Thursday, September 09, 2004

On Sep 9, 2004, at 3:58 AM, Burinskii Alexander wrote:

Dear Jack,

I see that the main source of our contradictions is in the ON-OFF-shell
assumptions on the photons which play the part in Casimir effect.

Yes. On-mass-shell in orthodox globally flat special relativistic quantum field theories like QED means REAL particles that are excitations ABOVE the physical vacuum.

The physical vacuum must, by definition, only consist of RANDOM OFF-mass-shell quanta plus vacuum condensates that are macro-quantum coherent states of off-mass-shell virtual fermion-antifermion pairs. Note that non-radiative near EM fields like, the static Coulomb field, fields in capacitors and transformers and power lines are also macro-quantum coherent states of virtual photons but they are not inside the vacuum of course, but are part of the Tuv(EM) stress-energy density tensor contribution on the non-vacuum source RHS in Einstein's smooth c-number ODLRO "superfluid" macro-quantum local field equation:

Guv + /\zpfguv = (8piG/c^4)Tuv

"Classical" space-time is, in reality, a ODLRO LOCAL EMERGENT macro-quantum coherent post-inflationary phenomenon from the phase variations of the condensate. Hydrodynamic "superflow" is replaced by 4D "elastic-plastic" deformations where torsion and curvature come from "vortex line" singularities in the spontaneous broken vacuum symmetry Goldstone phase of the ODLRO order parameter. The pre-inflationary unstable false vacuum is globally flat with zero macro-quantum coherence. The dark energy and the dark matter come directly from the variations in the Higgs intensity of the this giant vacuum coherent LOCAL wave. The coherence and the locality solve Roger Penrose's problem with inflationary cosmology of the origin and direction of the Arrow of Time for the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

I know that calculation of the Casimir effect in FLAT space may be exactly
performed on the base of ON-shell plane wave photons with 2-transverse polarizations (De

I do not accept that. If De Witt did that it was his "greatest blunder"! :-) Such an idea is nonsense by definition as I argue above. It contradicts Feynman's papers on the subject. If in fact what you describe is accurate it is a great scandal for theoretical physics. It is obviously an inconsistent procedure that I find unacceptable and irrational. When I get a chance I will look at De Witt's papers on this. Exact references? I find it hard to believe since I know that De Witt completely understood Feynman and Schwinger's theories.

The mass gap may be neglected for the very high frequencies and it does not prevent to

I do not see how this last statement affects my simple argument that you cannot argue /\ = 0 from cancellation between RANDOM virtual photons and RANDOM virtual electron-positron pairs because of two reasons

1. there is an extra longitudinal virtual photon mode

2. the mass-gap of the virtual electrons in Dirac's negative energy sea means that the virtual photon modes below the gap escape any possible cancellation!

Arguments from infinite renormalization are irrelevant. Also I know from personal conversation with Richard Feynman back in 1968 in his office at Cal Tech that Feynman considered his own and Schwinger's infinite renormalization a "shell game". Feynman told me that any such method was probably "inconsistent" and it was a "scandal in physics" that no one was able to do any better! Feynman considered his own work here no more than a temporary stop-gap measure. Also Herbert Frohlich echoed Feynman saying that the concept of the "point particle" was what was wrong with quantum field theory. You only need infinite renormalization because the electron (quarks and leptons also now) are treated as point particles. In my theory they are spatially extended "geon" exotic vacuum solutions of

Guv + /\zpfguv = 0

GCT and local Lorentz symmetry are obeyed!

No more infinite renormalization or regularizations needed. Any argument based on those ideas is not relevant at all to the new paradigm I am professing here.

I cannot agree that ``...SUPERSYMMETRY is failed idea.'' ...and that it is
``...badly broken".
The exact matching of the bosonic and fermionic modes is the main demand of
retained supersymmetry, and Zumino showed in 1974 that this is satisfied for the assumed vacuum
structure (apparently without gravity that time).

No one in the field takes Zumino's 1974 argument seriously anymore I thought?

Of course, each real field lead to
a breakdown of supersymmetry, but this breakdown
is only a partial, without catastrophic consequences.
Indeed, I have an intuitive conjecture that this breakdown is a source of
gravity and /\ term .

Not even Witten agrees with you is my understanding. Yes, indeed you can make implausible arguments that /\ = 0 EXACTLY from UNBROKEN SUPERSYMMETRY. But since no one has observed real on-mass-shell super symmetry partners it is a failed idea. You can argue this with Carlos Castro. In any case a mere "intuitive conjecture" is not good enough since I have a precise mathematical model that simply explains the actual observed mysteries without the need of any excess theoretical baggage like infinite renormalization/regularization numbo-jumbo algorithms, nor unobservable supersymmetry. :-)

Meantime I derive

Guv + /\zpfguv = 0

From the vacuum coherent condensate.

Until I see you or any one else do as well I do not see any reason to introduce excess theoretical baggage into what I think is basically a simple problem. Parsimony rules. Of course I could be wrong, but so far I see everyone is very confused on these fundamentals including ALL the theorists at GR 17 in Dublin - even Hawking! The only theorist who was not confused was Roger Penrose. Penrose is clear about what he doesn't know and he questioned where Hawking was coming from in his insistence on using globally flat micro-quantum S-Matrix ideas like absolute unitarity to explain the information blackhole paradox. All The King's Men are running around like headless chickens and a tribe of naked emperors grasping at straws with irrelevant ideas trying to put Humpty Dumpty back together again. This was basically Roger Penrose's point in his GR 17 lecture "Fashion, Faith and Fantasy" - a stinging indictment of the conventional wisdom or, more accurately, pipe dreams that you are expressing here Alexander. :-)

What is the negative counterpart for huge
/\zpf ~ Lp^-2 ~ 10^66 cm^-2 in your model of
vacuum coherence?

Extremely simple. I wrote the equation in Paris back in Sept 2003 and I write it all the time. It's in my books.

/\zpf = Lp^-2[Lp^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 - 1]

Vacuum Coherence in this simplest ODLRO model, like two-fluid model of HeII, is a LOCAL complex scalar field.

The RANDOM micro-quantum zero point residue is analogous to "normal fluid excitations".

However, since this is a virtual quantum effect, it makes no contribution to the macroscopiv thermodynamic entropy of real quanta!

|Vacuum Coherence| = (Higgs Intensity)^1/2e^i(Goldstone Phase)

Elastic World Distortion Local Four-Vector is

du(x) = Lp^2(Goldstone Phase),u

,u is ordinary partial derivative relative to x^u

Note the 4D holographic quantum of area Lp*^2 replaces 3D h/m quantum of superfluid circulation.

Einstein's curved space-time metric tensor field is simply

guv(x) = nuv(Globally Flat) + (1/2)[du(x),v + dv(x),u]

Then use Hagen-Kleinert's method to get Einstein's field equation, which in vacuum is

Guv + /\zpfguv = 0

When vacuum coherence is optimized

/\zpf = 0

and we have the usual

Ruv = 0 NON-EXOTIC VACUUM field equation with NO dark energy and no dark matter.

Einstein's GCT (LOCAL GENERAL COORDINATE TRANSFORMATIONS) are derivatives of the LOCAL PHASE transformation.

Your claim on the role of OFF-shell photons in
Casimir is new for me. I would like to see such a derivation.

Simply read Feynman's original QED papers. If Casimir or anyone else do calculations using real photons the calculations are nonsense. Indeed, even Puthoff's simple heuristic "Type I" argument never mentions real photons. The argument for flat plates is simply the exclusion of the long wave virtual photon modes between the UNCHARGED plates. Also any argument based on the better Van Der Waals force between NEUTRAL molecules making up the plates does not use REAL PHOTONS ever! The effect does not depend upon RADIATION!

Note also that the QED Casimir force has nothing whatsoever to do with /\zpf which is a GR effect absent in QED. QED is a SR theory that has NO GRAVITY in principle as Einstein showed early on. You cannot get gravity from a SR theory of any kind ever!

Maybe I need
to look other sources -
not De Witt (original derivation by Lifshitz).
It is also very interesting if w=-1 for off-shell photons. Unfortunately the
pointed by you sources are
inaccessible for me. Are there derivations or only claims?

I will reproduce Peacock's derivation when I have time. But Mike Turner's April 2003 Physics Today article says it all with a minimum of math. That is reproduced in my messages from a few days ago.

Best regards,
Yours, Alex

PS. Reference for Zumino (I read this text long ago,
and I found this reference in SPIRES HEP:
By B. Zumino (CERN),. CERN-TH-1901, Jul 1974. 16pp.
Review talk given at 17th Int. Conf. on High Energy Physics, Imperial
College, London, England, Jul 1-10, 1974.
Published in London Conf.1974:I-254 (QCD161:H51:1974)

You know I attended Bruno's lectures on all this at Berkeley 20 + years ago. It is completely irrelevant to this real problem of the nature of the universe.

On Sep 8, 2004, at 9:05 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

On Sep 8, 2004, at 7:06 AM, Burinskii Alexander wrote:

Dear Jack,

Here are some extra sentences on my understanding of this problem.

What is our usual flat vacuum. It contains zpf
which is diverges or has an infinite energy.
E= infinite sum of electromagnetic modes (from zero to infinite

Yes, this is the conventional idea for virtual photons only. It is no good. It is incomplete. It leads to the cosmological constant problem that I think only I have the essentially correct idea on.

The infinite frequency only comes if a real mathematical continuum. That is clearly a false idea. But even with a 4D world lattice you are not better off because micro-quantum virtual photons without MACRO-QUANTUM vacuum coherence give

/\zpf ~ Lp^-2 ~ 10^66 cm^-2

Even if you take Hal Puthoff's value

/\zpg ~ (mc/h)^2 ~ 10^22 cm^-2

It's no damn good. Our universe cannot exist with such a large /\zpf.

The observed large-scale /\zpf(Dark Energy) is ~ 10^-56 cm^-2.

That is the cosmological constant problem that I solve with the idea of vacuum coherence, most of which comes from the MACRO-QUANTUM virtual electron-positron BEC whose robust phase coherence gives Einstein's c-number local field equations!

It is clear that it is a defect of our modern knowledge
and this sum has to be truncated on some high frequency.
This picture is not complete and we have to assume
that there is a Dirac sea of the negative energy particles which compensate
this divergence.

That idea simply does not work.

For one thing, there is an energy gap 2mc^2 in that picture. There are NO negative energy virtual electrons from -mc^2 to zero energy! This actually gives Hal Puthoff's /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^2 quite simply and obviously and I am surprised he never mentions it explicitly. But even so the idea is no good! The universe still cannot exist with these naive ideas!

To get our flat space we have to assume that each
modeof (bosonic) ZPF has a negative counterpart from the (fermionic) Dirac

Again this idea is no good at all not only because of rest mass gaps in the RANDOM micro-quantum Dirac negative energy sea, but also because the polarization modes DO NOT MATCH.

You have 3 independent SPIN 1 virtual photon modes and only 2 independent SPIN 2 virtual electron modes.

Furthermore, SUPERSYMMETRY is failed idea. No evidence for it whatsoever. Even with it, the high rest mass of the supersymmetry partners would not solve the cosmological constant problem.

It is main idea of supersymmetry !, And it does work!

I don't see how? How does it work? You should discuss this with Carlos Castro. Even Ed Witten says it does not work. His M theory assumes supersymmetry and one can make an argument that /\ = 0 - except I do not see how that works when supersymmetry is so badly broken? But then Witten says the observed dark energy destroys his /\ = 0 argument and that this is the "greatest crisis of my career."

