Question for Hal - where is the PV in Hal's PV?
Is there any "there" there?
In QED to leading order, the Vacuum Polarization tensor in momentum space is
Puv(q) = (quqv - guvq^2)P(q^2)
Where using Pauli-Villars regularization
Puv(q^2) to leading order in perturbation series is
Puv(0) ~ 1 + (1/137)log(M^2/m^2)
where m is the rest mass of the electron and
h/Mc is the short wave cutoff. If the cutoff is at h/mc as Hal wants in his Type II Casimir force model then
Puv(0) = 1
In general
P(q^2) ~ Integral x = 0 to 1 of dxx(1 - x)log[M^2(m^2 - x(1 - x)q^2)^-1]
In space-time X
P(X) = 4D Fourier transform of P(q^2) for isotropic vacuum approximation.
OK then
c^2 = co^2[1 + P(X)]^-1
Using Hal's PV Notation
c^2 = co^2/K
Where in Hal's simple SSS model
K = e^2G(Source Mass)/c^2r
Is that c or co in K?
How does Hal justify such a connection between his PV phenomenology and QED?
It seems totally adhoc with no deep plausibility?
How can Hal use "PV" without at least attempting to connect his model to QED?
Monday, September 27, 2004
expanded typo-corrected 2nd draft from earlier message
Casimir Force: The irrelevant explanation of EVOs for the wrong reasons
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 1019Gev. 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.
Alexander Burinskii in Moscow has rightly raised the issue of the distinction between renormalization and regularization of interacting field Feynman diagrams in special relativistic quantum field perturbation theory expansions in relation to the zero point energy problem. We need to see how all these ideas survive in quantum field theory in a c-number curved space dynamical background like in Birrell and Davies text book "Quantum Fields in Curved Space". The issue of the reality of quantum gravity foam of Einstein metric field Heisenberg uncertainty fluctuations is problematical in the soft condensed matter physics approach to gravity as a bottom-up emergent ODLRO macro-quantum phenomenon. That is gravity is a low energy effective c-number ODLRO macro-quantum coherent field theory that in principle is not to be quantized in the usual way the way QED is done. This feature is now being tested in gamma ray astronomy.
Why do Milonni's two naive free virtual photon field models of the Casimir force ~ hcA/d4 as virtual photon effects give, like Ptolemy’s epicycles, closed to the correct empirical answer for the wrong reasons?
In the simple boundary condition model using only free virtual photons Milonni computes
E(d) - E(infinity)
and he gets the cutoff-independent correct answer.
However, what he should compute is
E(d) + E(L - d)
Letting L >> d at the end.
The virtual photon ZPF force is then the negative gradient of this sum. This vanishes in 1 + 1 space-time.
The cosmological constant problem is that E(d) + E(L - d) is directly observable in general relativity. This is why Hal's "Type II Casimir Force" model is unacceptable because it requires a huge cosmological constant vacuum energy filling all space outside Ken Shoulders EVOs which have zero ZPE inside their charged shells at least below h/mc short wave cutoff. This contradicts general relativity that is the covering theory here. Any result from unstable globally flat quantum field theory that contradicts general relativity must be rejected. That is the basic problem with what Hal Puthoff is suggesting for metric engineering of warp, wormhole and weapon. Puthoff’s PV version of gravity is not consistent with Einstein’s general relativity as shown by his own assistant Michael Ibison. Lest, there be any confusion, I am not suggesting that the direct warping of space-time by zero point energy density is the explanation of the Casimir force. Indeed, the Casimir force as a direct electrostatic force of mutually induced dipoles in the uncharged conductors is observable only in the absenceof such strong zero point warping of space-time. I am suggesting that Ken Shoulders EVOs have such strong warping and have nothing to do with the Casimir force at all in the dominating approximation. Therefore, as Ian Peterson says, the Casimir force is not a way to tap the zero point vacuum energy of the virtual photons as the popular literature suggests. The only energy you can recover from the Casimir force is the weak mutually induced dipole electrostatic energies. Using the Casimir force as a pedagogical tool for zero point energy physics is profoundly misleading.
Casimir Force: The irrelevant explanation of EVOs for the wrong reasons
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 1019Gev. 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.
Alexander Burinskii in Moscow has rightly raised the issue of the distinction between renormalization and regularization of interacting field Feynman diagrams in special relativistic quantum field perturbation theory expansions in relation to the zero point energy problem. We need to see how all these ideas survive in quantum field theory in a c-number curved space dynamical background like in Birrell and Davies text book "Quantum Fields in Curved Space". The issue of the reality of quantum gravity foam of Einstein metric field Heisenberg uncertainty fluctuations is problematical in the soft condensed matter physics approach to gravity as a bottom-up emergent ODLRO macro-quantum phenomenon. That is gravity is a low energy effective c-number ODLRO macro-quantum coherent field theory that in principle is not to be quantized in the usual way the way QED is done. This feature is now being tested in gamma ray astronomy.
Why do Milonni's two naive free virtual photon field models of the Casimir force ~ hcA/d4 as virtual photon effects give, like Ptolemy’s epicycles, closed to the correct empirical answer for the wrong reasons?
In the simple boundary condition model using only free virtual photons Milonni computes
E(d) - E(infinity)
and he gets the cutoff-independent correct answer.
However, what he should compute is
E(d) + E(L - d)
Letting L >> d at the end.
The virtual photon ZPF force is then the negative gradient of this sum. This vanishes in 1 + 1 space-time.
The cosmological constant problem is that E(d) + E(L - d) is directly observable in general relativity. This is why Hal's "Type II Casimir Force" model is unacceptable because it requires a huge cosmological constant vacuum energy filling all space outside Ken Shoulders EVOs which have zero ZPE inside their charged shells at least below h/mc short wave cutoff. This contradicts general relativity that is the covering theory here. Any result from unstable globally flat quantum field theory that contradicts general relativity must be rejected. That is the basic problem with what Hal Puthoff is suggesting for metric engineering of warp, wormhole and weapon. Puthoff’s PV version of gravity is not consistent with Einstein’s general relativity as shown by his own assistant Michael Ibison. Lest, there be any confusion, I am not suggesting that the direct warping of space-time by zero point energy density is the explanation of the Casimir force. Indeed, the Casimir force as a direct electrostatic force of mutually induced dipoles in the uncharged conductors is observable only in the absenceof such strong zero point warping of space-time. I am suggesting that Ken Shoulders EVOs have such strong warping and have nothing to do with the Casimir force at all in the dominating approximation. Therefore, as Ian Peterson says, the Casimir force is not a way to tap the zero point vacuum energy of the virtual photons as the popular literature suggests. The only energy you can recover from the Casimir force is the weak mutually induced dipole electrostatic energies. Using the Casimir force as a pedagogical tool for zero point energy physics is profoundly misleading.
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.
Alexander Burinskii in Moscow has rightly raised the issue of the the distinction between renormalization and regularization of interacting field Feynman diagrams in special relativistic quantum field theory in relation to the zero point energy problem. We need to see how all these ideas survive in quantum field theory in a c-number curved space background like in Birrill and Davies text book. The issue of the reality of quantum foam is problematical in the soft condensed matter physics approach to gravity as an emergent ODLRO macro-quantum phenomenon. That is gravity is a low energy effective c-number ODLRO macro-quantum coherent field theory that in principle is not to be quantized in the usual way the way QED is done. This feature is now being tested in gamma ray astronomy.
Why do Milonni's two naive free photon field models of the Casimir force ~ hcA/d^4 as virtual photon effects give the correct empirical answer for the wrong reasons?
In the simple boundary condition model using only free virtual photons Milonni computes
E(d) - E(infinity)
and he gets the cutoff independent correct answer.
However, what he should compute is
E(d) + E(L - d)
Letting L >> d at the end.
The virtual photon ZPF force is then the negative gradient of this sum. This vanishes in 1 + 1 space-time.
The cosmological constant problem is that E(d) + E(L - d) is directly observable in general relativity. This is why Hal's "Type II Casimir Force" model is unacceptable because it requires a huge cosmological constant vacuum energy filling all space outside Ken Shoulders EVOs which have zero ZPE inside their charged shells at least below h/mc short wave cutoff. This contradicts general relativity that is the covering theory here. Any result from globally flat quantum field theory that contradicts general relativity must be rejected. That is the basic problem with what Hal Puthoff is suggesting for metric engineering of warp, wormhole and weapon.
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.
Alexander Burinskii in Moscow has rightly raised the issue of the the distinction between renormalization and regularization of interacting field Feynman diagrams in special relativistic quantum field theory in relation to the zero point energy problem. We need to see how all these ideas survive in quantum field theory in a c-number curved space background like in Birrill and Davies text book. The issue of the reality of quantum foam is problematical in the soft condensed matter physics approach to gravity as an emergent ODLRO macro-quantum phenomenon. That is gravity is a low energy effective c-number ODLRO macro-quantum coherent field theory that in principle is not to be quantized in the usual way the way QED is done. This feature is now being tested in gamma ray astronomy.
Why do Milonni's two naive free photon field models of the Casimir force ~ hcA/d^4 as virtual photon effects give the correct empirical answer for the wrong reasons?
In the simple boundary condition model using only free virtual photons Milonni computes
E(d) - E(infinity)
and he gets the cutoff independent correct answer.
However, what he should compute is
E(d) + E(L - d)
Letting L >> d at the end.
The virtual photon ZPF force is then the negative gradient of this sum. This vanishes in 1 + 1 space-time.
The cosmological constant problem is that E(d) + E(L - d) is directly observable in general relativity. This is why Hal's "Type II Casimir Force" model is unacceptable because it requires a huge cosmological constant vacuum energy filling all space outside Ken Shoulders EVOs which have zero ZPE inside their charged shells at least below h/mc short wave cutoff. This contradicts general relativity that is the covering theory here. Any result from globally flat quantum field theory that contradicts general relativity must be rejected. That is the basic problem with what Hal Puthoff is suggesting for metric engineering of warp, wormhole and weapon.
Sunday, September 26, 2004
Benjamin Franklin, American Genius
This is the basic physics discovery of Ben Franklin’s oil calming the turbulent waters presented in this book for the first time. Here is how I also smooth Hal Puthoff's choppy electromagnetic zero point waves into emergent gravity.
A Letter from Benjamin Franklin to William Brownrigg, 1773
"Dear Sir: I thank you for the remarks of your learned friend at Carlisle. I had, when a youth, read and smiled at Pliny's account of a practice among the seamen of his time, to still the waves in a storm by pouring oil into the sea; which he mentions as well as the use made of oil by the divers; but the stilling a tempest by throwing vinegar into the air had escaped me. I think with your friend that it has been of late too much the mode to slight the learning of the ancients. The learned, too, are apt to slight too much the knowledge of the vulgar. The cooling by evaporation was long an instance of the latter. The art of smoothing the waves by oil is an instance of both.
Perhaps you may not dislike to have an account of all I have heard, and learnt, and done in this way. Take it if you please as follows:"
http://jcbmac.chem.brown.edu/baird/Chem22I/Avogadro/BenFranklin.html
On Sep 26, 2004, at 11:47 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Furthermore, the issue of the “flow of time”, i.e. “Arrow of Time” is not found directly in the formalism of space-time that is a “block universe”. One must look elsewhere to the boundary conditions at the Big Bang to explain why the irreversibility of the Second Law of Thermodynamics points the same way as the expanding 3D space of our local Hubble horizoned universe. Roger Penrose deals with this problem extensively, e.g. his online lecture “Fashion, Faith and Fantasy” http://www.princeton.edu/WebMedia/lectures/
In my theory, the low initial entropy of the early post-inflationary universe is explained by the collapse of the volume of phase space of the pre-inflationary unstable globally flat false vacuum in the formation of the vacuum condensate of primarily bound virtual electron-positron pairs glued together by virtual photon exchange in the battle-tested non-perturbative background-independent BCS manner. The false vacuum prior to inflation may itself emerge from a spin foam, but one without emergent gravity that only comes after the formation of the vacuum condensate whose phase variations give Einstein’s metric field. There is no inertia without gravity and that is why the pre-inflationary globally flat false vacuum has only off-mass-shell massless charges. When the vacuum coherence vanishes inside a vortex core, for example, you do not get a “nonlinear graviton” (Roger Penrose) quantum gravity foam in my model. Therefore, you should not see any quantum gravity foam fluctuations in high energy gamma rays from way back in time if my model is correct. Einstein’s metric field is a smooth c-number ODLRO field from the vacuum coherence. Trying to quantize the metric field top-down is redundant as it is an emergent bottom-up “More is different” macro-quantum phenomenon. There is no such thing as “classical space-time”. What we have is “macro-quantum space-time.” However, just as a superfluid has “normal fluid” you can do perturbation theory with a spin 2 quantum field on the smooth curved space-time background ODLRO metric field. When the vacuum coherence vanishes you then get the “linear graviton” spin 2 quantum tensor field on the flat Minkowski background.
This is the basic physics discovery of Ben Franklin’s oil calming the turbulent waters presented in this book for the first time. Here is how I also smooth Hal Puthoff's choppy electromagnetic zero point waves into emergent gravity.
A Letter from Benjamin Franklin to William Brownrigg, 1773
"Dear Sir: I thank you for the remarks of your learned friend at Carlisle. I had, when a youth, read and smiled at Pliny's account of a practice among the seamen of his time, to still the waves in a storm by pouring oil into the sea; which he mentions as well as the use made of oil by the divers; but the stilling a tempest by throwing vinegar into the air had escaped me. I think with your friend that it has been of late too much the mode to slight the learning of the ancients. The learned, too, are apt to slight too much the knowledge of the vulgar. The cooling by evaporation was long an instance of the latter. The art of smoothing the waves by oil is an instance of both.
Perhaps you may not dislike to have an account of all I have heard, and learnt, and done in this way. Take it if you please as follows:"
http://jcbmac.chem.brown.edu/baird/Chem22I/Avogadro/BenFranklin.html
On Sep 26, 2004, at 11:47 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Furthermore, the issue of the “flow of time”, i.e. “Arrow of Time” is not found directly in the formalism of space-time that is a “block universe”. One must look elsewhere to the boundary conditions at the Big Bang to explain why the irreversibility of the Second Law of Thermodynamics points the same way as the expanding 3D space of our local Hubble horizoned universe. Roger Penrose deals with this problem extensively, e.g. his online lecture “Fashion, Faith and Fantasy” http://www.princeton.edu/WebMedia/lectures/
In my theory, the low initial entropy of the early post-inflationary universe is explained by the collapse of the volume of phase space of the pre-inflationary unstable globally flat false vacuum in the formation of the vacuum condensate of primarily bound virtual electron-positron pairs glued together by virtual photon exchange in the battle-tested non-perturbative background-independent BCS manner. The false vacuum prior to inflation may itself emerge from a spin foam, but one without emergent gravity that only comes after the formation of the vacuum condensate whose phase variations give Einstein’s metric field. There is no inertia without gravity and that is why the pre-inflationary globally flat false vacuum has only off-mass-shell massless charges. When the vacuum coherence vanishes inside a vortex core, for example, you do not get a “nonlinear graviton” (Roger Penrose) quantum gravity foam in my model. Therefore, you should not see any quantum gravity foam fluctuations in high energy gamma rays from way back in time if my model is correct. Einstein’s metric field is a smooth c-number ODLRO field from the vacuum coherence. Trying to quantize the metric field top-down is redundant as it is an emergent bottom-up “More is different” macro-quantum phenomenon. There is no such thing as “classical space-time”. What we have is “macro-quantum space-time.” However, just as a superfluid has “normal fluid” you can do perturbation theory with a spin 2 quantum field on the smooth curved space-time background ODLRO metric field. When the vacuum coherence vanishes you then get the “linear graviton” spin 2 quantum tensor field on the flat Minkowski background.
Saturday, September 25, 2004
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
i.e.
2EdE = 2pc^2dp
Therefore,
vg = dE/dp = c^2(p/E)
That is
(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:
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/physics/0409098
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."
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
i.e.
2EdE = 2pc^2dp
Therefore,
vg = dE/dp = c^2(p/E)
That is
(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:
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/physics/0409098
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."
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
i.e.
2EdE = 2pc^2dp
Therefore,
vg = dE/dp = c^2(p/E)
That is
(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:
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/physics/0409098
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."
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
i.e.
2EdE = 2pc^2dp
Therefore,
vg = dE/dp = c^2(p/E)
That is
(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:
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/physics/0409098
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."
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 1019Gev. 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 alsowhy the single electron is stable.
On Sep 24, 2004, at 10:28 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Puthoff on Casimir Force
Strange that Puthoff wrote today
“I'm not trying to scale up the Casimir force effect, never have, never even thought about it. Discussion of the Casimir effect in ZPE discussions are purely pedagogical, not application oriented, and this is clear to everyone else on your list who emails me privately. The devices that have not scaled up are Ken's charge cluster devices, not Casimir devices. My thoughts for ZPE extraction are based on totally different other approaches. I understand Petersen's work and the implications long before I ever even heard of Petersen. Where in my work have I ever talked about scaling up Casimir effect for engineering energy extraction devices, where?!”
However, in the interview he said:
(Puthoff) For example, Casimir plates in the vacuum can be considered coupled to an open system, and when driven together by vacuum forces, the vacuum has decayed to a lower energy state and heat has been generated by the collision of the plates, pretty standard stuff. For a more detailed discussion of the thermodynamic aspects of zero-point energy extraction, see D.C. Cole and H.E. Puthoff, "Extracting energy and heat from the vacuum”Phys. Rev. E, vol. 48, p. 1562, 1993."
Rebutted by Ian Peterson who wrote:
"The complexity of the Casimir analysis has led to some untenable assertions. It
has been claimed that the parallel-mirror configuration provides access to an infinite
source of energy [18,***19]. However the maximum energy that can be extracted by
allowing the separation of the mirrors to drop to zero cannot exceed the surface energy
of their constituent metals, which is typically of the order of 1 J.m-2 [20]. There have
also been claims that energy can be extracted by cycling a machine 21].
...
16. J Schwinger, L L De Raad, K A Milton Ann. Phys. 115, 1 (1978).
17. S K Lamoreaux Phys. Rev. A 59, R3149-R3153 (1999).
18. R Forward Phys. Rev. B 30, 1700 (1984).
***19. D C Cole, H E Puthoff Phys. Rev. E 48, 1562-1565 (1993).
20. CRC Handbook of Chemistry, Physics, 80th Edn., (Ed D R Lide) (CRC Press, Boca
Raton, FL 1999) pp4-120, 6-144.
21. G J Maclay Phys. Rev. A 61, 052110 (2000).
22. T H Boyer Phys. Rev. A 9, 2078-2084 (1974).”
Note that Peterson from University of Coventry UK also rebuts Maclay another one of the NASA BPP "usual suspects"! ;-)
Then on August 31, 2004, Hal tried to explain Ken Shoulders charge clusters as a Casimir force which contradicts his above remark:
“The devices that have not scaled up are Ken's charge cluster devices, not Casimir devices.”
I had written to Hal: Even if that is what you mean, I do not see how anything gets "balanced" here? You have a "classical" electrostatic energy density and a micro-quantum ZPF virtual photon density. Both are positive. In what sense do they balance?
Hal replied: “Force balance. The ZPE pressure (as in Milonni et al.'s paper "Radiation pressure from the vacuum: Physical interpretation of the Casimir force", Phys. Rev. A, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 1621-1623, 1988) outside the sphere presses inward, and there being no pressure from within the ZPE-depleted sphere - - at least from below the Compton freq - - pressing outward, so the net ZPE pressure is inward. This is what balances (with stability) the outward Coulomb pressure. This is specifically displayed in http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0408114 .”
What is wrong here is that virtual photons have negative pressure since w = -1 for them and their energy density is positive. It is wrong to use the positive pressure of real photons here. Real photons have w = +1/3 and Milonni’s paper is wrong for that reason. Note also that I do not claim that the strong direct gravity warping of space-time by unbalanced zero point energy pressures have anything to do with the Casimir force. They don’t. These are two qualitatively different physical effects. Hal misunderstood what I actually am claiming when he wrongly said that my effect predicts repulsion between the Casimir plates from the virtual photon negative pressure. In fact, I predict nothing of the kind. Under conditions of the Casimir force, the virtual photon pressure should be zero compensated by the vacuum coherence. The Casimir force is then explained as Ian Peterson does as an induced electric dipole-dipole electrostatic force. The naïve photon pressure models give the right answer for the wrong reasons. It is an interesting fluke like Ptolemy’s epicycles.
Puthoff on Casimir Force
Strange that Puthoff wrote today
“I'm not trying to scale up the Casimir force effect, never have, never even thought about it. Discussion of the Casimir effect in ZPE discussions are purely pedagogical, not application oriented, and this is clear to everyone else on your list who emails me privately. The devices that have not scaled up are Ken's charge cluster devices, not Casimir devices. My thoughts for ZPE extraction are based on totally different other approaches. I understand Petersen's work and the implications long before I ever even heard of Petersen. Where in my work have I ever talked about scaling up Casimir effect for engineering energy extraction devices, where?!”
However, in the interview he said:
(Puthoff) For example, Casimir plates in the vacuum can be considered coupled to an open system, and when driven together by vacuum forces, the vacuum has decayed to a lower energy state and heat has been generated by the collision of the plates, pretty standard stuff. For a more detailed discussion of the thermodynamic aspects of zero-point energy extraction, see D.C. Cole and H.E. Puthoff, "Extracting energy and heat from the vacuum”Phys. Rev. E, vol. 48, p. 1562, 1993."
Rebutted by Ian Peterson who wrote:
"The complexity of the Casimir analysis has led to some untenable assertions. It
has been claimed that the parallel-mirror configuration provides access to an infinite
source of energy [18,***19]. However the maximum energy that can be extracted by
allowing the separation of the mirrors to drop to zero cannot exceed the surface energy
of their constituent metals, which is typically of the order of 1 J.m-2 [20]. There have
also been claims that energy can be extracted by cycling a machine 21].
...
16. J Schwinger, L L De Raad, K A Milton Ann. Phys. 115, 1 (1978).
17. S K Lamoreaux Phys. Rev. A 59, R3149-R3153 (1999).
18. R Forward Phys. Rev. B 30, 1700 (1984).
***19. D C Cole, H E Puthoff Phys. Rev. E 48, 1562-1565 (1993).
20. CRC Handbook of Chemistry, Physics, 80th Edn., (Ed D R Lide) (CRC Press, Boca
Raton, FL 1999) pp4-120, 6-144.
21. G J Maclay Phys. Rev. A 61, 052110 (2000).
22. T H Boyer Phys. Rev. A 9, 2078-2084 (1974).”
Note that Peterson from University of Coventry UK also rebuts Maclay another one of the NASA BPP "usual suspects"! ;-)
Then on August 31, 2004, Hal tried to explain Ken Shoulders charge clusters as a Casimir force which contradicts his above remark:
“The devices that have not scaled up are Ken's charge cluster devices, not Casimir devices.”
I had written to Hal: Even if that is what you mean, I do not see how anything gets "balanced" here? You have a "classical" electrostatic energy density and a micro-quantum ZPF virtual photon density. Both are positive. In what sense do they balance?
Hal replied: “Force balance. The ZPE pressure (as in Milonni et al.'s paper "Radiation pressure from the vacuum: Physical interpretation of the Casimir force", Phys. Rev. A, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 1621-1623, 1988) outside the sphere presses inward, and there being no pressure from within the ZPE-depleted sphere - - at least from below the Compton freq - - pressing outward, so the net ZPE pressure is inward. This is what balances (with stability) the outward Coulomb pressure. This is specifically displayed in http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0408114 .”
What is wrong here is that virtual photons have negative pressure since w = -1 for them and their energy density is positive. It is wrong to use the positive pressure of real photons here. Real photons have w = +1/3 and Milonni’s paper is wrong for that reason. Note also that I do not claim that the strong direct gravity warping of space-time by unbalanced zero point energy pressures have anything to do with the Casimir force. They don’t. These are two qualitatively different physical effects. Hal misunderstood what I actually am claiming when he wrongly said that my effect predicts repulsion between the Casimir plates from the virtual photon negative pressure. In fact, I predict nothing of the kind. Under conditions of the Casimir force, the virtual photon pressure should be zero compensated by the vacuum coherence. The Casimir force is then explained as Ian Peterson does as an induced electric dipole-dipole electrostatic force. The naïve photon pressure models give the right answer for the wrong reasons. It is an interesting fluke like Ptolemy’s epicycles.
Sunday, September 19, 2004
Suppose one knew almost no physics. One could easily compute the functional form of the Casimir force as
Casimir force ~ hcA/d^4
Where A = area of plates
d = separation of plates
from the idea that the force must decrease as separation of plates increases and that it must increase as area of plates increases all in the simplest way i.e. linearly as the area A.
Also it must depend on h and c.
But also note that hc has same dimensions as e^2, i.e. a classical electrostatic VdW effect that does not require infinite virtual photon energy densities and pressures that form INFINITE CURVATURE SINGULARITIES everywhere in space!
Therefore, attributing the Casimir force to FREE virtual photon pressure differences across the plates is far from compelling.
On Sep 19, 2004, at 10:03 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
PS
Milonni assume zero length cutoff a -> 0, therefore INFINITE virtual photon zero point energies. He subtracts two infinite energies E(d) and E(infinity) to get a finite energy that appears to agree with an experimental result.
1. This violates Einstein's general theory of relativity where these virtual energies strongly warp space-time. This is essentially the cosmological constant problem that greatly worries Princeton's IAS Genius Ed Witten but does not seem to bother Hal Puthoff at his same name "IAS" in Austin. Well I suppose it is no surprise that another fellow from Austin now in The White House thinks things are going well in Iraq! Both seem out of touch with reality. :-)
2. In contrast, I do not look at E(d) - E(infinity) I keep a finite cutoff a, but I calculate FINITE E on both sides of each plate in the parallel plate experiment using only the relevant virtual photons from the relevant longitudinal modes along the normal to the planes of the plates and I take the total force
-(d/dx)[E(inside) + E(outside)] to get
Introducing vacuum coherence gives for the free virtual photon ZPF force
- (1/2)(hc/d^2)(A/a^2)[1 - a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2]
d = separation of plates
A = area of plates
a = short-wave cutoff
This whole thing vanishes in ordinary vacuum because of the vacuum coherence that solves the cosmological constant problem as well.
The observed Casimir force ~ 1/d^4 must be calculated from summing over all molecules in both plates the retarded r^-7 VdW potential between two mutually induced electric dipoles one in each of the two plates.
Casimir force ~ hcA/d^4
Where A = area of plates
d = separation of plates
from the idea that the force must decrease as separation of plates increases and that it must increase as area of plates increases all in the simplest way i.e. linearly as the area A.
Also it must depend on h and c.
But also note that hc has same dimensions as e^2, i.e. a classical electrostatic VdW effect that does not require infinite virtual photon energy densities and pressures that form INFINITE CURVATURE SINGULARITIES everywhere in space!
Therefore, attributing the Casimir force to FREE virtual photon pressure differences across the plates is far from compelling.
On Sep 19, 2004, at 10:03 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
PS
Milonni assume zero length cutoff a -> 0, therefore INFINITE virtual photon zero point energies. He subtracts two infinite energies E(d) and E(infinity) to get a finite energy that appears to agree with an experimental result.
1. This violates Einstein's general theory of relativity where these virtual energies strongly warp space-time. This is essentially the cosmological constant problem that greatly worries Princeton's IAS Genius Ed Witten but does not seem to bother Hal Puthoff at his same name "IAS" in Austin. Well I suppose it is no surprise that another fellow from Austin now in The White House thinks things are going well in Iraq! Both seem out of touch with reality. :-)
2. In contrast, I do not look at E(d) - E(infinity) I keep a finite cutoff a, but I calculate FINITE E on both sides of each plate in the parallel plate experiment using only the relevant virtual photons from the relevant longitudinal modes along the normal to the planes of the plates and I take the total force
-(d/dx)[E(inside) + E(outside)] to get
Introducing vacuum coherence gives for the free virtual photon ZPF force
- (1/2)(hc/d^2)(A/a^2)[1 - a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2]
d = separation of plates
A = area of plates
a = short-wave cutoff
This whole thing vanishes in ordinary vacuum because of the vacuum coherence that solves the cosmological constant problem as well.
The observed Casimir force ~ 1/d^4 must be calculated from summing over all molecules in both plates the retarded r^-7 VdW potential between two mutually induced electric dipoles one in each of the two plates.
Ref. The Quantum Vacuum by Peter Milonni, Acad Press, 1994
2.7 The Casimir Effect pp 54 - 58
This calculation was plausible until the 1999 discovery of dark energy as most of the stuff of our mostly "virtual" (i.e. off mass shell) universe. The problem is that the virtual photon zero point energy density as well as all the other contributions like virtual electron-positron pairs are directly observable in principle because of the laws of gravity! This is precisely the cosmological constant paradox, which is to physics today, what the black body radiation paradox was 100 years ago.
Even if we take Milonni's calculation as is, it fails because it posits an infinite virtual photon zero point energy background. The universe cannot exist in that case. It is no longer a valid rule in The Game to pretend that this infinite energy can be simply "subtracted". Indeed one must put in a short-wave cutoff, but one can do it in a generally covariant way.
You need vacuum coherence to absorb the large but finite incoherent zero point fluctuation energy in the ordinary vacuum, which when disturbed, results in anomalous "dark energy" exotic vacuum of negative pressure or anomalous "dark matter" exotic vacuum of positive pressure. Both forms of exotic vacuum have w = (pressure/energy density) = -1. w = -1 because of the generally covariant laws of Einstein's gravity theory AKA "GR".
For example, look at Milonni's E(infinity) i.e. eq. (2.100) p.57
What you really have there is E(a) where a is the short-wave cutoff, but E(a) has the vacuum coherence factor
(1 - a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2) = 0 under "normal conditions".
Look at Milonni's "spectral density" of quantum harmonic field oscillators (2.73) p.49 that comes from the more fundamental quantity
Mode Density ~ 4pip^2dp/h^3 = phase space factor per unit volume = = number of quantum harmonic field oscillators per unit volume
Because of spherical symmetry, take pc/2 as the common virtual photon energy of that spherical shell in momentum space to get
ZPE density per unit volume = (2pi)cp^3dp/h^3
In general, with finite asymmetric boundary conditions you need to use
ZPE Mode Density ~ dpxdpydpz/h^3 = number of quantum harmonic field oscillators per unit volume
i.e. as I showed yesterday, without the vacuum coherence factor that can be put in at end of the calculation.
Given the asymmetric boundary conditions of parallel plates, we need to
be careful about how to do the integration in momentum space. We cannot
use spherical coordinates in momentum space. We must use Cartesian
rectangular coordinates, i.e. for the spectral density
dpxdpydpz not 4pip^2dp
Let the parallel plates be separated by x along the x-axis.
Between the plates, the limits are from px(min) = h/2x to px(max) = h/a.
However, in the plane of the plates the limits are from 0 to p(max) =
h/a.
How do we do the virtual photon ZPE integral?
That integral must split into longitudinal and transverse parts.
The longitudinal FREE VIRTUAL PHOTON ZPE integral BETWEEN THE PLATES is
ZPE(x) = (1/2)c[px(max)^2 - px(min)^2]py(max)pz(max)xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)c[(h/a)^2 - (h/x)^2](h/a)^2xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)(h/a)^2(h/a)^2xYZ/h^3 - (1/2)c(h/x)^2(h/a)^2xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)(hc/a)(xYZ/a^3) - (1/2)(hc/x)(YZ/a^2)
The ZPF force from this term is
-(d/dx)ZPE(x) = -(1/2)(hc/a^2)(YZ/a^2) - (1/2)(hc/x^2)(YZ/a^2)
= -(1/2)(hc/a^4)YZ - (1/2)(hc/x^2)(YZ/a^2)
The longitudinal FREE VIRTUAL PHOTON ZPE integral OUTSIDE THE PLATES is
ZPE(X-x) = (1/2)c[px(max)^2 - px(min)^2]py(max)pz(max)(X-x)YZ/h^3
= (1/2)c[(h/a)^2 - (h/(X-x))^2](h/a)^2(X-x)xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)(hc/a)((X-x)YZ/a^3) - (1/2)(hc/(X-x))(YZ/a^2)
The ZPF force from this term is from -(d/dx)ZPE(X-x) =
+(1/2)(hc/a^2)(YZ/a^2) + (hc/2)(YZ/a^2)(d/dx)(1/(X-x))
(d/dx)(1/(X-x)) = +(X - x)^-2
Next look at the transverse free virtual photon integral ZPE(xYZ).
ZPE(xYZ) = (c/2)xYZ[(px(max) - px(min)](Integral of 2pip^2dp from 0 to
p(max))/h^3
= (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/x)]xYZ(Integral of 2pip^2dp from 0 to p(max))/h^2
= (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/x)]xYZ(2pi/3)(1/a)^3
This term gives a net attractive force along x of -(hc/2a^4)YZ.
ZPE((X-x)YZ) = (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/(X-x))](X-x)YZ(Integral of 2pip^2dp
from 0 to p(max))/h^2
= (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/(X-x))](X-x)YZ(2pi/3)(1/a)^3
This term gives a net repulsive force along x of +(hc/2a^4)YZ.
Therefore, as expected, we need only look at the longitudinal integral
for these non-spherically symmetric parallel plate boundary conditions.
Area of plates A = YZ.
Thus the NET ZPF force along x at the plate located at x is
-(1/2)(hc/a^4)A - (1/2)(hc/x^2)(A/a^2) +(1/2)(hc/a^2)(A/a^2) +
(hc/2)(A/a^2)(d/dx)(1/(X-x))
- (1/2)(hc/x^2)(A/a^2) + (hc/2)(A/a^2)(1/(X-x)^2)
Assume x << X. As X --> infinity we can ignore the second term from
outside the plates.
This is a net attractive force ~ -1/x^2 not - 1/x^4, but it is too weak
to contain unbalanced charges in the EVO.
This FINITE WAY of mode counting does not agree with Milonni's Rube Goldberg sleight-of-hand shell game giving the observed Casimir force potential (2.108) p. 58
U(d) = -(pi^2hc/720d^3)A
from subtracting two infinities to get this finite difference.
It's the right empirical answer for the wrong reasons!
Milonni's 3.10 is also spurious because virtual photons do not propagate energy and momentum the way real photons do! Milonni here assumes w = +1/3, which is true for real photons, but not for virtual photons where w = -1. The only acceptable explanation for the Casimir force is indicated in Milonni's 3.11 on the Van der Waals forces. Of course the virtual photons play a vital role there but not as directly as they do in the first two models that are misleading because they are not consistent with the laws of Einstein's general relativity that reach down even to the microscale. It's not enough to get the right empirical answer. One must get it for the right reasons. Again up until the discovery of dark energy the choices between the three ways Milonni presents of looking at the orgin of the Casimir force was moot or degenerate. The discovery of dark energy "lifts the degeneracy" and only the retarded Casimir-Polder VdW potential eq. (3.91) p.105 ~ r^-7, which when integrated over many induced dipoles in both parallel plates allegedly gives the result close to (2.108) p. 58 is physically acceptable. See Ian Peterson's papers on this that the only energy you can get from the Casimir force is the small electrostatic induced dipole energy not the large virtual photon ZPE energy!
That is, zero point energy densities and their equal-in-magnitude but opposite-in-sign pressures STRONGLY WARP space-time geometry if not absorbed into the vacuum condensate! Upsetting that equilibrium is the key to the practical metric engineering of warp, wormhole and weapon that we see in the flying saucer evidence on the NIDS website.
That is,
Guv + /\zpfguv = 0
/\zpf = a^-2[1 - a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2]
a = short-wave invariant cutoff (proper spacelike interval)
/\zpf is a "scalar"
ZPE density = t00(vac) = (c^4/8piG*)/\zpfgoo = (String Tension)(Micro-Quantum ZPE Curvature of Vacuum)goo
For example, in the Schwarzschild vacuum solution
goo = (1 - 2r*/r) when r* < r
But /\zpf is a function of r as well.
2.7 The Casimir Effect pp 54 - 58
This calculation was plausible until the 1999 discovery of dark energy as most of the stuff of our mostly "virtual" (i.e. off mass shell) universe. The problem is that the virtual photon zero point energy density as well as all the other contributions like virtual electron-positron pairs are directly observable in principle because of the laws of gravity! This is precisely the cosmological constant paradox, which is to physics today, what the black body radiation paradox was 100 years ago.
Even if we take Milonni's calculation as is, it fails because it posits an infinite virtual photon zero point energy background. The universe cannot exist in that case. It is no longer a valid rule in The Game to pretend that this infinite energy can be simply "subtracted". Indeed one must put in a short-wave cutoff, but one can do it in a generally covariant way.
You need vacuum coherence to absorb the large but finite incoherent zero point fluctuation energy in the ordinary vacuum, which when disturbed, results in anomalous "dark energy" exotic vacuum of negative pressure or anomalous "dark matter" exotic vacuum of positive pressure. Both forms of exotic vacuum have w = (pressure/energy density) = -1. w = -1 because of the generally covariant laws of Einstein's gravity theory AKA "GR".
For example, look at Milonni's E(infinity) i.e. eq. (2.100) p.57
What you really have there is E(a) where a is the short-wave cutoff, but E(a) has the vacuum coherence factor
(1 - a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2) = 0 under "normal conditions".
Look at Milonni's "spectral density" of quantum harmonic field oscillators (2.73) p.49 that comes from the more fundamental quantity
Mode Density ~ 4pip^2dp/h^3 = phase space factor per unit volume = = number of quantum harmonic field oscillators per unit volume
Because of spherical symmetry, take pc/2 as the common virtual photon energy of that spherical shell in momentum space to get
ZPE density per unit volume = (2pi)cp^3dp/h^3
In general, with finite asymmetric boundary conditions you need to use
ZPE Mode Density ~ dpxdpydpz/h^3 = number of quantum harmonic field oscillators per unit volume
i.e. as I showed yesterday, without the vacuum coherence factor that can be put in at end of the calculation.
Given the asymmetric boundary conditions of parallel plates, we need to
be careful about how to do the integration in momentum space. We cannot
use spherical coordinates in momentum space. We must use Cartesian
rectangular coordinates, i.e. for the spectral density
dpxdpydpz not 4pip^2dp
Let the parallel plates be separated by x along the x-axis.
Between the plates, the limits are from px(min) = h/2x to px(max) = h/a.
However, in the plane of the plates the limits are from 0 to p(max) =
h/a.
How do we do the virtual photon ZPE integral?
That integral must split into longitudinal and transverse parts.
The longitudinal FREE VIRTUAL PHOTON ZPE integral BETWEEN THE PLATES is
ZPE(x) = (1/2)c[px(max)^2 - px(min)^2]py(max)pz(max)xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)c[(h/a)^2 - (h/x)^2](h/a)^2xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)(h/a)^2(h/a)^2xYZ/h^3 - (1/2)c(h/x)^2(h/a)^2xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)(hc/a)(xYZ/a^3) - (1/2)(hc/x)(YZ/a^2)
The ZPF force from this term is
-(d/dx)ZPE(x) = -(1/2)(hc/a^2)(YZ/a^2) - (1/2)(hc/x^2)(YZ/a^2)
= -(1/2)(hc/a^4)YZ - (1/2)(hc/x^2)(YZ/a^2)
The longitudinal FREE VIRTUAL PHOTON ZPE integral OUTSIDE THE PLATES is
ZPE(X-x) = (1/2)c[px(max)^2 - px(min)^2]py(max)pz(max)(X-x)YZ/h^3
= (1/2)c[(h/a)^2 - (h/(X-x))^2](h/a)^2(X-x)xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)(hc/a)((X-x)YZ/a^3) - (1/2)(hc/(X-x))(YZ/a^2)
The ZPF force from this term is from -(d/dx)ZPE(X-x) =
+(1/2)(hc/a^2)(YZ/a^2) + (hc/2)(YZ/a^2)(d/dx)(1/(X-x))
(d/dx)(1/(X-x)) = +(X - x)^-2
Next look at the transverse free virtual photon integral ZPE(xYZ).
ZPE(xYZ) = (c/2)xYZ[(px(max) - px(min)](Integral of 2pip^2dp from 0 to
p(max))/h^3
= (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/x)]xYZ(Integral of 2pip^2dp from 0 to p(max))/h^2
= (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/x)]xYZ(2pi/3)(1/a)^3
This term gives a net attractive force along x of -(hc/2a^4)YZ.
ZPE((X-x)YZ) = (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/(X-x))](X-x)YZ(Integral of 2pip^2dp
from 0 to p(max))/h^2
= (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/(X-x))](X-x)YZ(2pi/3)(1/a)^3
This term gives a net repulsive force along x of +(hc/2a^4)YZ.
Therefore, as expected, we need only look at the longitudinal integral
for these non-spherically symmetric parallel plate boundary conditions.
Area of plates A = YZ.
Thus the NET ZPF force along x at the plate located at x is
-(1/2)(hc/a^4)A - (1/2)(hc/x^2)(A/a^2) +(1/2)(hc/a^2)(A/a^2) +
(hc/2)(A/a^2)(d/dx)(1/(X-x))
- (1/2)(hc/x^2)(A/a^2) + (hc/2)(A/a^2)(1/(X-x)^2)
Assume x << X. As X --> infinity we can ignore the second term from
outside the plates.
This is a net attractive force ~ -1/x^2 not - 1/x^4, but it is too weak
to contain unbalanced charges in the EVO.
This FINITE WAY of mode counting does not agree with Milonni's Rube Goldberg sleight-of-hand shell game giving the observed Casimir force potential (2.108) p. 58
U(d) = -(pi^2hc/720d^3)A
from subtracting two infinities to get this finite difference.
It's the right empirical answer for the wrong reasons!
Milonni's 3.10 is also spurious because virtual photons do not propagate energy and momentum the way real photons do! Milonni here assumes w = +1/3, which is true for real photons, but not for virtual photons where w = -1. The only acceptable explanation for the Casimir force is indicated in Milonni's 3.11 on the Van der Waals forces. Of course the virtual photons play a vital role there but not as directly as they do in the first two models that are misleading because they are not consistent with the laws of Einstein's general relativity that reach down even to the microscale. It's not enough to get the right empirical answer. One must get it for the right reasons. Again up until the discovery of dark energy the choices between the three ways Milonni presents of looking at the orgin of the Casimir force was moot or degenerate. The discovery of dark energy "lifts the degeneracy" and only the retarded Casimir-Polder VdW potential eq. (3.91) p.105 ~ r^-7, which when integrated over many induced dipoles in both parallel plates allegedly gives the result close to (2.108) p. 58 is physically acceptable. See Ian Peterson's papers on this that the only energy you can get from the Casimir force is the small electrostatic induced dipole energy not the large virtual photon ZPE energy!
That is, zero point energy densities and their equal-in-magnitude but opposite-in-sign pressures STRONGLY WARP space-time geometry if not absorbed into the vacuum condensate! Upsetting that equilibrium is the key to the practical metric engineering of warp, wormhole and weapon that we see in the flying saucer evidence on the NIDS website.
That is,
Guv + /\zpfguv = 0
/\zpf = a^-2[1 - a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2]
a = short-wave invariant cutoff (proper spacelike interval)
/\zpf is a "scalar"
ZPE density = t00(vac) = (c^4/8piG*)/\zpfgoo = (String Tension)(Micro-Quantum ZPE Curvature of Vacuum)goo
For example, in the Schwarzschild vacuum solution
goo = (1 - 2r*/r) when r* < r
But /\zpf is a function of r as well.
Saturday, September 18, 2004
Let d be the separation between the flat uncharged plates.
The observed Casimir VdW force is ~ A/d^4 ~ 0.016/d^4 dynes per square cm. Do a Google search.
I have calculated the FREE VIRTUAL PHOTON ZPF attractive force in this same situation to be
- (1/2)(hc/d^2)(A/a^2)
A is area of the plates and a is the short-wave cutoff.
Therefore, unless Hal & Co can point out a specific error in the precise detailed phase space calculation below, all the articles and text books that attribute the Casimir force to a pressure differential of purely free virtual photons between the inside and the outside of the plates are simply wrong.
In fact the free virtual photon ZPF force must be exactly ZERO in the non-exotic vacuum limit where the real formula is
ZPF Free Virtual Photon Force (parallel plates) = - (1/2)(hc/d^2)(A/a^2)[1 - a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2] = 0
=/= Casimir VdW Force ~ 0.016/d^4 dynes per square cm
The precise calculation of the ZPF Free Virtual Photon Force is short-wave cutoff dependent from simple phase space calculations. The error Milonni and other Pundits make in their text books is to do the phase space integrations incorrectly to get the spurious result ~ 1/d^4 for the virtual photons. That is they use the spherically symmetric phase space integral in an inappropriate situation that does not match the non-spherically symmetric boundary conditions!
On Sep 18, 2004, at 6:50 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
On Sep 18, 2004, at 2:57 AM, RKiehn2352@aol.com wrote:
Dear Jack
I find it miraculous that you admit to a mistake (re ZPF). (grin)
Milonni and Hal Puthoff appear to have made even bigger ones!
My today's correction to my yesterday's correction now agrees in form, i.e. -x^-2 attraction (mod dimensionless coefficient that one must use QED with j.A to get) with A. Zee's calculation in "Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell" and as I recall disagrees with Milonni's in "The Quantum Vacuum". I have former book with me but not the latter here in Southern California. See below
*
There may be another way to interpret Ken Shoulders EVO's.
**
Ken put together a meeting (financed by Church's Fried Chicken) a long time ago in the SAF bay area. Attendants: Shoulders, Aharonov, Puthoff, Kiehn.
*
Since then,I have always been interested in Ken's experiments.
**
Last week I attended euromech448 conference on Vortex Dynamics and Field interactions.
Crowdy from Imperial college gave an interesting talk on exact COMPACT vortex solutions to the Euler equations in terms of complex variable theory. The key idea here is COMPACT structures of reasonable lifetimes.
The numerical people had been experimenting with "Patch Distributions" of vorticity (curl V) combined with vortex line "1-D singularities" or strings. The key result is they got numeric results that seemed to mimic compact vortex structures (like hurricanes). Now Crowdy comes along and finds exact families of analytic solutions. Neat.
*
That evening I woke up with the idea of how to generalize Crowdy's ideas beyond 2 dimensions, and express the ideas in terms of exterior differential forms. The technique combines "2-D singularities" or branes with patches of charge-current densities to form COMPACT charge structures. The combination of the singularities and the patches can be used to define a deformable boundary of a COMPACT topological cohererent structure (blobs) -- the higher dimensional analogue of the COMPACT vortex topologically coherent structures in fluids. This of course does not require metric.
*
I immediately thought of Ken's experiments.
*
You might find interest in
http://www22.pair.com/csdc/download/kiehneuromech448.pdf
and
http://www.cartan.pair.com/ebooks.htm
regards,
RMK
More corrections. Puthoff's argument is still not correct. It's easy to
make a mistake of a - sign. Appealing to text books is not good enough.
They may all be wrong about these ZPE calculations because the rules of
QED conflict with the rules of GR and one cannot really use tricks like
normal ordering of the photon creation and destruction operators.
Milonni's book, for example, completely ignores GR. The discovery of
dark energy shows one cannot ignore GR even at small scales.
On waking next morning at 5AM I realized we better take another look.
Given the asymmetric boundary conditions of parallel plates, we need to
be careful about how to do the integration in momentum space. We cannot
use spherical coordinates in momentum space. We must use Cartesian
rectangular coordinates, i.e. for the spectral density
dpxdpydpz not 4pip^2dp
Let the parallel plates be separated by x along the x-axis.
Between the plates, the limits are from px(min) = h/2x to px(max) = h/a.
However, in the plane of the plates the limits are from 0 to p(max) =
h/a.
How do we do the virtual photon ZPE integral?
That integral must split into longitudinal and transverse parts.
The longitudinal FREE VIRTUAL PHOTON ZPE integral BETWEEN THE PLATES is
ZPE(x) = (1/2)c[px(max)^2 - px(min)^2]py(max)pz(max)xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)c[(h/a)^2 - (h/x)^2](h/a)^2xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)(h/a)^2(h/a)^2xYZ/h^3 - (1/2)c(h/x)^2(h/a)^2xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)(hc/a)(xYZ/a^3) - (1/2)(hc/x)(YZ/a^2)
The ZPF force from this term is
-(d/dx)ZPE(x) = -(1/2)(hc/a^2)(YZ/a^2) - (1/2)(hc/x^2)(YZ/a^2)
= -(1/2)(hc/a^4)YZ - (1/2)(hc/x^2)(YZ/a^2)
The longitudinal FREE VIRTUAL PHOTON ZPE integral OUTSIDE THE PLATES is
ZPE(X-x) = (1/2)c[px(max)^2 - px(min)^2]py(max)pz(max)(X-x)YZ/h^3
= (1/2)c[(h/a)^2 - (h/(X-x))^2](h/a)^2(X-x)xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)(hc/a)((X-x)YZ/a^3) - (1/2)(hc/(X-x))(YZ/a^2)
The ZPF force from this term is from -(d/dx)ZPE(X-x) =
+(1/2)(hc/a^2)(YZ/a^2) + (hc/2)(YZ/a^2)(d/dx)(1/(X-x))
(d/dx)(1/(X-x)) = +(X - x)^-2
Next look at the transverse free virtual photon integral ZPE(xYZ).
ZPE(xYZ) = (c/2)xYZ[(px(max) - px(min)](Integral of 2pip^2dp from 0 to
p(max))/h^3
= (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/x)]xYZ(Integral of 2pip^2dp from 0 to p(max))/h^2
= (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/x)]xYZ(2pi/3)(1/a)^3
This term gives a net attractive force along x of -(hc/2a^4)YZ.
ZPE((X-x)YZ) = (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/(X-x))](X-x)YZ(Integral of 2pip^2dp
from 0 to p(max))/h^2
= (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/(X-x))](X-x)YZ(2pi/3)(1/a)^3
This term gives a net repulsive force along x of +(hc/2a^4)YZ.
Therefore, as expected, we need only look at the longitudinal integral
for these non-spherically symmetric parallel plate boundary conditions.
Area of plates A = YZ.
Thus the NET ZPF force along x at the plate located at x is
-(1/2)(hc/a^4)A - (1/2)(hc/x^2)(A/a^2) +(1/2)(hc/a^2)(A/a^2) +
(hc/2)(A/a^2)(d/dx)(1/(X-x))
- (1/2)(hc/x^2)(A/a^2) + (hc/2)(A/a^2)(1/(X-x)^2)
Assume x << X. As X --> infinity we can ignore the second term from
outside the plates.
This is a net attractive force ~ -1/x^2 not - 1/x^4, but it is too weak
to contain unbalanced charges in the EVO.
The observed Casimir VdW force is ~ A/d^4 ~ 0.016/d^4 dynes per square cm. Do a Google search.
I have calculated the FREE VIRTUAL PHOTON ZPF attractive force in this same situation to be
- (1/2)(hc/d^2)(A/a^2)
A is area of the plates and a is the short-wave cutoff.
Therefore, unless Hal & Co can point out a specific error in the precise detailed phase space calculation below, all the articles and text books that attribute the Casimir force to a pressure differential of purely free virtual photons between the inside and the outside of the plates are simply wrong.
In fact the free virtual photon ZPF force must be exactly ZERO in the non-exotic vacuum limit where the real formula is
ZPF Free Virtual Photon Force (parallel plates) = - (1/2)(hc/d^2)(A/a^2)[1 - a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2] = 0
=/= Casimir VdW Force ~ 0.016/d^4 dynes per square cm
The precise calculation of the ZPF Free Virtual Photon Force is short-wave cutoff dependent from simple phase space calculations. The error Milonni and other Pundits make in their text books is to do the phase space integrations incorrectly to get the spurious result ~ 1/d^4 for the virtual photons. That is they use the spherically symmetric phase space integral in an inappropriate situation that does not match the non-spherically symmetric boundary conditions!
On Sep 18, 2004, at 6:50 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
On Sep 18, 2004, at 2:57 AM, RKiehn2352@aol.com wrote:
Dear Jack
I find it miraculous that you admit to a mistake (re ZPF). (grin)
Milonni and Hal Puthoff appear to have made even bigger ones!
My today's correction to my yesterday's correction now agrees in form, i.e. -x^-2 attraction (mod dimensionless coefficient that one must use QED with j.A to get) with A. Zee's calculation in "Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell" and as I recall disagrees with Milonni's in "The Quantum Vacuum". I have former book with me but not the latter here in Southern California. See below
*
There may be another way to interpret Ken Shoulders EVO's.
**
Ken put together a meeting (financed by Church's Fried Chicken) a long time ago in the SAF bay area. Attendants: Shoulders, Aharonov, Puthoff, Kiehn.
*
Since then,I have always been interested in Ken's experiments.
**
Last week I attended euromech448 conference on Vortex Dynamics and Field interactions.
Crowdy from Imperial college gave an interesting talk on exact COMPACT vortex solutions to the Euler equations in terms of complex variable theory. The key idea here is COMPACT structures of reasonable lifetimes.
The numerical people had been experimenting with "Patch Distributions" of vorticity (curl V) combined with vortex line "1-D singularities" or strings. The key result is they got numeric results that seemed to mimic compact vortex structures (like hurricanes). Now Crowdy comes along and finds exact families of analytic solutions. Neat.
*
That evening I woke up with the idea of how to generalize Crowdy's ideas beyond 2 dimensions, and express the ideas in terms of exterior differential forms. The technique combines "2-D singularities" or branes with patches of charge-current densities to form COMPACT charge structures. The combination of the singularities and the patches can be used to define a deformable boundary of a COMPACT topological cohererent structure (blobs) -- the higher dimensional analogue of the COMPACT vortex topologically coherent structures in fluids. This of course does not require metric.
*
I immediately thought of Ken's experiments.
*
You might find interest in
http://www22.pair.com/csdc/download/kiehneuromech448.pdf
and
http://www.cartan.pair.com/ebooks.htm
regards,
RMK
More corrections. Puthoff's argument is still not correct. It's easy to
make a mistake of a - sign. Appealing to text books is not good enough.
They may all be wrong about these ZPE calculations because the rules of
QED conflict with the rules of GR and one cannot really use tricks like
normal ordering of the photon creation and destruction operators.
Milonni's book, for example, completely ignores GR. The discovery of
dark energy shows one cannot ignore GR even at small scales.
On waking next morning at 5AM I realized we better take another look.
Given the asymmetric boundary conditions of parallel plates, we need to
be careful about how to do the integration in momentum space. We cannot
use spherical coordinates in momentum space. We must use Cartesian
rectangular coordinates, i.e. for the spectral density
dpxdpydpz not 4pip^2dp
Let the parallel plates be separated by x along the x-axis.
Between the plates, the limits are from px(min) = h/2x to px(max) = h/a.
However, in the plane of the plates the limits are from 0 to p(max) =
h/a.
How do we do the virtual photon ZPE integral?
That integral must split into longitudinal and transverse parts.
The longitudinal FREE VIRTUAL PHOTON ZPE integral BETWEEN THE PLATES is
ZPE(x) = (1/2)c[px(max)^2 - px(min)^2]py(max)pz(max)xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)c[(h/a)^2 - (h/x)^2](h/a)^2xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)(h/a)^2(h/a)^2xYZ/h^3 - (1/2)c(h/x)^2(h/a)^2xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)(hc/a)(xYZ/a^3) - (1/2)(hc/x)(YZ/a^2)
The ZPF force from this term is
-(d/dx)ZPE(x) = -(1/2)(hc/a^2)(YZ/a^2) - (1/2)(hc/x^2)(YZ/a^2)
= -(1/2)(hc/a^4)YZ - (1/2)(hc/x^2)(YZ/a^2)
The longitudinal FREE VIRTUAL PHOTON ZPE integral OUTSIDE THE PLATES is
ZPE(X-x) = (1/2)c[px(max)^2 - px(min)^2]py(max)pz(max)(X-x)YZ/h^3
= (1/2)c[(h/a)^2 - (h/(X-x))^2](h/a)^2(X-x)xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)(hc/a)((X-x)YZ/a^3) - (1/2)(hc/(X-x))(YZ/a^2)
The ZPF force from this term is from -(d/dx)ZPE(X-x) =
+(1/2)(hc/a^2)(YZ/a^2) + (hc/2)(YZ/a^2)(d/dx)(1/(X-x))
(d/dx)(1/(X-x)) = +(X - x)^-2
Next look at the transverse free virtual photon integral ZPE(xYZ).
ZPE(xYZ) = (c/2)xYZ[(px(max) - px(min)](Integral of 2pip^2dp from 0 to
p(max))/h^3
= (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/x)]xYZ(Integral of 2pip^2dp from 0 to p(max))/h^2
= (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/x)]xYZ(2pi/3)(1/a)^3
This term gives a net attractive force along x of -(hc/2a^4)YZ.
ZPE((X-x)YZ) = (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/(X-x))](X-x)YZ(Integral of 2pip^2dp
from 0 to p(max))/h^2
= (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/(X-x))](X-x)YZ(2pi/3)(1/a)^3
This term gives a net repulsive force along x of +(hc/2a^4)YZ.
Therefore, as expected, we need only look at the longitudinal integral
for these non-spherically symmetric parallel plate boundary conditions.
Area of plates A = YZ.
Thus the NET ZPF force along x at the plate located at x is
-(1/2)(hc/a^4)A - (1/2)(hc/x^2)(A/a^2) +(1/2)(hc/a^2)(A/a^2) +
(hc/2)(A/a^2)(d/dx)(1/(X-x))
- (1/2)(hc/x^2)(A/a^2) + (hc/2)(A/a^2)(1/(X-x)^2)
Assume x << X. As X --> infinity we can ignore the second term from
outside the plates.
This is a net attractive force ~ -1/x^2 not - 1/x^4, but it is too weak
to contain unbalanced charges in the EVO.
More corrections. Puthoff's argument is still not correct. It's easy to make a mistake of a - sign. Appealing to text books is not good enough. They may all be wrong about these ZPE calculations because the rules of QED conflict with the rules of GR and one cannot really use tricks like normal ordering of the photon creation and destruction operators. Milonni's book, for example, completely ignores GR. The discovery of dark energy shows one cannot ignore GR even at small scales.
On waking next morning at 5AM I realized we better take another look.
Given the asymmetric boundary conditions of parallel plates, we need to be careful about how to do the integration in momentum space. We cannot use spherical coordinates in momentum space. We must use Cartesian rectangular coordinates, i.e. for the spectral density
dpxdpydpz not 4pip^2dp
Let the parallel plates be separated by x along the x-axis.
Between the plates, the limits are from px(min) = h/2x to px(max) = h/a.
However, in the plane of the plates the limits are from 0 to p(max) = h/a.
How do we do the virtual photon ZPE integral?
That integral must split into longitudinal and transverse parts.
The longitudinal FREE VIRTUAL PHOTON ZPE integral BETWEEN THE PLATES is
ZPE(x) = (1/2)c[px(max)^2 - px(min)^2]py(max)pz(max)xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)c[(h/a)^2 - (h/x)^2](h/a)^2xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)(h/a)^2(h/a)^2xYZ/h^3 - (1/2)c(h/x)^2(h/a)^2xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)(hc/a)(xYZ/a^3) - (1/2)(hc/x)(YZ/a^2)
The ZPF force from this term is
-(d/dx)ZPE(x) = -(1/2)(hc/a^2)(YZ/a^2) - (1/2)(hc/x^2)(YZ/a^2)
= -(1/2)(hc/a^4)YZ - (1/2)(hc/x^2)(YZ/a^2)
The longitudinal FREE VIRTUAL PHOTON ZPE integral OUTSIDE THE PLATES is
ZPE(X-x) = (1/2)c[px(max)^2 - px(min)^2]py(max)pz(max)(X-x)YZ/h^3
= (1/2)c[(h/a)^2 - (h/(X-x))^2](h/a)^2(X-x)xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)(hc/a)((X-x)YZ/a^3) - (1/2)(hc/(X-x))(YZ/a^2)
The ZPF force from this term is from -(d/dx)ZPE(X-x) =
+(1/2)(hc/a^2)(YZ/a^2) + (hc/2)(YZ/a^2)(d/dx)(1/(X-x))
(d/dx)(1/(X-x)) = +(X - x)^-2
Next look at the transverse free virtual photon integral ZPE(xYZ).
ZPE(xYZ) = (c/2)xYZ[(px(max) - px(min)](Integral of 2pip^2dp from 0 to p(max))/h^3
= (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/x)]xYZ(Integral of 2pip^2dp from 0 to p(max))/h^2
= (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/x)]xYZ(2pi/3)(1/a)^3
This term gives a net attractive force along x of -(hc/2a^4)YZ.
ZPE((X-x)YZ) = (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/(X-x))](X-x)YZ(Integral of 2pip^2dp from 0 to p(max))/h^2
= (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/(X-x))](X-x)YZ(2pi/3)(1/a)^3
This term gives a net repulsive force along x of +(hc/2a^4)YZ.
Therefore, as expected, we need only look at the longitudinal integral for these non-spherically symmetric parallel plate boundary conditions.
Area of plates A = YZ.
Thus the NET ZPF force along x at the plate located at x is
-(1/2)(hc/a^4)A - (1/2)(hc/x^2)(A/a^2) +(1/2)(hc/a^2)(A/a^2) + (hc/2)(A/a^2)(d/dx)(1/(X-x))
- (1/2)(hc/x^2)(A/a^2) + (hc/2)(A/a^2)(1/(X-x)^2)
Assume x << X. As X --> infinity we can ignore the second term from outside the plates.
This is a net attractive force ~ -1/x^2 not - 1/x^4, but it is too weak to contain unbalanced charges in the EVO.
Therefore, this calculation corrects the wrong calculation below.
On Sep 17, 2004, at 6:18 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
On waking this morning, I realized that I ignored the lower infrared limit pmin in the calculations below integrating from 0 to pmax. The boundary conditions determine the nature of this term. For parallel plates perpendicular to x reaching to the end of the BIG BOX we need to integrate from pmin = h/2x to pmax = h/a for the little box.
This gives the additional total ZPE term in 3D case for the small box
-(pi/32)(hc/x)(V/x^3) = -(pi/32)(hc/x^3)yz
for the little box.
Similarly for the BIG BOX pmin = h/2(X - x)
-(pi/32)(hc/(X - x))(V/(X - x)^3) = -(pi/32)(hc/(X - x))((X - x)(Y - Y)(Z - Z)/(X - x)^3) = 0
So this asymmetric boundary condition does give a net ZPF force ~ - 1/x^4.
This is wrong.
Spherical shells will give a different answer.
*Therefore, I retract my previous remark that there is no net free virtual photon ZPF force under any conditions.
Corrected 3rd draft below.
On Sep 16, 2004, at 6:24 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Review of standard phase space calculations of zero point energy.
Spectral density in 3D space is from a spherical shell in momentum space.
4pip^2dp/h^3 = 3D Spectral Density
Where for the zero point virtual photon the energy is pc/2.
Therefore, integrate from p = 0 to p(max) to get
Total virtual photon zero point energy is in volume V
ZPE(3D) = Integral of (pc/2)4pip^2dp/h^3V = (4pic/8)p^4(max)V/h^3 = (pi/2)(hc/a)(V/a^3)
where p(max) = h/a
a = short-wave cutoff
This assumes Euclidean geometry continuum in 3D momentum space with basically ignoring oddly shaped cavities.
Same kind of calculation in 2D with an annulus in 2D momentum space gives (ignoring factors of 2, pi etc)
2pipdp/h^2 = 2D Spectral Density
ZPE(2D) ~ (hc/a)(A/a^2)
And in 1D along a line
dp/h = 1D Spectral Density
ZPE(1D) ~ (hc/a)(L/a)
In 1D one can do an exact calculation using finite series Sum of n from 1 to N = (1/2)N(N+1), but when L/a >> 1 you get essentially the same result as using the continuum integration.
Next go back to 3D with ZERO VACUUM COHERENCE.
3D Pressure = -d(Internal Energy)/dV
In this case
3D ZPF Pressure = -(pi/2)(hc/a^4) Independent of V! Also the pressure is negative!
w = Pressure/(Energy Density) = -1 not Hal Puthoff's "w = + 1/3" which is true only for real photons not virtual ZPF photons.
If you have a little box of volume v = xyz inside a large BOX of volume V = XYZ, then the total ZPE inside the little box is in 3D
ZPE(v) ~ (hc/a^4)v
The total ZPE inside the BIG outer BOX is
ZPE(V - v) ~ (hc/a^4)(V - v)
Note the LINEAR additive rule
ZPE(v) + ZPE(V - v) = ZPE(V)
Similarly in 2D for ZPE(A) and in 1D for ZPE(L).
Back to 3D what is the total ZPF force perpendicular to the wall x of the little box?
It is obviously
Fx(ZPF) = -dZPE(v)/dx - dZPE(V - v)/dx = -yz(hc/a^4)(1 - 1) = 0
Similarly in 2D and 1D. The number of effective space dimensions in conditions of different symmetries on the boundary conditionns makes no essential difference to this general conclusion.
Typo-corrected 2nd Draft
On Sep 16, 2004, at 7:26 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
My previous calculations below for the free photon field without any j.A coupling to electric charges assumes zero vacuum coherence. Putting in the virtual electron-positron pairs is equivalent to one virtual quantum of negative energy per transverse polarized mode. This is because of the Pauli exclusion principle's anti-commutation rules for the Dirac electron field. The electron has spin 1/2, the photon spin 1, neglecting supersymmetry is OK since there is no evidence for it at all, therefore, the longitudinally polarized virtual photon mode is not compensated for by the virtual electron-positron pairs.
In general with the macro-quantum vacuum coherence, the net virtual photon + virtual electron positron, zero point energy density is positive ~ (hc/2a^4)(1 - a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2), which is adjusted to ZERO in the non-exotic vacuum without any dark energy and any dark matter. The latter two are simply exotic vacuum phases where
a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 < 1
a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 > 1
respectively.
Ken Shoulders EVOs are stabilized by DARK ENERGY core that holds the unbalanced charge -Ne together via
V(r) = +(Ne)^2/mr + c^2/\zpfr^2
Note that the gradients of these two terms are of opposite sign allowing dynamical stability. This also explains the stability of a single spatially-extended electron as a Bohm hidden variable possibly allowing Vigier's tight atomic states as a new form of atomic energy investigated by Maric and Dragic in Beograd. We need to add the rotation term of course.
Where
/\zpf = (8piG*/c^4)(ZPE Density) > 0
[/\zpf] = 1/Area, i.e. curvature
[8piG*/c^4] = [String Tension]^-1 = [Energy/Length]^-1 = Length/Energy
[ZPE Density] = Energy/Volume
G* is the effective gravity constant at the small scale ~ 10^-5 - 10^-3 cm of the EVO, which may, or may not be, Newton's G. That is an empirical question.
Furthermore
N(h/mc)^2 = (Space-Warp Factor)4pi(Observed EVO Radius)^2
Where Space-Warp Factor << 1, i.e. non-Euclidean 3D space geometry for the mesoscopic EVO is my prediction.
On Sep 16, 2004, at 3:31 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
In 3D case for a little box of volume xyz inside a big box of VOLUME XYX
The total free virtual photon ZPE in the little box is, with short-wave cutoff a:
~ (hc/2a)(xyx/a^3)
The total free virtual photon ZPE in the BIG BOX outside the little box is
~ (hc/2a)((X-x)(Y-y)(X-x)/a^3)
Note that in both cases the total 3D free virtual photon positive ZPE density is the same, i.e. ~ hc/2a^4, on both inside and outside of the little box inside the BIG BOX and is - the NEGATIIVE pressure, i.e. w = -1 not Puthoff's wrong value w = +1/3 that he uses in his most recent paper about Ken Shoulders EVO data.
On Sep 15, 2004, at 7:09 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
typo-corrected 2nd draft
If you posit that momentum space is a CONTINUUM metric space and assume FLAT Euclidean geometry with the Pythagorean theorem, then
1. Virtual photon ZPE on a 1D line of length L with short wave cutoff "a", L >> a, with standing wave modes ~ (L)^-1/2sin(kx)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(L/a) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
1D ZPE PRESSURE = STRING TENSION = -(d/dL)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^2) = constant = -ZPE LINE DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
2. Virtual photon ZPE on a 2D lattice of area A with short wave cutoff "a", A >> a^2, with standing wave modes ~(L)^-1sin(kx)sin(k'y)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(A/a^2) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
2D ZPE PRESSURE = Membrane Tension = -(d/dA)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^3) = constant = -ZPE Membrane DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
3. Virtual photon ZPE on a 3D volume V with short wave cutoff "a", V >> a^3, with standing wave modes ~ (L)^-3/2sin(kx)sin(k'y)sin(k"z)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(V/a^3) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
3D ZPE PRESSURE = -(d/dV)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^3) = constant = -ZPE DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
In all three cases, no contribution of virtual photons to any vacuum pressure difference that can be attributed to a VdW "Casimir force".
The effect of EFFECTIVE dimension is in how the "pressure" scales with short-wave cutoff. One could also imagine FRACTALS with a non-integer power of the short-wave cutoff.
On waking next morning at 5AM I realized we better take another look.
Given the asymmetric boundary conditions of parallel plates, we need to be careful about how to do the integration in momentum space. We cannot use spherical coordinates in momentum space. We must use Cartesian rectangular coordinates, i.e. for the spectral density
dpxdpydpz not 4pip^2dp
Let the parallel plates be separated by x along the x-axis.
Between the plates, the limits are from px(min) = h/2x to px(max) = h/a.
However, in the plane of the plates the limits are from 0 to p(max) = h/a.
How do we do the virtual photon ZPE integral?
That integral must split into longitudinal and transverse parts.
The longitudinal FREE VIRTUAL PHOTON ZPE integral BETWEEN THE PLATES is
ZPE(x) = (1/2)c[px(max)^2 - px(min)^2]py(max)pz(max)xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)c[(h/a)^2 - (h/x)^2](h/a)^2xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)(h/a)^2(h/a)^2xYZ/h^3 - (1/2)c(h/x)^2(h/a)^2xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)(hc/a)(xYZ/a^3) - (1/2)(hc/x)(YZ/a^2)
The ZPF force from this term is
-(d/dx)ZPE(x) = -(1/2)(hc/a^2)(YZ/a^2) - (1/2)(hc/x^2)(YZ/a^2)
= -(1/2)(hc/a^4)YZ - (1/2)(hc/x^2)(YZ/a^2)
The longitudinal FREE VIRTUAL PHOTON ZPE integral OUTSIDE THE PLATES is
ZPE(X-x) = (1/2)c[px(max)^2 - px(min)^2]py(max)pz(max)(X-x)YZ/h^3
= (1/2)c[(h/a)^2 - (h/(X-x))^2](h/a)^2(X-x)xYZ/h^3
= (1/2)(hc/a)((X-x)YZ/a^3) - (1/2)(hc/(X-x))(YZ/a^2)
The ZPF force from this term is from -(d/dx)ZPE(X-x) =
+(1/2)(hc/a^2)(YZ/a^2) + (hc/2)(YZ/a^2)(d/dx)(1/(X-x))
(d/dx)(1/(X-x)) = +(X - x)^-2
Next look at the transverse free virtual photon integral ZPE(xYZ).
ZPE(xYZ) = (c/2)xYZ[(px(max) - px(min)](Integral of 2pip^2dp from 0 to p(max))/h^3
= (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/x)]xYZ(Integral of 2pip^2dp from 0 to p(max))/h^2
= (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/x)]xYZ(2pi/3)(1/a)^3
This term gives a net attractive force along x of -(hc/2a^4)YZ.
ZPE((X-x)YZ) = (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/(X-x))](X-x)YZ(Integral of 2pip^2dp from 0 to p(max))/h^2
= (hc/2)[(1/a) - (1/(X-x))](X-x)YZ(2pi/3)(1/a)^3
This term gives a net repulsive force along x of +(hc/2a^4)YZ.
Therefore, as expected, we need only look at the longitudinal integral for these non-spherically symmetric parallel plate boundary conditions.
Area of plates A = YZ.
Thus the NET ZPF force along x at the plate located at x is
-(1/2)(hc/a^4)A - (1/2)(hc/x^2)(A/a^2) +(1/2)(hc/a^2)(A/a^2) + (hc/2)(A/a^2)(d/dx)(1/(X-x))
- (1/2)(hc/x^2)(A/a^2) + (hc/2)(A/a^2)(1/(X-x)^2)
Assume x << X. As X --> infinity we can ignore the second term from outside the plates.
This is a net attractive force ~ -1/x^2 not - 1/x^4, but it is too weak to contain unbalanced charges in the EVO.
Therefore, this calculation corrects the wrong calculation below.
On Sep 17, 2004, at 6:18 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
On waking this morning, I realized that I ignored the lower infrared limit pmin in the calculations below integrating from 0 to pmax. The boundary conditions determine the nature of this term. For parallel plates perpendicular to x reaching to the end of the BIG BOX we need to integrate from pmin = h/2x to pmax = h/a for the little box.
This gives the additional total ZPE term in 3D case for the small box
-(pi/32)(hc/x)(V/x^3) = -(pi/32)(hc/x^3)yz
for the little box.
Similarly for the BIG BOX pmin = h/2(X - x)
-(pi/32)(hc/(X - x))(V/(X - x)^3) = -(pi/32)(hc/(X - x))((X - x)(Y - Y)(Z - Z)/(X - x)^3) = 0
So this asymmetric boundary condition does give a net ZPF force ~ - 1/x^4.
This is wrong.
Spherical shells will give a different answer.
*Therefore, I retract my previous remark that there is no net free virtual photon ZPF force under any conditions.
Corrected 3rd draft below.
On Sep 16, 2004, at 6:24 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Review of standard phase space calculations of zero point energy.
Spectral density in 3D space is from a spherical shell in momentum space.
4pip^2dp/h^3 = 3D Spectral Density
Where for the zero point virtual photon the energy is pc/2.
Therefore, integrate from p = 0 to p(max) to get
Total virtual photon zero point energy is in volume V
ZPE(3D) = Integral of (pc/2)4pip^2dp/h^3V = (4pic/8)p^4(max)V/h^3 = (pi/2)(hc/a)(V/a^3)
where p(max) = h/a
a = short-wave cutoff
This assumes Euclidean geometry continuum in 3D momentum space with basically ignoring oddly shaped cavities.
Same kind of calculation in 2D with an annulus in 2D momentum space gives (ignoring factors of 2, pi etc)
2pipdp/h^2 = 2D Spectral Density
ZPE(2D) ~ (hc/a)(A/a^2)
And in 1D along a line
dp/h = 1D Spectral Density
ZPE(1D) ~ (hc/a)(L/a)
In 1D one can do an exact calculation using finite series Sum of n from 1 to N = (1/2)N(N+1), but when L/a >> 1 you get essentially the same result as using the continuum integration.
Next go back to 3D with ZERO VACUUM COHERENCE.
3D Pressure = -d(Internal Energy)/dV
In this case
3D ZPF Pressure = -(pi/2)(hc/a^4) Independent of V! Also the pressure is negative!
w = Pressure/(Energy Density) = -1 not Hal Puthoff's "w = + 1/3" which is true only for real photons not virtual ZPF photons.
If you have a little box of volume v = xyz inside a large BOX of volume V = XYZ, then the total ZPE inside the little box is in 3D
ZPE(v) ~ (hc/a^4)v
The total ZPE inside the BIG outer BOX is
ZPE(V - v) ~ (hc/a^4)(V - v)
Note the LINEAR additive rule
ZPE(v) + ZPE(V - v) = ZPE(V)
Similarly in 2D for ZPE(A) and in 1D for ZPE(L).
Back to 3D what is the total ZPF force perpendicular to the wall x of the little box?
It is obviously
Fx(ZPF) = -dZPE(v)/dx - dZPE(V - v)/dx = -yz(hc/a^4)(1 - 1) = 0
Similarly in 2D and 1D. The number of effective space dimensions in conditions of different symmetries on the boundary conditionns makes no essential difference to this general conclusion.
Typo-corrected 2nd Draft
On Sep 16, 2004, at 7:26 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
My previous calculations below for the free photon field without any j.A coupling to electric charges assumes zero vacuum coherence. Putting in the virtual electron-positron pairs is equivalent to one virtual quantum of negative energy per transverse polarized mode. This is because of the Pauli exclusion principle's anti-commutation rules for the Dirac electron field. The electron has spin 1/2, the photon spin 1, neglecting supersymmetry is OK since there is no evidence for it at all, therefore, the longitudinally polarized virtual photon mode is not compensated for by the virtual electron-positron pairs.
In general with the macro-quantum vacuum coherence, the net virtual photon + virtual electron positron, zero point energy density is positive ~ (hc/2a^4)(1 - a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2), which is adjusted to ZERO in the non-exotic vacuum without any dark energy and any dark matter. The latter two are simply exotic vacuum phases where
a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 < 1
a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 > 1
respectively.
Ken Shoulders EVOs are stabilized by DARK ENERGY core that holds the unbalanced charge -Ne together via
V(r) = +(Ne)^2/mr + c^2/\zpfr^2
Note that the gradients of these two terms are of opposite sign allowing dynamical stability. This also explains the stability of a single spatially-extended electron as a Bohm hidden variable possibly allowing Vigier's tight atomic states as a new form of atomic energy investigated by Maric and Dragic in Beograd. We need to add the rotation term of course.
Where
/\zpf = (8piG*/c^4)(ZPE Density) > 0
[/\zpf] = 1/Area, i.e. curvature
[8piG*/c^4] = [String Tension]^-1 = [Energy/Length]^-1 = Length/Energy
[ZPE Density] = Energy/Volume
G* is the effective gravity constant at the small scale ~ 10^-5 - 10^-3 cm of the EVO, which may, or may not be, Newton's G. That is an empirical question.
Furthermore
N(h/mc)^2 = (Space-Warp Factor)4pi(Observed EVO Radius)^2
Where Space-Warp Factor << 1, i.e. non-Euclidean 3D space geometry for the mesoscopic EVO is my prediction.
On Sep 16, 2004, at 3:31 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
In 3D case for a little box of volume xyz inside a big box of VOLUME XYX
The total free virtual photon ZPE in the little box is, with short-wave cutoff a:
~ (hc/2a)(xyx/a^3)
The total free virtual photon ZPE in the BIG BOX outside the little box is
~ (hc/2a)((X-x)(Y-y)(X-x)/a^3)
Note that in both cases the total 3D free virtual photon positive ZPE density is the same, i.e. ~ hc/2a^4, on both inside and outside of the little box inside the BIG BOX and is - the NEGATIIVE pressure, i.e. w = -1 not Puthoff's wrong value w = +1/3 that he uses in his most recent paper about Ken Shoulders EVO data.
On Sep 15, 2004, at 7:09 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
typo-corrected 2nd draft
If you posit that momentum space is a CONTINUUM metric space and assume FLAT Euclidean geometry with the Pythagorean theorem, then
1. Virtual photon ZPE on a 1D line of length L with short wave cutoff "a", L >> a, with standing wave modes ~ (L)^-1/2sin(kx)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(L/a) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
1D ZPE PRESSURE = STRING TENSION = -(d/dL)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^2) = constant = -ZPE LINE DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
2. Virtual photon ZPE on a 2D lattice of area A with short wave cutoff "a", A >> a^2, with standing wave modes ~(L)^-1sin(kx)sin(k'y)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(A/a^2) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
2D ZPE PRESSURE = Membrane Tension = -(d/dA)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^3) = constant = -ZPE Membrane DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
3. Virtual photon ZPE on a 3D volume V with short wave cutoff "a", V >> a^3, with standing wave modes ~ (L)^-3/2sin(kx)sin(k'y)sin(k"z)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(V/a^3) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
3D ZPE PRESSURE = -(d/dV)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^3) = constant = -ZPE DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
In all three cases, no contribution of virtual photons to any vacuum pressure difference that can be attributed to a VdW "Casimir force".
The effect of EFFECTIVE dimension is in how the "pressure" scales with short-wave cutoff. One could also imagine FRACTALS with a non-integer power of the short-wave cutoff.
Friday, September 17, 2004
There is still a problem here on the SIGN of the ZPF force for parallel plates! It is repulsive NOT ATTRACTIVE!
Therefore Hal Puthoff is still wrong to explain the observed attractive Casimir force as simply due to free virtual photon pressure differences. You still need the j.A coupling to real charges inside the neutral plates to explain the Casimir force! Saying that the virtual photon energy between the plates is negative is a false argument!
On Sep 17, 2004, at 6:18 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
On waking this morning, I realized that I ignored the lower infrared limit pmin in the calculations below integrating from 0 to pmax. The boundary conditions determine the nature of this term. For parallel plates perpendicular to x reaching to the end of the BIG BOX we need to integrate from pmin = h/2x to pmax = h/a for the little box.
This gives the additional total POSITIVE ZPE term in 3D case for the small box
~(pi/32)(hc/x)(V/x^3) = +(pi/32)(hc/x^3)yz
for the little box.
Similarly for the BIG BOX pmin = h/2(X - x)
-(pi/32)(hc/(X - x))(V/(X - x)^3) = -(pi/32)(hc/(X - x))((X - x)(Y - Y)(Z - Z)/(X - x)^3) = 0
You get ZERO because y = Y and z = Z in this case.
So this asymmetric boundary condition does give a net ZPF REPULSIVE force ~ +1/x^4.
Therefore Hal Puthoff is still wrong to explain the observed attractive Casimir force as simply due to free virtual photon pressure differences. You still need the j.A coupling to real charges inside the neutral plates to explain the Casimir force! Saying that the virtual photon energy between the plates is negative is a false argument!
On Sep 17, 2004, at 6:18 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
On waking this morning, I realized that I ignored the lower infrared limit pmin in the calculations below integrating from 0 to pmax. The boundary conditions determine the nature of this term. For parallel plates perpendicular to x reaching to the end of the BIG BOX we need to integrate from pmin = h/2x to pmax = h/a for the little box.
This gives the additional total POSITIVE ZPE term in 3D case for the small box
~(pi/32)(hc/x)(V/x^3) = +(pi/32)(hc/x^3)yz
for the little box.
Similarly for the BIG BOX pmin = h/2(X - x)
-(pi/32)(hc/(X - x))(V/(X - x)^3) = -(pi/32)(hc/(X - x))((X - x)(Y - Y)(Z - Z)/(X - x)^3) = 0
You get ZERO because y = Y and z = Z in this case.
So this asymmetric boundary condition does give a net ZPF REPULSIVE force ~ +1/x^4.
My remarks about Hal Puthoff using wrong w = +1/3 factor in his EVO model still apply of course.
Let us look at the 3D spherical boundary case.
pmin = h/2r
where r is radius of the inner spherical conducting shell enclosed in a larger shell of radius R.
Therefore, there will be the infrared ZPE term ~ +(hc/r))(V/r)^3
But in this case V ~ r^3 so the net infrared ZPF boundary force term from the little sphere in this case is only ~ hc/r^2 and is repulsive. What about the big sphere?
pmin = h/2(R - r) giving outer ZPE term ~ [hc/(R - r)^4](R^3 - r^3)
However, when R -> infinity this term -> 0 as 1/R and can be ignored.
Note, that this problem is instructive because we now easily see how sensitive the net infrared ZPF force is to the precise nature of the mesoscopic boundary conditions!
Ken Shoulders EVO is to first approximation a spherical shell of N electrons. The free virtual ZPF force will be repulsive here and cannot stabilize it! This is distinct from the direct gravity warping induced by the same net ZPF pressure that requires a different set of equations from Einstein's GR - done elsewhere.
On Sep 17, 2004, at 6:18 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Further corrected.
On waking this morning, I realized that I ignored the lower infrared limit pmin in the calculations below integrating from 0 to pmax. The boundary conditions determine the nature of this term. For parallel plates perpendicular to x reaching to the end of the BIG BOX we need to integrate from pmin = h/2x to pmax = h/a for the little box.
This gives the additional total ZPE term in 3D case for the small box
-(pi/32)(hc/x)(V/x^3) = -(pi/32)(hc/x^3)yz
for the little box.
Similarly for the BIG BOX pmin = h/2(X - x)
-(pi/32)(hc/(X - x))(V/(X - x)^3) = -(pi/32)(hc/(X - x))((X - x)(Y - Y)(Z - Z)/(X - x)^3) = 0
So this asymmetric boundary condition does give a net ZPF force ~ - 1/x^4.
Spherical shells will give a different answer.
*Therefore, I retract my previous remark that there is no net free virtual photon ZPF force under any conditions.
Corrected 3rd draft below.
On Sep 16, 2004, at 6:24 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Review of standard phase space calculations of zero point energy.
Spectral density in 3D space is from a spherical shell in momentum space.
4pip^2dp/h^3 = 3D Spectral Density
Where for the zero point virtual photon the energy is pc/2.
Therefore, integrate from p = 0 to p(max) to get
Total virtual photon zero point energy is in volume V
ZPE(3D) = Integral of (pc/2)4pip^2dp/h^3V = (4pic/8)p^4(max)V/h^3 = (pi/2)(hc/a)(V/a^3)
where p(max) = h/a
a = short-wave cutoff
This assumes Euclidean geometry continuum in 3D momentum space with basically ignoring oddly shaped cavities.
Same kind of calculation in 2D with an annulus in 2D momentum space gives (ignoring factors of 2, pi etc)
2pipdp/h^2 = 2D Spectral Density
ZPE(2D) ~ (hc/a)(A/a^2)
And in 1D along a line
dp/h = 1D Spectral Density
ZPE(1D) ~ (hc/a)(L/a)
In 1D one can do an exact calculation using finite series Sum of n from 1 to N = (1/2)N(N+1), but when L/a >> 1 you get essentially the same result as using the continuum integration.
Next go back to 3D with ZERO VACUUM COHERENCE.
3D Pressure = -d(Internal Energy)/dV
In this case
3D ZPF Pressure = -(pi/2)(hc/a^4) Independent of V! Also the pressure is negative!
w = Pressure/(Energy Density) = -1 not Hal Puthoff's "w = + 1/3" which is true only for real photons not virtual ZPF photons.
If you have a little box of volume v = xyz inside a large BOX of volume V = XYZ, then the total ZPE inside the little box is in 3D
ZPE(v) ~ (hc/a^4)v
The total ZPE inside the BIG outer BOX is
ZPE(V - v) ~ (hc/a^4)(V - v)
Note the LINEAR additive rule
ZPE(v) + ZPE(V - v) = ZPE(V)
Similarly in 2D for ZPE(A) and in 1D for ZPE(L).
Back to 3D what is the total ZPF force perpendicular to the wall x of the little box?
It is obviously
Fx(ZPF) = -dZPE(v)/dx - dZPE(V - v)/dx = -yz(hc/a^4)(1 - 1) = 0
Similarly in 2D and 1D. The number of effective space dimensions in conditions of different symmetries on the boundary conditionns makes no essential difference to this general conclusion.
Typo-corrected 2nd Draft
On Sep 16, 2004, at 7:26 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
My previous calculations below for the free photon field without any j.A coupling to electric charges assumes zero vacuum coherence. Putting in the virtual electron-positron pairs is equivalent to one virtual quantum of negative energy per transverse polarized mode. This is because of the Pauli exclusion principle's anti-commutation rules for the Dirac electron field. The electron has spin 1/2, the photon spin 1, neglecting supersymmetry is OK since there is no evidence for it at all, therefore, the longitudinally polarized virtual photon mode is not compensated for by the virtual electron-positron pairs.
In general with the macro-quantum vacuum coherence, the net virtual photon + virtual electron positron, zero point energy density is positive ~ (hc/2a^4)(1 - a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2), which is adjusted to ZERO in the non-exotic vacuum without any dark energy and any dark matter. The latter two are simply exotic vacuum phases where
a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 < 1
a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 > 1
respectively.
Ken Shoulders EVOs are stabilized by DARK ENERGY core that holds the unbalanced charge -Ne together via
V(r) = +(Ne)^2/mr + c^2/\zpfr^2
Note that the gradients of these two terms are of opposite sign allowing dynamical stability. This also explains the stability of a single spatially-extended electron as a Bohm hidden variable possibly allowing Vigier's tight atomic states as a new form of atomic energy investigated by Maric and Dragic in Beograd. We need to add the rotation term of course.
Where
/\zpf = (8piG*/c^4)(ZPE Density) > 0
[/\zpf] = 1/Area, i.e. curvature
[8piG*/c^4] = [String Tension]^-1 = [Energy/Length]^-1 = Length/Energy
[ZPE Density] = Energy/Volume
G* is the effective gravity constant at the small scale ~ 10^-5 - 10^-3 cm of the EVO, which may, or may not be, Newton's G. That is an empirical question.
Furthermore
N(h/mc)^2 = (Space-Warp Factor)4pi(Observed EVO Radius)^2
Where Space-Warp Factor << 1, i.e. non-Euclidean 3D space geometry for the mesoscopic EVO is my prediction.
On Sep 16, 2004, at 3:31 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
In 3D case for a little box of volume xyz inside a big box of VOLUME XYX
The total free virtual photon ZPE in the little box is, with short-wave cutoff a:
~ (hc/2a)(xyx/a^3)
The total free virtual photon ZPE in the BIG BOX outside the little box is
~ (hc/2a)((X-x)(Y-y)(X-x)/a^3)
Note that in both cases the total 3D free virtual photon positive ZPE density is the same, i.e. ~ hc/2a^4, on both inside and outside of the little box inside the BIG BOX and is - the NEGATIIVE pressure, i.e. w = -1 not Puthoff's wrong value w = +1/3 that he uses in his most recent paper about Ken Shoulders EVO data.
On Sep 15, 2004, at 7:09 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
typo-corrected 2nd draft
If you posit that momentum space is a CONTINUUM metric space and assume FLAT Euclidean geometry with the Pythagorean theorem, then
1. Virtual photon ZPE on a 1D line of length L with short wave cutoff "a", L >> a, with standing wave modes ~ (L)^-1/2sin(kx)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(L/a) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
1D ZPE PRESSURE = STRING TENSION = -(d/dL)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^2) = constant = -ZPE LINE DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
2. Virtual photon ZPE on a 2D lattice of area A with short wave cutoff "a", A >> a^2, with standing wave modes ~(L)^-1sin(kx)sin(k'y)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(A/a^2) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
2D ZPE PRESSURE = Membrane Tension = -(d/dA)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^3) = constant = -ZPE Membrane DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
3. Virtual photon ZPE on a 3D volume V with short wave cutoff "a", V >> a^3, with standing wave modes ~ (L)^-3/2sin(kx)sin(k'y)sin(k"z)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(V/a^3) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
3D ZPE PRESSURE = -(d/dV)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^3) = constant = -ZPE DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
The effect of EFFECTIVE dimension is in how the "pressure" scales with short-wave cutoff. One could also imagine FRACTALS with a non-integer power of the short-wave cutoff.
Let us look at the 3D spherical boundary case.
pmin = h/2r
where r is radius of the inner spherical conducting shell enclosed in a larger shell of radius R.
Therefore, there will be the infrared ZPE term ~ +(hc/r))(V/r)^3
But in this case V ~ r^3 so the net infrared ZPF boundary force term from the little sphere in this case is only ~ hc/r^2 and is repulsive. What about the big sphere?
pmin = h/2(R - r) giving outer ZPE term ~ [hc/(R - r)^4](R^3 - r^3)
However, when R -> infinity this term -> 0 as 1/R and can be ignored.
Note, that this problem is instructive because we now easily see how sensitive the net infrared ZPF force is to the precise nature of the mesoscopic boundary conditions!
Ken Shoulders EVO is to first approximation a spherical shell of N electrons. The free virtual ZPF force will be repulsive here and cannot stabilize it! This is distinct from the direct gravity warping induced by the same net ZPF pressure that requires a different set of equations from Einstein's GR - done elsewhere.
On Sep 17, 2004, at 6:18 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Further corrected.
On waking this morning, I realized that I ignored the lower infrared limit pmin in the calculations below integrating from 0 to pmax. The boundary conditions determine the nature of this term. For parallel plates perpendicular to x reaching to the end of the BIG BOX we need to integrate from pmin = h/2x to pmax = h/a for the little box.
This gives the additional total ZPE term in 3D case for the small box
-(pi/32)(hc/x)(V/x^3) = -(pi/32)(hc/x^3)yz
for the little box.
Similarly for the BIG BOX pmin = h/2(X - x)
-(pi/32)(hc/(X - x))(V/(X - x)^3) = -(pi/32)(hc/(X - x))((X - x)(Y - Y)(Z - Z)/(X - x)^3) = 0
So this asymmetric boundary condition does give a net ZPF force ~ - 1/x^4.
Spherical shells will give a different answer.
*Therefore, I retract my previous remark that there is no net free virtual photon ZPF force under any conditions.
Corrected 3rd draft below.
On Sep 16, 2004, at 6:24 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Review of standard phase space calculations of zero point energy.
Spectral density in 3D space is from a spherical shell in momentum space.
4pip^2dp/h^3 = 3D Spectral Density
Where for the zero point virtual photon the energy is pc/2.
Therefore, integrate from p = 0 to p(max) to get
Total virtual photon zero point energy is in volume V
ZPE(3D) = Integral of (pc/2)4pip^2dp/h^3V = (4pic/8)p^4(max)V/h^3 = (pi/2)(hc/a)(V/a^3)
where p(max) = h/a
a = short-wave cutoff
This assumes Euclidean geometry continuum in 3D momentum space with basically ignoring oddly shaped cavities.
Same kind of calculation in 2D with an annulus in 2D momentum space gives (ignoring factors of 2, pi etc)
2pipdp/h^2 = 2D Spectral Density
ZPE(2D) ~ (hc/a)(A/a^2)
And in 1D along a line
dp/h = 1D Spectral Density
ZPE(1D) ~ (hc/a)(L/a)
In 1D one can do an exact calculation using finite series Sum of n from 1 to N = (1/2)N(N+1), but when L/a >> 1 you get essentially the same result as using the continuum integration.
Next go back to 3D with ZERO VACUUM COHERENCE.
3D Pressure = -d(Internal Energy)/dV
In this case
3D ZPF Pressure = -(pi/2)(hc/a^4) Independent of V! Also the pressure is negative!
w = Pressure/(Energy Density) = -1 not Hal Puthoff's "w = + 1/3" which is true only for real photons not virtual ZPF photons.
If you have a little box of volume v = xyz inside a large BOX of volume V = XYZ, then the total ZPE inside the little box is in 3D
ZPE(v) ~ (hc/a^4)v
The total ZPE inside the BIG outer BOX is
ZPE(V - v) ~ (hc/a^4)(V - v)
Note the LINEAR additive rule
ZPE(v) + ZPE(V - v) = ZPE(V)
Similarly in 2D for ZPE(A) and in 1D for ZPE(L).
Back to 3D what is the total ZPF force perpendicular to the wall x of the little box?
It is obviously
Fx(ZPF) = -dZPE(v)/dx - dZPE(V - v)/dx = -yz(hc/a^4)(1 - 1) = 0
Similarly in 2D and 1D. The number of effective space dimensions in conditions of different symmetries on the boundary conditionns makes no essential difference to this general conclusion.
Typo-corrected 2nd Draft
On Sep 16, 2004, at 7:26 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
My previous calculations below for the free photon field without any j.A coupling to electric charges assumes zero vacuum coherence. Putting in the virtual electron-positron pairs is equivalent to one virtual quantum of negative energy per transverse polarized mode. This is because of the Pauli exclusion principle's anti-commutation rules for the Dirac electron field. The electron has spin 1/2, the photon spin 1, neglecting supersymmetry is OK since there is no evidence for it at all, therefore, the longitudinally polarized virtual photon mode is not compensated for by the virtual electron-positron pairs.
In general with the macro-quantum vacuum coherence, the net virtual photon + virtual electron positron, zero point energy density is positive ~ (hc/2a^4)(1 - a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2), which is adjusted to ZERO in the non-exotic vacuum without any dark energy and any dark matter. The latter two are simply exotic vacuum phases where
a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 < 1
a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 > 1
respectively.
Ken Shoulders EVOs are stabilized by DARK ENERGY core that holds the unbalanced charge -Ne together via
V(r) = +(Ne)^2/mr + c^2/\zpfr^2
Note that the gradients of these two terms are of opposite sign allowing dynamical stability. This also explains the stability of a single spatially-extended electron as a Bohm hidden variable possibly allowing Vigier's tight atomic states as a new form of atomic energy investigated by Maric and Dragic in Beograd. We need to add the rotation term of course.
Where
/\zpf = (8piG*/c^4)(ZPE Density) > 0
[/\zpf] = 1/Area, i.e. curvature
[8piG*/c^4] = [String Tension]^-1 = [Energy/Length]^-1 = Length/Energy
[ZPE Density] = Energy/Volume
G* is the effective gravity constant at the small scale ~ 10^-5 - 10^-3 cm of the EVO, which may, or may not be, Newton's G. That is an empirical question.
Furthermore
N(h/mc)^2 = (Space-Warp Factor)4pi(Observed EVO Radius)^2
Where Space-Warp Factor << 1, i.e. non-Euclidean 3D space geometry for the mesoscopic EVO is my prediction.
On Sep 16, 2004, at 3:31 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
In 3D case for a little box of volume xyz inside a big box of VOLUME XYX
The total free virtual photon ZPE in the little box is, with short-wave cutoff a:
~ (hc/2a)(xyx/a^3)
The total free virtual photon ZPE in the BIG BOX outside the little box is
~ (hc/2a)((X-x)(Y-y)(X-x)/a^3)
Note that in both cases the total 3D free virtual photon positive ZPE density is the same, i.e. ~ hc/2a^4, on both inside and outside of the little box inside the BIG BOX and is - the NEGATIIVE pressure, i.e. w = -1 not Puthoff's wrong value w = +1/3 that he uses in his most recent paper about Ken Shoulders EVO data.
On Sep 15, 2004, at 7:09 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
typo-corrected 2nd draft
If you posit that momentum space is a CONTINUUM metric space and assume FLAT Euclidean geometry with the Pythagorean theorem, then
1. Virtual photon ZPE on a 1D line of length L with short wave cutoff "a", L >> a, with standing wave modes ~ (L)^-1/2sin(kx)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(L/a) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
1D ZPE PRESSURE = STRING TENSION = -(d/dL)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^2) = constant = -ZPE LINE DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
2. Virtual photon ZPE on a 2D lattice of area A with short wave cutoff "a", A >> a^2, with standing wave modes ~(L)^-1sin(kx)sin(k'y)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(A/a^2) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
2D ZPE PRESSURE = Membrane Tension = -(d/dA)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^3) = constant = -ZPE Membrane DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
3. Virtual photon ZPE on a 3D volume V with short wave cutoff "a", V >> a^3, with standing wave modes ~ (L)^-3/2sin(kx)sin(k'y)sin(k"z)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(V/a^3) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
3D ZPE PRESSURE = -(d/dV)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^3) = constant = -ZPE DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
The effect of EFFECTIVE dimension is in how the "pressure" scales with short-wave cutoff. One could also imagine FRACTALS with a non-integer power of the short-wave cutoff.
Thursday, September 16, 2004
Review of standard phase space calculations of zero point energy.
Spectral density in 3D space is from a spherical shell in momentum space.
4pip^2dp/h^3 = 3D Spectral Density
Where for the zero point virtual photon the energy is pc/2.
Therefore, integrate from p = 0 to p(max) to get
Total virtual photon zero point energy is in volume V
ZPE(3D) = Integral of (pc/2)4pip^2dp/h^3V = (4pic/8)p^4(max)V/h^3 = (pi/2)(hc/a)(V/a^3)
where p(max) = h/a
a = short-wave cutoff
This assumes Euclidean geometry continuum in 3D momentum space with basically ignoring oddly shaped cavities.
Same kind of calculation in 2D with an annulus in 2D momentum space gives (ignoring factors of 2, pi etc)
2pipdp/h^2 = 2D Spectral Density
ZPE(2D) ~ (hc/a)(A/a^2)
And in 1D along a line
dp/h = 1D Spectral Density
ZPE(1D) ~ (hc/a)(L/a)
In 1D one can do an exact calculation using finite series Sum of n from 1 to N = (1/2)N(N+1), but when L/a >> 1 you get essentially the same result as using the continuum integration.
Next go back to 3D with ZERO VACUUM COHERENCE.
3D Pressure = -d(Internal Energy)/dV
In this case
3D ZPF Pressure = -(pi/2)(hc/a^4) Independent of V! Also the pressure is negative!
w = Pressure/(Energy Density) = -1 not Hal Puthoff's "w = + 1/3" which is true only for real photons not virtual ZPF photons.
If you have a little box of volume v = xyz inside a large BOX of volume V = XYZ, then the total ZPE inside the little box is in 3D
ZPE(v) ~ (hc/a^4)v
The total ZPE inside the BIG outer BOX is
ZPE(V - v) ~ (hc/a^4)(V - v)
Note the LINEAR additive rule
ZPE(v) + ZPE(V - v) = ZPE(V)
Similarly in 2D for ZPE(A) and in 1D for ZPE(L).
Back to 3D what is the total ZPF force perpendicular to the wall x of the little box?
It is obviously
Fx(ZPF) = -dZPE(v)/dx - dZPE(V - v)/dx = -yz(hc/a^4)(1 - 1) = 0
That is, with ZERO VACUUM COHERENCE there is NEVER any NET purely FREE virtual photon force on any wall. Therefore, you can never explain the actual Casimir force as some kind of free virtual photon ZPF pressure differential on a pair of electrically UNCHARGED conducting parallel plates as Hal Puthoff, and others, have repeatedly done in popular physics articles. The Casimir force is a Van der Waals electrostatic force and in no way can ever tap the completely random free virtual ZPF photons neglecting the actual QED coupling j.A.
Similarly in 2D and 1D. The number of effective space dimensions in conditions of different symmetries on the boundary conditionns makes no essential difference to this general conclusion.
Spectral density in 3D space is from a spherical shell in momentum space.
4pip^2dp/h^3 = 3D Spectral Density
Where for the zero point virtual photon the energy is pc/2.
Therefore, integrate from p = 0 to p(max) to get
Total virtual photon zero point energy is in volume V
ZPE(3D) = Integral of (pc/2)4pip^2dp/h^3V = (4pic/8)p^4(max)V/h^3 = (pi/2)(hc/a)(V/a^3)
where p(max) = h/a
a = short-wave cutoff
This assumes Euclidean geometry continuum in 3D momentum space with basically ignoring oddly shaped cavities.
Same kind of calculation in 2D with an annulus in 2D momentum space gives (ignoring factors of 2, pi etc)
2pipdp/h^2 = 2D Spectral Density
ZPE(2D) ~ (hc/a)(A/a^2)
And in 1D along a line
dp/h = 1D Spectral Density
ZPE(1D) ~ (hc/a)(L/a)
In 1D one can do an exact calculation using finite series Sum of n from 1 to N = (1/2)N(N+1), but when L/a >> 1 you get essentially the same result as using the continuum integration.
Next go back to 3D with ZERO VACUUM COHERENCE.
3D Pressure = -d(Internal Energy)/dV
In this case
3D ZPF Pressure = -(pi/2)(hc/a^4) Independent of V! Also the pressure is negative!
w = Pressure/(Energy Density) = -1 not Hal Puthoff's "w = + 1/3" which is true only for real photons not virtual ZPF photons.
If you have a little box of volume v = xyz inside a large BOX of volume V = XYZ, then the total ZPE inside the little box is in 3D
ZPE(v) ~ (hc/a^4)v
The total ZPE inside the BIG outer BOX is
ZPE(V - v) ~ (hc/a^4)(V - v)
Note the LINEAR additive rule
ZPE(v) + ZPE(V - v) = ZPE(V)
Similarly in 2D for ZPE(A) and in 1D for ZPE(L).
Back to 3D what is the total ZPF force perpendicular to the wall x of the little box?
It is obviously
Fx(ZPF) = -dZPE(v)/dx - dZPE(V - v)/dx = -yz(hc/a^4)(1 - 1) = 0
That is, with ZERO VACUUM COHERENCE there is NEVER any NET purely FREE virtual photon force on any wall. Therefore, you can never explain the actual Casimir force as some kind of free virtual photon ZPF pressure differential on a pair of electrically UNCHARGED conducting parallel plates as Hal Puthoff, and others, have repeatedly done in popular physics articles. The Casimir force is a Van der Waals electrostatic force and in no way can ever tap the completely random free virtual ZPF photons neglecting the actual QED coupling j.A.
Similarly in 2D and 1D. The number of effective space dimensions in conditions of different symmetries on the boundary conditionns makes no essential difference to this general conclusion.
My previous calculations below for the free photon field without any j.A coupling to electric charges assumes zero vacuum coherence. Putting in the virtual electron-positron pairs is equivalent to one virtual quantum of negative energy per transverse polarized mode. This is because of the Pauli exclusion principle's anti-commutation rules for the Dirac electron field. The electron has spin 1/2, the photon spin 1, neglecting supersymmetry is OK since there is no evidence for it at all, therefore, the longitudinally polarized virtual photon mode is not compensated for by the virtual electron-positron pairs.
In general with the macro-quantum vacuum coherence, the net virtual photon + virtual electron positron, zero point energy density is positive ~ (hc/2a^4)(1 - a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2), which is adjusted to ZERO in the non-exotic vacuum without any dark energy and any dark matter. The latter two are simply exotic vacuum phases where
a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 < 1
a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 > 1
respectively.
Ken Shoulders EVOs are stabilized by DARK ENERGY core that holds the unbalanced charge -Ne together via
V(r) = +(Ne)^2/mr + c^2/\zpfr^2
Note that the gradients of these two terms are of opposite sign allowing dynamical stability. This also explains the stability of a single spatially-extended electron as a Bohm hidden variable possibly allowing Vigier's tight atomic states as a new form of atomic energy investigated by Maric and Dragic in Beograd. We need to add the rotation term of course.
Where
/\zpf = (8piG*/c^4)(ZPE Density) > 0
G* is the effective gravity constant at the small scale ~ 10^-5 - 10^-3 cm of the EVO, which may, or may not be, Newton's G. That is an empirical question.
Furthermore
N(h/mc)^2 = (Space-Warp Factor)4pi(Observed EVO Radius)^2
Where Space-Warp Factor << 1, i.e. non-Euclidean 3D space geometry for the mesoscopic EVO is my prediction.
On Sep 16, 2004, at 3:31 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
In 3D case for a little box of volume xyz inside a big box of VOLUME XYX
The total free virtual photon ZPE in the little box is, with short-wave cutoff a:
~ (hc/2a)(xyx/a^3)
The total free virtual photon ZPE in the BIG BOX outside the little box is
~ (hc/2a)((X-x)(Y-y)(X-x)/a^3)
Note that in both cases the total 3D free virtual photon positive ZPE density is the same, i.e. ~ hc/2a^4, on both inside and outside of the little box inside the BIG BOX and is - the NEGATIIVE pressure, i.e. w = -1 not Puthoff's wrong value w = +1/3 that he uses in his most recent paper about Ken Shoulders EVO data.
What is the total ZPF force at the walls of the little box?
It is obviously ZERO!
For example, the total ZPF force perpendicular to the wall x cancels from both sides.
Take -(d/dx) of total ZPE inside + outside wall x. The -x term outside the wall in BIG BOX cancels the x term inside the box when you take the gradient!
This works same in any number of dimensions, also if you use spherical shell method with Pythagorean theorem, same final answer, i.e. r^3 and R^3 - r^3 terms, the radial gradients also cancel.
On Sep 15, 2004, at 7:09 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
typo-corrected 2nd draft
If you posit that momentum space is a CONTINUUM metric space and assume FLAT Euclidean geometry with the Pythagorean theorem, then
1. Virtual photon ZPE on a 1D line of length L with short wave cutoff "a", L >> a, with standing wave modes ~ (L)^-1/2sin(kx)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(L/a) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
1D ZPE PRESSURE = STRING TENSION = -(d/dL)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^2) = constant = -ZPE LINE DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
2. Virtual photon ZPE on a 2D lattice of area A with short wave cutoff "a", A >> a^2, with standing wave modes ~(L)^-1sin(kx)sin(k'y)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(A/a^2) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
2D ZPE PRESSURE = Membrane Tension = -(d/dA)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^3) = constant = -ZPE Membrane DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
3. Virtual photon ZPE on a 3D volume V with short wave cutoff "a", V >> a^3, with standing wave modes ~ (L)^-3/2sin(kx)sin(k'y)sin(k"z)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(V/a^3) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
3D ZPE PRESSURE = -(d/dV)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^3) = constant = -ZPE DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
In all three cases, no contribution of virtual photons to any vacuum pressure difference that can be attributed to a VdW "Casimir force".
The effect of EFFECTIVE dimension is in how the "pressure" scales with short-wave cutoff. One could also imagine FRACTALS with a non-integer power of the short-wave cutoff.
In general with the macro-quantum vacuum coherence, the net virtual photon + virtual electron positron, zero point energy density is positive ~ (hc/2a^4)(1 - a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2), which is adjusted to ZERO in the non-exotic vacuum without any dark energy and any dark matter. The latter two are simply exotic vacuum phases where
a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 < 1
a^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 > 1
respectively.
Ken Shoulders EVOs are stabilized by DARK ENERGY core that holds the unbalanced charge -Ne together via
V(r) = +(Ne)^2/mr + c^2/\zpfr^2
Note that the gradients of these two terms are of opposite sign allowing dynamical stability. This also explains the stability of a single spatially-extended electron as a Bohm hidden variable possibly allowing Vigier's tight atomic states as a new form of atomic energy investigated by Maric and Dragic in Beograd. We need to add the rotation term of course.
Where
/\zpf = (8piG*/c^4)(ZPE Density) > 0
G* is the effective gravity constant at the small scale ~ 10^-5 - 10^-3 cm of the EVO, which may, or may not be, Newton's G. That is an empirical question.
Furthermore
N(h/mc)^2 = (Space-Warp Factor)4pi(Observed EVO Radius)^2
Where Space-Warp Factor << 1, i.e. non-Euclidean 3D space geometry for the mesoscopic EVO is my prediction.
On Sep 16, 2004, at 3:31 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
In 3D case for a little box of volume xyz inside a big box of VOLUME XYX
The total free virtual photon ZPE in the little box is, with short-wave cutoff a:
~ (hc/2a)(xyx/a^3)
The total free virtual photon ZPE in the BIG BOX outside the little box is
~ (hc/2a)((X-x)(Y-y)(X-x)/a^3)
Note that in both cases the total 3D free virtual photon positive ZPE density is the same, i.e. ~ hc/2a^4, on both inside and outside of the little box inside the BIG BOX and is - the NEGATIIVE pressure, i.e. w = -1 not Puthoff's wrong value w = +1/3 that he uses in his most recent paper about Ken Shoulders EVO data.
What is the total ZPF force at the walls of the little box?
It is obviously ZERO!
For example, the total ZPF force perpendicular to the wall x cancels from both sides.
Take -(d/dx) of total ZPE inside + outside wall x. The -x term outside the wall in BIG BOX cancels the x term inside the box when you take the gradient!
This works same in any number of dimensions, also if you use spherical shell method with Pythagorean theorem, same final answer, i.e. r^3 and R^3 - r^3 terms, the radial gradients also cancel.
On Sep 15, 2004, at 7:09 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
typo-corrected 2nd draft
If you posit that momentum space is a CONTINUUM metric space and assume FLAT Euclidean geometry with the Pythagorean theorem, then
1. Virtual photon ZPE on a 1D line of length L with short wave cutoff "a", L >> a, with standing wave modes ~ (L)^-1/2sin(kx)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(L/a) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
1D ZPE PRESSURE = STRING TENSION = -(d/dL)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^2) = constant = -ZPE LINE DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
2. Virtual photon ZPE on a 2D lattice of area A with short wave cutoff "a", A >> a^2, with standing wave modes ~(L)^-1sin(kx)sin(k'y)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(A/a^2) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
2D ZPE PRESSURE = Membrane Tension = -(d/dA)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^3) = constant = -ZPE Membrane DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
3. Virtual photon ZPE on a 3D volume V with short wave cutoff "a", V >> a^3, with standing wave modes ~ (L)^-3/2sin(kx)sin(k'y)sin(k"z)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(V/a^3) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
3D ZPE PRESSURE = -(d/dV)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^3) = constant = -ZPE DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
In all three cases, no contribution of virtual photons to any vacuum pressure difference that can be attributed to a VdW "Casimir force".
The effect of EFFECTIVE dimension is in how the "pressure" scales with short-wave cutoff. One could also imagine FRACTALS with a non-integer power of the short-wave cutoff.
Wednesday, September 15, 2004
If you posit that momentum space is a CONTINUUM metric space and assume FLAT Euclidean geometry with the Pythagorean theorem, then
1. Virtual photon ZPE on a 1D line of length L with short wave cutoff "a", L >> a, with standing wave modes (L)^-1/2sin(kx)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(L/a) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
1D ZPE PRESSURE = STRING TENSION = -(d/dL)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^2) = constant = -ZPE LINE DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
2. Virtual photon ZPE on a 2D lattice of area A with short wave cutoff "a", L >> a, with standing wave modes (L)^-1sin(kx)sin(k'y)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(A/a^2) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
2D ZPE PRESSURE = Membrane Tension = -(d/dA)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^3) = constant = -ZPE Membrane DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
3. Virtual photon ZPE on a 3D volume V with short wave cutoff "a", V >> a^3, with standing wave modes (L)^-3/2sin(kx)sin(k'y)sin(k"z)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(V/a^3) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
3D ZPE PRESSURE = -(d/dV)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^3) = constant = -ZPE LINE DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
In all three cases, no contribution of virtual photons to any vacuum pressure difference that can be attributed to a "Casimir force".
The effect of EFFECTIVE dimension is in how the "pressure" scales with short-wave cutoff. One could also imagine FRACTALS with a non-integer power of the short-wave cutoff.
1. Virtual photon ZPE on a 1D line of length L with short wave cutoff "a", L >> a, with standing wave modes (L)^-1/2sin(kx)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(L/a) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
1D ZPE PRESSURE = STRING TENSION = -(d/dL)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^2) = constant = -ZPE LINE DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
2. Virtual photon ZPE on a 2D lattice of area A with short wave cutoff "a", L >> a, with standing wave modes (L)^-1sin(kx)sin(k'y)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(A/a^2) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
2D ZPE PRESSURE = Membrane Tension = -(d/dA)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^3) = constant = -ZPE Membrane DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
3. Virtual photon ZPE on a 3D volume V with short wave cutoff "a", V >> a^3, with standing wave modes (L)^-3/2sin(kx)sin(k'y)sin(k"z)
Total ZPE per polarization ~ pi(hc/4a)(V/a^3) = (pi/2)(ZPE of shortest wave virtual photon)(Number of cells of phase space)
3D ZPE PRESSURE = -(d/dV)(Total ZPE) = pi(hc/4a^3) = constant = -ZPE LINE DENSITY, i.e. w = -1
In all three cases, no contribution of virtual photons to any vacuum pressure difference that can be attributed to a "Casimir force".
The effect of EFFECTIVE dimension is in how the "pressure" scales with short-wave cutoff. One could also imagine FRACTALS with a non-integer power of the short-wave cutoff.
On Sep 15, 2004, at 12:38 PM, main_engineering wrote:
I understand your math and the physics perfectly well. I don't understand
why you are using the wrong math in this example and limiting yourself to a
1 dimensional problem when in fact 3 are required to model reality.
Because, my model is true any dimension. Also the piston in the cylinder is the simplest situation and it is effectively 1D by symmetry since the important parameter is the movement of the piston in the cylinder.
The same calculation works in all dimensions because the space-dimensions are LINEARLY INDEPENDENT.
The key conclusion that, contrary to Hal Puthoff's frequent claims to science journalists, FREE virtual zero point photons without any j.A coupling to electrons and protons make exactly ZERO contribution to the measured Casimir force, which is not at all a direct zero point force, but is, rather, an electrostatic Van Der Waals force between real charges placed outside the vacuum in spatially separated charge neutral configurations. The free virtual photon pressure is CONSTANT in the case of zero vacuum coherence and it obeys w = -1 with a positive ZPE density and an equal in magnitude but opposite in sign NEGATIVE PRESSURE. I prove this explicitly below using the standard continuum spherically symmetric Lorentz-invariant spectral density of field oscillators, which is an APPROXIMATION to the more exact discrete sum in a finite cavity problem. Contrary to QED, in GR you cannot subtract off even these constant free virtual photon ZPE densities, which have STRONG direct space-time warping power when not suppressed by MACRO-QUANTUM VACUUM COHERENCE out of which Einstein's gravity and the inertia of ordinary matter emerges. Note Hal Puthoff's category confusion here. I am NOT claiming that the Casimir force is in anyway related to the origin of gravity and inertia as Hal has suggested in numerous pop interviews with the media.
Look the idea is very simple.
Suppose you have a finite 3D box cavity, independent x,y,z axes with a little box of variable size X, Y, Z inside a big box of fixed size Lx, Ly, Lz. The counting of the LINEARLY INDEPENDENT standing wave modes along each direction works the same way.
Count the number of independent modes along each space direction exactly as I did. Assume a common short-wave cutoff a for simplicity. The EXACT total number of modes is then inside the little box
N = NxNyNz = (1/8((X/a)(X/a + 1)(Y/a)(Y/a + 1)(Z/a)(Z/a + 1)
But there is only 1 virtual photon per independent mode, and their virtual zero point energies add linearly even though the modes in different independent directions multiply.
That is the Hamiltonian for a sum of independent field oscillators is
H = Sum over all independent modes of hck(a*kak + 1/2)
where we sandwich the LINEAR ENERGY OPERATOR between the VACUUM STATE
|0> that is a product of the vacuum states |0>k one for each independent mode. Standing wave cavity modes in different directions are independent as well as those along the same direction with different nx, ny, nz and
k<0|a*kak|0>k = 0
using 2nd quantization in Fock occupation number space in the traditional textbook way.
a* creates a real photon, a destroys a real photon.
The wave number for each independent standing wave cavity mode field oscillator, that in the vacuum has NO real photons is
knx = nxpi/X
where nx = 1 to X/a, similarly for y, z
DO NOT CONFUSE THESE MODE INTEGERS WITH THE EIGENVALUES OF a*kak for the number of REAL PHOTONS in each independent cavity mode field oscillator k that is a standing wave obeying the cavity boundary conditions.
Note that
Nx = SUM of ALL the MODE INTEGERS nx from 1 to X/a (in sense of nearest least integer to X/a).
Similarly for ny & nz.
Each independent mode of wave number knx = nxpi/X contributes a zero point energy hckni/2 with a fixed coefficient hcpi/2X, so that the key quantity is sum of nx from 1 to (X/a) which is (1/2)(X/a)(X/a + 1). Similarly for y and z and you simply ADD the separate linearly independent zero point virtual photon energies for EACH independent oscillator! So my EXACT calculation obviously works in 1D, 2D, 3D ... ND.
This is simple and obvious.
Now
you're not just saying that Hal is wrong, you're trying to tell me that
Planck, Casimir, Milonni and everything else QED has to say about the ZPF is
wrong without any justification other than your desire to prove you're right
and everyone else is wrong. I know better than to believe such nonsense.
I never said Planck was wrong. Show me where Planck did such a calculation?
Show what is wrong with the above simple exact DISCRETE counting?
The standard CONTINUUM SPHERICALLY SYMMETRIC argument is:
Density of oscillator states in 3D is 4pik^2dk per polarization.
k^2 = kx^2 + ky^2 + kz^2
= (nxpi/X)^2 + (nypi/Y)^2 + (nzpi/Z)^2
FOR GLOBALLY FLAT MOMENTUM SPACE WITH EUCLIDEAN CONTINUUM GEOMETRY USING PYTHAGOREAN THEOREM.
But this discrete sum is approximated by a continuous integral below and spherical symmetry is assumed. These two approximations introduce mathematical artifacts LIKE LORENTZ INVARIANCE!
The total zero point energy density is then
Integral (hc/2)4pik^3dk = 4pi(hc/8)k(MAX)^4
k(MAX) = 2pi/a
a = short wave cut off
Total zero point energy ZPE is then
ZPE = 4pi(hc/8)(2pi/a)^4V > 0 in a spatial volume V.
Note LINEAR DEPENDENCE OF TOTAL VIRTUAL PHOTON ZPE ON VOLUME V.
Note that even in this calculation, the PRESSURE is - d(ZPE)/dV = - 4pi(hc/8)(2pi/a)^4 is CONSTANT independent of changes in volume V. AND IT IS NEGATIVE and it is - the ZPE DENSITY! That is w = -1!
Therefore even in this continuum spherical symmetric model one gets the same effective result I get with my more exact purely discretum model with NO SPHERICAL SYMMETRY IMPOSED ADHOC! There is NO net ZPE pressure differential on any wall. You have exactly the same negative free virtual photon pressures on each side of the wall NO MATTER HOW YOU CALCULATE IT!
If the formula used to derive the ZPF mode pressure presented by Milonni is
wrong, then so is the spectral energy density of the ZPF and the Lorentz
invariance of that density.
No it's not as I just showed. To the extent that V --> infinity and a --> 0 which is what you need for globally flat continuum of special relativity with EFFECTIVE SPATIAL SPHERICAL SYMMETRY (no finite cavity walls of arbitrary shape), you get same essential result! That same essential result is that there is NO contribution to the Casimir force from purely free virtual zero point photons! The Casimir force requires the j.A coupling to properly compute as a Van Der Waals force between real charges. This is NOT a pure vacuum problem!
That cannot be so. It has been verified by more
than 1 kind of experiment. QED is the best tested theory there ever was.
IMO, test after test it has proven itself correct. It is even more battle
tested and proven in day to day life than GR ever was.
Not true! The domain of validity of QED is much more limited than anyone realized even though the accuracy of the QED measurements is very high and even though renormalization methods work very well - too well, although not even Richard Feynman understood why! Feynman told me that directly BTW!
main_engineering
-----Original Message-----
From: Jack:
completely.
I count the number of modes exactly. There is one FREE virtual photon
per mode (AKA field oscillator). Therefore, the calculation is exact
and simple.
I understand your math and the physics perfectly well. I don't understand
why you are using the wrong math in this example and limiting yourself to a
1 dimensional problem when in fact 3 are required to model reality.
Because, my model is true any dimension. Also the piston in the cylinder is the simplest situation and it is effectively 1D by symmetry since the important parameter is the movement of the piston in the cylinder.
The same calculation works in all dimensions because the space-dimensions are LINEARLY INDEPENDENT.
The key conclusion that, contrary to Hal Puthoff's frequent claims to science journalists, FREE virtual zero point photons without any j.A coupling to electrons and protons make exactly ZERO contribution to the measured Casimir force, which is not at all a direct zero point force, but is, rather, an electrostatic Van Der Waals force between real charges placed outside the vacuum in spatially separated charge neutral configurations. The free virtual photon pressure is CONSTANT in the case of zero vacuum coherence and it obeys w = -1 with a positive ZPE density and an equal in magnitude but opposite in sign NEGATIVE PRESSURE. I prove this explicitly below using the standard continuum spherically symmetric Lorentz-invariant spectral density of field oscillators, which is an APPROXIMATION to the more exact discrete sum in a finite cavity problem. Contrary to QED, in GR you cannot subtract off even these constant free virtual photon ZPE densities, which have STRONG direct space-time warping power when not suppressed by MACRO-QUANTUM VACUUM COHERENCE out of which Einstein's gravity and the inertia of ordinary matter emerges. Note Hal Puthoff's category confusion here. I am NOT claiming that the Casimir force is in anyway related to the origin of gravity and inertia as Hal has suggested in numerous pop interviews with the media.
