Talking to the Future Humans - Dr Jack Sarfatti Thinks I'm an Idiot

Dr Jack Sarfatti

Dr Jack Sarfatti is a post-quantum theoretical physicist, which basically means he’s spent a lot of time thinking about what happened to the world when Schrödinger finally opened that up box he was dragging his dead cat around in. His brain drifts in the hinterland of scientific endeavour, where it explores the potentials of metamaterials (artificial super materials that take a giant shit on whatever Mother Nature’s sorry ass can muster), how the future can affect the present, the possibility of walking through a time-travelling wormhole in space-time and, of course, aliens. You know, the stuff we all ponder in the quieter moments of our day. Back in the 1970s he was part of a group of hippy physicists called the Fundamental Fysiks Group. They were like the Merry Pranksters of science, mixing esoteric philosophies with the occidental quantum flowerings of the Enlightenment. Initially dismissed by the mainstream science geeks, they have since been credited with turning the science community on to some of the mindmelting ideas that you’ll hear if you spend 40 minutes watching a BBC Horizon show about black holes. Dr Emmett Brown from Back to the Future is supposedly based on Dr Jack, who has conducted CIA-funded research into ESP [telepathy, clairvoyance, etc] and is part of the NASA and DARPA-supported 100 Year Starship study. It’s a privately funded project that looks at how, in the next 100 years, humanity can pilot a spaceship that can head off on long-term, long-distance interstellar travel. He’s the kind of man who might know a thing or two about what’s round the corner for humanity when we eventually fly back to the cosmic womb from whence we came, so I thought it would be a good idea to talk to him. But it was quite the struggle getting Dr Jack to part with the hidden mysteries of the universe – my first round of questions featured such gems as: ‘Your own theories talk about future causality, where the future can impact the present. Is this why Marty snogged his own mother in Back to the Future?’ But you don’t get to be a non-local lord of consciousness by answering dumbass questions like that. So I thought I might be able to tease some answers from Dr. Jack if I emailed him relentlessly for days on end. But then lots of answers came back telling me to: “See my book Destiny Matrix for details”, or to "See my website, Stardrive.org" and to “use Google”, and my hopes faded each time I pressed the send button. I think he didn’t totally hate me, because he also sent me a video of him flying in a friend’s private jet to Palm Beach to spend Thanksgiving at Donald Trump’s place, the Mar-A-Lago Club. Or maybe he was just trying to make me jealous.

I struggled onwards. I knew the answer to the conundrum of the super cosmos that would help me break through the mask of maya and penetrate the simulacra of our false reality wasn’t going to be obtained easily. And so I ventured deeper into the cave of wisdom. Were those shadows dancing on the walls? Or was the cave just a construct of my own mind? It was hard to tell. All Dr Jack’s hints and pointers were leaving me ever more baffled. The more questions I asked, the more he seemed to get annoyed, wearily declaring: “I don't have time to go back to square one on this,” while sending me PDFs of scientific papers full of pages of text that said things like: “Hermitian observables guarantee orthogonal sender base states that erase any nonlocal influence of the sender settings on the detection probabilities at the receiver.” But eventually I was able to muster up the slapdash of barely journalistic practices (it was more like harassment) that you can read below. VICE: Can you explain in layman’s terms how future causality works?
Dr Jack Sarfatti: No, not in layman’s terms. Any simple explanation will be a fake. Mathematics is the language of physics. Asking questions about time, future causality etc. in the language of laymen is futile. Any such explanation will be bogus – simpler than is possible. A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing. Non-scientists think they can grasp the mysteries with watered-down analogies. They can't. It’s pandering to the lowest denominator – my opinion. OK, but does that mean that non-scientists can never grasp these mysteries, then?
Yes, not fully. Ordinary experience is not good enough. They can only get an emotional glimpse through the glass darkly – not the kind of understanding that the mathematics gives. Brian Greene on NOVA and Michio Kaku et al come as close as possible for the public.

You supposedly had a VALIS-type experience [Philip K. Dick wrote the book VALIS because he thought a spaceship of that name was sending signals to his brain from the "Sirius star system"] when you were 13 years old, where something was trying to communicate with you. Was it a spacecraft from the future?
What do you think it was? Again, this is all covered in detail in my book Destiny Matrix (order it on Amazon) – there were witnesses, the cold metallic voice said it was a computer on a spacecraft. What it really was, who it was, I don’t know. However, what it predicted to happen 20 years in the future in 1973 did happen. In your email you sent me a link about remote viewing and the CIA, which kind of spooked me, because it’s got nothing to do with staring at electronic devices for your TV and more about extra-sensory perception [ESP]. Can you remote view what I’m doing right now? And also, what were the conclusions to the CIA programme that you were involved with, called ESPionage, that looked into the phenomenon of ESP?
I never said I could remote view. Look you have not done your homework here. Lots of stuff on web. Google “Hal Puthoff SRI CIA remote viewing” and Google “Daryl Bem, feeling the future”. [I googled them and came back with the following question] What did your role as "house theorist" involve when you were working for Stanford Research Institute, researching telepathy and ESP for the CIA?
Remote viewing is real. The physics behind it is signal nonlocality. See the attachments. [The attachments contained the quote above about “Hermitian observables”.]

Do you believe, like Timothy Leary did, in space migration?
Yes. Tim and I knew each other and I stayed in his house in the Hollywood Hills. Did you drop acid together?
No, I did not do acid with Tim – this was after he was out of prison. You talk about metamaterials being able to slow light speed down to a crawl, which raises the possibility of a spacecraft using a warp drive to move faster than the speed of light. How long do you think before we see technology that can travel at warp speed?
No one can predict that – depends on $ and whether we have captured ET craft that already have it. You also talk about conscious robots that could be built using nanotechnologies. How will this work and is there any research or scientists at the moment who are exploring or attempting to build this?
Not yet, specifically because they do not know what consciousness is physically – I do. Good for you. And lastly, what is time?
Surely, you jest? Yes indeed, Dr Jack. Yes indeed.