Wednesday, November 03, 2004

Ch 10: CAPS are mine not in the original

81. Gravity in Newtonian physics (Galilean relativity)

"all bodies move [in gravity fields] in the same manner independently of mass, provided the initial conditions are the same ... This property of the gravitational fields PROVIDES THE POSSIBILITY OF ESTABLISHING AN ANALOGY between the motion of a body in a gravitational field and the motion of a body not located in any external field, but which is considered from the point of view of a non-inertial system of reference. ... in an inertial system, the FREE MOTION of all bodies is uniform and rectilinear ... Thus the properties of the motion in a noninertial system are the same as those in an inertial system of reference in the presence of a gravitational field. In other words a noninertial system is equivalent to a certain gravitational field. This is called the principle of equivalence."

L&L then give the example of a GLOBAL uniformly accelerating noninertial frame that is equivalent to a uniform gravitation field. Here "gravitational field" and "g-force" mean the same thing. Note that warp drive requires zero local g-force. A covariant tensor g-force is a physical absurdity. Also g-force is obviously a local observable that is only non-zero in a noninertial frame. Any physics theory that does not recognize that elementary fact is simply wrong.

"COORDINATE" vs "ACTUAL" Gravity Fields

What Zielinski has been trying to achieve, insofar as it is correct, and not unintelligible handwaving, is already well known. Zielinski's method has been to over-dramatize some informal remark that Einstein allegedly made in 1916 cited by Ruffini in his text book. No one has bothered to check the original German to see if the alleged (SEP) remark is not an error of translation? Thus as L&L continue:

"However, the fields to which the noninertial fields are equivalent ARE NOT COMPLETELY IDENTICAL with "ACTUAL" gravitational fields WHICH OCCUR ALSO IN INERTIAL FRAMES."

L&L are talking Newtonian mechanics here not Einstein's geometrodynamics.

The VERY Fundamental Importance of Asymptotic Flatness of Space-Time

"FOR THERE IS A VERY ESSENTIAL DIFFERENCE with respect to their BEHAVIOR AT INFINITY. At infinite distances from
Whthe bodies producing the field, "ACTUAL" GRAVITATIONAL FIELDS ALWAYS GO TO ZERO."

That is the static gravity Green's function of the Poisson scalar field equation G(r - r') = |r - r'|^-1

r = field point for a point test particle, r = source point (source may be real on-mass-shell or virtual off-mass-shell exotic vacuum /\zpf "dark energy" field).

"Contrary to this, the [gravity] fields to which noninertial frames are equivalent INCREASE WITHOUT LIMIT AT INFINITY, or, in any event, REMAIN FINITE IN VALUE. Thus, for example, the centrifugal force which appears in a [global] ROTATING REFERENCE SYSTEM INCREASES WITHOUT LIMIT AS WE MOVE AWAY FROM THE AXIS OF ROTATION; [another example] THE [global gravity] FIELD TO WHICH A [noninertial] REFERENCE SYSTEM IN ACCELERATED LINEAR MOTION IS EQUIVALENT TO IS THE SAME OVER ALL SPACE AND ALSO AT INFINITY."

I forget the language Zielinski used to pooh pooh this essential physical constraint as "adhoc" or a "fudge" in his ill-posed pseudo-problem.

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

Why g-force cannot be a GCT covariant tensor quantity! Why any pure gravity stress-energy current density quantity cannot be a local GCT tensor!

"The fields to which [GLOBAL] noninertial systems are equivalent VANISH AS SOON AS WE TRANSFORM TO AN INERTIAL SYSTEM."

This continues to hold when we extend Newton's theory of gravity to Einstein's where global frames are replaced by local frames. In that case the "actual gravitational field" is not g-force, but is the tidal force given by the 4th rank curvature GCT tensor R^uvwl in the geodesic deviation equation.

d^2(xA - xB)^u/ds^2 = R^uvwl(xA - xB)^v(dxA^w/ds)(dxB^l/ds) in an LNIF

You have equation of same form in the coincident LIF where the curved indices u,v,w,l go over to the flat indices a,b,c,d

This equation works when Lp << xA - xB << local radii of curvature.

This geodesic deviation is detected, in principle, with Doppler radars on a pair of test particles A & B each of which is in zero g-force "free fall" timelike geodesic motion in curved space-time, but which nevertheless are in relative motion.

Example: Coordinate fake gravity field in a rotating global frame of reference in flat space-time. Since the tangential rods have Lorentz contraction and the radial rods do not, circumference/radius > pi. And the fake gravity force increases as f^2r, where f is the rotation frequency and r is cylinder distance from axis of roation. In contrast, for a "actual" gravity field in the Schwarzschild solution, in the rest LNIF the radial rods shrink and the tangential rods do not, therefore circumference/radius << pi. This is why lepto-quark quasi-particle Bohm hidden variables in the Higgs Ocean shrink from 10^-11 cm low magnification to 10^-16 cm high magnification from their zero point energy /\zpf cores (SLAC deep inelastic electron-hadron scattering).