Look the idea is very simple.
Suppose you have a finite 3D box cavity, independent x,y,z axes with a little box of variable size X, Y, Z inside a big box of fixed size Lx, Ly, Lz. The counting of the LINEARLY INDEPENDENT standing wave modes along each direction works the same way.
Count the number of independent modes along each space direction exactly as I did. Assume a common short-wave cutoff a for simplicity. The EXACT total number of modes is then inside the little box
N = NxNyNz = (1/8((X/a)(X/a + 1)(Y/a)(Y/a + 1)(Z/a)(Z/a + 1)
But there is only 1 virtual photon per independent mode, and their virtual zero point energies add linearly even though the modes in different independent directions multiply.
That is the Hamiltonian for a sum of independent field oscillators is
H = Sum over all independent modes of hck(a*kak + 1/2)
where we sandwich the LINEAR ENERGY OPERATOR between the VACUUM STATE
|0> that is a product of the vacuum states |0>k one for each independent mode. Standing wave cavity modes in different directions are independent as well as those along the same direction with different nx, ny, nz and
k<0|a*kak|0>k = 0
using 2nd quantization in Fock occupation number space in the traditional textbook way.
a* creates a real photon, a destroys a real photon.
The wave number for each independent standing wave cavity mode field oscillator, that in the vacuum has NO real photons is
knx = nxpi/X
where nx = 1 to X/a, similarly for y, z
DO NOT CONFUSE THESE MODE INTEGERS WITH THE EIGENVALUES OF a*kak for the number of REAL PHOTONS in each independent cavity mode field oscillator k that is a standing wave obeying the cavity boundary conditions.
Note that
Nx = SUM of ALL the MODE INTEGERS nx from 1 to X/a (in sense of nearest least integer to X/a).
Similarly for ny & nz.
Each independent mode of wave number knx = nxpi/X contributes a zero point energy hckni/2 with a fixed coefficient hcpi/2X, so that the key quantity is sum of nx from 1 to (X/a) which is (1/2)(X/a)(X/a + 1). Similarly for y and z and you simply ADD the separate linearly independent zero point virtual photon energies for EACH independent oscillator! So my EXACT calculation obviously works in 1D, 2D, 3D ... ND.
This is simple and obvious.
Now
you're not just saying that Hal is wrong, you're trying to tell me that
Planck, Casimir, Milonni and everything else QED has to say about the ZPF is
wrong without any justification other than your desire to prove you're right
and everyone else is wrong. I know better than to believe such nonsense.
I never said Planck was wrong. Show me where Planck did such a calculation?
Show what is wrong with the above simple exact DISCRETE counting?
The standard CONTINUUM SPHERICALLY SYMMETRIC argument is:
Density of oscillator states in 3D is 4pik^2dk per polarization.
k^2 = kx^2 + ky^2 + kz^2
= (nxpi/X)^2 + (nypi/Y)^2 + (nzpi/Z)^2
FOR GLOBALLY FLAT MOMENTUM SPACE WITH EUCLIDEAN CONTINUUM GEOMETRY USING PYTHAGOREAN THEOREM.
But this discrete sum is approximated by a continuous integral below and spherical symmetry is assumed. These two approximations introduce mathematical artifacts LIKE LORENTZ INVARIANCE!
The total zero point energy density is then
Integral (hc/2)4pik^3dk = 4pi(hc/8)k(MAX)^4
k(MAX) = 2pi/a
a = short wave cut off
Total zero point energy ZPE is then
ZPE = 4pi(hc/8)(2pi/a)^4V > 0 in a spatial volume V.
Note LINEAR DEPENDENCE OF TOTAL VIRTUAL PHOTON ZPE ON VOLUME V.
Note that even in this calculation, the PRESSURE is - d(ZPE)/dV = - 4pi(hc/8)(2pi/a)^4 is CONSTANT independent of changes in volume V. AND IT IS NEGATIVE and it is - the ZPE DENSITY! That is w = -1!
Therefore even in this continuum spherical symmetric model one gets the same effective result I get with my more exact purely discretum model with NO SPHERICAL SYMMETRY IMPOSED ADHOC! There is NO net ZPE pressure differential on any wall. You have exactly the same negative free virtual photon pressures on each side of the wall NO MATTER HOW YOU CALCULATE IT!
If the formula used to derive the ZPF mode pressure presented by Milonni is
wrong, then so is the spectral energy density of the ZPF and the Lorentz
invariance of that density.
No it's not as I just showed. To the extent that V --> infinity and a --> 0 which is what you need for globally flat continuum of special relativity with EFFECTIVE SPATIAL SPHERICAL SYMMETRY (no finite cavity walls of arbitrary shape), you get same essential result! That same essential result is that there is NO contribution to the Casimir force from purely free virtual zero point photons! The Casimir force requires the j.A coupling to properly compute as a Van Der Waals force between real charges. This is NOT a pure vacuum problem!
That cannot be so. It has been verified by more
than 1 kind of experiment. QED is the best tested theory there ever was.
IMO, test after test it has proven itself correct. It is even more battle
tested and proven in day to day life than GR ever was.
Not true! The domain of validity of QED is much more limited than anyone realized even though the accuracy of the QED measurements is very high and even though renormalization methods work very well - too well, although not even Richard Feynman understood why! Feynman told me that directly BTW!
main_engineering
-----Original Message-----
From: Jack:
completely.
I count the number of modes exactly. There is one FREE virtual photon
per mode (AKA field oscillator). Therefore, the calculation is exact
and simple.
On Sep 15, 2004, at 8:01 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
PS I had not read the thread that came with Dan's stuff below. Indeed,
I do also agree with Scott that I do not take the theological mish mash
seriously. I suspect neither does Puthoff.
On Sep 15, 2004, at 7:56 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
I have not read the piece by Scott Dan is responding to. However,
Dan's description of post-quantum physics with metric engineering is
accurate. Precision cosmology shows we live in the virtual universe
that is effectively a cosmic video game of IT (material) from BIT
(mind) in a two-way loop including BIT from IT to generate the streams
of consciousness attached to globs of IT. I have shown explicitly how
IT in the form of Einstein's guv field emerges from the coherent phase
of MACRO-BIT, which in turn emerges from an instability in the
micro-qubit vacuum with the local gauge fields and lepto-quark fields
already there. So they need to emerge from a BIT like spin-foam in a 2
step process. Something like loop quantum gravity to get to unstable
globally flat pre-inflationary false vacuum prior to second step
emergence of gravity and inertia.
On the material plane:
1. Hal Puthoff and I have the same strategic objectives. I am saying
his physics to achieve them is seriously wrong. Because of Hal's black
ops connections from way back to National Security Agency his wrong
ideas are leading to USG intelligence threat assessment blunders, that
in the long run, will be worse than the Leo Strauss Utopian Cult Neo
Con blunders on Iraq WMD in Doug Feith's OSP prior to the
ill-conceived attack on Iraq. As Seymour Hersh and Pat Buchanan et-al
put it "Eight or nine Neo Cons" essentially pulled the wool over
Bushie's eyes in the panic of 911 where we have jumped from the frying
pan into the fire. Kerry has no solution either. "What a revolting
development this is." William Bendix. There is no "End Game". Easy to
see now in hindsight, but not 2 years ago.
2.
On Sep 15, 2004, at 6:59 AM, Ken Shoulders wrote:
ELECTRON CONDENSER
by
Ken Shoulders
Abstract
An apparatus is proposed for the condensation of electrons to a
containable fluid state. This miniature apparatus consists of an ion
pumped vacuum system, a split anode magnetron and a quadrupole
electron trap fitted with suitable electron injectors, in the form of
EVO generators, and numerous ways for analyzing the effluent captured
in the trap. The apparatus design emphasizes simplicity and uses only
minimal hand tools for construction. The cost of the easily found
construction materials required is in the range of a few hundred
dollars.
This recent paper can be downloaded from: http://www.svn.net/krscfs/
3. As to zero point energy. It's easy to do the free virtual photon
cavity mode problem exactly. There is no net free virtual photon zero
point force on any wall.
Think of a piston in a cylinder to total length L. The piston is at
distance z from the left wall. There is cylindrical symmetry. All we
need do is think of the virtual photon waves that can fit between 0
and z and between z and L. Each wave that fits has virtual photon
energy hck/2 per polarization mode.
The largest mode that fits in z has wave number k = pi/z.
Each mode has wave number npi/z.
The total number of such modes is simply (z/a)(z/a + 1)/2 where a is
the short-wave cut off and we mean smallest closest integer to z/a.
The total zero point free virtual photon energy for the left partition
between 0 and z is obviously, where z/a >> 1
Sum n = 1 to d/a of (hc/2)(pi/z)n ~ (hc/4)(pi/z)(z/a)^2 = (hc/4a^2)z
linear in z.
Similarly for the right partition between z and L - z
Total free virtual photon ZPE is (hc/4a^2)(L - z)
The total ZPE at the piston is the sum. Whose force total negative
gradient -d/dz is exactly zero independent of cutoff a.
Now this is not what is usually calculated for the Casimir force that
is really a weak Van der Waals force between the neutral molecules
making up the uncharged walls of the cylinder and piston. The weak
Casimir force does not tap the free random totally incoherent virtual
photon ZPF. Calculations that make such a claim are wrong.
On Sep 14, 2004, at 7:28 PM, Dan Smith wrote:
Scott,
Oh, you, of little imagination. For once in your life, see if you
can remove your blinders for but a few seconds.
You cling to your 'rock solid' reality for dear life. Why would
cling so tightly unless you were afraid that it might finally elude
your grasp?
Now you see reality dimly as through a darkened glass, but then you
shall see it face to face.
The visitors are here simply to awaken us from our slumber of
materialism.
Any ufologist worth her salt knows that they can bend our reality to
their will. They see through our thoughts, they walk through our
walls. This is not technology, Scott, this is mind over matter.
This is the unobstructable power of Spirit.
We all know that the visitors do not come here in rocket ships. They
come here by warping our space and our time. Our space and our time,
they bend to their will.
They can transit between universes they way we can transit between
the rooms of a building.
Your attempt to apply 19th century physics to the visitors and their
hyper dimensional reality is really nothing short of grotesque.
Have you never played an arcade game? The younger generation is
being fed on virtual reality, the way you were fed on oatmeal. They
are no longer going to be stuck in the mud of your materialism. They
are being prepared for the other dimensions, the power of the
imagination and spirit that lies just beyond the Green Door in Area
51. They don't call it Dreamland for nothing.
You rail against the larger cosmos. You demand that reality must fit
your Procrustean bed. The visitors make a mockery of your
metaphysical prudery.
Look around you, Scott. Where are your fellow scientists? They are
sufficiently prudent not to pick a fight with the paranormal Tar
Baby. They know they will not win this battle. Nay, they will not
win this war. They continue to fiddle with their formulas while Rome
continues to burn.
Jack and Hal attempt to carve out little pieces of the paranormal.
Their strategy is to divide and conquer. My hat is off to their
perseverance. They stand at the edge of their reality and grasp at
straws. They might as well reap the whirl wind.
We inhabit but a cocoon in the cosmic Matrix. There is a crack in
that cosmic egg. We are trying to peck our way out of the shell.
The visitors are here to show us how.
But first we must marshal our spirit. Perhaps that is where I come
into the picture. There are some mental calisthenics that will help
us to limber up our spirits.
Can you stretch your mind, Scott? Has it become sclerotic?
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Littleton [mailto:yokatta@oxy.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 5:01 PM
To: Dan Smith; caryn anscomb; Jack Sarfatti; Nick Cook
Subject: RE: Smelling a rat....
Hi Caryn, et al.
Let me respond to you and your excellent (and extremely kind)
message, as well as to our resident “prophet” (soi dissant) re his
attempt to put a Christian eschatological spin on the agenda of the
“Alien Raj.” First of all, Saint Daniel’s concept of an “eschaton”
is utterly absurd, no matter who endorses it. Indeed, I seriously
doubt whether either Jack Sarfatti or Hal Puthoff, no matter how at
odds they may be over the arcana of post-quantum physics, or any
other credible physical scientists, for that matter, take this
bizarre theological mishmash seriously. Indeed, the whole notion of
eschatology, Christian and otherwise, reflects an archaic stage in
the evolution of human thought, one that took shape long before our
ancestors had any accurate knowledge whatsoever of how the universe
works. Yes, I’m convinced that all traditional human belief systems,
from animism to Zoroastrianism—which, BTW, is chock full of
eschatological concepts that were already ancient by the time Yeshua
ben Yosuf (aka in Latin Jesus) was “magically” conceived aboard a
hovering UFO, if in fact there’s any glimmer of truth behind the
“virgin birth” legend—are, as the late Mircea Eliade pointed out some
years ago, essentially anthropocentric attempts to turn “Chaos” into
“Cosmos,” to impose an imagined order on what was, given the meager
objective knowledge base available to all pre-modern societies, an
otherwise utterly chaotic existence. Or, as the well-known
Anglo-Polish anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski, whose researches
into the nature of religion were generally isomorphic with Eliade’s,
phased it: If human beings don’t have rational explanations and/or
empirically-based mechanisms that will allow them a modicum of
control over their environment, they will invent them. (Indeed,
Voltaire probably summed up this line of reasoning as succinctly as
anyone who came after him: If there were no God, it would be
necessary to invent one.)
That most, if not traditional human belief systems deeply reflect the
presence of the “Alien Raj” is undoubted. But that presence itself
was an integral part of the pre-modern chaos that, according to
Eliade, et al., engendered religion in the first place. That is,
the aliens came to be conceived of as divine beings, fairly folk,
etc.
The trap that Dan and his fellow “eschaton” mavens have fallen into,
aside from the absurdity of drawing specifically on the dogma of a
single, extremely derivative and highly syncretic religious belief
system that began as what amounted to a Judean “cargo cult” preached
by a figure who was most probably a heavily conditioned an alien
“subject,” is to take seriously the patently mythological concepts
our ancestors used to make sense out of the world. Indeed, the
inherently irrational concept of “faith” is part and parcel of this
archaic Weltanschauung, and it is faith rather than reason that
drives Smith and his fellow eschatologists.
A much more efficient model here, one that owes more to Marx than to
the Bible, is that the “Alien Raj” is an imperialist, exploitative
oppressor, rather than a supernatural phenomenon, as Dan and his
buddies appear to conceive it, despite their rhetoric, that has
managed to impose its will on this planet. To be sure, at present,
this authority is for the most part exercised clandestinely, but ask
any woman whose fetus has been forcibly removed whether this
authority actually exists. Dan dismisses the “Raj’s” DNA harvesting
as trivial, but I think he’s dead wrong here. Whatever else they may
be exploiting, human DNA appears to be the prime target, just as gold
was to the Conquistadors in Mexico and Peru half a millennium ago.
Indeed, the process of hybridization seems to be a central aspect of
their agenda, and, while I don’t take quite as pessimistic a position
David Jacobs does in THE THREAT, as I’m not convinced that they’re
out to totally replace us, it seems abundantly clear that their
agenda is NOT framed in terms of an altruistic effort to “uplift” us
to a “:higher spiritual level,” that is, to realize Dan’s
eschatological fantasies. Rather, like its terrestrial prototype,
the British Raj, its primary purpose is to administer the affairs of
this planet in such a way as to facilitate its imperialist agenda.
Thus, I while I don’t think they’re out to annihilate us—they could
have done so long since—I do think that we’re the “natives” and will
remain such until we manage to overthrow our planetary oppressors,
either through the efforts of a Gandhi-like moral force that appeals
to their “:better” nature (assuming they have one), or, more
probably, by someday getting our hands on enough of their technology
so we can effectively rise up against them. In other words, by
instigating a war of “planetary liberation,” I would, however,
caution against any rash actions here, as the technology we’re up
against makes the gap between Cortes and Moteczuma look
infinitesimal.
Complicating this “liberation” scenario is the high probability that
there exists a cadre of sell-outs, vendidos, as my Latino friends
would call them, who have sold out human autonomy for the
technological “trinkets” I mentioned in my previous post. These
would include the “insiders” Dan mentioned, as well as MJ-12 (or
whatever they call it at the moment), assuming they’re not one and
the same, as well as their counterparts in other highly developed
human societies, such as the U.K., Russia, Japan, and yes Israel,
etc.). I suspect this began with an unratified “treaty” negotiated
by Eisenhower at Edwards AFB in 1954, which, although periodically
modified, has continued in force up to the present. Again, there
are a many analogs in the history of terrestrial colonialism: the
Anglo-Indians, the Vietnamese Catholics, and other subsets of
conquered populations that accommodate to their oppressors in return
for some crumbs from the latters’ table. Indeed, the old
African-American label “Uncle Tom”—perhaps recast as “Uncle Homo
sapiens”—would seem apt here.
Finally, Caryn, as I’ve said before in our correspondence, to the
best of my conscious knowledge, I’ve never had the “pleasure” of
meeting the little buggers up close & personal. But I can certainly
sympathize with what you say here. The fact that you were unable to
perceive whether your captors were here “to save us or eat us!” fits
nicely with the hypothesis I’ve suggested, that is, that they, like
your fellow countrymen in India back in the 19th century, they are
here neither to destroy us nor to “redeem” us (although the British
Raj did have its share of pious missionaries who, when they weren’t
exploiting them, did their best to convert the Hindu and Moslem
“Wogs” to Christianity), but rather simply to exploit us (i.e., our
DNA) and other terrestrial resources they may need or desire.
Cheers,
Scotty
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Smith [mailto:dantsmith@comcast.net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 10:49 AM
To: caryn anscomb; Scott Littleton; Jack Sarfatti; Nick Cook
Cc: Joel Isaacson; Colin Bennett; S-P Sirag; john dering; Warren
Hinckle; Tim Jerome; nancyWerd@aol.com; Randall Stickrod;
Amara@Kurzweilai. Net; RAY HUDSON; John Brandenburg; Dick Farley;
mitc1615@bellsouth.net; RICK DOTY; james norwood pratt; Jagdish Mann;
Constantin Ivanenko; David Gladstone; Gary S. Bekkum
Subject: Smelling a rat....
bcc.
Caryn,
We have insiders and outsiders. If the insiders wish to communicate
with the outsiders, they would naturally use intermediaries. It
appears that I'm being used as an intermediary.
The insiders and the visitors will come out of the closet at the
appropriate time. I am helping them to test the waters. That is
what the EFG is for.
Why don't your entities inform you about their agenda? It is simply
a matter of the Prime Directive, minimal interference.
The main point, however, is that the Eschaton is not their agenda.
It is OUR agenda. The Eschaton is of us, by us and for us. The
visitors are here as helpers. They are here to facilitate our
awakening to our own destiny.
You want to hear all this from the 'horse's mouth'. My purpose here
is to help demonstrate that we are the ultimate source for what has
happened and what is about to. You have come to the 'horse's mouth'
and it is us. Temporarily I am being the spokesperson, the
intermediary in helping us to realize that fundamentally we are the
co-creators of this reality, and we are its redeemers.
I do interpret this role in Christian terms. That is how it was
presented to me by Sophia. This is simply the completion of the
christ event. This is that unfinished business. Sophia is my
'horse's mouth'.
I am facilitating her communication. I'm playing the role of a
prophet. This role is traditionally reserved for mortals, rather
like you and me, not for ETs/UTs/Visitors.
Whatever role I am playing is apparently being overseen by the
insiders, the visitors and Sophia.
Now, Caryn, you are welcome to object to the prophetic tradition and
to my role as a putative prophet, but then you are under some
obligation to come up with a better plan. I'm certainly open to
discuss that, but I think you will end up reinventing this
same wheel.
The sooner that I can obtain a fair hearing from my peers, the sooner
will I be able to ride off into the sunset. So why don't we get onto
the business of discussing the why's and wherefores of all this?
Dan
P.S. I have just received a note from Gary Bekkum pointing to Steve
Greer's Aug. 8/9 interview on the Art Bell show. Here is an
excerpt:
SG: [chuckles] Look, this is - part of this isn't a rational
discussion and
here's why. You have people in this policy group, and there are two
or three
hundred people in it (some people call it the MJ-12 group, it's not
called
that anymore) and I know a number of these people in it.
AB: Do you think it really was once called that?
SG: Yes.
AB: Okay.
SG: What's interesting is that there is a hardcore center of it that
are
eschatologists. Okay? These are people who fantasize about how the
world is
going to end.
---------------------------------
Some folks have been trying to get this same message to Steve, but,
evidently, it is not quite fitting into his paradigm.
PS I had not read the thread that came with Dan's stuff below. Indeed,
I do also agree with Scott that I do not take the theological mish mash
seriously. I suspect neither does Puthoff.
On Sep 15, 2004, at 7:56 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
I have not read the piece by Scott Dan is responding to. However,
Dan's description of post-quantum physics with metric engineering is
accurate. Precision cosmology shows we live in the virtual universe
that is effectively a cosmic video game of IT (material) from BIT
(mind) in a two-way loop including BIT from IT to generate the streams
of consciousness attached to globs of IT. I have shown explicitly how
IT in the form of Einstein's guv field emerges from the coherent phase
of MACRO-BIT, which in turn emerges from an instability in the
micro-qubit vacuum with the local gauge fields and lepto-quark fields
already there. So they need to emerge from a BIT like spin-foam in a 2
step process. Something like loop quantum gravity to get to unstable
globally flat pre-inflationary false vacuum prior to second step
emergence of gravity and inertia.
On the material plane:
1. Hal Puthoff and I have the same strategic objectives. I am saying
his physics to achieve them is seriously wrong. Because of Hal's black
ops connections from way back to National Security Agency his wrong
ideas are leading to USG intelligence threat assessment blunders, that
in the long run, will be worse than the Leo Strauss Utopian Cult Neo
Con blunders on Iraq WMD in Doug Feith's OSP prior to the
ill-conceived attack on Iraq. As Seymour Hersh and Pat Buchanan et-al
put it "Eight or nine Neo Cons" essentially pulled the wool over
Bushie's eyes in the panic of 911 where we have jumped from the frying
pan into the fire. Kerry has no solution either. "What a revolting
development this is." William Bendix. There is no "End Game". Easy to
see now in hindsight, but not 2 years ago.
2.
On Sep 15, 2004, at 6:59 AM, Ken Shoulders wrote:
ELECTRON CONDENSER
by
Ken Shoulders
Abstract
An apparatus is proposed for the condensation of electrons to a
containable fluid state. This miniature apparatus consists of an ion
pumped vacuum system, a split anode magnetron and a quadrupole
electron trap fitted with suitable electron injectors, in the form of
EVO generators, and numerous ways for analyzing the effluent captured
in the trap. The apparatus design emphasizes simplicity and uses only
minimal hand tools for construction. The cost of the easily found
construction materials required is in the range of a few hundred
dollars.
This recent paper can be downloaded from: http://www.svn.net/krscfs/
3. As to zero point energy. It's easy to do the free virtual photon
cavity mode problem exactly. There is no net free virtual photon zero
point force on any wall.
Think of a piston in a cylinder to total length L. The piston is at
distance z from the left wall. There is cylindrical symmetry. All we
need do is think of the virtual photon waves that can fit between 0
and z and between z and L. Each wave that fits has virtual photon
energy hck/2 per polarization mode.
The largest mode that fits in z has wave number k = pi/z.
Each mode has wave number npi/z.
The total number of such modes is simply (z/a)(z/a + 1)/2 where a is
the short-wave cut off and we mean smallest closest integer to z/a.
The total zero point free virtual photon energy for the left partition
between 0 and z is obviously, where z/a >> 1
Sum n = 1 to d/a of (hc/2)(pi/z)n ~ (hc/4)(pi/z)(z/a)^2 = (hc/4a^2)z
linear in z.
Similarly for the right partition between z and L - z
Total free virtual photon ZPE is (hc/4a^2)(L - z)
The total ZPE at the piston is the sum. Whose force total negative
gradient -d/dz is exactly zero independent of cutoff a.
Now this is not what is usually calculated for the Casimir force that
is really a weak Van der Waals force between the neutral molecules
making up the uncharged walls of the cylinder and piston. The weak
Casimir force does not tap the free random totally incoherent virtual
photon ZPF. Calculations that make such a claim are wrong.
On Sep 14, 2004, at 7:28 PM, Dan Smith wrote:
Scott,
Oh, you, of little imagination. For once in your life, see if you
can remove your blinders for but a few seconds.
You cling to your 'rock solid' reality for dear life. Why would
cling so tightly unless you were afraid that it might finally elude
your grasp?
Now you see reality dimly as through a darkened glass, but then you
shall see it face to face.
The visitors are here simply to awaken us from our slumber of
materialism.
Any ufologist worth her salt knows that they can bend our reality to
their will. They see through our thoughts, they walk through our
walls. This is not technology, Scott, this is mind over matter.
This is the unobstructable power of Spirit.
We all know that the visitors do not come here in rocket ships. They
come here by warping our space and our time. Our space and our time,
they bend to their will.
They can transit between universes they way we can transit between
the rooms of a building.
Your attempt to apply 19th century physics to the visitors and their
hyper dimensional reality is really nothing short of grotesque.
Have you never played an arcade game? The younger generation is
being fed on virtual reality, the way you were fed on oatmeal. They
are no longer going to be stuck in the mud of your materialism. They
are being prepared for the other dimensions, the power of the
imagination and spirit that lies just beyond the Green Door in Area
51. They don't call it Dreamland for nothing.
You rail against the larger cosmos. You demand that reality must fit
your Procrustean bed. The visitors make a mockery of your
metaphysical prudery.
Look around you, Scott. Where are your fellow scientists? They are
sufficiently prudent not to pick a fight with the paranormal Tar
Baby. They know they will not win this battle. Nay, they will not
win this war. They continue to fiddle with their formulas while Rome
continues to burn.
Jack and Hal attempt to carve out little pieces of the paranormal.
Their strategy is to divide and conquer. My hat is off to their
perseverance. They stand at the edge of their reality and grasp at
straws. They might as well reap the whirl wind.
We inhabit but a cocoon in the cosmic Matrix. There is a crack in
that cosmic egg. We are trying to peck our way out of the shell.
The visitors are here to show us how.
But first we must marshal our spirit. Perhaps that is where I come
into the picture. There are some mental calisthenics that will help
us to limber up our spirits.
Can you stretch your mind, Scott? Has it become sclerotic?
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Littleton [mailto:yokatta@oxy.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 5:01 PM
To: Dan Smith; caryn anscomb; Jack Sarfatti; Nick Cook
Subject: RE: Smelling a rat....
Hi Caryn, et al.
Let me respond to you and your excellent (and extremely kind)
message, as well as to our resident “prophet” (soi dissant) re his
attempt to put a Christian eschatological spin on the agenda of the
“Alien Raj.” First of all, Saint Daniel’s concept of an “eschaton”
is utterly absurd, no matter who endorses it. Indeed, I seriously
doubt whether either Jack Sarfatti or Hal Puthoff, no matter how at
odds they may be over the arcana of post-quantum physics, or any
other credible physical scientists, for that matter, take this
bizarre theological mishmash seriously. Indeed, the whole notion of
eschatology, Christian and otherwise, reflects an archaic stage in
the evolution of human thought, one that took shape long before our
ancestors had any accurate knowledge whatsoever of how the universe
works. Yes, I’m convinced that all traditional human belief systems,
from animism to Zoroastrianism—which, BTW, is chock full of
eschatological concepts that were already ancient by the time Yeshua
ben Yosuf (aka in Latin Jesus) was “magically” conceived aboard a
hovering UFO, if in fact there’s any glimmer of truth behind the
“virgin birth” legend—are, as the late Mircea Eliade pointed out some
years ago, essentially anthropocentric attempts to turn “Chaos” into
“Cosmos,” to impose an imagined order on what was, given the meager
objective knowledge base available to all pre-modern societies, an
otherwise utterly chaotic existence. Or, as the well-known
Anglo-Polish anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski, whose researches
into the nature of religion were generally isomorphic with Eliade’s,
phased it: If human beings don’t have rational explanations and/or
empirically-based mechanisms that will allow them a modicum of
control over their environment, they will invent them. (Indeed,
Voltaire probably summed up this line of reasoning as succinctly as
anyone who came after him: If there were no God, it would be
necessary to invent one.)
That most, if not traditional human belief systems deeply reflect the
presence of the “Alien Raj” is undoubted. But that presence itself
was an integral part of the pre-modern chaos that, according to
Eliade, et al., engendered religion in the first place. That is,
the aliens came to be conceived of as divine beings, fairly folk,
etc.
The trap that Dan and his fellow “eschaton” mavens have fallen into,
aside from the absurdity of drawing specifically on the dogma of a
single, extremely derivative and highly syncretic religious belief
system that began as what amounted to a Judean “cargo cult” preached
by a figure who was most probably a heavily conditioned an alien
“subject,” is to take seriously the patently mythological concepts
our ancestors used to make sense out of the world. Indeed, the
inherently irrational concept of “faith” is part and parcel of this
archaic Weltanschauung, and it is faith rather than reason that
drives Smith and his fellow eschatologists.
A much more efficient model here, one that owes more to Marx than to
the Bible, is that the “Alien Raj” is an imperialist, exploitative
oppressor, rather than a supernatural phenomenon, as Dan and his
buddies appear to conceive it, despite their rhetoric, that has
managed to impose its will on this planet. To be sure, at present,
this authority is for the most part exercised clandestinely, but ask
any woman whose fetus has been forcibly removed whether this
authority actually exists. Dan dismisses the “Raj’s” DNA harvesting
as trivial, but I think he’s dead wrong here. Whatever else they may
be exploiting, human DNA appears to be the prime target, just as gold
was to the Conquistadors in Mexico and Peru half a millennium ago.
Indeed, the process of hybridization seems to be a central aspect of
their agenda, and, while I don’t take quite as pessimistic a position
David Jacobs does in THE THREAT, as I’m not convinced that they’re
out to totally replace us, it seems abundantly clear that their
agenda is NOT framed in terms of an altruistic effort to “uplift” us
to a “:higher spiritual level,” that is, to realize Dan’s
eschatological fantasies. Rather, like its terrestrial prototype,
the British Raj, its primary purpose is to administer the affairs of
this planet in such a way as to facilitate its imperialist agenda.
Thus, I while I don’t think they’re out to annihilate us—they could
have done so long since—I do think that we’re the “natives” and will
remain such until we manage to overthrow our planetary oppressors,
either through the efforts of a Gandhi-like moral force that appeals
to their “:better” nature (assuming they have one), or, more
probably, by someday getting our hands on enough of their technology
so we can effectively rise up against them. In other words, by
instigating a war of “planetary liberation,” I would, however,
caution against any rash actions here, as the technology we’re up
against makes the gap between Cortes and Moteczuma look
infinitesimal.
Complicating this “liberation” scenario is the high probability that
there exists a cadre of sell-outs, vendidos, as my Latino friends
would call them, who have sold out human autonomy for the
technological “trinkets” I mentioned in my previous post. These
would include the “insiders” Dan mentioned, as well as MJ-12 (or
whatever they call it at the moment), assuming they’re not one and
the same, as well as their counterparts in other highly developed
human societies, such as the U.K., Russia, Japan, and yes Israel,
etc.). I suspect this began with an unratified “treaty” negotiated
by Eisenhower at Edwards AFB in 1954, which, although periodically
modified, has continued in force up to the present. Again, there
are a many analogs in the history of terrestrial colonialism: the
Anglo-Indians, the Vietnamese Catholics, and other subsets of
conquered populations that accommodate to their oppressors in return
for some crumbs from the latters’ table. Indeed, the old
African-American label “Uncle Tom”—perhaps recast as “Uncle Homo
sapiens”—would seem apt here.
Finally, Caryn, as I’ve said before in our correspondence, to the
best of my conscious knowledge, I’ve never had the “pleasure” of
meeting the little buggers up close & personal. But I can certainly
sympathize with what you say here. The fact that you were unable to
perceive whether your captors were here “to save us or eat us!” fits
nicely with the hypothesis I’ve suggested, that is, that they, like
your fellow countrymen in India back in the 19th century, they are
here neither to destroy us nor to “redeem” us (although the British
Raj did have its share of pious missionaries who, when they weren’t
exploiting them, did their best to convert the Hindu and Moslem
“Wogs” to Christianity), but rather simply to exploit us (i.e., our
DNA) and other terrestrial resources they may need or desire.
Cheers,
Scotty
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Smith [mailto:dantsmith@comcast.net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 10:49 AM
To: caryn anscomb; Scott Littleton; Jack Sarfatti; Nick Cook
Cc: Joel Isaacson; Colin Bennett; S-P Sirag; john dering; Warren
Hinckle; Tim Jerome; nancyWerd@aol.com; Randall Stickrod;
Amara@Kurzweilai. Net; RAY HUDSON; John Brandenburg; Dick Farley;
mitc1615@bellsouth.net; RICK DOTY; james norwood pratt; Jagdish Mann;
Constantin Ivanenko; David Gladstone; Gary S. Bekkum
Subject: Smelling a rat....
bcc.
Caryn,
We have insiders and outsiders. If the insiders wish to communicate
with the outsiders, they would naturally use intermediaries. It
appears that I'm being used as an intermediary.
The insiders and the visitors will come out of the closet at the
appropriate time. I am helping them to test the waters. That is
what the EFG is for.
Why don't your entities inform you about their agenda? It is simply
a matter of the Prime Directive, minimal interference.
The main point, however, is that the Eschaton is not their agenda.
It is OUR agenda. The Eschaton is of us, by us and for us. The
visitors are here as helpers. They are here to facilitate our
awakening to our own destiny.
You want to hear all this from the 'horse's mouth'. My purpose here
is to help demonstrate that we are the ultimate source for what has
happened and what is about to. You have come to the 'horse's mouth'
and it is us. Temporarily I am being the spokesperson, the
intermediary in helping us to realize that fundamentally we are the
co-creators of this reality, and we are its redeemers.
I do interpret this role in Christian terms. That is how it was
presented to me by Sophia. This is simply the completion of the
christ event. This is that unfinished business. Sophia is my
'horse's mouth'.
I am facilitating her communication. I'm playing the role of a
prophet. This role is traditionally reserved for mortals, rather
like you and me, not for ETs/UTs/Visitors.
Whatever role I am playing is apparently being overseen by the
insiders, the visitors and Sophia.
Now, Caryn, you are welcome to object to the prophetic tradition and
to my role as a putative prophet, but then you are under some
obligation to come up with a better plan. I'm certainly open to
discuss that, but I think you will end up reinventing this
same wheel.
The sooner that I can obtain a fair hearing from my peers, the sooner
will I be able to ride off into the sunset. So why don't we get onto
the business of discussing the why's and wherefores of all this?
Dan
P.S. I have just received a note from Gary Bekkum pointing to Steve
Greer's Aug. 8/9 interview on the Art Bell show. Here is an
excerpt:
SG: [chuckles] Look, this is - part of this isn't a rational
discussion and
here's why. You have people in this policy group, and there are two
or three
hundred people in it (some people call it the MJ-12 group, it's not
called
that anymore) and I know a number of these people in it.
AB: Do you think it really was once called that?
SG: Yes.
AB: Okay.
SG: What's interesting is that there is a hardcore center of it that
are
eschatologists. Okay? These are people who fantasize about how the
world is
going to end.
---------------------------------
Some folks have been trying to get this same message to Steve, but,
evidently, it is not quite fitting into his paradigm.
Sunday, September 12, 2004
On Sep 12, 2004, at 4:06 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
New from Kim Burrafato http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,5014153-110878,00.html
On Sep 12, 2004, at 3:17 PM, Colin Bennett wrote:
Jack, you must really keep on writing like this. This is a new textual
form. I call it “signal system” prose. It is a cyber style suitable for the
web, analogous to music yet aware of techno, etc. It is science and
history, culture and personality, facts synthesizing fictions a vice versa.
I am sure that a lot of lurkers are listening to these broadcasts of yours
as people used to gather around big valve radios in the village square.
It is very Joycean – history and vision and cracks about hill-billies,
cargo-cult psycho-babble (how Joyce would have loved that phrase)
and the pony and trap brigade in the middle of the maths and the
claims to be a re-born god. No wonder the distraught Mr Farley and
poor Mr Ibison are a mite baffled and breathless with it all. With Scott
Littleton, Dan Smith, and d1494@copper.net forming an erudite Greek
chorus on occasion, we have here a kind of modern cyber-sonata-form
emerging. One only hope that soon the equally awesome Grenville Croll
will choose to make a contribution. As you will see from our re-broadcast
of "Sarfatti's Illuminati" we are doing our best to spread the word. As for
Dan Smith's UFO Aviary Iluminati Eschaton Meeting in DC (oh what a
four-in-one there is there!), our editors are preparing this broadcast as I
speak.
Colin
HQ Combat Diaries
Portobello Road
London
New from Kim Burrafato http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,5014153-110878,00.html
On Sep 12, 2004, at 3:17 PM, Colin Bennett wrote:
Jack, you must really keep on writing like this. This is a new textual
form. I call it “signal system” prose. It is a cyber style suitable for the
web, analogous to music yet aware of techno, etc. It is science and
history, culture and personality, facts synthesizing fictions a vice versa.
I am sure that a lot of lurkers are listening to these broadcasts of yours
as people used to gather around big valve radios in the village square.
It is very Joycean – history and vision and cracks about hill-billies,
cargo-cult psycho-babble (how Joyce would have loved that phrase)
and the pony and trap brigade in the middle of the maths and the
claims to be a re-born god. No wonder the distraught Mr Farley and
poor Mr Ibison are a mite baffled and breathless with it all. With Scott
Littleton, Dan Smith, and d1494@copper.net forming an erudite Greek
chorus on occasion, we have here a kind of modern cyber-sonata-form
emerging. One only hope that soon the equally awesome Grenville Croll
will choose to make a contribution. As you will see from our re-broadcast
of "Sarfatti's Illuminati" we are doing our best to spread the word. As for
Dan Smith's UFO Aviary Iluminati Eschaton Meeting in DC (oh what a
four-in-one there is there!), our editors are preparing this broadcast as I
speak.
Colin
HQ Combat Diaries
Portobello Road
London
On Sep 12, 2004, at 6:19 PM, main_engineering wrote:
Jack: Now you can do the problem for two concentric spheres and see if it is
topologically equivalent to the cylinder problem with the movable
piston inside.
Thank you! I'll work on it.
Actually I did it in last message - same story.
Milonni uses a rectangular cavity in chapter 2, sec. 2.7 to derive the
Casimir force. It is much easier than your cylinder with a piston. Where is
the error in his calculation?
His calculation is overly-complicated with lots of fudge factors. I am leaving for a week and will look at it in detail when I get back. Oh! Aha! I see! He asks the wrong question. Milonni does not include the modes outside the plates. Rather he uses
U(x) - U(infinity) where x = separation between the plates.
This is the conceptual error since what he should do is compare
-dU(x)/dx with -dU(L - x)/dx at x.
That is, the correct thing to calculate is not
U(x) - U(infinity)
But is
U(x) + U(L - x)
With the total ZPF force at x from both sides
-(d/dx)[U(x) + U(L - x)] = 0
"The Question is: What is The Question?" John A. Wheeler
The exact FREE PHOTON FIELD calculation with no real on-mass-shell charges, i.e. interaction j.A = 0, has
U(x) linear in x and U(L - x) linear in L - x with the SAME coefficients!
I now use 3 plates one at 0, one at x and one at L, and look at the ZPF forces on the plate at x from the virtual photons between 0 and x (inside region) and between x and L (outside region).
I compute U(x) and U(L - x) exactly from a finite series and I find that
F(from between the plates on one plate) = dU(x)/dx = -dU(L - x)/dx = - F(from outside the plates on that same one plate).
Therefore, the net ZPF force (not to be misidentified with the Casimir force) on the given plate from FINITE NUMBERS of both the inside and outside free virtual photon discrete cavity modes adds to zero exactly.
Also by exact counting of FINITE number of modes
U(x) = A(hc/a^2)x
U(L - x) = A(hc/a^2)(L - x)
Where a is the short-wave cutoff and L is the long-wave cut off.
Since the total ZPF force adds to zero exactly on each plate, it does not matter that the separate contributions to the ZPF force go to infinity as the short-wave cutoff goes to zero. The long-wave cutoff L is irrelevant to the ZPF force on the plate at x.
The VdW Casimir force BETWEEN TWO NEUTRAL MOLECULES is an entirely different problem. What you have are sheets of these molecules making up the plates and you need to integrate over the plates to wind up with the Casimir force
Note that Milonni computes
Total Casimir Force = - (pi^2hc/240x^4)(AREA OF PLATES)
In contrast A. Zee computes for this same problem
pihc/24x^2 with no area dependence!
Therefore, the two mainstream pundits do not even agree with each other!
Probably Milonni's is closer to experiment - but the techniques used in both cases are wrong.
The only right way to do it is to explicitly compute the VdW force using the actual electron-photon interaction. You cannot do it correctly using only free photon quantum field theory without any j.A coupling - that is my main point.
My claim is that when you do use ONLY free photon quantum field theory without any explicit j.A coupling then the net ZPF force is exactly ZERO and it is not the VdW Casimir force that has a qualitatively different origin.
He too sums the modes within a cavity of volume V = d*L^2, where L^2 is the
area of "plates" at the ends of the cavity and d is their separation, to
find the energy. He simply takes the difference in the energies contained in
the cavity, between when d is large and when d is small and then takes the
gradient wrt d. Pressure exerted from outside is NOT even included in this
problem. It deals solely with the allowed frequency modes contained in the
cavity as a function of d.
If I use his calculation and consider a cube (square cylinder) of length L
with a movable piston inside, then I get the energies,
U(d) = -((pi^2*hc)/(720*d^3))*L^2 (Milonni 2.108)
U(L-d) = -((pi^2*hc)/(720*(L-d)^3))*L^2
The force per unit area on the piston does not cancel out!
F(d) = (pi^2*hc)/(240*d^4)
F(L-d) = -(pi^2*hc)/(240*(L-d)^4)
His method is independent of the high freq. cutoff where yours is not.
The only difference between this and your original piston in a cylinder is
that the cross section of the cylinder is square instead of round. The force
is due to a negative energy density inside (fewer allowed modes inside), not
a positive pressure from outside.
main_engineering
Jack: Now you can do the problem for two concentric spheres and see if it is
topologically equivalent to the cylinder problem with the movable
piston inside.
Thank you! I'll work on it.
Actually I did it in last message - same story.
Milonni uses a rectangular cavity in chapter 2, sec. 2.7 to derive the
Casimir force. It is much easier than your cylinder with a piston. Where is
the error in his calculation?
His calculation is overly-complicated with lots of fudge factors. I am leaving for a week and will look at it in detail when I get back. Oh! Aha! I see! He asks the wrong question. Milonni does not include the modes outside the plates. Rather he uses
U(x) - U(infinity) where x = separation between the plates.
This is the conceptual error since what he should do is compare
-dU(x)/dx with -dU(L - x)/dx at x.
That is, the correct thing to calculate is not
U(x) - U(infinity)
But is
U(x) + U(L - x)
With the total ZPF force at x from both sides
-(d/dx)[U(x) + U(L - x)] = 0
"The Question is: What is The Question?" John A. Wheeler
The exact FREE PHOTON FIELD calculation with no real on-mass-shell charges, i.e. interaction j.A = 0, has
U(x) linear in x and U(L - x) linear in L - x with the SAME coefficients!
I now use 3 plates one at 0, one at x and one at L, and look at the ZPF forces on the plate at x from the virtual photons between 0 and x (inside region) and between x and L (outside region).
I compute U(x) and U(L - x) exactly from a finite series and I find that
F(from between the plates on one plate) = dU(x)/dx = -dU(L - x)/dx = - F(from outside the plates on that same one plate).
Therefore, the net ZPF force (not to be misidentified with the Casimir force) on the given plate from FINITE NUMBERS of both the inside and outside free virtual photon discrete cavity modes adds to zero exactly.
Also by exact counting of FINITE number of modes
U(x) = A(hc/a^2)x
U(L - x) = A(hc/a^2)(L - x)
Where a is the short-wave cutoff and L is the long-wave cut off.
Since the total ZPF force adds to zero exactly on each plate, it does not matter that the separate contributions to the ZPF force go to infinity as the short-wave cutoff goes to zero. The long-wave cutoff L is irrelevant to the ZPF force on the plate at x.
The VdW Casimir force BETWEEN TWO NEUTRAL MOLECULES is an entirely different problem. What you have are sheets of these molecules making up the plates and you need to integrate over the plates to wind up with the Casimir force
Note that Milonni computes
Total Casimir Force = - (pi^2hc/240x^4)(AREA OF PLATES)
In contrast A. Zee computes for this same problem
pihc/24x^2 with no area dependence!
Therefore, the two mainstream pundits do not even agree with each other!
Probably Milonni's is closer to experiment - but the techniques used in both cases are wrong.
The only right way to do it is to explicitly compute the VdW force using the actual electron-photon interaction. You cannot do it correctly using only free photon quantum field theory without any j.A coupling - that is my main point.
My claim is that when you do use ONLY free photon quantum field theory without any explicit j.A coupling then the net ZPF force is exactly ZERO and it is not the VdW Casimir force that has a qualitatively different origin.
He too sums the modes within a cavity of volume V = d*L^2, where L^2 is the
area of "plates" at the ends of the cavity and d is their separation, to
find the energy. He simply takes the difference in the energies contained in
the cavity, between when d is large and when d is small and then takes the
gradient wrt d. Pressure exerted from outside is NOT even included in this
problem. It deals solely with the allowed frequency modes contained in the
cavity as a function of d.
If I use his calculation and consider a cube (square cylinder) of length L
with a movable piston inside, then I get the energies,
U(d) = -((pi^2*hc)/(720*d^3))*L^2 (Milonni 2.108)
U(L-d) = -((pi^2*hc)/(720*(L-d)^3))*L^2
The force per unit area on the piston does not cancel out!
F(d) = (pi^2*hc)/(240*d^4)
F(L-d) = -(pi^2*hc)/(240*(L-d)^4)
His method is independent of the high freq. cutoff where yours is not.
The only difference between this and your original piston in a cylinder is
that the cross section of the cylinder is square instead of round. The force
is due to a negative energy density inside (fewer allowed modes inside), not
a positive pressure from outside.
main_engineering
OK I will say this most politely, or, rather, "collegially". ;-)
Read sections 7.1 and 7.2 in Milonni, quote..
"In attempting to better understand this result, Casimir found that the van
der Waals interaction could be attributed to the change in the zero point
energy of the field due to the presence of the two atoms, much as in
Feynman's later argument for the Lamb shift. He then considered the simpler
example of two parallel conducting plates... (pg. 218)
Jack: Yes, that is precisely my point. The key words are "THE CHANGE in the zero point energy due to the presence of the two atoms. There are NO ATOMS in my EXACT CALCULATION using ONLY THE FREE EM FIELD with boundary conditions. It is not however any effect of FREE EM FIELDS WITHOUT THAT INTERACTION! That's the point you keep missing!
On Sep 12, 2004, at 1:34 PM, main_engineering wrote:
Todd: Sorry, I did not catch that distinction before. So you disagree on what the
ZPF spectral energy density is?
Jack: No. You are thinking sloppy with too loose associations. Your statements are ill-posed. ZPF spectral energy density in what kind of situation?
Your method of calculating ZPEnergy by finite series will not give you the
well known spectral energy density,
rho(w) = (hbar*w^3)/(2*pi^2c^3) = (hbar*k^3)/(2*pi^2)
will it? As on pg. 49 in Milonni?
No, because there two distinct physical situations here. I did a cylindrical symmetry cavity problem that essentially is a good approximation to the flat plates. You could also try spherical symmetry.
The usual mode density for isotropic 3D space takes a shell in momentum space of radius p and thickness dp. The volume of this Euclidean shell is obviously 4pip^2dp. The total phase space volume is then
4pip^2dpV. The total number of cells of phase space in this shell is then (3 polarizations for virtual photons not 2)
dN = 12pip^2dpV/h^3
Therefore
dN/V = 12pip^2dp/h^3
Each virtual photon has energy pc/2
Virtual photon energy density is then (pc/2)dN/V - 6pip^3dp/h^3
But you are making an unjustified CONTINUUM APPROXIMATION if you do a Riemann integral to get
Virtual photon energy density ~ (3/2)cp(Max)^4/h^3 (Energy/Volume)
Where you integrate from p(Min) = 0 to p(Max) = h/a
Your p(Min) already assumes an INFINITE LONG WAVE CUTOFF! So it does not work exactly for a FINITE CAVITY!
Imagine a large sphere in 3D of radius R whose surface is an electrically neutral metal conductor.
What is the volume of the phase space for electromagnetic field modes?
Put in the adhoc short-wave cutoff a.
The longest wave that will fit is 4R.
The shortest wave that will fit is ~ a.
Ignore different polarizations for now to keep the math simple.
The largest spherical wave number that will fit is
k(Max) ~ (R/a)2pi/R = 2pi/a
I may be off by a factor of 2 or 4 here. Will look at it more carefully later.
Notice that R cancels out of the problem for k(Max).
The total volume of phase space per polarization state for these modes in flat space is therefore
(4pi/3)R^3(4pi/3)(1/a)^3 = (16pi^2/9)(R/a)^3
Therefore, the total number of allowed spherical modes here is
N = (48pi^2/9)(R/a)^3 = (48pi^2/9)(R/a)^3
because there are 3 independent virtual photon polarizations for spin 1 imposed by local U(1) gauge symmetry on the phase of the charged sources.
R = long-wave cutoff
a = short-wave cutoff
The total number of modes for FREE virtual photons.
N(virtual photons) = (48pi^2/9)(Long-Wave Cutoff/Short-Wave Cutoff)^3
in sense of nearest integer with a small round-off error.
However, I have made the same careless error AS ABOVE of including infinitely long waves here by using Euclid's continuum geometry for the volume of a sphere in continuous space! I have inconsistently neglected the DISCRETE boundary conditions on the allowed spherical waves! Physicists do this sloppy all the time! They are Onanites when they do this! :-)
Now you can do the problem for two concentric spheres and see if it is topologically equivalent to the cylinder problem with the movable piston inside.
Back to a thin shell
The allowed spherical wave numbers are
k{n} = npi/R
n = 1 to N(max) = 4R/a (nearest integer)
Therefore, the total ZPF virtual photon energy is
Sum from n = 1 to ~ R/a of (hc/2)(pi/2R)n
= (hc/4)(pi/2R)(R/a)(R/a + 1) --> (hc/4a)(R/a)
where R >> a.
This is essentially same problem as before. It also works for spherical cavities!
With 2 concentric cavities you have inner radius r and outer radius R.
What you want is -d/dr to get the CONSTANT free virtual photon ZPF force that IS NOT, I repeat, IS NOT, the Casimir VDW force! There are no real charges here in the problem! The VDW problem is a different more complicated problem.
"ZPF FORCE" =/= "Casimir Force" = "VDW Force"
The FREE VIRTUAL PHOTON ZPF Force is ~ hc/4a^2 = hc/4(Short-Wave Cutoff)^2
But it is same in magnitude and opposite in direction on both sides of each sphere in a set of concentric spheres.
That is on each spherical surface the total ZPF Force = 0 independent of Short-Wave Cutoff!
What about for EXPANDING SPACE OF UNIVERSE?
There the analogy breaks down because there is NO OUTSIDE of the UNIVERSE and there is work done by the guv metric field such that
w(virtual quanta of all types) = (Vacuum Pressure/Vacuum Energy Density) = -1
in order to reconcile Einstein's general relativity of gravity with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle as shown by John Peacock in "Cosmological Physics" ~ p. 26
The introduction of VACUUM COHERENCE missing from above will make some differences i.e. new phenomena not previously anticipated. However, I have never said that the observed VDW Casimir force between flat plates has anything at all to do with this NEW VACUUM COHERENCE EFFECT. It does not. Puthoff is not even in the right ball park to claim that Ken Shoulders charge clusters are explained by the VDW Casimir force. That is obvious nonsense since the unbalanced charge -Ne of the EVO cluster is not like the VDW force between two NEUTRAL molecules! The EVO stability is a genuinely new mesoscopic exotic vacuum coherence phenomenon completely under Puthoff's radar. Tweaking that stability will lead to micro-fusion energy sources including weapons like new kinds of powerful bombs unfortunately - in my opinion at this time. I could be wrong of course, but don't bet on that.
On Sep 12, 2004, at 12:34 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote to Main Engineering:
Todd,
I AM SAYING THE CASIMIR FORCE IS THE VAN DER WAALS FORCE!
IT IS NOT THE ZPF FORCE!
On Sep 12, 2004, at 12:18 PM, main_engineering wrote:
Read sections 7.1 and 7.2 in Milonni, quote..
"In attempting to better understand this result, Casimir found that the van
der Waals interaction could be attributed to the change in the zero point
energy of the field due to the presence of the two atoms, much as in
Feynman's later argument for the Lamb shift. He then considered the simpler
example of two parallel conducting plates... (pg. 218)
Yes, that is precisely my point. The key words are "THE CHANGE in the zero point energy due to the presence of the two atoms. There are NO ATOMS in my EXACT CALCULATION using ONLY THE FREE EM FIELD with boundary conditions.
It is not however any effect of FREE EM FIELDS WITHOUT THAT INTERACTION! That's the point you keep missing!
and on pg. 220-221
"...motivated Lifshitz (1956) to develop a macroscopic theory of the forces
between dielectrics. His results reduce to those of the microscopic theory
with additive intermolecular forces when the dielectric constants are close
to unity, but are substantially different otherwise. In the limiting case of
perfect conductors, the predicted force between two plates reduces to the
Casimir force (7.1). Except for a few details discussed in the following
chapter, the Lifshitz theory is now generally accepted and, as we shall see,
has been supported by some careful experiments."
Nothing I do contradicts that.
It seems to me that Milonni is saying that the van der Waals force is in
fact responsible for the Casimir effect AND vice-versa, and that Lifshitz's
macroscopic theory of intermolecular (van der Waals) forces and the Casimir
effect are one in the same.
THAT'S WHAT I AM SAYING! You keep missing the significant distinction! What you cite is not the free-field completely random virtual photon ZPF force!
Now, in your "exact calculation" you are deriving the force on each side of
the piston by finding the gradient. The gradients are equal on both sides,
no doubt. However, the energy density on each side of the piston is not
identical. The longer side of the partitioned cylinder has more energy
density because it permits more modes to exist in that volume. The energy
density exerts a ZPF pressure on the piston that is not equal on both sides
and leads to the Casimir force. Your force is proportional to 1/a^2 where
"a" is your high end cut-off. Where as, the Casimir force is proportional to
1/d^4 where "d" is the separation between the plates. To my knowledge, this
has been confirmed empirically.
What you say here is completely false as my complete mathematics showed. Let's see your math of back up this false hand waving. The longer side does have more total EXTENSIVE FREE virtual photon energy because it can fit more modes, but it has exactly the same INTENSIVE FREE virtual photon energy density since you need to divide by the bigger volume and the two effects exactly cancel when you do the sum over the modes correctly. Also note, there is not a molecule in sight here. When you stick them in and do the full QED you get the correct VDW answer.
On Sep 12, 2004, at 12:18 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
PS Hal Puthoff also wrote:
In summary, we see how Casimir's positive-radiation-pressure
"blunder" model leads to agreement with experiment; we don't see how
your opposite-sign dark-energy w = -1 repulsion force model would
lead to the observed attraction. Please show this. If you can show
this for the standard parallel plate Casimir Effect, then
consideration of its use for more exotic geometries (e.g., Shoulders'
charge cluster phenomenon) would be warranted. If not .....
As I just showed in detail, the bogus mode-counting argument rests on a strange fluke using that ad hoc exponential fudge factor for short-wave cutoff that allows the exact sum of an infinite series of ZPF FREE FIELD virtual photon modes that SYNCHRONISTICALLY gives the correct Van Der Waals force answer, but for entirely the wrong physical reasons! I admit this is very curious and it has thrown ALL OF US way off base for more than 50 years. Even I fell for this BLUNDER!
In fact, the real problem for the ZPF FORCE is completely FINITE as I showed in detail today.
Again lest there be no confusion in this very confused situation.
1. The observed Casimir force is NOT a free virtual photon ZPF force at all. That ZPF force (not to be confused with the Van der Waals (VDW) Casimir force) always cancels out exactly! That it is zero, for vanishing vacuum coherence, which you assume, is CUTOFF INDEPENDENT.
2. The VDW Casimir force plays no important role in Ken Shoulders "charge cluster" EVOs.
3. The EVOs are a micro-fusion dark energy zero point energy effect from variation in the vacuum coherence completely missing in ALL your models of the phenomena.
4. I never claimed that the observed Casimir force, e.g. in the parallel plates experiment, had anything to do with dark energy. That is your misunderstanding of what I have been trying to teach you.
5. Your most recent Casimir force explanation of EVOs is wrong.
6. What you say in Nick Cook's book "The Hunt for Zero Point" and in Aviation Week's "To The Stars" is seriously wrong and throws everyone off the track.
Read sections 7.1 and 7.2 in Milonni, quote..
"In attempting to better understand this result, Casimir found that the van
der Waals interaction could be attributed to the change in the zero point
energy of the field due to the presence of the two atoms, much as in
Feynman's later argument for the Lamb shift. He then considered the simpler
example of two parallel conducting plates... (pg. 218)
Jack: Yes, that is precisely my point. The key words are "THE CHANGE in the zero point energy due to the presence of the two atoms. There are NO ATOMS in my EXACT CALCULATION using ONLY THE FREE EM FIELD with boundary conditions. It is not however any effect of FREE EM FIELDS WITHOUT THAT INTERACTION! That's the point you keep missing!
On Sep 12, 2004, at 1:34 PM, main_engineering wrote:
Todd: Sorry, I did not catch that distinction before. So you disagree on what the
ZPF spectral energy density is?
Jack: No. You are thinking sloppy with too loose associations. Your statements are ill-posed. ZPF spectral energy density in what kind of situation?
Your method of calculating ZPEnergy by finite series will not give you the
well known spectral energy density,
rho(w) = (hbar*w^3)/(2*pi^2c^3) = (hbar*k^3)/(2*pi^2)
will it? As on pg. 49 in Milonni?
No, because there two distinct physical situations here. I did a cylindrical symmetry cavity problem that essentially is a good approximation to the flat plates. You could also try spherical symmetry.
The usual mode density for isotropic 3D space takes a shell in momentum space of radius p and thickness dp. The volume of this Euclidean shell is obviously 4pip^2dp. The total phase space volume is then
4pip^2dpV. The total number of cells of phase space in this shell is then (3 polarizations for virtual photons not 2)
dN = 12pip^2dpV/h^3
Therefore
dN/V = 12pip^2dp/h^3
Each virtual photon has energy pc/2
Virtual photon energy density is then (pc/2)dN/V - 6pip^3dp/h^3
But you are making an unjustified CONTINUUM APPROXIMATION if you do a Riemann integral to get
Virtual photon energy density ~ (3/2)cp(Max)^4/h^3 (Energy/Volume)
Where you integrate from p(Min) = 0 to p(Max) = h/a
Your p(Min) already assumes an INFINITE LONG WAVE CUTOFF! So it does not work exactly for a FINITE CAVITY!
Imagine a large sphere in 3D of radius R whose surface is an electrically neutral metal conductor.
What is the volume of the phase space for electromagnetic field modes?
Put in the adhoc short-wave cutoff a.
The longest wave that will fit is 4R.
The shortest wave that will fit is ~ a.
Ignore different polarizations for now to keep the math simple.
The largest spherical wave number that will fit is
k(Max) ~ (R/a)2pi/R = 2pi/a
I may be off by a factor of 2 or 4 here. Will look at it more carefully later.
Notice that R cancels out of the problem for k(Max).
The total volume of phase space per polarization state for these modes in flat space is therefore
(4pi/3)R^3(4pi/3)(1/a)^3 = (16pi^2/9)(R/a)^3
Therefore, the total number of allowed spherical modes here is
N = (48pi^2/9)(R/a)^3 = (48pi^2/9)(R/a)^3
because there are 3 independent virtual photon polarizations for spin 1 imposed by local U(1) gauge symmetry on the phase of the charged sources.
R = long-wave cutoff
a = short-wave cutoff
The total number of modes for FREE virtual photons.
N(virtual photons) = (48pi^2/9)(Long-Wave Cutoff/Short-Wave Cutoff)^3
in sense of nearest integer with a small round-off error.
However, I have made the same careless error AS ABOVE of including infinitely long waves here by using Euclid's continuum geometry for the volume of a sphere in continuous space! I have inconsistently neglected the DISCRETE boundary conditions on the allowed spherical waves! Physicists do this sloppy all the time! They are Onanites when they do this! :-)
Now you can do the problem for two concentric spheres and see if it is topologically equivalent to the cylinder problem with the movable piston inside.
Back to a thin shell
The allowed spherical wave numbers are
k{n} = npi/R
n = 1 to N(max) = 4R/a (nearest integer)
Therefore, the total ZPF virtual photon energy is
Sum from n = 1 to ~ R/a of (hc/2)(pi/2R)n
= (hc/4)(pi/2R)(R/a)(R/a + 1) --> (hc/4a)(R/a)
where R >> a.
This is essentially same problem as before. It also works for spherical cavities!
With 2 concentric cavities you have inner radius r and outer radius R.
What you want is -d/dr to get the CONSTANT free virtual photon ZPF force that IS NOT, I repeat, IS NOT, the Casimir VDW force! There are no real charges here in the problem! The VDW problem is a different more complicated problem.
"ZPF FORCE" =/= "Casimir Force" = "VDW Force"
The FREE VIRTUAL PHOTON ZPF Force is ~ hc/4a^2 = hc/4(Short-Wave Cutoff)^2
But it is same in magnitude and opposite in direction on both sides of each sphere in a set of concentric spheres.
That is on each spherical surface the total ZPF Force = 0 independent of Short-Wave Cutoff!
What about for EXPANDING SPACE OF UNIVERSE?
There the analogy breaks down because there is NO OUTSIDE of the UNIVERSE and there is work done by the guv metric field such that
w(virtual quanta of all types) = (Vacuum Pressure/Vacuum Energy Density) = -1
in order to reconcile Einstein's general relativity of gravity with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle as shown by John Peacock in "Cosmological Physics" ~ p. 26
The introduction of VACUUM COHERENCE missing from above will make some differences i.e. new phenomena not previously anticipated. However, I have never said that the observed VDW Casimir force between flat plates has anything at all to do with this NEW VACUUM COHERENCE EFFECT. It does not. Puthoff is not even in the right ball park to claim that Ken Shoulders charge clusters are explained by the VDW Casimir force. That is obvious nonsense since the unbalanced charge -Ne of the EVO cluster is not like the VDW force between two NEUTRAL molecules! The EVO stability is a genuinely new mesoscopic exotic vacuum coherence phenomenon completely under Puthoff's radar. Tweaking that stability will lead to micro-fusion energy sources including weapons like new kinds of powerful bombs unfortunately - in my opinion at this time. I could be wrong of course, but don't bet on that.
On Sep 12, 2004, at 12:34 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote to Main Engineering:
Todd,
I AM SAYING THE CASIMIR FORCE IS THE VAN DER WAALS FORCE!
IT IS NOT THE ZPF FORCE!
On Sep 12, 2004, at 12:18 PM, main_engineering wrote:
Read sections 7.1 and 7.2 in Milonni, quote..
"In attempting to better understand this result, Casimir found that the van
der Waals interaction could be attributed to the change in the zero point
energy of the field due to the presence of the two atoms, much as in
Feynman's later argument for the Lamb shift. He then considered the simpler
example of two parallel conducting plates... (pg. 218)
Yes, that is precisely my point. The key words are "THE CHANGE in the zero point energy due to the presence of the two atoms. There are NO ATOMS in my EXACT CALCULATION using ONLY THE FREE EM FIELD with boundary conditions.
It is not however any effect of FREE EM FIELDS WITHOUT THAT INTERACTION! That's the point you keep missing!
and on pg. 220-221
"...motivated Lifshitz (1956) to develop a macroscopic theory of the forces
between dielectrics. His results reduce to those of the microscopic theory
with additive intermolecular forces when the dielectric constants are close
to unity, but are substantially different otherwise. In the limiting case of
perfect conductors, the predicted force between two plates reduces to the
Casimir force (7.1). Except for a few details discussed in the following
chapter, the Lifshitz theory is now generally accepted and, as we shall see,
has been supported by some careful experiments."
Nothing I do contradicts that.
It seems to me that Milonni is saying that the van der Waals force is in
fact responsible for the Casimir effect AND vice-versa, and that Lifshitz's
macroscopic theory of intermolecular (van der Waals) forces and the Casimir
effect are one in the same.
THAT'S WHAT I AM SAYING! You keep missing the significant distinction! What you cite is not the free-field completely random virtual photon ZPF force!
Now, in your "exact calculation" you are deriving the force on each side of
the piston by finding the gradient. The gradients are equal on both sides,
no doubt. However, the energy density on each side of the piston is not
identical. The longer side of the partitioned cylinder has more energy
density because it permits more modes to exist in that volume. The energy
density exerts a ZPF pressure on the piston that is not equal on both sides
and leads to the Casimir force. Your force is proportional to 1/a^2 where
"a" is your high end cut-off. Where as, the Casimir force is proportional to
1/d^4 where "d" is the separation between the plates. To my knowledge, this
has been confirmed empirically.
What you say here is completely false as my complete mathematics showed. Let's see your math of back up this false hand waving. The longer side does have more total EXTENSIVE FREE virtual photon energy because it can fit more modes, but it has exactly the same INTENSIVE FREE virtual photon energy density since you need to divide by the bigger volume and the two effects exactly cancel when you do the sum over the modes correctly. Also note, there is not a molecule in sight here. When you stick them in and do the full QED you get the correct VDW answer.
On Sep 12, 2004, at 12:18 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
PS Hal Puthoff also wrote:
In summary, we see how Casimir's positive-radiation-pressure
"blunder" model leads to agreement with experiment; we don't see how
your opposite-sign dark-energy w = -1 repulsion force model would
lead to the observed attraction. Please show this. If you can show
this for the standard parallel plate Casimir Effect, then
consideration of its use for more exotic geometries (e.g., Shoulders'
charge cluster phenomenon) would be warranted. If not .....
As I just showed in detail, the bogus mode-counting argument rests on a strange fluke using that ad hoc exponential fudge factor for short-wave cutoff that allows the exact sum of an infinite series of ZPF FREE FIELD virtual photon modes that SYNCHRONISTICALLY gives the correct Van Der Waals force answer, but for entirely the wrong physical reasons! I admit this is very curious and it has thrown ALL OF US way off base for more than 50 years. Even I fell for this BLUNDER!
In fact, the real problem for the ZPF FORCE is completely FINITE as I showed in detail today.
Again lest there be no confusion in this very confused situation.
1. The observed Casimir force is NOT a free virtual photon ZPF force at all. That ZPF force (not to be confused with the Van der Waals (VDW) Casimir force) always cancels out exactly! That it is zero, for vanishing vacuum coherence, which you assume, is CUTOFF INDEPENDENT.
2. The VDW Casimir force plays no important role in Ken Shoulders "charge cluster" EVOs.
3. The EVOs are a micro-fusion dark energy zero point energy effect from variation in the vacuum coherence completely missing in ALL your models of the phenomena.
4. I never claimed that the observed Casimir force, e.g. in the parallel plates experiment, had anything to do with dark energy. That is your misunderstanding of what I have been trying to teach you.
5. Your most recent Casimir force explanation of EVOs is wrong.
6. What you say in Nick Cook's book "The Hunt for Zero Point" and in Aviation Week's "To The Stars" is seriously wrong and throws everyone off the track.
On Sep 12, 2004, at 12:59 PM, Joel Isaacson wrote:
From: Jack Sarfatti
To: "Joel Isaacson"
CC: Colin Bennett
Subject: Re: Proof of Sarfatti's PhD in physics from UC
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 10:25:41 -0700
bcc
No, Magali Sarfatti is my not-too-distant cousin.
Use "Jack Sarfatt" without the i.
I did not officially use the i until 1975.
On further thought, this Yud may be more significant than meets
the eye... first, note that that "epsilon" caught my attention before, on August 20:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From : Joel Isaacson
Sent : Friday, August 20, 2004 8:33 PM
To : Sarfatti@pacbell.net
Subject : "Sarfatti" off by an epsilon...
There is an ancient Hebrew saying: "Al kotzo shel Yud" which means, roughly,
"by the shred of a Yud". This saying applies when something is very-nearly
that which is could be, but falls short somehow...
Yud is the tiniest letter of the Hebrew alphabet, the 10th. Its Atbash
dual is Mem. Yud is the last letter of Sarfatti: Tsadi-Reish-Pe-Tav-Yud
If we apply Atbash to the entire Sarfatti name (rather than to every other letter,
as we have done before) we get: Heh-Gimel-Vav-Aleph-Mem,
pronounced "Ha'Goem" or "Ha'Guam". The last letter, Mem, is one letter
removed from Lamed, which precedes it in the Hebrew alphabet.
If Lamed were to show up, instead of Mem, the full-Atbash-Sarfatti-code
would spell Heh-Gimel-Vav-Aleph-Lamed ==>>> Ha'Goel,
which means {brace yourself} "The Redeemer" or "The Savior"...
That would explain why Robert Bashlow, Walter Breen's 14 year old assistant, wrote a song for me in 1954
"Oh Crucify Me On The Lone Prairie."
Bashlow died in a hotel fire in Saragossa, Spain after leaving his Orphic Lute at Gary Zukav's house where I had been living. He gave a Scarlatti piano concert at Francis Ford Coppola's house right before leaving for his Appointment With Death in Saragossa. This was in ~ 1976.
Legend is that Godfroi, Count de Champagne, the patron of my alleged ancestor Rashi de Troyes, was in fact descended from the children of Mary Magdalene with Jesus Christ. Indeed, Rashi and Godfroi may have been blood relations? The Star of David is in the Merovingian Coat of Arms of Godfroi, Military Commander of the First Crusade to Jerusalem. This adventure led to the formation of The Knights Templar, to Robert The Bruce of Scotland, the Cathar Massacre, and eventually to The Free Masons and The Society of Cincinatus of Officers of the American Revolutionary Army, The Communist International Paris 1848, Wagner's Parsifal and Order of The Golden Dawn/The Priory de Sion of the real Da Vinci Code that Carlo Suares and Frank Malina may have been members of. That in a nutshell is a rough outline of the Occult History of the origins of the Techgnostic Aviary including Yale's "Skull and Bones". How else did "the cult eight or nine Neocons like Wolfowitz, Feith ..." says Seymour Hersh get control of Rummy's Pentagon and bulldoze Colin Powell, George Tenet, Condi Rice and Bushie into the Iraq invasion without any "exit strategy", no "endgame? Who were Leo Straus's friends back in the 40's to the 60's? Wolfy was at Cornell when I was. I did not know him but I was aware of his dad in the math department. This would explain Carlo Suares telling me in Paris in 1973 after our visit to Aleister Crowley's student Frank Malina's that I was "Heir to The Tradition", but would not come into my "power" until I was with "The Woman and The Child". Obvious mystical Christian imagery of The Madonna and Christ, also of Mary Magdalene. Details are in my book "Destiny Matrix." Background is in "Holy Blood, Holy Grail." Now Appalachian Rednecks like Dick Farley may pooh pooh this in their peasant rebellion and Caliban-like envy against Dan Smith's aristocracy, very understandable, but we must really stay cool about all of these strange connections and look at them rationally without smears of "delusion" and "insanity" which are convenient instruments of mental control by competing Occult Secret Societies.
Again, don't ask me why... I don't know... but anyone with rudimentary Hebrew
can easily verify this...
So, Jacob, "Sarfatti" is overdone by an epsilon... strange but true....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quite possible that you didn't start focusing on becoming "The Rotem"
i.e., The Harnesser, until such time as your name was restored to "Sarfatti"...
Yes, as Saul-Paul Sirag has chronicled.
Also, the uncertainty/fluctuation of that Yud is consistent with the "near-Savior"
infatuation that Hyman has had in re Jesus..
Yes, obviously.
-- Joel
My mother dropped it from my birth certificate in 1939 because our Sarfatti not-too-distant cousins created Benito Mussolini as CIA's top counter-terrorism expert Victor Cannistraro (with Brian Sullivan) describes in his "Il Duce's Other Woman". This is explained in my book "Destiny Matrix". I looked very much like Margherita's son Amedeo at same age i.e. photo in book. Margherita looks very much like my father's sisters. She was a Grassini of Venice but a close blood cousin to her husband Cesare Sarfatti who was Mussolini's Consiligere. Capische? :-)
My father officially changed it back to his real name "Sarfatti" with the Brooklyn Registrar of Births only in 1975 6 years after my Ph.D. Indeed, the apartment registry at 2047 Nostrand Ave, Flatbush where I lived in 1940's and early 50's had "Hyman Sarfatti" listed in the mailbox. I was still living there when I met Walter Breen who came there and inteviewed my mother as part of the Columbia University project (William Sheldon) funded by Eugene McDermott a co-founder of Texas Instruments and a power in the USG Intelligence Community of the day.
From: Jack Sarfatti
To: "Joel Isaacson"
CC: Colin Bennett
Subject: Re: Proof of Sarfatti's PhD in physics from UC
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 10:25:41 -0700
bcc
No, Magali Sarfatti is my not-too-distant cousin.
Use "Jack Sarfatt" without the i.
I did not officially use the i until 1975.
On further thought, this Yud may be more significant than meets
the eye... first, note that that "epsilon" caught my attention before, on August 20:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From : Joel Isaacson
Sent : Friday, August 20, 2004 8:33 PM
To : Sarfatti@pacbell.net
Subject : "Sarfatti" off by an epsilon...
There is an ancient Hebrew saying: "Al kotzo shel Yud" which means, roughly,
"by the shred of a Yud". This saying applies when something is very-nearly
that which is could be, but falls short somehow...
Yud is the tiniest letter of the Hebrew alphabet, the 10th. Its Atbash
dual is Mem. Yud is the last letter of Sarfatti: Tsadi-Reish-Pe-Tav-Yud
If we apply Atbash to the entire Sarfatti name (rather than to every other letter,
as we have done before) we get: Heh-Gimel-Vav-Aleph-Mem,
pronounced "Ha'Goem" or "Ha'Guam". The last letter, Mem, is one letter
removed from Lamed, which precedes it in the Hebrew alphabet.
If Lamed were to show up, instead of Mem, the full-Atbash-Sarfatti-code
would spell Heh-Gimel-Vav-Aleph-Lamed ==>>> Ha'Goel,
which means {brace yourself} "The Redeemer" or "The Savior"...
That would explain why Robert Bashlow, Walter Breen's 14 year old assistant, wrote a song for me in 1954
"Oh Crucify Me On The Lone Prairie."
Bashlow died in a hotel fire in Saragossa, Spain after leaving his Orphic Lute at Gary Zukav's house where I had been living. He gave a Scarlatti piano concert at Francis Ford Coppola's house right before leaving for his Appointment With Death in Saragossa. This was in ~ 1976.
Legend is that Godfroi, Count de Champagne, the patron of my alleged ancestor Rashi de Troyes, was in fact descended from the children of Mary Magdalene with Jesus Christ. Indeed, Rashi and Godfroi may have been blood relations? The Star of David is in the Merovingian Coat of Arms of Godfroi, Military Commander of the First Crusade to Jerusalem. This adventure led to the formation of The Knights Templar, to Robert The Bruce of Scotland, the Cathar Massacre, and eventually to The Free Masons and The Society of Cincinatus of Officers of the American Revolutionary Army, The Communist International Paris 1848, Wagner's Parsifal and Order of The Golden Dawn/The Priory de Sion of the real Da Vinci Code that Carlo Suares and Frank Malina may have been members of. That in a nutshell is a rough outline of the Occult History of the origins of the Techgnostic Aviary including Yale's "Skull and Bones". How else did "the cult eight or nine Neocons like Wolfowitz, Feith ..." says Seymour Hersh get control of Rummy's Pentagon and bulldoze Colin Powell, George Tenet, Condi Rice and Bushie into the Iraq invasion without any "exit strategy", no "endgame? Who were Leo Straus's friends back in the 40's to the 60's? Wolfy was at Cornell when I was. I did not know him but I was aware of his dad in the math department. This would explain Carlo Suares telling me in Paris in 1973 after our visit to Aleister Crowley's student Frank Malina's that I was "Heir to The Tradition", but would not come into my "power" until I was with "The Woman and The Child". Obvious mystical Christian imagery of The Madonna and Christ, also of Mary Magdalene. Details are in my book "Destiny Matrix." Background is in "Holy Blood, Holy Grail." Now Appalachian Rednecks like Dick Farley may pooh pooh this in their peasant rebellion and Caliban-like envy against Dan Smith's aristocracy, very understandable, but we must really stay cool about all of these strange connections and look at them rationally without smears of "delusion" and "insanity" which are convenient instruments of mental control by competing Occult Secret Societies.
Again, don't ask me why... I don't know... but anyone with rudimentary Hebrew
can easily verify this...
So, Jacob, "Sarfatti" is overdone by an epsilon... strange but true....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quite possible that you didn't start focusing on becoming "The Rotem"
i.e., The Harnesser, until such time as your name was restored to "Sarfatti"...
Yes, as Saul-Paul Sirag has chronicled.
Also, the uncertainty/fluctuation of that Yud is consistent with the "near-Savior"
infatuation that Hyman has had in re Jesus..
Yes, obviously.
-- Joel
My mother dropped it from my birth certificate in 1939 because our Sarfatti not-too-distant cousins created Benito Mussolini as CIA's top counter-terrorism expert Victor Cannistraro (with Brian Sullivan) describes in his "Il Duce's Other Woman". This is explained in my book "Destiny Matrix". I looked very much like Margherita's son Amedeo at same age i.e. photo in book. Margherita looks very much like my father's sisters. She was a Grassini of Venice but a close blood cousin to her husband Cesare Sarfatti who was Mussolini's Consiligere. Capische? :-)
My father officially changed it back to his real name "Sarfatti" with the Brooklyn Registrar of Births only in 1975 6 years after my Ph.D. Indeed, the apartment registry at 2047 Nostrand Ave, Flatbush where I lived in 1940's and early 50's had "Hyman Sarfatti" listed in the mailbox. I was still living there when I met Walter Breen who came there and inteviewed my mother as part of the Columbia University project (William Sheldon) funded by Eugene McDermott a co-founder of Texas Instruments and a power in the USG Intelligence Community of the day.
PS Hal Puthoff also wrote:
In summary, we see how Casimir's positive-radiation-pressure
"blunder" model leads to agreement with experiment; we don't see how
your opposite-sign dark-energy w = -1 repulsion force model would
lead to the observed attraction. Please show this. If you can show
this for the standard parallel plate Casimir Effect, then
consideration of its use for more exotic geometries (e.g., Shoulders'
charge cluster phenomenon) would be warranted. If not .....
As I just showed in detail, the bogus mode-counting argument rests on a strange fluke using that ad hoc exponential fudge factor for short-wave cutoff that allows the exact sum of an infinite series of ZPF FREE FIELD virtual photon modes that SYNCHRONISTICALLY gives the correct Van Der Waals force answer, but for entirely the wrong physical reasons! I admit this is very curious and it has thrown ALL OF US way off base for more than 50 years. Even I fell for this BLUNDER!
In fact, the real problem for the ZPF FORCE is completely FINITE as I showed in detail today.
Again lest there be no confusion in this very confused situation.
1. The observed Casimir force is NOT a free virtual photon ZPF force at all. That ZPF force (not to be confused with the Van der Waals (VDW) Casimir force) always cancels out exactly! That it is zero, for vanishing vacuum coherence, which you assume, is CUTOFF INDEPENDENT.
2. The VDW Casimir force plays no important role in Ken Shoulders "charge cluster" EVOs.
3. The EVOs are a micro-fusion dark energy zero point energy effect from variation in the vacuum coherence completely missing in ALL your models of the phenomena.
4. I never claimed that the observed Casimir force, e.g. in the parallel plates experiment, had anything to do with dark energy. That is your misunderstanding of what I have been trying to teach you.
5. Your most recent Casimir force explanation of EVOs is wrong.
6. What you say in Nick Cook's book "The Hunt for Zero Point" and in Aviation Week's "To The Stars" is seriously wrong and throws everyone off the track.
In summary, we see how Casimir's positive-radiation-pressure
"blunder" model leads to agreement with experiment; we don't see how
your opposite-sign dark-energy w = -1 repulsion force model would
lead to the observed attraction. Please show this. If you can show
this for the standard parallel plate Casimir Effect, then
consideration of its use for more exotic geometries (e.g., Shoulders'
charge cluster phenomenon) would be warranted. If not .....
As I just showed in detail, the bogus mode-counting argument rests on a strange fluke using that ad hoc exponential fudge factor for short-wave cutoff that allows the exact sum of an infinite series of ZPF FREE FIELD virtual photon modes that SYNCHRONISTICALLY gives the correct Van Der Waals force answer, but for entirely the wrong physical reasons! I admit this is very curious and it has thrown ALL OF US way off base for more than 50 years. Even I fell for this BLUNDER!
In fact, the real problem for the ZPF FORCE is completely FINITE as I showed in detail today.
Again lest there be no confusion in this very confused situation.
1. The observed Casimir force is NOT a free virtual photon ZPF force at all. That ZPF force (not to be confused with the Van der Waals (VDW) Casimir force) always cancels out exactly! That it is zero, for vanishing vacuum coherence, which you assume, is CUTOFF INDEPENDENT.
2. The VDW Casimir force plays no important role in Ken Shoulders "charge cluster" EVOs.
3. The EVOs are a micro-fusion dark energy zero point energy effect from variation in the vacuum coherence completely missing in ALL your models of the phenomena.
4. I never claimed that the observed Casimir force, e.g. in the parallel plates experiment, had anything to do with dark energy. That is your misunderstanding of what I have been trying to teach you.
5. Your most recent Casimir force explanation of EVOs is wrong.
6. What you say in Nick Cook's book "The Hunt for Zero Point" and in Aviation Week's "To The Stars" is seriously wrong and throws everyone off the track.
On Sep 11, 2004, at 2:14 PM, main_engineering wrote:
"Jack,
The ZPF energy density in any given interval of frequency, w2 > w1, is
proportional to the difference in the 4th power of these frequencies,
~(w2^4 - w1^4)
when you integrate the spectral energy density over that frequency interval
to get the energy density. The w^3 dependency of the spectral energy density
of the ZPF is required in order to retain Lorentz invariance. When you
integrate over the frequency interval, you get the above dependence over any
finite interval.
If you lower the low end cut-off (w1) by making your volume bigger, not only
does the energy content in that volume increase, but the overall energy
density is also increased by the difference of the 4th powers.
Therefore, when you said,
"Therefore the 1D Zero Point Energy Density is CONSTANT!"
This is absolutely Wrong in any 3D closed container. It is not constant. The
larger you make your volume, the larger the energy density of the ZPF
becomes in that volume and in all smaller volume elements contained therein.
main_engineering"
Your argument is false as is proved by direct calculation, which I here repeat with, I hope a clearer notation. The long-wave cutoff cancels out of the problem! Only the short-wave cutoff remains. You have made an elementary error.
Imagine a closed cylinder of length L made of the same kind of perfect uncharged conducting material used in the plates of actual Casimir force measurements, with a movable piston made of same kind of material inside that is separated by distance d from the left wall. We will introduce a short-wave cutoff "a". We can solve this problem completely for the standing wave electromagnetic field oscillator modes. We neglect electron-photon interactions. So does Puthoff. This is, of course an error because the real Casimir force is simply the integrated Van Der Waals force of mutually-induced electric dipole moments between the neutral molecules making the material of the plates. The correct explanation is in 7.6 of Peter Milonni's "The Quantum Vacuum" and in papers by Ian Peterson of Coventry University in UK. Even Milonni and others, maybe even Casimir, seem to have made an incorrect approximation for the FREE PHOTON FIELD, sans QED interaction that by a weird fluke, gives the same answer as the correct Van Der Waals explanation! I have not had time to go into that in detail. However, I can easily do the exact calculation that I give below. The key point for metric engineering warps, wormholes and EVO "micro-fusion" weapons is that the observed tiny Casimir force is irrelevant only "tapping" very weak electrostatic molecular energy, i.e. virtual photons exchanged between charges on the parts of the separated neutral molecules of the material!
We can ignore the transverse wave numbers. The problem is effectively 1D by symmetry. All that matters is the shift in d as the internal piston is moved.
The boundary conditions in the left partition A are for the wave number
k{n(A)} = n(A)(2pi/2d) = n(A)(pi/d)
n(A) = 1, 2, 3 ... nearest integer to d/a.
Similarly, for the right partition
k{n(B)} = n(B)(pi/(L - d)
n(B) = 1, 2, 3 ... nearest integer to (L - d)/a.
The mathematical error made in MANY text books seems to be on p. 66 of "Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell" by A. Zee, where the entirely unnecessary fudge factor e^-cka is put in adhoc giving an infinite series n --> infinity with the FALSE result on the left side
ZPEnergy(d) ~ - hc(pi/2d)e^api/d/(e^api/d - 1)^2 eq. 18 p. 66
That WRONGLY gives the Casimir force as
-[ZPE(d) - ZPE(L - d)],d ~ pihc/24d^2 when L >> d
i.e. the right Van Der Waals answer for entirely the wrong physical reasons!
It is not enough to be right. One must be right for the right reasons!
Here is the EXACT calculation without the bogus exponential cutoff fudge factor that permits a completely unphysical sum over an infinite number of modes. The actual number of modes is finite and is easily exactly calculated. This seems to be the source of the widespread WRONG IDEA that the Casimir force works because of some kind of effective LOCAL spatial gradient in the completely random virtual photon TOTAL ENERGY caused by a difference in virtual photon pressures between the inside of the plates and the outside of the plates.
The EXACT calculation is:
1. Assume, as everyone does, that each k{n(A(B))} mode has ONE virtual ZPF photon of energy (1/2)hck{n(A9B))}
2. The finite series of integers
Sum from 1 to N of n = (1/2)N(N + 1)
Therefore,
3. Total EXTENSIVE ZPEnergy(A) = Sum from 1 to d/a (with small round-off error) (1/2)hck{n(A)}
= Sum from 1 to d/a of hc(pi/2d)n(A)
= hc(pi/4d)(d/a)[(d/a) + 1] = hc(pi/4a)[(d/a) + 1] ~ hc(pi/4a)(d/a) when d/a >> 1
(with small round-off error)
The ZPF FORCE from this TOTAL ZPF POTENTIAL ENERGY on the left partition is the negative gradient of this potential function that is LINEAR in the separation of the plates! Mind you that this is an EXACT calculation with an ignorable round off arithmetic error that reflects the fact that there are only a finite number of modes not an infinite number with a smooth exponential cutoff fudge factor that gives a misleading result!
Therefore, the ZPF force on the left side A is
F(A) = -hcpi/4a^2
Note that this force is independent of d the separation between the plates, but it does depend on the short-wave cutoff!
Next, I compute the ZPF force on the RHS B.
4. Total EXTENSIVE ZPEnergy(B) = Sum from 1 to (L - d)/a (with small round-off error) (1/2)hck{n(B)}
= Sum from 1 to (L - d)/a of hcn(B)pi/2(L - d)
= [hcpi/2(L - d)][(L - d)/a][((L - d)/a) + 1] = hc(pi/4a)[(L - d)/a) + 1] ~ hc(pi/4a^2)(L - d) when d/a >> 1
Note the - sign for d!
Therefore, again taking the negative gradient
F(B) = + hcpi/4a^2
Notice that the LONG-WAVE CUTOFF CANCELS OUT OF THE ZPF FORCE!
This is an elementary example of REGULARIZATION and FINITE RENORMALIZATION!
The ZPF FORCE on each side is CONSTANT but EQUAL IN MAGNITUDE AND OPPOSITE IN DIRECTION
Therefore, the TOTAL ZPF FORCE for FREE TOTALLY RANDOM VIRTUAL PHOTONS (i.e. ZERO VACUUM COHERENCE - another story) EXACTLY VANISHES!
F(A) + F(B) = 0
THE ZPF FORCE IS NOT THE OBSERVED CASIMIR FORCE! What is observed is the Van Der Waals force.
Puthoff & Co are completely off-base about that! So is NASA BPP.
Note that the ZPF total energy diverges to infinity as the short-wave cutoff -> 0 but, nevertheless the TOTAL ZPF FORCE on EACH PLATE is EXACTLY ZERO.
The hand waving mode-counting argument is BOGUS. Even Scientific American fell for it. I did as well until I did this calculation!
"Jack,
The ZPF energy density in any given interval of frequency, w2 > w1, is
proportional to the difference in the 4th power of these frequencies,
~(w2^4 - w1^4)
when you integrate the spectral energy density over that frequency interval
to get the energy density. The w^3 dependency of the spectral energy density
of the ZPF is required in order to retain Lorentz invariance. When you
integrate over the frequency interval, you get the above dependence over any
finite interval.
If you lower the low end cut-off (w1) by making your volume bigger, not only
does the energy content in that volume increase, but the overall energy
density is also increased by the difference of the 4th powers.
Therefore, when you said,
"Therefore the 1D Zero Point Energy Density is CONSTANT!"
This is absolutely Wrong in any 3D closed container. It is not constant. The
larger you make your volume, the larger the energy density of the ZPF
becomes in that volume and in all smaller volume elements contained therein.
main_engineering"
Your argument is false as is proved by direct calculation, which I here repeat with, I hope a clearer notation. The long-wave cutoff cancels out of the problem! Only the short-wave cutoff remains. You have made an elementary error.
Imagine a closed cylinder of length L made of the same kind of perfect uncharged conducting material used in the plates of actual Casimir force measurements, with a movable piston made of same kind of material inside that is separated by distance d from the left wall. We will introduce a short-wave cutoff "a". We can solve this problem completely for the standing wave electromagnetic field oscillator modes. We neglect electron-photon interactions. So does Puthoff. This is, of course an error because the real Casimir force is simply the integrated Van Der Waals force of mutually-induced electric dipole moments between the neutral molecules making the material of the plates. The correct explanation is in 7.6 of Peter Milonni's "The Quantum Vacuum" and in papers by Ian Peterson of Coventry University in UK. Even Milonni and others, maybe even Casimir, seem to have made an incorrect approximation for the FREE PHOTON FIELD, sans QED interaction that by a weird fluke, gives the same answer as the correct Van Der Waals explanation! I have not had time to go into that in detail. However, I can easily do the exact calculation that I give below. The key point for metric engineering warps, wormholes and EVO "micro-fusion" weapons is that the observed tiny Casimir force is irrelevant only "tapping" very weak electrostatic molecular energy, i.e. virtual photons exchanged between charges on the parts of the separated neutral molecules of the material!
We can ignore the transverse wave numbers. The problem is effectively 1D by symmetry. All that matters is the shift in d as the internal piston is moved.
The boundary conditions in the left partition A are for the wave number
k{n(A)} = n(A)(2pi/2d) = n(A)(pi/d)
n(A) = 1, 2, 3 ... nearest integer to d/a.
Similarly, for the right partition
k{n(B)} = n(B)(pi/(L - d)
n(B) = 1, 2, 3 ... nearest integer to (L - d)/a.
The mathematical error made in MANY text books seems to be on p. 66 of "Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell" by A. Zee, where the entirely unnecessary fudge factor e^-cka is put in adhoc giving an infinite series n --> infinity with the FALSE result on the left side
ZPEnergy(d) ~ - hc(pi/2d)e^api/d/(e^api/d - 1)^2 eq. 18 p. 66
That WRONGLY gives the Casimir force as
-[ZPE(d) - ZPE(L - d)],d ~ pihc/24d^2 when L >> d
i.e. the right Van Der Waals answer for entirely the wrong physical reasons!
It is not enough to be right. One must be right for the right reasons!
Here is the EXACT calculation without the bogus exponential cutoff fudge factor that permits a completely unphysical sum over an infinite number of modes. The actual number of modes is finite and is easily exactly calculated. This seems to be the source of the widespread WRONG IDEA that the Casimir force works because of some kind of effective LOCAL spatial gradient in the completely random virtual photon TOTAL ENERGY caused by a difference in virtual photon pressures between the inside of the plates and the outside of the plates.
The EXACT calculation is:
1. Assume, as everyone does, that each k{n(A(B))} mode has ONE virtual ZPF photon of energy (1/2)hck{n(A9B))}
2. The finite series of integers
Sum from 1 to N of n = (1/2)N(N + 1)
Therefore,
3. Total EXTENSIVE ZPEnergy(A) = Sum from 1 to d/a (with small round-off error) (1/2)hck{n(A)}
= Sum from 1 to d/a of hc(pi/2d)n(A)
= hc(pi/4d)(d/a)[(d/a) + 1] = hc(pi/4a)[(d/a) + 1] ~ hc(pi/4a)(d/a) when d/a >> 1
(with small round-off error)
The ZPF FORCE from this TOTAL ZPF POTENTIAL ENERGY on the left partition is the negative gradient of this potential function that is LINEAR in the separation of the plates! Mind you that this is an EXACT calculation with an ignorable round off arithmetic error that reflects the fact that there are only a finite number of modes not an infinite number with a smooth exponential cutoff fudge factor that gives a misleading result!
Therefore, the ZPF force on the left side A is
F(A) = -hcpi/4a^2
Note that this force is independent of d the separation between the plates, but it does depend on the short-wave cutoff!
Next, I compute the ZPF force on the RHS B.
4. Total EXTENSIVE ZPEnergy(B) = Sum from 1 to (L - d)/a (with small round-off error) (1/2)hck{n(B)}
= Sum from 1 to (L - d)/a of hcn(B)pi/2(L - d)
= [hcpi/2(L - d)][(L - d)/a][((L - d)/a) + 1] = hc(pi/4a)[(L - d)/a) + 1] ~ hc(pi/4a^2)(L - d) when d/a >> 1
Note the - sign for d!
Therefore, again taking the negative gradient
F(B) = + hcpi/4a^2
Notice that the LONG-WAVE CUTOFF CANCELS OUT OF THE ZPF FORCE!
This is an elementary example of REGULARIZATION and FINITE RENORMALIZATION!
The ZPF FORCE on each side is CONSTANT but EQUAL IN MAGNITUDE AND OPPOSITE IN DIRECTION
Therefore, the TOTAL ZPF FORCE for FREE TOTALLY RANDOM VIRTUAL PHOTONS (i.e. ZERO VACUUM COHERENCE - another story) EXACTLY VANISHES!
F(A) + F(B) = 0
THE ZPF FORCE IS NOT THE OBSERVED CASIMIR FORCE! What is observed is the Van Der Waals force.
Puthoff & Co are completely off-base about that! So is NASA BPP.
Note that the ZPF total energy diverges to infinity as the short-wave cutoff -> 0 but, nevertheless the TOTAL ZPF FORCE on EACH PLATE is EXACTLY ZERO.
The hand waving mode-counting argument is BOGUS. Even Scientific American fell for it. I did as well until I did this calculation!
Friday, September 10, 2004
Memorandum for the Record
Subject: The Conquest of Space-Time by The Metric Engineers In Their Unconventional Flying Objects From The World of Tomorrow.
http://www.skycaptain.com/
From: Sky Captain Smiling Jack Flash
Theorem: The observed QED Casimir force is NOT a zero point energy effect at all! It is an extremely weak Van Der Waals force only. The observed Casimir force is not important for metric engineering. I repeat. Now here this, Captain on board: The observed Casimir force is not important for the metric engineering of warp, wormhole and weapon. There is no zero point force here at all. The zero point force manifests in an entirely different way. All previous papers by everyone who have made the ZPF Casimir force claim based on mode-counting have made a mathematical error illustrated explicitly below.
The fallacy in Hal Puthoff's mode-counting argument is that whilst the outside of the plates do indeed have more modes that fit the boundary conditions than do the inside of the plates, NEVERTHELESS, the total incoherent completely random zero point energy density on both sides of the plates is identical with identical pressures, no matter what w is, because the additional EXTENSIVE space on the outside cancels the additional total energy EXTENSIVE effect of the additional outside modes on the INTENSIVE ZPF energy density. That is, the EXTENSIVE TOTAL ZPF energy scales identically to the total available space such that the ZPF energy density remains invariant! I show this rigorously for the 1D case that should describe the symmetry of ideal infinite flat parallel plates where only the distance perpendicular to the plates should affect the final result.
On Sept 2, 2004 Hal Puthoff challenged Sky Captain Jack to a Duel of Wits:
"It would seem that you insist that instead the w = -1 repulsive force is the important force on this level, previously neglected, so please show how to derive the attractive Casimir force by your counter-claim with its opposite-sign vacuum force."
BTW I never said that the direct gravity of ZPF had anything at all to do with the QED Casimir force, which is merely a very weak negligible Van Der Waal's force having nothing whatsoever to do with zero point energy.
OK, imagine a long closed EMPTY conducting uncharged cylinder with a movable piston inside it that partitions it into two volumes V(A) and V(B) with V(A) << V(B). There are more photon cavity modes that can fit inside the large V(B) than the small V(A). Therefore the sum of the TOTAL virtual photon zero point energies of hf/2 per mode is larger for V(B) than that of V(A). Of course, the REAL issue is the relative virtual photon energy densities. Let's make the problem even simpler by considering only one dimension of space so think of 1D lengths L rather than 3D volumes V. Imagine there is a short wave cut-off "a". We must fit the waves to obey the boundary conditions. The longest waves in each are 2L(A) and 2L(B) where L(A) << L(B).
I make the usual "mainstream" assumption of ZERO VACUUM COHERENCE in the model below.
The allowed standing wave cavity modes of the electromagnetic field oscillators have reciprocal wavelength "wave numbers" N(A)pi/2L(A) and N(B)pi/2L(B) respectively where N(A) and N(B) are positive integers. N(A)max ~ L(A)/a and N(B)max ~ L(B)/a in sense of "nearest integer to". This is the essentially the same as the musical harmonics on Orpheus's Lute studied by my Pythagorean ancestors who migrated to Ancient Greece from what is now Palestine/Israel.
However, I will now rigorously mathematically prove that the mode density in this 1D case is constant.
So we have total zero point energy in L(A) is ~ (1/2)hcSum npi/2L(A) from n = 1 to L(A)/a.
Note sum of first N integers is N(N + 1)/2
Therefore, the total zero point energy on the finite line segment L(A or B) is, assuming L(A or B) >> a
ZPE(A or B) ~ (1/2)(pihc/4L(A or B)){[L(A or B)/a][L(A or B)/a + 1] ~ (pi/8)(hc/a)(L/a)
Therefore the 1D Zero Point Energy Density is CONSTANT! That is divide by L
1D ZPE Density ~ (pi/8)(hc/a^2)
Note that this 1D "string" has a ZPE Density = String Tension, i.e. Energy per unit length, which is same as the Newtonian "force".
Even though there are more modes in the larger line segment, the available "space" is also larger! More modes in a larger space such that the density of virtual energy is constant! There is complete compensation. The ZERO POINT ENERGY DENSITY stays CONSTANT in BOTH PARTITIONS! It doesn't even matter what w is! It will be w = -1 for other reasons of general relativity. There is no zero point pressure differential at all! Now is this an artifact of making the problem 1 dimensional? Even if it is, the idealized Casimir force problem is for two infinite plane parallel thin plates and this should be a good symmetry approximation. Actually, the number of space dimensions should not matter because the mode density power scales the same way as the "space".
For example in 2D fdf that integrates to f^2 in 3D f^2df that integrates to f^3 and so on.
Of course, this all assumes zero vacuum coherence, that the ZPE is totally random. You can get an effect if the vacuum coherence is different on the two sides. But that is NOT the Casimir force! That is something entirely new that only I have predicted.
Therefore, there is something deeply wrong about the mode-counting argument to get the virtual photon Casimir force
~ (pi/24)hc/a^2 for two plates separated by distance a.
* These considerations do not apply to Ian Peterson's Van Der Waal's force argument!
Original message from Hal:
"Jack,
In several of your recent postings you say that the flat-space, quantum physics Casimir model that we quantum physicists use (that does not take into account w = -1 implications of dark energy on the microscopic scale) has been overtaken by the discovery of dark energy. Indeed, you use this claim to (a) criticize the Casimir model and (b) come up with a "dark energy" model for Shoulders' charge cluster phenomenon ("dark energy in a bottle," you call it).
When I point out that Casimir, Milonni, I, et al. use the quantum vacuum fluctuation Casimir-type model to advantage (and, BTW, get the right answer for Casimir attraction between parallel plates!) you point out that it is a false model in a flat space that does not take into account the recent GR cosmology concepts and therefore is flawed ("Casimir's greatest blunder," you call it!).
Specifically, you argue that the ZPE radiation pressure modeling that uses w = 1/3 vacuum radiation pressure forces (as in the 1988 Phys. Rev A paper by Milonni et al., "Radiation pressure from the vacuum: Physical interpretation of the Casimir force") must be set aside in favor of the use of the w = -1 repulsion vacuum forces.
Here is my challenge to your line of logic. Forget the Shoulders' model for the moment, and simply show how your line of logic involving the w = -1 repulsion vacuum force leads to the known attractive Casimir force between parallel plates, which has been precisely measured and accounted for on the basis of the quantum physicists' use of the w = 1/3 vacuum forces. It would seem that you insist that instead the w = -1 repulsive force is the important force on this level, previously neglected, so please show how to derive the attractive Casimir force by your counter-claim with its opposite-sign vacuum force.
In summary, we see how Casimir's positive-radiation-pressure "blunder" model leads to agreement with experiment; we don't see how your opposite-sign dark-energy w = -1 repulsion force model would lead to the observed attraction. Please show this. If you can show this for the standard parallel plate Casimir Effect, then consideration of its use for more exotic geometries (e.g., Shoulders' charge cluster phenomenon) would be warranted. If not .....
Collegially,
Hal"
Subject: The Conquest of Space-Time by The Metric Engineers In Their Unconventional Flying Objects From The World of Tomorrow.
http://www.skycaptain.com/
From: Sky Captain Smiling Jack Flash
Theorem: The observed QED Casimir force is NOT a zero point energy effect at all! It is an extremely weak Van Der Waals force only. The observed Casimir force is not important for metric engineering. I repeat. Now here this, Captain on board: The observed Casimir force is not important for the metric engineering of warp, wormhole and weapon. There is no zero point force here at all. The zero point force manifests in an entirely different way. All previous papers by everyone who have made the ZPF Casimir force claim based on mode-counting have made a mathematical error illustrated explicitly below.
The fallacy in Hal Puthoff's mode-counting argument is that whilst the outside of the plates do indeed have more modes that fit the boundary conditions than do the inside of the plates, NEVERTHELESS, the total incoherent completely random zero point energy density on both sides of the plates is identical with identical pressures, no matter what w is, because the additional EXTENSIVE space on the outside cancels the additional total energy EXTENSIVE effect of the additional outside modes on the INTENSIVE ZPF energy density. That is, the EXTENSIVE TOTAL ZPF energy scales identically to the total available space such that the ZPF energy density remains invariant! I show this rigorously for the 1D case that should describe the symmetry of ideal infinite flat parallel plates where only the distance perpendicular to the plates should affect the final result.
On Sept 2, 2004 Hal Puthoff challenged Sky Captain Jack to a Duel of Wits:
"It would seem that you insist that instead the w = -1 repulsive force is the important force on this level, previously neglected, so please show how to derive the attractive Casimir force by your counter-claim with its opposite-sign vacuum force."
BTW I never said that the direct gravity of ZPF had anything at all to do with the QED Casimir force, which is merely a very weak negligible Van Der Waal's force having nothing whatsoever to do with zero point energy.
OK, imagine a long closed EMPTY conducting uncharged cylinder with a movable piston inside it that partitions it into two volumes V(A) and V(B) with V(A) << V(B). There are more photon cavity modes that can fit inside the large V(B) than the small V(A). Therefore the sum of the TOTAL virtual photon zero point energies of hf/2 per mode is larger for V(B) than that of V(A). Of course, the REAL issue is the relative virtual photon energy densities. Let's make the problem even simpler by considering only one dimension of space so think of 1D lengths L rather than 3D volumes V. Imagine there is a short wave cut-off "a". We must fit the waves to obey the boundary conditions. The longest waves in each are 2L(A) and 2L(B) where L(A) << L(B).
I make the usual "mainstream" assumption of ZERO VACUUM COHERENCE in the model below.
The allowed standing wave cavity modes of the electromagnetic field oscillators have reciprocal wavelength "wave numbers" N(A)pi/2L(A) and N(B)pi/2L(B) respectively where N(A) and N(B) are positive integers. N(A)max ~ L(A)/a and N(B)max ~ L(B)/a in sense of "nearest integer to". This is the essentially the same as the musical harmonics on Orpheus's Lute studied by my Pythagorean ancestors who migrated to Ancient Greece from what is now Palestine/Israel.
However, I will now rigorously mathematically prove that the mode density in this 1D case is constant.
So we have total zero point energy in L(A) is ~ (1/2)hcSum npi/2L(A) from n = 1 to L(A)/a.
Note sum of first N integers is N(N + 1)/2
Therefore, the total zero point energy on the finite line segment L(A or B) is, assuming L(A or B) >> a
ZPE(A or B) ~ (1/2)(pihc/4L(A or B)){[L(A or B)/a][L(A or B)/a + 1] ~ (pi/8)(hc/a)(L/a)
Therefore the 1D Zero Point Energy Density is CONSTANT! That is divide by L
1D ZPE Density ~ (pi/8)(hc/a^2)
Note that this 1D "string" has a ZPE Density = String Tension, i.e. Energy per unit length, which is same as the Newtonian "force".
Even though there are more modes in the larger line segment, the available "space" is also larger! More modes in a larger space such that the density of virtual energy is constant! There is complete compensation. The ZERO POINT ENERGY DENSITY stays CONSTANT in BOTH PARTITIONS! It doesn't even matter what w is! It will be w = -1 for other reasons of general relativity. There is no zero point pressure differential at all! Now is this an artifact of making the problem 1 dimensional? Even if it is, the idealized Casimir force problem is for two infinite plane parallel thin plates and this should be a good symmetry approximation. Actually, the number of space dimensions should not matter because the mode density power scales the same way as the "space".
For example in 2D fdf that integrates to f^2 in 3D f^2df that integrates to f^3 and so on.
Of course, this all assumes zero vacuum coherence, that the ZPE is totally random. You can get an effect if the vacuum coherence is different on the two sides. But that is NOT the Casimir force! That is something entirely new that only I have predicted.
Therefore, there is something deeply wrong about the mode-counting argument to get the virtual photon Casimir force
~ (pi/24)hc/a^2 for two plates separated by distance a.
* These considerations do not apply to Ian Peterson's Van Der Waal's force argument!
Original message from Hal:
"Jack,
In several of your recent postings you say that the flat-space, quantum physics Casimir model that we quantum physicists use (that does not take into account w = -1 implications of dark energy on the microscopic scale) has been overtaken by the discovery of dark energy. Indeed, you use this claim to (a) criticize the Casimir model and (b) come up with a "dark energy" model for Shoulders' charge cluster phenomenon ("dark energy in a bottle," you call it).
When I point out that Casimir, Milonni, I, et al. use the quantum vacuum fluctuation Casimir-type model to advantage (and, BTW, get the right answer for Casimir attraction between parallel plates!) you point out that it is a false model in a flat space that does not take into account the recent GR cosmology concepts and therefore is flawed ("Casimir's greatest blunder," you call it!).
Specifically, you argue that the ZPE radiation pressure modeling that uses w = 1/3 vacuum radiation pressure forces (as in the 1988 Phys. Rev A paper by Milonni et al., "Radiation pressure from the vacuum: Physical interpretation of the Casimir force") must be set aside in favor of the use of the w = -1 repulsion vacuum forces.
Here is my challenge to your line of logic. Forget the Shoulders' model for the moment, and simply show how your line of logic involving the w = -1 repulsion vacuum force leads to the known attractive Casimir force between parallel plates, which has been precisely measured and accounted for on the basis of the quantum physicists' use of the w = 1/3 vacuum forces. It would seem that you insist that instead the w = -1 repulsive force is the important force on this level, previously neglected, so please show how to derive the attractive Casimir force by your counter-claim with its opposite-sign vacuum force.
In summary, we see how Casimir's positive-radiation-pressure "blunder" model leads to agreement with experiment; we don't see how your opposite-sign dark-energy w = -1 repulsion force model would lead to the observed attraction. Please show this. If you can show this for the standard parallel plate Casimir Effect, then consideration of its use for more exotic geometries (e.g., Shoulders' charge cluster phenomenon) would be warranted. If not .....
Collegially,
Hal"
On Sep 10, 2004, at 5:28 AM, Dr. Burinskii Alexander wrote from Moscow's Russian Academy of Sciences:
Dear Jack,
You wrote:
I know that De Witt completely understood Feynman and Schwinger's
theories.
I would like to add a few words on the De Witt approach since I find it is
very clear and consistent. Besides, there is a possibility to compare it
with your
equation
Guv + /\zpfguv = (8piG/c^4)Tuv
De Witt wrote the Einstein equation as follows
Guv = Tuv_regularized,
where
Tuv_regularized = Tuv - Tuv _vac,
T_vac =<0|T|0>
In the form
Guv + (8piG/c^4) Tuv_vac = Tuv
De Witt equation is similar to your equation.
Guv + /\zpfguv = (8piG/c^4)Tuv
Yes, however Tuv_vac is restricted to the form (c^4/8piG)/\zpfguv
where /\zpf is a scalar dependent on "vacuum coherence" that is absent in all mainstream theories in the precise new way I use it (zero rank tensor both for local Lorentz group in tangent fiber and the GCT group in curved base space), i.e.
/\zpf = (Cutoff Length)^-2[[Cutoff Length]^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 - 1]
Note this is a scalar for all symmetry groups so there is no "cutoff" violation of symmetry here!
Hal Puthoff, for example, wants to use
Cutoff Length = h/mc = 10^-11 cm
Others use
Cutoff Length = (hG/c^3)^1/2 = 10^-33 cm
In terms of symmetry and covariance that does not matter, but is an empirical matter.
Note of course that Puthoff's PV model violates the usual symmetry and covariance constraints of Einstein's gravity theory.
However:
1. De Witt constructs the vacuum stress tensor T_vac=<0|Tuv|0> from the sum
of modes f_k which satisfy the operator D f_k=0. At least in flat space it
is on-shell equation.
Agreed. But I need to study the exact way he uses it. The ZPF, in this case virtual photon contribution, is from what is NOT from the poles of the Feynman integrals. What you write here, i.e.
Df_k = 0
is simply the locus of the pole's path of the integral for the Feynman photon propagator in the complex energy plane as a function of the momentum.
As a result, in flat space ZPF cannot give a contribution to /\ term.
Agreed, that the ON-MASS-SHELL pole contributions to the relevant integrals do not contribute to the /\zpf term. That's what I have been saying all along. Only the off-mass shell contribution contribute and, since in this globally flat micro-quantum PRE-INFLATIONARY FALSE VACUUM, with constant metric nuv(Minkowski) we have
MACRO-QUANTUM ODLRO Vacuum Coherence = 0
/\zpf in FALSE VACUUM ~ (Cutoff Length)^-2
The CREATION OF THE UNIVERSE (our "Hubble Bubble" in sense of Max Tegmark's "Parallel Universes" May 2003 Scientific American -- also found online BTW by Google) is the VACUUM PHASE TRANSITION, a collapse of phase space, in which now emerges in accord with P.W. Anderson's "More is different" Ansatz:
/\zpf in TRUE VACUUM ~ (Cutoff Length)^-2[(Cutoff Length)^3|ODLRO Vacuum Coherence|^2 - 1]
Where Einstein's emergent smooth curved space time metric tensor field is now
guv(Curved Space-Time) = nuv(False Vacuum) + (Elastic World Strain Tensor)uv
in Hagen Kleinert's sense http://www.physik.fu-berlin.de/~kleinert/
(Elastic World Strain Tensor)uv = (1/2)[du,v + dv,u]
This formula is found in Kleinert's work.
du is the local distortion of the vacuum from global flatness
It is the compensating gauge force field from locally gauging the 4-parameter translation sub-group of the 15 parameter conformal group. It obviously gives rise to Einstein's general coordinate transformations GCT
x^u'(P) = x^u'(x^u(P))
for space-time event P
To this work of Kleinert's I add my new original LOCAL MACRO-QUANTUM Bohm Hidden Variable "guidance constraint"
du(P) = (Cutoff Length)^2(Phase of the ODLRO Vacuum Coherence),u in 4D
Think of the analogous superfluid flow eq in 3D
Velocity of Hidden Variable = (h/m)Gradient of Phase of the Giant Pilot Wave)
This also works on micro-level of course in Bohm's theory.
Note, that in general we will have the ANHOLONOMY that the mixed second order partial derivatives of the LOCAL macro-quantum ODLRO phase do not commute! This means a TORSION FIELD from locally gauging the additional 6-parameter Lorentz group. We have at least 5 more parameters to locally gauge to get even MORE exotic compensating gauge force fields beyond Einstein's 1915 gravity theory that really comes only from spontaneously breaking (and restoring with the compensating local field du) the 4-parameter translation group vacuum symmetry!
* Remember these are all LOCAL smooth c-number emergent "More is different" MACRO-QUANTUM ODLRO fields. They are NOT to be re-micro-quantized. This is the meaning of "Einstein gravity is not consistent with renormalizable quantum field theories."
But such contributions may
appear a) in curved space and b) from longitudinal modes, so
Tuv_vac =/\_quant + T_Casimir ... + anything more.
No. Such contributions appear from ALL three spin 1 virtual photon polarization modes even in the globally flat totally random incoherent pre-inflationary false vacuum without any trace of gravity nor rest mass of spin 1/2 lepto-quarks and W bosons whatsoever. The problem there, however, is as I showed /\zpf is TOO BIG! One also needs to put in all the virtual lepto-quark particle-antiparticle pairs and all the weak and strong virtual bosons in addition to the virtual photons you discuss above. I don't think we need supersymmetry, but we can stick it in later to see if we really need it.
The micro-geons from the smooth COHERENT ODLRO c-number guv field have "Mass without mass" with all the virtues of string theory already! No more point particles! No more infinite renormalizations!
Remember a "geon" is dual to a tangled string!
We may not need extra-space dimensions, but we can accommodate them. But for now use parsimony. More with less. Keep the excess theoretical baggage down to a minimum!
2. The right sight of the De Witt equation Tuv is not
regularized now and contain all the quantum divergences.
Yeah, but that misses my new insight completely! It's a new ball game. De Witt has NO ODLRO. His theory is NO GOOD! It is only a pre-inflationary FALSE VACUUM theory without any NON-PERTURBATIVE phase transition to the post-inflationary true vacuum with ODLRO.
BTW the pre-inflationary false vacuum must be CONFORMAL without any rest mass at all! Rest mass only emerges with vacuum coherence in accord with Einstein's equivalence principle. Furthermore the post-inflation vacuum with gravity has less entropy than did the pre-inflationary false unstable vacuum without gravity. This explains the direction of the Arrow of Time of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, i.e. WHY it points in the direction of the expansion of the post-inflationary universe we are trapped inside of like Edwin Abbott's "Flatlanders."
In this form
I checked once more a few books and found that the Casimir ZPF in flat
vacuum space is formed by the on-shell modes, in particular plane wave
photons with 2 transverse polarizations.
* Then all those papers are wrong! What you are really saying is that the Van Der Waal's force alternative derivation of the Casimir force is the true explanation and that the ZPF model is self-contradictory and for some strange reason gives the correct answer FOR THE WRONG REASONS - this has happened before in physics.
The unique difference from the real photons is that E_vac = E_real/ 2. =h
\nu / 2.
I don't understand this last sentence.
Of course a quantum simple harmonic boson oscillator of frequency f has a ground (vacuum) state energy of + hf/2.
However, one cannot assume that f = ck INSIDE that vacuum!
f = ck is true ONLY for the n real photons in the excited eigenstate OUTSIDE the vacuum whose energy eigenvalue
En = nhf + (1/2)hf
Maybe I am wrong, but I believe, that excluding the on-shell VACUUM photons
you exclude the main part of the Casimir effect.
You must be wrong on elementary conceptual grounds of heuristic consistency, or, alternatively, all those papers are wrong. They violate the simple idea that by definition the fully interacting physical vacuum is the STRICT ABSENCE of ON-MASS-SHELL quanta! What you are citing is an obviously self-contradictory physical idea like 1 = 0 in mathematics!
If the latter: Never have so many been so wrong about an important physics idea!
I can agree with your following remarks:
AB The mass gap may be neglected for the very high frequencies and it
does not prevent to
regularization.
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!
This example was taken from very old suggestions.
It is working for superdense matter, but is not good example to explain /\_vac = 0. In supersymmetry counterpartners must have the same mass.
But that is all fantasy. Such things have never been observed - no evidence. You will note that ALL my theories here are evidence driven not mere pretty math! I mean by "evidence"
1. Gravity lensing of dark matter.
2. Type 1a supernovae anomalous red shifts
3. Anomalous violent events, quasars, gamma ray bursts etc.
4. Null results from dark matter detectors! Like Michelson-Morely experiment 100 years ago.
5. Paradox of the cosmological constant. Like blackbody radiation paradox of 100 years ago that led Planck to the quantum.
6. Small temperature fluctuations in the cosmic blackbody radiation WMAP and all that.
7. Leptoquarks inside hadrons shrink in size under increasingly larger magnification.
8. Universal Regge trajectories of hadronic resonances.
9. Cold Fusion
10. Ken Shoulders EVOs
11. Last but not least the flying saucer UFO data.
JS.
Meantime I derive
Guv + /\zpfguv = 0
If you put in vacuum T_uv=0 then the divergence of
/\zpfguv is compensated by the divergence of Guv.
I do not understand, is your G_uv divergent (or huge) in VACUUM?
You cannot use the old ideas of point particle field theory here.
My Guv is FINITE.
The exotic vacuum field equation for both dark energy and dark matter is an ODLRO macro-quantum c-number equation
Guv + /\zpfguv = 0
Now you can do quantum perturbation theory around this curved dynamical background c-number metric, for now I ignore adding the spin 2 quantum operator field huv. Better to work with RENORMALIZABLE spin 1 &du quantum field using gravitons as EPR "Bell state" pairs of spin 1 quanta.
NO MORE NAIVE Bianchi identities here!
i.e. when /\zpf =/= 0
you cannot use
Guv^;v = 0
Instead you must use
Guv^;v + /\zpf^,vguv = 0
if you assume guv^;v = 0
;v = covariant derivative
,v = ordinary partial derivative
also ;v is relative to the CONNECTION and that depends on whether
du,v = dv,u OR NOT? i.e. no torsion OR torsion?
i.e. on the kinds of topological Berry phase singularities in the LOCAL MACRO-QUANTUM Vacuum Coherence field that must be kept single-valued!
The torsion field can be ignored in ordinary vacuum where /\zpf = 0, but not so in exotic dark energy/matter vacua where /\zpf (a local dynamical scalar field) =/= 0.
The reverence to B. De Witt Phys Rep. 19(1975), 295.
"Reverence" is right. These old theories are now impotent and obsolete and I do not revere them uncritically! No one understood anything back then in 1975 and even less in 1961 where Hal Puthoff is still stuck in a Ground Hog Day time loop! :-)
Close description is in the book by Birell and Davies, but they use the on-shell scalar waves
for simplicity.
I ordered that book and will look at what they say. :-)
Again they stick in guv with QFT adhoc. I derive guv from a non-perturbative ODLRO vacuum phase transition. Very different physical picture!
Best regards, Alexander
Dear Jack,
You wrote:
I know that De Witt completely understood Feynman and Schwinger's
theories.
I would like to add a few words on the De Witt approach since I find it is
very clear and consistent. Besides, there is a possibility to compare it
with your
equation
Guv + /\zpfguv = (8piG/c^4)Tuv
De Witt wrote the Einstein equation as follows
Guv = Tuv_regularized,
where
Tuv_regularized = Tuv - Tuv _vac,
T_vac =<0|T|0>
In the form
Guv + (8piG/c^4) Tuv_vac = Tuv
De Witt equation is similar to your equation.
Guv + /\zpfguv = (8piG/c^4)Tuv
Yes, however Tuv_vac is restricted to the form (c^4/8piG)/\zpfguv
where /\zpf is a scalar dependent on "vacuum coherence" that is absent in all mainstream theories in the precise new way I use it (zero rank tensor both for local Lorentz group in tangent fiber and the GCT group in curved base space), i.e.
/\zpf = (Cutoff Length)^-2[[Cutoff Length]^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 - 1]
Note this is a scalar for all symmetry groups so there is no "cutoff" violation of symmetry here!
Hal Puthoff, for example, wants to use
Cutoff Length = h/mc = 10^-11 cm
Others use
Cutoff Length = (hG/c^3)^1/2 = 10^-33 cm
In terms of symmetry and covariance that does not matter, but is an empirical matter.
Note of course that Puthoff's PV model violates the usual symmetry and covariance constraints of Einstein's gravity theory.
However:
1. De Witt constructs the vacuum stress tensor T_vac=<0|Tuv|0> from the sum
of modes f_k which satisfy the operator D f_k=0. At least in flat space it
is on-shell equation.
Agreed. But I need to study the exact way he uses it. The ZPF, in this case virtual photon contribution, is from what is NOT from the poles of the Feynman integrals. What you write here, i.e.
Df_k = 0
is simply the locus of the pole's path of the integral for the Feynman photon propagator in the complex energy plane as a function of the momentum.
As a result, in flat space ZPF cannot give a contribution to /\ term.
Agreed, that the ON-MASS-SHELL pole contributions to the relevant integrals do not contribute to the /\zpf term. That's what I have been saying all along. Only the off-mass shell contribution contribute and, since in this globally flat micro-quantum PRE-INFLATIONARY FALSE VACUUM, with constant metric nuv(Minkowski) we have
MACRO-QUANTUM ODLRO Vacuum Coherence = 0
/\zpf in FALSE VACUUM ~ (Cutoff Length)^-2
The CREATION OF THE UNIVERSE (our "Hubble Bubble" in sense of Max Tegmark's "Parallel Universes" May 2003 Scientific American -- also found online BTW by Google) is the VACUUM PHASE TRANSITION, a collapse of phase space, in which now emerges in accord with P.W. Anderson's "More is different" Ansatz:
/\zpf in TRUE VACUUM ~ (Cutoff Length)^-2[(Cutoff Length)^3|ODLRO Vacuum Coherence|^2 - 1]
Where Einstein's emergent smooth curved space time metric tensor field is now
guv(Curved Space-Time) = nuv(False Vacuum) + (Elastic World Strain Tensor)uv
in Hagen Kleinert's sense http://www.physik.fu-berlin.de/~kleinert/
(Elastic World Strain Tensor)uv = (1/2)[du,v + dv,u]
This formula is found in Kleinert's work.
du is the local distortion of the vacuum from global flatness
It is the compensating gauge force field from locally gauging the 4-parameter translation sub-group of the 15 parameter conformal group. It obviously gives rise to Einstein's general coordinate transformations GCT
x^u'(P) = x^u'(x^u(P))
for space-time event P
To this work of Kleinert's I add my new original LOCAL MACRO-QUANTUM Bohm Hidden Variable "guidance constraint"
du(P) = (Cutoff Length)^2(Phase of the ODLRO Vacuum Coherence),u in 4D
Think of the analogous superfluid flow eq in 3D
Velocity of Hidden Variable = (h/m)Gradient of Phase of the Giant Pilot Wave)
This also works on micro-level of course in Bohm's theory.
Note, that in general we will have the ANHOLONOMY that the mixed second order partial derivatives of the LOCAL macro-quantum ODLRO phase do not commute! This means a TORSION FIELD from locally gauging the additional 6-parameter Lorentz group. We have at least 5 more parameters to locally gauge to get even MORE exotic compensating gauge force fields beyond Einstein's 1915 gravity theory that really comes only from spontaneously breaking (and restoring with the compensating local field du) the 4-parameter translation group vacuum symmetry!
* Remember these are all LOCAL smooth c-number emergent "More is different" MACRO-QUANTUM ODLRO fields. They are NOT to be re-micro-quantized. This is the meaning of "Einstein gravity is not consistent with renormalizable quantum field theories."
But such contributions may
appear a) in curved space and b) from longitudinal modes, so
Tuv_vac =/\_quant + T_Casimir ... + anything more.
No. Such contributions appear from ALL three spin 1 virtual photon polarization modes even in the globally flat totally random incoherent pre-inflationary false vacuum without any trace of gravity nor rest mass of spin 1/2 lepto-quarks and W bosons whatsoever. The problem there, however, is as I showed /\zpf is TOO BIG! One also needs to put in all the virtual lepto-quark particle-antiparticle pairs and all the weak and strong virtual bosons in addition to the virtual photons you discuss above. I don't think we need supersymmetry, but we can stick it in later to see if we really need it.
The micro-geons from the smooth COHERENT ODLRO c-number guv field have "Mass without mass" with all the virtues of string theory already! No more point particles! No more infinite renormalizations!
Remember a "geon" is dual to a tangled string!
We may not need extra-space dimensions, but we can accommodate them. But for now use parsimony. More with less. Keep the excess theoretical baggage down to a minimum!
2. The right sight of the De Witt equation Tuv is not
regularized now and contain all the quantum divergences.
Yeah, but that misses my new insight completely! It's a new ball game. De Witt has NO ODLRO. His theory is NO GOOD! It is only a pre-inflationary FALSE VACUUM theory without any NON-PERTURBATIVE phase transition to the post-inflationary true vacuum with ODLRO.
BTW the pre-inflationary false vacuum must be CONFORMAL without any rest mass at all! Rest mass only emerges with vacuum coherence in accord with Einstein's equivalence principle. Furthermore the post-inflation vacuum with gravity has less entropy than did the pre-inflationary false unstable vacuum without gravity. This explains the direction of the Arrow of Time of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, i.e. WHY it points in the direction of the expansion of the post-inflationary universe we are trapped inside of like Edwin Abbott's "Flatlanders."
In this form
I checked once more a few books and found that the Casimir ZPF in flat
vacuum space is formed by the on-shell modes, in particular plane wave
photons with 2 transverse polarizations.
* Then all those papers are wrong! What you are really saying is that the Van Der Waal's force alternative derivation of the Casimir force is the true explanation and that the ZPF model is self-contradictory and for some strange reason gives the correct answer FOR THE WRONG REASONS - this has happened before in physics.
The unique difference from the real photons is that E_vac = E_real/ 2. =h
\nu / 2.
I don't understand this last sentence.
Of course a quantum simple harmonic boson oscillator of frequency f has a ground (vacuum) state energy of + hf/2.
However, one cannot assume that f = ck INSIDE that vacuum!
f = ck is true ONLY for the n real photons in the excited eigenstate OUTSIDE the vacuum whose energy eigenvalue
En = nhf + (1/2)hf
Maybe I am wrong, but I believe, that excluding the on-shell VACUUM photons
you exclude the main part of the Casimir effect.
You must be wrong on elementary conceptual grounds of heuristic consistency, or, alternatively, all those papers are wrong. They violate the simple idea that by definition the fully interacting physical vacuum is the STRICT ABSENCE of ON-MASS-SHELL quanta! What you are citing is an obviously self-contradictory physical idea like 1 = 0 in mathematics!
If the latter: Never have so many been so wrong about an important physics idea!
I can agree with your following remarks:
AB The mass gap may be neglected for the very high frequencies and it
does not prevent to
regularization.
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!
This example was taken from very old suggestions.
It is working for superdense matter, but is not good example to explain /\_vac = 0. In supersymmetry counterpartners must have the same mass.
But that is all fantasy. Such things have never been observed - no evidence. You will note that ALL my theories here are evidence driven not mere pretty math! I mean by "evidence"
1. Gravity lensing of dark matter.
2. Type 1a supernovae anomalous red shifts
3. Anomalous violent events, quasars, gamma ray bursts etc.
4. Null results from dark matter detectors! Like Michelson-Morely experiment 100 years ago.
5. Paradox of the cosmological constant. Like blackbody radiation paradox of 100 years ago that led Planck to the quantum.
6. Small temperature fluctuations in the cosmic blackbody radiation WMAP and all that.
7. Leptoquarks inside hadrons shrink in size under increasingly larger magnification.
8. Universal Regge trajectories of hadronic resonances.
9. Cold Fusion
10. Ken Shoulders EVOs
11. Last but not least the flying saucer UFO data.
JS.
Meantime I derive
Guv + /\zpfguv = 0
If you put in vacuum T_uv=0 then the divergence of
/\zpfguv is compensated by the divergence of Guv.
I do not understand, is your G_uv divergent (or huge) in VACUUM?
You cannot use the old ideas of point particle field theory here.
My Guv is FINITE.
The exotic vacuum field equation for both dark energy and dark matter is an ODLRO macro-quantum c-number equation
Guv + /\zpfguv = 0
Now you can do quantum perturbation theory around this curved dynamical background c-number metric, for now I ignore adding the spin 2 quantum operator field huv. Better to work with RENORMALIZABLE spin 1 &du quantum field using gravitons as EPR "Bell state" pairs of spin 1 quanta.
NO MORE NAIVE Bianchi identities here!
i.e. when /\zpf =/= 0
you cannot use
Guv^;v = 0
Instead you must use
Guv^;v + /\zpf^,vguv = 0
if you assume guv^;v = 0
;v = covariant derivative
,v = ordinary partial derivative
also ;v is relative to the CONNECTION and that depends on whether
du,v = dv,u OR NOT? i.e. no torsion OR torsion?
i.e. on the kinds of topological Berry phase singularities in the LOCAL MACRO-QUANTUM Vacuum Coherence field that must be kept single-valued!
The torsion field can be ignored in ordinary vacuum where /\zpf = 0, but not so in exotic dark energy/matter vacua where /\zpf (a local dynamical scalar field) =/= 0.
The reverence to B. De Witt Phys Rep. 19(1975), 295.
"Reverence" is right. These old theories are now impotent and obsolete and I do not revere them uncritically! No one understood anything back then in 1975 and even less in 1961 where Hal Puthoff is still stuck in a Ground Hog Day time loop! :-)
Close description is in the book by Birell and Davies, but they use the on-shell scalar waves
for simplicity.
I ordered that book and will look at what they say. :-)
Again they stick in guv with QFT adhoc. I derive guv from a non-perturbative ODLRO vacuum phase transition. Very different physical picture!
Best regards, Alexander
Thursday, September 09, 2004
Zero Point Energy Density ~ hc/(Cutoff)^4 for ZERO vacuum coherence.
hc/(Cutoff)^4 = (c^4/8piG*)/\zpf
(Cutoff)^-4 = (c^3/8pihG)/\zpf ~ Lp^-2/\zpf
The usual assumption is
Cutoff = Lp = 10^-33 cm.
On the other hand if you prefer Puthoff's
Cutoff = h/mc = 10^-11 cm
You get a different /\zpf.
In that case
10^44 cm^-4 = 10^66 cm^-2/\zpf cm^-2
/\zpf ~ 10^-22 cm^-2 also!
i.e. radius of vacuum curvature is 10^11 cm
Universe cannot come into being and becoming that way! That's not how God did it and is doing it in the parallel universes next door as The Raven Flies in Hyperspace! Who is that knock, knock, knocking at my door? ;-)
Without vacuum coherence you have BIG TSURAS! (Yiddish) - a very BIG
BUBBKA under the noses of all theoretical physicists today that they
cannot get rid of! Out out damned BUBBKA! :-)
Why? Simple, ask Heisenberg! It's his uncertainty!
What you get, even Puthoff gets this much, is that
Zero Point Energy Density ~ hc/(Cutoff)^4
Even when the cutoff is ~ h/mc ~ 10^-11 cm, which Puthoff likes
This is
10^-27 10^10 10^44 = 10^27 ergs/cc
Ergo the universe cannot exist! Not even Hal Puthoff wishing will make
it so. Fairy Dust doesn't work. The real Magick Wand, The "Staif" of
Moses (AKA Prospero) is "Vacuum Coherence" i..
Total Micro-Quantum Zero Point Energy Density ~
[hc/(Cutoff)^4]{(Cutoff)^3|Macro-Quantum Vacuum Coherence|^2 - 1]
The non-exotic "classical vacuum" has ZERO Total Micro-Quantum Zero
Point Energy Density.
No supersymmetry, no point particle renormalization.
Macro-Quantum Vacuum Coherence is an idea from soft condensed matter
physics taken from "on-mass-shell" to "off-mass-shell" in which gravity
is emergent not from RANDOM micro-quantum zero point energy has Andrei
Sakharov incorrectly conjectured in 1967, but never proved, but from
NON-RANDOM MACRO-QUANTUM Goldstone "phase rigidity" in the sense of
P.W. Anderson's "More is different" principle for the emergence of
qualitatively new forms of phenomena from substrata.
hc/(Cutoff)^4 = (c^4/8piG*)/\zpf
(Cutoff)^-4 = (c^3/8pihG)/\zpf ~ Lp^-2/\zpf
The usual assumption is
Cutoff = Lp = 10^-33 cm.
On the other hand if you prefer Puthoff's
Cutoff = h/mc = 10^-11 cm
You get a different /\zpf.
In that case
10^44 cm^-4 = 10^66 cm^-2/\zpf cm^-2
/\zpf ~ 10^-22 cm^-2 also!
i.e. radius of vacuum curvature is 10^11 cm
Universe cannot come into being and becoming that way! That's not how God did it and is doing it in the parallel universes next door as The Raven Flies in Hyperspace! Who is that knock, knock, knocking at my door? ;-)
Without vacuum coherence you have BIG TSURAS! (Yiddish) - a very BIG
BUBBKA under the noses of all theoretical physicists today that they
cannot get rid of! Out out damned BUBBKA! :-)
Why? Simple, ask Heisenberg! It's his uncertainty!
What you get, even Puthoff gets this much, is that
Zero Point Energy Density ~ hc/(Cutoff)^4
Even when the cutoff is ~ h/mc ~ 10^-11 cm, which Puthoff likes
This is
10^-27 10^10 10^44 = 10^27 ergs/cc
Ergo the universe cannot exist! Not even Hal Puthoff wishing will make
it so. Fairy Dust doesn't work. The real Magick Wand, The "Staif" of
Moses (AKA Prospero) is "Vacuum Coherence" i..
Total Micro-Quantum Zero Point Energy Density ~
[hc/(Cutoff)^4]{(Cutoff)^3|Macro-Quantum Vacuum Coherence|^2 - 1]
The non-exotic "classical vacuum" has ZERO Total Micro-Quantum Zero
Point Energy Density.
No supersymmetry, no point particle renormalization.
Macro-Quantum Vacuum Coherence is an idea from soft condensed matter
physics taken from "on-mass-shell" to "off-mass-shell" in which gravity
is emergent not from RANDOM micro-quantum zero point energy has Andrei
Sakharov incorrectly conjectured in 1967, but never proved, but from
NON-RANDOM MACRO-QUANTUM Goldstone "phase rigidity" in the sense of
P.W. Anderson's "More is different" principle for the emergence of
qualitatively new forms of phenomena from substrata.
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
Witt).
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
regularization.
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:
FERMI-BOSE SUPERSYMMETRY (SUPERGAUGE SYMMETRY IN FOUR-DIMENSIONS).
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
frequencies).
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
sea.
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
diag(1,1/3,1/3,1/3).
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
Then
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
i.e. essence of the EVO is a MESOSCOPIC GR EFFECT of RESIDUAL ZERO POINT ENERGY DENSITY.
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
now.
JS.
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.
AB.
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. :-)
JS.
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?
AB
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
2002.
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
NEGATIVE PRESSURE.''
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,
Alexander
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Sarfatti"
To: "SarfattiScienceSeminars@YahooGroups. com"
Cc: "ItalianPhysicsCenter";
"Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars"
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
is
~ 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
Puthoff.
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
BOTTLE.
The Dark Energy potential per unit electron mass is a POSITIVE 3D
Harmonic Oscillator potential
c^2/\zpfr^2
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
Therefore
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
Hour."
Therefore, for the (1/10) Coulomb EVO the self-ripping destructive
force is
~ 10^-2 10^8(Million Tons) ~ ONE TRILLION TONS!
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
Witt).
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
regularization.
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:
FERMI-BOSE SUPERSYMMETRY (SUPERGAUGE SYMMETRY IN FOUR-DIMENSIONS).
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
frequencies).
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
sea.
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
diag(1,1/3,1/3,1/3).
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
Then
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
i.e. essence of the EVO is a MESOSCOPIC GR EFFECT of RESIDUAL ZERO POINT ENERGY DENSITY.
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
now.
JS.
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.
AB.
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. :-)
JS.
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?
AB
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
2002.
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
NEGATIVE PRESSURE.''
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,
Alexander
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Sarfatti"
To: "SarfattiScienceSeminars@YahooGroups. com"
Cc: "ItalianPhysicsCenter"
"Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars"
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
is
~ 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
Puthoff.
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
BOTTLE.
The Dark Energy potential per unit electron mass is a POSITIVE 3D
Harmonic Oscillator potential
c^2/\zpfr^2
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
Therefore
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
Hour."
Therefore, for the (1/10) Coulomb EVO the self-ripping destructive
force is
~ 10^-2 10^8(Million Tons) ~ ONE TRILLION TONS!
Wednesday, September 08, 2004
Memorandum For The Record
Subject: Cold Fusion, Dark Zero Point Energy, Metric Engineering & Exotic WMD
From: Jack Sarfatti
Never have so few been so wrong about so many important physics problems! :-)
The problem is that using naive flat 3D space geometry leads to very large unbalanced negative electric charge on Ken Shoulders observed EVOs. Of course a direct measurement of the total charge -Ne would be good. The RADIAL space warp with positive curvature gives a surface area A ~ N(h/mc)^2 for the EVO shell that is smaller than the square of the directly measured EVO radius "a" by a dimensionless local anisotropic radial "Space Warp Factor" where
N(h/mc)^2 = 4pi(Space Warp Factor)a^2
Space Warp Factor < 1 for positive elliptic space curvature
Space Warp Factor > 1 for negative hyperbolic space curvature
Space Warp Factor = 1 for "zero space curvature" parabolic flat Euclidean space.
Note that for negative space curvature the EVO would be like a flattened pancake an effective drop in space dimension from 3D to 2D. However, the unbalanced charge problem would be even worse in that case!
* Here is a new calculation of the Space Warp Factor for the Einstein vacuum Reisser-Nordstrom non-rotating charged EVO modeled as a MESOSCOPIC WHEELER GEOMETRODYNAMIC GEON. That is, the Casimir force model of the EVO in any incarnation whatsoever is a completely false idea for the EVO. The QED Casimir force is only a small correction and completely misses the qualitative cause of the EVO, which is the strong direct warping of 4D space-time by unbalanced micro-quantum zero point vacuum fluctuations in the "exotic vacua" (i.e. "dark energy" and "dark matter" with negative and positive micro-quantum pressure respectively from w = -1 ONLY) with sub-optimal LOCAL intensity of vacuum coherence. Vacuum coherence on large-scale is the cosmological inflation field. It is also the Higgs field on the small-scale. These scales merge of course in the early universe. The origin of rest inertia of the lepto-quarks is a vacuum coherence effect and is not caused by the random SED acceleration "friction" of zero rest mass charges as suggested by Haisch, Puthoff & Co at now defunct CIPA. Matt Visser also rejected that model in addition to the pure Puthoff PV model. Never have so few been so wrong about so many important physics problems! :-)
The conventional LOCAL RADIAL SPACE WARP FACTOR is in that case 1 - rs/r + rQ^2/r^2 (eq.2.44, p. 21, Matt Visser's "Lorentzian Wormholes" cited by Eric Davis and Jacques Vallee in their apparently latest public UFO paper from NIDS in .). Note for the record that from my direct conversation with Matt Visser at the Dublin GR 17 Conference, where Stephen Hawking made, in my opinion his "biggest blunder" (It happens to the best of us! :-)) Visser told me he completely rejects Hal Puthoff's PV gravity theory that uses the "isotropic radial coordinate" and, in principle, lacks the LOCAL ANISOTROPIC RADIAL SPACE DISTORTION WARP FACTOR I calculate here.
Theorem: The upper bound on the EVO unbalanced negative electric charge is
N(MAX) ~ (Measured Radius of EVO Shell/Electron Compton Wave Length)S
S = [1 - x^2]/[1 + x^2] < 1
where
x^2 ~ (Fine Structure Constant)N^2(Electron Compton Wavelength/Measured Radius of EVO Shell)
Example: an EVO modeled as a non-rotating Wheeler Geon of size 10^-5 cm cannot have an electric charge greater than
N(Max) ~ a/(h/mc) = (amc/h) --> (10^-5/10^-11) ~ 10^6 ~ 10^-13 Coulombs
"a" = Measured Radius of EVO shell as reported by Ken Shoulders http://www.svn.net/krscfs/
h/mc ~ 10^-11 cm = Electron Compton Wavelength
This is a MESOSCOPIC General Relativity Effect of the STRONG DIRECT SPACE WARP from unbalanced ZERO POINT VACUUM ENERGY DENSITY - with no connection to the QED Casimir force. QED only works when GRAVITY is NEGLIGIBLE, not true in our EVO problem. Also no need for supersymmetry or partons or any other excess baggage.
Compare this with the FLAT Euclidean space estimate from
N(h/mc)^2 = 4pi(Measured Radius of EVO)^2
N ~ (10^-10/10^-11)^2 ~ 10^12 ~ 10^-7 Coulombs
That is, the Einstein General Relativity correction lowers the EVO charge by a factor of a MILLION in this example! This is not possible at all using the Puthoff Casimir force models of EVOs. Therefore, a direct independent measurement of the EVO electric charge, not an indirect inference based on a particular model of space geometry is a crucial test in accord with Karl Popper's criterion of falsifiability in the decision problem among conflicting models of the same phenomenon.
Proof of The Theorem.
rs = 2GM/c^2
rQ^2 = G(Ne)^2/c^4
The above is for the orthodox "on-mass-shell" REAL source. For the VIRTUAL source "exotic vacua" of BOTH "dark energy" and "dark matter" (their only relevant difference is negative pressure in the former and positive pressure in the latter with local vacuum coherence as the metric engineering control parameter) we have
GM replaced by c^2/\zpfa^3
where "a" = DIRECTLY measured radius of the EVO
For the simplest model, neglecting rotation and tiny QED Casimir forces
V = c^2/\zpfr^2 + (Ne)^2/mr
"a" is at the critical point
dV/dr = 0
Therefore
2c^2/\zpfa - (Ne)^2/ma^2 = 0
/\zpf = N^2(e^2/mc^2)/a^3
But e^2/mc^2 = Classical Electron Radius ~ 10^-13 cm = (Fine Structure Constant)(Electron Compton Wavelength)
Therefore
/\zpfa^2 ~ N^2(Fine Structure Constant)(Electron Compton Wavelength/Observed Radius of the EVO)
Homework Problem: Complete the algebra. I get
N ~ (amc/h){[1 - (e^2/hc)N^2(h/amc)]/[1 + (e^2/hc)N^2(h/amc)]}
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
frequencies).
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
sea.
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
diag(1,1/3,1/3,1/3).
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
Then
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
i.e. essence of the EVO is a MESOSCOPIC GR EFFECT of RESIDUAL ZERO POINT ENERGY DENSITY.
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
now.
JS.
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.
AB.
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. :-)
JS.
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?
AB
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
2002.
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
NEGATIVE PRESSURE.''
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,
Alexander
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Sarfatti"
To: "SarfattiScienceSeminars@YahooGroups. com"
Cc: "ItalianPhysicsCenter";
"Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars"
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
is
~ 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
Puthoff.
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
BOTTLE.
The Dark Energy potential per unit electron mass is a POSITIVE 3D
Harmonic Oscillator potential
c^2/\zpfr^2
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
Therefore
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
Hour."
Therefore, for the (1/10) Coulomb EVO the self-ripping destructive
force is
~ 10^-2 10^8(Million Tons) ~ ONE TRILLION TONS!
Subject: Cold Fusion, Dark Zero Point Energy, Metric Engineering & Exotic WMD
From: Jack Sarfatti
Never have so few been so wrong about so many important physics problems! :-)
The problem is that using naive flat 3D space geometry leads to very large unbalanced negative electric charge on Ken Shoulders observed EVOs. Of course a direct measurement of the total charge -Ne would be good. The RADIAL space warp with positive curvature gives a surface area A ~ N(h/mc)^2 for the EVO shell that is smaller than the square of the directly measured EVO radius "a" by a dimensionless local anisotropic radial "Space Warp Factor" where
N(h/mc)^2 = 4pi(Space Warp Factor)a^2
Space Warp Factor < 1 for positive elliptic space curvature
Space Warp Factor > 1 for negative hyperbolic space curvature
Space Warp Factor = 1 for "zero space curvature" parabolic flat Euclidean space.
Note that for negative space curvature the EVO would be like a flattened pancake an effective drop in space dimension from 3D to 2D. However, the unbalanced charge problem would be even worse in that case!
* Here is a new calculation of the Space Warp Factor for the Einstein vacuum Reisser-Nordstrom non-rotating charged EVO modeled as a MESOSCOPIC WHEELER GEOMETRODYNAMIC GEON. That is, the Casimir force model of the EVO in any incarnation whatsoever is a completely false idea for the EVO. The QED Casimir force is only a small correction and completely misses the qualitative cause of the EVO, which is the strong direct warping of 4D space-time by unbalanced micro-quantum zero point vacuum fluctuations in the "exotic vacua" (i.e. "dark energy" and "dark matter" with negative and positive micro-quantum pressure respectively from w = -1 ONLY) with sub-optimal LOCAL intensity of vacuum coherence. Vacuum coherence on large-scale is the cosmological inflation field. It is also the Higgs field on the small-scale. These scales merge of course in the early universe. The origin of rest inertia of the lepto-quarks is a vacuum coherence effect and is not caused by the random SED acceleration "friction" of zero rest mass charges as suggested by Haisch, Puthoff & Co at now defunct CIPA. Matt Visser also rejected that model in addition to the pure Puthoff PV model. Never have so few been so wrong about so many important physics problems! :-)
The conventional LOCAL RADIAL SPACE WARP FACTOR is in that case 1 - rs/r + rQ^2/r^2 (eq.2.44, p. 21, Matt Visser's "Lorentzian Wormholes" cited by Eric Davis and Jacques Vallee in their apparently latest public UFO paper from NIDS in .). Note for the record that from my direct conversation with Matt Visser at the Dublin GR 17 Conference, where Stephen Hawking made, in my opinion his "biggest blunder" (It happens to the best of us! :-)) Visser told me he completely rejects Hal Puthoff's PV gravity theory that uses the "isotropic radial coordinate" and, in principle, lacks the LOCAL ANISOTROPIC RADIAL SPACE DISTORTION WARP FACTOR I calculate here.
Theorem: The upper bound on the EVO unbalanced negative electric charge is
N(MAX) ~ (Measured Radius of EVO Shell/Electron Compton Wave Length)S
S = [1 - x^2]/[1 + x^2] < 1
where
x^2 ~ (Fine Structure Constant)N^2(Electron Compton Wavelength/Measured Radius of EVO Shell)
Example: an EVO modeled as a non-rotating Wheeler Geon of size 10^-5 cm cannot have an electric charge greater than
N(Max) ~ a/(h/mc) = (amc/h) --> (10^-5/10^-11) ~ 10^6 ~ 10^-13 Coulombs
"a" = Measured Radius of EVO shell as reported by Ken Shoulders http://www.svn.net/krscfs/
h/mc ~ 10^-11 cm = Electron Compton Wavelength
This is a MESOSCOPIC General Relativity Effect of the STRONG DIRECT SPACE WARP from unbalanced ZERO POINT VACUUM ENERGY DENSITY - with no connection to the QED Casimir force. QED only works when GRAVITY is NEGLIGIBLE, not true in our EVO problem. Also no need for supersymmetry or partons or any other excess baggage.
Compare this with the FLAT Euclidean space estimate from
N(h/mc)^2 = 4pi(Measured Radius of EVO)^2
N ~ (10^-10/10^-11)^2 ~ 10^12 ~ 10^-7 Coulombs
That is, the Einstein General Relativity correction lowers the EVO charge by a factor of a MILLION in this example! This is not possible at all using the Puthoff Casimir force models of EVOs. Therefore, a direct independent measurement of the EVO electric charge, not an indirect inference based on a particular model of space geometry is a crucial test in accord with Karl Popper's criterion of falsifiability in the decision problem among conflicting models of the same phenomenon.
Proof of The Theorem.
rs = 2GM/c^2
rQ^2 = G(Ne)^2/c^4
The above is for the orthodox "on-mass-shell" REAL source. For the VIRTUAL source "exotic vacua" of BOTH "dark energy" and "dark matter" (their only relevant difference is negative pressure in the former and positive pressure in the latter with local vacuum coherence as the metric engineering control parameter) we have
GM replaced by c^2/\zpfa^3
where "a" = DIRECTLY measured radius of the EVO
For the simplest model, neglecting rotation and tiny QED Casimir forces
V = c^2/\zpfr^2 + (Ne)^2/mr
"a" is at the critical point
dV/dr = 0
Therefore
2c^2/\zpfa - (Ne)^2/ma^2 = 0
/\zpf = N^2(e^2/mc^2)/a^3
But e^2/mc^2 = Classical Electron Radius ~ 10^-13 cm = (Fine Structure Constant)(Electron Compton Wavelength)
Therefore
/\zpfa^2 ~ N^2(Fine Structure Constant)(Electron Compton Wavelength/Observed Radius of the EVO)
Homework Problem: Complete the algebra. I get
N ~ (amc/h){[1 - (e^2/hc)N^2(h/amc)]/[1 + (e^2/hc)N^2(h/amc)]}
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
frequencies).
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
sea.
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
diag(1,1/3,1/3,1/3).
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
Then
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
i.e. essence of the EVO is a MESOSCOPIC GR EFFECT of RESIDUAL ZERO POINT ENERGY DENSITY.
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
now.
JS.
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.
AB.
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. :-)
JS.
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?
AB
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
2002.
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
NEGATIVE PRESSURE.''
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,
Alexander
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Sarfatti"
To: "SarfattiScienceSeminars@YahooGroups. com"
Cc: "ItalianPhysicsCenter"
"Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars"
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
is
~ 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
Puthoff.
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
BOTTLE.
The Dark Energy potential per unit electron mass is a POSITIVE 3D
Harmonic Oscillator potential
c^2/\zpfr^2
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
Therefore
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
Hour."
Therefore, for the (1/10) Coulomb EVO the self-ripping destructive
force is
~ 10^-2 10^8(Million Tons) ~ ONE TRILLION TONS!
From: sarfatti@pacbell.net
Subject: Common wrong ideas about zero point energy and gravity
Date: September 8, 2004 9:05:16 AM PDT
To: SarfattiScienceSeminars@yahoogroups.com
Cc: ItalianPhysicsCenter@YahooGroups.com, Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars@yahoogroups.com
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
frequencies).
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
sea.
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
diag(1,1/3,1/3,1/3).
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
Then
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
i.e. essence of the EVO is a MESOSCOPIC GR EFFECT of RESIDUAL ZERO POINT ENERGY DENSITY.
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
now.
JS.
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.
AB.
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. :-)
JS.
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?
AB
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
2002.
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
NEGATIVE PRESSURE.''
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,
Alexander
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Sarfatti"
To: "SarfattiScienceSeminars@YahooGroups. com"
Cc: "ItalianPhysicsCenter";
"Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars"
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
is
~ 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
Puthoff.
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
BOTTLE.
The Dark Energy potential per unit electron mass is a POSITIVE 3D
Harmonic Oscillator potential
c^2/\zpfr^2
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
Therefore
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
Hour."
Therefore, for the (1/10) Coulomb EVO the self-ripping destructive
force is
~ 10^-2 10^8(Million Tons) ~ ONE TRILLION TONS!
Subject: Common wrong ideas about zero point energy and gravity
Date: September 8, 2004 9:05:16 AM PDT
To: SarfattiScienceSeminars@yahoogroups.com
Cc: ItalianPhysicsCenter@YahooGroups.com, Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars@yahoogroups.com
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
frequencies).
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
sea.
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
diag(1,1/3,1/3,1/3).
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
Then
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
i.e. essence of the EVO is a MESOSCOPIC GR EFFECT of RESIDUAL ZERO POINT ENERGY DENSITY.
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
now.
JS.
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.
AB.
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. :-)
JS.
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?
AB
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
2002.
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
NEGATIVE PRESSURE.''
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,
Alexander
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Sarfatti"
To: "SarfattiScienceSeminars@YahooGroups. com"
Cc: "ItalianPhysicsCenter"
"Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars"
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
is
~ 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
Puthoff.
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
BOTTLE.
The Dark Energy potential per unit electron mass is a POSITIVE 3D
Harmonic Oscillator potential
c^2/\zpfr^2
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
Therefore
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
Hour."
Therefore, for the (1/10) Coulomb EVO the self-ripping destructive
force is
~ 10^-2 10^8(Million Tons) ~ ONE TRILLION TONS!
Tuesday, September 07, 2004
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
Then
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
i.e. essence of the EVO is a MESOSCOPIC GR EFFECT of RESIDUAL ZERO POINT ENERGY DENSITY.
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
now.
JS.
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.
AB.
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. :-)
JS.
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?
AB
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
2002.
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
NEGATIVE PRESSURE.''
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,
Alexander
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Sarfatti"
To: "SarfattiScienceSeminars@YahooGroups. com"
Cc: "ItalianPhysicsCenter";
"Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars"
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
is
~ 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
Puthoff.
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
BOTTLE.
The Dark Energy potential per unit electron mass is a POSITIVE 3D
Harmonic Oscillator potential
c^2/\zpfr^2
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
Therefore
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
Hour."
Therefore, for the (1/10) Coulomb EVO the self-ripping destructive
force is
~ 10^-2 10^8(Million Tons) ~ ONE TRILLION TONS!
On Sep 6, 2004, at 3:11 AM, Burinskii Alexander, Ph.D physicist in
Moscow wrote:
Dear Jack,
Returning from country I looked the mail and
met the very strong fights on the field of the Casimir effect between
you
and Puthoff. Your discussions are now in a very deep stage, so it is
not
easy to me to understand the origin of arguments now.
However, looking at the Puthoff and Piestrup paper I have noted that
the
Casimir II model was described by me in Phys Lett B216(1989)p.123 and
reconsidered recently from another point of view
(connected to supersymmetry) in hep-th/0205127. I called it the Volume
Casimir effect for a ball contrary to the effect for plates.
My previous attempts (from 1986) to publish it in Russian Academic
journals
led to a rejection from journals and to a very big storm of critique.
And I
was not able to convince my skilled opponents. Some troubles occurred
also
by publication of the paper hep-th/0205127. This problem is very
non-trivial as all what concerns the vacuum structure.
I heard also, that some similar paper was published by Thorn about
1989.
Best regards,
Yours, Alexander
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
Then
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
i.e. essence of the EVO is a MESOSCOPIC GR EFFECT of RESIDUAL ZERO POINT ENERGY DENSITY.
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
now.
JS.
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.
AB.
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. :-)
JS.
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?
AB
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
2002.
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
NEGATIVE PRESSURE.''
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,
Alexander
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Sarfatti"
To: "SarfattiScienceSeminars@YahooGroups. com"
Cc: "ItalianPhysicsCenter"
"Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars"
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
is
~ 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
Puthoff.
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
BOTTLE.
The Dark Energy potential per unit electron mass is a POSITIVE 3D
Harmonic Oscillator potential
c^2/\zpfr^2
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
Therefore
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
Hour."
Therefore, for the (1/10) Coulomb EVO the self-ripping destructive
force is
~ 10^-2 10^8(Million Tons) ~ ONE TRILLION TONS!
On Sep 6, 2004, at 3:11 AM, Burinskii Alexander, Ph.D physicist in
Moscow wrote:
Dear Jack,
Returning from country I looked the mail and
met the very strong fights on the field of the Casimir effect between
you
and Puthoff. Your discussions are now in a very deep stage, so it is
not
easy to me to understand the origin of arguments now.
However, looking at the Puthoff and Piestrup paper I have noted that
the
Casimir II model was described by me in Phys Lett B216(1989)p.123 and
reconsidered recently from another point of view
(connected to supersymmetry) in hep-th/0205127. I called it the Volume
Casimir effect for a ball contrary to the effect for plates.
My previous attempts (from 1986) to publish it in Russian Academic
journals
led to a rejection from journals and to a very big storm of critique.
And I
was not able to convince my skilled opponents. Some troubles occurred
also
by publication of the paper hep-th/0205127. This problem is very
non-trivial as all what concerns the vacuum structure.
I heard also, that some similar paper was published by Thorn about
1989.
Best regards,
Yours, Alexander
Monday, September 06, 2004
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 is
~ 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 Puthoff.
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 BOTTLE.
The Dark Energy potential per unit electron mass is a POSITIVE 3D Harmonic Oscillator potential
c^2/\zpfr^2
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
Therefore
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 Hour."
Therefore, for the (1/10) Coulomb EVO the self-ripping destructive force is
~ 10^-2 10^8(Million Tons) ~ ONE TRILLION TONS!
On Sep 6, 2004, at 3:11 AM, Burinskii Alexander, Ph.D physicist in Moscow wrote:
Dear Jack,
Returning from country I looked the mail and
met the very strong fights on the field of the Casimir effect between you
and Puthoff. Your discussions are now in a very deep stage, so it is not
easy to me to understand the origin of arguments now.
However, looking at the Puthoff and Piestrup paper I have noted that the
Casimir II model was described by me in Phys Lett B216(1989)p.123 and
reconsidered recently from another point of view
(connected to supersymmetry) in hep-th/0205127. I called it the Volume
Casimir effect for a ball contrary to the effect for plates.
My previous attempts (from 1986) to publish it in Russian Academic journals
led to a rejection from journals and to a very big storm of critique. And I
was not able to convince my skilled opponents. Some troubles occurred also
by publication of the paper hep-th/0205127. This problem is very
non-trivial as all what concerns the vacuum structure.
I heard also, that some similar paper was published by Thorn about 1989.
Best regards,
Yours, Alexander
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 is
~ 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 Puthoff.
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 BOTTLE.
The Dark Energy potential per unit electron mass is a POSITIVE 3D Harmonic Oscillator potential
c^2/\zpfr^2
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
Therefore
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 Hour."
Therefore, for the (1/10) Coulomb EVO the self-ripping destructive force is
~ 10^-2 10^8(Million Tons) ~ ONE TRILLION TONS!
On Sep 6, 2004, at 3:11 AM, Burinskii Alexander, Ph.D physicist in Moscow wrote:
Dear Jack,
Returning from country I looked the mail and
met the very strong fights on the field of the Casimir effect between you
and Puthoff. Your discussions are now in a very deep stage, so it is not
easy to me to understand the origin of arguments now.
However, looking at the Puthoff and Piestrup paper I have noted that the
Casimir II model was described by me in Phys Lett B216(1989)p.123 and
reconsidered recently from another point of view
(connected to supersymmetry) in hep-th/0205127. I called it the Volume
Casimir effect for a ball contrary to the effect for plates.
My previous attempts (from 1986) to publish it in Russian Academic journals
led to a rejection from journals and to a very big storm of critique. And I
was not able to convince my skilled opponents. Some troubles occurred also
by publication of the paper hep-th/0205127. This problem is very
non-trivial as all what concerns the vacuum structure.
I heard also, that some similar paper was published by Thorn about 1989.
Best regards,
Yours, Alexander
Saturday, September 04, 2004
On Sep 3, 2004, at 7:30 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
On Sep 3, 2004, at 9:31 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Memorandum for the Record
Subject: Metric Engineering the Fabric of Space-Time for Warps, Wormholes and WMD Warning.
Background references:
http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/379/12737_weapons.html
http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/377/12778_weapons.html
http://popularmechanics.com/science/research/2004/8/dangerous_science/index5.phtml
http://www.brothersjudd.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/reviews.detail/book_id/1318/Our%20Final%20Ho.htm
The apparent enormity of the unbalanced electric charge Ne on the EVO is obviously disquieting and has bothered me from the beginning. The problem stems from using flat Euclidean geometry when in fact the EVO must be strongly warped into a Wheeler geometrodynamic micro-geon by its dark energy exotic vacuum core. Note that Hal Puthoff's Type II EVO model also suffers from this same defect as does my "flat" model below. This permits N to be much smaller for the same apparent size of the EVO than is expected from ordinary flat space geometry. Indeed this effect has been allegedly seen in UFOs according to Vallee and Davis's NIDS paper.
http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2003/nov/m07-015.shtml
One must really use the full Kerr-Newman metric solution of Einstein's GR field equations or at least put in the charged shell. However, for now I give a crude back-of-the-envelope estimate using the static spherically symmetric Schwarzschild solution for a uniform dark energy sphere of variable physical radius R to show the basic idea that
Area of the surface of the EVO << 4pi(Observed Physical Size of EVO)^2
i.e.
A = 4pir^2 ~ N(h/mc)^2 << 4pia^2
Where
Area of the surface of the EVO = A = 4piN(h/mc)^2 in terms of the Schwarzschild radial coordinate r.
Start with the EVO potential energy per unit electron mass m
V(r) = (Ne)^2/mr + c^2/\zpfr^2
See Kip Thorne's "Black Holes and Time Warps" for background on why Area << 4pi(Physical Size)^2.
The critical point for dynamical equilibrium is then
dV(r)/dr = 0
i.e.
- (Ne)^2/mr^2 + 2c^2/\zpfr = 0
Therefore,
N^2(e^2/mc^2) = 2/\zpfr^3
Where e^2/mc^2 is the classical electron radius ~ 1 fermi ~ 10^-13 cm = 10^-15 meters and /\zpf has dimensions of reciprocal area, i.e. CURVATURE.
On the other hand we know that
A/4pi = N(h/mc)^2 = r^2
Therefore
r^3 = N^3/2(h/mc)^3
N^2(e^2/mc^2) = 2/\zpfN^3/2(h/mc)^3
N^1/2(e^2/mc^2) = 2/\zpf(h/mc)^3
N^1/2(e^2/mc^2)/(h/mc) = 2/\zpf(h/mc)^2
N^1/2(e^2/hc) = 2/\zpf(h/mc)^2
N^1/2 ~ 2(137)/\zpf10^-22
with /\zpf in units cm^-2.
i.e.
/\zpf(Dark Energy Core of EVO) ~ N^1/2(Twice the Fine Structure Constant)(Electron Compton Wavelength)^-2
The square root of the pure number Fine Structure Constant e^2/hc ~ 1/137 is the absolute QED coupling strength for a VERTEX of a Feynman diagram where a photon couples to a charge e (both can be real or virtual).
For an EVO of unbalanced charge Ne of physical size a. But what is a? Experimentally a is typically 10^-5 cm to 10^-5 meters. We want of course
N(h/mc)^2 = 4pi(Space Warp Factor)(Observed Size of EVO)^2
Where (Space Warp Factor) << 1
So that the unbalanced charge Ne is not as large as modeled below.
That is, we do not really want N ~ 10^12 to 10^16 as predicted by the FLAT SPACE model.
This problem is still unsolved of course and I am working on it.
Ken Shoulders' EVO
On Aug 18, 2004, at 8:54 AM, Ken Shoulders wrote:
"THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY
by
Ken Shoulders
Abstract
Electron clusters, or EVOs, are shown to be ideal candidates for electrical power generation using easily available methods for manipulation of electronic charge. The work to be done is described as manipulation of the exotic vacuum in a way that takes advantage of the ability to move the EVO against an electrical load using only a fraction of the input power usually used, resulting in an energy gain. However, the high intensity of the process and ease of applying it to mischievous ends portend future difficulties with its use.
Prologue
It has long been known by the author that the best form of charge manipulation for the generation of electrical power involved the use of EVs, or EVOs, in a relatively free form in either vacuum or low gas pressure. This basic method was the subject of a patent issued to Shoulders in 1991(2) for anomalous energy conversion. It was also determined early on that this discovery opened an undesirable gateway to high energy misuse of such charge structures and the work was then turned to more benign solid state methods of thermal energy production, closely related to what is called “cold fusion”. Unfortunately, the difficulty of designing an acceptable machine for anomalous energy production was unacceptably large, primarily due to the fundamental, self-destructive nature of the process and the inability to find a feasible way to automatically rebuild the machine for a useful lifetime. This difficulty has now redirected the work toward the original process of using EVOs in a near solid-state form while immersed in low-pressure gas containers. The attendant difficulties of mischievous use of EVOs on an unprecedented level are the secondary subject of this paper, to which the author has no viable solutions."
This recently posted file can be downloaded from: http://www.svn.net/krscfs/
Some points both subtle and unsubtle.
1. Hal Puthoff's Casimir Type II Model of the Ken Shoulders EVO has /\zpf = (mc/h)^2 outside the EVO shell of N electrons for a total unbalanced charge Ne in a close-packed spherical shell of radius a ~ N^1/2(h/mc). Hal also assumes /\zpf = 0 inside the EVO shell and he makes the blatantly wrong assumption that w = +1/3. Appealing to Casimir and Milonni does not help. If they did it, they are also wrong. The EVOs Ken makes allegedly have N ~ 10^12 to 10^16. (h/mc) ~ 10^-11 cm so that is a ~ 10^-5 cm to 10^-3 cm What happened to the positive charge left behind? Note that 10^12e ~ 10^-7 Coulombs. Two like charges of 1 Coulomb each 1 meter apart repel each other with a force of 1 MILLION TONS! We now have for the EVO N ~ 10^12e in a sphere 10^-7 meters across, a self-repulsive force of ~ 10^-1410^14 MILLION TONS ~ 1 MILLION TONS! That is, the zero point pressure must prevent the EVOs at the small end of the spectrum reported by Ken Shoulders from ripping itself apart with a force of ONE MILLION TONS! What about the bigger EVO at 10^-3 Coulombs? That's 10^-6x10^10 MILLION TONS ~ 100 TRILLION TONS OF SELF-DESTRUCTIVE FORCE!
In general the self-ripping unbalanced electric force ~ (Ne)^2/N(h/mc)^2 ~ N(emc/h)^2
2. The zero point energy density that Hal posits outside the EVO surface is enormous if we use Newton's constant of gravity.
Puthoff's zero point energy density ~ (c^4/8piG)(mc/h)^2 ~ 10^19Gev x 10^33 x 10^22 ~ 10^74 Gev/cc ~ 10^64 Joules/cc (since 1 Joule ~ 10^19 ev). If G* is much bigger than G at these small scales the ZPF energy density will be smaller.
This is a ridiculous once one realizes that in General Relativity the zero point energy density warps space-time directly as Mike Turner clearly explains below. Therefore, Hal's model for the EVO is clearly wrong! That is, our universe could not even exist if Hal's EVO model were true.
Remember from Mike Turner's article below, w = (pressure)/(energy density) for ALL STUFF both REAL and VIRTUAL!
My model says we live in a universe where /\zpf ~ 0 because the random micro-quantum ZPF energy density is absorbed into the MACRO-QUANTUM VACUUM CONDENSATE or Vacuum BEC. Ken's EVO has an INTERIOR UNIFORM DARK ENERGY CORE with /\zpf > 0, w = -1 and a NEGATIVE ZPF PRESSURE since the virtual photon ZPF energy density is positive from boson quantum statistics.
A SUBTLE POINT!
Positive potential energy with an inverse power law is repulsive.
Example 1. U = +e^2/r, dU/dr = -e^2/r^2, F = -dU/dr points in the direction of increasing r, i.e. repulsion
Negative potential energy with an inverse power law is attractive.
Example 2. U = -e^2/r, dU/dr = e^2/r^2, F = -dU/dr points in the direction of decreasing r, i.e. attraction
Positive potential energy with a direct power law is attractive.
Example 3. U = +mc^2|/\zpf|r^2 a 3D harmonic oscillator potential with SU(3) quantum symmetry group like quarks in a bag (e.g. "QCD Lite" Frank Wilczek) Flatten this to a plane to get SU(2)?
dU/dr = +2mc^2|/\zpf|r, therefore -dU/dr points in the direction of decreasing r, i.e. attraction
Negative potential energy with a direct power law is repulsive.
Example 4. Trivial exercise.
From p. 26 of John Peacock's "Cosmological Physics" one sees that to a first approximation model /\zpf inside the EVO shell as uniform. This follows from Einstein's equivalence principle + Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Therefore, like drilling a hole through center of Earth and dropping a ball down the hole, one gets a simple harmonic motion i.e. the 3D harmonic oscillator.
Consequently the HYPOTHETICAL EVO in simplest model obeys the simple math
V = (Ne)^2/mr + /\zpfr^2 from the inside of the EVO shell. /\zpf = 0 OUTSIDE the EVO shell.
neglecting rotation and a very small QED Casimir Type I force from virtual photons. Do not confuse that with Puthoff's Type II model.
Balance the two forces at the critical point
dV/dr = 0
which is a stable minimum when
d^2V/dr^2 > 0
Voila! Ce la Vie!
On Sept 3, 2004 Hal Puthoff wrote
[Hal previous] "When I point out that Casimir, Milonni, I, et al. use the
quantum vacuum fluctuation Casimir-type model to advantage (and,
BTW, get the right answer for Casimir attraction between parallel
plates!) you point out that it is a false model in a flat space that
does not take into account the recent GR cosmology concepts and
therefore is flawed ("Casimir's greatest blunder," you call it!)."
[Jack previous] What you say here is false. You have done a "bait and switch".
Casimir does not use your Model II to get the parallel plates result!
[Hal] "No bait and switch. I'm talking about Casimir Model I for parallel plates. Reread above."
[Jack] I have adequately answered this below. The ordinary Casimir Force Model I as WEAK Van Der Waals force between UNCHARGED finite edge parallel plates works fine because there is no dark energy, i.e. /\zpf ~ 0 everywhere in that problem. Your parallel plate objection is a Red Herring. It is completely different from the Ken Shoulders Ne CHARGED closed thin electron shell "dark energy bottle" EVO of radius a ~ N^1/2(h/mc). You have objected to my bushel of apples with your bushel of oranges. The two phenomena are qualitatively inequivalent.
*TYPO-CORRECTED THIRD DRAFT*
On Sep 3, 2004, at 8:58 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Hal Puthoff wrote on Sept 2, 2004:
"Jack,
In several of your recent postings you say that the flat-space, quantum physics Casimir model that we quantum physicists use (that does not take into account w = -1 implications of dark energy on the microscopic scale) has been overtaken by the discovery of dark energy."
[Jack] Exactly. I am saying that Einstein's local field equation
Guv + /\zpfguv = 0
definitely applies down at scale h/mc ~ 10^-11 cm. Of course the FRW cosmological metric solution does not apply there. That is a different story. In other words the effects of the equivalence principle and general coordinate covariance GCT play an essential role in this problem of zero point energy. In particular, /\zpf ~ 0 in the non-exotic ordinary vacuum where we live. This is because almost all of the random micro-quantum vacuum fluctuation zero point energy density is absorbed into the vacuum coherence field.
Note that the zero point energy density (from all sources) is
too(zpf) = (c^4/8piG*)/\zpfgoo
Where guv is the curved spacetime metric tensor
guv(curved) = nuv(globally flat) + (1/2)d[u,v]
du = (short wave cutoff)^2(Phase of Vacuum Coherence),u
The POST-INFLATIONARY elastic strain tensor (1/2)d[u,v] has all the gravity curvature information. This is not a small perturbation. It is a large non-perturbative term similar to the nonanalytic energy gap in the BCS superconductor theory. The resulting guv curved space-time local field is DYNAMICAL, i.e. "background independent" the way the loop "spin foam" guys like John Baez and Ashktekar mean it. That is, the guv field has same status as the EM Fuv field and objective local events at P are relations between the guv and Fuv local fields and are not the formal points in a manifold that have no direct physical meaning, i.e. active Diff(4) symmetry as explained by Rovelli in his new book on Quantum Gravity. You can then do perturbation theory adding a spin 2 tensor "graviton" quantum field in the smooth curved DYNAMICAL guv metric. There is no "quantum foam" in this theory. When the vacuum coherence -> 0 you simply get back globally flat space-time, i.e. the PRE-INFLATIONARY FALSE VACUUM. You do not directly quantize guv! Doing so is non-renormalizable for a very good reason. The pre-inflationary globally flat sub-stratum is renormalizable of course. There is a good reason why John Baez is not able to derive
Guv = 0
from Penrose combinatoric spin foams and will not be able to do so ever.
The GCT group derives from the U(1) local gauge transformations on the Vacuum Coherence phase.
That is, the curvature of 4D space-time is the non-Abelian local compensating gauge force field from breaking the symmetry of the 4-parameter translation group infinitesimally generated by total Energy-Momentum 4-vector. The compensating field du elastic world distortion field restores the broken translational symmetry. As Kibble showed 40 years ago you really need to locally gauge the entire 10 parameter Poincare group. The spin connection from the 6-parameter Lorentz group also plays a significant role and there is a torsion field in the completely self-consistent theory, although it usually plays no role in the vacuum problem only coupling to the spins of on-mass-shell particles in the Tuv source term. However, this assumption may not be correct - a matter for future research.
Where
/\zpf = (short wave cutoff)^-2[(short wave cutoff)^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 - 1]
G* may be larger than Newton's G at these small scales, i.e. it is a running coupling constant of an emergent effective field theory, which in this case is a local smooth c-number field from the ODLRO in the physical vacuum.
The ODLRO Vacuum Coherence Local Field characterizes the pre-inflationary to post-inflationary false to true vacuum phase transition and it explains why the Arrow of Time points in the direction of the expanding universe.
Globally flat quantum field theory is intrinsically an unstable theory because global special relativity does not permit the emergence of gravity.
[Hal] "Indeed, you use this claim to (a) criticize the Casimir model and (b) come up with a "dark energy" model for Shoulders' charge cluster phenomenon ("dark energy in a bottle," you call it).
[Jack} Correct. There are two very serious errors in the Casimir Type II model you use. Casimir simply did not know the correct physics, neither did Milonni. No one knew at the time they published their stuff. This only became clear post-1999 - actually 2002.
The serious errors are, as Mike Turner and everyone else working in dark energy at GR 17 will tell you
1. w = (pressure)/(energy density) = -1 for ALL ZPF not +1/3
2. You cannot have an exterior /\zpf = (mc/h)^-2 outside the EVO. The universe could not exist if that were the case. This is a very fundamental objection against the Casimir Type II Model!
[Hal] "When I point out that Casimir, Milonni, I, et al. use the quantum vacuum fluctuation Casimir-type model to advantage (and, BTW, get the right answer for Casimir attraction between parallel plates!) you point out that it is a false model in a flat space that does not take into account the recent GR cosmology concepts and therefore is flawed ("Casimir's greatest blunder," you call it!)."
[Hal] What you say here is false. You have done a "bait and switch". Casimir does not use your Model II to get the parallel plates result! That is, Casimir does not assume /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^-2 outside the plates with /\zpf ~ 0 inside the plates!
In fact what we have in the parallel plates is that /\zpf ~ 0 both inside and outside the plates so that you can use the ordinary QED boundary effect to a good approximation in that case. The EVO is a completely different phenomenon and you cannot work by analogy. The open finite edges of the plates ensure /\zpf ~ 0 everywhere!
"0" here means ~ 10^-56 cm^-2.
So, you have misrepresented what I say for the open finite parallel plates. I say, since /\zpf ~ 0 both inside and outside the plates, you can use Casimir's Type I QED model for that problem. You blurred the distinction between Type I and Type II in your remark above.
[Hal] Specifically, you argue that the ZPE radiation pressure modeling that uses w = 1/3 vacuum radiation pressure forces (as in the 1988 Phys. Rev A paper by Milonni et al., "Radiation pressure from the vacuum: Physical interpretation of the Casimir force") must be set aside in favor of the use of the w = -1 repulsion vacuum forces.
[Jack] Yes, I certainly say that! Milonni has made a serious error in fundamental physics. His paper is wrong period. w = +1/3 only works for REAL PHOTONS on the classical light cone.
[Hal] Here is my challenge to your line of logic. Forget the Shoulders' model for the moment, and simply show how your line of logic involving the w = -1 repulsion vacuum force leads to the known attractive Casimir force between parallel plates, which has been precisely measured and accounted for on the basis of the quantum physicists' use of the w = 1/3 vacuum forces. It would seem that you insist that instead the w = -1 repulsive force is the important force on this level, previously neglected, so please show how to derive the attractive Casimir force by your counter-claim with its opposite-sign vacuum force.
[Jack] Trivial. I already showed you above. The parallel plates phenomenon happens in ORDINARY non-exotic vacuum where /\zpf ~ 0 so you can use the Type I Casimir QED model! The ordinary open finite parallel plates experiment does not have any dark energy exotic vacuum effect at all because the vacuum coherence has adjusted to keep /\zpf ~ 0 every where in the relevant regions. That is the total ZPF pressure and energy density is zero in the ordinary non-exotic vacuum! Notice that the virtual photon ZPF pressure and energy density is not the total. All quantum fields contribute to /\zpf not only the virtual photons.
*Note also that the induced gravity larger (i.e. more negative) virtual photon "negative pressure" outside the plates will repel more strongly than the weaker negative pressure between the plates. Therefore, this will also give a net attractive force between the plates. However, I am not suggesting that this attraction is identical to the QED Casimir Van Der Waals force between the UNCHARGED PLATES (qualitatively different from the CHARGED EVOs).
* However, the plates SLIGHTLY perturb this. So, in the open plates case you will have a slightly higher virtual photon energy density outside the plates than you have inside because there are the additional long-wave modes. Therefore you have more negative virtual photon pressure outside the UNCHARGED plates than inside the plates. However, the positive virtual electron-positron pressure will compensate the virtual photon negative pressure to keep /\zpf ~ 0 everywhere and the resulting attractive Casimir force between the plates is simply the VERY WEAK induced Van Der Waals force as shown by Ian Peterson and others. There is no /\zpf exotic vacuum effect in this case at all! You have compared apples to oranges. You have confused two incompatible "total experimental arrangements" in Niels Bohr's sense. There is no good analogy between the EVO phenomenon with a CHARGED N-electron "shell" "dark energy bottle" and the tiny attractive force between two finite UNCHARGED very clean flat plates.
[Hal] "In summary, we see how Casimir's positive-radiation-pressure "blunder" model leads to agreement with experiment; we don't see how your opposite-sign dark-energy w = -1 repulsion force model would lead to the observed attraction. Please show this. If you can show this for the standard parallel plate Casimir Effect, then consideration of its use for more exotic geometries (e.g., Shoulders' charge cluster phenomenon) would be warranted. If not ....."
[Jack] I have answered your misplaced objection.
Collegially,
On Sep 2, 2004, at 8:08 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
As reading Mike Turner's article below shows, zero point energy density and its equal and opposite pressure, together directly warp space-time. This is different from QED based on globally flat spacetime without any gravity at all in which to a rough approximation you can ignore energy scales and simply subtract off the virtual photon zero point energy density with "normal ordering" of the photon creation and destruction non-Hermitian operators. See Milonni's book "The Quantum Vacuum" for these details, which ignore gravity effects.
Hal needs vanishing zero point energy density inside the EVO shell with an enormous zero point energy density outside the shell. This immediately falsifies his model, apart from the other issue that he needs a positive external pressure to hold in the Coulomb repulsion of the N electrons making the EVO thin shell. Casimir was not aware of the general relativity constraints on the problem. Casimir's Type II model would require that we live in an exotic vacuum where /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^2 ~ 10^22 cm^-2. In fact the vacuum we live in has /\zpf ~ 10^-56 cm^-2. Indeed the Casimir-Puthoff external /\zpf would not permit our universe to exist! It would warp space-time too much! In fact the EVO needs a negative pressure inside its shell with /\zpf ~ 10^-56 cm^-2 outside it where we exist. How come the non-exotic vacuum has such a small /\zpf? Simple, the vacuum coherence ABSORBS the random ZPF into the VACUUM CONDENSATE as a kind of zero entropy superfluid reservoir. The random ZPF is analogous to the "normal fluid" excitations. This also solves Penrose's problem in "Fashion, Faith and Fantasy" explaining why the early SPATIALLY-FLAT (on large-scale only) inflationary universe has low initial thermodynamic entropy setting the direction of the Arrow of Time of irreversibility of the Second Law of Thermodynamics to point the same way as the expansion of the universe.
On Sep 1, 2004, at 11:28 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Yes, thanks Joel. Mike Turner's remark below, in his otherwise very excellent Op/Ed, may well prove to be his "greatest blunder". :-)
On Sep 1, 2004, at 10:03 AM, Joel Isaacson wrote:
Public service: Mike Turner's Physics Today article on Dark Energy ===>>
[Note: the contrarian statement therein is: "Even though repulsive gravity
sounds like fun, dark energy--as far as we know--can't be bottled up to
create an object with antigravity." =jdi=
TYPO-CORRECTED! Also a new error by Turner detected below?
Dark Energy: Just What Theorists Ordered
Michael S. Turner
In the article on page 53, Saul Perlmutter describes how his team, and one
led by Brian Schmidt, used distant supernovae to discover that the expansion
of the universe is speeding up, not slowing down. At puzzling times like
these, theorists are called upon to provide understanding and, in the
process, to convince their audience that they actually anticipated the
puzzling discovery (maybe even predicted it).
The discovery of cosmic speedup, perhaps one of the most important in all of
science over the past 25 years, saved a beautiful theory--inflation--and
presented theorists with a wonderful puzzle--"dark energy," the stuff
causing cosmic speedup. What more could we ask for?
Since 1980, Alan Guth's cosmic inflation has been the driving idea in
cosmology. Central to inflation is a very early, tremendous burst of
expansion, powered by the potential energy associated with a hypothetical
scalar field called the inflaton. In a tiny fraction of a second, a small
bit of the universe is blown up to a size that encompasses all that we can
see today and much, much more. Any spatial curvature becomes flattened, and
quantum fluctuations in the inflaton field are stretched from subatomic to
astrophysical size. The decay of the inflaton produces the heat of the Big
Bang, and the quantum fluctuations in it lead to the matter inhomogeneity
that provides the seeds for all the structure in the universe, from galaxies
to clusters of galaxies and beyond.
Inflation not only explains, it also predicts. Its predictions include: a
spatially flat universe, a pattern of anisotropy in the cosmic microwave
background (CMB) that arises from the quantum-produced density
perturbations, and a sea of gravitational waves. Inflation was the
inspiration for the very successful cold dark matter (CDM) scenario for how
structure formed. CDM theory is based on a flat universe, dark matter made
of slowly moving elementary particles, and density perturbations arising
from quantum fluctuations.
From the beginning, inflation's signature prediction--a flat universe--was
in trouble. According to Einstein's theory, the mean energy density c^2rho0
determines the spatial curvature of the universe; for a flat universe, it
must be equal to the critical energy density. In cosmology talk, Omega0 = 1,
where Omega0 is the ratio of the mean energy density in any and all forms to the
critical energy density. In 1980, astronomers' measurements of Omega0 indicated
its value was something around 0.1.
Inflationists (like me) pinned our hopes on growing evidence for enormous
amounts of dark matter that hold galaxies and clusters of galaxies together.
This dark matter is distributed more diffusely than stars, making it harder
to inventory. Estimates for Omega0 rose, and for a while it appeared that enough
dark matter would be found to meet the inflationary prediction.
Cosmic troubles
By 1990, the problems for a flat universe were piling up. Estimates of the
amount of dark matter were getting better and still falling short, and
observations of large-scale structure suggested a CDM universe with a matter
density that was one-third of the critical density, that is, Omega(M) = 1/3.
Several of us sheepishly made a suggestion1 to save inflation: Add a
cosmological constant, /\, for the missing two-thirds of the critical
density, Omega(/\) = 2/3. Thus Omega0 = Omega(M) + Omega(/\) = 1. The inflationary prediction is a
flat universe, not necessarily Omega(M) = 1.
To save a beautiful theory, theorists are willing to consider the
implausible, although not the impossible. With its checkered history in
cosmology, the cosmological constant was certainly implausible. Albert
Einstein used it to create a static model of the universe; Hermann Bondi,
Thomas Gold, and Fred Hoyle used the cosmological constant to address the
fact that the time back to the Big Bang appeared to be less than the age of
Earth, and now it is invoked to save inflation.
By the mid-1990s, the observational evidence for the /\ version of CDM,
including the first hints from CMB anisotropy measurements that the universe
is flat, was becoming compelling, at least for theorists.1 However, there
was a problem: /\CDM (CDM with a cosmological constant) also predicts
accelerated expansion, and the first supernova results did not yet show
acceleration.
With the discovery of cosmic speedup in 1998, everything quickly fell into
place: The universe is flat, with one-third in matter and two-thirds in
something like a cosmological constant. Overnight, skeptical astronomers
became believers in inflation. Strange as it was, cosmic speedup was the
missing piece in the puzzle. It saved inflation, but be careful what you
wish for!
According to Isaac Newton, gravity is always attractive, because the
strength of an object's gravity depends only on its mass. Einstein's theory,
however, allows for repulsive gravity and cosmic speedup because the
strength of gravity also depends on pressure, p, with c^2rho + 3p acting as the
source of gravity. Something that is very elastic (that is, negative
pressure p < -c^2rho/3) has gravity that repels, rather than attracts.
Something with pressure comparable to its energy density is exotic. Matter,
even at the center of a sun, has a pressure that is orders of magnitude
smaller than its energy density. The ratio of pressure to energy density is
characterized by the square of the internal velocity divided by c2. Thus
dark energy is intrinsically relativistic and is more like energy than
matter. Even though repulsive gravity sounds like fun, dark energy--as far
as we know--can't be bottled up to create an object with antigravity.
Quantum mechanics provides a candidate for something that is very elastic:
The virtual pairs that fill the vacuum have negative pressure.
I think Mike made an error here. The virtual pairs have positive pressure. The virtual photons have negative pressure. See Milonni's Quantum Vacuum book where boson statistics require positive ZPF energy density c^2rho and Fermi statistics require negative ZPF energy density, and both have w = -1. Of course a virtual pair condensate will be like a boson superfluid.
To see this,
compute the pdV work done by an expanding piston that encloses quantum
vacuum; you will find that pvac = - c^2rhovac where rvac is the quantum vacuum's
energy density (see the figure). Thus, quantum vacuum energy is very
repulsive because c^2rho + 3p = -2 rho(vac). Mathematically, quantum vacuum energy is
equivalent to Einstein's infamous cosmological constant /\.
Although Einstein dismissed the cosmological constant as a personal blunder,
quantum mechanics makes it obligatory. Unfortunately, even the best quantum
"mechanics" have failed to produce a sensible prediction for /\. The sum of
zero-point energies diverges due to short-wavelength modes. Truncating at an
energy scale beyond which we can appeal to physics ignorance illustrates the
enormity of the problem: For a 100-GeV cutoff, Omega(/\) = 10^55. This disparity is
the greatest embarrassment in all of theoretical physics.
Many particle theorists believe that a correct calculation of /\ will yield
precisely zero because of the utter implausibility of obtaining a number 55
or more orders of magnitude smaller than its "natural value." If quantum
nothingness weighs nothing, what, then, is causing the universe to
accelerate? Dark energy!
Mystery deepens
What do we know about dark energy and how can we learn more? It accounts for
about two-thirds of the critical energy density and is much more smoothly
distributed than matter. If it clumped, we would see its effects when
studying clusters and other gravitationally bound objects, and we do not.
Dark energy is characterized by an "equation of state," which is the ratio w
(pronounced "dubya") of its pressure to its energy density w = p/c^2rho. Although
w need not be constant, for simplicity I will assume that for now.
If dark energy is vacuum energy, w = -1 (for comparison, for nonrelativistic
matter w = 0, and for radiation, w = 1/3.) The ratio w determines how the
energy density of dark energy changes as the universe expands: rho ~
(1/R^3)(1+w), where R is the cosmic scale factor. Negative pressure (w < 0)
leads to an energy density that decreases more slowly than matter (rho(M) ~
1/R^3). Because of this fact, dark energy was less important in the past and
will become more important in the future. Why dark energy is just becoming
important today begs for explanation. I call this the Nancy Kerrigan
problem--why me, why now?
That dark energy was unimportant in the past is good: This fact means the
repulsive gravity of dark energy doesn't interfere with the attractive
gravity of dark matter that drives the formation of cosmic structure. The
lesser importance of dark energy in the past is also the root of an
independent argument for cosmic acceleration. The "missing energy" needed in
addition to matter to account for the flat universe determined from CMB
measurements (see the story on page 21) must have been unimportant in the
past; otherwise its smooth distribution would have interfered with the
formation of structure. To make the missing energy unimportant in the past
requires that w < -1/2, which implies that it must have repulsive gravity.
Imaginative theorists have suggested an array of possibilities for dark
energy. Many involve the existence of a new, scalar field and the idea that
we are in a period of mild inflation while this field (called quintessence)
rolls toward its ground state. Because quintessence and inflation both
involve accelerated expansion and the underlying cause of each is poorly
understood, it has been speculated that they might be related. Thus far,
quintessence has raised new questions without shedding light on dark energy.
What we call dark energy could be the harbinger of exotic physics rather
than a new, etherlike substance. Cosmic acceleration could be signaling that
Einstein's theory requires modification, perhaps due to the influence of
unseen additional spatial dimensions. An interesting twist is that some
string theorists believe that cosmic speedup and string theory, which itself
predicts extra dimensions, are incompatible. This will come as a relief to
the less enthusiastic fans of string theory.
Destiny
One thing is clear: Dark energy leads to a revision in our view of cosmic
destiny. With matter alone, destiny and geometry are one: Closed universes
recollapse and open or flat universes expand forever. If dark energy is
vacuum energy, our flat universe will continue accelerating to a bleak
future--in 100 billion years all but a few hundred galaxies nearby will have
their light shifted too far into the red to be seen. If dark energy
eventually dissipates, the universe will begin to decelerate, possibly even
recollapse.
Because dark energy is so diffuse, cosmology offers the only known way of
getting at it, and w is the hook. The energy density of dark energy, which
depends on w, affects the expansion rate. Models for dark energy differ in
their predictions for w and thus in their predictions for the expansion
history of the universe. Distant supernovae, galaxy clusters, and
gravitational lensing can all be used to chart the past expansion rate and
determine w. And there is much interest in doing so: Two new centers--the
Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology at Stanford
University and the NSF Center for Cosmological Physics at the University of
Chicago--list the study of dark energy as a primary science goal. The US
Department of Energy is planning a dedicated space telescope for supernovae,
the SuperNova/ Acceleration Probe (SNAP). NASA has targeted dark energy for
one of its new Einstein probes. NSF is considering an 8-m wide-field survey
telescope to study dark energy, the Large-aperture Synoptic Survey Telescope
(LSST). Add in my nine-year-old son's theoretical work, and progress is
assured.
Dark energy is one of the deepest and most exciting puzzles in all of
science. It is likely that a crazy new idea is needed to explain cosmic
speedup and resolve the cosmological constant problem. (That does not mean
every crazy idea is a solution.) The payoff will be well worth the effort:
We will gain new insights into the nature of matter, space, and time, and
shed light on our cosmic destiny.
References
1. M. S. Turner, G. Steigman, L. Krauss, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 2090 (1984);
P. J. E. Peebles, Astrophys. J. 52, 2090 (1984); L. Kofman, A. A.
Starobinskii, Sov. Astron. Lett. 11, 271 (1985); G. Efstathiou et al.,
Nature 348, 705 (1990); M. S. Turner, Phys. Scr. T36, 167 (1991).
2. L. Krauss, M. S. Turner, Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 27, 1137 (1995); J.
Ostriker, P. Steinhardt, Nature 377, 600 (1996).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Turner is the Rauner Distinguished Service Professor at the
University of Chicago and a staff scientist at Fermilab.
From: Jack Sarfatti
Reply-To: SarfattiScienceSeminars@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Starfleet Command] Worldwide Exclusive: 'Dark Energy' bomb
more powerful than thermonuke?
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 09:36:15 -0700
Information on Ken Shoulders
1. Long-time associate of Hal Puthoff. Both worked in US Intelligence
Community for years.
2. Brilliant gadgeteer with small microwave devices holds several
important patents.
3. Ken's opinions are taken seriously in the USG Defense Intelligence
Community.
4. Pressure is mounting for Shoulders, Sarfatti and Puthoff to write a
joint paper together showing conflicting models of the phenomenon.
Puthoff uses a model of Casimir's "Type II" in which there is a positive
zero point energy pressure outside the thin shell of electrons and
vanishing zero point pressure inside it. Sarfatti says Casimir made an
error by assuming that the well known "dubya factor" (i.e. w =
(pressure)/(energy density)) is +1/3, which it is for real photons
propagating energy to infinity as electromagnetic radiation. Sarfatti
objects that w = -1 for the virtual photons of the zero point vacuum
fluctuations. That w = -1 for this case is well known to cosmologists
working on the "dark energy" (e.g. Mike Turner's Op/Ed in April 2003
Physics Today). "w = -1 follows from Einstein's equivalence principle
together with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Furthermore, boson
statistics require a positive virtual photon energy density, therefore an
equal and opposite negative virtual photon pressure. Virtual quanta are
directly observable in their warping of spacetime. You cannot subtract
them out. The pressure warps space-time three times more than the energy
density. The negative pressure makes repulsive anti-gravity that is the
'Right Stuff' for weightless warp drives, wide wormholes and,
unfortunately 'universe destroying' weird weapons." said Sarfatti.
Sarfatti cited Sir Martin Rees's book "Our Final Hour" on this subject.
Sarfatti's model is the mirror opposite of Puthoff's. "The zero point
pressure is negative inside the thin shell of typically a trillion to ten
thousand trillion electrons in the observed EVOs 10^-5 cm to 10^-5 meters
across and is zero outside. Negative zero point pressure makes the vacuum
like a spring and the electric repulsion does work against the vacuum to
create a metastable EVO. The electrons make a bottle or container for the
anti-gravity dark energy vacuum core of the EVO. Break the bottle to
release the Dark Energy Genie as 'Cold Fusion'. Mike Turner wrote that it
couldn't be done, apparently Ken Shoulders has done what was thought to
be an impossible dream." says Sarfatti.
For further reading see August 2004 Popular Mechanics p. 77
http://popularmechanics.com/science/research/2004/8/dangerous_science/
index5.phtml
The above article mentions the recent unsolved murder of Cold Fusion
advocate Gene Mallove.
And Moscow's PRAVDA
http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/379/12737_weapons.html
On Sep 1, 2004, at 7:53 AM, Victor Martinez wrote:
www.prweb.com/printer.php?prid=153747
WORLDWIDE MILTARY ORDNANCE EXCLUSIVE: DARK ENERGY BOMB MORE
POWERFUL THAN NUKES! –
"If done too fast with a large enough Exotic Vacuum Object this would be
a powerful bomb - more powerful than thermonuclear" – Dr. Jack
Sarfatti
(PRWEB) September 1, 2004 -- Experimentalist Ken Shoulders claims that
electrons are behaving in ways thought to be impossible. A new and
previously unknown force appears to be binding the electrons at short
range into clusters of electron charge. Shoulders calls these clusters
Exotic Vacuum Objects, or EVO's.
Shoulders describes this as "a short-range force resembling a positive
charge negating the effect of repulsive electronic charge"
One of Ken Shoulder's latest papers suggests nefarious uses for charged
cluster technology based on EVO's:
"The author can easily imagine a scenario where instructions are
generated with enough clarity for about 1 person in 1,000 to perform the
necessary operations to refine and store a gallon jug of electrons in
the form of Exotic Vacuum Objects (EVO's) ... there is no doubt that
this jug would be light enough to carry and be highly sensitive to
destabilization of a catastrophic nature..."
Ken Shoulders has recently collaborated on several papers with
independent theoretical physicist Dr. Jack Sarfatti, in San Francisco.
Sarfatti suggests that his theory of exotic vacuum dark energy/dark
matter can explain Shoulders' experimental data.
Although Sarfatti hopes for carefully controlled release of energy from
the EVO's, both Sarfatti and Shoulders warn that rapid release of a
large EVO would be explosive, perhaps more powerful than a thermonuclear
device.
Contact Information:
Gary Bekkum
STARstream Research
952-909-3862
----------------------------------------
Disclaimer: If you have any questions regarding information in these
press releases please contact the company listed in the press release.
Please do not contact PR Web™. We will be unable to assist you with
your inquiry. PR Web™ disclaims any content contained in these
release. Our complete disclaimer appears here.
© Copyright 1997-2004, PR Web™. All Rights Reserved
On Sep 3, 2004, at 9:31 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Memorandum for the Record
Subject: Metric Engineering the Fabric of Space-Time for Warps, Wormholes and WMD Warning.
Background references:
http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/379/12737_weapons.html
http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/377/12778_weapons.html
http://popularmechanics.com/science/research/2004/8/dangerous_science/index5.phtml
http://www.brothersjudd.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/reviews.detail/book_id/1318/Our%20Final%20Ho.htm
The apparent enormity of the unbalanced electric charge Ne on the EVO is obviously disquieting and has bothered me from the beginning. The problem stems from using flat Euclidean geometry when in fact the EVO must be strongly warped into a Wheeler geometrodynamic micro-geon by its dark energy exotic vacuum core. Note that Hal Puthoff's Type II EVO model also suffers from this same defect as does my "flat" model below. This permits N to be much smaller for the same apparent size of the EVO than is expected from ordinary flat space geometry. Indeed this effect has been allegedly seen in UFOs according to Vallee and Davis's NIDS paper.
http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2003/nov/m07-015.shtml
One must really use the full Kerr-Newman metric solution of Einstein's GR field equations or at least put in the charged shell. However, for now I give a crude back-of-the-envelope estimate using the static spherically symmetric Schwarzschild solution for a uniform dark energy sphere of variable physical radius R to show the basic idea that
Area of the surface of the EVO << 4pi(Observed Physical Size of EVO)^2
i.e.
A = 4pir^2 ~ N(h/mc)^2 << 4pia^2
Where
Area of the surface of the EVO = A = 4piN(h/mc)^2 in terms of the Schwarzschild radial coordinate r.
Start with the EVO potential energy per unit electron mass m
V(r) = (Ne)^2/mr + c^2/\zpfr^2
See Kip Thorne's "Black Holes and Time Warps" for background on why Area << 4pi(Physical Size)^2.
The critical point for dynamical equilibrium is then
dV(r)/dr = 0
i.e.
- (Ne)^2/mr^2 + 2c^2/\zpfr = 0
Therefore,
N^2(e^2/mc^2) = 2/\zpfr^3
Where e^2/mc^2 is the classical electron radius ~ 1 fermi ~ 10^-13 cm = 10^-15 meters and /\zpf has dimensions of reciprocal area, i.e. CURVATURE.
On the other hand we know that
A/4pi = N(h/mc)^2 = r^2
Therefore
r^3 = N^3/2(h/mc)^3
N^2(e^2/mc^2) = 2/\zpfN^3/2(h/mc)^3
N^1/2(e^2/mc^2) = 2/\zpf(h/mc)^3
N^1/2(e^2/mc^2)/(h/mc) = 2/\zpf(h/mc)^2
N^1/2(e^2/hc) = 2/\zpf(h/mc)^2
N^1/2 ~ 2(137)/\zpf10^-22
with /\zpf in units cm^-2.
i.e.
/\zpf(Dark Energy Core of EVO) ~ N^1/2(Twice the Fine Structure Constant)(Electron Compton Wavelength)^-2
The square root of the pure number Fine Structure Constant e^2/hc ~ 1/137 is the absolute QED coupling strength for a VERTEX of a Feynman diagram where a photon couples to a charge e (both can be real or virtual).
For an EVO of unbalanced charge Ne of physical size a. But what is a? Experimentally a is typically 10^-5 cm to 10^-5 meters. We want of course
N(h/mc)^2 = 4pi(Space Warp Factor)(Observed Size of EVO)^2
Where (Space Warp Factor) << 1
So that the unbalanced charge Ne is not as large as modeled below.
That is, we do not really want N ~ 10^12 to 10^16 as predicted by the FLAT SPACE model.
This problem is still unsolved of course and I am working on it.
Ken Shoulders' EVO
On Aug 18, 2004, at 8:54 AM, Ken Shoulders wrote:
"THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY
by
Ken Shoulders
Abstract
Electron clusters, or EVOs, are shown to be ideal candidates for electrical power generation using easily available methods for manipulation of electronic charge. The work to be done is described as manipulation of the exotic vacuum in a way that takes advantage of the ability to move the EVO against an electrical load using only a fraction of the input power usually used, resulting in an energy gain. However, the high intensity of the process and ease of applying it to mischievous ends portend future difficulties with its use.
Prologue
It has long been known by the author that the best form of charge manipulation for the generation of electrical power involved the use of EVs, or EVOs, in a relatively free form in either vacuum or low gas pressure. This basic method was the subject of a patent issued to Shoulders in 1991(2) for anomalous energy conversion. It was also determined early on that this discovery opened an undesirable gateway to high energy misuse of such charge structures and the work was then turned to more benign solid state methods of thermal energy production, closely related to what is called “cold fusion”. Unfortunately, the difficulty of designing an acceptable machine for anomalous energy production was unacceptably large, primarily due to the fundamental, self-destructive nature of the process and the inability to find a feasible way to automatically rebuild the machine for a useful lifetime. This difficulty has now redirected the work toward the original process of using EVOs in a near solid-state form while immersed in low-pressure gas containers. The attendant difficulties of mischievous use of EVOs on an unprecedented level are the secondary subject of this paper, to which the author has no viable solutions."
This recently posted file can be downloaded from: http://www.svn.net/krscfs/
Some points both subtle and unsubtle.
1. Hal Puthoff's Casimir Type II Model of the Ken Shoulders EVO has /\zpf = (mc/h)^2 outside the EVO shell of N electrons for a total unbalanced charge Ne in a close-packed spherical shell of radius a ~ N^1/2(h/mc). Hal also assumes /\zpf = 0 inside the EVO shell and he makes the blatantly wrong assumption that w = +1/3. Appealing to Casimir and Milonni does not help. If they did it, they are also wrong. The EVOs Ken makes allegedly have N ~ 10^12 to 10^16. (h/mc) ~ 10^-11 cm so that is a ~ 10^-5 cm to 10^-3 cm What happened to the positive charge left behind? Note that 10^12e ~ 10^-7 Coulombs. Two like charges of 1 Coulomb each 1 meter apart repel each other with a force of 1 MILLION TONS! We now have for the EVO N ~ 10^12e in a sphere 10^-7 meters across, a self-repulsive force of ~ 10^-1410^14 MILLION TONS ~ 1 MILLION TONS! That is, the zero point pressure must prevent the EVOs at the small end of the spectrum reported by Ken Shoulders from ripping itself apart with a force of ONE MILLION TONS! What about the bigger EVO at 10^-3 Coulombs? That's 10^-6x10^10 MILLION TONS ~ 100 TRILLION TONS OF SELF-DESTRUCTIVE FORCE!
In general the self-ripping unbalanced electric force ~ (Ne)^2/N(h/mc)^2 ~ N(emc/h)^2
2. The zero point energy density that Hal posits outside the EVO surface is enormous if we use Newton's constant of gravity.
Puthoff's zero point energy density ~ (c^4/8piG)(mc/h)^2 ~ 10^19Gev x 10^33 x 10^22 ~ 10^74 Gev/cc ~ 10^64 Joules/cc (since 1 Joule ~ 10^19 ev). If G* is much bigger than G at these small scales the ZPF energy density will be smaller.
This is a ridiculous once one realizes that in General Relativity the zero point energy density warps space-time directly as Mike Turner clearly explains below. Therefore, Hal's model for the EVO is clearly wrong! That is, our universe could not even exist if Hal's EVO model were true.
Remember from Mike Turner's article below, w = (pressure)/(energy density) for ALL STUFF both REAL and VIRTUAL!
My model says we live in a universe where /\zpf ~ 0 because the random micro-quantum ZPF energy density is absorbed into the MACRO-QUANTUM VACUUM CONDENSATE or Vacuum BEC. Ken's EVO has an INTERIOR UNIFORM DARK ENERGY CORE with /\zpf > 0, w = -1 and a NEGATIVE ZPF PRESSURE since the virtual photon ZPF energy density is positive from boson quantum statistics.
A SUBTLE POINT!
Positive potential energy with an inverse power law is repulsive.
Example 1. U = +e^2/r, dU/dr = -e^2/r^2, F = -dU/dr points in the direction of increasing r, i.e. repulsion
Negative potential energy with an inverse power law is attractive.
Example 2. U = -e^2/r, dU/dr = e^2/r^2, F = -dU/dr points in the direction of decreasing r, i.e. attraction
Positive potential energy with a direct power law is attractive.
Example 3. U = +mc^2|/\zpf|r^2 a 3D harmonic oscillator potential with SU(3) quantum symmetry group like quarks in a bag (e.g. "QCD Lite" Frank Wilczek) Flatten this to a plane to get SU(2)?
dU/dr = +2mc^2|/\zpf|r, therefore -dU/dr points in the direction of decreasing r, i.e. attraction
Negative potential energy with a direct power law is repulsive.
Example 4. Trivial exercise.
From p. 26 of John Peacock's "Cosmological Physics" one sees that to a first approximation model /\zpf inside the EVO shell as uniform. This follows from Einstein's equivalence principle + Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Therefore, like drilling a hole through center of Earth and dropping a ball down the hole, one gets a simple harmonic motion i.e. the 3D harmonic oscillator.
Consequently the HYPOTHETICAL EVO in simplest model obeys the simple math
V = (Ne)^2/mr + /\zpfr^2 from the inside of the EVO shell. /\zpf = 0 OUTSIDE the EVO shell.
neglecting rotation and a very small QED Casimir Type I force from virtual photons. Do not confuse that with Puthoff's Type II model.
Balance the two forces at the critical point
dV/dr = 0
which is a stable minimum when
d^2V/dr^2 > 0
Voila! Ce la Vie!
On Sept 3, 2004 Hal Puthoff wrote
[Hal previous] "When I point out that Casimir, Milonni, I, et al. use the
quantum vacuum fluctuation Casimir-type model to advantage (and,
BTW, get the right answer for Casimir attraction between parallel
plates!) you point out that it is a false model in a flat space that
does not take into account the recent GR cosmology concepts and
therefore is flawed ("Casimir's greatest blunder," you call it!)."
[Jack previous] What you say here is false. You have done a "bait and switch".
Casimir does not use your Model II to get the parallel plates result!
[Hal] "No bait and switch. I'm talking about Casimir Model I for parallel plates. Reread above."
[Jack] I have adequately answered this below. The ordinary Casimir Force Model I as WEAK Van Der Waals force between UNCHARGED finite edge parallel plates works fine because there is no dark energy, i.e. /\zpf ~ 0 everywhere in that problem. Your parallel plate objection is a Red Herring. It is completely different from the Ken Shoulders Ne CHARGED closed thin electron shell "dark energy bottle" EVO of radius a ~ N^1/2(h/mc). You have objected to my bushel of apples with your bushel of oranges. The two phenomena are qualitatively inequivalent.
*TYPO-CORRECTED THIRD DRAFT*
On Sep 3, 2004, at 8:58 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Hal Puthoff wrote on Sept 2, 2004:
"Jack,
In several of your recent postings you say that the flat-space, quantum physics Casimir model that we quantum physicists use (that does not take into account w = -1 implications of dark energy on the microscopic scale) has been overtaken by the discovery of dark energy."
[Jack] Exactly. I am saying that Einstein's local field equation
Guv + /\zpfguv = 0
definitely applies down at scale h/mc ~ 10^-11 cm. Of course the FRW cosmological metric solution does not apply there. That is a different story. In other words the effects of the equivalence principle and general coordinate covariance GCT play an essential role in this problem of zero point energy. In particular, /\zpf ~ 0 in the non-exotic ordinary vacuum where we live. This is because almost all of the random micro-quantum vacuum fluctuation zero point energy density is absorbed into the vacuum coherence field.
Note that the zero point energy density (from all sources) is
too(zpf) = (c^4/8piG*)/\zpfgoo
Where guv is the curved spacetime metric tensor
guv(curved) = nuv(globally flat) + (1/2)d[u,v]
du = (short wave cutoff)^2(Phase of Vacuum Coherence),u
The POST-INFLATIONARY elastic strain tensor (1/2)d[u,v] has all the gravity curvature information. This is not a small perturbation. It is a large non-perturbative term similar to the nonanalytic energy gap in the BCS superconductor theory. The resulting guv curved space-time local field is DYNAMICAL, i.e. "background independent" the way the loop "spin foam" guys like John Baez and Ashktekar mean it. That is, the guv field has same status as the EM Fuv field and objective local events at P are relations between the guv and Fuv local fields and are not the formal points in a manifold that have no direct physical meaning, i.e. active Diff(4) symmetry as explained by Rovelli in his new book on Quantum Gravity. You can then do perturbation theory adding a spin 2 tensor "graviton" quantum field in the smooth curved DYNAMICAL guv metric. There is no "quantum foam" in this theory. When the vacuum coherence -> 0 you simply get back globally flat space-time, i.e. the PRE-INFLATIONARY FALSE VACUUM. You do not directly quantize guv! Doing so is non-renormalizable for a very good reason. The pre-inflationary globally flat sub-stratum is renormalizable of course. There is a good reason why John Baez is not able to derive
Guv = 0
from Penrose combinatoric spin foams and will not be able to do so ever.
The GCT group derives from the U(1) local gauge transformations on the Vacuum Coherence phase.
That is, the curvature of 4D space-time is the non-Abelian local compensating gauge force field from breaking the symmetry of the 4-parameter translation group infinitesimally generated by total Energy-Momentum 4-vector. The compensating field du elastic world distortion field restores the broken translational symmetry. As Kibble showed 40 years ago you really need to locally gauge the entire 10 parameter Poincare group. The spin connection from the 6-parameter Lorentz group also plays a significant role and there is a torsion field in the completely self-consistent theory, although it usually plays no role in the vacuum problem only coupling to the spins of on-mass-shell particles in the Tuv source term. However, this assumption may not be correct - a matter for future research.
Where
/\zpf = (short wave cutoff)^-2[(short wave cutoff)^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 - 1]
G* may be larger than Newton's G at these small scales, i.e. it is a running coupling constant of an emergent effective field theory, which in this case is a local smooth c-number field from the ODLRO in the physical vacuum.
The ODLRO Vacuum Coherence Local Field characterizes the pre-inflationary to post-inflationary false to true vacuum phase transition and it explains why the Arrow of Time points in the direction of the expanding universe.
Globally flat quantum field theory is intrinsically an unstable theory because global special relativity does not permit the emergence of gravity.
[Hal] "Indeed, you use this claim to (a) criticize the Casimir model and (b) come up with a "dark energy" model for Shoulders' charge cluster phenomenon ("dark energy in a bottle," you call it).
[Jack} Correct. There are two very serious errors in the Casimir Type II model you use. Casimir simply did not know the correct physics, neither did Milonni. No one knew at the time they published their stuff. This only became clear post-1999 - actually 2002.
The serious errors are, as Mike Turner and everyone else working in dark energy at GR 17 will tell you
1. w = (pressure)/(energy density) = -1 for ALL ZPF not +1/3
2. You cannot have an exterior /\zpf = (mc/h)^-2 outside the EVO. The universe could not exist if that were the case. This is a very fundamental objection against the Casimir Type II Model!
[Hal] "When I point out that Casimir, Milonni, I, et al. use the quantum vacuum fluctuation Casimir-type model to advantage (and, BTW, get the right answer for Casimir attraction between parallel plates!) you point out that it is a false model in a flat space that does not take into account the recent GR cosmology concepts and therefore is flawed ("Casimir's greatest blunder," you call it!)."
[Hal] What you say here is false. You have done a "bait and switch". Casimir does not use your Model II to get the parallel plates result! That is, Casimir does not assume /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^-2 outside the plates with /\zpf ~ 0 inside the plates!
In fact what we have in the parallel plates is that /\zpf ~ 0 both inside and outside the plates so that you can use the ordinary QED boundary effect to a good approximation in that case. The EVO is a completely different phenomenon and you cannot work by analogy. The open finite edges of the plates ensure /\zpf ~ 0 everywhere!
"0" here means ~ 10^-56 cm^-2.
So, you have misrepresented what I say for the open finite parallel plates. I say, since /\zpf ~ 0 both inside and outside the plates, you can use Casimir's Type I QED model for that problem. You blurred the distinction between Type I and Type II in your remark above.
[Hal] Specifically, you argue that the ZPE radiation pressure modeling that uses w = 1/3 vacuum radiation pressure forces (as in the 1988 Phys. Rev A paper by Milonni et al., "Radiation pressure from the vacuum: Physical interpretation of the Casimir force") must be set aside in favor of the use of the w = -1 repulsion vacuum forces.
[Jack] Yes, I certainly say that! Milonni has made a serious error in fundamental physics. His paper is wrong period. w = +1/3 only works for REAL PHOTONS on the classical light cone.
[Hal] Here is my challenge to your line of logic. Forget the Shoulders' model for the moment, and simply show how your line of logic involving the w = -1 repulsion vacuum force leads to the known attractive Casimir force between parallel plates, which has been precisely measured and accounted for on the basis of the quantum physicists' use of the w = 1/3 vacuum forces. It would seem that you insist that instead the w = -1 repulsive force is the important force on this level, previously neglected, so please show how to derive the attractive Casimir force by your counter-claim with its opposite-sign vacuum force.
[Jack] Trivial. I already showed you above. The parallel plates phenomenon happens in ORDINARY non-exotic vacuum where /\zpf ~ 0 so you can use the Type I Casimir QED model! The ordinary open finite parallel plates experiment does not have any dark energy exotic vacuum effect at all because the vacuum coherence has adjusted to keep /\zpf ~ 0 every where in the relevant regions. That is the total ZPF pressure and energy density is zero in the ordinary non-exotic vacuum! Notice that the virtual photon ZPF pressure and energy density is not the total. All quantum fields contribute to /\zpf not only the virtual photons.
*Note also that the induced gravity larger (i.e. more negative) virtual photon "negative pressure" outside the plates will repel more strongly than the weaker negative pressure between the plates. Therefore, this will also give a net attractive force between the plates. However, I am not suggesting that this attraction is identical to the QED Casimir Van Der Waals force between the UNCHARGED PLATES (qualitatively different from the CHARGED EVOs).
* However, the plates SLIGHTLY perturb this. So, in the open plates case you will have a slightly higher virtual photon energy density outside the plates than you have inside because there are the additional long-wave modes. Therefore you have more negative virtual photon pressure outside the UNCHARGED plates than inside the plates. However, the positive virtual electron-positron pressure will compensate the virtual photon negative pressure to keep /\zpf ~ 0 everywhere and the resulting attractive Casimir force between the plates is simply the VERY WEAK induced Van Der Waals force as shown by Ian Peterson and others. There is no /\zpf exotic vacuum effect in this case at all! You have compared apples to oranges. You have confused two incompatible "total experimental arrangements" in Niels Bohr's sense. There is no good analogy between the EVO phenomenon with a CHARGED N-electron "shell" "dark energy bottle" and the tiny attractive force between two finite UNCHARGED very clean flat plates.
[Hal] "In summary, we see how Casimir's positive-radiation-pressure "blunder" model leads to agreement with experiment; we don't see how your opposite-sign dark-energy w = -1 repulsion force model would lead to the observed attraction. Please show this. If you can show this for the standard parallel plate Casimir Effect, then consideration of its use for more exotic geometries (e.g., Shoulders' charge cluster phenomenon) would be warranted. If not ....."
[Jack] I have answered your misplaced objection.
Collegially,
On Sep 2, 2004, at 8:08 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
As reading Mike Turner's article below shows, zero point energy density and its equal and opposite pressure, together directly warp space-time. This is different from QED based on globally flat spacetime without any gravity at all in which to a rough approximation you can ignore energy scales and simply subtract off the virtual photon zero point energy density with "normal ordering" of the photon creation and destruction non-Hermitian operators. See Milonni's book "The Quantum Vacuum" for these details, which ignore gravity effects.
Hal needs vanishing zero point energy density inside the EVO shell with an enormous zero point energy density outside the shell. This immediately falsifies his model, apart from the other issue that he needs a positive external pressure to hold in the Coulomb repulsion of the N electrons making the EVO thin shell. Casimir was not aware of the general relativity constraints on the problem. Casimir's Type II model would require that we live in an exotic vacuum where /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^2 ~ 10^22 cm^-2. In fact the vacuum we live in has /\zpf ~ 10^-56 cm^-2. Indeed the Casimir-Puthoff external /\zpf would not permit our universe to exist! It would warp space-time too much! In fact the EVO needs a negative pressure inside its shell with /\zpf ~ 10^-56 cm^-2 outside it where we exist. How come the non-exotic vacuum has such a small /\zpf? Simple, the vacuum coherence ABSORBS the random ZPF into the VACUUM CONDENSATE as a kind of zero entropy superfluid reservoir. The random ZPF is analogous to the "normal fluid" excitations. This also solves Penrose's problem in "Fashion, Faith and Fantasy" explaining why the early SPATIALLY-FLAT (on large-scale only) inflationary universe has low initial thermodynamic entropy setting the direction of the Arrow of Time of irreversibility of the Second Law of Thermodynamics to point the same way as the expansion of the universe.
On Sep 1, 2004, at 11:28 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Yes, thanks Joel. Mike Turner's remark below, in his otherwise very excellent Op/Ed, may well prove to be his "greatest blunder". :-)
On Sep 1, 2004, at 10:03 AM, Joel Isaacson wrote:
Public service: Mike Turner's Physics Today article on Dark Energy ===>>
[Note: the contrarian statement therein is: "Even though repulsive gravity
sounds like fun, dark energy--as far as we know--can't be bottled up to
create an object with antigravity." =jdi=
TYPO-CORRECTED! Also a new error by Turner detected below?
Dark Energy: Just What Theorists Ordered
Michael S. Turner
In the article on page 53, Saul Perlmutter describes how his team, and one
led by Brian Schmidt, used distant supernovae to discover that the expansion
of the universe is speeding up, not slowing down. At puzzling times like
these, theorists are called upon to provide understanding and, in the
process, to convince their audience that they actually anticipated the
puzzling discovery (maybe even predicted it).
The discovery of cosmic speedup, perhaps one of the most important in all of
science over the past 25 years, saved a beautiful theory--inflation--and
presented theorists with a wonderful puzzle--"dark energy," the stuff
causing cosmic speedup. What more could we ask for?
Since 1980, Alan Guth's cosmic inflation has been the driving idea in
cosmology. Central to inflation is a very early, tremendous burst of
expansion, powered by the potential energy associated with a hypothetical
scalar field called the inflaton. In a tiny fraction of a second, a small
bit of the universe is blown up to a size that encompasses all that we can
see today and much, much more. Any spatial curvature becomes flattened, and
quantum fluctuations in the inflaton field are stretched from subatomic to
astrophysical size. The decay of the inflaton produces the heat of the Big
Bang, and the quantum fluctuations in it lead to the matter inhomogeneity
that provides the seeds for all the structure in the universe, from galaxies
to clusters of galaxies and beyond.
Inflation not only explains, it also predicts. Its predictions include: a
spatially flat universe, a pattern of anisotropy in the cosmic microwave
background (CMB) that arises from the quantum-produced density
perturbations, and a sea of gravitational waves. Inflation was the
inspiration for the very successful cold dark matter (CDM) scenario for how
structure formed. CDM theory is based on a flat universe, dark matter made
of slowly moving elementary particles, and density perturbations arising
from quantum fluctuations.
From the beginning, inflation's signature prediction--a flat universe--was
in trouble. According to Einstein's theory, the mean energy density c^2rho0
determines the spatial curvature of the universe; for a flat universe, it
must be equal to the critical energy density. In cosmology talk, Omega0 = 1,
where Omega0 is the ratio of the mean energy density in any and all forms to the
critical energy density. In 1980, astronomers' measurements of Omega0 indicated
its value was something around 0.1.
Inflationists (like me) pinned our hopes on growing evidence for enormous
amounts of dark matter that hold galaxies and clusters of galaxies together.
This dark matter is distributed more diffusely than stars, making it harder
to inventory. Estimates for Omega0 rose, and for a while it appeared that enough
dark matter would be found to meet the inflationary prediction.
Cosmic troubles
By 1990, the problems for a flat universe were piling up. Estimates of the
amount of dark matter were getting better and still falling short, and
observations of large-scale structure suggested a CDM universe with a matter
density that was one-third of the critical density, that is, Omega(M) = 1/3.
Several of us sheepishly made a suggestion1 to save inflation: Add a
cosmological constant, /\, for the missing two-thirds of the critical
density, Omega(/\) = 2/3. Thus Omega0 = Omega(M) + Omega(/\) = 1. The inflationary prediction is a
flat universe, not necessarily Omega(M) = 1.
To save a beautiful theory, theorists are willing to consider the
implausible, although not the impossible. With its checkered history in
cosmology, the cosmological constant was certainly implausible. Albert
Einstein used it to create a static model of the universe; Hermann Bondi,
Thomas Gold, and Fred Hoyle used the cosmological constant to address the
fact that the time back to the Big Bang appeared to be less than the age of
Earth, and now it is invoked to save inflation.
By the mid-1990s, the observational evidence for the /\ version of CDM,
including the first hints from CMB anisotropy measurements that the universe
is flat, was becoming compelling, at least for theorists.1 However, there
was a problem: /\CDM (CDM with a cosmological constant) also predicts
accelerated expansion, and the first supernova results did not yet show
acceleration.
With the discovery of cosmic speedup in 1998, everything quickly fell into
place: The universe is flat, with one-third in matter and two-thirds in
something like a cosmological constant. Overnight, skeptical astronomers
became believers in inflation. Strange as it was, cosmic speedup was the
missing piece in the puzzle. It saved inflation, but be careful what you
wish for!
According to Isaac Newton, gravity is always attractive, because the
strength of an object's gravity depends only on its mass. Einstein's theory,
however, allows for repulsive gravity and cosmic speedup because the
strength of gravity also depends on pressure, p, with c^2rho + 3p acting as the
source of gravity. Something that is very elastic (that is, negative
pressure p < -c^2rho/3) has gravity that repels, rather than attracts.
Something with pressure comparable to its energy density is exotic. Matter,
even at the center of a sun, has a pressure that is orders of magnitude
smaller than its energy density. The ratio of pressure to energy density is
characterized by the square of the internal velocity divided by c2. Thus
dark energy is intrinsically relativistic and is more like energy than
matter. Even though repulsive gravity sounds like fun, dark energy--as far
as we know--can't be bottled up to create an object with antigravity.
Quantum mechanics provides a candidate for something that is very elastic:
The virtual pairs that fill the vacuum have negative pressure.
I think Mike made an error here. The virtual pairs have positive pressure. The virtual photons have negative pressure. See Milonni's Quantum Vacuum book where boson statistics require positive ZPF energy density c^2rho and Fermi statistics require negative ZPF energy density, and both have w = -1. Of course a virtual pair condensate will be like a boson superfluid.
To see this,
compute the pdV work done by an expanding piston that encloses quantum
vacuum; you will find that pvac = - c^2rhovac where rvac is the quantum vacuum's
energy density (see the figure). Thus, quantum vacuum energy is very
repulsive because c^2rho + 3p = -2 rho(vac). Mathematically, quantum vacuum energy is
equivalent to Einstein's infamous cosmological constant /\.
Although Einstein dismissed the cosmological constant as a personal blunder,
quantum mechanics makes it obligatory. Unfortunately, even the best quantum
"mechanics" have failed to produce a sensible prediction for /\. The sum of
zero-point energies diverges due to short-wavelength modes. Truncating at an
energy scale beyond which we can appeal to physics ignorance illustrates the
enormity of the problem: For a 100-GeV cutoff, Omega(/\) = 10^55. This disparity is
the greatest embarrassment in all of theoretical physics.
Many particle theorists believe that a correct calculation of /\ will yield
precisely zero because of the utter implausibility of obtaining a number 55
or more orders of magnitude smaller than its "natural value." If quantum
nothingness weighs nothing, what, then, is causing the universe to
accelerate? Dark energy!
Mystery deepens
What do we know about dark energy and how can we learn more? It accounts for
about two-thirds of the critical energy density and is much more smoothly
distributed than matter. If it clumped, we would see its effects when
studying clusters and other gravitationally bound objects, and we do not.
Dark energy is characterized by an "equation of state," which is the ratio w
(pronounced "dubya") of its pressure to its energy density w = p/c^2rho. Although
w need not be constant, for simplicity I will assume that for now.
If dark energy is vacuum energy, w = -1 (for comparison, for nonrelativistic
matter w = 0, and for radiation, w = 1/3.) The ratio w determines how the
energy density of dark energy changes as the universe expands: rho ~
(1/R^3)(1+w), where R is the cosmic scale factor. Negative pressure (w < 0)
leads to an energy density that decreases more slowly than matter (rho(M) ~
1/R^3). Because of this fact, dark energy was less important in the past and
will become more important in the future. Why dark energy is just becoming
important today begs for explanation. I call this the Nancy Kerrigan
problem--why me, why now?
That dark energy was unimportant in the past is good: This fact means the
repulsive gravity of dark energy doesn't interfere with the attractive
gravity of dark matter that drives the formation of cosmic structure. The
lesser importance of dark energy in the past is also the root of an
independent argument for cosmic acceleration. The "missing energy" needed in
addition to matter to account for the flat universe determined from CMB
measurements (see the story on page 21) must have been unimportant in the
past; otherwise its smooth distribution would have interfered with the
formation of structure. To make the missing energy unimportant in the past
requires that w < -1/2, which implies that it must have repulsive gravity.
Imaginative theorists have suggested an array of possibilities for dark
energy. Many involve the existence of a new, scalar field and the idea that
we are in a period of mild inflation while this field (called quintessence)
rolls toward its ground state. Because quintessence and inflation both
involve accelerated expansion and the underlying cause of each is poorly
understood, it has been speculated that they might be related. Thus far,
quintessence has raised new questions without shedding light on dark energy.
What we call dark energy could be the harbinger of exotic physics rather
than a new, etherlike substance. Cosmic acceleration could be signaling that
Einstein's theory requires modification, perhaps due to the influence of
unseen additional spatial dimensions. An interesting twist is that some
string theorists believe that cosmic speedup and string theory, which itself
predicts extra dimensions, are incompatible. This will come as a relief to
the less enthusiastic fans of string theory.
Destiny
One thing is clear: Dark energy leads to a revision in our view of cosmic
destiny. With matter alone, destiny and geometry are one: Closed universes
recollapse and open or flat universes expand forever. If dark energy is
vacuum energy, our flat universe will continue accelerating to a bleak
future--in 100 billion years all but a few hundred galaxies nearby will have
their light shifted too far into the red to be seen. If dark energy
eventually dissipates, the universe will begin to decelerate, possibly even
recollapse.
Because dark energy is so diffuse, cosmology offers the only known way of
getting at it, and w is the hook. The energy density of dark energy, which
depends on w, affects the expansion rate. Models for dark energy differ in
their predictions for w and thus in their predictions for the expansion
history of the universe. Distant supernovae, galaxy clusters, and
gravitational lensing can all be used to chart the past expansion rate and
determine w. And there is much interest in doing so: Two new centers--the
Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology at Stanford
University and the NSF Center for Cosmological Physics at the University of
Chicago--list the study of dark energy as a primary science goal. The US
Department of Energy is planning a dedicated space telescope for supernovae,
the SuperNova/ Acceleration Probe (SNAP). NASA has targeted dark energy for
one of its new Einstein probes. NSF is considering an 8-m wide-field survey
telescope to study dark energy, the Large-aperture Synoptic Survey Telescope
(LSST). Add in my nine-year-old son's theoretical work, and progress is
assured.
Dark energy is one of the deepest and most exciting puzzles in all of
science. It is likely that a crazy new idea is needed to explain cosmic
speedup and resolve the cosmological constant problem. (That does not mean
every crazy idea is a solution.) The payoff will be well worth the effort:
We will gain new insights into the nature of matter, space, and time, and
shed light on our cosmic destiny.
References
1. M. S. Turner, G. Steigman, L. Krauss, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 2090 (1984);
P. J. E. Peebles, Astrophys. J. 52, 2090 (1984); L. Kofman, A. A.
Starobinskii, Sov. Astron. Lett. 11, 271 (1985); G. Efstathiou et al.,
Nature 348, 705 (1990); M. S. Turner, Phys. Scr. T36, 167 (1991).
2. L. Krauss, M. S. Turner, Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 27, 1137 (1995); J.
Ostriker, P. Steinhardt, Nature 377, 600 (1996).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Turner is the Rauner Distinguished Service Professor at the
University of Chicago and a staff scientist at Fermilab.
From: Jack Sarfatti
Reply-To: SarfattiScienceSeminars@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Starfleet Command] Worldwide Exclusive: 'Dark Energy' bomb
more powerful than thermonuke?
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 09:36:15 -0700
Information on Ken Shoulders
1. Long-time associate of Hal Puthoff. Both worked in US Intelligence
Community for years.
2. Brilliant gadgeteer with small microwave devices holds several
important patents.
3. Ken's opinions are taken seriously in the USG Defense Intelligence
Community.
4. Pressure is mounting for Shoulders, Sarfatti and Puthoff to write a
joint paper together showing conflicting models of the phenomenon.
Puthoff uses a model of Casimir's "Type II" in which there is a positive
zero point energy pressure outside the thin shell of electrons and
vanishing zero point pressure inside it. Sarfatti says Casimir made an
error by assuming that the well known "dubya factor" (i.e. w =
(pressure)/(energy density)) is +1/3, which it is for real photons
propagating energy to infinity as electromagnetic radiation. Sarfatti
objects that w = -1 for the virtual photons of the zero point vacuum
fluctuations. That w = -1 for this case is well known to cosmologists
working on the "dark energy" (e.g. Mike Turner's Op/Ed in April 2003
Physics Today). "w = -1 follows from Einstein's equivalence principle
together with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Furthermore, boson
statistics require a positive virtual photon energy density, therefore an
equal and opposite negative virtual photon pressure. Virtual quanta are
directly observable in their warping of spacetime. You cannot subtract
them out. The pressure warps space-time three times more than the energy
density. The negative pressure makes repulsive anti-gravity that is the
'Right Stuff' for weightless warp drives, wide wormholes and,
unfortunately 'universe destroying' weird weapons." said Sarfatti.
Sarfatti cited Sir Martin Rees's book "Our Final Hour" on this subject.
Sarfatti's model is the mirror opposite of Puthoff's. "The zero point
pressure is negative inside the thin shell of typically a trillion to ten
thousand trillion electrons in the observed EVOs 10^-5 cm to 10^-5 meters
across and is zero outside. Negative zero point pressure makes the vacuum
like a spring and the electric repulsion does work against the vacuum to
create a metastable EVO. The electrons make a bottle or container for the
anti-gravity dark energy vacuum core of the EVO. Break the bottle to
release the Dark Energy Genie as 'Cold Fusion'. Mike Turner wrote that it
couldn't be done, apparently Ken Shoulders has done what was thought to
be an impossible dream." says Sarfatti.
For further reading see August 2004 Popular Mechanics p. 77
http://popularmechanics.com/science/research/2004/8/dangerous_science/
index5.phtml
The above article mentions the recent unsolved murder of Cold Fusion
advocate Gene Mallove.
And Moscow's PRAVDA
http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/379/12737_weapons.html
On Sep 1, 2004, at 7:53 AM, Victor Martinez wrote:
www.prweb.com/printer.php?prid=153747
WORLDWIDE MILTARY ORDNANCE EXCLUSIVE: DARK ENERGY BOMB MORE
POWERFUL THAN NUKES! –
"If done too fast with a large enough Exotic Vacuum Object this would be
a powerful bomb - more powerful than thermonuclear" – Dr. Jack
Sarfatti
(PRWEB) September 1, 2004 -- Experimentalist Ken Shoulders claims that
electrons are behaving in ways thought to be impossible. A new and
previously unknown force appears to be binding the electrons at short
range into clusters of electron charge. Shoulders calls these clusters
Exotic Vacuum Objects, or EVO's.
Shoulders describes this as "a short-range force resembling a positive
charge negating the effect of repulsive electronic charge"
One of Ken Shoulder's latest papers suggests nefarious uses for charged
cluster technology based on EVO's:
"The author can easily imagine a scenario where instructions are
generated with enough clarity for about 1 person in 1,000 to perform the
necessary operations to refine and store a gallon jug of electrons in
the form of Exotic Vacuum Objects (EVO's) ... there is no doubt that
this jug would be light enough to carry and be highly sensitive to
destabilization of a catastrophic nature..."
Ken Shoulders has recently collaborated on several papers with
independent theoretical physicist Dr. Jack Sarfatti, in San Francisco.
Sarfatti suggests that his theory of exotic vacuum dark energy/dark
matter can explain Shoulders' experimental data.
Although Sarfatti hopes for carefully controlled release of energy from
the EVO's, both Sarfatti and Shoulders warn that rapid release of a
large EVO would be explosive, perhaps more powerful than a thermonuclear
device.
Contact Information:
Gary Bekkum
STARstream Research
952-909-3862
----------------------------------------
Disclaimer: If you have any questions regarding information in these
press releases please contact the company listed in the press release.
Please do not contact PR Web™. We will be unable to assist you with
your inquiry. PR Web™ disclaims any content contained in these
release. Our complete disclaimer appears here.
© Copyright 1997-2004, PR Web™. All Rights Reserved
Friday, September 03, 2004
On Sep 3, 2004, at 7:52 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
What about a single isolated electron as an EVO i.e. a spatially-extended Bohm hidden variable that J.P. Vigier posited to predict "tight atomic state" "Cold Fusion" in tests by Maric and Dragic in Beograd?
Some points both subtle and unsubtle.
1. Hal Puthoff's Casimir Type II Model of the Ken Shoulders EVO has /\zpf = (mc/h)^2 outside the EVO shell of N electrons for a total unbalanced charge Ne in a close-packed spherical shell of radius a ~ N^1/2(h/mc). Hal also assumes /\zpf = 0 inside the EVO shell and he makes the blatantly wrong assumption that w = +1/3. Appealing to Casimir and Milonni does not help. If they did it, they are also wrong. The EVOs Ken makes allegedly have N ~ 10^12 to 10^16. (h/mc) ~ 10^-11 cm so that is a ~ 10^-5 cm to 10^-3 cm What happened to the positive charge left behind? Note that 10^12e ~ 10^-7 Coulombs. Two like charges of 1 Coulomb each 1 meter apart repel each other with a force of 1 MILLION TONS! We now have for the EVO N ~ 10^12e in a sphere 10^-7 meters across, a self-repulsive force of ~ 10^-1410^14 MILLION TONS ~ 1 MILLION TONS! That is, the zero point pressure must prevent the EVOs at the small end of the spectrum reported by Ken Shoulders from ripping itself apart with a force of ONE MILLION TONS! What about the bigger EVO at 10^-3 Coulombs? That's 10^-6x10^10 MILLION TONS ~ 100 TRILLION TONS OF SELF-DESTRUCTIVE FORCE!
In general the self-ripping unbalanced electric force ~ (Ne)^2/N(h/mc)^2 ~ N(emc/h)^2
e ~ 10^-19 Coulomb
a ~ 10^-13 meters
i.e. 10^-38x10^26 Million Tons ~ 10^-12 Million Tons ~ 10^-6 Tons i.e. a micro-Ton.
What about a single isolated electron as an EVO i.e. a spatially-extended Bohm hidden variable that J.P. Vigier posited to predict "tight atomic state" "Cold Fusion" in tests by Maric and Dragic in Beograd?
Some points both subtle and unsubtle.
1. Hal Puthoff's Casimir Type II Model of the Ken Shoulders EVO has /\zpf = (mc/h)^2 outside the EVO shell of N electrons for a total unbalanced charge Ne in a close-packed spherical shell of radius a ~ N^1/2(h/mc). Hal also assumes /\zpf = 0 inside the EVO shell and he makes the blatantly wrong assumption that w = +1/3. Appealing to Casimir and Milonni does not help. If they did it, they are also wrong. The EVOs Ken makes allegedly have N ~ 10^12 to 10^16. (h/mc) ~ 10^-11 cm so that is a ~ 10^-5 cm to 10^-3 cm What happened to the positive charge left behind? Note that 10^12e ~ 10^-7 Coulombs. Two like charges of 1 Coulomb each 1 meter apart repel each other with a force of 1 MILLION TONS! We now have for the EVO N ~ 10^12e in a sphere 10^-7 meters across, a self-repulsive force of ~ 10^-1410^14 MILLION TONS ~ 1 MILLION TONS! That is, the zero point pressure must prevent the EVOs at the small end of the spectrum reported by Ken Shoulders from ripping itself apart with a force of ONE MILLION TONS! What about the bigger EVO at 10^-3 Coulombs? That's 10^-6x10^10 MILLION TONS ~ 100 TRILLION TONS OF SELF-DESTRUCTIVE FORCE!
In general the self-ripping unbalanced electric force ~ (Ne)^2/N(h/mc)^2 ~ N(emc/h)^2
e ~ 10^-19 Coulomb
a ~ 10^-13 meters
i.e. 10^-38x10^26 Million Tons ~ 10^-12 Million Tons ~ 10^-6 Tons i.e. a micro-Ton.
On Sep 3, 2004, at 9:31 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Memorandum for the Record
Subject: Metric Engineering the Fabric of Space-Time for Warps, Wormholes and WMD Warning.
Background references:
http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/379/12737_weapons.html
http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/377/12778_weapons.html
http://popularmechanics.com/science/research/2004/8/dangerous_science/index5.phtml
http://www.brothersjudd.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/reviews.detail/book_id/1318/Our%20Final%20Ho.htm
Ken Shoulders' EVO
On Aug 18, 2004, at 8:54 AM, Ken Shoulders wrote:
"THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY
by
Ken Shoulders
Abstract
Electron clusters, or EVOs, are shown to be ideal candidates for electrical power generation using easily available methods for manipulation of electronic charge. The work to be done is described as manipulation of the exotic vacuum in a way that takes advantage of the ability to move the EVO against an electrical load using only a fraction of the input power usually used, resulting in an energy gain. However, the high intensity of the process and ease of applying it to mischievous ends portend future difficulties with its use.
Prologue
It has long been known by the author that the best form of charge manipulation for the generation of electrical power involved the use of EVs, or EVOs, in a relatively free form in either vacuum or low gas pressure. This basic method was the subject of a patent issued to Shoulders in 1991(2) for anomalous energy conversion. It was also determined early on that this discovery opened an undesirable gateway to high energy misuse of such charge structures and the work was then turned to more benign solid state methods of thermal energy production, closely related to what is called “cold fusion”. Unfortunately, the difficulty of designing an acceptable machine for anomalous energy production was unacceptably large, primarily due to the fundamental, self-destructive nature of the process and the inability to find a feasible way to automatically rebuild the machine for a useful lifetime. This difficulty has now redirected the work toward the original process of using EVOs in a near solid-state form while immersed in low-pressure gas containers. The attendant difficulties of mischievous use of EVOs on an unprecedented level are the secondary subject of this paper, to which the author has no viable solutions."
This recently posted file can be downloaded from: http://www.svn.net/krscfs/
Some points both subtle and unsubtle.
1. Hal Puthoff's Casimir Type II Model of the Ken Shoulders EVO has /\zpf = (mc/h)^2 outside the EVO shell of N electrons for a total unbalanced charge Ne in a close-packed spherical shell of radius a ~ N^1/2(h/mc). Hal also assumes /\zpf = 0 inside the EVO shell and he makes the blatantly wrong assumption that w = +1/3. Appealing to Casimir and Milonni does not help. If they did it, they are also wrong. The EVOs Ken makes allegedly have N ~ 10^12 to 10^16. (h/mc) ~ 10^-11 cm so that is a ~ 10^-5 cm to 10^-3 cm What happened to the positive charge left behind? Note that 10^12e ~ 10^-7 Coulombs. Two like charges of 1 Coulomb each 1 meter apart repel each other with a force of 1 MILLION TONS! We now have for the EVO N ~ 10^12e in a sphere 10^-7 meters across, a self-repulsive force of ~ 10^-1410^14 MILLION TONS ~ 1 MILLION TONS! That is, the zero point pressure must prevent the EVOs at the small end of the spectrum reported by Ken Shoulders from ripping itself apart with a force of ONE MILLION TONS! What about the bigger EVO at 10^-3 Coulombs? That's 10^-6x10^10 MILLION TONS ~ 100 TRILLION TONS OF SELF-DESTRUCTIVE FORCE!
In general the self-ripping unbalanced electric force ~ (Ne)^2/N(h/mc)^2 ~ N(emc/h)^2
2. The zero point energy density that Hal posits outside the EVO surface is enormous if we use Newton's constant of gravity.
Puthoff's zero point energy density ~ (c^4/8piG)(mc/h)^2 ~ 10^19Gev x 10^33 x 10^22 ~ 10^74 Gev/cc ~ 10^64 Joules/cc (since 1 Joule ~ 10^19 ev). If G* is much bigger than G at these small scales the ZPF energy density will be smaller.
This is a ridiculous once one realizes that in General Relativity the zero point energy density warps space-time directly as Mike Turner clearly explains below. Therefore, Hal's model for the EVO is clearly wrong! That is, our universe could not even exist if Hal's EVO model were true.
Remember from Mike Turner's article below, w = (pressure)/(energy density) for ALL STUFF both REAL and VIRTUAL!
My model says we live in a universe where /\zpf ~ 0 because the random micro-quantum ZPF energy density is absorbed into the MACRO-QUANTUM VACUUM CONDENSATE or Vacuum BEC. Ken's EVO has an INTERIOR UNIFORM DARK ENERGY CORE with /\zpf > 0, w = -1 and a NEGATIVE ZPF PRESSURE since the virtual photon ZPF energy density is positive from boson quantum statistics.
A SUBTLE POINT!
Positive potential energy with an inverse power law is repulsive.
Example 1. U = +e^2/r, dU/dr = -e^2/r^2, F = -dU/dr points in the direction of increasing r, i.e. repulsion
Negative potential energy with an inverse power law is attractive.
Example 2. U = -e^2/r, dU/dr = e^2/r^2, F = -dU/dr points in the direction of decreasing r, i.e. attraction
Positive potential energy with a direct power law is attractive.
Example 3. U = +mc^2|/\zpf|r^2 a 3D harmonic oscillator potential with SU(3) quantum symmetry group like quarks in a bag (e.g. "QCD Lite" Frank Wilczek) Flatten this to a plane to get SU(2)?
dU/dr = +2mc^2|/\zpf|r, therefore -dU/dr points in the direction of decreasing r, i.e. attraction
Negative potential energy with a direct power law is repulsive.
Example 4. Trivial exercise.
From p. 26 of John Peacock's "Cosmological Physics" one sees that to a first approximation model /\zpf inside the EVO shell as uniform. This follows from Einstein's equivalence principle + Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Therefore, like drilling a hole through center of Earth and dropping a ball down the hole, one gets a simple harmonic motion i.e. the 3D harmonic oscillator.
Consequently the HYPOTHETICAL EVO in simplest model obeys the simple math
V = (Ne)^2/mr + /\zpfr^2 from the inside of the EVO shell. /\zpf = 0 OUTSIDE the EVO shell.
neglecting rotation and a very small QED Casimir Type I force from virtual photons. Do not confuse that with Puthoff's Type II model.
Balance the two forces at the critical point
dV/dr = 0
which is a stable minimum when
d^2V/dr^2 > 0
Voila! Ce la Vie!
On Sept 3, 2004 Hal Puthoff wrote
[Hal previous] "When I point out that Casimir, Milonni, I, et al. use the
quantum vacuum fluctuation Casimir-type model to advantage (and,
BTW, get the right answer for Casimir attraction between parallel
plates!) you point out that it is a false model in a flat space that
does not take into account the recent GR cosmology concepts and
therefore is flawed ("Casimir's greatest blunder," you call it!)."
[Jack previous] What you say here is false. You have done a "bait and switch".
Casimir does not use your Model II to get the parallel plates result!
[Hal] "No bait and switch. I'm talking about Casimir Model I for parallel plates. Reread above."
[Jack] I have adequately answered this below. The ordinary Casimir Force Model I as WEAK Van Der Waals force between UNCHARGED finite edge parallel plates works fine because there is no dark energy, i.e. /\zpf ~ 0 everywhere in that problem. Your parallel plate objection is a Red Herring. It is completely different from the Ken Shoulders Ne CHARGED closed thin electron shell "dark energy bottle" EVO of radius a ~ N^1/2(h/mc). You have objected to my bushel of apples with your bushel of oranges. The two phenomena are qualitatively inequivalent.
*TYPO-CORRECTED THIRD DRAFT*
On Sep 3, 2004, at 8:58 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Hal Puthoff wrote on Sept 2, 2004:
"Jack,
In several of your recent postings you say that the flat-space, quantum physics Casimir model that we quantum physicists use (that does not take into account w = -1 implications of dark energy on the microscopic scale) has been overtaken by the discovery of dark energy."
[Jack] Exactly. I am saying that Einstein's local field equation
Guv + /\zpfguv = 0
definitely applies down at scale h/mc ~ 10^-11 cm. Of course the FRW cosmological metric solution does not apply there. That is a different story. In other words the effects of the equivalence principle and general coordinate covariance GCT play an essential role in this problem of zero point energy. In particular, /\zpf ~ 0 in the non-exotic ordinary vacuum where we live. This is because almost all of the random micro-quantum vacuum fluctuation zero point energy density is absorbed into the vacuum coherence field.
Note that the zero point energy density (from all sources) is
too(zpf) = (c^4/8piG*)/\zpfgoo
Where guv is the curved spacetime metric tensor
guv(curved) = nuv(globally flat) + (1/2)d[u,v]
du = (short wave cutoff)^2(Phase of Vacuum Coherence),u
The POST-INFLATIONARY elastic strain tensor (1/2)d[u,v] has all the gravity curvature information. This is not a small perturbation. It is a large non-perturbative term similar to the nonanalytic energy gap in the BCS superconductor theory. The resulting guv curved space-time local field is DYNAMICAL, i.e. "background independent" the way the loop "spin foam" guys like John Baez and Ashktekar mean it. That is, the guv field has same status as the EM Fuv field and objective local events at P are relations between the guv and Fuv local fields and are not the formal points in a manifold that have no direct physical meaning, i.e. active Diff(4) symmetry as explained by Rovelli in his new book on Quantum Gravity. You can then do perturbation theory adding a spin 2 tensor "graviton" quantum field in the smooth curved DYNAMICAL guv metric. There is no "quantum foam" in this theory. When the vacuum coherence -> 0 you simply get back globally flat space-time, i.e. the PRE-INFLATIONARY FALSE VACUUM. You do not directly quantize guv! Doing so is non-renormalizable for a very good reason. The pre-inflationary globally flat sub-stratum is renormalizable of course. There is a good reason why John Baez is not able to derive
Guv = 0
from Penrose combinatoric spin foams and will not be able to do so ever.
The GCT group derives from the U(1) local gauge transformations on the Vacuum Coherence phase.
That is, the curvature of 4D space-time is the non-Abelian local compensating gauge force field from breaking the symmetry of the 4-parameter translation group infinitesimally generated by total Energy-Momentum 4-vector. The compensating field du elastic world distortion field restores the broken translational symmetry. As Kibble showed 40 years ago you really need to locally gauge the entire 10 parameter Poincare group. The spin connection from the 6-parameter Lorentz group also plays a significant role and there is a torsion field in the completely self-consistent theory, although it usually plays no role in the vacuum problem only coupling to the spins of on-mass-shell particles in the Tuv source term. However, this assumption may not be correct - a matter for future research.
Where
/\zpf = (short wave cutoff)^-2[(short wave cutoff)^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 - 1]
G* may be larger than Newton's G at these small scales, i.e. it is a running coupling constant of an emergent effective field theory, which in this case is a local smooth c-number field from the ODLRO in the physical vacuum.
The ODLRO Vacuum Coherence Local Field characterizes the pre-inflationary to post-inflationary false to true vacuum phase transition and it explains why the Arrow of Time points in the direction of the expanding universe.
Globally flat quantum field theory is intrinsically an unstable theory because global special relativity does not permit the emergence of gravity.
[Hal] "Indeed, you use this claim to (a) criticize the Casimir model and (b) come up with a "dark energy" model for Shoulders' charge cluster phenomenon ("dark energy in a bottle," you call it).
[Jack} Correct. There are two very serious errors in the Casimir Type II model you use. Casimir simply did not know the correct physics, neither did Milonni. No one knew at the time they published their stuff. This only became clear post-1999 - actually 2002.
The serious errors are, as Mike Turner and everyone else working in dark energy at GR 17 will tell you
1. w = (pressure)/(energy density) = -1 for ALL ZPF not +1/3
2. You cannot have an exterior /\zpf = (mc/h)^-2 outside the EVO. The universe could not exist if that were the case. This is a very fundamental objection against the Casimir Type II Model!
[Hal] "When I point out that Casimir, Milonni, I, et al. use the quantum vacuum fluctuation Casimir-type model to advantage (and, BTW, get the right answer for Casimir attraction between parallel plates!) you point out that it is a false model in a flat space that does not take into account the recent GR cosmology concepts and therefore is flawed ("Casimir's greatest blunder," you call it!)."
[Hal] What you say here is false. You have done a "bait and switch". Casimir does not use your Model II to get the parallel plates result! That is, Casimir does not assume /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^-2 outside the plates with /\zpf ~ 0 inside the plates!
In fact what we have in the parallel plates is that /\zpf ~ 0 both inside and outside the plates so that you can use the ordinary QED boundary effect to a good approximation in that case. The EVO is a completely different phenomenon and you cannot work by analogy. The open finite edges of the plates ensure /\zpf ~ 0 everywhere!
"0" here means ~ 10^-56 cm^-2.
So, you have misrepresented what I say for the open finite parallel plates. I say, since /\zpf ~ 0 both inside and outside the plates, you can use Casimir's Type I QED model for that problem. You blurred the distinction between Type I and Type II in your remark above.
[Hal] Specifically, you argue that the ZPE radiation pressure modeling that uses w = 1/3 vacuum radiation pressure forces (as in the 1988 Phys. Rev A paper by Milonni et al., "Radiation pressure from the vacuum: Physical interpretation of the Casimir force") must be set aside in favor of the use of the w = -1 repulsion vacuum forces.
[Jack] Yes, I certainly say that! Milonni has made a serious error in fundamental physics. His paper is wrong period. w = +1/3 only works for REAL PHOTONS on the classical light cone.
[Hal] Here is my challenge to your line of logic. Forget the Shoulders' model for the moment, and simply show how your line of logic involving the w = -1 repulsion vacuum force leads to the known attractive Casimir force between parallel plates, which has been precisely measured and accounted for on the basis of the quantum physicists' use of the w = 1/3 vacuum forces. It would seem that you insist that instead the w = -1 repulsive force is the important force on this level, previously neglected, so please show how to derive the attractive Casimir force by your counter-claim with its opposite-sign vacuum force.
[Jack] Trivial. I already showed you above. The parallel plates phenomenon happens in ORDINARY non-exotic vacuum where /\zpf ~ 0 so you can use the Type I Casimir QED model! The ordinary open finite parallel plates experiment does not have any dark energy exotic vacuum effect at all because the vacuum coherence has adjusted to keep /\zpf ~ 0 every where in the relevant regions. That is the total ZPF pressure and energy density is zero in the ordinary non-exotic vacuum! Notice that the virtual photon ZPF pressure and energy density is not the total. All quantum fields contribute to /\zpf not only the virtual photons.
*Note also that the induced gravity larger (i.e. more negative) virtual photon "negative pressure" outside the plates will repel more strongly than the weaker negative pressure between the plates. Therefore, this will also give a net attractive force between the plates. However, I am not suggesting that this attraction is identical to the QED Casimir Van Der Waals force between the UNCHARGED PLATES (qualitatively different from the CHARGED EVOs).
* However, the plates SLIGHTLY perturb this. So, in the open plates case you will have a slightly higher virtual photon energy density outside the plates than you have inside because there are the additional long-wave modes. Therefore you have more negative virtual photon pressure outside the UNCHARGED plates than inside the plates. However, the positive virtual electron-positron pressure will compensate the virtual photon negative pressure to keep /\zpf ~ 0 everywhere and the resulting attractive Casimir force between the plates is simply the VERY WEAK induced Van Der Waals force as shown by Ian Peterson and others. There is no /\zpf exotic vacuum effect in this case at all! You have compared apples to oranges. You have confused two incompatible "total experimental arrangements" in Niels Bohr's sense. There is no good analogy between the EVO phenomenon with a CHARGED N-electron "shell" "dark energy bottle" and the tiny attractive force between two finite UNCHARGED very clean flat plates.
[Hal] "In summary, we see how Casimir's positive-radiation-pressure "blunder" model leads to agreement with experiment; we don't see how your opposite-sign dark-energy w = -1 repulsion force model would lead to the observed attraction. Please show this. If you can show this for the standard parallel plate Casimir Effect, then consideration of its use for more exotic geometries (e.g., Shoulders' charge cluster phenomenon) would be warranted. If not ....."
[Jack] I have answered your misplaced objection.
Collegially,
On Sep 2, 2004, at 8:08 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
As reading Mike Turner's article below shows, zero point energy density and its equal and opposite pressure, together directly warp space-time. This is different from QED based on globally flat spacetime without any gravity at all in which to a rough approximation you can ignore energy scales and simply subtract off the virtual photon zero point energy density with "normal ordering" of the photon creation and destruction non-Hermitian operators. See Milonni's book "The Quantum Vacuum" for these details, which ignore gravity effects.
Hal needs vanishing zero point energy density inside the EVO shell with an enormous zero point energy density outside the shell. This immediately falsifies his model, apart from the other issue that he needs a positive external pressure to hold in the Coulomb repulsion of the N electrons making the EVO thin shell. Casimir was not aware of the general relativity constraints on the problem. Casimir's Type II model would require that we live in an exotic vacuum where /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^2 ~ 10^22 cm^-2. In fact the vacuum we live in has /\zpf ~ 10^-56 cm^-2. Indeed the Casimir-Puthoff external /\zpf would not permit our universe to exist! It would warp space-time too much! In fact the EVO needs a negative pressure inside its shell with /\zpf ~ 10^-56 cm^-2 outside it where we exist. How come the non-exotic vacuum has such a small /\zpf? Simple, the vacuum coherence ABSORBS the random ZPF into the VACUUM CONDENSATE as a kind of zero entropy superfluid reservoir. The random ZPF is analogous to the "normal fluid" excitations. This also solves Penrose's problem in "Fashion, Faith and Fantasy" explaining why the early SPATIALLY-FLAT (on large-scale only) inflationary universe has low initial thermodynamic entropy setting the direction of the Arrow of Time of irreversibility of the Second Law of Thermodynamics to point the same way as the expansion of the universe.
On Sep 1, 2004, at 11:28 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Yes, thanks Joel. Mike Turner's remark below, in his otherwise very excellent Op/Ed, may well prove to be his "greatest blunder". :-)
On Sep 1, 2004, at 10:03 AM, Joel Isaacson wrote:
Public service: Mike Turner's Physics Today article on Dark Energy ===>>
[Note: the contrarian statement therein is: "Even though repulsive gravity
sounds like fun, dark energy--as far as we know--can't be bottled up to
create an object with antigravity." =jdi=
TYPO-CORRECTED! Also a new error by Turner detected below?
Dark Energy: Just What Theorists Ordered
Michael S. Turner
In the article on page 53, Saul Perlmutter describes how his team, and one
led by Brian Schmidt, used distant supernovae to discover that the expansion
of the universe is speeding up, not slowing down. At puzzling times like
these, theorists are called upon to provide understanding and, in the
process, to convince their audience that they actually anticipated the
puzzling discovery (maybe even predicted it).
The discovery of cosmic speedup, perhaps one of the most important in all of
science over the past 25 years, saved a beautiful theory--inflation--and
presented theorists with a wonderful puzzle--"dark energy," the stuff
causing cosmic speedup. What more could we ask for?
Since 1980, Alan Guth's cosmic inflation has been the driving idea in
cosmology. Central to inflation is a very early, tremendous burst of
expansion, powered by the potential energy associated with a hypothetical
scalar field called the inflaton. In a tiny fraction of a second, a small
bit of the universe is blown up to a size that encompasses all that we can
see today and much, much more. Any spatial curvature becomes flattened, and
quantum fluctuations in the inflaton field are stretched from subatomic to
astrophysical size. The decay of the inflaton produces the heat of the Big
Bang, and the quantum fluctuations in it lead to the matter inhomogeneity
that provides the seeds for all the structure in the universe, from galaxies
to clusters of galaxies and beyond.
Inflation not only explains, it also predicts. Its predictions include: a
spatially flat universe, a pattern of anisotropy in the cosmic microwave
background (CMB) that arises from the quantum-produced density
perturbations, and a sea of gravitational waves. Inflation was the
inspiration for the very successful cold dark matter (CDM) scenario for how
structure formed. CDM theory is based on a flat universe, dark matter made
of slowly moving elementary particles, and density perturbations arising
from quantum fluctuations.
From the beginning, inflation's signature prediction--a flat universe--was
in trouble. According to Einstein's theory, the mean energy density c^2rho0
determines the spatial curvature of the universe; for a flat universe, it
must be equal to the critical energy density. In cosmology talk, Omega0 = 1,
where Omega0 is the ratio of the mean energy density in any and all forms to the
critical energy density. In 1980, astronomers' measurements of Omega0 indicated
its value was something around 0.1.
Inflationists (like me) pinned our hopes on growing evidence for enormous
amounts of dark matter that hold galaxies and clusters of galaxies together.
This dark matter is distributed more diffusely than stars, making it harder
to inventory. Estimates for Omega0 rose, and for a while it appeared that enough
dark matter would be found to meet the inflationary prediction.
Cosmic troubles
By 1990, the problems for a flat universe were piling up. Estimates of the
amount of dark matter were getting better and still falling short, and
observations of large-scale structure suggested a CDM universe with a matter
density that was one-third of the critical density, that is, Omega(M) = 1/3.
Several of us sheepishly made a suggestion1 to save inflation: Add a
cosmological constant, /\, for the missing two-thirds of the critical
density, Omega(/\) = 2/3. Thus Omega0 = Omega(M) + Omega(/\) = 1. The inflationary prediction is a
flat universe, not necessarily Omega(M) = 1.
To save a beautiful theory, theorists are willing to consider the
implausible, although not the impossible. With its checkered history in
cosmology, the cosmological constant was certainly implausible. Albert
Einstein used it to create a static model of the universe; Hermann Bondi,
Thomas Gold, and Fred Hoyle used the cosmological constant to address the
fact that the time back to the Big Bang appeared to be less than the age of
Earth, and now it is invoked to save inflation.
By the mid-1990s, the observational evidence for the /\ version of CDM,
including the first hints from CMB anisotropy measurements that the universe
is flat, was becoming compelling, at least for theorists.1 However, there
was a problem: LCDM (CDM with a cosmological constant) also predicts
accelerated expansion, and the first supernova results did not yet show
acceleration.
With the discovery of cosmic speedup in 1998, everything quickly fell into
place: The universe is flat, with one-third in matter and two-thirds in
something like a cosmological constant. Overnight, skeptical astronomers
became believers in inflation. Strange as it was, cosmic speedup was the
missing piece in the puzzle. It saved inflation, but be careful what you
wish for!
According to Isaac Newton, gravity is always attractive, because the
strength of an object's gravity depends only on its mass. Einstein's theory,
however, allows for repulsive gravity and cosmic speedup because the
strength of gravity also depends on pressure, p, with c^2rho + 3p acting as the
source of gravity. Something that is very elastic (that is, negative
pressure p < -c^2rho/3) has gravity that repels, rather than attracts.
Something with pressure comparable to its energy density is exotic. Matter,
even at the center of a sun, has a pressure that is orders of magnitude
smaller than its energy density. The ratio of pressure to energy density is
characterized by the square of the internal velocity divided by c2. Thus
dark energy is intrinsically relativistic and is more like energy than
matter. Even though repulsive gravity sounds like fun, dark energy--as far
as we know--can't be bottled up to create an object with antigravity.
Quantum mechanics provides a candidate for something that is very elastic:
The virtual pairs that fill the vacuum have negative pressure.
I think Mike made an error here. The virtual pairs have positive pressure. The virtual photons have negative pressure. See Milonni's Quantum Vacuum book where boson statistics require positive ZPF energy density c^2rho and Fermi statistics require negative ZPF energy density, and both have w = -1. Of course a virtual pair condensate will be like a boson superfluid.
To see this,
compute the pdV work done by an expanding piston that encloses quantum
vacuum; you will find that pvac = - c^2rhovac where rvac is the quantum vacuum's
energy density (see the figure). Thus, quantum vacuum energy is very
repulsive because c^2rho + 3p = -2 rho(vac). Mathematically, quantum vacuum energy is
equivalent to Einstein's infamous cosmological constant /\.
Although Einstein dismissed the cosmological constant as a personal blunder,
quantum mechanics makes it obligatory. Unfortunately, even the best quantum
"mechanics" have failed to produce a sensible prediction for /\. The sum of
zero-point energies diverges due to short-wavelength modes. Truncating at an
energy scale beyond which we can appeal to physics ignorance illustrates the
enormity of the problem: For a 100-GeV cutoff, Omega(/\) = 10^55. This disparity is
the greatest embarrassment in all of theoretical physics.
Many particle theorists believe that a correct calculation of /\ will yield
precisely zero because of the utter implausibility of obtaining a number 55
or more orders of magnitude smaller than its "natural value." If quantum
nothingness weighs nothing, what, then, is causing the universe to
accelerate? Dark energy!
Mystery deepens
What do we know about dark energy and how can we learn more? It accounts for
about two-thirds of the critical energy density and is much more smoothly
distributed than matter. If it clumped, we would see its effects when
studying clusters and other gravitationally bound objects, and we do not.
Dark energy is characterized by an "equation of state," which is the ratio w
(pronounced "dubya") of its pressure to its energy density w = p/c^2rho. Although
w need not be constant, for simplicity I will assume that for now.
If dark energy is vacuum energy, w = -1 (for comparison, for nonrelativistic
matter w = 0, and for radiation, w = 1/3.) The ratio w determines how the
energy density of dark energy changes as the universe expands: rho ~
(1/R^3)(1+w), where R is the cosmic scale factor. Negative pressure (w < 0)
leads to an energy density that decreases more slowly than matter (rho(M) ~
1/R^3). Because of this fact, dark energy was less important in the past and
will become more important in the future. Why dark energy is just becoming
important today begs for explanation. I call this the Nancy Kerrigan
problem--why me, why now?
That dark energy was unimportant in the past is good: This fact means the
repulsive gravity of dark energy doesn't interfere with the attractive
gravity of dark matter that drives the formation of cosmic structure. The
lesser importance of dark energy in the past is also the root of an
independent argument for cosmic acceleration. The "missing energy" needed in
addition to matter to account for the flat universe determined from CMB
measurements (see the story on page 21) must have been unimportant in the
past; otherwise its smooth distribution would have interfered with the
formation of structure. To make the missing energy unimportant in the past
requires that w < -1/2, which implies that it must have repulsive gravity.
Imaginative theorists have suggested an array of possibilities for dark
energy. Many involve the existence of a new, scalar field and the idea that
we are in a period of mild inflation while this field (called quintessence)
rolls toward its ground state. Because quintessence and inflation both
involve accelerated expansion and the underlying cause of each is poorly
understood, it has been speculated that they might be related. Thus far,
quintessence has raised new questions without shedding light on dark energy.
What we call dark energy could be the harbinger of exotic physics rather
than a new, etherlike substance. Cosmic acceleration could be signaling that
Einstein's theory requires modification, perhaps due to the influence of
unseen additional spatial dimensions. An interesting twist is that some
string theorists believe that cosmic speedup and string theory, which itself
predicts extra dimensions, are incompatible. This will come as a relief to
the less enthusiastic fans of string theory.
Destiny
One thing is clear: Dark energy leads to a revision in our view of cosmic
destiny. With matter alone, destiny and geometry are one: Closed universes
recollapse and open or flat universes expand forever. If dark energy is
vacuum energy, our flat universe will continue accelerating to a bleak
future--in 100 billion years all but a few hundred galaxies nearby will have
their light shifted too far into the red to be seen. If dark energy
eventually dissipates, the universe will begin to decelerate, possibly even
recollapse.
Because dark energy is so diffuse, cosmology offers the only known way of
getting at it, and w is the hook. The energy density of dark energy, which
depends on w, affects the expansion rate. Models for dark energy differ in
their predictions for w and thus in their predictions for the expansion
history of the universe. Distant supernovae, galaxy clusters, and
gravitational lensing can all be used to chart the past expansion rate and
determine w. And there is much interest in doing so: Two new centers--the
Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology at Stanford
University and the NSF Center for Cosmological Physics at the University of
Chicago--list the study of dark energy as a primary science goal. The US
Department of Energy is planning a dedicated space telescope for supernovae,
the SuperNova/ Acceleration Probe (SNAP). NASA has targeted dark energy for
one of its new Einstein probes. NSF is considering an 8-m wide-field survey
telescope to study dark energy, the Large-aperture Synoptic Survey Telescope
(LSST). Add in my nine-year-old son's theoretical work, and progress is
assured.
Dark energy is one of the deepest and most exciting puzzles in all of
science. It is likely that a crazy new idea is needed to explain cosmic
speedup and resolve the cosmological constant problem. (That does not mean
every crazy idea is a solution.) The payoff will be well worth the effort:
We will gain new insights into the nature of matter, space, and time, and
shed light on our cosmic destiny.
References
1. M. S. Turner, G. Steigman, L. Krauss, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 2090 (1984);
P. J. E. Peebles, Astrophys. J. 52, 2090 (1984); L. Kofman, A. A.
Starobinskii, Sov. Astron. Lett. 11, 271 (1985); G. Efstathiou et al.,
Nature 348, 705 (1990); M. S. Turner, Phys. Scr. T36, 167 (1991).
2. L. Krauss, M. S. Turner, Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 27, 1137 (1995); J.
Ostriker, P. Steinhardt, Nature 377, 600 (1996).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Turner is the Rauner Distinguished Service Professor at the
University of Chicago and a staff scientist at Fermilab.
From: Jack Sarfatti
Reply-To: SarfattiScienceSeminars@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Starfleet Command] Worldwide Exclusive: 'Dark Energy' bomb
more powerful than thermonuke?
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 09:36:15 -0700
Information on Ken Shoulders
1. Long-time associate of Hal Puthoff. Both worked in US Intelligence
Community for years.
2. Brilliant gadgeteer with small microwave devices holds several
important patents.
3. Ken's opinions are taken seriously in the USG Defense Intelligence
Community.
4. Pressure is mounting for Shoulders, Sarfatti and Puthoff to write a
joint paper together showing conflicting models of the phenomenon.
Puthoff uses a model of Casimir's "Type II" in which there is a positive
zero point energy pressure outside the thin shell of electrons and
vanishing zero point pressure inside it. Sarfatti says Casimir made an
error by assuming that the well known "dubya factor" (i.e. w =
(pressure)/(energy density)) is +1/3, which it is for real photons
propagating energy to infinity as electromagnetic radiation. Sarfatti
objects that w = -1 for the virtual photons of the zero point vacuum
fluctuations. That w = -1 for this case is well known to cosmologists
working on the "dark energy" (e.g. Mike Turner's Op/Ed in April 2003
Physics Today). "w = -1 follows from Einstein's equivalence principle
together with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Furthermore, boson
statistics require a positive virtual photon energy density, therefore an
equal and opposite negative virtual photon pressure. Virtual quanta are
directly observable in their warping of spacetime. You cannot subtract
them out. The pressure warps space-time three times more than the energy
density. The negative pressure makes repulsive anti-gravity that is the
'Right Stuff' for weightless warp drives, wide wormholes and,
unfortunately 'universe destroying' weird weapons." said Sarfatti.
Sarfatti cited Sir Martin Rees's book "Our Final Hour" on this subject.
Sarfatti's model is the mirror opposite of Puthoff's. "The zero point
pressure is negative inside the thin shell of typically a trillion to ten
thousand trillion electrons in the observed EVOs 10^-5 cm to 10^-5 meters
across and is zero outside. Negative zero point pressure makes the vacuum
like a spring and the electric repulsion does work against the vacuum to
create a metastable EVO. The electrons make a bottle or container for the
anti-gravity dark energy vacuum core of the EVO. Break the bottle to
release the Dark Energy Genie as 'Cold Fusion'. Mike Turner wrote that it
couldn't be done, apparently Ken Shoulders has done what was thought to
be an impossible dream." says Sarfatti.
For further reading see August 2004 Popular Mechanics p. 77
http://popularmechanics.com/science/research/2004/8/dangerous_science/
index5.phtml
The above article mentions the recent unsolved murder of Cold Fusion
advocate Gene Mallove.
And Moscow's PRAVDA
http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/379/12737_weapons.html
On Sep 1, 2004, at 7:53 AM, Victor Martinez wrote:
www.prweb.com/printer.php?prid=153747
WORLDWIDE MILTARY ORDNANCE EXCLUSIVE: DARK ENERGY BOMB MORE
POWERFUL THAN NUKES! –
"If done too fast with a large enough Exotic Vacuum Object this would be
a powerful bomb - more powerful than thermonuclear" – Dr. Jack
Sarfatti
(PRWEB) September 1, 2004 -- Experimentalist Ken Shoulders claims that
electrons are behaving in ways thought to be impossible. A new and
previously unknown force appears to be binding the electrons at short
range into clusters of electron charge. Shoulders calls these clusters
Exotic Vacuum Objects, or EVO's.
Shoulders describes this as "a short-range force resembling a positive
charge negating the effect of repulsive electronic charge"
One of Ken Shoulder's latest papers suggests nefarious uses for charged
cluster technology based on EVO's:
"The author can easily imagine a scenario where instructions are
generated with enough clarity for about 1 person in 1,000 to perform the
necessary operations to refine and store a gallon jug of electrons in
the form of Exotic Vacuum Objects (EVO's) ... there is no doubt that
this jug would be light enough to carry and be highly sensitive to
destabilization of a catastrophic nature..."
Ken Shoulders has recently collaborated on several papers with
independent theoretical physicist Dr. Jack Sarfatti, in San Francisco.
Sarfatti suggests that his theory of exotic vacuum dark energy/dark
matter can explain Shoulders' experimental data.
Although Sarfatti hopes for carefully controlled release of energy from
the EVO's, both Sarfatti and Shoulders warn that rapid release of a
large EVO would be explosive, perhaps more powerful than a thermonuclear
device.
Contact Information:
Gary Bekkum
STARstream Research
952-909-3862
----------------------------------------
Disclaimer: If you have any questions regarding information in these
press releases please contact the company listed in the press release.
Please do not contact PR Web™. We will be unable to assist you with
your inquiry. PR Web™ disclaims any content contained in these
release. Our complete disclaimer appears here.
© Copyright 1997-2004, PR Web™. All Rights Reserved
Memorandum for the Record
Subject: Metric Engineering the Fabric of Space-Time for Warps, Wormholes and WMD Warning.
Background references:
http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/379/12737_weapons.html
http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/377/12778_weapons.html
http://popularmechanics.com/science/research/2004/8/dangerous_science/index5.phtml
http://www.brothersjudd.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/reviews.detail/book_id/1318/Our%20Final%20Ho.htm
Ken Shoulders' EVO
On Aug 18, 2004, at 8:54 AM, Ken Shoulders wrote:
"THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY
by
Ken Shoulders
Abstract
Electron clusters, or EVOs, are shown to be ideal candidates for electrical power generation using easily available methods for manipulation of electronic charge. The work to be done is described as manipulation of the exotic vacuum in a way that takes advantage of the ability to move the EVO against an electrical load using only a fraction of the input power usually used, resulting in an energy gain. However, the high intensity of the process and ease of applying it to mischievous ends portend future difficulties with its use.
Prologue
It has long been known by the author that the best form of charge manipulation for the generation of electrical power involved the use of EVs, or EVOs, in a relatively free form in either vacuum or low gas pressure. This basic method was the subject of a patent issued to Shoulders in 1991(2) for anomalous energy conversion. It was also determined early on that this discovery opened an undesirable gateway to high energy misuse of such charge structures and the work was then turned to more benign solid state methods of thermal energy production, closely related to what is called “cold fusion”. Unfortunately, the difficulty of designing an acceptable machine for anomalous energy production was unacceptably large, primarily due to the fundamental, self-destructive nature of the process and the inability to find a feasible way to automatically rebuild the machine for a useful lifetime. This difficulty has now redirected the work toward the original process of using EVOs in a near solid-state form while immersed in low-pressure gas containers. The attendant difficulties of mischievous use of EVOs on an unprecedented level are the secondary subject of this paper, to which the author has no viable solutions."
This recently posted file can be downloaded from: http://www.svn.net/krscfs/
Some points both subtle and unsubtle.
1. Hal Puthoff's Casimir Type II Model of the Ken Shoulders EVO has /\zpf = (mc/h)^2 outside the EVO shell of N electrons for a total unbalanced charge Ne in a close-packed spherical shell of radius a ~ N^1/2(h/mc). Hal also assumes /\zpf = 0 inside the EVO shell and he makes the blatantly wrong assumption that w = +1/3. Appealing to Casimir and Milonni does not help. If they did it, they are also wrong. The EVOs Ken makes allegedly have N ~ 10^12 to 10^16. (h/mc) ~ 10^-11 cm so that is a ~ 10^-5 cm to 10^-3 cm What happened to the positive charge left behind? Note that 10^12e ~ 10^-7 Coulombs. Two like charges of 1 Coulomb each 1 meter apart repel each other with a force of 1 MILLION TONS! We now have for the EVO N ~ 10^12e in a sphere 10^-7 meters across, a self-repulsive force of ~ 10^-1410^14 MILLION TONS ~ 1 MILLION TONS! That is, the zero point pressure must prevent the EVOs at the small end of the spectrum reported by Ken Shoulders from ripping itself apart with a force of ONE MILLION TONS! What about the bigger EVO at 10^-3 Coulombs? That's 10^-6x10^10 MILLION TONS ~ 100 TRILLION TONS OF SELF-DESTRUCTIVE FORCE!
In general the self-ripping unbalanced electric force ~ (Ne)^2/N(h/mc)^2 ~ N(emc/h)^2
2. The zero point energy density that Hal posits outside the EVO surface is enormous if we use Newton's constant of gravity.
Puthoff's zero point energy density ~ (c^4/8piG)(mc/h)^2 ~ 10^19Gev x 10^33 x 10^22 ~ 10^74 Gev/cc ~ 10^64 Joules/cc (since 1 Joule ~ 10^19 ev). If G* is much bigger than G at these small scales the ZPF energy density will be smaller.
This is a ridiculous once one realizes that in General Relativity the zero point energy density warps space-time directly as Mike Turner clearly explains below. Therefore, Hal's model for the EVO is clearly wrong! That is, our universe could not even exist if Hal's EVO model were true.
Remember from Mike Turner's article below, w = (pressure)/(energy density) for ALL STUFF both REAL and VIRTUAL!
My model says we live in a universe where /\zpf ~ 0 because the random micro-quantum ZPF energy density is absorbed into the MACRO-QUANTUM VACUUM CONDENSATE or Vacuum BEC. Ken's EVO has an INTERIOR UNIFORM DARK ENERGY CORE with /\zpf > 0, w = -1 and a NEGATIVE ZPF PRESSURE since the virtual photon ZPF energy density is positive from boson quantum statistics.
A SUBTLE POINT!
Positive potential energy with an inverse power law is repulsive.
Example 1. U = +e^2/r, dU/dr = -e^2/r^2, F = -dU/dr points in the direction of increasing r, i.e. repulsion
Negative potential energy with an inverse power law is attractive.
Example 2. U = -e^2/r, dU/dr = e^2/r^2, F = -dU/dr points in the direction of decreasing r, i.e. attraction
Positive potential energy with a direct power law is attractive.
Example 3. U = +mc^2|/\zpf|r^2 a 3D harmonic oscillator potential with SU(3) quantum symmetry group like quarks in a bag (e.g. "QCD Lite" Frank Wilczek) Flatten this to a plane to get SU(2)?
dU/dr = +2mc^2|/\zpf|r, therefore -dU/dr points in the direction of decreasing r, i.e. attraction
Negative potential energy with a direct power law is repulsive.
Example 4. Trivial exercise.
From p. 26 of John Peacock's "Cosmological Physics" one sees that to a first approximation model /\zpf inside the EVO shell as uniform. This follows from Einstein's equivalence principle + Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Therefore, like drilling a hole through center of Earth and dropping a ball down the hole, one gets a simple harmonic motion i.e. the 3D harmonic oscillator.
Consequently the HYPOTHETICAL EVO in simplest model obeys the simple math
V = (Ne)^2/mr + /\zpfr^2 from the inside of the EVO shell. /\zpf = 0 OUTSIDE the EVO shell.
neglecting rotation and a very small QED Casimir Type I force from virtual photons. Do not confuse that with Puthoff's Type II model.
Balance the two forces at the critical point
dV/dr = 0
which is a stable minimum when
d^2V/dr^2 > 0
Voila! Ce la Vie!
On Sept 3, 2004 Hal Puthoff wrote
[Hal previous] "When I point out that Casimir, Milonni, I, et al. use the
quantum vacuum fluctuation Casimir-type model to advantage (and,
BTW, get the right answer for Casimir attraction between parallel
plates!) you point out that it is a false model in a flat space that
does not take into account the recent GR cosmology concepts and
therefore is flawed ("Casimir's greatest blunder," you call it!)."
[Jack previous] What you say here is false. You have done a "bait and switch".
Casimir does not use your Model II to get the parallel plates result!
[Hal] "No bait and switch. I'm talking about Casimir Model I for parallel plates. Reread above."
[Jack] I have adequately answered this below. The ordinary Casimir Force Model I as WEAK Van Der Waals force between UNCHARGED finite edge parallel plates works fine because there is no dark energy, i.e. /\zpf ~ 0 everywhere in that problem. Your parallel plate objection is a Red Herring. It is completely different from the Ken Shoulders Ne CHARGED closed thin electron shell "dark energy bottle" EVO of radius a ~ N^1/2(h/mc). You have objected to my bushel of apples with your bushel of oranges. The two phenomena are qualitatively inequivalent.
*TYPO-CORRECTED THIRD DRAFT*
On Sep 3, 2004, at 8:58 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Hal Puthoff wrote on Sept 2, 2004:
"Jack,
In several of your recent postings you say that the flat-space, quantum physics Casimir model that we quantum physicists use (that does not take into account w = -1 implications of dark energy on the microscopic scale) has been overtaken by the discovery of dark energy."
[Jack] Exactly. I am saying that Einstein's local field equation
Guv + /\zpfguv = 0
definitely applies down at scale h/mc ~ 10^-11 cm. Of course the FRW cosmological metric solution does not apply there. That is a different story. In other words the effects of the equivalence principle and general coordinate covariance GCT play an essential role in this problem of zero point energy. In particular, /\zpf ~ 0 in the non-exotic ordinary vacuum where we live. This is because almost all of the random micro-quantum vacuum fluctuation zero point energy density is absorbed into the vacuum coherence field.
Note that the zero point energy density (from all sources) is
too(zpf) = (c^4/8piG*)/\zpfgoo
Where guv is the curved spacetime metric tensor
guv(curved) = nuv(globally flat) + (1/2)d[u,v]
du = (short wave cutoff)^2(Phase of Vacuum Coherence),u
The POST-INFLATIONARY elastic strain tensor (1/2)d[u,v] has all the gravity curvature information. This is not a small perturbation. It is a large non-perturbative term similar to the nonanalytic energy gap in the BCS superconductor theory. The resulting guv curved space-time local field is DYNAMICAL, i.e. "background independent" the way the loop "spin foam" guys like John Baez and Ashktekar mean it. That is, the guv field has same status as the EM Fuv field and objective local events at P are relations between the guv and Fuv local fields and are not the formal points in a manifold that have no direct physical meaning, i.e. active Diff(4) symmetry as explained by Rovelli in his new book on Quantum Gravity. You can then do perturbation theory adding a spin 2 tensor "graviton" quantum field in the smooth curved DYNAMICAL guv metric. There is no "quantum foam" in this theory. When the vacuum coherence -> 0 you simply get back globally flat space-time, i.e. the PRE-INFLATIONARY FALSE VACUUM. You do not directly quantize guv! Doing so is non-renormalizable for a very good reason. The pre-inflationary globally flat sub-stratum is renormalizable of course. There is a good reason why John Baez is not able to derive
Guv = 0
from Penrose combinatoric spin foams and will not be able to do so ever.
The GCT group derives from the U(1) local gauge transformations on the Vacuum Coherence phase.
That is, the curvature of 4D space-time is the non-Abelian local compensating gauge force field from breaking the symmetry of the 4-parameter translation group infinitesimally generated by total Energy-Momentum 4-vector. The compensating field du elastic world distortion field restores the broken translational symmetry. As Kibble showed 40 years ago you really need to locally gauge the entire 10 parameter Poincare group. The spin connection from the 6-parameter Lorentz group also plays a significant role and there is a torsion field in the completely self-consistent theory, although it usually plays no role in the vacuum problem only coupling to the spins of on-mass-shell particles in the Tuv source term. However, this assumption may not be correct - a matter for future research.
Where
/\zpf = (short wave cutoff)^-2[(short wave cutoff)^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 - 1]
G* may be larger than Newton's G at these small scales, i.e. it is a running coupling constant of an emergent effective field theory, which in this case is a local smooth c-number field from the ODLRO in the physical vacuum.
The ODLRO Vacuum Coherence Local Field characterizes the pre-inflationary to post-inflationary false to true vacuum phase transition and it explains why the Arrow of Time points in the direction of the expanding universe.
Globally flat quantum field theory is intrinsically an unstable theory because global special relativity does not permit the emergence of gravity.
[Hal] "Indeed, you use this claim to (a) criticize the Casimir model and (b) come up with a "dark energy" model for Shoulders' charge cluster phenomenon ("dark energy in a bottle," you call it).
[Jack} Correct. There are two very serious errors in the Casimir Type II model you use. Casimir simply did not know the correct physics, neither did Milonni. No one knew at the time they published their stuff. This only became clear post-1999 - actually 2002.
The serious errors are, as Mike Turner and everyone else working in dark energy at GR 17 will tell you
1. w = (pressure)/(energy density) = -1 for ALL ZPF not +1/3
2. You cannot have an exterior /\zpf = (mc/h)^-2 outside the EVO. The universe could not exist if that were the case. This is a very fundamental objection against the Casimir Type II Model!
[Hal] "When I point out that Casimir, Milonni, I, et al. use the quantum vacuum fluctuation Casimir-type model to advantage (and, BTW, get the right answer for Casimir attraction between parallel plates!) you point out that it is a false model in a flat space that does not take into account the recent GR cosmology concepts and therefore is flawed ("Casimir's greatest blunder," you call it!)."
[Hal] What you say here is false. You have done a "bait and switch". Casimir does not use your Model II to get the parallel plates result! That is, Casimir does not assume /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^-2 outside the plates with /\zpf ~ 0 inside the plates!
In fact what we have in the parallel plates is that /\zpf ~ 0 both inside and outside the plates so that you can use the ordinary QED boundary effect to a good approximation in that case. The EVO is a completely different phenomenon and you cannot work by analogy. The open finite edges of the plates ensure /\zpf ~ 0 everywhere!
"0" here means ~ 10^-56 cm^-2.
So, you have misrepresented what I say for the open finite parallel plates. I say, since /\zpf ~ 0 both inside and outside the plates, you can use Casimir's Type I QED model for that problem. You blurred the distinction between Type I and Type II in your remark above.
[Hal] Specifically, you argue that the ZPE radiation pressure modeling that uses w = 1/3 vacuum radiation pressure forces (as in the 1988 Phys. Rev A paper by Milonni et al., "Radiation pressure from the vacuum: Physical interpretation of the Casimir force") must be set aside in favor of the use of the w = -1 repulsion vacuum forces.
[Jack] Yes, I certainly say that! Milonni has made a serious error in fundamental physics. His paper is wrong period. w = +1/3 only works for REAL PHOTONS on the classical light cone.
[Hal] Here is my challenge to your line of logic. Forget the Shoulders' model for the moment, and simply show how your line of logic involving the w = -1 repulsion vacuum force leads to the known attractive Casimir force between parallel plates, which has been precisely measured and accounted for on the basis of the quantum physicists' use of the w = 1/3 vacuum forces. It would seem that you insist that instead the w = -1 repulsive force is the important force on this level, previously neglected, so please show how to derive the attractive Casimir force by your counter-claim with its opposite-sign vacuum force.
[Jack] Trivial. I already showed you above. The parallel plates phenomenon happens in ORDINARY non-exotic vacuum where /\zpf ~ 0 so you can use the Type I Casimir QED model! The ordinary open finite parallel plates experiment does not have any dark energy exotic vacuum effect at all because the vacuum coherence has adjusted to keep /\zpf ~ 0 every where in the relevant regions. That is the total ZPF pressure and energy density is zero in the ordinary non-exotic vacuum! Notice that the virtual photon ZPF pressure and energy density is not the total. All quantum fields contribute to /\zpf not only the virtual photons.
*Note also that the induced gravity larger (i.e. more negative) virtual photon "negative pressure" outside the plates will repel more strongly than the weaker negative pressure between the plates. Therefore, this will also give a net attractive force between the plates. However, I am not suggesting that this attraction is identical to the QED Casimir Van Der Waals force between the UNCHARGED PLATES (qualitatively different from the CHARGED EVOs).
* However, the plates SLIGHTLY perturb this. So, in the open plates case you will have a slightly higher virtual photon energy density outside the plates than you have inside because there are the additional long-wave modes. Therefore you have more negative virtual photon pressure outside the UNCHARGED plates than inside the plates. However, the positive virtual electron-positron pressure will compensate the virtual photon negative pressure to keep /\zpf ~ 0 everywhere and the resulting attractive Casimir force between the plates is simply the VERY WEAK induced Van Der Waals force as shown by Ian Peterson and others. There is no /\zpf exotic vacuum effect in this case at all! You have compared apples to oranges. You have confused two incompatible "total experimental arrangements" in Niels Bohr's sense. There is no good analogy between the EVO phenomenon with a CHARGED N-electron "shell" "dark energy bottle" and the tiny attractive force between two finite UNCHARGED very clean flat plates.
[Hal] "In summary, we see how Casimir's positive-radiation-pressure "blunder" model leads to agreement with experiment; we don't see how your opposite-sign dark-energy w = -1 repulsion force model would lead to the observed attraction. Please show this. If you can show this for the standard parallel plate Casimir Effect, then consideration of its use for more exotic geometries (e.g., Shoulders' charge cluster phenomenon) would be warranted. If not ....."
[Jack] I have answered your misplaced objection.
Collegially,
On Sep 2, 2004, at 8:08 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
As reading Mike Turner's article below shows, zero point energy density and its equal and opposite pressure, together directly warp space-time. This is different from QED based on globally flat spacetime without any gravity at all in which to a rough approximation you can ignore energy scales and simply subtract off the virtual photon zero point energy density with "normal ordering" of the photon creation and destruction non-Hermitian operators. See Milonni's book "The Quantum Vacuum" for these details, which ignore gravity effects.
Hal needs vanishing zero point energy density inside the EVO shell with an enormous zero point energy density outside the shell. This immediately falsifies his model, apart from the other issue that he needs a positive external pressure to hold in the Coulomb repulsion of the N electrons making the EVO thin shell. Casimir was not aware of the general relativity constraints on the problem. Casimir's Type II model would require that we live in an exotic vacuum where /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^2 ~ 10^22 cm^-2. In fact the vacuum we live in has /\zpf ~ 10^-56 cm^-2. Indeed the Casimir-Puthoff external /\zpf would not permit our universe to exist! It would warp space-time too much! In fact the EVO needs a negative pressure inside its shell with /\zpf ~ 10^-56 cm^-2 outside it where we exist. How come the non-exotic vacuum has such a small /\zpf? Simple, the vacuum coherence ABSORBS the random ZPF into the VACUUM CONDENSATE as a kind of zero entropy superfluid reservoir. The random ZPF is analogous to the "normal fluid" excitations. This also solves Penrose's problem in "Fashion, Faith and Fantasy" explaining why the early SPATIALLY-FLAT (on large-scale only) inflationary universe has low initial thermodynamic entropy setting the direction of the Arrow of Time of irreversibility of the Second Law of Thermodynamics to point the same way as the expansion of the universe.
On Sep 1, 2004, at 11:28 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Yes, thanks Joel. Mike Turner's remark below, in his otherwise very excellent Op/Ed, may well prove to be his "greatest blunder". :-)
On Sep 1, 2004, at 10:03 AM, Joel Isaacson wrote:
Public service: Mike Turner's Physics Today article on Dark Energy ===>>
[Note: the contrarian statement therein is: "Even though repulsive gravity
sounds like fun, dark energy--as far as we know--can't be bottled up to
create an object with antigravity." =jdi=
TYPO-CORRECTED! Also a new error by Turner detected below?
Dark Energy: Just What Theorists Ordered
Michael S. Turner
In the article on page 53, Saul Perlmutter describes how his team, and one
led by Brian Schmidt, used distant supernovae to discover that the expansion
of the universe is speeding up, not slowing down. At puzzling times like
these, theorists are called upon to provide understanding and, in the
process, to convince their audience that they actually anticipated the
puzzling discovery (maybe even predicted it).
The discovery of cosmic speedup, perhaps one of the most important in all of
science over the past 25 years, saved a beautiful theory--inflation--and
presented theorists with a wonderful puzzle--"dark energy," the stuff
causing cosmic speedup. What more could we ask for?
Since 1980, Alan Guth's cosmic inflation has been the driving idea in
cosmology. Central to inflation is a very early, tremendous burst of
expansion, powered by the potential energy associated with a hypothetical
scalar field called the inflaton. In a tiny fraction of a second, a small
bit of the universe is blown up to a size that encompasses all that we can
see today and much, much more. Any spatial curvature becomes flattened, and
quantum fluctuations in the inflaton field are stretched from subatomic to
astrophysical size. The decay of the inflaton produces the heat of the Big
Bang, and the quantum fluctuations in it lead to the matter inhomogeneity
that provides the seeds for all the structure in the universe, from galaxies
to clusters of galaxies and beyond.
Inflation not only explains, it also predicts. Its predictions include: a
spatially flat universe, a pattern of anisotropy in the cosmic microwave
background (CMB) that arises from the quantum-produced density
perturbations, and a sea of gravitational waves. Inflation was the
inspiration for the very successful cold dark matter (CDM) scenario for how
structure formed. CDM theory is based on a flat universe, dark matter made
of slowly moving elementary particles, and density perturbations arising
from quantum fluctuations.
From the beginning, inflation's signature prediction--a flat universe--was
in trouble. According to Einstein's theory, the mean energy density c^2rho0
determines the spatial curvature of the universe; for a flat universe, it
must be equal to the critical energy density. In cosmology talk, Omega0 = 1,
where Omega0 is the ratio of the mean energy density in any and all forms to the
critical energy density. In 1980, astronomers' measurements of Omega0 indicated
its value was something around 0.1.
Inflationists (like me) pinned our hopes on growing evidence for enormous
amounts of dark matter that hold galaxies and clusters of galaxies together.
This dark matter is distributed more diffusely than stars, making it harder
to inventory. Estimates for Omega0 rose, and for a while it appeared that enough
dark matter would be found to meet the inflationary prediction.
Cosmic troubles
By 1990, the problems for a flat universe were piling up. Estimates of the
amount of dark matter were getting better and still falling short, and
observations of large-scale structure suggested a CDM universe with a matter
density that was one-third of the critical density, that is, Omega(M) = 1/3.
Several of us sheepishly made a suggestion1 to save inflation: Add a
cosmological constant, /\, for the missing two-thirds of the critical
density, Omega(/\) = 2/3. Thus Omega0 = Omega(M) + Omega(/\) = 1. The inflationary prediction is a
flat universe, not necessarily Omega(M) = 1.
To save a beautiful theory, theorists are willing to consider the
implausible, although not the impossible. With its checkered history in
cosmology, the cosmological constant was certainly implausible. Albert
Einstein used it to create a static model of the universe; Hermann Bondi,
Thomas Gold, and Fred Hoyle used the cosmological constant to address the
fact that the time back to the Big Bang appeared to be less than the age of
Earth, and now it is invoked to save inflation.
By the mid-1990s, the observational evidence for the /\ version of CDM,
including the first hints from CMB anisotropy measurements that the universe
is flat, was becoming compelling, at least for theorists.1 However, there
was a problem: LCDM (CDM with a cosmological constant) also predicts
accelerated expansion, and the first supernova results did not yet show
acceleration.
With the discovery of cosmic speedup in 1998, everything quickly fell into
place: The universe is flat, with one-third in matter and two-thirds in
something like a cosmological constant. Overnight, skeptical astronomers
became believers in inflation. Strange as it was, cosmic speedup was the
missing piece in the puzzle. It saved inflation, but be careful what you
wish for!
According to Isaac Newton, gravity is always attractive, because the
strength of an object's gravity depends only on its mass. Einstein's theory,
however, allows for repulsive gravity and cosmic speedup because the
strength of gravity also depends on pressure, p, with c^2rho + 3p acting as the
source of gravity. Something that is very elastic (that is, negative
pressure p < -c^2rho/3) has gravity that repels, rather than attracts.
Something with pressure comparable to its energy density is exotic. Matter,
even at the center of a sun, has a pressure that is orders of magnitude
smaller than its energy density. The ratio of pressure to energy density is
characterized by the square of the internal velocity divided by c2. Thus
dark energy is intrinsically relativistic and is more like energy than
matter. Even though repulsive gravity sounds like fun, dark energy--as far
as we know--can't be bottled up to create an object with antigravity.
Quantum mechanics provides a candidate for something that is very elastic:
The virtual pairs that fill the vacuum have negative pressure.
I think Mike made an error here. The virtual pairs have positive pressure. The virtual photons have negative pressure. See Milonni's Quantum Vacuum book where boson statistics require positive ZPF energy density c^2rho and Fermi statistics require negative ZPF energy density, and both have w = -1. Of course a virtual pair condensate will be like a boson superfluid.
To see this,
compute the pdV work done by an expanding piston that encloses quantum
vacuum; you will find that pvac = - c^2rhovac where rvac is the quantum vacuum's
energy density (see the figure). Thus, quantum vacuum energy is very
repulsive because c^2rho + 3p = -2 rho(vac). Mathematically, quantum vacuum energy is
equivalent to Einstein's infamous cosmological constant /\.
Although Einstein dismissed the cosmological constant as a personal blunder,
quantum mechanics makes it obligatory. Unfortunately, even the best quantum
"mechanics" have failed to produce a sensible prediction for /\. The sum of
zero-point energies diverges due to short-wavelength modes. Truncating at an
energy scale beyond which we can appeal to physics ignorance illustrates the
enormity of the problem: For a 100-GeV cutoff, Omega(/\) = 10^55. This disparity is
the greatest embarrassment in all of theoretical physics.
Many particle theorists believe that a correct calculation of /\ will yield
precisely zero because of the utter implausibility of obtaining a number 55
or more orders of magnitude smaller than its "natural value." If quantum
nothingness weighs nothing, what, then, is causing the universe to
accelerate? Dark energy!
Mystery deepens
What do we know about dark energy and how can we learn more? It accounts for
about two-thirds of the critical energy density and is much more smoothly
distributed than matter. If it clumped, we would see its effects when
studying clusters and other gravitationally bound objects, and we do not.
Dark energy is characterized by an "equation of state," which is the ratio w
(pronounced "dubya") of its pressure to its energy density w = p/c^2rho. Although
w need not be constant, for simplicity I will assume that for now.
If dark energy is vacuum energy, w = -1 (for comparison, for nonrelativistic
matter w = 0, and for radiation, w = 1/3.) The ratio w determines how the
energy density of dark energy changes as the universe expands: rho ~
(1/R^3)(1+w), where R is the cosmic scale factor. Negative pressure (w < 0)
leads to an energy density that decreases more slowly than matter (rho(M) ~
1/R^3). Because of this fact, dark energy was less important in the past and
will become more important in the future. Why dark energy is just becoming
important today begs for explanation. I call this the Nancy Kerrigan
problem--why me, why now?
That dark energy was unimportant in the past is good: This fact means the
repulsive gravity of dark energy doesn't interfere with the attractive
gravity of dark matter that drives the formation of cosmic structure. The
lesser importance of dark energy in the past is also the root of an
independent argument for cosmic acceleration. The "missing energy" needed in
addition to matter to account for the flat universe determined from CMB
measurements (see the story on page 21) must have been unimportant in the
past; otherwise its smooth distribution would have interfered with the
formation of structure. To make the missing energy unimportant in the past
requires that w < -1/2, which implies that it must have repulsive gravity.
Imaginative theorists have suggested an array of possibilities for dark
energy. Many involve the existence of a new, scalar field and the idea that
we are in a period of mild inflation while this field (called quintessence)
rolls toward its ground state. Because quintessence and inflation both
involve accelerated expansion and the underlying cause of each is poorly
understood, it has been speculated that they might be related. Thus far,
quintessence has raised new questions without shedding light on dark energy.
What we call dark energy could be the harbinger of exotic physics rather
than a new, etherlike substance. Cosmic acceleration could be signaling that
Einstein's theory requires modification, perhaps due to the influence of
unseen additional spatial dimensions. An interesting twist is that some
string theorists believe that cosmic speedup and string theory, which itself
predicts extra dimensions, are incompatible. This will come as a relief to
the less enthusiastic fans of string theory.
Destiny
One thing is clear: Dark energy leads to a revision in our view of cosmic
destiny. With matter alone, destiny and geometry are one: Closed universes
recollapse and open or flat universes expand forever. If dark energy is
vacuum energy, our flat universe will continue accelerating to a bleak
future--in 100 billion years all but a few hundred galaxies nearby will have
their light shifted too far into the red to be seen. If dark energy
eventually dissipates, the universe will begin to decelerate, possibly even
recollapse.
Because dark energy is so diffuse, cosmology offers the only known way of
getting at it, and w is the hook. The energy density of dark energy, which
depends on w, affects the expansion rate. Models for dark energy differ in
their predictions for w and thus in their predictions for the expansion
history of the universe. Distant supernovae, galaxy clusters, and
gravitational lensing can all be used to chart the past expansion rate and
determine w. And there is much interest in doing so: Two new centers--the
Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology at Stanford
University and the NSF Center for Cosmological Physics at the University of
Chicago--list the study of dark energy as a primary science goal. The US
Department of Energy is planning a dedicated space telescope for supernovae,
the SuperNova/ Acceleration Probe (SNAP). NASA has targeted dark energy for
one of its new Einstein probes. NSF is considering an 8-m wide-field survey
telescope to study dark energy, the Large-aperture Synoptic Survey Telescope
(LSST). Add in my nine-year-old son's theoretical work, and progress is
assured.
Dark energy is one of the deepest and most exciting puzzles in all of
science. It is likely that a crazy new idea is needed to explain cosmic
speedup and resolve the cosmological constant problem. (That does not mean
every crazy idea is a solution.) The payoff will be well worth the effort:
We will gain new insights into the nature of matter, space, and time, and
shed light on our cosmic destiny.
References
1. M. S. Turner, G. Steigman, L. Krauss, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 2090 (1984);
P. J. E. Peebles, Astrophys. J. 52, 2090 (1984); L. Kofman, A. A.
Starobinskii, Sov. Astron. Lett. 11, 271 (1985); G. Efstathiou et al.,
Nature 348, 705 (1990); M. S. Turner, Phys. Scr. T36, 167 (1991).
2. L. Krauss, M. S. Turner, Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 27, 1137 (1995); J.
Ostriker, P. Steinhardt, Nature 377, 600 (1996).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Turner is the Rauner Distinguished Service Professor at the
University of Chicago and a staff scientist at Fermilab.
From: Jack Sarfatti
Reply-To: SarfattiScienceSeminars@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Starfleet Command] Worldwide Exclusive: 'Dark Energy' bomb
more powerful than thermonuke?
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 09:36:15 -0700
Information on Ken Shoulders
1. Long-time associate of Hal Puthoff. Both worked in US Intelligence
Community for years.
2. Brilliant gadgeteer with small microwave devices holds several
important patents.
3. Ken's opinions are taken seriously in the USG Defense Intelligence
Community.
4. Pressure is mounting for Shoulders, Sarfatti and Puthoff to write a
joint paper together showing conflicting models of the phenomenon.
Puthoff uses a model of Casimir's "Type II" in which there is a positive
zero point energy pressure outside the thin shell of electrons and
vanishing zero point pressure inside it. Sarfatti says Casimir made an
error by assuming that the well known "dubya factor" (i.e. w =
(pressure)/(energy density)) is +1/3, which it is for real photons
propagating energy to infinity as electromagnetic radiation. Sarfatti
objects that w = -1 for the virtual photons of the zero point vacuum
fluctuations. That w = -1 for this case is well known to cosmologists
working on the "dark energy" (e.g. Mike Turner's Op/Ed in April 2003
Physics Today). "w = -1 follows from Einstein's equivalence principle
together with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Furthermore, boson
statistics require a positive virtual photon energy density, therefore an
equal and opposite negative virtual photon pressure. Virtual quanta are
directly observable in their warping of spacetime. You cannot subtract
them out. The pressure warps space-time three times more than the energy
density. The negative pressure makes repulsive anti-gravity that is the
'Right Stuff' for weightless warp drives, wide wormholes and,
unfortunately 'universe destroying' weird weapons." said Sarfatti.
Sarfatti cited Sir Martin Rees's book "Our Final Hour" on this subject.
Sarfatti's model is the mirror opposite of Puthoff's. "The zero point
pressure is negative inside the thin shell of typically a trillion to ten
thousand trillion electrons in the observed EVOs 10^-5 cm to 10^-5 meters
across and is zero outside. Negative zero point pressure makes the vacuum
like a spring and the electric repulsion does work against the vacuum to
create a metastable EVO. The electrons make a bottle or container for the
anti-gravity dark energy vacuum core of the EVO. Break the bottle to
release the Dark Energy Genie as 'Cold Fusion'. Mike Turner wrote that it
couldn't be done, apparently Ken Shoulders has done what was thought to
be an impossible dream." says Sarfatti.
For further reading see August 2004 Popular Mechanics p. 77
http://popularmechanics.com/science/research/2004/8/dangerous_science/
index5.phtml
The above article mentions the recent unsolved murder of Cold Fusion
advocate Gene Mallove.
And Moscow's PRAVDA
http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/379/12737_weapons.html
On Sep 1, 2004, at 7:53 AM, Victor Martinez wrote:
www.prweb.com/printer.php?prid=153747
WORLDWIDE MILTARY ORDNANCE EXCLUSIVE: DARK ENERGY BOMB MORE
POWERFUL THAN NUKES! –
"If done too fast with a large enough Exotic Vacuum Object this would be
a powerful bomb - more powerful than thermonuclear" – Dr. Jack
Sarfatti
(PRWEB) September 1, 2004 -- Experimentalist Ken Shoulders claims that
electrons are behaving in ways thought to be impossible. A new and
previously unknown force appears to be binding the electrons at short
range into clusters of electron charge. Shoulders calls these clusters
Exotic Vacuum Objects, or EVO's.
Shoulders describes this as "a short-range force resembling a positive
charge negating the effect of repulsive electronic charge"
One of Ken Shoulder's latest papers suggests nefarious uses for charged
cluster technology based on EVO's:
"The author can easily imagine a scenario where instructions are
generated with enough clarity for about 1 person in 1,000 to perform the
necessary operations to refine and store a gallon jug of electrons in
the form of Exotic Vacuum Objects (EVO's) ... there is no doubt that
this jug would be light enough to carry and be highly sensitive to
destabilization of a catastrophic nature..."
Ken Shoulders has recently collaborated on several papers with
independent theoretical physicist Dr. Jack Sarfatti, in San Francisco.
Sarfatti suggests that his theory of exotic vacuum dark energy/dark
matter can explain Shoulders' experimental data.
Although Sarfatti hopes for carefully controlled release of energy from
the EVO's, both Sarfatti and Shoulders warn that rapid release of a
large EVO would be explosive, perhaps more powerful than a thermonuclear
device.
Contact Information:
Gary Bekkum
STARstream Research
952-909-3862
----------------------------------------
Disclaimer: If you have any questions regarding information in these
press releases please contact the company listed in the press release.
Please do not contact PR Web™. We will be unable to assist you with
your inquiry. PR Web™ disclaims any content contained in these
release. Our complete disclaimer appears here.
© Copyright 1997-2004, PR Web™. All Rights Reserved
Hal Puthoff wrote on Sept 2, 2004:
"Jack,
In several of your recent postings you say that the flat-space, quantum physics Casimir model that we quantum physicists use (that does not take into account w = -1 implications of dark energy on the microscopic scale) has been overtaken by the discovery of dark energy."
[Jack] Exactly. I am saying that Einstein's local field equation
Guv + /\zpfguv = 0
definitely applies down at scale h/mc ~ 10^-11 cm. Of course the FRW cosmological metric solution does not apply there. That is a different story. In other words the effects of the equivalence principle and general coordinate covariance GCT play an essential role in this problem of zero point energy. In particular, /\zpf ~ 0 in the non-exotic ordinary vacuum where we live. This is because almost all of the random micro-quantum vacuum fluctuation zero point energy density is absorbed into the vacuum coherence field.
Note that the zero point energy density (from all sources) is
too(zpf) = (c^4/8piG*)/\zpfgoo
Where guv is the curved spacetime metric tensor
guv(curved) = nuv(globally flat) + (1/2)d[u,v]
du = (short wave cutoff)^2(Phase of Vacuum Coherence),u
The POST-INFLATIONARY elastic strain tensor (1/2)d[u,v] has all the gravity curvature information. This is not a small perturbation. It is a large non-perturbative term similar to the nonanalytic energy gap in the BCS superconductor theory. The resulting guv curved space-time local field is DYNAMICAL, i.e. "background independent" the way the loop "spin foam" guys like John Baez and Ashktekar mean it. That is, the guv field has same status as the EM Fuv field and objective local events at P are relations between the guv and Fuv local fields and not the formal points in a manifold that have no direct physical meaning i.e. active Diff(4) symmetry as explained by Rovelli in his new book on Quantum Gravity. You can then do perturbation theory adding a spin 2 tensor "graviton" quantum field in the smooth curved DYNAMICAL guv metric. There is no "quantum foam" in this theory. When the vacuum coherence -> 0 you simply get back globally flat space-time, i.e. the PRE-INFLATIONARY FALSE VACUUM. You do not directly quantize guv! Doing so is non-renormalizable for a very good reason. The pre-inflationary globally flat sub-stratum is renormalizable of course. There is a good reason why John Baez is not able to derive
Guv = 0
from Penrose combinatoric spin foams and will not be able to do so ever.
The GCT group derives from the U(1) local gauge transformations on the Vacuum Coherence phase.
That is, the curvature of 4D space-time is the non-Abelian local compensating gauge force field from breaking the symmetry of the 4-parameter translation group infinitesimally generated by total Energy-Momentum 4-vector. The compensating field du elastic world distortion field restores the broken translational symmetry. As Kibble showed 40 years ago you really need to locally gauge the entire 10 parameter Poincare group. The spin connection from the 6-parameter Lorentz group also plays a significant role and there is a torsion field in the completely self-consistent theory, although it usually plays no role in the vacuum problem only coupling to the spins of on-mass-shell particles in the Tuv source term. However, this assumption may not be correct - a matter for future research.
Where
/\zpf = (short wave cutoff)^-2[(short wave cutoff)^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 - 1]
G* may be larger than Newton's G at these small scales, i.e. it is a running coupling constant of an emergent effective field theory, which in this case is a local smooth c-number field from the ODLRO in the physical vacuum.
Globally flat quantum field theory is intrinsically an unstable theory because global special relativity does not permit the emergence of gravity.
[Hal] "Indeed, you use this claim to (a) criticize the Casimir model and (b) come up with a "dark energy" model for Shoulders' charge cluster phenomenon ("dark energy in a bottle," you call it).
[Jack} Correct. There are two very serious errors in the Casimir Type II model you use. Casimir simply did not know the correct physics, neither did Milonni. No one knew at the time they published their stuff. This only became clear post-1999 - actually 2002.
The serious errors are, as Mike Turner and everyone else working in dark energy at GR 17 will tell you
1. w = (pressure)/(energy density) = -1 for ALL ZPF not +1/3
2. You cannot have an exterior /\zpf = (mc/h)^-2 outside the EVO. The universe could not exist if that were the case. This is very fundamental!
[Hal] "When I point out that Casimir, Milonni, I, et al. use the quantum vacuum fluctuation Casimir-type model to advantage (and, BTW, get the right answer for Casimir attraction between parallel plates!) you point out that it is a false model in a flat space that does not take into account the recent GR cosmology concepts and therefore is flawed ("Casimir's greatest blunder," you call it!)."
[Hal] What you say here is false. You have done a "bait and switch". Casimir does not use your Model II to get the parallel plates result! That is, Casimir does not assume /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^-2 outside the plates with /\zpf ~ 0 inside the plates!
In fact what we have in the parallel plates is that /\zpf ~ 0 both inside and outside the plates so that you can use ordinary QED boundary effect to a good approximation in that case. The EVO is a completely different phenomenon and you cannot work by analogy. The open finite edges of the plates ensure /\zpf ~ 0 everywhere!
"0" here means ~ 10^-56 cm^-2.
So, you have misrepresented what I say for the open finite parallel plates. I say, since /\zpf ~ 0 both inside and outside the plates, you can use Casimir's Type I QED model for that problem. You blurred the distinction between Type I and Type II in your remark above.
[Hal] Specifically, you argue that the ZPE radiation pressure modeling that uses w = 1/3 vacuum radiation pressure forces (as in the 1988 Phys. Rev A paper by Milonni et al., "Radiation pressure from the vacuum: Physical interpretation of the Casimir force") must be set aside in favor of the use of the w = -1 repulsion vacuum forces.
[Jack] Yes, I certainly say that! Milonni has made a serious error in fundamental physics. His paper is wrong period. w = +1/3 only works for REAL PHOTONS on the classical light cone.
[Hal] Here is my challenge to your line of logic. Forget the Shoulders' model for the moment, and simply show how your line of logic involving the w = -1 repulsion vacuum force leads to the known attractive Casimir force between parallel plates, which has been precisely measured and accounted for on the basis of the quantum physicists' use of the w = 1/3 vacuum forces. It would seem that you insist that instead the w = -1 repulsive force is the important force on this level, previously neglected, so please show how to derive the attractive Casimir force by your counter-claim with its opposite-sign vacuum force.
[Jack] Trivial. I already showed you above. The parallel plates happens in ORDINARY non-exotic vacuum where /\zpf ~ 0 so you can use the Type I Casimir QED model! The ordinary open finite parallel plates experiment does not have and dark energy exotic vacuum effect at all because the vacuum coherence has adjusted to keep /\zpf ~ 0 every where in the relevant regions. That is the total ZPF pressure and energy density is zero in the ordinary non-exotic vacuum! Notice that the virtual photon ZPF pressure and energy density is not the total. All quantum fields contribute to /\zpf not only the virtual photons.
*Note also that the induced gravity larger (i.e. more negative) virtual photon "negative pressure" outside the plates will repel more strongly than the weaker negative pressure between the plates. Therefore, this will also give a net attractive force between the plates. However, I am not suggesting that this attraction is identical to the QED Casimir Van Der Waals force between the UNCHARGED PLATES (qualitatively different form the CHARGED EVOs).
* However, the plates SLIGHTLY perturb this. So, in the open plates case you will have a slightly higher virtual photon energy density outside the plates than you have inside because there are the additional long-wave modes. Therefore you have more negative virtual photon pressure outside the UNCHARGED plates than inside the plates. However, the positive virtual electron-positron pressure will compensate the virtual photon negative pressure to keep /\zpf ~ 0 everywhere and the resulting attractive Casimir force between the plates is simply the VERY WEAK induced Van Der Waals force as shown by Ian Peterson and others. There is no /\zpf exotic vacuum effect in this case at all! You have compared apples to oranges. You have confused two incompatible "total experimental arrangements" in Niels Bohr's sense. There is no good analogy between the EVO phenomenon with a CHARGED N-electron "shell" "dark energy bottle" and the tiny attractive force between two finite UNCHARGED very clean flat plates.
[Hal] "In summary, we see how Casimir's positive-radiation-pressure "blunder" model leads to agreement with experiment; we don't see how your opposite-sign dark-energy w = -1 repulsion force model would lead to the observed attraction. Please show this. If you can show this for the standard parallel plate Casimir Effect, then consideration of its use for more exotic geometries (e.g., Shoulders' charge cluster phenomenon) would be warranted. If not ....."
[Jack] I have answered your misplaced objection.
Collegially,
On Sep 2, 2004, at 8:08 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
As reading Mike Turner's article below shows, zero point energy density and its equal and opposite pressure, together directly warp space-time. This is different from QED based on globally flat spacetime without any gravity at all in which to a rough approximation you can ignore energy scales and simply subtract off the virtual photon zero point energy density with "normal ordering" of the photon creation and destruction non-Hermitian operators. See Milonni's book "The Quantum Vacuum" for these details, which ignore gravity effects.
Hal needs vanishing zero point energy density inside the EVO shell with an enormous zero point energy density outside the shell. This immediately falsifies his model, apart from the other issue that he needs a positive external pressure to hold in the Coulomb repulsion of the N electrons making the EVO thin shell. Casimir was not aware of the general relativity constraints on the problem. Casimir's Type II model would require that we live in an exotic vacuum where /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^2 ~ 10^22 cm^-2. In fact the vacuum we live in has /\zpf ~ 10^-56 cm^-2. Indeed the Casimir-Puthoff external /\zpf would not permit our universe to exist! It would warp space-time too much! In fact the EVO needs a negative pressure inside its shell with /\zpf ~ 10^-56 cm^-2 outside it where we exist. How come the non-exotic vacuum has such a small /\zpf? Simple, the vacuum coherence ABSORBS the random ZPF into the VACUUM CONDENSATE as a kind of zero entropy superfluid reservoir. The random ZPF is analogous to the "normal fluid" excitations. This also solves Penrose's problem in "Fashion, Faith and Fantasy" explaining why the early SPATIALLY-FLAT (on large-scale only) inflationary universe has low initial thermodynamic entropy setting the direction of the Arrow of Time of irreversibility of the Second Law of Thermodynamics to point the same way as the expansion of the universe.
On Sep 1, 2004, at 11:28 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Yes, thanks Joel. Mike Turner's remark below, in his otherwise very excellent Op/Ed, may well prove to be his "greatest blunder". :-)
On Sep 1, 2004, at 10:03 AM, Joel Isaacson wrote:
Public service: Mike Turner's Physics Today article on Dark Energy ===>>
[Note: the contrarian statement therein is: "Even though repulsive gravity
sounds like fun, dark energy--as far as we know--can't be bottled up to
create an object with antigravity." =jdi=
TYPO-CORRECTED! Also a new error by Turner detected below?
Dark Energy: Just What Theorists Ordered
Michael S. Turner
In the article on page 53, Saul Perlmutter describes how his team, and one
led by Brian Schmidt, used distant supernovae to discover that the expansion
of the universe is speeding up, not slowing down. At puzzling times like
these, theorists are called upon to provide understanding and, in the
process, to convince their audience that they actually anticipated the
puzzling discovery (maybe even predicted it).
The discovery of cosmic speedup, perhaps one of the most important in all of
science over the past 25 years, saved a beautiful theory--inflation--and
presented theorists with a wonderful puzzle--"dark energy," the stuff
causing cosmic speedup. What more could we ask for?
Since 1980, Alan Guth's cosmic inflation has been the driving idea in
cosmology. Central to inflation is a very early, tremendous burst of
expansion, powered by the potential energy associated with a hypothetical
scalar field called the inflaton. In a tiny fraction of a second, a small
bit of the universe is blown up to a size that encompasses all that we can
see today and much, much more. Any spatial curvature becomes flattened, and
quantum fluctuations in the inflaton field are stretched from subatomic to
astrophysical size. The decay of the inflaton produces the heat of the Big
Bang, and the quantum fluctuations in it lead to the matter inhomogeneity
that provides the seeds for all the structure in the universe, from galaxies
to clusters of galaxies and beyond.
Inflation not only explains, it also predicts. Its predictions include: a
spatially flat universe, a pattern of anisotropy in the cosmic microwave
background (CMB) that arises from the quantum-produced density
perturbations, and a sea of gravitational waves. Inflation was the
inspiration for the very successful cold dark matter (CDM) scenario for how
structure formed. CDM theory is based on a flat universe, dark matter made
of slowly moving elementary particles, and density perturbations arising
from quantum fluctuations.
From the beginning, inflation's signature prediction--a flat universe--was
in trouble. According to Einstein's theory, the mean energy density c^2rho0
determines the spatial curvature of the universe; for a flat universe, it
must be equal to the critical energy density. In cosmology talk, Omega0 = 1,
where Omega0 is the ratio of the mean energy density in any and all forms to the
critical energy density. In 1980, astronomers' measurements of Omega0 indicated
its value was something around 0.1.
Inflationists (like me) pinned our hopes on growing evidence for enormous
amounts of dark matter that hold galaxies and clusters of galaxies together.
This dark matter is distributed more diffusely than stars, making it harder
to inventory. Estimates for Omega0 rose, and for a while it appeared that enough
dark matter would be found to meet the inflationary prediction.
Cosmic troubles
By 1990, the problems for a flat universe were piling up. Estimates of the
amount of dark matter were getting better and still falling short, and
observations of large-scale structure suggested a CDM universe with a matter
density that was one-third of the critical density, that is, Omega(M) = 1/3.
Several of us sheepishly made a suggestion1 to save inflation: Add a
cosmological constant, /\, for the missing two-thirds of the critical
density, Omega(/\) = 2/3. Thus Omega0 = Omega(M) + Omega(/\) = 1. The inflationary prediction is a
flat universe, not necessarily Omega(M) = 1.
To save a beautiful theory, theorists are willing to consider the
implausible, although not the impossible. With its checkered history in
cosmology, the cosmological constant was certainly implausible. Albert
Einstein used it to create a static model of the universe; Hermann Bondi,
Thomas Gold, and Fred Hoyle used the cosmological constant to address the
fact that the time back to the Big Bang appeared to be less than the age of
Earth, and now it is invoked to save inflation.
By the mid-1990s, the observational evidence for the /\ version of CDM,
including the first hints from CMB anisotropy measurements that the universe
is flat, was becoming compelling, at least for theorists.1 However, there
was a problem: LCDM (CDM with a cosmological constant) also predicts
accelerated expansion, and the first supernova results did not yet show
acceleration.
With the discovery of cosmic speedup in 1998, everything quickly fell into
place: The universe is flat, with one-third in matter and two-thirds in
something like a cosmological constant. Overnight, skeptical astronomers
became believers in inflation. Strange as it was, cosmic speedup was the
missing piece in the puzzle. It saved inflation, but be careful what you
wish for!
According to Isaac Newton, gravity is always attractive, because the
strength of an object's gravity depends only on its mass. Einstein's theory,
however, allows for repulsive gravity and cosmic speedup because the
strength of gravity also depends on pressure, p, with c^2rho + 3p acting as the
source of gravity. Something that is very elastic (that is, negative
pressure p < -c^2rho/3) has gravity that repels, rather than attracts.
Something with pressure comparable to its energy density is exotic. Matter,
even at the center of a sun, has a pressure that is orders of magnitude
smaller than its energy density. The ratio of pressure to energy density is
characterized by the square of the internal velocity divided by c2. Thus
dark energy is intrinsically relativistic and is more like energy than
matter. Even though repulsive gravity sounds like fun, dark energy--as far
as we know--can't be bottled up to create an object with antigravity.
Quantum mechanics provides a candidate for something that is very elastic:
The virtual pairs that fill the vacuum have negative pressure.
I think Mike made an error here. The virtual pairs have positive pressure. The virtual photons have negative pressure. See Milonni's Quantum Vacuum book where boson statistics require positive ZPF energy density c^2rho and Fermi statistics require negative ZPF energy density, and both have w = -1. Of course a virtual pair condensate will be like a boson superfluid.
To see this,
compute the pdV work done by an expanding piston that encloses quantum
vacuum; you will find that pvac = - c^2rhovac where rvac is the quantum vacuum's
energy density (see the figure). Thus, quantum vacuum energy is very
repulsive because c^2rho + 3p = -2 rho(vac). Mathematically, quantum vacuum energy is
equivalent to Einstein's infamous cosmological constant /\.
Although Einstein dismissed the cosmological constant as a personal blunder,
quantum mechanics makes it obligatory. Unfortunately, even the best quantum
"mechanics" have failed to produce a sensible prediction for /\. The sum of
zero-point energies diverges due to short-wavelength modes. Truncating at an
energy scale beyond which we can appeal to physics ignorance illustrates the
enormity of the problem: For a 100-GeV cutoff, Omega(/\) = 10^55. This disparity is
the greatest embarrassment in all of theoretical physics.
Many particle theorists believe that a correct calculation of L will yield
precisely zero because of the utter implausibility of obtaining a number 55
or more orders of magnitude smaller than its "natural value." If quantum
nothingness weighs nothing, what, then, is causing the universe to
accelerate? Dark energy!
Mystery deepens
What do we know about dark energy and how can we learn more? It accounts for
about two-thirds of the critical energy density and is much more smoothly
distributed than matter. If it clumped, we would see its effects when
studying clusters and other gravitationally bound objects, and we do not.
Dark energy is characterized by an "equation of state," which is the ratio w
(pronounced "dubya") of its pressure to its energy density w = p/c^2rho. Although
w need not be constant, for simplicity I will assume that for now.
If dark energy is vacuum energy, w = -1 (for comparison, for nonrelativistic
matter w = 0, and for radiation, w = 1/3.) The ratio w determines how the
energy density of dark energy changes as the universe expands: rho ~
(1/R^3)(1+w), where R is the cosmic scale factor. Negative pressure (w < 0)
leads to an energy density that decreases more slowly than matter (rho(M) ~
1/R^3). Because of this fact, dark energy was less important in the past and
will become more important in the future. Why dark energy is just becoming
important today begs for explanation. I call this the Nancy Kerrigan
problem--why me, why now?
That dark energy was unimportant in the past is good: This fact means the
repulsive gravity of dark energy doesn't interfere with the attractive
gravity of dark matter that drives the formation of cosmic structure. The
lesser importance of dark energy in the past is also the root of an
independent argument for cosmic acceleration. The "missing energy" needed in
addition to matter to account for the flat universe determined from CMB
measurements (see the story on page 21) must have been unimportant in the
past; otherwise its smooth distribution would have interfered with the
formation of structure. To make the missing energy unimportant in the past
requires that w < -1/2, which implies that it must have repulsive gravity.
Imaginative theorists have suggested an array of possibilities for dark
energy. Many involve the existence of a new, scalar field and the idea that
we are in a period of mild inflation while this field (called quintessence)
rolls toward its ground state. Because quintessence and inflation both
involve accelerated expansion and the underlying cause of each is poorly
understood, it has been speculated that they might be related. Thus far,
quintessence has raised new questions without shedding light on dark energy.
What we call dark energy could be the harbinger of exotic physics rather
than a new, etherlike substance. Cosmic acceleration could be signaling that
Einstein's theory requires modification, perhaps due to the influence of
unseen additional spatial dimensions. An interesting twist is that some
string theorists believe that cosmic speedup and string theory, which itself
predicts extra dimensions, are incompatible. This will come as a relief to
the less enthusiastic fans of string theory.
Destiny
One thing is clear: Dark energy leads to a revision in our view of cosmic
destiny. With matter alone, destiny and geometry are one: Closed universes
recollapse and open or flat universes expand forever. If dark energy is
vacuum energy, our flat universe will continue accelerating to a bleak
future--in 100 billion years all but a few hundred galaxies nearby will have
their light shifted too far into the red to be seen. If dark energy
eventually dissipates, the universe will begin to decelerate, possibly even
recollapse.
Because dark energy is so diffuse, cosmology offers the only known way of
getting at it, and w is the hook. The energy density of dark energy, which
depends on w, affects the expansion rate. Models for dark energy differ in
their predictions for w and thus in their predictions for the expansion
history of the universe. Distant supernovae, galaxy clusters, and
gravitational lensing can all be used to chart the past expansion rate and
determine w. And there is much interest in doing so: Two new centers--the
Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology at Stanford
University and the NSF Center for Cosmological Physics at the University of
Chicago--list the study of dark energy as a primary science goal. The US
Department of Energy is planning a dedicated space telescope for supernovae,
the SuperNova/ Acceleration Probe (SNAP). NASA has targeted dark energy for
one of its new Einstein probes. NSF is considering an 8-m wide-field survey
telescope to study dark energy, the Large-aperture Synoptic Survey Telescope
(LSST). Add in my nine-year-old son's theoretical work, and progress is
assured.
Dark energy is one of the deepest and most exciting puzzles in all of
science. It is likely that a crazy new idea is needed to explain cosmic
speedup and resolve the cosmological constant problem. (That does not mean
every crazy idea is a solution.) The payoff will be well worth the effort:
We will gain new insights into the nature of matter, space, and time, and
shed light on our cosmic destiny.
References
1. M. S. Turner, G. Steigman, L. Krauss, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 2090 (1984);
P. J. E. Peebles, Astrophys. J. 52, 2090 (1984); L. Kofman, A. A.
Starobinskii, Sov. Astron. Lett. 11, 271 (1985); G. Efstathiou et al.,
Nature 348, 705 (1990); M. S. Turner, Phys. Scr. T36, 167 (1991).
2. L. Krauss, M. S. Turner, Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 27, 1137 (1995); J.
Ostriker, P. Steinhardt, Nature 377, 600 (1996).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Turner is the Rauner Distinguished Service Professor at the
University of Chicago and a staff scientist at Fermilab.
From: Jack Sarfatti
Reply-To: SarfattiScienceSeminars@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Starfleet Command] Worldwide Exclusive: 'Dark Energy' bomb
more powerful than thermonuke?
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 09:36:15 -0700
Information on Ken Shoulders
1. Long-time associate of Hal Puthoff. Both worked in US Intelligence
Community for years.
2. Brilliant gadgeteer with small microwave devices holds several
important patents.
3. Ken's opinions are taken seriously in the USG Defense Intelligence
Community.
4. Pressure is mounting for Shoulders, Sarfatti and Puthoff to write a
joint paper together showing conflicting models of the phenomenon.
Puthoff uses a model of Casimir's "Type II" in which there is a positive
zero point energy pressure outside the thin shell of electrons and
vanishing zero point pressure inside it. Sarfatti says Casimir made an
error by assuming that the well known "dubya factor" (i.e. w =
(pressure)/(energy density)) is +1/3, which it is for real photons
propagating energy to infinity as electromagnetic radiation. Sarfatti
objects that w = -1 for the virtual photons of the zero point vacuum
fluctuations. That w = -1 for this case is well known to cosmologists
working on the "dark energy" (e.g. Mike Turner's Op/Ed in April 2003
Physics Today). "w = -1 follows from Einstein's equivalence principle
together with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Furthermore, boson
statistics require a positive virtual photon energy density, therefore an
equal and opposite negative virtual photon pressure. Virtual quanta are
directly observable in their warping of spacetime. You cannot subtract
them out. The pressure warps space-time three times more than the energy
density. The negative pressure makes repulsive anti-gravity that is the
'Right Stuff' for weightless warp drives, wide wormholes and,
unfortunately 'universe destroying' weird weapons." said Sarfatti.
Sarfatti cited Sir Martin Rees's book "Our Final Hour" on this subject.
Sarfatti's model is the mirror opposite of Puthoff's. "The zero point
pressure is negative inside the thin shell of typically a trillion to ten
thousand trillion electrons in the observed EVOs 10^-5 cm to 10^-5 meters
across and is zero outside. Negative zero point pressure makes the vacuum
like a spring and the electric repulsion does work against the vacuum to
create a metastable EVO. The electrons make a bottle or container for the
anti-gravity dark energy vacuum core of the EVO. Break the bottle to
release the Dark Energy Genie as 'Cold Fusion'. Mike Turner wrote that it
couldn't be done, apparently Ken Shoulders has done what was thought to
be an impossible dream." says Sarfatti.
For further reading see August 2004 Popular Mechanics p. 77
http://popularmechanics.com/science/research/2004/8/dangerous_science/
index5.phtml
The above article mentions the recent unsolved murder of Cold Fusion
advocate Gene Mallove.
And Moscow's PRAVDA
http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/379/12737_weapons.html
On Sep 1, 2004, at 7:53 AM, Victor Martinez wrote:
www.prweb.com/printer.php?prid=153747
WORLDWIDE MILTARY ORDNANCE EXCLUSIVE: DARK ENERGY BOMB MORE
POWERFUL THAN NUKES! –
"If done too fast with a large enough Exotic Vacuum Object this would be
a powerful bomb - more powerful than thermonuclear" – Dr. Jack
Sarfatti
(PRWEB) September 1, 2004 -- Experimentalist Ken Shoulders claims that
electrons are behaving in ways thought to be impossible. A new and
previously unknown force appears to be binding the electrons at short
range into clusters of electron charge. Shoulders calls these clusters
Exotic Vacuum Objects, or EVO's.
Shoulders describes this as "a short-range force resembling a positive
charge negating the effect of repulsive electronic charge"
One of Ken Shoulder's latest papers suggests nefarious uses for charged
cluster technology based on EVO's:
"The author can easily imagine a scenario where instructions are
generated with enough clarity for about 1 person in 1,000 to perform the
necessary operations to refine and store a gallon jug of electrons in
the form of Exotic Vacuum Objects (EVO's) ... there is no doubt that
this jug would be light enough to carry and be highly sensitive to
destabilization of a catastrophic nature..."
Ken Shoulders has recently collaborated on several papers with
independent theoretical physicist Dr. Jack Sarfatti, in San Francisco.
Sarfatti suggests that his theory of exotic vacuum dark energy/dark
matter can explain Shoulders' experimental data.
Although Sarfatti hopes for carefully controlled release of energy from
the EVO's, both Sarfatti and Shoulders warn that rapid release of a
large EVO would be explosive, perhaps more powerful than a thermonuclear
device.
Contact Information:
Gary Bekkum
STARstream Research
952-909-3862
----------------------------------------
Disclaimer: If you have any questions regarding information in these
press releases please contact the company listed in the press release.
Please do not contact PR Web™. We will be unable to assist you with
your inquiry. PR Web™ disclaims any content contained in these
release. Our complete disclaimer appears here.
© Copyright 1997-2004, PR Web™. All Rights Reserved
"Jack,
In several of your recent postings you say that the flat-space, quantum physics Casimir model that we quantum physicists use (that does not take into account w = -1 implications of dark energy on the microscopic scale) has been overtaken by the discovery of dark energy."
[Jack] Exactly. I am saying that Einstein's local field equation
Guv + /\zpfguv = 0
definitely applies down at scale h/mc ~ 10^-11 cm. Of course the FRW cosmological metric solution does not apply there. That is a different story. In other words the effects of the equivalence principle and general coordinate covariance GCT play an essential role in this problem of zero point energy. In particular, /\zpf ~ 0 in the non-exotic ordinary vacuum where we live. This is because almost all of the random micro-quantum vacuum fluctuation zero point energy density is absorbed into the vacuum coherence field.
Note that the zero point energy density (from all sources) is
too(zpf) = (c^4/8piG*)/\zpfgoo
Where guv is the curved spacetime metric tensor
guv(curved) = nuv(globally flat) + (1/2)d[u,v]
du = (short wave cutoff)^2(Phase of Vacuum Coherence),u
The POST-INFLATIONARY elastic strain tensor (1/2)d[u,v] has all the gravity curvature information. This is not a small perturbation. It is a large non-perturbative term similar to the nonanalytic energy gap in the BCS superconductor theory. The resulting guv curved space-time local field is DYNAMICAL, i.e. "background independent" the way the loop "spin foam" guys like John Baez and Ashktekar mean it. That is, the guv field has same status as the EM Fuv field and objective local events at P are relations between the guv and Fuv local fields and not the formal points in a manifold that have no direct physical meaning i.e. active Diff(4) symmetry as explained by Rovelli in his new book on Quantum Gravity. You can then do perturbation theory adding a spin 2 tensor "graviton" quantum field in the smooth curved DYNAMICAL guv metric. There is no "quantum foam" in this theory. When the vacuum coherence -> 0 you simply get back globally flat space-time, i.e. the PRE-INFLATIONARY FALSE VACUUM. You do not directly quantize guv! Doing so is non-renormalizable for a very good reason. The pre-inflationary globally flat sub-stratum is renormalizable of course. There is a good reason why John Baez is not able to derive
Guv = 0
from Penrose combinatoric spin foams and will not be able to do so ever.
The GCT group derives from the U(1) local gauge transformations on the Vacuum Coherence phase.
That is, the curvature of 4D space-time is the non-Abelian local compensating gauge force field from breaking the symmetry of the 4-parameter translation group infinitesimally generated by total Energy-Momentum 4-vector. The compensating field du elastic world distortion field restores the broken translational symmetry. As Kibble showed 40 years ago you really need to locally gauge the entire 10 parameter Poincare group. The spin connection from the 6-parameter Lorentz group also plays a significant role and there is a torsion field in the completely self-consistent theory, although it usually plays no role in the vacuum problem only coupling to the spins of on-mass-shell particles in the Tuv source term. However, this assumption may not be correct - a matter for future research.
Where
/\zpf = (short wave cutoff)^-2[(short wave cutoff)^3|Vacuum Coherence|^2 - 1]
G* may be larger than Newton's G at these small scales, i.e. it is a running coupling constant of an emergent effective field theory, which in this case is a local smooth c-number field from the ODLRO in the physical vacuum.
Globally flat quantum field theory is intrinsically an unstable theory because global special relativity does not permit the emergence of gravity.
[Hal] "Indeed, you use this claim to (a) criticize the Casimir model and (b) come up with a "dark energy" model for Shoulders' charge cluster phenomenon ("dark energy in a bottle," you call it).
[Jack} Correct. There are two very serious errors in the Casimir Type II model you use. Casimir simply did not know the correct physics, neither did Milonni. No one knew at the time they published their stuff. This only became clear post-1999 - actually 2002.
The serious errors are, as Mike Turner and everyone else working in dark energy at GR 17 will tell you
1. w = (pressure)/(energy density) = -1 for ALL ZPF not +1/3
2. You cannot have an exterior /\zpf = (mc/h)^-2 outside the EVO. The universe could not exist if that were the case. This is very fundamental!
[Hal] "When I point out that Casimir, Milonni, I, et al. use the quantum vacuum fluctuation Casimir-type model to advantage (and, BTW, get the right answer for Casimir attraction between parallel plates!) you point out that it is a false model in a flat space that does not take into account the recent GR cosmology concepts and therefore is flawed ("Casimir's greatest blunder," you call it!)."
[Hal] What you say here is false. You have done a "bait and switch". Casimir does not use your Model II to get the parallel plates result! That is, Casimir does not assume /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^-2 outside the plates with /\zpf ~ 0 inside the plates!
In fact what we have in the parallel plates is that /\zpf ~ 0 both inside and outside the plates so that you can use ordinary QED boundary effect to a good approximation in that case. The EVO is a completely different phenomenon and you cannot work by analogy. The open finite edges of the plates ensure /\zpf ~ 0 everywhere!
"0" here means ~ 10^-56 cm^-2.
So, you have misrepresented what I say for the open finite parallel plates. I say, since /\zpf ~ 0 both inside and outside the plates, you can use Casimir's Type I QED model for that problem. You blurred the distinction between Type I and Type II in your remark above.
[Hal] Specifically, you argue that the ZPE radiation pressure modeling that uses w = 1/3 vacuum radiation pressure forces (as in the 1988 Phys. Rev A paper by Milonni et al., "Radiation pressure from the vacuum: Physical interpretation of the Casimir force") must be set aside in favor of the use of the w = -1 repulsion vacuum forces.
[Jack] Yes, I certainly say that! Milonni has made a serious error in fundamental physics. His paper is wrong period. w = +1/3 only works for REAL PHOTONS on the classical light cone.
[Hal] Here is my challenge to your line of logic. Forget the Shoulders' model for the moment, and simply show how your line of logic involving the w = -1 repulsion vacuum force leads to the known attractive Casimir force between parallel plates, which has been precisely measured and accounted for on the basis of the quantum physicists' use of the w = 1/3 vacuum forces. It would seem that you insist that instead the w = -1 repulsive force is the important force on this level, previously neglected, so please show how to derive the attractive Casimir force by your counter-claim with its opposite-sign vacuum force.
[Jack] Trivial. I already showed you above. The parallel plates happens in ORDINARY non-exotic vacuum where /\zpf ~ 0 so you can use the Type I Casimir QED model! The ordinary open finite parallel plates experiment does not have and dark energy exotic vacuum effect at all because the vacuum coherence has adjusted to keep /\zpf ~ 0 every where in the relevant regions. That is the total ZPF pressure and energy density is zero in the ordinary non-exotic vacuum! Notice that the virtual photon ZPF pressure and energy density is not the total. All quantum fields contribute to /\zpf not only the virtual photons.
*Note also that the induced gravity larger (i.e. more negative) virtual photon "negative pressure" outside the plates will repel more strongly than the weaker negative pressure between the plates. Therefore, this will also give a net attractive force between the plates. However, I am not suggesting that this attraction is identical to the QED Casimir Van Der Waals force between the UNCHARGED PLATES (qualitatively different form the CHARGED EVOs).
* However, the plates SLIGHTLY perturb this. So, in the open plates case you will have a slightly higher virtual photon energy density outside the plates than you have inside because there are the additional long-wave modes. Therefore you have more negative virtual photon pressure outside the UNCHARGED plates than inside the plates. However, the positive virtual electron-positron pressure will compensate the virtual photon negative pressure to keep /\zpf ~ 0 everywhere and the resulting attractive Casimir force between the plates is simply the VERY WEAK induced Van Der Waals force as shown by Ian Peterson and others. There is no /\zpf exotic vacuum effect in this case at all! You have compared apples to oranges. You have confused two incompatible "total experimental arrangements" in Niels Bohr's sense. There is no good analogy between the EVO phenomenon with a CHARGED N-electron "shell" "dark energy bottle" and the tiny attractive force between two finite UNCHARGED very clean flat plates.
[Hal] "In summary, we see how Casimir's positive-radiation-pressure "blunder" model leads to agreement with experiment; we don't see how your opposite-sign dark-energy w = -1 repulsion force model would lead to the observed attraction. Please show this. If you can show this for the standard parallel plate Casimir Effect, then consideration of its use for more exotic geometries (e.g., Shoulders' charge cluster phenomenon) would be warranted. If not ....."
[Jack] I have answered your misplaced objection.
Collegially,
On Sep 2, 2004, at 8:08 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
As reading Mike Turner's article below shows, zero point energy density and its equal and opposite pressure, together directly warp space-time. This is different from QED based on globally flat spacetime without any gravity at all in which to a rough approximation you can ignore energy scales and simply subtract off the virtual photon zero point energy density with "normal ordering" of the photon creation and destruction non-Hermitian operators. See Milonni's book "The Quantum Vacuum" for these details, which ignore gravity effects.
Hal needs vanishing zero point energy density inside the EVO shell with an enormous zero point energy density outside the shell. This immediately falsifies his model, apart from the other issue that he needs a positive external pressure to hold in the Coulomb repulsion of the N electrons making the EVO thin shell. Casimir was not aware of the general relativity constraints on the problem. Casimir's Type II model would require that we live in an exotic vacuum where /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^2 ~ 10^22 cm^-2. In fact the vacuum we live in has /\zpf ~ 10^-56 cm^-2. Indeed the Casimir-Puthoff external /\zpf would not permit our universe to exist! It would warp space-time too much! In fact the EVO needs a negative pressure inside its shell with /\zpf ~ 10^-56 cm^-2 outside it where we exist. How come the non-exotic vacuum has such a small /\zpf? Simple, the vacuum coherence ABSORBS the random ZPF into the VACUUM CONDENSATE as a kind of zero entropy superfluid reservoir. The random ZPF is analogous to the "normal fluid" excitations. This also solves Penrose's problem in "Fashion, Faith and Fantasy" explaining why the early SPATIALLY-FLAT (on large-scale only) inflationary universe has low initial thermodynamic entropy setting the direction of the Arrow of Time of irreversibility of the Second Law of Thermodynamics to point the same way as the expansion of the universe.
On Sep 1, 2004, at 11:28 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Yes, thanks Joel. Mike Turner's remark below, in his otherwise very excellent Op/Ed, may well prove to be his "greatest blunder". :-)
On Sep 1, 2004, at 10:03 AM, Joel Isaacson wrote:
Public service: Mike Turner's Physics Today article on Dark Energy ===>>
[Note: the contrarian statement therein is: "Even though repulsive gravity
sounds like fun, dark energy--as far as we know--can't be bottled up to
create an object with antigravity." =jdi=
TYPO-CORRECTED! Also a new error by Turner detected below?
Dark Energy: Just What Theorists Ordered
Michael S. Turner
In the article on page 53, Saul Perlmutter describes how his team, and one
led by Brian Schmidt, used distant supernovae to discover that the expansion
of the universe is speeding up, not slowing down. At puzzling times like
these, theorists are called upon to provide understanding and, in the
process, to convince their audience that they actually anticipated the
puzzling discovery (maybe even predicted it).
The discovery of cosmic speedup, perhaps one of the most important in all of
science over the past 25 years, saved a beautiful theory--inflation--and
presented theorists with a wonderful puzzle--"dark energy," the stuff
causing cosmic speedup. What more could we ask for?
Since 1980, Alan Guth's cosmic inflation has been the driving idea in
cosmology. Central to inflation is a very early, tremendous burst of
expansion, powered by the potential energy associated with a hypothetical
scalar field called the inflaton. In a tiny fraction of a second, a small
bit of the universe is blown up to a size that encompasses all that we can
see today and much, much more. Any spatial curvature becomes flattened, and
quantum fluctuations in the inflaton field are stretched from subatomic to
astrophysical size. The decay of the inflaton produces the heat of the Big
Bang, and the quantum fluctuations in it lead to the matter inhomogeneity
that provides the seeds for all the structure in the universe, from galaxies
to clusters of galaxies and beyond.
Inflation not only explains, it also predicts. Its predictions include: a
spatially flat universe, a pattern of anisotropy in the cosmic microwave
background (CMB) that arises from the quantum-produced density
perturbations, and a sea of gravitational waves. Inflation was the
inspiration for the very successful cold dark matter (CDM) scenario for how
structure formed. CDM theory is based on a flat universe, dark matter made
of slowly moving elementary particles, and density perturbations arising
from quantum fluctuations.
From the beginning, inflation's signature prediction--a flat universe--was
in trouble. According to Einstein's theory, the mean energy density c^2rho0
determines the spatial curvature of the universe; for a flat universe, it
must be equal to the critical energy density. In cosmology talk, Omega0 = 1,
where Omega0 is the ratio of the mean energy density in any and all forms to the
critical energy density. In 1980, astronomers' measurements of Omega0 indicated
its value was something around 0.1.
Inflationists (like me) pinned our hopes on growing evidence for enormous
amounts of dark matter that hold galaxies and clusters of galaxies together.
This dark matter is distributed more diffusely than stars, making it harder
to inventory. Estimates for Omega0 rose, and for a while it appeared that enough
dark matter would be found to meet the inflationary prediction.
Cosmic troubles
By 1990, the problems for a flat universe were piling up. Estimates of the
amount of dark matter were getting better and still falling short, and
observations of large-scale structure suggested a CDM universe with a matter
density that was one-third of the critical density, that is, Omega(M) = 1/3.
Several of us sheepishly made a suggestion1 to save inflation: Add a
cosmological constant, /\, for the missing two-thirds of the critical
density, Omega(/\) = 2/3. Thus Omega0 = Omega(M) + Omega(/\) = 1. The inflationary prediction is a
flat universe, not necessarily Omega(M) = 1.
To save a beautiful theory, theorists are willing to consider the
implausible, although not the impossible. With its checkered history in
cosmology, the cosmological constant was certainly implausible. Albert
Einstein used it to create a static model of the universe; Hermann Bondi,
Thomas Gold, and Fred Hoyle used the cosmological constant to address the
fact that the time back to the Big Bang appeared to be less than the age of
Earth, and now it is invoked to save inflation.
By the mid-1990s, the observational evidence for the /\ version of CDM,
including the first hints from CMB anisotropy measurements that the universe
is flat, was becoming compelling, at least for theorists.1 However, there
was a problem: LCDM (CDM with a cosmological constant) also predicts
accelerated expansion, and the first supernova results did not yet show
acceleration.
With the discovery of cosmic speedup in 1998, everything quickly fell into
place: The universe is flat, with one-third in matter and two-thirds in
something like a cosmological constant. Overnight, skeptical astronomers
became believers in inflation. Strange as it was, cosmic speedup was the
missing piece in the puzzle. It saved inflation, but be careful what you
wish for!
According to Isaac Newton, gravity is always attractive, because the
strength of an object's gravity depends only on its mass. Einstein's theory,
however, allows for repulsive gravity and cosmic speedup because the
strength of gravity also depends on pressure, p, with c^2rho + 3p acting as the
source of gravity. Something that is very elastic (that is, negative
pressure p < -c^2rho/3) has gravity that repels, rather than attracts.
Something with pressure comparable to its energy density is exotic. Matter,
even at the center of a sun, has a pressure that is orders of magnitude
smaller than its energy density. The ratio of pressure to energy density is
characterized by the square of the internal velocity divided by c2. Thus
dark energy is intrinsically relativistic and is more like energy than
matter. Even though repulsive gravity sounds like fun, dark energy--as far
as we know--can't be bottled up to create an object with antigravity.
Quantum mechanics provides a candidate for something that is very elastic:
The virtual pairs that fill the vacuum have negative pressure.
I think Mike made an error here. The virtual pairs have positive pressure. The virtual photons have negative pressure. See Milonni's Quantum Vacuum book where boson statistics require positive ZPF energy density c^2rho and Fermi statistics require negative ZPF energy density, and both have w = -1. Of course a virtual pair condensate will be like a boson superfluid.
To see this,
compute the pdV work done by an expanding piston that encloses quantum
vacuum; you will find that pvac = - c^2rhovac where rvac is the quantum vacuum's
energy density (see the figure). Thus, quantum vacuum energy is very
repulsive because c^2rho + 3p = -2 rho(vac). Mathematically, quantum vacuum energy is
equivalent to Einstein's infamous cosmological constant /\.
Although Einstein dismissed the cosmological constant as a personal blunder,
quantum mechanics makes it obligatory. Unfortunately, even the best quantum
"mechanics" have failed to produce a sensible prediction for /\. The sum of
zero-point energies diverges due to short-wavelength modes. Truncating at an
energy scale beyond which we can appeal to physics ignorance illustrates the
enormity of the problem: For a 100-GeV cutoff, Omega(/\) = 10^55. This disparity is
the greatest embarrassment in all of theoretical physics.
Many particle theorists believe that a correct calculation of L will yield
precisely zero because of the utter implausibility of obtaining a number 55
or more orders of magnitude smaller than its "natural value." If quantum
nothingness weighs nothing, what, then, is causing the universe to
accelerate? Dark energy!
Mystery deepens
What do we know about dark energy and how can we learn more? It accounts for
about two-thirds of the critical energy density and is much more smoothly
distributed than matter. If it clumped, we would see its effects when
studying clusters and other gravitationally bound objects, and we do not.
Dark energy is characterized by an "equation of state," which is the ratio w
(pronounced "dubya") of its pressure to its energy density w = p/c^2rho. Although
w need not be constant, for simplicity I will assume that for now.
If dark energy is vacuum energy, w = -1 (for comparison, for nonrelativistic
matter w = 0, and for radiation, w = 1/3.) The ratio w determines how the
energy density of dark energy changes as the universe expands: rho ~
(1/R^3)(1+w), where R is the cosmic scale factor. Negative pressure (w < 0)
leads to an energy density that decreases more slowly than matter (rho(M) ~
1/R^3). Because of this fact, dark energy was less important in the past and
will become more important in the future. Why dark energy is just becoming
important today begs for explanation. I call this the Nancy Kerrigan
problem--why me, why now?
That dark energy was unimportant in the past is good: This fact means the
repulsive gravity of dark energy doesn't interfere with the attractive
gravity of dark matter that drives the formation of cosmic structure. The
lesser importance of dark energy in the past is also the root of an
independent argument for cosmic acceleration. The "missing energy" needed in
addition to matter to account for the flat universe determined from CMB
measurements (see the story on page 21) must have been unimportant in the
past; otherwise its smooth distribution would have interfered with the
formation of structure. To make the missing energy unimportant in the past
requires that w < -1/2, which implies that it must have repulsive gravity.
Imaginative theorists have suggested an array of possibilities for dark
energy. Many involve the existence of a new, scalar field and the idea that
we are in a period of mild inflation while this field (called quintessence)
rolls toward its ground state. Because quintessence and inflation both
involve accelerated expansion and the underlying cause of each is poorly
understood, it has been speculated that they might be related. Thus far,
quintessence has raised new questions without shedding light on dark energy.
What we call dark energy could be the harbinger of exotic physics rather
than a new, etherlike substance. Cosmic acceleration could be signaling that
Einstein's theory requires modification, perhaps due to the influence of
unseen additional spatial dimensions. An interesting twist is that some
string theorists believe that cosmic speedup and string theory, which itself
predicts extra dimensions, are incompatible. This will come as a relief to
the less enthusiastic fans of string theory.
Destiny
One thing is clear: Dark energy leads to a revision in our view of cosmic
destiny. With matter alone, destiny and geometry are one: Closed universes
recollapse and open or flat universes expand forever. If dark energy is
vacuum energy, our flat universe will continue accelerating to a bleak
future--in 100 billion years all but a few hundred galaxies nearby will have
their light shifted too far into the red to be seen. If dark energy
eventually dissipates, the universe will begin to decelerate, possibly even
recollapse.
Because dark energy is so diffuse, cosmology offers the only known way of
getting at it, and w is the hook. The energy density of dark energy, which
depends on w, affects the expansion rate. Models for dark energy differ in
their predictions for w and thus in their predictions for the expansion
history of the universe. Distant supernovae, galaxy clusters, and
gravitational lensing can all be used to chart the past expansion rate and
determine w. And there is much interest in doing so: Two new centers--the
Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology at Stanford
University and the NSF Center for Cosmological Physics at the University of
Chicago--list the study of dark energy as a primary science goal. The US
Department of Energy is planning a dedicated space telescope for supernovae,
the SuperNova/ Acceleration Probe (SNAP). NASA has targeted dark energy for
one of its new Einstein probes. NSF is considering an 8-m wide-field survey
telescope to study dark energy, the Large-aperture Synoptic Survey Telescope
(LSST). Add in my nine-year-old son's theoretical work, and progress is
assured.
Dark energy is one of the deepest and most exciting puzzles in all of
science. It is likely that a crazy new idea is needed to explain cosmic
speedup and resolve the cosmological constant problem. (That does not mean
every crazy idea is a solution.) The payoff will be well worth the effort:
We will gain new insights into the nature of matter, space, and time, and
shed light on our cosmic destiny.
References
1. M. S. Turner, G. Steigman, L. Krauss, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 2090 (1984);
P. J. E. Peebles, Astrophys. J. 52, 2090 (1984); L. Kofman, A. A.
Starobinskii, Sov. Astron. Lett. 11, 271 (1985); G. Efstathiou et al.,
Nature 348, 705 (1990); M. S. Turner, Phys. Scr. T36, 167 (1991).
2. L. Krauss, M. S. Turner, Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 27, 1137 (1995); J.
Ostriker, P. Steinhardt, Nature 377, 600 (1996).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Turner is the Rauner Distinguished Service Professor at the
University of Chicago and a staff scientist at Fermilab.
From: Jack Sarfatti
Reply-To: SarfattiScienceSeminars@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Starfleet Command] Worldwide Exclusive: 'Dark Energy' bomb
more powerful than thermonuke?
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 09:36:15 -0700
Information on Ken Shoulders
1. Long-time associate of Hal Puthoff. Both worked in US Intelligence
Community for years.
2. Brilliant gadgeteer with small microwave devices holds several
important patents.
3. Ken's opinions are taken seriously in the USG Defense Intelligence
Community.
4. Pressure is mounting for Shoulders, Sarfatti and Puthoff to write a
joint paper together showing conflicting models of the phenomenon.
Puthoff uses a model of Casimir's "Type II" in which there is a positive
zero point energy pressure outside the thin shell of electrons and
vanishing zero point pressure inside it. Sarfatti says Casimir made an
error by assuming that the well known "dubya factor" (i.e. w =
(pressure)/(energy density)) is +1/3, which it is for real photons
propagating energy to infinity as electromagnetic radiation. Sarfatti
objects that w = -1 for the virtual photons of the zero point vacuum
fluctuations. That w = -1 for this case is well known to cosmologists
working on the "dark energy" (e.g. Mike Turner's Op/Ed in April 2003
Physics Today). "w = -1 follows from Einstein's equivalence principle
together with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Furthermore, boson
statistics require a positive virtual photon energy density, therefore an
equal and opposite negative virtual photon pressure. Virtual quanta are
directly observable in their warping of spacetime. You cannot subtract
them out. The pressure warps space-time three times more than the energy
density. The negative pressure makes repulsive anti-gravity that is the
'Right Stuff' for weightless warp drives, wide wormholes and,
unfortunately 'universe destroying' weird weapons." said Sarfatti.
Sarfatti cited Sir Martin Rees's book "Our Final Hour" on this subject.
Sarfatti's model is the mirror opposite of Puthoff's. "The zero point
pressure is negative inside the thin shell of typically a trillion to ten
thousand trillion electrons in the observed EVOs 10^-5 cm to 10^-5 meters
across and is zero outside. Negative zero point pressure makes the vacuum
like a spring and the electric repulsion does work against the vacuum to
create a metastable EVO. The electrons make a bottle or container for the
anti-gravity dark energy vacuum core of the EVO. Break the bottle to
release the Dark Energy Genie as 'Cold Fusion'. Mike Turner wrote that it
couldn't be done, apparently Ken Shoulders has done what was thought to
be an impossible dream." says Sarfatti.
For further reading see August 2004 Popular Mechanics p. 77
http://popularmechanics.com/science/research/2004/8/dangerous_science/
index5.phtml
The above article mentions the recent unsolved murder of Cold Fusion
advocate Gene Mallove.
And Moscow's PRAVDA
http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/379/12737_weapons.html
On Sep 1, 2004, at 7:53 AM, Victor Martinez wrote:
www.prweb.com/printer.php?prid=153747
WORLDWIDE MILTARY ORDNANCE EXCLUSIVE: DARK ENERGY BOMB MORE
POWERFUL THAN NUKES! –
"If done too fast with a large enough Exotic Vacuum Object this would be
a powerful bomb - more powerful than thermonuclear" – Dr. Jack
Sarfatti
(PRWEB) September 1, 2004 -- Experimentalist Ken Shoulders claims that
electrons are behaving in ways thought to be impossible. A new and
previously unknown force appears to be binding the electrons at short
range into clusters of electron charge. Shoulders calls these clusters
Exotic Vacuum Objects, or EVO's.
Shoulders describes this as "a short-range force resembling a positive
charge negating the effect of repulsive electronic charge"
One of Ken Shoulder's latest papers suggests nefarious uses for charged
cluster technology based on EVO's:
"The author can easily imagine a scenario where instructions are
generated with enough clarity for about 1 person in 1,000 to perform the
necessary operations to refine and store a gallon jug of electrons in
the form of Exotic Vacuum Objects (EVO's) ... there is no doubt that
this jug would be light enough to carry and be highly sensitive to
destabilization of a catastrophic nature..."
Ken Shoulders has recently collaborated on several papers with
independent theoretical physicist Dr. Jack Sarfatti, in San Francisco.
Sarfatti suggests that his theory of exotic vacuum dark energy/dark
matter can explain Shoulders' experimental data.
Although Sarfatti hopes for carefully controlled release of energy from
the EVO's, both Sarfatti and Shoulders warn that rapid release of a
large EVO would be explosive, perhaps more powerful than a thermonuclear
device.
Contact Information:
Gary Bekkum
STARstream Research
952-909-3862
----------------------------------------
Disclaimer: If you have any questions regarding information in these
press releases please contact the company listed in the press release.
Please do not contact PR Web™. We will be unable to assist you with
your inquiry. PR Web™ disclaims any content contained in these
release. Our complete disclaimer appears here.
© Copyright 1997-2004, PR Web™. All Rights Reserved
Thursday, September 02, 2004
As reading Mike Turner's article below shows, zero point energy density and its equal and opposite pressure, together directly warp space-time. This is different from QED based on globally flat spacetime without any gravity at all in which to a rough approximation you can ignore energy scales and simply subtract off the virtual photon zero point energy density with "normal ordering" of the photon creation and destruction non-Hermitian operators. See Milonni's book "The Quantum Vacuum" for these details, which ignore gravity effects.
Hal needs vanishing zero point energy density inside the EVO shell with an enormous zero point energy density outside the shell. This immediately falsifies his model, apart from the other issue that he needs a positive external pressure to hold in the Coulomb repulsion of the N electrons making the EVO thin shell. Casimir was not aware of the general relativity constraints on the problem. Casimir's Type II model would require that we live in an exotic vacuum where /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^2 ~ 10^22 cm^-2. In fact the vacuum we live in has /\zpf ~ 10^-56 cm^-2. Indeed the Casimir-Puthoff external /\zpf would not permit our universe to exist! It would warp space-time too much! In fact the EVO needs a negative pressure inside its shell with /\zpf ~ 10^-56 cm^-2 outside it where we exist. How come the non-exotic vacuum has such a small /\zpf? Simple, the vacuum coherence ABSORBS the random ZPF into the VACUUM CONDENSATE as a kind of zero entropy superfluid reservoir. The random ZPF is analogous to the "normal fluid" excitations. This also solves Penrose's problem in "Fashion, Faith and Fantasy" explaining why the early SPATIALLY-FLAT (on large-scale only) inflationary universe has low initial thermodynamic entropy setting the direction of the Arrow of Time of irreversibility of the Second Law of Thermodynamics to point the same way as the expansion of the universe.
Hal needs vanishing zero point energy density inside the EVO shell with an enormous zero point energy density outside the shell. This immediately falsifies his model, apart from the other issue that he needs a positive external pressure to hold in the Coulomb repulsion of the N electrons making the EVO thin shell. Casimir was not aware of the general relativity constraints on the problem. Casimir's Type II model would require that we live in an exotic vacuum where /\zpf ~ (mc/h)^2 ~ 10^22 cm^-2. In fact the vacuum we live in has /\zpf ~ 10^-56 cm^-2. Indeed the Casimir-Puthoff external /\zpf would not permit our universe to exist! It would warp space-time too much! In fact the EVO needs a negative pressure inside its shell with /\zpf ~ 10^-56 cm^-2 outside it where we exist. How come the non-exotic vacuum has such a small /\zpf? Simple, the vacuum coherence ABSORBS the random ZPF into the VACUUM CONDENSATE as a kind of zero entropy superfluid reservoir. The random ZPF is analogous to the "normal fluid" excitations. This also solves Penrose's problem in "Fashion, Faith and Fantasy" explaining why the early SPATIALLY-FLAT (on large-scale only) inflationary universe has low initial thermodynamic entropy setting the direction of the Arrow of Time of irreversibility of the Second Law of Thermodynamics to point the same way as the expansion of the universe.
Wednesday, September 01, 2004
Information on Ken Shoulders
1. Long-time associate of Hal Puthoff. Both worked in US Intelligence Community for years.
2. Brilliant gadgeteer with small microwave devices holds several important patents.
3. Ken's opinions are taken seriously in the USG Defense Intelligence Community.
4. Pressure is mounting for Shoulders, Sarfatti and Puthoff to write a joint paper together showing conflicting models of the phenomenon. Puthoff uses a model of Casimir's "Type II" in which there is a positive zero point energy pressure outside the thin shell of electrons and vanishing zero point pressure inside it. Sarfatti says Casimir made an error by assuming that the well known "dubya factor" (i.e. w = (pressure)/(energy density)) is +1/3, which it is for real photons propagating energy to infinity as electromagnetic radiation. Sarfatti objects that w = -1 for the virtual photons of the zero point vacuum fluctuations. That w = -1 for this case is well known to cosmologists working on the "dark energy" (e.g. Mike Turner's Op/Ed in April 2003 Physics Today). "w = -1 follows from Einstein's equivalence principle together with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Furthermore, boson statistics require a positive virtual photon energy density, therefore an equal and opposite negative virtual photon pressure. Virtual quanta are directly observable in their warping of spacetime. You cannot subtract them out. The pressure warps space-time three times more than the energy density. The negative pressure makes repulsive anti-gravity that is the 'Right Stuff' for weightless warp drives, wide wormholes and, unfortunately 'universe destroying' weird weapons." said Sarfatti. Sarfatti cited Sir Martin Rees's book "Our Final Hour" on this subject. Sarfatti's model is the mirror opposite of Puthoff's. "The zero point pressure is negative inside the thin shell of typically a trillion to ten thousand trillion electrons in the observed EVOs 10^-5 cm to 10^-5 meters across and is zero outside. Negative zero point pressure makes the vacuum like a spring and the electric repulsion does work against the vacuum to create a metastable EVO. The electrons make a bottle or container for the anti-gravity dark energy vacuum core of the EVO. Break the bottle to release the Dark Energy Genie as 'Cold Fusion'. Mike Turner wrote that it couldn't be done, apparently Ken Shoulders has done what was thought to be an impossible dream." says Sarfatti.
For further reading see August 2004 Popular Mechanics p. 77
http://popularmechanics.com/science/research/2004/8/dangerous_science/index5.phtml
The above article mentions the recent unsolved murder of Cold Fusion advocate Gene Mallove.
And Moscow's PRAVDA
http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/379/12737_weapons.html
On Sep 1, 2004, at 7:53 AM, Victor Martinez wrote:
www.prweb.com/printer.php?prid=153747
WORLDWIDE MILTARY ORDNANCE EXCLUSIVE: DARK ENERGY BOMB MORE
POWERFUL THAN NUKES! –
"If done too fast with a large enough Exotic Vacuum Object this would be
a powerful bomb - more powerful than thermonuclear" – Dr. Jack
Sarfatti
(PRWEB) September 1, 2004 -- Experimentalist Ken Shoulders claims that
electrons are behaving in ways thought to be impossible. A new and
previously unknown force appears to be binding the electrons at short
range into clusters of electron charge. Shoulders calls these clusters
Exotic Vacuum Objects, or EVO's.
Shoulders describes this as "a short-range force resembling a positive
charge negating the effect of repulsive electronic charge"
One of Ken Shoulder's latest papers suggests nefarious uses for charged
cluster technology based on EVO's:
"The author can easily imagine a scenario where instructions are
generated with enough clarity for about 1 person in 1,000 to perform the
necessary operations to refine and store a gallon jug of electrons in
the form of Exotic Vacuum Objects (EVO's) ... there is no doubt that
this jug would be light enough to carry and be highly sensitive to
destabilization of a catastrophic nature..."
Ken Shoulders has recently collaborated on several papers with
independent theoretical physicist Dr. Jack Sarfatti, in San Francisco.
Sarfatti suggests that his theory of exotic vacuum dark energy/dark
matter can explain Shoulders' experimental data.
Although Sarfatti hopes for carefully controlled release of energy from
the EVO's, both Sarfatti and Shoulders warn that rapid release of a
large EVO would be explosive, perhaps more powerful than a thermonuclear
device.
Contact Information:
Gary Bekkum
STARstream Research
952-909-3862
----------------------------------------
Disclaimer: If you have any questions regarding information in these
press releases please contact the company listed in the press release.
Please do not contact PR Web™. We will be unable to assist you with
your inquiry. PR Web™ disclaims any content contained in these
release. Our complete disclaimer appears here.
© Copyright 1997-2004, PR Web™. All Rights Reserved
1. Long-time associate of Hal Puthoff. Both worked in US Intelligence Community for years.
2. Brilliant gadgeteer with small microwave devices holds several important patents.
3. Ken's opinions are taken seriously in the USG Defense Intelligence Community.
4. Pressure is mounting for Shoulders, Sarfatti and Puthoff to write a joint paper together showing conflicting models of the phenomenon. Puthoff uses a model of Casimir's "Type II" in which there is a positive zero point energy pressure outside the thin shell of electrons and vanishing zero point pressure inside it. Sarfatti says Casimir made an error by assuming that the well known "dubya factor" (i.e. w = (pressure)/(energy density)) is +1/3, which it is for real photons propagating energy to infinity as electromagnetic radiation. Sarfatti objects that w = -1 for the virtual photons of the zero point vacuum fluctuations. That w = -1 for this case is well known to cosmologists working on the "dark energy" (e.g. Mike Turner's Op/Ed in April 2003 Physics Today). "w = -1 follows from Einstein's equivalence principle together with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Furthermore, boson statistics require a positive virtual photon energy density, therefore an equal and opposite negative virtual photon pressure. Virtual quanta are directly observable in their warping of spacetime. You cannot subtract them out. The pressure warps space-time three times more than the energy density. The negative pressure makes repulsive anti-gravity that is the 'Right Stuff' for weightless warp drives, wide wormholes and, unfortunately 'universe destroying' weird weapons." said Sarfatti. Sarfatti cited Sir Martin Rees's book "Our Final Hour" on this subject. Sarfatti's model is the mirror opposite of Puthoff's. "The zero point pressure is negative inside the thin shell of typically a trillion to ten thousand trillion electrons in the observed EVOs 10^-5 cm to 10^-5 meters across and is zero outside. Negative zero point pressure makes the vacuum like a spring and the electric repulsion does work against the vacuum to create a metastable EVO. The electrons make a bottle or container for the anti-gravity dark energy vacuum core of the EVO. Break the bottle to release the Dark Energy Genie as 'Cold Fusion'. Mike Turner wrote that it couldn't be done, apparently Ken Shoulders has done what was thought to be an impossible dream." says Sarfatti.
For further reading see August 2004 Popular Mechanics p. 77
http://popularmechanics.com/science/research/2004/8/dangerous_science/index5.phtml
The above article mentions the recent unsolved murder of Cold Fusion advocate Gene Mallove.
And Moscow's PRAVDA
http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/379/12737_weapons.html
On Sep 1, 2004, at 7:53 AM, Victor Martinez wrote:
www.prweb.com/printer.php?prid=153747
WORLDWIDE MILTARY ORDNANCE EXCLUSIVE: DARK ENERGY BOMB MORE
POWERFUL THAN NUKES! –
"If done too fast with a large enough Exotic Vacuum Object this would be
a powerful bomb - more powerful than thermonuclear" – Dr. Jack
Sarfatti
(PRWEB) September 1, 2004 -- Experimentalist Ken Shoulders claims that
electrons are behaving in ways thought to be impossible. A new and
previously unknown force appears to be binding the electrons at short
range into clusters of electron charge. Shoulders calls these clusters
Exotic Vacuum Objects, or EVO's.
Shoulders describes this as "a short-range force resembling a positive
charge negating the effect of repulsive electronic charge"
One of Ken Shoulder's latest papers suggests nefarious uses for charged
cluster technology based on EVO's:
"The author can easily imagine a scenario where instructions are
generated with enough clarity for about 1 person in 1,000 to perform the
necessary operations to refine and store a gallon jug of electrons in
the form of Exotic Vacuum Objects (EVO's) ... there is no doubt that
this jug would be light enough to carry and be highly sensitive to
destabilization of a catastrophic nature..."
Ken Shoulders has recently collaborated on several papers with
independent theoretical physicist Dr. Jack Sarfatti, in San Francisco.
Sarfatti suggests that his theory of exotic vacuum dark energy/dark
matter can explain Shoulders' experimental data.
Although Sarfatti hopes for carefully controlled release of energy from
the EVO's, both Sarfatti and Shoulders warn that rapid release of a
large EVO would be explosive, perhaps more powerful than a thermonuclear
device.
Contact Information:
Gary Bekkum
STARstream Research
952-909-3862
----------------------------------------
Disclaimer: If you have any questions regarding information in these
press releases please contact the company listed in the press release.
Please do not contact PR Web™. We will be unable to assist you with
your inquiry. PR Web™ disclaims any content contained in these
release. Our complete disclaimer appears here.
© Copyright 1997-2004, PR Web™. All Rights Reserved
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)