If ZPF is separated from the negative energy superpartners, consistency of
vacuum is broken. We do not feel the zpf and have /\ ~0 in flat space only due to
supersymmetry. We cannot even speak on the value of /\ without thinking on
the energy of fermionic partners.

Again, I do not think this argument works. Do you have a detailed mathematical argument for it? If so, I would like to see it. I am sure at least one of the assumptions are factually incorrect. I know such a belief is a common myth among the string theorists, but I suspect it rests on very shaky ground. :-)

In QED these fermions are MASSIVE vacuum electrons of the Dirac sea,
but in the other models of the superconducting coherent states they can be
some other fermions which I called ``partons".

Again if your partons have finite rest mass m you will still get uncompensated

/\zpf ~ (mc/h)^2

as well as the problem of not having a balance of spin modes of positive and negative ZPF energy densities.

The zpf photons in the Casimir I effect are the plane e.m. waves which are
on shell

No, this is a completely false self-contradiction! I think Puthoff uses it also and maybe others like Milonni. This is a completely unacceptable error of conception.

It is a contradiction to say that ZPF virtual photons are ON MASS SHELL with f = ck. Any model that makes that assumption is obviously wrong in conflict with for example Feynman's classic papers on quantum electrodynamics reproduced in the Dover volume edited by Schwinger.

By DEFINITION a ZPF virtual photon is OFF-MASS-SHELL - not a pole of the interacting photon propagator in the complex energy plane using globally flat space-time with COMPLETE ABSENCE OF GRAVITY!

and, after averaging on angular directions, yield the stress
tensor T~diag(1,1/3,1/3,1/3) which has w = 1/3 and Trace=0,
which can give only ZERO contribution to scalar curvature.

Again this is a false argument proceeding from an inconsistent premise. If you read Mike Turner's article in April 2003 Physics Today and any modern review of precision cosmology you will see that

w = +1/3 only works for real on mass shell photons in macro-quantum coherent states that is classical far field radiation in only 2 transverse polarized modes such as the CMB of WMAP at ~ 2.7 deg K.

Also in your last message you wrote w = -1/3. The sign of w is very important physically. Hal does use w = + 1/3. But all of these arguments are simply wrong and unacceptable.

You cannot get virtual ZPF photons to give w = +1/3 or w = -1/3. Virtual ZPF photons have w = -1 EXACTLY. The proof from general relativity is on p. 26 of John Peacock's "Cosmological Physics".

BTW Virtual ZPF electron-positron pairs also have w = -1. The only difference is that virtual photons have positive ZPF energy density from boson commutation rules and virtual electron-positron pairs have negative ZPF energy density from fermion anti-commutation rules.

I checked it looking the very good old review by B. De Witt Phys Rep. 19(1975) 295.

I do not believe De Witt ever wrote that ZPF virtual photons have w = + 1/3. If he did, he also is wrong. Also these ideas were not well understood back in 1975.

In my opinion, only a sum of zpf and massive vacuum fermions can result to w = -1
and give a nonzero /\ related to zpf.

This is false. See reference to Peacock above. I assume you meant to write:

In my opinion, only a sum of zpf virtual photons and massive vacuum fermions can result to w = -1
and give a nonzero /\ related to zpf.

w = -1 holds for EACH VIRTUAL SPECIES separately following from general principles of Einstein's GR and micro-quantum theory. Again Peacock explains this, so does Mike Turner in April 2003 Physics Today.

When we speak on Casimir II. we assume that a part
of zpf is pulled out from the ball. There appears an
energy cavity, and T-inside get a negative contribution T(inside) ~ - c

No this is wrong. Also it is not what Puthoff even claims. I understand him to claim

Total virtual photon ZPF pressure = 0 inside the EVO shell and Total virtual photon ZPF pressure outside the EVO shell is positive = (+1/3)(Virtual Photon ZPF Energy Density) ~ (+1/3)hc/(h/mc)^4.
Puthoff completely ignores virtual electron-positron pairs and he also completely ignores Einstein's general relativity, i.e.

Guv + /\zpfguv = 0

Therefore, Puthoff's Type II Casimir force model of Ken Shoulders observed EVOs is completely unacceptable.

In my work 1989 I argued that some cloud
of massive matter by a transfer to superdense state
get a negative contribution to the mass due Casimir II
and may transit to a pseudovacuum state if their
constituents will be packed closely up to Compton distances between them.

Maybe so. I don't know, but I do not see how that has any relevance to the EVO problem? :-)
On Sep 7, 2004, at 2:34 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

What is the Nature of The Beast that this way comes? Remember The Sufi Elephant Story. The Hunt for Zero Point is like Moby Dick, The Great Leviathan that lies beneath. There is Cold Fire in IT's FROM BIT's Belly.

On the meaning of "w" AKA "dubya" (Mike Turner in April 2003 Physics Today).

Note that Alex's value w = -1/3 he gives below is exactly what we do not want! That throws the EVO baby out with the bathwater.

I shall now pontificate on the true nature of the Exotic Stuff that dominates The World and paves the way to the Conquest of Space-Time in which We, Men Like Gods, weave The Fabric of Space-Time into Warp, Wormhole, and Weapon (if need be). The Handwriting is On The Great Wall.

w = -1/3 is the EXACT BOUNDARY VALUE at The Edge of Eschaton's Apocalypse Now for which the "exotic stuff" of The World DOES NOT GRAVITATE OR ANTI-GRAVITE!

Nothing Hal Puthoff & Co have written about this problem is even in the right ball park because you never see the key equation

Guv + /\zpfguv = 0

in anything "they" write on this problem.

If you want to use Einstein's

Guv = (String Tension)^-1Tuv

Note that

Guv a curvature has dimensions of Area^-1.

Tuv has dimensions Energy/Volume

String Tension = c^4/8piG has dimensions Energy/Length


Tuv(Exotic Stuff) must be, because of EEP, GCT and Heisenberg's micro-quantum principle, of the RESTRICTED form

(Energy Density)(1 + 3w)guv

Obviously w = -1/3 means Tuv(Exotic Stuff) = 0, i.e. COMPLETELY USELESS for metric engineering WARP, WORMHOLE and WEAPON! Capische? ;-)

Besides, Hal uses w = +1/3 in his Type II Casimir Model, which, if I understood his cryptic remarks, means TOTAL virtual photon pressure inside the EVO shell is zero, whilst it is positive outside the shell of magnitude

~ (1/3)(String Tension)(mc/h)^2 ~ 10^83 ev/cc MUCH TOO BIG!

Alex, what you wrote about the long wave cutoff inside the shell below is not what Hal means at all. That obvious Casimir force effect ~ hc/a^4 (for an EVO of size "a") is much too small as I showed and as Hal even agreed. That is the Type I model not the Type II model. In any case neither is even close to being correct. They both miss the mark!

Corrected 2nd Draft for the record

On Sep 7, 2004, at 11:17 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

PS A major issue with regard to Ken Shoulders EVO laboratory observations is the huge unbalanced negative electric charge Ne on the EVO shell, that I say is a "bottle" or "cage" for the completely virtual "dark energy" ZPF positive energy density "core" /\zpf > 0 inside the EVO "cosmic eggshell". Also where did the positive charges go? Using only supersymmetry/parton/conventional QED Casimir force ideas et-al leads to very doubtful large values of N ~ 10^12 to 10^16 for the observed EVOs, that are also, it appears, the sources of "Cold Fusion" when the EVO eggshells break. Humpty Dumpty fell off the wall. :-) With the STRONG direct ZPF warping of space-time from

Guv + /\zpfguv = 0

independent of the QED Casimir forces, that remain only as relatively small corrections, N is much smaller because of the large local short-range space warp as explained by Kip Thorne in "Black Holes and Time Warps" (Fig on ~ p. 30).

That is

N(h/mc)^2 ~ (Space Warp Factor)(Observed Size of EVO)^2

(Space Warp Factor) << 1 for POSITIVE SPACE CURVATURE


The EVO is a ZPF driven dark energy mesoscopic Wheeler "Geon".

The single electron can be modeled in a similar way with Kerr-Newman type metrics as you have been doing.

Remember effective potential per unit electron mass of the dark energy interior is

V(dark energy core of EVO) = c^2/\zpfr^2 > 0 a 3D Harmonic Oscillator Potential with NEGATIVE PRESSURE making an attractive force to balance against the Coulomb repulsive self-force per unit electron mass ~ (Ne)^2/mr^2.

That's basically the simple EVO story - elementary physics!

On Sep 7, 2004, at 8:35 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

On Sep 7, 2004, at 3:31 AM, Burinskii Alexander wrote:

Dear Jack,

I will try to answer here some of your questions as I understand the problem

Let's make sure you mean the same model as Hal. Hal models each
electron as a tiny sphere of radius ~ h/mc ~ 10^-11 cm. Using flat
Euclidean space geometry, Hal then imagines N of these electrons
closely packed to form a larger EVO sphere ~ N(h/mc)^2 in area. Again
using flat space Euclidean geometry.

1. I considered Casimir II effect in 1989 without application to a charged
body, but with an intention
to apply it in future to the stress of the charged electron shell. I
understood later (in 2000-2002) that
it has an almost equivalent description in terms of supersymmetry.
All the VOLUME of sphere (not a thin area) was closely packed by some
partons. (This is the VOLUME Casimir effect II).
These partons in a cosmic case could be the neutron
constituents of a superdense star, or other superdense matter in a cluster.

I do not know what you mean here by "partons"? Are they "particles" "on-mass-shell" or "off-mass-shell"? If the former, then it is not a vacuum inside the EVO shell. Also, I think I can explain the whole thing without these additional assumptions of "partons" and "supersymmetry". Remember these EVOs are rather large typically 10^-5 cm to 10^-5 meters. We should not need to use high-energy physics ideas to explain them. My model is much simpler and we want to do more with less. :-)

Apparently the Casimir Type II Ansatz is that the zero point energy
density ~ /\zpf INSIDE the EVO sphere is ZERO.
The zero point energy density OUTSIDE the EVO sphere is positive of
order /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^2. You need to multiply /\zpf by (c^4/8piG) to get
dimensions of energy density. Hal then assume a POSITIVE ZPF pressure
that is (1/3) the positive ZPF energy density. He then balances the
Coulomb repulsion force ~ (Ne)^2/r^2 against this lop-sided EXTERNAL
positive ZPF pressure.

Now is the above your picture below?


In the effect II the low frequency PART of ZPF
INSIDE the EVO sphere is ZERO and pressure has the factor - 1/3.

I have THREE objections.

1. I believe Hal has said that the total ZPF pressure from virtual photons inside the EVO shell is zero, not only the low frequency part as it would be in the Casimir Type 1 model. Also one cannot assume f = ck for virtual photons. This detail is ignored by almost all papers on the Casimir effect. It is a serious error.

2. w = -1 for ALL virtual quanta, whether photons, electron-positron pairs, partons et-al. This requirement is from General Relativity explained by John Peacock on p. 26 "Cosmological Physics" and completely absent in Milonni's book "The Quantum Vacuum" with no mention of "dubya" w as explained in Mike Turner's April 2003 Physics Today article. The only issue is what is the sign of their ZPF energy density and that depends on the spin-statistics connection and possibly the non-Abelian nature of the field theory.

3. Hal claims in his Type II that w = +1/3 not w = -1/3.

Therefore, I do not see that your model is the same as Hal Puthoff's Model II at all. :-)

However (!), /\zpf INSIDE the EVO sphere is composed from ZPF + superdense
matter + gravity, and total /\=/\tot has to satisfy the relation w = -1
which follows from supersymmetry for the flat, de Sitter and anti-de Sitter
states. It was also shown
for a charged gravitating ball without supersymmetry in some of my papers in

Again, I say these EVOs are large. You can almost see them with the unaided eye. My explanation is much simpler and does not require these additional ideas from really short-scale physics in globally flat space-time.

Similar, the EXTERNAL ZPF electromagnetic pressure is combined with other
zero point fields
( fermionic and other ???, structure of vacuum is not clear now) leading to
the observable /\tot ~ 0.

No this simple argument from supersymmetry is well known to fail because supersymmetry is badly broken and in fact there is no evidence for it at all as Carlos Castro has pointed out. I do not need supersymmetry at all. It is replaced by "vacuum coherence" in my theory, which is extremely simple and parsimonious only needing Einstein's ideas, Heisenberg's and well known broken symmetry "ODLRO" ideas of Lars Onsager, Oliver Penrose and P.W. Anderson used extensively in soft condensed matter physics in the emergence of complex forms of organization from less organized sub-strata.

Therefore, the results of Casimir II effect coincide
with your results:
``...of the Ken Shoulders EVO has /\zpf ~ 0 OUTSIDE the EVO shell. This is
a vacuum coherence effect that simply solves the
cosmological constant mystery.....INSIDE the EVO shell with w = -1

The balance of the pressure and energy + energy of gravity for charged EVOs
is a very thin thing which I tried to discuss in hep-th/0008129,
hep-th/0205127 (there is a simple graphical analysis for the Kerr
background in gr-qc/010985, showing that w= -1 for interior.)

A few words on the origin of the Compton cutoff for
the low frequency ZPF in Casimir II. As I know it is not a Casimir
suggestion, but it follows from the properties of the conducting matter. It
is not shielding of waves, but rather is similar to the Meisner effect. The
conducting lattice is not penetrable for the modes of e.m. fields if the
length of wave is bigger then the cell of the lattice, but is penetrable
for the high frequency modes having the small length of waves. This effect
may be described by the Higgs or Landau-Ginzburg model of superconductivity
showing that the FALSE vacuum which is INSIDE the EVO may be considered as
superconducting one.
This is exactly yours ``...vacuum coherence as
the origin of both the inflation field and the Higgs field... ''

OK I would need to see the math here, but I doubt one needs partons and supersymmetry.

So, in my opinion, Puthoff and Piestrup have apparently a good insight on
the important role of the Casimir II effect, but do some mistakes in his
application. It seems to me that their mistakes are going from the
misunderstanding that the Casimir effect II it is the VOLUME effect, not
the ``...Casimir Shell Model II...'' .

I don't think so. In my model the Casimir force is there but it is very small. The essence of the effect is the strong DIRECT WARPING of space-time demanded by general relativity in the equation

Guv + /\zpfguv = 0

That's almost the whole simple story. It is a qualitative error to try to explain EVOs as essentially a Casimir effect using orthodox QED in globally flat space-time.

Sorry that was not able to answer all the your questions,
Yours sincerely,

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Sarfatti"
To: "SarfattiScienceSeminars@YahooGroups. com"

Cc: "ItalianPhysicsCenter" ;
Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 8:13 PM
Subject: Re: How big is the unbalanced EVO electric charge anyway?

Hi Alex

Let's make sure you mean the same model as Hal. Hal models each
electron as a tiny sphere of radius ~ h/mc ~ 10^-11 cm. Using flat
Euclidean space geometry, Hal then imagines N of these electrons
closely packed to form a larger EVO sphere ~ N(h/mc)^2 in area. Again
using flat space Euclidean geometry.

Apparently the Casimir Type II Ansatz is that the zero point energy
density ~ /\zpf INSIDE the EVO sphere is ZERO.
The zero point energy density OUTSIDE the EVO sphere is positive of
order /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^2. You need to multiply /\zpf by (c^4/8piG) to get
dimensions of energy density. Hal then assume a POSITIVE ZPF pressure
that is (1/3) the positive ZPF energy density. He then balances the
Coulomb repulsion force ~ (Ne)^2/r^2 against this lop-sided EXTERNAL
positive ZPF pressure.

Now is the above your picture below?

My objections to Hal's model are:

1. Hal assumes w = pressure/(energy density) = + 1/3 which is false for
all ZPF virtual quanta of any spin. w = +1/3 only works for on mass
shell REAL photons forming the radiation far field with only transverse
polarizations for zero rest mass photons.

2. General relativity and Heisenberg quantum uncertainty demand w = -1
for all such virtual ZPF quanta

Reference: p. 26 of John Peacock's "Cosmological Physics".

3. ZPF energy density and pressure DO (ANTI) GRAVITATE depending on the
sign of the ZPF energy density. This is required by Einstein's theory.
You cannot simply hand wave ZPF energy density away as Hal essentially
does. Therefore Hal's assumption that the external ZPF energy density

~ 10^19Gev 10^33 cm^-1 10^22 cm^-2 ~ 10^28x10^33x10^22 ~ 10^83 ev/cc

is obviously wrong. The universe could not exist in such a state! This
is essentially the cosmological constant paradox, which no human
physicist alive today, from this time (excluding time travelers from
the future in their Unconventional Flying Objects) properly understands
except for me! I must be candid here.

What is lacking here is the proper understanding of vacuum coherence as
the origin of both the inflation field and the Higgs field for the
coherent origin of the rest mass inertia of the lepto-quarks directly
opposed to the random ZPF acceleration friction model of Haisch and

4. My model of the Ken Shoulders EVO has /\zpf ~ 0 OUTSIDE the EVO
shell. This is a vacuum coherence effect that simply solves the
cosmological constant mystery. With /\zpf roughly (mc/h)^2 (factor of
alpha fine structure constant ignored for now) INSIDE the EVO shell
with w = -1 NEGATIVE PRESSURE. That is the interior of the EVO N
electron shell is DARK ENERGY! The N-electron shell is a DARK ENERGY

The Dark Energy potential per unit electron mass is a POSITIVE 3D
Harmonic Oscillator potential


Therefore, its force gradient -2c^2/\zpfr is attractive and it balances
the repulsive Coulomb self-force per unit electon mass +(Ne)^2/mr^2 -
very simple, neat and pretty. Any bright high school serious physics
student can follow this argument.

5. Finally, there is the issue of the unacceptibly large unbalanced
negative electric charge on the EVO and where did the compensating
positive charge disappear to in the violent creation of the EVO?

The EVO is a mesoscopic geon in Wheeler's sense.

The surface area of the EVO = (Space Warp Factor)(radial size of EVO)^2

In flat space geometry

(Space Warp Factor) = 4pi

However, we need in the EVO

(Space Warp Factor) << 1


N(h/mc)^2 ~ (Space Warp Factor)a^2

where a is directly observed to be ~ 10^-5 cm to 10^-5 meters in Ken
Shoulders lab measurements.

This means that N can be a lot smaller than the FLAT SPACE estimates of
N ~ 10^12 to 10^16 unbalanced electron charges.

Recall that 10^18 electron charges (1/10 Coulomb) would make a flat
space EVO of radius ~ 10^9 10^-11 cm ~ 10^-4 meters.

Two unbalanced 1 Coulomb like charges separated by 1 meter repel with a
force ~ 10^10 Newtons ~ 1 MILLION TONS!

i.e. the MKS reciprocal permitivity of vacuum is ~ 10^10 - another
reason why Hal's PV model is no good for practical metric engineering
or tailoring of the fabric of 4D spacetime into weightless warp drives,
wide wormhole star gate time travel passage ways, and the weird "vacuum
bubble" WMD of Andrei Sakharov described by Martin Rees in "Our Final

Therefore, for the (1/10) Coulomb EVO the self-ripping destructive
force is

~ 10^-2 10^8(Million Tons) ~ ONE TRILLION TONS!

No comments: