The inks we did it resonates like a crystal because it is transparent with >> When was the last an old crystal? Let's say like an old crystal. >> Yeah. Well, well, it's not a crystal. It's limestone, right?

>> Yeah. So limestone is not a crystal. But this the the qualitative >> processed image of this is very much transparent like a crystal. I thought this was spectacular. >> And when you're presenting this data to an academic community that is going to be extremely rigorously trying to tear this apart, >> the background noise, the layover, the inability to detect certain structures because of the tomographic line. I would

scrap all of that and go with this. >> No, this is uh very nice. I like it. Let's get I mean, seriously, I mean, this is going to drive me insane. Let's >> see. This is why I wanted to show you >> Well, let let's let's get you crowdfunded the money to so that you can get this level of quality on the actual coffer pyramid substructure. >> What's that? >> Oh, let's get you better. Let's get you better. But even this would be cuz I do think there's an issue if you're like

you know all the validation looks like that and then you know your reading on the coffer pyramid looks like the way you and and then it's like we have to we're basically taking your word for it and I my all my soft signaling is like you're legit but like that's me. I'm one person and like you know I also would love for there to be like an energy grid under the pyramid. So I think we need this level on You know the actual coffee >> will I it it it

will be done. >> It will be done. >> Okay. Amazing. Soon. >> Now we if we work in the right uh we will establish a foundation and uh in Malta there we will install the computers and maybe we will do something better also better than this. and and hopefully today I wanted to give you some feedback as a friend for ways

that you can improve the presentation to the academic community because the questions that I have are the reasons that they have immediately rejected all of the data because there's a lot of >> but if you lead with this there can be less objections to the data this I thought was spectacular. When I saw this in Malta, this really caught my attention and it bothered me that you went from this, which is transparent

like a crystal. I think this is >> The the scan the scan of this structure here, you can even see it here from far away. You can see the triangular, the transverse tunnel, you can see the mountain, and you can see the inside of the laboratory. >> I Filippo, I love this. This is the best proof of concept that you have access to a technology that can scan inside >> But then you go from this to this

>> and I was like, what is going on here? There's a there's such a huge difference between quality A and quality B that it takes away from the credibility of this and it's not an efficient proof of concept. But uh I know I agree with your um on what you are saying but >> there are results you you we can't see we can't say that are better results. So, I would love to see >> do it with the new thing

>> because yeah, the new I would love to see that >> the new thing is so easy to read for a lay person that I do think it would just help you your cause. And I I I'll defend you here and say the fact that unless you are fabricating that first image, you're if you're using Sard Doppler tomography to Jeffrey's point to reconstruct the Grand Sasso Laboratory in that image on that we saw on the left. Yeah. Here. >> That is a total proof of concept for the

actual like technique. That's amazing. And then that's my point. >> And then and then you need to do that for the thing that's going viral that everybody cares about. >> Watching this. >> Yeah. So this was very good and that's why I wanted to show this and that's why >> and you see also the facilities >> here. Yeah. Yeah. We can see the facility here. The triangular and this is where the intererometer is. >> Oh, the intererometer is fantastic. Yes. >> Okay. So, the ferrometer is fantastic. >> Another caveat on testing modern

structures as proof of concept. >> These are operating systems. >> There's electricity. There's moving components. There's people, you know, they didn't turn the lab off for him to scan this. So there are inherent vibrations in a modern operating facility that are producing more readily readable signatures. >> In an ancient structure, there are no moving parts.

>> The great pyramid is chambers. That's it. There's no ventilators. There's no electricity. There's no moving parts. So my only issue with the proof of concept using modern facilities is there are actual active vibrations, mechanical vibrations within the structure that are producing more intense signatures. >> Yes. But you have 1.4 kilome. Yeah. Right. Right. Um the the height of the mountain is way bigger than a >> That's a fair point and I I do think

that should be addressed. I think it's at the margins compared to the larger point which is that this technique looks fundamentally different and yeah I think uh Filippo you should definitely do the structures underneath the coffer pyramid but with this technique that you're showing here and it's really important for these you know you're giving fodder to the skeptics you know if you if you don't do this >> so we always say when you present something new put your best foot forward

because it helps to eliminate >> But I can see your pride in this. >> And I felt the same way about it. I was like, "Okay, this is this is cool." When I saw this, I was like, "He's really possibly on to something >> for sure." >> But then we again moved on to the rest of the presentation where he's showing the new scans of the Kafra pyramid. So here's another one that's another proof of concept of the Mosul Dam. And there are some turbines, two different types of turbines. There's a Kaplan turbine

and another circular turbine like this. >> So, this was another proof of concept where they scanned the Mosul dam, >> but that's using the like raw data that looks like the raw data, >> the secondary the inferior technology, >> which which which I think is that's a good proof of concept then. >> Yes. But uh I I have to crit criticize this. Okay. >> In the context of uh ancient megalytics in this case the two beings are in

movement and they produce >> that was going to be my point is that these are >> of energy in terms of >> mechanical moving parts. >> So of course there's going to be a proof of concept. Yes. But is a proof a proof of concept not applicable in megalytics because there in megalithics you need a lot of precision a lot of sensitiv >> and when you what are what's the word you're using mega >> megalithic structure because these are these are operating moving mechanical components the dam is working right so

he's scanning an piece of machinery >> you are but it's okay yeah >> to to play devil's advocate if you one slide back like uh go one again like that looks like decent I I I can't read you know sorry I'll put this but this is the configuration one slide to the right like that that looks like decent to me that looks like >> so so let me show here what so this is the configuration of the Kaplan turbine >> and then this is the configuration of the spiral turbine

>> and what we have here is the Kaplan turbine and this is the Francis spiral So it's >> so my only question that would help validate this is do you have an engineering blueprint of the Mosul dam >> that shows that there are these two different types of turbines >> they are confin >> so you're >> it's not possible to retrive the >> that was my question is like this is great and you're showing two different types of turbines right next to each

>> but it's it's sufficient to to say that there's a franchises and a couple insufficient uh Jeffoffrey you can't have the e the effective um design of the turbine um cham you say the tbein area >> that's that's a valid point >> very very difficult to have it >> sure sure but I was just my question is do you have access to an engineering

blueprint that can corroborate this configuration within the dam That would just >> I don't know. I don't have >> enhance. Yeah. No, it's okay. Yeah. I was just curious if you did because that would be even more evidence to show here is just like we did with the diagrams of the great pyramid. You could take the engineering blueprint >> speaking on something very simple to obtain because they are mechanically move moving and also the thickness is very low. The >> in the dam

>> in the dam. Yes. is not I think 300 m something like that is is very >> so the three of us immediately latched on to my entire point of that discussion >> is that there's qualitatively vastly superior technology being used for the proof of concepts. The proof of concepts are modern mechanically operating structures that are very different to imaging megalithic structures where there are no moving mechanical points. So

again, I I was just when I saw this, >> can I say it slightly differently, which >> I don't know that it's qualitatively better. The problem is in Filippo's head, it might actually not be qualitatively better. It just looks to it's it's it's qualitatively more digestible, translatable, comprehensible any average person because you get like a better image for for a layman to read. For all I know, if I'm inside his head, he's thinking, I am just as confident

looking at those like what look like thermal imaging blotches. >> So, this is the final proof of concept. The Gddard tunnel. Another tunnel. >> Again, this is the tunnel. This is the mountain range here. >> So you can see the mountain range here >> and the tunnel runs through here >> and then there's another one that goes underground here. >> What is Goddard tunnel? >> So it's just a tunnel through a mountain in Switzerland. >> I think 2 kilometers under the >> so interesting >> again and using the nomenclature from

the first paper transparent like a crystal. This is what I would want to >> Yeah, it's beautiful. >> And again it was just frustrating for me when I was going through this. I really >> Yeah. So, if you can if you can come to the table with something like that, >> I think that would silence a lot of the haters. So, debunking is an attempt to >> So, when somebody is a debunker, they're trying to say >> S technology is fake because of X, Y,

and Z reasons. So, that's debunking. And there's a lot of people that have attempted to debunk this to say it's fake. And then there's the other side where people absolutely love it and they really believe it. So that's what we mean by debunking. And again, that's not what I'm here to do. Clearly, I'm interested and I'm fascinated by this and I have a vested interest in knowing the truth. Yeah. It's it's uh we should come up with a new term which is stress testing. It's not debunking. It's you know if there is a a there there you try

it under all conditions constructively stress testing in a positive way which I think we're doing here. So yeah. >> So again this is another image of the >> going through here. >> Again the reason I showed these is >> see anywhere. >> Yeah. This is this is supposed to be the proof of concept for the new scanning, but it's it looks so much different >> there's a contradiction between the quality of this and then what is shown. >> I know you I know you understand it.

>> Yeah, of course. Right. But but all of us want to see this. Especially the people that don't believe in this >> You you have to go back and do it again. >> You do. You do. You do. and and and seriously uh come up with a number and like I I will rally Jeffrey will rally everybody with the platform will rally to just crowdfund you the money. Let's try we'll get you we'll get you the money somehow. I mean it's so important. >> Yeah, cuz it's on you though to come up with a number, come up with a figure and

we'll get you know it's it's it's really important. So this is the rest of the presentation is just going into their presentation during Malta when they're showing the new scans from inside the Kafra pyramid. >> You know, we already talked about the azimuth compression. This is the scan of the Osiris shaft. >> Okay, so this was another proof of concept scanning a known structure to show that their technology is able to pick up the configuration that we absolutely know is there. But here we're

back to the kind of lower res uh correct >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So that that that is, you know, good a good sign of validation. >> Yeah. So there's been >> there's been some issues proposed with this. Okay. >> So this is from a channel called Night Scarab who did measurements that show that the signatures >> are off and that the measurements don't exactly match the known configuration. >> What do you say to that? But because any any measurement is

affected by errors and aberration. You remember that you are watching things that is propagating in matter. >> so you're just saying this is within the margin of air. >> It's the best of uh what we can retrive >> What? Sure. But what not? >> Yeah, of course. >> Gods, humans. So measurements that oh we have error >> out of out of curiosity what is the margin of error like

>> uh which kind of the the >> so he was saying that the measurement I think 4 meters 4 m of error >> which considering you're measuring from space using vibrations from underground we are measuring is a relative you are telling me you you made 4 meters of >> does anybody argue that the structure >> doesn't comport with the Osiris shaft or does everybody admit that it basically >> so the only right so the only sort of

caveat to this scan >> is this structure over here >> so I actually went out to the Giza plateau after the Malta conference as soon as we got back we live in Egypt so I can go to the Giza plateau anytime >> I think you found something no >> yeah that's why I was asking you about the footprint the square meter imaging footprint the area of the footprint that's that's the footprint is very >> It's it's huge, right? >> 5 km by 5 km is a huge footprint >> and in the vicinity of the Osiris shaft.