Here L&L only mean in Newtonian theory as their equations (81.1 - 2) show. That is, the Lagrangian IN A GLOBAL NEWTONIAN INERTIAL FRAME is

L = mv^2/2 - mV(gravity)

dv/dt = -gradV

LOCALITY of equivalence principle even in Newtonian physics

"All that can be done by a suitable choice of reference system is to ELIMINATE THE GRAVITATIONAL FIELD IN A GIVEN REGION OF SPACE, SUFFICIENTLY SMALL SO THAT THE FIELD CAN BE CONSIDERED UNIFORM OVER IT. This can be done by choosing a [local] system in accelerated motion, the acceleration of which is equal to that which would be acquired by a particle placed in the region of the field which we are considering."

On Nov 2, 2004, at 9:22 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

Orthodox 1916 GR is a local gauge force theory from only the 4-parameter translation subgroup of the 15 parameter conformal group. The compensating dynamical field is then guv(curved space-time)

If you also locally gauge the 6-parameter Lorentz group you get a new dynamical torsion field that is a 3rd rank tensor relative to the new expanded symmetry group that is larger than the 1916 Diff(4) group. This is basically what Gennady Shipov has proposed in Moscow.

Alex's "nonmetricity" may still be locally-gauging still a larger part of the conformal group. I am not sure at this point. I have not looked into it as yet.

However, Paul, your argument has nothing to do with this much deeper POV. You are still claiming to use only the 1916 theory and you are not doing it correctly.

On Nov 2, 2004, at 8:57 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

Write this up in equation editor and send it out. It does not smell right to me, but I do not have the patience to wade through the e-mail notation. Your argument is basically unintelligible to me. There is no way you can split the inhomogeneous connection field transformation term XY (see below) into a tensor and a coordinate part in a frame independent way using only the orthodox 1916 GR theory. If you can get someone else to explain it maybe I will get it. So far, it seems "not even wrong." If you send it in standard notation I will look again. I do not want to be bush-wacked in this essentially trivial side issue when I am making breakthroughs in real stuff dealing with real observations (Pioneer 10/11 Solar Exotic Vacuum Hedgehog Defect, Galactic halo flat rotation curve, Entropy of Universe, Star Gate exotic vacuum field equations, Josephson effect metric engineering equation for induced /\zpf ...) and coming military related technology for warp, wormhole and weapon. I was informed that my debate on metric engineering with Puthoff was discussed very recently in a hush hush closed door session with high officials at DIA, CIA, NASA, NAS, Lockheed-Martin Skunkworks ...

See "Teleportation Physics Study" by Eric W. Davis, Air Force
Research Lab Special Report, Edwards Air Force Base, August
2004, distribution unlimited (1.7 MB PDF file):

On Nov 2, 2004, at 6:36 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

I see no connection between Alex's precise mathematical extension of GR with torsion and nonmetricity and any of the vague unintelligible non-mathematical words you are using. I have not studied Alex's model in detail as yet, but I think what he is saying is that one needs to get beyond the 1916 GR, i.e. a bigger notion of the connection field to get a localized pure gravity energy-momentum tensor. This is a reasonable proposal. Indeed Einstein himself spent his later years doing precisely that. You have not said anything like that at all! You are working inside the GR 1916 framework and simply playing with words. Alex has NEW MATH that you do not have. In no sense is Alex agreeing with you, as there is nothing intelligible to agree with. This explains his silence. When have you said a larger connection field with non-metricity is required? Never!

Suppose we have

(Connection) = (Tensor Connection) + (Coordinate Connection)

Start from (Connection) = 0 in an LIF in accord with WEP. I will only use WEP not EEP from now on to avoid that Red Herring.

So that (Tensor Connection LIF) = -(Coordinate Connection LIF)

Diff(4) acting on 0 produces (Connection LNIF) =/= 0

Diff(4):(Connection)^uvw = (Connection)^u'v'w' = X^u'uX^vv'X^ww'(Connection)^uvw + X^u'kY^kv'w'

= X^u'uX^vv'X^ww'[(Tensor Connection LIF) + (Coordinate Connection LIF)]^uvw + X^u'kY^kv'w'

= X^u'kY^kv'w'

So the problem is how do you SPLIT

X^u'kY^kv'w' into (Tensor Connection LNIF)^u'v'w' + (Coordinate Connection LNIF)^u'v'w'

You could not even get this far in asking the question mathematically in 3 years. It's obvious this cannot be done. If it can just do it. Show us!

On Nov 1, 2004, at 4:49 PM, Doc Savage wrote:

On Nov 1, 2004, at 4:41 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

re: See "Teleportation Physics Study" by Eric W. Davis, Air Force
Research Lab Special Report, Edwards Air Force Base, August
2004, distribution unlimited (1.7 MB PDF file):

Hal Puthoff wrote (in quotes) on Nov 1, 2004

In a message dated 11/1/2004 3:12:19 PM Central Standard Time, writes:

Despite fact Hal Puthoff has published his PV model in peer-reviewed
journals many times over for maybe 20 years he is still unable to show
the gravimagnetism predicted and confirmed by GR. Also GR correctly
predicts 1913 + 16 pulsar data to a precision of 10^-14 where PV gives
a wrong answer way outside that error bar.

"Straw man. PV, being a scalar theory, was never meant to apply to gravimagnetism or to cover the total degrees of freedom of gravitational radiation, and you know it."

Well Franklin Mead at USAF Edwards AFB Advanced Propulsion apparently doesn't know that. Eric Davis never says that in his USAF report on "Teleportation" you arranged for him. Chief Scientists at DIA, CIA, NAS, Lockheed Martin ... also editors at Aviation Week also Nick Cook at Jane's Defence Weekly don't know that. They all think I am a Blue Meanie to poor you! ;-)

I agree your puny little 98 lb weakling PV scalar theory compared to Einstein's Charles Atlas tensor GR theory for the past 20 years is able to get the same 3 classic results that Einstein already had by 1916. That's not a victory by any standards. Mike Ibison did a nice PV paper showing that the you cannot explain 1913 + 16. Mike also says your PV is not consistent with Diff(4) GCT.

Since you cannot get gravimagnetism frame drag, how can you claim, with a straight face, that PV is any good for metric engineering of warp, wormhole and WMD to all those USAF, DIA, CIA, NASA, L-M Skunkworks, BAE et-al Chief Scientists, Project Managers, CEOs, Investors etc? Also we know that the real purpose of all this is the UFO flying saucers and you don't dare deny that! We have discussed that directly in the past with witnesses like Saul-Paul Sirag - for example at the Gorbachev State of the World Forum 2000 at the Fairmount Hotel in San Francisco. These people at DIA, CIA, NASA, L-M, BAE, Jane's Defence ... want something that has some hope of working. Something that can do it all. Something seamlessly integrated with the Battle-Tested Real McCoy Einstein's General Theory of Relativity. Eric Davis and you & Co never even whisper "Dark Energy has anti-gravity" it's not in any of your papers and I have written it in copyrighted form in the relevant context for the first time in 2 books already in 2002 that are both on These serious folks want The Right Stuff. How long do you think you can keep stringing them along with these promises, promises, promises, false hopes and wishing that never make it so? How long I ask you? Do you think the physicists in Moscow, Beograd, Kiev, Teheran, Beijing are waiting for you? They are forging ahead while you spin your wheels at the bottom of the Sand Dune for years and years and years. I have come Hal to wake you from your dogmatic slumbers. It's time to get out of the Tea Pot Hal. The Queen of Hearts is definitely not amused. Capisce? ;-)

"It is only meant to apply to those applications in its domain of applicability.  And there it does very well."

Not good enough.

"Your other straw man, that your GR 17 colleagues don't take PV seriously as a replacement for GR is just a statement against your claim that that's what it's claimed to be.  What they're saying is true.  What you're saying is false."

Stop splitting legal hairs and quibbling. You know what I mean. We are talking defense policy planning dealing with the UFO coverup. Now that dark energy has been discovered this is Disclosure time.

The Right Stuff?
To be published in "Super Cosmos".

Nick Cook in his book "The Hunt for Zero Point" and Aviation Week in "To the Stars" have been put on a wild goose chase. Here is the True Story with The Right Virtual Stuff.

Casimir force? We don't need no damn Casimir force to reach for The Stars and Beyond! ;-)

Start from Matt Visser's "Lorentzian Wormholes" 2.3.12 Generic static spherically symmetric spacetime: Without horizon i.e. Stargate metric toy model.

Visser's eq. (2.72) is essentially Davis's eq. (2.1). Visser's equations (2.73) - (2.84) p. 26 have what we need.

Notation: ' is ,r i.e. radial partial derivative. r is the Schwarzschild coordinate not the isotropic one Hal Puthoff misuses in his "PV without PV" "corrupted file will not display" parody of GR. :-) Matt Visser agreed with me on that at GR 17 in our double decker bus ride for drinks to The Vault on Dublin's river front. See Visser's eq. (2.40) p. 20 on Schwarzschild r vs isotropic r for GR SSS, see also Fig 2.2 Kruskal coordinate patches, p. 21 ignored in PV completely because of the "exponential" that does not work for now observed gravimagnetism (essential to metric engineering warp, wormhole & weapon).

b(r) is the wormhole mouth (stargate portal) shape function. Z(r) is the "time machine" through the stargate function. Z(r) = 0 means no time-travel shift through the star gate. Ignore Hawking's "chronology protection" infinite blue shift barrier against time travel to the past for now since it looks to me like we can time reverse it to a harmless infinite red shift. I cannot prove this yet but there is indirect empirical evidence from UFO "high strangeness" as in Eric Davis's NIDS paper with Jacques Vallee.

T00 is the energy density. Trr is the radial tension, p = transverse pressure = Ttheta,theta = Tphi,phi in spherical polar coordinates.

Trace Tuv (energy-momentum tensor of gravity source real and/or virtual exotic vacuum) = (energy density) + (radial tension) + 2(transverse pressure)

For isotropy (radial tension = transverse pressure) this reduces to (energy density)(1 + 3w)

For zpf w - -1 from Lorentz covariance in tangent space + WEP minimal coupling of source to geometry, i.e. local gauge invariance relative to 4-parameter translation group.

The Einstein field equations, reduce to

b' = (8piG/c^4)r^2T00 a dimensionless pure number

Z' = [b - (8piG/c^4)r^3Trr]/2r^2(1 - b/r)

Trr' = (T00 - Trr)Z' - 2(p + Trr)/r

In the special case of the exotic vacuum dark zero point energy

Tuv(exotic vacuum) = (c^4/8piG)/\zpfguv

Therefore, the stargate field equations with exotic vacuum dark zero point energy are:

b' = r^2/\zpfg00

Z' = [b - r^3/\zpfgrr]/2r^2(1 - b/r)

(/\zpfgrr)' = /\zpf(g00 - grr)Z' + [/\zpf(gtheta,theta + gphi,phi)]/r

Where we can use Eric Davis's eq. (2.2) i.e. in my notation

g00 = -e^2Z(r) (metric time travel distortion through the stargate)

grr = [1 - b(r)/r]^-1 (shape of star gate passage way AKA throat function)

gtheta,theta = 1

gphi,phi = sin^2(theta)

The guv must be dimensionless.

On Oct 31, 2004, at 9:21 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

My point here is that in my macro-quantum theory gravity comes from the phase of a post-inflation giant quantum vacuum wave (Higgs Ocean) of small entropy that comes from an instability in the pre-inflation micro-quantum Dirac Sea of charged massless virtual fermions with large entropy. This is analogous to a superconductor. The origin of inertia of the lepto-quarks is a vacuum coherence effect, not the random ZPF EM drag of Haisch and Puthoff. This is like the energy-gap in the fermion quasi-particle spectrum of the BCS superconductor from the binding energy of electron pairs in the condensate. Nambu & Jona Lasino had this basic idea decades ago. But they did not have gravity and dark energy built in as I do.

There is no quantum gravity foam here. When the giant quantum wave vanishes in a dark energy macro-quantum topological defect like the one at the center of the Sun causing the anomaly in the motion of the NASA Pioneer space probes then we simply get back the globally flat unstable pre-inflation false vacuum inside the core of a topological defect in the coherent calm low entropy Higgs Ocean.

Note for NASA Space Probes Pioneer 10/11:

a_p = cH ~ 10^-7 cm/sec^2 to ~ 10% precision = anomalous acceleration back towards Sun.

Here /\zpf(Pioneer anomaly) = H(t)/cr

H(t) = R(t)^-1dR(t)/dt

R(t) = dimensionless FRW scale factor

t = cosmic time

Gravity potential energy per unit test mass of the exotic vacuum hedgehog topological defect between the 2 spheres, the first at 20 AU from Sun is

V(zpf) = c^2/\zpfr^2 = cHr = cv Pioneer 10/11 anomaly

v = Hubble recession speed of the expanding space of the universe.

Or, like the flat stellar rotation curves around the dark matter Galactic Halo concentric to the giant black hole in the galactic center

V(zpf) = c^2/\zpfr^2 = v'^2 Galactic Halo

v' is constant stellar circulating speed in the flat part of the rotation curve of the Galaxy

/\zpf(Galactic Halo) = (v'/cr)^2

The entropy of the universe if it is a hologram in sense of Hawking's formula

S/kB = A/4Lp^2

in my theory is exactly

S(Universe)/kB = R(t)^2/4 BITS

R(today t = 13.7 billion years from Big Bang) = 10^61

The entropy/kB of our universe today is ~ 10^122 BITS.

The universe starts from 1/4 BIT at the initial singularity, i.e. Dirac Sea to Higgs Ocean vacuum phase transition.

No comments: