On Oct 19, 2005, at 3:11 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
bcc
Key point below is simply
V(Sarfatti)/c^2 = V(Puthoff)/c^2 + V(Dark Energy)/c^2
where
V(Dark Energy)/c^2 = /\zpfr^2 for w = -1
DeWitt below is simply talking about how to compute the Casimir boundary contribution to V(Puthoff)/c^2. But that is not my point here.
On Oct 19, 2005, at 2:09 PM, art wagner wrote:
See
(http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/0410117)
Thanks Art, looks good. Hope to comment on this one & Becker's MITRE review http://www.americanantigravity.com/documents/HFGW-2003/123-Becker-Prepub.pdf :-)
On Oct 19, 2005, at 1:02 PM, Puthoff@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 10/19/2005 2:48:31 P.M. Central Daylight Time, sarfatti@pacbell.net writes:
Also Hal assumes a positive zero point pressure using w = +1/3 with
positive zero point energy density. This is an error inconsistent
with the direct gravity of zero point energy density that requires w
= -1 (isotropic case).
Re-read DeWitt, Section 2.2.
Regularization of w = -1 isotropic vacuum in the presence of conducting boundaries in the analysis of the Casimir Effect from a GR vacuum energy viewpoint yields a transformed w = +1/3 effective vacuum.
Read DeWitt's lips! Following Eq. (31): "This has exactly the same form as the stress tensor of a photon gas at rest (zero total 3-momentum) in the chosen frame."
If you don't see this or understand this, I can't help you.
Hal
Hal, this is a minor detail. Look here is the point, the effective potential is
V(EVO)/c^2 = Casimir Energy + Coulomb Self-Energy + Rotational Energy + Dark Energy
What you are quibbling about in your citation of DeWitt above is simply the precise way to calculate the dimensionless number coefficient "a" in
Casimir Energy (per unit massc^2) = a(h/mcr)
You have left out the key term, which is the Dark Energy term =/= Casimir Energy term
Dark Energy (per unit mc^2) is /\zpf(Dark Energy)r^2
this is what stabilizes the EVO (and individual electron & quark) no matter what number positive or negative you put in for the pure number "a" multiplying (h/mcr).
DeWitt above is simply deriving "a", which is the BOUNDARY CASIMIR EFFECT. I am talking about a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT EFFECT you left out. It is independent of that boundary. Also, in that old paper does DeWitt talk about the cosmological constant term /\?
Now are you saying that cosmology is wrong? That Mike Turner is wrong? Are you saying this is wrong? Are you saying DeWitt denies this?:
http://www-conf.slac.stanford.edu/ssi/2005/lec_notes/Kolb1/kolb1new_Page_05_jpg.htm
I don't think so. It's as clear as day w = -1 to give the EXTRA DARK ENERGY TERM /\zpfr^2 that you OMITTED. DeWitt is simply talking about how to compute "a" in the Casimir BOUNDARY TERM a(h/mcr) in a way consistent with GR.
While you may use, perhaps, w = +1/3 to make the QED in curved space-time calculation of the pure number coefficient "a", you must use w = -1 for the ambient dark energy term.
It is my NEW /\zpfr^2 term that explains the stability of the shell of charge as the STRONG negative pressure springiness of the vacuum inside the shell with the much weaker negative pressure outside the shell of charge consistent with cosmology's
Omega(Dark Energy) ~ 0.73. DeWitt wrote his paper a long time ago before he knew about dark energy at all! Also you wind up with the obviously wrong result of a HUGE positive zero point AMBIENT pressure of ~ (c^4/8piG)(mc/h)^2 FILLING ALL SPACE OUTSIDE the shell of charge that has ~ zero pressure inside. Your EVO is a kind of POSITIVE PRESSURE COOKER. My EVO is NEGATIVE PRESSURE COOKER.
Do you see the physical idea here? I mean do you see it now? Just look at the two formulae - the difference is I have the /\zpfr^2 term and you do not. That's the key difference mathematically referring to simply a NEW IDEA you, and every one else, MISSED. Those Indians are getting there however in
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/0212119
sent by Art Wagner today.
i.e.
V(Puthoff)/c^2 = Casimir Energy + Coulomb Energy + Rotational
Energy (per unit mass)
V(Puthoff)/c^2 V/c^2 = ahc/Nmr + bN^2e^2/Nmc^2r + (Nh/2Nmcr)^2
= ahc/Nmr + bNe^2/mc^2r + [(h/2 + L)/mcr]^2
L is orbital angular momentum, h/2 is spin, this gives the doublet
J = L +- h/2
...
In contrast
V(Sarfatti)/c^2 = Casimir Energy + Coulomb Energy + Rotational
Energy + Dark Energy
V(Sarfatti)/c^2 = ahc/Nmr + bNe^2/mc^2r + [(h/2 + L)/mcr]^2 + /\zpfr^2
Hal misses the all important Dark Energy Core term (3D SU(3)
harmonic oscillator "spring" potential with negative pressure for
positive zero point energy density
Basically Hal's EVO model (and all Casimir models that ignore the absolute gravity of zero point energy density from Einstein's equivalence principle) fails because it is conceptually incomplete in the following precise mathematical sense for a rotating EVO shell of N electrons (in weak field slow speed semi-classical limit of GR)
V(Puthoff)/c^2 = Casimir Energy + Coulomb Energy + Rotational Energy (per unit mass)
V(Puthoff)/c^2 V/c^2 = ahc/Nmr + bN^2e^2/Nmc^2r + (Nh/2Nmcr)^2
= ahc/Nmr + bNe^2/mc^2r + [(h/2 + L)/mcr]^2
L is orbital angular momentum, h/2 is spin, this gives the doublet
J = L +- h/2
Also Hal assumes a positive zero point pressure using w = +1/3 with positive zero point energy density. This is an error inconsistent with the direct gravity of zero point energy density that requires w = -1 (isotropic case). Hal makes an additional error that only relative differences in zero point energy density gravitates. Hal and others do not realize the profound difference between QED & GR in this regard.
In contrast
V(Sarfatti)/c^2 = Casimir Energy + Coulomb Energy + Rotational Energy + Dark Energy
= V(Puthoff)/c^2 + V(Dark Energy)/c^2
= ahc/Nmr + bNe^2/mc^2r + [(h/2 + L)/mcr]^2 + /\zpfr^2
Hal misses the all important Dark Energy Core term (3D SU(3) harmonic oscillator "spring" potential with negative pressure for positive zero point energy density
/\zpf(Dark Energy)r^2
where /\zpf > 0.
There is the issue of the exact identity of particles (Viki Weisskopf "Knowledge and Wonder) not a problem here. These micro-geons need not be identical extended space structures. They are Bohm hidden variables and, therefore, the entangled quantum permutation symmetry and spin-statistics connection is obeyed by the many-particle quantum potential in configuration space in the usual way. This shows that the Copenhagen interpretation and all those derivative from it is wrong experimentally and that the Bohm pilot wave theory is the only interpretation consistent with all the facts to date.
On Oct 19, 2005, at 9:30 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Gentlemen
re:
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/0212119
Your paper has come to my attention. Please note I have published a very similar idea in my book Super Cosmos http://amazon.com in which I explain the electron as a rotating shell of electric charge stabilized by a uniform core of dark zero point energy of negative pressure. I presented a Newtonian model with effective potential energy per unit mass V where we have the dimensionless quantity
V/c^2 = Casimir energy + Coulomb self-energy + rotational energy + dark energy core
V/c^2 = ahc/mr + be^2/mc^2r + (h/2mcr)^2 + /\zpfr^2
where ahc/r is the Casimir energy from QED that provides the numerical value for a for a spherical cavity.
The equilibrium is at
dV/dr = 0
Stability is assured from
d^2V/dr^2 > 0
This would correspond to the g00 Newtonian limit of your more general GR formulation.
In my model at low energy the electron micro-geon is ~ 10^-11 cm. However, for small impact parameters in scattering your full GR model will provide a strong space-warp so that the apparent size of the electron shrinks down to ~ 10^-16 cm for the momentum transfers of the appropriate scattering experiments.
Note that the dark energy core /\zpfr^2 3D harmonic oscillator potential with SU(3) symmetry is equivalent to an effective short range gravity G* ~ 10^40G is like a spring preventing the rotating shell of charge from exploding. This also suggests a simple way to understand the confinement of quarks inside the hadron.
The zero point energy density outside the shell of charge is, of course, consistent with the cosmological measurement Omega(Dark Energy) ~ 0.73.
This model came out of my consultations with experimentalist Ken Shoulder observing "charge cluster" EVOS.
fyi
http://www.alwayson-network.com/comments.php?id=P11751_0_5_0_C
Hey Joe, where going with that EVO in your hand?
EVOs exotic weapons and the race to master dark energy
[jch] [[ddff-ltd] | Global Broadband Strategies] | POSTED: 08.27.05 @15:31
1. Ken Shoulders bottles some exotic vacuum energy.
(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.
2. Who Is Ken Shoulders?
a. Long-time associate of Hal Puthoff. Both worked in US Intelligence Community for years.
b. Brilliant gadgeteer with small microwave devices, holds several important patents.
c. Ken's opinions are taken seriously in the USG Defense Intelligence Community.
d. Pressure is mounting for Shoulders, Sarfatti and Puthoff to write a joint paper together showing conflicting models of the phenomenon.
3. Puthoff Model: Positive pressure outside, zero pressure inside, w = 1/3
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.
4. Sarfatti Model: Zero pressure outside, negative pressure inside, w = -1
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.
5. Break the bottle to create Cold Fusion.
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.
6. Further Reading
* August 2004 Popular Mechanics: 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.
* Moscow's Pravda: http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/379/12737_weapons.html American military is pursuing new types of exotic weapons
No comments:
Post a Comment