Russian Torsion Field R&D

A brief look at Gennady's equations here shows it to be similar to James Woodward's scheme. Neither Woodward's not Gennady's proposals would be WWD (Weightless Warp Drive) or GWD (Geodesic Warp Drive) in the sense of Alcubierre where we change the shape of the local geodesic glide path of the ship FROM the ship itself. However, both their schemes, would be PP, i.e. Propellantless Propulsion of the NON-geodesic kind so that, unlike WWD, the occupants in their ships will feel g-force stresses. My WWD is a superior scheme in that regard. The Shipov-Woodward fighters would be obviously outclassed by a WWD fighter in aerial or space combat.

Again for clarity

Woodward/Shipov schemes are PP but are not WWD, they are non-geodesic PP.

My scheme is WWD = geodesic PP.

Woodward tries to use Mach's Principle globally (or via advanced action Wheeler-Feynman) to get his

(dM/dt)v term

Note that Newton's F = dp/dt = Mdv/dt + (dM/dt)v

The second term on the RHS is the rocket propulsion term

Non-geodesic PP means dM/dt =/= 0 WITHOUT EJECTING PHYSICAL MASS.

Gennady Shipov

Dear Jack,

Concept of geodesic is relative.

Yes of course.

In Newton mechanics not geodesic movement (for example, free falling of the lift of Einstein) in Einstein's theory is considered as geodesic.

Yes of course.

In my work I use geodesic movement in geometry of absolute parallelism which from point of view of Newton mechanics is not geodesic.

OK

The main poin that now in physics there is a change of a scientific paradigm. To use the theories created in 20 century mean to go in impasse. The new 21 century demands new theory which should explain in the fundamental way the phenomena which now are proclaimed as abnormal. Now we know a lot of devices which have no a scientific substantiation within the framework of the equations of modern physics. The new physics, physics of 21 centuries is necessary and I think, that it will be a Theory of Physical vacuum. Creation of this theory is more important, than the invention of abnormal devices.

I need to see the math. I like the Cartan notation because

1. It is simple

2. It is automatically locally frame invariant for all symmetry groups.

So I say

e' = 1 + B + S = e + S

B is curvature 1-form tetrad

S is torsion 1-form tetrad

D' = d + W/\ + S/\ = D + S/

W is GR spin connection zero torsion where

d(1 + B) + W/\(1 + B) = 0

T = dS + W/\S + S/\(1 + B + S) = torsion 2-form

R = dW + W/\W = 1915 GR curvature 2-form

DR = 0 is 1915 Bianchi identity (like dF = 0 in EM)

D*R = *J (like d*F = *J in EM)

D^2R = D*J = 0

is 1915 GR stress-energy current density local conservation

R' = d(W + S) + (W + S)/\(W + S)

Absolute parallelism is

R' = 0

in that case,

dW + dS + W/\W + W/\S + S/\W + S/\S = 0

But

T = dS + W/\S + S/\(1 + B + S)

T = dS + W/\S + S/\S + S/\1 + S/\B

dS + W/\S + S/\S = T - S/\1 - S/\B

Therefore

dW + dS + W/\W + W/\S + S/\W + S/\S = 0

dW + T - S/\1 - S/\B + W/\W + S/\W = 0

R + T - S/\(1 + B + W) = 0

R + T = S/\(1 + B + W)

And when S = 0, therefore T = 0 and then

R = 0

which is flat space-time since R is the curvature 2-form, so that's OK.

However, when S =/= 0

R = S(1 + B + W) - T

where W is determined by B entirely.

B = (hG/c^3)^1/2"d"(Goldstone Phase)

Also

In general, however when

R' =/= 0

D'R' = 0

D'*R' = *J'

1915 GR uses only the unprimed pieces when S = 0.

Jack

The DANGER HERE is its INTRINSIC INSTABILITY - if you are too successful and change e/m for electrons and nucleons, then you BLOW UP THE MACHINE and indeed it may be a CATASTROPHIC WMD!

Gennady Shipov

Absolutely is no DANGER. The variable inertial mass M in the equation Mdv/dt + (dM/dt)v=0

That says dP/dt = 0, OK no external force.

appears as periodic function of time, instead of monotonously decreasing as at jet movement.

Depends on scale. If you change e/m on microscale you have a BOMB. This may apply more to James Woodward's device than to yours. I don't really know at this moment.

Jack

Gennady uses the torsion field Tuv^w to get the same term.

Note that neither Woodward nor Gennady use the full machinery of Einstein's GR the way I do. I also need Gennady's torsion field, but I use it in a completely different way.

Gennady Shipov

We go by different ways, but the main thing that we have one goal.

Jack

Note the connection of my notation to Gennady's notation

The Cartan torsion 2-form in curved base space is T where

T = Tuvdx^u/\dx^v

Tuv = Tuv^a&a

a is in the tangent fiber and &a is a co-form basis in the tangent fiber.

Shipov's Tuv^w = Tuv^ae'a^w

where, in local frame-invariant INTRINSIC FORM for BOTH LIF & LNIF (mutually COINCIDENT)

e' = 1 + B + S

B is the curvature connection 1-form from locally gauging T4 to Diff(4) ref. Utiyama & Kibble 1960's

S is the torsion-connection 1-form from locally gauging O(1,3) giving Gennady's extra 6D for his "oriented point".

In my theory, using the Higgs field of the simplest version of the standard model of quarks and leptons - just to show the main idea pedagogically, spontaneous breakdown of internal SU(2) hypercharge in the physical vacuum gives

B = (hG/c^3)^1/2"d"(argphi)

"d" indicates argphi Goldstone phase singularities or branch cut phase jumps for topological defects associated with the non-trivial topology of the degenerate vacuum manifold G/H where H is the unbroken normal subgroup.

In effect

dB =/= 0

i.e.

d^2 = 0

but

d"d" =/= 0 from singularities giving "Flux without flux" "multi-valued gauge transformations" (H. Kleinert)

Also?phi the LOCAL vacuum coherence macro-quantum Higgs field order parameter is shown here

http://www-conf.slac.stanford.edu/ssi/2005/lec_notes/Kolb1/kolb1new_Page_27_jpg.htm

Furthermore, the curvature-torsion relation is

T = dS + W/\S + S/\(1 + B + S)

where

dB + W/\(1 + B) = 0

W is the 1915 GR "spin connection".

T = Tuvdx^u/\dx^v

Tuv = argphi[,u,v]

Gennady Shipov

Goldstone's fields and Higgs's mechanism in my theory are connected with primary torsion fields.

Jack

Show equations.

Shipov

It is object which appears pioneering from Absolute Vacuum.

Jack

Show equations

## Thursday, September 22, 2005

Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

## No comments:

Post a Comment