VORTEX PROPELLANTLESS PROPULSION?

On Aug 6, 2006, at 4:21 AM, Waldyr A. Rodrigues Jr. wrote:

1) I said the universe is boring in the sense that it used the same basic idea many times. UFOS do not need an exotic topological manifold to "fly".

Well if you can prove that it will be very interesting of course. I disagree. I think Stargates are real and they are exotic topologies. I could be wrong of course so let's see your proof of this. I mean your model. Also your new theory without blackhole event horizons presumably must explain all the data - a daunting task.

Also, as you know I have been investigating paranormal phenomena (almost as main activity) for more than 30 years.

Yes, of course.

You cannot leave out our "brane" in a "material" state, even if you are on board of a UFO.

I don't understand the above sentence. You mean "branes" or "brains"? :-)

2) I know very well that gravitational field is described by QFT by a spin 2 field.

Of course.

The interacting tetrad fields are equivalent to a spin 2 field when some conditions are fulfilled.

My idea here is that the SUBSPACE tetrad fields when quantized should be spin 1. It is then obvious that they are vector quantum field theories in flat Minkowski tangent fiber space to curved space-time base space of the tangent bundle. Since Einstein's geometrodynamic field forming EMERGENT curved base space is bilinear in the spin 1 tetrads we know from the quantum rules for adding spins

1 + 1 = 2, or 1, or 0

That is the basic Einstein geometrodynamic quanta have spin 2 - the conventional ones, but also spin 1 and spin 0 fields!

You can think of the spin 2 geometrodynamic quantum as an Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen pair correlated state like in a BCS superconductor - but the SUBSPACE tetrad quanta are also bosons I suppose. The spin 1 boson tetrad fields are also 2-qubit Penrose SPINOR fermion entangled states. Therefore the Einstein geometrodynamic field is a 4 qubit entangled string.

IT FROM BIT!

It is now obvious that TETRAD SUBSPACE is a truly flat space-time quantum field theory in the tangent fiber sense and that it is obviously MAXWELLIAN and RENORMALIZABLE.

It also suggests additional "anti-gravity" spin 1 quantum gravity vector fields and spin 0 scalar fields.

If A is curved invariant tetrad scalar field in FLAT SUBSPACE

F = dA ~ dTheta/\dPhi ~ SUBSPACE Maxwellian Field Tensor

Theta & Phi Goldstone phases of vacuum ODLRO inflation field

This is World Hologram Ansatz

F = Loop Quantum Gravity Area Flux Density Field

dF = 0

d*F = *J

d&J = 0

for U(1) group

You can make this Yang-Mills trivially by introducing 3 and 8 additional internal dimensions respectively and

D = d + A/

for SU(2) and SU(3)

When it is described by a single 1-form potential A, the field is generated by the Ricci operator (which is an exterior product of two Dirac operators D^D) applied to that potential G=(D^D)A, and the resulting field is of spin 2 if some conditions are fulfilled. Note that the electromagnetic field F is generated from a potential 1-form A’ using only one time the Dirac operator by F=DA’…

3) The tetrads are mathematical objects that are sections a principal bundle called the frame bundle. Each member of a given tetrad is also a section of a vector bundle called the cotangent bundle.

Tetrads are not flat or curved. These wordings concerning these objects are sheer nonsense. Flat or curve refers to properties of a connection.

I disagree.

In my theory, the local frame independent scalar invariant e formed from the 4 tetrads e^a is

e = 1 + A

When A = 0 the emergent geometrodynamic field given by the EQUIVALENCE PRINCIPLE

guv = eu^a(MINKOWSKI METRIC)abev^b

has intrinsic geodesic deviation AKA "curvature".

When A = 0 the emergent space-time is globally flat.

I explicitly showed that you can interpret the gravitational field in Einstein’s theory as fields in the Faraday sense living in Minkowski spacetime or as generating an effective Lorentzian spacetime (with non null Riemann curvature tensor and null torsion)

I don't understand how it can simultaneously be Minkowski and yet have curvature? That seems a contradiction. In my theory I have TWO levels.

1. DIRAC SUBSTRATUM (or "SUBSPACE")RENORMALIZABLE FLAT SPIN 1 TETRAD LEVEL "square root" of EMERGENT GEOMETRODYNAMIC FIELD.

2. Einstein emergent SPIN 2 CURVED GEOMETRODYNAMIC FIELD. Also possibly spin 1 & spin 0 effects in the zero point quantum "dark energy/matter" fluctuations on the smooth c-number vacuum ODLRO "condensate" (SUPERSOLID) non-rigid dynamical background.

or an effective teleparallel spacetime (with null Riemann curvature and non null torsion tensor). