Professor Kleinert is also a leading expert on general relativity and torsion fields at the Free University in Berlin. He worked with Feynman at Cal Tech,

On May 31, 2004, at 3:43 AM, Hagen Kleinert wrote:

Thanks for your mail Jack!

Have a look also at

H. Kleinert and J. Zaanen

World Nematic Crystal Model of Gravity

Explaining the Absence of Torsion

http://www.physik.fu-berlin.de/~kleinert/346

FU-Berlin preprint 2003

http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/0307033

On May 31, 2004, at 3:38 AM, Alexander Konkretny wrote:

I guess what Gennady is saying is that Hammond does not make a

distinction between the Cartan torsion and "the Ricci torsion".

Funny, but of all theoreticians I know only Gennady Shipov

makes such a distinction. I wonder if Gennady could name just one

theoretician who would know what the hell is "the Ricci torsion"

he is talking about.

I am making an annotated pdf version of Hammond's review paper and will put it on line with key parts highlighted in yellow and pop-up annotations, so everyone can see for themselves. Hammond has a nice concise description of the essence of Gennady's particular version of torsion fields in Section 4 "Teleparallelism" eqs. 185-190.

"Teleparallelism" is a kind of absolute holonomy or integrability, i.e. path independence in parallel transport between two events (state functions - reversible process of constant entropy in the Catheodory (spelling?) formal thermodynamics analogy, e.g. R. Kiehn). This is like elementary Euclidean geometry. Of course the connection field is more than the symmetric Levi-Civita one from 1916 GR. The generalized curvature is zero, but this curvature is the Einstein curvature + torsion field contribution.

My theory of exotic vacuum from zero point energy has an equation

Guv(Einstein) + /\zpfguv(Einstein) = 0

which is a special case of Hammond's eq. 186. My quantum correction term /\zpfguv(Einstein) is independent of Hammond's (Shipov's?) classical torsion term tuv(torsion) spelled out in eq. (187). Therefore, in my theory with torsion, the exotic vacuum equation is

Guv(Einstein) + /\zpfguv(Einstein) + tuv(torsion) = 0

Let h = c = G = 1 for now for simplicity.

The vacuum propeller equation is simply the Einstein covariant divergence of this exotic vacuum local field equation. Metric engineering simply means shaping Guv(Einstein) on the world line of the Unconventional Flying Object (as defined by Paul Hill) from INSIDE the spacecraft using small amounts of power.

Hal Puthoff has never given a clear definition of what precisely he means by "metric engineering."

This is only possible if effective G, i.e. G* >> Newton's G on the scale of the propulsion device. Alleged observations by military intelligence sources of several nations of actual craft suggest this is true.

The Einstein covariant 4 divergences of the second and third terms in the exotic vacuum field equation are the zero point energy and the torsion field vacuum propeller terms respectively.

The /\zpfguv term includes both dark energy and dark matter as w = -1 exotic vacuum phases of negative and positive quantum pressure respectively which can, it appears, be controlled locally by a generalized Josephson effect (essence of Schauberger-Podkletnov-Ning Li effect)

/\zpf(induced) =

(volume of circulating supercurrent in a loop)^1/3(density of paired real electrons)^1/2(density of paired virtual electron-positron pairs)^1/2cos2pi[(magnetic flux trapped inside sc loop)/(magnetic flux quantum) - (mechanical circulation (vorticity) of single electron pair)/(vorticity quantum)]

This requires very delicate precise phase stability in the rotating superconductors almost impossible to achieve in the big rotating disks of Podkletnov and Ning Li which is why their effects are weak and hard to reproduce. They have the wrong idea in their heads. Modanese only had a small piece of the right idea. You have to go nano-tech! This is why the flying saucers are empty inside (Col. Phil Corso) it's all inside the thin strong smart nano-engineered skin of the alleged captured alien ET saucers that I am reverse engineering in the sense of Einstein's gedankenexperiment meditiation-visualization technique. In a sense I am remote-viewing them like any good psychic detective! :-) That is "detective" not "defective." :-)

See Berkant's latest on possible nano-tech mesh architectures for the smart skin of the zero point energy powered space-craft with zero g-force "G-Engine" (1956 George Trimble in Nick Cook's "The Hunt for Zero Point")

On May 31, 2004, at 1:00 AM, Gennady I Shipov wrote:

Hi, Jack!

I have closely studied R.Nammonda's work.

I think it is necessary to begin discussion on torsion with participation of Hammond. Once again I want to pay your attention to distinction between Cartan and Ricci torsions. Similar, that R.Hammond of this distinction does not make (see the formula (190) his article).

On May 31, 2004, at 8:11 AM, Berkant Goeksel wrote:

"Jack Sarfatti"

Note one minor typo correction below. I would like to see entire paper

with math and pictures. You have a lot of ideas. :-)

Make sure you cite latest papers also the one with Ken Shoulders on

EVOs.

As usual in my papers.. I will quote the source and all relevant as much as possible.

This paper is for the...

It is not for ... dealing with warp drives. I think even your 1999 Heaviside force ideas are superior to what we have seen up-to-date from other sources which are quoted in the attached AIAA paper by Tony Robertson from 2001. Topic is "Exploration of anomalous gravity effects by magnetized high-Tx superconducting oxides.

You need to talk to James Woodward and Hal Puthoff BEFORE you give your paper. Even though Woodward and Puthoff disagree with each other on many things, they agree that Corum's Heaviside idea will not work. I am not sure if any of that will work. Ask Woodward, he may have something which might work? In any case, you should make the distinction that any kind of Heaviside force propulsion is NOT a warp drive. The problem is that the two guys running this part of STAIF i.e. Tony Robertson and Paul Murad simply do not understand what the problem is. They are not asking the right questions and have entirely confused not even wrong pictures in their minds. So does Marc Millis of NASA BPP, so does the entire Greenglow group. All these people are in the Dark Ages of blood letting and exorcism - it's all Cargo Cult Physics.

"The Question is: What is the Question?" John A. Wheeler

The STAIF split into FO5 and FO7 is confused. If Tony Robertson is interested in Podkletnov/Ning Li Modanese/Schauberger type physics that is WARP DRIVE, i.e. metric engineering Guv(Einstein) to make an Alcubierre type self-controlled timelike geodesic with the smart skin.

What Tony Robertson tried to duplicate would be a warp drive not a Heaviside force effect if he succeeded. He did not succeed and cannot succeed because you cannot do it with large rotating superconducting disks- there is too much phase noise that washes out the all important cosine control term in /\zpf(induced)! Any attempt to explain Podkletnov/Ning Li as an electromagnetic stress propulsion Heaviside force is completely confused! That's the point here. Of course, there is little hope that Robertson and Murad will understand what I am saying to you here. The STAIF 2005 meeting is essentially a waste of time and money for whoever is paying for it. It's the blind leading the blind in my opinion. They are not even close to understanding the real problem.

Yes, we played with Heaviside force at ISSO 1999-2000 and wasted one million dollars on a SARA contract because of Jim Corum's prestige and because we did not understand the nature of the problem. I was as much in the dark then as Jim Corum, Hal Puthoff, Bernie Haisch, Paul Murad, Tony Robertson, Marc Millis, Modanese, et-al still are today because they have closed their minds to what I have been saying since 2002. Dark energy was not understood in 1999-2000, I did not connect the dots between the dark energy of precision cosmology

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0308418

and the Bondi-Hill-Trimble acceleration field G-Engine (negative zero point quantum vacuum pressure) for UFOs until 2002!

*I would not spend any money on Heaviside force propulsion. It is the wrong way to go. Even if it worked it is too energy inefficient as a matter of principle.

You know that my vacuum propeller equation is from modified Bianchi

zero point energy identities in exotic vacuum

Guv;^v + /\zpf^,vguv = 0

This is for zero torsion fields and zero non-metricity fields that

would add still more "propulsion" terms as shown by Richard Hammond in

"Torsion Gravity" Vol 65 Rep. Prog. Phys. (2002).

It's the /\zpf,^v that does the vacuum propeller trick even without

torsion fields. Remember how I relate all that to the gravimagnetic

field

3D Divergence of Gravimagnetic Field = Alcubierre's "Tr(K)" ~ /\zpf

This needs G* >>> Newton's G at the nanometer scale

where

/\zpf(induced) ~ Lp*^-2 ~ (volume of vacuum- superconductor Weak

Link)^1/3(density of superconductor electron pairs)^1/2(density of

virtual electron-positron bound state pairs)^1/2cos2pi[(magnetic flux

through sc loop node of mesh)/(quantum of magnetic flux) - (mechanical

vorticity flux)/(quantum of vorticity)]

Lp*^2 = hG*/c^3

See my very recent papers at http://qedcorp.com/destiny/

Be sure to cite that directory and also

http://qedcorp.com/APS/

for details.

Okay. I will quote relevant papers. But please note this time we are talking about Heaviside forces. So your old ISSO papers are most relevant. But the outlook chapters could talk about the next steps towards zero-g drives.

It's like you are giving a paper on horse-driven carriages as the future of transportation when there is a Toyota Prius parked outside.

The organization of STAIF 2005 split into FO5 and FO7 is totally confused conceptually if they are linking Podkletnov/Ning Li with Heaviside force propulsion.

On my 1999-2000 Heaviside force confusions listen to

http://www.ladyofthecake.com/mel/frank/sounds/doodoo.wav

Been there, done that. Heaviside force is a false lead, wrong turn in the road, barking up the wrong tree, shining strong light in the wrong part of the dark Cave, touching the wrong part of the Elephant. As a Sufi you know what I mean, eh? ;-)

The Heaviside force is not a true vacuum propeller at all because the crew will feel g-forces! The crew is in a LNIF. Any vacuum propeller worthy of the name must keep the crew in a LIF at all times!

This is an important distinction.

This paper will also discuss the practical feasibility of a

Heaviside lifting vacuum propeller reaction force using state-of-

the-art nano-circuit design based on coaxial nanotube capacitors

wound into a torus loop with a toriodal solenoid made of

superconducting carbon nanotube quantum wires able to carry

supercurrents (Josephson currents).

I need to see a detailed picture of what you mean.

I confused here. It is real supercurrents as you already described.

Yes, there are real supercurrents in the little loops. The coherent phase of those real supercurrents must STABLY beat against the coherent phase of the virtual electron-positron vacuum currents, but there is no actual tunnelling current in this case. The real electron pairs of charge 2e do not transform into virtual electron-positron pairs of charge zero and vice versa! There is no physical quantum jumping between the superconductor nodal loop and the vacuum it occupies. Nevertheless their macro-quantum coherent phases can interfere with each other because they are collective emergent processes that do not remember their micro-dynamic origin but acquire a life of their own so to speak. P.W. Anderson talks about this as "generalized phase rigidity" in his "More is different" series of papers "A Career in Theoretical Physics" (World Scientific)

The fact that real electron pairs quantum jump across thin barriers in Josephson's junction is not essential to the more general effect of the beating of macro-coherent phases, which in that particular case is concommitant with actual quantum jumping of real pairs of charge 2e.

The wires are wrapped around the

capacitor whereby each end of the solenoid is connected to a

different plate of the coaxial carbon nano-tube metal-insulator-

semiconductor capacitor. It is envisioned that this set up can give

a rectified Heaviside force that gets larger as the LC circuit is

scaled down to nanometer size. Millions of such vacuum propeller

nano-modules could form an ultra-strong 3D-matrix smart skin carbon

nanotube composite material for use on transatmospheric flight

vehicles of future generations.

What do you mean "transatmospheric"? You mean "space"?

Transatmospheric is a term often used by aerospace engineers working on hypersonic applications. you enter space and re-enter atmosphere again.

Sort of like popping into and out of the vacuum in virtual processes.

Multi-wall carbon nanotubes consist of multiple shells, where the

tube is arranged in a coaxial fashion. Tubes with different atomic

and electronic structures can be fused together to create intra-

molecular metal-metal, metal-semiconductor, or semiconductor-

semiconductor junctions that are only a few atoms in cross section

and based entirely on carbon. Single-wall carbon nanotubes are

discussed for use as molecular superconducting quantum wires to

carry high supercurrents (Josephson currents).

Same mistake here. Of course, real currents.

Please note that we do not need any metals. You can mimic metal-like properties using carbon nanotubes. so the entire matrix could be made of carbon only.. this is what I understand.

Fine. I never said anything about that.

the question is how can we form the matrix??

In 1998, Bezryadin described an electrostatic self-assembly

technique which is used to arrange conducting nanoparticles into

long continous chains. The process takes place between a pair of

voltage biased micro-electrodes, immersed in a dielectric

(electrorheological) liquid with suspended graphitized carbon

nanoparticles.

I think this is a good approach.. yesterday I got it mind to use electrostatic (sound) waves to be used in the dielectric liquid with the suspended graphitized carbon nanoparticles..

Fine - I am not thinking on that level as yet.

the micro-electrodes could be used to generate electrostatic waves which could sound shape the nanoparticles into any shape we want.. but I am not sure how this could work..

To meet future environmental quality goals, the aeroengine company

Rolls-Royce Deutschland (RRD) recently announced the technology

tasks for air transportation in 2012 and after. The major technology

task for the time horizon after 2020 is the development of zero

emission propulsion systems: 1. Fuel cells driven conventional

mechanical propellers, 2. Fuel cells driven speculative electro-

magnetic vacuum propellers.

Probably tiny imbedded nano-fuel cells that get recharged from

/\zpf(induced).

yes, maybe. please note that carbon nanotubes are currently also discussed as hydrogen storage devices.. but I think you have something else in mind.. is it possible to generate hydrogen out of nothing?

No I don't mean that. I mean negative matter propulsion is a source of energy. Look at my EVO paper with Ken Shoulders for some possibly real data! Ken used to work with Puthoff, but obviously thinks my theory is better than Hal's to deal with the actual experimental data!

The smart skin is also a computer at three levels.

1. Classical with signal locality

2. Quantum with signal locality

3. Post-Quantum with "Conscious AI" (term I coined) with "signal

nonlocality"

Woow.

So the smart skin is a Command Control Communication zero g-force warp

drive "G-Engine" (George Trimble) with a controlled Paul Hill

"acceleration field" using Hermann Bondi's "negative matter propulsion"

with "negative matter" replaced by my original /\zpf field that depends

on vacuum coherence. Be sure to quote me exactly as these are all

original ideas of mine not found anywhere else. Also cite my book

"Super Cosmos" and Nick Cook's book "The Hunt for Zero Point."

Yes. It is all your and Creon's idea and this will be mentioned.

See my paper on the smart skin.. it is nearly all a paper of quotations.:-)

so it is nearly like a paper written in a popular scientific journal.

but please do not ask me to quote book which I have not read so far...

Cite ExoticVacuumObjects.pdf

Podkletnov.pdf

in http://qedcorp.com/destiny

that you have read

What's The Big Deal?

Origin of Arrow of Time simply explained below.

Nick Cook of Jane's Defence Weekly in "The Hunt for Zero Point"

mentions a torsion field as a possible explanation for the alleged Nazi

"Time Machine" experiment of Victor Schauberger in the final days of

WWII. This is of interest because Nick also says that Schauberger's

work influenced Podkletnov's work that was apparently also tested by

Tony Robertson of NASA/STAIF?

http://qedcorp.com/book/psi/hitweapon.html

Hammond has a nice historical discussion of torsion fields as a gauge

force theory. The fact is that you get a theory of gravity as

space-time curvature from matter stress-energy density currents (4

translation parameters), and torsion from quantum spin and orbital

rotational currents (3 space rotations + 3 Lorentz boosts or space-time

rotations).

This excludes the 4 special conformal translations and the dilation

that will give more "force" fields in addition to curvature and

torsion. I use "force" loosely since the "geometrodynamic" view

eliminates force. We can use either depending on what level we are

talking. For example, the curvature field derives ultimately from the

Kleinert elastic world crystal lattice distortion field that comes from

the "More is different" (P.W. Anderson) macro-quantum coherent hologram

phase of the virtual electron-positron PV condensate. Einstein's metric

field is the "spin 2" elastic strain tensor of the Kleinert spin 1

compensating gauge force field from locally gauging the 4 space-time

translations infinitesimally generated by the total energy-momentum

4-vector Pu. The curvature field comes from 1-dim string topological

defects in the spin 0 scalar PV condensate corresponding to

disclination defects in the world crystal lattice spacing Lp* that is a

scale-dependent variable. Although the electron is a 4-component Dirac

spinor field, the PV condensate is a spin 0 scalar macro-quantum order

parameter from a BCS pairing of two spinor fields. A spin 1 vector

order parameter is also conceivable with new classes of topological

defects. The additional torsion field corresponds to dislocation

defects in the scalar order parameter. These defects are phase singular

strings on which the order parameter vanishes like in the core of a

vortex in a superfluid. Andrei Sakharov's "metric elasticity" for

emergent smooth c-number ODLRO Einstein gravity corresponds to P.W.

Anderson's "More is different" "generalized phase rigidity" (basis for

"world hologram" of Lenny Susskind), and to inverse of Ed Witten's

string tension alpha'^-1 and the "quantum of area" Lp*^2 of

non-perturbative Loop Gravity.

G*/c^4 ~ (G*h/c^3)(hc)^-1 = Lp*^2/hc = alpha'/hc = (String Tension)^-1

= (Phase Rigidity)^-1 = (Metric Elasticity)

The world hologram entropy of a 3D region of space with bounding area A

is S/k ~ A/4Lp*^2 (k = Boltzmann's constant)

For the expanding FRW universe with scale factor R(t) (in units of

length)

Lp* = Lp^2/3R(t)^1/3

The thermodynamic entropy of the Universe is therefore,

S(Universe)/k ~ R(t)^2 /4Lp^4/3R(t)^2/3 ~ R(t)^4/3

This explains the Arrow of Time of the Second Law of Thermodynamics in

terms of the spatial expansion of the Universe and it also explains why

the entropy of the Universe is zero at the Big Bang because R(0) = 0.

What's the Big Deal?

The effects of the extra dimensions of hyperspace is to promote

Newton's G from a constant to a renormalization group flow

scale-dependent running coupling parameter G*(s) at scale s in the

sense of the continuous wavelet transform generalization of Wigner's

phase space density and Green's function propagators based on the rigid

Fourier transform.

On May 29, 2004, at 12:43 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

A: No. So we eliminate that.

Equation (28) p. 604 of Richard Hammond's "Torsion Gravity" Rep Prog

Phys 65 (2002) is interesting. It is, for a metric theory with zero

non-metricity tensor, but with torsion S

R = Ro + 4(S^u;u - S^uSu) + SuvwS^u^v^w - 2SuvwS^v^w^u

Where ; is covariant derivative with respect to only the 1916

symmetric Levi-Civita connection for parallel transport of tensor

fields in the curved-torsioned space-time.

In the ordinary non-gravitating vacuum Ro i.e. the zero torsion Ricci

curvature scalar vanishes.

That leaves for the exotic vacuum field equation

Ruv + 4(S^u;u - S^uSu) + SuvwS^u^v^w - 2SuvwS^v^w^u = 0

Only if

4(S^u;u - S^uSu) + SuvwS^u^v^w - 2SuvwS^v^w^u = /\zpfguv

Could we interpret the torsion field as a cosmological field. This

does not seem like a good idea. Since the torsion field comes from

locally gauging the Lorentz group, it is a classical field with no

necessary connection to zero point energy density.

## No comments:

Post a Comment