Correction - that paper by Modanese was already given in 2004. I am amazed that no one corrected that obvious error! It's minor of course.
Note that what really matters for the metric engineering of warp, wormhole and weapon that we see in the UFOs Out There is not real graviton beams. That is folly. What matters are the the c-number guv curved space-time dynamical fields coming from the rigid Goldstone phase of the vacuum condensate that forms weak Josephson links to the real superconductors, or other macro-quantum coherent order parameters like in the quantum Hall effect of 2D electron sheets forming anyons at high Tc. Modanese does not understand the role of the vacuum condensate generating the emergent guv field. Modanese only has a fragment of the problem showing that given a real superconductor order parameter it will influence the /\ contribution to Einstein's guv field. That is good, but does not go deep enough. Modanese does not have my metric engineering equation
Induced /\ = (Short-Wave Cut-Off)^-2(Vacuum Condensate Density)^1/2(Control Condensate Density)^1/2(Common Overlap Volume)Cosine of the relative phase between the vacuum and control coherent order parameters.
On Sep 25, 2004, at 2:04 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
On Sep 25, 2004, at 12:04 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Remember, macro-quantum vacuum coherence hides random micro-quantum zero point vacuum energy under the rug. Any random zero point energy that leaks out is exotic vacuum that contributes to the cosmological constant either as dark energy or dark matter depending on the sign of the pressure negative or positive respectively. Dark energy at a distance is a universal repulsive antigravity field. Dark matter at a distance is a universal attractive gravity field. Both fields can be stronger than what is expected from Newton’s constant. That is the effective Planck energy is smaller than 10^19Gev. However, as possibly in the case of Ken Shoulders “charge clusters” the effective forces inside an extended exotic vacuum region can change sign! Indeed, that is why the EVO is stable and that is also why the single electron is stable.
Modanese's paper below is of interest of course. There is an error in his eq. 6 that may be a problem in the broken English of the Italian authors. What they call "phase velocity" there should really be "group velocity."
Phase velocity is E/p = hf/hk. Modanese writes it upside down as p/E.
Note that when
E^2 = (pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2
group velocity is
vg = dE/dp
2EdE = 2pc^2dp
vg = dE/dp = c^2(p/E)
(vgroup)(vphase) = c^2
for both m^2 > 0 and m^2 < 0
However, this error is not fatal and the paper has some interesting ideas that overlap my own independent research.
The emphasis at STAIF on real gravitons I think is a mistake. They will only produce small effects not directly relevant to the real metric engineering we see Out There in the UFO phenomenon. That empirical purely descriptive part is nicely presented in the recent NIDS paper by Jacques Vallee and Eric Davis.
On Sep 25, 2004, at 9:42 AM, Gary S. Bekkum wrote:
Effect of the Vacuum Energy Density on Graviton Propagation
Authors: Giovanni Modanese, Giorgio Fontana
Comments: CP699, Space Technology and Applications International Forum-STAIF 2004, proceedings published by AIP and edited by M.S. El-Genk
Subj-class: General Physics
"It is known that the value L of the vacuum energy density affects the propagation equation for gravitons: A mass term appears in the propagation equation, such that m^2=-L. As a consequence, the polarization states of gravitons also change. This effect of the L-term has been confirmed by recent calculations in a curved background, which is the only proper setting, since solutions of the classical Einstein equations in the presence of a L-term represent a space with constant curvature. A real value for the mass (when L<0) will show up as a slight exponential damping in the gravitational potential, which is however strongly constrained by astronomical data. The consequences of an imaginary mass (for L>0) are still unclear; on general grounds, one can expect the onset of instabilities in this case. This is also confirmed by numerical simulations of quantum gravity which became recently available. These properties gain a special interest in consideration of the following. (1) The most recent cosmological data indicate that L is positive and of the order of 0.1 J/m^3. Is this value compatible with a stable propagation of gravitons? (2) The answer to the previous question lies perhaps in the scale dependence of the effective value of L. L may be negative at the small distance/large energy scale at which the quantum behavior of gravitational fields and waves becomes relevant. Furthermore, local contributions to the vacuum energy density (in superconductors in certain states, and in very strong static electromagnetic fields) can change locally the sign of L, and so affect locally the propagation and the properties of gravitons. The graviton wavefunction, for different values of the parameters, may be characterized by superluminal phase velocity or by unitarity only in imaginary valued time."