So it's located along the causeway, right? This connector pathway >> that leads from the Cafrey eastern temple down to the valley temple in >> And the Osiris shaft is located below the causeway. M. So directly on top of the causeway, maybe 10 to 15 ft away from the Osiris shaft opening, is another rectangular opening in the causeway that is indicative of another bedrock shaft. There's these big

vertical bedrock shafts all along the causeway adjacent to the central pyramid. They're just huge shafts that go down into the bedrock. There is an opening here at the top of the causeway that goes down into something, but like all of these bedrock shafts, they're completely filled in. It's fil it's filled in with sand and debris. >> Debris. Yeah. >> And then now we show the some shaft of those that you are making >> later later in the the presentation.

There's also another structure to the south of the causeway that appears to go underground. That's again why I was asking about the footprint of the area. >> Is he measuring any of these? >> Filippo in these scans. >> Oh, in terms of the the measurements. >> Oh, I don't know. >> Okay. Cuz it would be interesting if like you knew of something specific around the Osiris shaft that he picked >> Well, no, that's what I'm saying is we went out there and we found two different structures. >> In the vicinity of the Osiris shaft

>> that could be creating this signature >> Okay. Interesting. Interesting. So, we actually went out, my wife and I, shout out to my wife Alexa from Archo Alchemy that's been sitting over there patiently watching watching this whole thing go down audience me live audience. >> And this is why we need to go out together. You, me, and Orando need to go to Giza Plateau and look at this stuff so that I'm I'm so I know the Giza Plateau like the back of my hand. And anytime we want to look at a structure, I know where there's anomalies and

things like that all over the Giza Plateau that can help us get closer to the truth of what we're looking at here. So, I did find some structures that are in the vicinity of the footprint of the scan area that could be producing this signature here on the left. >> So, here on the right, we have level one, level two, and level three. >> Mhm. But then there's also these other horizontal signatures that go all the way down. >> This one, this one, you know, all of these different horizontal signatures.

>> We Filipo, you don't have a conclusive explanation for what's producing this section here. >> I want to ask you a question. >> You know very well the structure of the Osiris shaft. >> The last floor where you have the swimming pool >> here. Yes. Yes, there there are some studies, some research that attempt to go and see what there is below the the water level.

>> Have they excavated below the water >> or or I don't know, they put the camera to see what or >> No, no. As far as I know, the only investigation into anomalies inside the Osiris shaft >> is some connecting tunnels. >> Okay. There are some bedrock tunnels that connect into the Osiris shaft. During the original excavations, they did pump all of the water out. >> Oh, they that is impossible.

>> No, they did. >> Ah, they did. >> Yeah, they did a pump and they pumped maybe not all of it, but they pumped the water out of the Osiris shaft. >> And so the water level was going down. >> Correct. And then but if they don't pump any don't pump anymore >> it comes right back up >> in in how how much time? >> Oh I don't know but so this was done by Zahi Hawas and team. >> They pumped all the water out so that they could lift the lid off of the container on the third level.

>> So there's a container on the third level that's surrounded by four pillars. It's like um a limestone island in the middle of this water with this big container. And they were going down in this thing supposed to be the burial shaft of Osiris. And they're going to lift the lid off of this container and find feronic burial or Osiris's body in here. Of course, absolutely nothing was discovered when they lifted the lid of this thing. >> Wow. So they did pump the water out to

do this excavation. After the excavation is done, the water level came right back up because as I was saying, there's a there's an independent aquifer >> directly below the structure here. Yes. >> And the third level of the Osiris shaft taps into the water level in this independent aquifer. So everything that we're showing here is underwater. So, nobody knows how deep is the water.

>> Oh my god. >> There's never been um a hydraological investigation of the depth of the water below the Osiris shaft. >> Can I ask a question? >> How big the the substructures under the copper pyramid that you feel like you're measuring uh these columns, hollow tubular structures, what is the >> Yes. I think I don't remember if we have um indicated this but uh approximately

uh 20 m >> each one >> the the the diameter >> but each the diameter of each sorry not yes not circumference what is the >> the diameter approximately 20 m >> of each tube >> yes and they are this and they have a distance of about 5 m >> so each tube is 60 ft >> uh 20 m I don't Yeah. I mean that to me that makes me higher conviction I have to say because you know if you're not measuring the Queen's Chamber because of

some granite you know and it's too small or whatever you know I guess the granite actually helps as far as Yeah. >> So if you're not measuring the Queen's Chamber because it's too small you know and then you have this possible you know error margin here displayed in the Osiris shaft that's four meters. >> Yeah. I do think if you have a 20 meter single column and then that's repeating four four plus four you know eight times >> that somehow feels like the only thing if I were in his position I could say pretty confidently you know and again we

have to get into like can you penetrate below so let's penetrate that because I I have a pressing question that I'd like for you to answer yeah so every everyone's seen >> so this is some of the raw data >> of their scan of The third pyramid, the man kar pyramid, >> showing these vertical signatures below the menar pyramid. Same thing here. These are more of the vertical signatures of these structures below the >> Same thing here. Pyramid of menar.

There's this big signature here of a possible vertical something below the structure. Here is the model that they presented at the end of the Malta conference showing the entire Giza plateau and these underground vertical features connected into these cube features the whole model here. So this gets into the question of the water level. Some of the the tubular structures are under the sphinx as well >> uh that you measure. >> Yes, we have measured I don't know if we

have the the slide here. Yes. But the answer is yes. >> So here on the left in the data >> you said that when the image tapers off a cut off of energy we discussed in >> Yeah. So I'm I'm just explaining to the >> So on the data here in these vertical >> where the data starts to taper off >> is an indication of the water level. >> Okay. And that's reflected in the model >> could be could be the indication of the

water level but is not the water level is not present abruptly. Do this experiment. Take a dry sponge. H dig a hole on the dry sponge. So you have the dry sponge and the hole on the dry sponge. >> Okay. You put the the dry sponge here or into a container and you put water.

You will see that the water goes into the sponge and for gravity the water will stabilize somewhere. But the liar that uh uh represents the dry part of the sponge and the more wet part of the sponge is not abrupt but you have >> the transition right. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. So the permeation of the water is not

>> Yeah. It's not >> it depends on the absorption of the >> abruptly. Right. Okay. >> Yes. So I don't know I that that is a strange effect that as we discussed uh before I can't give you an exact answer okay >> that phenomena because I don't know >> okay and that was my question is >> the water level in the model and in the >> is approximately a kilometer down

>> but it but this is not true because So that's why the water level is >> there. It is >> that's the next point >> is that the actual water level >> below the water table of the Giza plateau is shown to be approximately 50 >> 50 m >> below the plateau not is it is it 15 or >> So it's 15 m above sea level 50 m below the plateau. >> Got it. >> Right. So this is courtesy of ancient

architects. another individual in the community who basically debunked debunked the the study. >> He's a debunker. No, >> he's a debunker. Yes. Yeah. So again, I was just curious what was your explanation for the difference of the water level shown here. >> The water level I I tell you you can it's much higher. >> You can see it from this tomography. >> This line >> approximately approximately. >> Okay. Okay. So it's not 15 m >> you can see something related to the

water level. >> And it's not that but it's that one. >> So the tapering of the image here is not because of the water level. maybe effectively you have an effective physical cut off of something and then they continue with another kind of structure. >> So this is I think this is >> no I if you ask me why is like that you

have to go and see effectively sure >> the measurements are those >> right? So so what you're saying is that this is supposed to be a solid object. >> Yes. going more than a kilometer down and connecting into these large cubes very deep. >> However, the signature of this solid >> does not >> changes changes >> changes significantly >> The explanation you had given in Malta was because that the water level was

>> but we both agree that this is not the water level that's causing the >> maybe is is that is there. >> Yeah. This blue line. >> Yeah. Yeah. That one. So if this is a solid object, what is creating the lack of signature >> I don't know. >> Is the is does the lack of signature start a kilometer down or how many how many meters down is that kind of cut off where it starts to go from >> approximately 600. >> Okay. So you I guess then if I was you

>> maybe there is a something that I was but I can't disclose it now. There is something I can't disclose it now. >> Interesting. Okay. Okay. But um is it is there a reason you're saying 600 m but like why did you say it goes a kilometer >> Yes. Look how nice it is. >> You can see that cut off. I do see that it maintains >> the different different sensors you see the same cutff. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But that's what I'm

wondering. Why? Why do why are we saying a kilometer deep instead of 600 m deep? >> I don't >> Well, that was just my estimate. So, so but it was his estimate. >> Maybe I am I am saying something wrong. >> Uh the vertical uh numbers you can read it. You can read it. >> So again here. >> So they're getting a cut off. This is >> Yeah. So this is 600 m here. >> So this is where the image itself and whatever this is the signature of this

starts to cut off. >> Here but there it looks like it cuts off less and does extend it depends on the close to a kilometer. >> It depends on the processing procedure that we are doing. It depends. >> Okay. Hundreds of meters you would say confidently but and then you don't know what to attribute. No. >> To Jeffrey's point, that sort of awkward gradient, you know, >> because now we are we agree together that the water levels is high. >> And and you have a cut off of of the

>> Yeah. And all of all of these vertical >> show a tapering of the signature. >> So that's that's an anomaly of these vertical signatures that we don't have a good explanation for. If this is a solid object, why doesn't the signature register all the way down? It's not. We've agreed it's not a result of the water table, there's there's something else happening with the signature where it's possibly no longer able to detect that deep.

>> Well, do do you have an alternative hypothesis or >> so again at this stage I'm just asking >> Yep. Maybe we are we are focusing the attention on something that uh it is normal to have that kind of result. >> Do you see an attenuation of signal? >> No no only here. >> Okay. Only here. So there is something idiosyncratic unique here going on. Okay. That's >> Yeah. So we can see it here in this this polarized tomographic image. This is again the vertical signatures. >> I will say the the polarized tomographic

image even the raw tomographic image >> super nice. those look very tubular and like you know >> same thing here it has that same the deeper the deeper it goes >> even when you get that awkward kind of gradient cut off like it still looks like it's maintaining some sort of >> look the water we see >> this up at the top >> yeah got it okay so you would you admit now that you were you didn't know about

exactly where the water level was back then or Oh, okay. >> We can we can make mistakes. >> Sure. Sure. Sure. Probably is the water >> But no, because the water level is now >> it's Yeah. >> Can I ask can I ask a dumb question because a lot of this is prefaced on this idea of these structures being man-made and artificial. >> And so two question. >> Oh my god. >> You don't know. >> No, we don't know. We don't know. >> We don't know. But they

>> at least a lot of the speculation around them is around >> my best opinion they are man-made. >> But if it's an artificial structure, how would you build something that penetrates that deeply into the water >> You asked to me. Okay, you are asking me >> Yeah. Have you speculated about that? I mean you have to have thought of it or >> it is something that uh um I we I discuss about this issue with Colorado. >> Okay. And uh we agree that uh it is something that uh it is man-made. Okay.

So somebody built those things there. Mhm. It can be that uh once the pyramids were built so from the top maybe they dig it hole they dig it on the bottom but it it they are not simply holes. M >> they are built. How can how can I say? >> But if if they're 20 m in diameter and

they are going a kilometer deep, >> then I'm going with aliens. >> Like how do how do we explain that? That's pretty >> that feels harder to explain than the construction of the pyramids themselves, which are really hard to explain. >> Yeah. But so that's the problem though is that's where this disintegrates from an academic conversation regarding the actual data to the leap of speculation into alien constructions which is why the academic community has outright rejected this whole thing because there's no physical

way that these could possibly have been built. Period. There's there's no way. >> Yeah, but you you would say the same thing about the pyramid. >> We don't understand. No, I agree with you there. We we still don't understand the mechanisms of operation, >> but it's also a completely different conversation building something above ground when we're talking about >> how could you even excavate into the bedrock to be able to build something. It's the the the logistics of the engineering. So, we were talking kind of

off camera >> how the civilization that built the pyramids and associated structures were absolutely able to build components that tap into the existing water level. The Osiron is excavated from the bedrock and constructed to tap directly into the water table below the structure. The configuration of the temple structure is precisely designed so that it hits that water table. Again, an independent

aquifer that's not connected to the Nile River because the water level inside the Osiron is the same as it was in the original design. The island and the reservoir surrounding the island. Same thing with the Osiris shaft. They were capable of building structures that go down to the water level and tap into the water level. Now we're talking about going a kilometer below the water level to excavate. The whole thing is filled

with water. If they are real, I I have a difficult time accepting that there is such a thing that is a man-made structure that goes a kilometer deep. the Giza Plateau is the bottom of an ocean from millions of years ago. The Tethus Sea, are you familiar with the formation of the Giza Plateau? >> Right? It used to be the bottom of an ocean millions of years ago. And there

is evidence of hydrothermal mineral deposits on the Giza Plateau. So hydrothermal vents are vertical structures that can go kilometers deep into the bedrock. >> So we can talk about this here in just a second. I just I want to walk through one more piece of data. So we've talked Can I ask one more question? >> Yeah. Because it's very related to the logistics of being able to build something that goes penetrates a kilometer deep. Um and this is a this is

a flint dibble point. Is it too hot down >> Ah yes remember. >> Yes. we have to speak about this. it is very simple to give you an answer. The first thing is it is uh normal that uh people could be there maybe you can build. Yes. To build these people has to go down. Yes, that's true.

But there are a lot of methods to cool down high temperature. The first one is this. The enormous quantity quantity of shafts that are present on the surface of the that are filled with debris and one of those I show I show them in the presentation. I don't know if you >> I have that in here too. We had there are a lot of shafts and the shafts

uh are um can have the function of giving air, giving light and so cooling the underground structures that are below. So the answer is okay, we want to build something like that. Yes. Let's begin building this thing, this uh mega mega mega structure here by digging

and building the the cooling shafts. Okay, we start from the shafts. Then once we are downstairs there, we intercept maybe natural horizontal cavities. Okay, and so we build and we start to build In some way they they they they did it in some way somebody did these things. So the vertical shafts that you find principally uh between the the the

sphinx and the caf pyramid. There are three uh four or five uh um shafts that are blocked by debris. and those facilities we um uh we are thinking to submit a proposal to the Egyptian government because those shafts can be the entrance of the underground facility without doing any kind of drill. We don't have to drill.

>> we we only have to clean. >> We only have to clean enough. >> Well, I I hope you get that approval. I guess another question I would have is are all of the tubular structures a kilometer deep? The ones under the sphinx as well, they all are hundreds of meters deep. >> I have the the the the slide. Yes. Because had to uh transport fresh air and light into uh the below uh

the the structures that are below. >> Yes. and Idelio those tag 471. Yes, those. >> So, this is this is the causeway here. >> Right. So, we're talking about the Osiris shaft being located on the causeway and these bedrock vertical shafts are adjacent to the causeway on both sides. So, there's some over here on this side and some on the southern side that go down vertically into the >> to an unknown depth. They've never been

fully excavated. They were filled with debris and sand. Now also trash accumulation for, you know, >> decades and all all sorts of stuff. Just completely filled in with junk. >> Yeah. All the tires there are of there is there is rubbish. And >> so there's ev there's evidence even just looking down into these vertical pits, there's evidence of transverse horizontal shaft. So >> we I detected >> Yeah. Yeah, they they they showed that.

So these shafts go down vertically into the bedrock and then there's horizontal transverse connecting shafts that link these things. >> So in in my opinion, that's part of the industrial infrastructure of the Giza plateau. And I I have a slide on that here in just a sec. So the other pressing question, Filipo, I know you know this was coming and this is kind of the last question I have for you. Yeah. So this is the data of the scan of the Kafra pyramid and the big objection is

the fact that the known chambers are not shown on the data. >> So this is above the Belleone chamber here and the known chambers should be somewhere down here. >> Yes. So this is this is the configuration of the Kafra pyramid the known internal chambers and all of these areas that are marked with hash marks here are bedrock excavated chambers so they're carved directly from the bedrock

of the Giza plateau and this was the statement I don't know if you wrote this or if Armando wrote this but so it states here that the detection issues related to the known structures inside by the Kafra pyramid. The satellite data only reveals the entrance descending corridor and the roof. This is because the structures are embedded in a limestone slab that absorbs the signal. So this is the bedrock of the Giza

plateau from which these chambers are This is no deeper than 15 m into the and the radar signal is absorbed in that limestone bedrock according to the quote from your team. Again, I don't think I think Ali Armando wrote this. I don't know if you wrote this, but this was published on the Facebook page. So can you clarify

why the signal is being absorbed in this bedrock and then how if it's absorbed in 15 m of bedrock here how can it possibly scan any deeper? >> Okay. Yes. Uh the the answer is this uh let's start from a from this matter of fact. We are not dedecting the Belony. We are not detecting the narrow corridors. Uh uh yes the narrow

corridors uh because uh in that tomographic line that we are using they are not present. Okay. So now we are dealing this problem uh being aware that the in sometimes targets are not dedact. Uh in this case uh we uh think that the um exactly what that uh message was uh

we were we we wrote that message because the most uh part of the vibrational energy in that case were um attenuated a lot the signal. So we would not be able to uh retrive the Belony chamber and also other um uh because uh no energy we failed the uh detection of those known uh chambers.

>> Okay. Okay. But then the next logical question is if you're >> if you're saying that the signal is getting absorbed and attenuated because of limestone that's just 15 m deep then >> how you are detecting those >> a kilome deep through the same it is a question of measurements in those measurements we we were not able to retrive those uh those structure. Okay. But considering the particular

configuration of those huge um tubes approximately for more than 1 kilometers having a diameter of approximately 20 m we can we can uh we can see that they are very big. Okay. So you are comparing a very small object with huge

structures. So I I don't think that this is a point of comparation good comparation uh point because you are comparing huge structures with something very small. So in this case the very small things are not detected and that's a matter of fact you ask me why uh we gave that explanation okay because the big rock we don't have the the the vibration we

don't have the the the vibration but we have the vibrations to detect the huge structure and we have detected the uh very here. Uh that's the answer. It is obvious that this work we we have to continue to do this work. So we have to continue to scan the uh caf pyramid uh and so I am sure that we will find uh

results that uh show us also the bur. You got to bring the grand sasso improved methodology. Yes. Each and do it again. >> We need it. This Fippo, this is critical because again to say that the energy and >> micro vibrations are absorbed in bedrock >> 15 m deep. >> The deeper you go, the more bedrock there is and the more bedrock there is

to prevent these vibrations from being detected. So this is it's a big issue and this is the biggest objection that's been proposed in the community >> is this bedrock excavated chamber. There is also another thing that I have to explain you why there are things that are very visible and things that are difficult to be uh detected. It is a question of measurements.

Sometimes things are invisible, sometimes thing are very visible, are very bright. on the surface of the earth, >> anchored. So they start from the surface like the pyramid like that. Like >> we see it very very clear because the vanishment waves are very

um energetically on the boundary. So on the surface of the earth >> in that case the shafts are directly connected to the surface of the earth. So why the vibrate the the surface vibrates they we can detect the vibrations in that case the bony is something that is not directly on net you say is there yes so we need to scan it more more and more

>> have you tried doing these scans on any other limestone bedrock >> specifically we have the shafts >> the Osiris shaft >> yeah the shafts but also the vertical shafts how deep are those? >> So, we don't know how deep they go. He shows that they're going down hundreds of meters according to the scans. Yeah. >> And those are anchored on the surface of there. So, we can see it behind. >> Yeah. So, the the opening of the shaft is actually on the surface. >> So, you can look down directly into the

shaft and see that it goes down into the bedrock. So, that reminded me of a good point. So another thing we need is control samples. So for example, you provided really good proof of concept in the scanning of the tunnels and the physics laboratory. Those are fantastic. >> Another thing that we don't have in the studies are control samples. >> No, I So for example, >> I have mines.

>> No, no, no. So, so scan a structure just like a hill where there is nothing >> Oh, okay. Yeah. Yeah. >> To show us a control sample comparison. >> Do it. Yes. >> Yeah. So that people can see. So this >> we're going to scan the hill and show what is inside of a hill where we know there's nothing inside and we know there's no big vertical. So this has been another big criticism is that there's no control sample comparison.

>> We we will do it. Yes, we can do it. >> So this is also important in a scientific study. You always want to have a control sample so that you can compare the control sample to the test >> Can I just ask what because this touches on what you're asking. Yeah. in the context these commercial contexts where you're under NDA you don't need to talk about any of the specifics but I would just ask you how many instances are there of these because it's not a perfect control like you know Jeff is sort of describing here but it is

somewhat of a control where you're looking for like minerals and other things and we can kind of pattern match like regular land versus these megalithic archaeological sites. >> Yeah. So do you know like how how many times have you done this roughly >> what if >> you had to estimate just the method >> scanning like on anything like it is it between 100 and a thousand between a th00and and 10,000 >> how how many sites >> yeah how how many different sites yeah it's a better question >> not a lot about 10 >> about 10 okay got it

>> they are sufficient to to show things uh where are present let's see Let's say >> So tunnels inside tunnels. >> And we're both assuming >> things that are more controlled where nothing is present. >> And we're >> So you have different. >> Yeah. And we're assuming you've never seen anything like this. Anything like these column like 20 m, you know, >> are present because you see signadors

that are devastating. You you see those columns. What are those? >> Are there other times where they've missed structures that are more suspended and not tied to the foundational bedrock of the earth? >> Are there other examples of that miss? >> Yes. Yes, I have it. I have I have those kind of uh Yes. >> It's it's exciting. >> The experience that's that's if the if these things are ancorate on the surface of the earth is better. >> Yeah. Yeah. No, >> even better. I mean, this is exciting

because it's it's uh I uh you know, the way I net out is like you have you got a lot of work to do, you know, but I don't think I don't think it anything's conclusive in either direction. I think you got to just keep >> Yeah, that's that's kind of my my >> Yeah. So, uh all the question and thank you for your question. >> I care about this, Filipo. This is >> I tried to give the best answer. Yeah. So in the position that I am now I maybe I I am a bit tired because of the jet

>> No understandably >> and maybe uh this last uh issue this is an issue that of the Bonia I am thinking always of the Belone. >> we will solve it. We will solve it. So uh it has to be um investigated. >> we solve also this issue. So the issue is why we are not watching the Bony at the moment. What you read is the best answer that we can give you. >> Right. Yeah.

>> But we we I will ensure you I assure you that more scans will be done on the caf in order to find something to detect bone. Okay. Yeah. >> So, I know you have a big day tomorrow >> and I'll wrap this up quickly just so we can get through this and I know you know we both traveled yesterday and I'll just kind of cover this briefly. So, we're talking about Lewis Alvarez. >> Yep. I see that. >> Just just uh uh one thing about the the

vertical shafts. >> The vertical shafts are very important. I don't know why nobody went there to escalate to esavate to clean. I'm sorry. >> The bedrock shafts. Yeah. >> Why? There's there's so there's also >> no good archaeological explanation for what those shafts are for >> from from the feronic burial >> Archaeology and Egyptology does not have a good explanation for those vertical bedrock shafts adjacent to the causeway.

Some of some of them are burials >> where they've found smaller ones and they found bodies >> down inside of these because >> there have been a plethora of burials discovered on the Giza Plateau, >> not in the pyramids, but in structures adjacent to the pyramid structures. So they have found intrusive burials in some of these shafts, but there's not a good consensus for why these things are

>> So they've never made it after the the original construction. >> Sure. That's another question is which came first? >> And are those bedrock shafts an original part or are they part of the dynastic era construction? So that's always a a problem when looking at the layers of building and construction in Egypt. >> You observed from the internal those shafts and you I'm I think that you believe me that are made with

>> uh squared um constructions one on each like that that goes down >> going down into the bedrock. Yes. And I tell you that for me the shafts are It means that the water that is the water level if you if you um if you can see the water level that is outside the shafts the water is not able to go inside the shafts.

>> So if we clean the shafts we always find air not water also we've go below a lot. Okay. I don't know if you are if you agree with my idea. >> Yes. Because that also fits with my hypothesis on the function of those >> So that's that would get us into another hourong discussion on so you and I should you and I should sit down and talk about the function of everything

sometime. And so the project proposal that we are submitting, we are thinking to submit these weeks we are involving University of Ferrara. We are involving uh um other academic um organization. Yeah, >> I am out of this project because it's better that I will remain out. And we our intention is to use robots,

>> not humans because it's dangerous to go to go there. >> To use robots and clean the shops. >> I don't know. >> They should do that anyway because of all the trash. >> Yes. Let's say uh we can go below one to 5 m a day. Okay. >> Yeah. We just begin to work and every day we go. >> Yeah. Absolutely. So that so this next thing I I mentioned that there was a muon scanning of the central pyramid. Lewis Alvarez, I knew I recognized the

name. So he was a part of this. They scanned the Bone Chamber and the area above the Belleone chamber. They didn't find anything. Mhm. >> So they scanned approximately 19% of the total volume in an area here that was a cone half angle of 35° from the vertical. So it's this cone that they scanned above the Bone chamber >> and they didn't find anything. >> These are also supposedly located directly above the Belleone chamber. And

we've already kind of had a back and forth discussion about >> which is the most viable detection method. Muon scanning or S scanning. Muon scanning says there's nothing. S is now detecting something. Yes. >> So again, we don't have to get into a labor discussion about, you know, who's right and who's wrong. >> No, it's better that they work together. Maybe in this case mo the old version of Mo because that's a paper >> from the 70s. Yes. >> The 70s. Maybe in that and I am not criticizing

Mu because they are fantastic. Uh maybe in that time they are detecting nothing on on a 35% of aperture. >> Correct. Do you have an explanation though for why they didn't detect anything above the bleon chamber and you I tell you why because the as now we know that the more scanning are detecting things that is the sum of everything you are watching on the top

is the sum like that and so it is it is it is difficult for me to to see things facilities when you are watching the sum of everything you saw uh 50 years later that paper. So now the modern the modern moon detectors they are it is highly probability that

they are saying that there is a big void on the grand gallery which is parallel but in my best lubin are watching the top and the bottom and the roof the roof and the and the the floor of the big g of the grand gallery. Yeah. >> Like that like that. Look there watching this and that. It means that the technique fails sometimes and it failed maybe it failed also uh 50

years ago at in the in the period of when that paper was uh was written using old detectors. Who knows there is something that happened and they are detecting nothing. >> Yeah. And I don't know that any recent muon scanning has been done inside the central pyramid. >> So they need to go back and do it again. >> Yeah, they they has to they have to do it again. Why do why do they they they they do they why

>> they didn't install detectors inside the >> Right. Right. >> It's a good question. So, so just kind of a final note that was that was the end of my questions for the S project and Filipo I think you did a really really good job today. >> Thank you >> in answering to the best of your ability >> that I could >> absolutely yeah >> sure agreed. >> So the the final note here is just a mention of these hydrothermal veins >> and iron ore deposits. So here I'm

standing in the middle >> this photo. Look how nice it is. There you can you can find the floor of the of the Jiza plateau where the pyramids are >> So this is bedrock here. >> This is limestone paving. This this part >> is man-made. >> It's manmade. >> This part here. >> This is bedrock. limestone bedrock that's permeated with iron ore deposits, metal ore minerals, which is directly applicable to the utilization of your

technology for finding metal or mineral deposits. So, this is this is where these two things have a synergy that I think we need to look at further. >> So, here I'm down inside of one of these quote unquote boat pits. >> And this is an image of >> It's a tube. A tube. A metal tube. >> Metal tube. Correct. It's It's an iron. >> I saw it. It's a metal tube. >> It's an iron ore vein. Yeah. So, these are You've never seen this before. >> That's wild. >> So, this is about a foot and a half long

>> and a foot deep and it's a tube of iron >> And these veins run all through the Giza >> They are hydrothermal metal ore mineral deposits that are embedded in the limestone bedrock of the Giza Plateau. >> Wow. So these are the result of hydrothermal vent systems, >> sealoor hydrothermal vents that push these metal minerals up from the earth

and then they deposit them on the surface and inside the layers of the bedrock. That's how these things form. So here in red I have depicted these vertical bedrock shafts adjacent to the causeway and the interconnecting transverse shaft. So you can actually look down in this, >> you know, about 20 m down and you can see the transverse connecting shafts that aren't that deep. >> Mhm. Here we have what Filippo's team is

showing, which could be the remnants of some of these hydrothermal mineral vents, these hydrothermal vents coming out from the bedrock with the magma chamber. So again, there's magma down here, which could be these cubic type >> huge geological formations that are known to go down kilometers into the >> Interesting. What do you think about that theory? >> It it is a theory. I accept it

absolutely like I accept very well the theory of Christopher Dan and the theory of Joffrey. Yeah, >> we we I am we have to collaborate all and see effectively what there is and which is the effective purpose of the >> Exactly. It it can be not only mine or yours or also the sum of course multiple

>> Sure. No. >> Something like that. >> And I think that understanding the impetus for choosing Giza. >> Is critical in understanding the overall function of the Giza plateau because we have hydrothermal vents. We have metal or mineral deposits. And in this paper, they've also shown that there is a karst cave and tunnel system >> that is the source of hydrogen sulfide

gas coming up from the Giza plateau. So there's caves and tunnels >> all throughout the Giza plateau natural that you can also see produce these vertical features located directly below the Giza plateau. And my hypothesis for the function of the great pyramid is that the hydrogen sulfide gas coming from this subterranean karst cave tunnel system is the initial reactant in the chemical manufacturing sequence within

the great pyramid. >> So they picked the Giza plateau specifically because of all of these features in the bedrock, the metal, the hydrothermal vents, all of it works in conjunction with the system above ground. Yeah. >> So there is absolutely something below the Giza plateau located directly below the pyramids. >> What would you do with the hydrogen >> Convert it into sulfuric acid. >> And what would you do with the sulfuric >> Sulfuric acid can be used for fertilizer

applications but also specifically for mining and metallergy. >> Got it. >> Because we have a huge supply of metal ore directly on the Giza plateau. >> So So agriculture and mining and metallergy. Interesting. >> Gold mining. So the samples of the iron ore deposits on the Giza plateau also contain gold, silver, electrum, precious metals, rare earth elements, everything that you could think of. We'll we'll talk about >> Love it. >> I have all the sample analysis data.

>> This is the perfect cliffhanger to end >> And also there is also electricity inside this. >> So in in the veins has his >> fossilized lightning. Okay. >> In these iron ore veins, we have samples that contain fulgarites, which is evidence of high voltage electric current distribution through these iron >> We'll get into it tomorrow. >> Oh, wow. Okay. Well, what a clipping.

>> We have to do another >> Yeah, we we do. Seriously. No, but this has been uh amazing. Jeffrey, really appreciate your questions. you uh asked just really detailed first principles questions but that were very respectful and I think this was just this beautiful exploration and Filippo uh you know I can't say enough about how just open you are to fielding these sorts of questions a lot of people get very precious about their theories and they don't let them be questioned and you >> thank you for these uh these questions

>> you're clearly not that you're clearly open to updating your own hypothesis beliefs And I think we have a lot of action items here. I think maybe the the the biggest one is getting those thinly sliced, you know, what you did with the Grand Sasso, but for, you know, the structures underneath the copper pyramid. But this was amazing and I appreciate you both. >> Thank you. >> All right.