Saturday, January 29, 2005

Wall of Dark Energy

PS I forgot to add the Vilenken problem.

How do we know if we are in a gravity field? (real or artificial no matter)
We use the rough HOVERING TEST. Focus on some reference place with your Doppler Radar.
Turn your rockets off. Are you moving relative to that chosen place?

If NO, then you are in flat spacetime most likely.

If YES, then switch on rockets and scan for a HOVER SETTING in which you remain at rest relative to the reference place you have chosen. If you find such a HOVERING SETTING then you are definitely in a gravitational field (real or artificial no matter).


Switch your rockets OFF. Use a liquid drop with small surface tension and measure the LOCAL RIEMANN CURVATURE TENSOR COMPONENTS Ruvwl in the RELATIVE COORDINATES usual text book way. Remember, the GEODESIC MOTION is ONLY FOR THE CENTER OF MASS of the EXTENDED TEST BODY. If you get non-zero results then that is SUFFICIENT to determined that you are in a REAL GRAVITY FIELD, but COUNTER-INTUITIVELY, IT AIN'T NECESSARILY SO!

You can PASS the HOVER TEST and FAIL the TIDAL TEST - that's seen in Vilenken's WALL OF DARK ENERGY.






The CLOSED NON-EXACT 1-FORM is there ONLY IF NON-TRIVIAL MULTIPLY-CONNECTED GLOBAL TOPOLOGY in the 1-Co-FORM LOOP Co-Homology i.e. closed loop ANHOLONOMIES that cannot be continuously shrunk down to zero in the space of the VACUUM COHERENCE ORDER PARAMETERS.

I think this is correct - but I will have to go back and double check. :-)

On Jan 29, 2005, at 2:34 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

Memorandum For The Record
From: Jack Sarfatti (Ph.D. physics degree from UC)
Subject: Next Generation Metric Engineering Weapons Systems Threat Assessment

OK, in fact this has been a very fruitful discussion, including the comic theatrical banter with our staged personas. :-) You raised an interesting issue that is really not properly addressed in all the text books and, as it turns out, it's at the crux of the Russian allegations (Shipov & Akimov mostly) that torsion fields are real with technological application to, e.g. C^3 submarine warfare (also Richard Hammond's US claims).

Here is how I see the Big Picture at the moment in the light of the Brazilian torsion field paper that I think Art Wagner forwarded?

1. General coordinate transformations appear to introduce "curved metrics" when, in fact, the intrinsic properties of warped spacetime should be intrinsic tensor or spinor objects that transform homogeneously under the relevant symmetry groups of transformations of local frames of reference.

2. Not all local observables are homogeneous tensor (spinors) densities. The most important exception are the inertial forces (E.G. Coriolis, centrifugal) that are artifacts of the acceleration of a local frame that is, by definition, "non-inertial".

3. A common thread in the several forms of the local equivalence principle is that, in a sense that must be carefully defined operationally, one cannot LOCALLY distinguish a real gravitational field from an inertial field.

4. There is a creative tension between the Newtonian idea of a "gravity force" and Einstein's geometrodynamics where gravity force is eliminated. Landau & Lifshitz in "The Classical Theory of Fields" point out explicitly the bait and switch in the inertial/non-inertial frame distinction in the transformation from Newton's to Einstein's paradigms. In Newton's theory one can imagine a global inertial frame with a gravity force field just like an electric field. The local freely falling frame in Newton's theory is non-inertial. The little frame of reference falls because it is, like EVERYTHING, also subject to the universal force of gravity. Most NASA engineers still think this way and you can even send rockets to the moon, Mars and Titan using the Newtonian gravity force idea. Einstein turned Newton topsy-turvy upside-down, very much like what Marx did to Hegel. All inertial forces are eliminated in inertial frames for both Einstein and Newton. That is essentially a common definition in both Bohr complementary paradigms. For Einstein, LOCALLY

gravity force is equivalent to inertial force (LOCALLY means now at a SINGLE POINT EVENT)

You CAN tell the difference GLOBALLY. For example phony gravity fields like the centrifugal force get stronger with distance from a center instead of weaker like a legitimate gravity field from a compact source. See Landau & Lifshitz.

Inertial frames do not have any inertial forces. Since gravity is locally equivalent to an inertial force, the gravity "force" field VANISHES in a LOCAL INERTIAL FRAME, AKA "LIF". Roughly think of "gravity force" as "weight". Indeed, the Astronauts orbiting Earth in a closed elliptical orbit, with rockets off, are CONTINUOUSLY WEIGHTLESS in FREE FLOAT. They are passing through a sequence of LIFs. There is no LOCAL POINT-LIKE gravity force in LIFs. Indeed, what to Newton, is an accelerated curved motion in FLAT Euclidean 3D space is to Einstein the STRAIGHTEST POSSIBLE "GEODESIC MOTION" IN CURVED 4D SPACE-TIME.

What is reality really like? Is it Newtonian or is it Einsteinian? This, it turns out is a BOGUS QUESTION. It is not a good question.

"The Question is: What is The Question?" John Archibald Wheeler

We need to invoke Bohr's general philosophical or meta-theoretic "complementarity principle" that has been nicely formulated in a recent paper from Brazil forwarded to me by Art Wagner on Jan 12, 2005.

Within the context of the Cartan "tetrad" reformulation of Einstein's "tensor" geometrodynamics, Einstein's theory of gravity is unified conceptually and classically with all the other gauge force theories of the electro-weak-strong (sub-nuclear) forces. One can move at will between the two pictures like The Two Faces of Janus. They are equivalent more precisely, in fact, than the way different "string theories" are equivalent in the M Theory of the over-hyped Inelegant Multi-Verse. ;-) Essentially this is a Gestalt Shift like Old Woman/Young Woman
Gauge Force/Geometrodynamics - take you pick.

Now it turns out that the gauge force picture fits nicely with my "More is Different" Anderson/Sakharov emergence of Einstein's gravity with dark energy from the partial cohering of the random zero point energy vacuum fluctuations of the pre-inflationary false vacuum in the micro-quantum -> macro-quantum breaking of symmetry of the physical vacuum that leads Frank Wilczek (Nobel Prize in Physics, 2004) to say that the multi-verse is permeated by a multi-layered multi-colored cosmic superconducting field (Nature, 20 Jan 2005 "In Search of Symmetry Lost"). My macro-quantum vacuum theory fits inside Wilczek's picture nicely, and the Brazilian paper shows how to make the mathematical morphing between Wilczek's post-Newtonianism and Einstein's geometrodynamics.

The two key battle-tested ideas are:

1. Locally gauge every continuous symmetry group in sight both inside spacetime and beyond it. This makes compensating gauge force fields in the post-Newtonian picture.

2. Look for physical vacuum instabilities that spontaneously break some of those symmetries. In particular, the exchange of a virtual photon between a virtual electron and a virtual positron inside the vacuum makes it unstable and out of that instability forming some of the multi-layered multi-colored superconducting Higgs-Goldstone cosmic field out of which beautifully emerges EINSTEIN'S GRAVITY, the REPULSIVE "DARK ENERGY" accelerating the universe along with the ATTRACTIVE "DARK MATTER HALOS". The observed anomaly of the NASA Pioneer 10&11 space probes out beyond 20 AU from the Sun with a tug a_g = -cH = 10^-7 cm/sec^2, H is the Hubble parameter, is simply a large-scale "hedgehog topological defect" in the multi-layered multi-colored cosmic superconducting field. These hedgehogs probably surround all stars and are universal remnants of their seed formation.

On Jan 29, 2005, at 12:36 PM, wrote:

Let's talk about this after I've had a closer look at tetrads.

Jack Sarfatti wrote:

Math typo-corrected 4th draft

The role of the Ricci coefficients is subtle. I corrected a few more math typos from late last night in the clarity of the morning.

Paul Zielinski has been trying to separate out the real intrinsic geometry from the appearance of coordinate transformations. He has failed to get anywhere specific for three or more years because he is not familiar with the Cartan tetrad way of doing Einstein's gravity theory. The problem becomes simple in the tetrad formalism below. The "gauge potential" is what Zielinski has been looking for, but he could not find it using old-fashioned tensor methods. It requires the Cartan tetrad technique introduced in the 1920s after Einstein did his 1915 work. Einstein, apparently was never really happy with tetrads (Einstein-Cartan letters) and got into a three-year tiff with Schrodinger about them in early thirties?

Bu = Lp^2Bu^aPa/h

from locally gauging T4 is the "intrinsic geometry" where the Cartan tetrad is

eu^a = (Kronecker Delta)u^a + Bu^a

When Bu = 0, i.e. when the Goldstone Phase = 0 in a spacetime region, then all the GCTs are simply different descriptions of globally flat Minkowski space-time seen from the POVs of arbitrary arrays of LNIF observers firing their rocket engines in empty deep space. The connection field is derived simply from the tetrads eu^a. Under GCTs, eu^a is a first rank GCT tensor in the u LNIF base space index, where a is the LIF tangent fiber space index. That is, for the Jacobian Matrix of the GCT

eu’^a = Xu'^ueu^a

Where the Levi-Civita connection field for parallel transport is

{LC}^wvu = ea^we^av,u + e^waA^abue^bv

A^abu is the spin connection that couples to the Lie algebra of the Lorentz symmetry group O(1,3) of the LIF tangent fiber. O(1,3) is not locally gauged here in 1916 GR only T4 is locally gauged to give the Bu gauge potential equivalent to geometrodynamic curvature under the proper map. A^abc are globally constant "phases" canonically conjugate to the Sab space-time rotation Lie algebra generators of O(1,3). When O(1,3) is locally gauged then the spin connection coefficients A^abc are arbitrary functions in which the torsion tensor field of Gennady Shipov is the compensating field. Of course, A^abu is an arbitrary variable function in spacetime because

A^abu(x) = eu^c(x)A^abc

and the variable spacetime dependence is in the tetrad eu^c(x). Locally gauging O(1,3) in addition to T4 is beyond 1916 GR. I am going further than Frank Wilczek here suggesting that Einstein's general relativity GR in the form of the exotic vacuum field equation

Guv + /\zpfguv = 0

where the dark zero point energy (matter) energy density

(c^4/8piG)/\zpf = (String Tension)(DeSitter Curvature)

plays a major role on the small-scale where the constant large-scale DeSitter Curvature /\zpf generalizes to a local scalar field.

Bu = Lp^2Bu^aPa/h = Lp^2(Macro-Quantum Vacuum World Hologram Goldstone Phase),u

Bu^a is dimensionless, where

Bu^aPa/h = (Macro-Quantum Vacuum World Hologram Goldstone Phase),u

eu^a = (Kronecker Delta)u^a + Bu^a = flat trivial piece + curved intrinsic piece

guv(LNIF) = nuv(Minkowski) + (1/2)[Bu,v + Bv,u] is dimensionless Einstein metric tensor for LNIFs

Lp^2 = hG/c^3 = quantum of area of World Hologram

eu^a = Cartan tetrad (dimensionless)

Bu = gauge potential compensating field from locally gauging the translation group T4 (dimension of length)

{Pa} = "Mom-energy" Lie algebra of T4

The Ricci rotation coefficients (spin-connection) Au^ab are not independent dynamical fields in this torsion-free plain vanilla 1916Einstein GR emergence theory.

The covariant derivative on spinors is

Psi;u = Psi,u + Au^abSabPsi

{Sab} is Lie algebra of Lorentz group O(1,3), which, when locally gauged, gives Gennady Shipov's torsion field theory that Akimov in Moscow says has practical WMD potential. Shipov BTW told me yesterday that he is currently in Bangkok.

No comments: