Episode 4 – Epstein and Hawking: Portal Conspiracy -

Speculates on whether the Epstein network could be remnants of Jack Parsons–influenced Thelema sect thinking from the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s.  

0:00 Intro video 
2:55 Attention to a recent X post 
4:13 Welcome and introduction  
14:34  Special topic: Epstein and Hawking portal conspiracy 
40:10 Final thoughts & Outro video 

Transcript

Copy

SPEAKER_01 3:13

I believe I made a serious error in one of the claims in a recent ex post, and I want to address it. It concerns the father of Gislaine Maxwell, Robert Maxwell, and his publishing company Pergamon Press. The name Pergamon refers to the place described in the Bible as the Throne of Satan. In my recent ex posts, I gave the impression that Epstein's scientific network was based around Pergamon Press. This is a claim I cannot prove. My source was Jason Giorgiani, but after further research, I must withdraw my suggestion that the two were connected. Now we're getting started with the special topic in Episode 4, where the main focus will be on the collaboration between Epstein and Stephen Hawking. And as recently explained in the introduction to this episode, Stephen Hawking became very central for the article on the Paradise Machine model. He was actually on the verge of stopping the whole 2024 article in 2023. I even wrote on Headbiotech.com before I started on the article that it was not certain there would be an article due to Hawking radiation. I knew that if it turned out that I could not find any credible holes in Stephen Hawking's theories about Hawking radiation, then I could not write the article, because then there would be no point in spending more time on the idea that black holes could convert mass and energy into the predicted paradise state. So I set aside several months because I understood this was going to be a heavy task, because Hawking's theory on radiation in black holes involves some heavy quantum mechanics and mathematics, so I didn't quite know how deep I would have to go. But it actually didn't take that long. I became more and more certain that there are indeed holes in his theory, especially the so-called information paradox. Even though he could explain the radiation process mathematically, the problem remains that information appears to be lost after mass and energy pass the event horizon. In other words, the energy does not come back out again as information. That breaks a completely fundamental principle in nature, which is the conservation of information. And these principles govern much of science, but in a sense, Stephen Hawking has also been vindicated. The idea that mass energy could simply disappear from the universe should not be possible because of the principle of conservation of mass energy, which states that the total amount of mass and energy in the universe remains constant. I realized that when I proposed the fourth law of thermodynamics in 2010, that all mass and energy in the universe will one day disappear and be converted into 100% love and intelligence, it would have to break the law of conservation of mass energy. But when I later learned more about black holes and realized that mass energy apparently disappears there, it fit perfectly with the fourth law of thermodynamics. At last, there seemed to be a place in the universe where mass energy could truly disappear on a large scale. But of course, top scientists like Stephen Hawking had already considered this long ago. They assumed it could not be true because it would violate the conservation of mass energy in the universe. So Stephen Hawking studied the problem, an extraordinarily talented scientist. But his premise is the principle of conservation of mass and energy, and the entire scientific world was waiting for the same result. They were not looking for anything else. They were all waiting to find a solution to a question they had already decided the answer to. So this is the preconception I think might be wrong, that the first law of thermodynamics must necessarily be true. Even though we can't detect it here, on a universal scale mass energy disappears in favor of producing love intelligence. According to the Paradise Machine model, the illustration on my right here over Epstein and Hawking shows one version of the model I created. So this model becomes very central now. It is, in a way, portals beyond the event horizon, and that all mass energy disappears there. And somewhere behind the event horizon, the magic happens something I don't dare venture into. But something in physics or mathematics should convert mass energy from our part of the universe into what I want to call an entirely new state. In the 2024 article, I described it as the absolute lowest energy state in the universe that we have not yet observed. AU equals zero. Behind the event horizon is where the magic is supposed to happen, the production of the eternal paradise state. But the only thing I have proposed is that the state should exist in a mathematical form, and that the life form existing there, the Fermi Life form, should be related to us. I call them Fermi Life forms, because we should be related, even though billions of years separate us. We might recognize them by a feminine nature and similar traits. They should actually like us, indeed, as I say, as long as we haven't triggered zero risk. Then come the scary parts of the Paradise Machine model. I say that all children are 100% safe, and if the theory is correct, actually 110% secure, I would also say that almost all of us are, but there are cases like Jack Parsons, perhaps Epstein, and others who may be in the danger zone. My main fields are shown here in bioinformatics and molecular medicine. As biologists, I'm not interested in sending any humans to hell. And we biologists tend, even if we can argue or accuse each other of things, to step back and ask what we humans actually are. We are just a life form, participating in the struggle for existence. Often I see it as being thrown into a game we never ask to play, a game we never chose to take part in, and then having to adapt to its brutal rules. And if you look at biology and evolution, you just see the brutal principle. It's just putting food into your own mouth and preventing others from getting food into theirs in a way. That's sort of what drives evolution forward, according to Darwin. But now, in 2026, I think we've come very far in evolution. Things are getting really interesting with technological development and the Fermi Paradox, which is also why I have this podcast. And since I feel I've received confirmation for the Paradise Machine model, I want my contribution to be positive. I prefer to think that we all can reach an eternal paradise. If this is true, let's all head to paradise. Even figures like Jack Parsons, Epstein, and Stephen Hawking, since they are just humans after all. I suggest, hey, let's all go to this paradise. Even Epstein, Parsons, and Stephen Hawking, those that might be in the danger zone. In any case, we are all just humans. Even those that are in the danger of triggering the zero-risk trap. Also those that always try to reduce the chaos, the globalists and Marxists. But as I see it as a biologist, they've just tried to survive, but with a strategy that could turn out to be terribly serious if the Paradise Machine is correct. Because those who achieve zero risk risk ending up in a merciless machine that just decides, okay, now we can prove that you intended to send us to hell. So then we can send you to hell and still maintain a balance of justice. That principle of justice, which is part of the proposed design in the Paradise Machine. So before I start with this conspiracy about Epstein and them, I want to defend them a little first. And poor little Hawkin. I mean, he might not deserve this conspiracy at all. It is mostly Epstein then. If you've watched the film about him, you can grasp what an unbelievable achievement his whole life represents. Just picture it, the man and everything he did. He should have won Olympic gold ten times straight. So, yes, but then there was this conference at one of Epstein's islands, twenty years ago in March 2006, and this is when I truly began unpacking the conspiracy in this episode. That famous gravity conference in 2006 tied to Epstein, the one in the Caribbean, reflected his deep interest in quantum gravity. Epstein cultivated strong scientific ties in this area, including with Stephen Hawking, who participated. From my research, a lot of theories connect this ideologically to Jack Parsons and Talema. The same elitist, globalist mindset with Marxist undertones, where a small elite dominates everyone else. The big remaining question is whether today's version shares Parsons' views on demons, portals, and similar occult ideas. From the first three episodes, I've concluded that, as I learned more about Jack Parsons' take on Telema, it all ties back to the principles outlined in the fourth law of thermodynamics, just with an opposite sign. Ultimately, it brands them as evil, direct adversaries of nature. Doing research for this episode, especially watching those long interviews, I found myself starting to like Epstein. I don't see a monster at all. I could picture having a real conversation with him. They're just heading in the wrong, evil direction. I'm not that different from them, except I think the wisest move is to ally with nature and recognize that others came before us. That's what I realized back in episodes 1 and 2 that the real divide with these supposed demon sects is their belief that humanity must become gods. This conference in 2006 was led by the well-known Lawrence Cross. As someone who identifies as a science person, I have great respect for all of them, so when I mention his name now, I'm not implying he's part of the Epstein network. And honestly, I don't really care about that. I've actually seen videos of Cross before. Back when I was researching my 2025 article on FTL signaling, I remember coming across him. He's actually taught me a lot about these topics. The name of this conference led by Cross was Confronting Gravity. The event ran March 1621, 2006. Conspiracy-wise, it's exciting. If you know the Paradise Woman story, this falls right after the supposed opening of the Paradise Portals. That's also minutes after the fourth law appeared. E equals zero equals paradise. In episode 2 on the Crowley Demon Bible, Telema's key texts which explicitly say not to join the first part of the formula to the last. Perhaps that act was what opened the portal between our reality and the paradise state back in 2006, and that that moment was the true starting point of the approach, after opening the portals for the Fermi Lifeforms. That completion of the formula back in 2006 was essentially their first successful transmission of signals from the Paradise Women, which then actually was the Fermi Lifeform. Looking back 20 years on, I now think those were only faint preliminary signals. Today, with phenomena like Aomuamua and 3i slash Atlas, it's clear they are approaching much nearer, allowing them to do far more. That is the essence in the approach theory from the 2024 article. Lawrence Cross, the theoretical physics and cosmology expert, is openly against religion and God. He insists God is non-existent, just a human invention we've repeated across thousands of gods throughout history. Science, in his view, lets us finally move past all that. The big difference I want to stress, unlike him, I take a much more religious position. I agree with Cross that we've always invented gods, replacing one with another, like seeing Thor in thunder or praying to rain gods in the past. But why do thoughts of God, especially paradise and a higher power promising eternal reward, stay so central in religion? Why has evolution selected and preserved this idea? That's my perspective. As I've said before, and I find it very interesting. Already in the pilot episode I mentioned this idea about Islam and the 72 women in paradise. Cross criticizes Islam heavily, but technically I'm pro-Islam in this context. According to the fourth law of thermodynamics and related principles, I believe Islam is one of the religions most pure or most compatible with the fourth law and the paradise machine model. Of course, there are major things in Islam I see as wrong, like the stoning of women, which is hugely dangerous. It represents zero risk for the perpetrators. Burying someone helpless and having 20-30 people throw stones at them is like stepping on a baby, completely risk-free. So no, I don't support Islam in every aspect. But many of its core principles I do agree with or find strongly connected to these ideas. I couldn't live by it myself. I'm not that preoccupied with it personally, but I find it interesting, just as I often draw from the Bible. I frequently reference the Bible because I find it aligns with the same core principles as the Paradise Machine model. It's similar in Hinduism with Shiva, who destroys the universe only to recreate it. Look at his classic iconic. Iconography, a circular disk encircled by flames, and suddenly we're talking about black holes. The deeper point is dissolving all mass and energy, reducing everything to the pure paradise state. What I see is that religions often carry bits of truth, and if the paradise machine model is right, it's the central element they all share. Cross says we invent new gods and religions endlessly. I agree, but the persistent core across them isn't controlling the rain, it's reaching paradise under a higher intelligence. The shared essence is reaching paradise under a higher intelligence, the smartest assumption to hold. If true, Islam's stoning of women is gruesome, idiotic, paradise model, incompatible, and hugely dangerous, potentially damning to hell if you ask me. But the basic rule in Islam is more like honor, honor, honor. Like we should have honor, the opposite of zero risk. Oh no. I'm sorry about that. It's just these things that can happen. So I did some investigating on Lawrence Cross. Yeah, and it connects to what I mentioned earlier about Islam, especially that strong focus on Anna. In Islam, generally, I don't see practices like stoning women as truly representative of the religion. What stands out to me instead is the strong emphasis on anna, not stepping on or harming what sacred and severe consequences for grave sins. For example, killing children can lead straight to hell. I recall the film about Gandhi. A Muslim man comes to him confessing he killed a child in revenge and fears he's damned to hell. Gandhi offers comforting words. I pick up on these small, meaningful details all the time, even though I'm not deeply invested enough to sit and read the Quran cover to cover. What makes Lawrence Cross so exciting in this conspiratorial episode is his view that no, there are no higher others here. It's we humans who must become gods ourselves. That's exactly the same mindset Jack Parsons held, a small elite should dominate the many, and it all ties back to the fourth law of thermodynamics. First, you must collect energy like a tax on the masses in order to reduce your own chaos. The evil side of Parsons was this: we shall create chaos for others, as I understand it, and explain the irony why they should want chaos. So when these smartest managers to turn around and change who controlling the chaos, they actually become enemies of nature. And in that process, they achieve zero risk. That's what I'm saying. They've fallen into a trap. So back to Epstein. The deeper I look, the more I feel they all share the same globalist Marxist mindset. I don't know Cross's political stance, for example, but I suspect it aligns. Still, I believe it's merely a struggle for existence. Everyone deserves the right to pursue their own strategies. My aim is simply to warn them, or at least prompt reflection. So fewer people fall into this horrible zero-risk trap. Now, back to the conspiracy then. It's intriguing that the conference took place just after the so-called Paradise portals were meant to have opened in January 2006, and then Stephen Hawking enters the picture. Because he began to really irritate me in 2023, because he blocked the suggestion that black holes acted as sinks where mass energy vanishes completely. The scientific world clings to the first law of thermodynamics, insisting mass energy must be conserved universe-wide. So Hawking offered his famous theoretical workaround. Yet I sparted critical flaws above all the information paradox. String theory attempted fixes later, but those solutions aren't broadly accepted. That's when I began writing the article Pan the Portals in the Machine Model. And now Hawking, perhaps, show up in this demon portal sect conspiracy. But eventually I found holes in his theory to launch the 2024 paper. In the beginning, the article was simply meant to propose that black holes convert Merce energy into 100% love and intelligence, and that they might function as components in a larger machine. That's how I arrived at the name Paradise Machine, a concept that actually originates from the famous physicist Leonard Suskind, as I've mentioned before. Suskind asked, are we sitting in a car or some other machine? As he put it, we might only glimpse something small, like the axle of a wheel, without ever stepping back to see the full picture that we're actually inside a car you can drive places with. That's the essence. Then it hit me. What if the bigger structure is a paradise machine? One built for a single goal to generate paradise or 100% love and intelligence. And there is an illustration of that machine. The idea is that there should be billions of these small paradises, masses upon masses of villages connected with these tunnel structures. But remember, this isn't the core of the theory. It's more something I borrow from the Paradise Woman story from 2006, and I simply assume those inhabitants are Fermi life forms. If it turns out to be true, then that's roughly how it would look. The core of the fourth law of thermodynamics is that the role of all life forms throughout the universe is to convert mass energy into love and intelligence. That's how the paradise machine perceives it. Even an ant contributes in the way the universe measures it, though we probably can't detect it at that scale. But with the highest life forms, we can also measure it and even see it. I propose this process connects directly to black holes where love and intelligence reach 100% full potential across the entire universe. Now, back to Stephen Hawking. He who stood in the way of my ideas, and I have to admit it irritated me quite a bit. Why should he block the whole thing, right? But eventually I saw the holes in his theory, especially the information paradox. What I find so strange now is that he keeps reappearing in all of this. So now I'm theorizing that Hawking pops up in these tell him, inspired evil or demonic pursuits, may be connected to Epstein's drives. Epstein referred to that conference as confronting gravity back in March 2006. And don't forget the iconic photo of Hawking and Epstein in the submarine, allegedly near the Bermuda Triangle. The idea is Epstein thought quantum anomalies existed there, opening up portals. Given how objects supposedly vanish in the Bermuda Triangle, hunting for portals makes some twisted sense. The more I've read about Epstein in this case, the more I see you have to look beyond the words. He didn't call the conference something like, Shall we find a portal to hell? What Jack Parsons might say in the 1930s, obsessed as he was with hell portals and summoning demon women from the abyss. So he would never title the meeting. How do we get the demons here? Even though he called it what is gravity, I claim, or at least imagine. No one expects him to reveal the true intent if it's a secret conspiracy, an occult sect sharing ideas with Jack Parsons and Eliester Crowley. When I research into the serious material about Epstein, a pattern emerged. That all his efforts, the scientists he brought to that conference, his real obsessions, they focused on the mysteries of what happens in black holes and portals. That's why theories suggest portals could form in black holes. That's right at the intersection of quantum gravity and Einstein's relativity, where it becomes theoretically possible to generate wormholes and portals. People sometimes say Epstein chased gravity research because he wanted UFO technology, like advanced propulsion systems. Actually, that's a bit off. It was Gislain Maxwell, his girlfriend, who was really into Atlantis, UFOs, and those kinds of things. Epstein did not share that obsession to the same degree as Gislaine. In my view, his genuine fascination with quantum gravity points more toward portals. All that remains to say is he never explicitly mentioned portals, and at least not portals to evil. They don't even perceive their actions and goals as evil at all. In their eyes, it's about achieving personal freedom, entering their own paradise. The Crowley take on this. But if the paradise machine model holds true, then in relation to nature's ego and the model itself, it qualifies as evil, seen through that lens. What they chased mirrors exactly what Jack Parsons pursued, portals to demons. I maintain my position. It has to be evil, as also debated in the first episodes on Parsons, Crowley, and Telema. The Paradise Machine model judge their activities as evil, though they will say, but all is relative. That's precisely what these groups are trying to determine. If they see themselves as the first intelligent beings who can dominate the universe, they'll end up creating something evil. Fortunately, the paradise machine model says others' life forms preceded us in the universe. Plus, they're simply not numerous enough on Earth. Once the truth comes out, if the paradise machine model holds, they're now revealed and outnumbered, as they have no real shot against 8 billion humans. If everyone on Earth realizes this is ultimately about going to hell or paradise, then saying we just want to help you or we're creating justice and equality between poor and rich won't help at all, because people will see through it. No, it's really about collecting money to generate constant abundance to reduce chaos. Anyone with basic chemistry and physics knowledge understands that reducing chaos first requires concentrating energy, an unnatural act in the universe. You must gather massive energy abundance to enforce rules and maintain a low chaos system without collapse. That's precisely when they gain full control. Those with the highest IQ, for example, which isn't so strange that fail aim at, and in that process is likely where they triggered the zero risk signal. According to the approach theory, Fermi life forms are now heading toward Earth because of that stress signal. I brought up earlier. The apes I referenced in the 2024 article as part of my argument. The Paradise Machine Model's main design feature is this relentless drive toward hunting zero-risk achievers in the universe. The machine model suggests that once anyone truly achieves zero risk, the system won't let them hold on to it because the underlying intelligence knows exactly what they plan to do with that power down the line if they aren't stopped. I explore this in the third article from 2021, linking it to wave particle duality and particularly the delayed choice quantum eraser effect. I see those quantum phenomena as deliberate markers or clues embedded in the machine, placed there so that life forms, not just on Earth but throughout the universe, will reveal themselves. The Paradise Machine model predicts that any sufficiently advanced life form will eventually hit zero risk. It's hardwired into the structure of the design. At that moment, God's curse comes into the picture from part three in the 2024 article, since I can't fathom a benevolent life form intentionally choosing that solution. Therefore, I suggest the gruesome punishment for achieving zero risk must come from an earlier godlike intelligence, one that existed long before the Fermi life forms. What I imagine is that these life forms, the Fermi ones, came long after the original creator, God himself, perhaps billions of years ago, we don't know exactly, but even they arrived after others who initiated everything, so let's call the originator God. The Paradise Machine's rules were already established by then, what I termed God's curse in the 2024 article. Even these good, loving, intelligent beings have no choice but to follow that brutal rule. The only way they can preserve a just machine is by navigating the zero-risk trap. If this model is true, then I don't want people like Epstein to end up in hell. Now that I've gotten a bit closer to understanding him, I don't see a monster, I set aside what he might be judged for, and nothing I've seen truly categorizes him as a monster, not yet that is. So in cases of doubt, the benefit should go to the accused, of course. So episode 4 concluded the conspiratorial thread. It never set out to be about Jack Parsons, he was merely the starting point when researching NASA. I hope this wraps it up for me. There must be a limit to how much time I can spend on these demon sect theories. In the end, it now circled back to Epstein. If I had to pull one core message from the four episodes, it's this warning about their relationship to children, which is profoundly disturbing. I've come across Joe Rogan discussions speculating that Epstein ordered large quantities of sulfuric acid barrels, and some people claim these groups consume babies or children. Yet if the Paradise Machine model is right, their stance toward children should be the polar opposite of the Fermi Lifeforms approach. They may hide it, but theoretically, if the full conspiracy and chaos reduction logic are accurate, these are the ones who likely triggered the zero-risk signal. They embody evil, given that goodness was predefined much earlier in the universe. So this business with tormenting children is exactly the sign I point to that the paradise machine is fundamentally good. Zero risk connects to situations involving complete vulnerability, like a baby, and those who exploit that helplessness, stepping on the defenseless without consequence, define the line where evil begins. So, if the Epstein Globalist Network conspiracy is accurate, they embody evil. Call it relative or not, my response is simply thank God some earlier intelligence was here before us and engineered the machine to stop them from ever seizing ultimate power. That seems to be what's playing out. When I go on podcasts as a representative of humanity, I must say, if there's a truly horrific hidden side to him involving things like eating babies or other atrocities, then yes, that would be devastating. But based on what I've observed, I don't see full-blown monstrosity. From a biologist's perspective, we humans simply haven't had sufficient time to evolve into deeply, irredeemably evil beings, only far enough to cross the threshold and activate the risk trap. There won't be any more episodes for a while, I can promise that, unless something completely dramatic occurs. Right now I have to prepare for the live broadcast of the Artemis 2 launch in April. I'll really try to go live and follow the launch closely. It's not that I hope it explodes, but I have to admit there's this dilemma. If it did, four people would die and many would lose loved ones. At the same time, we're in a position where the Fermi paradox could resolve itself right before our eyes. If something like that happened, my consolation would be that it probably means we all end up in paradise.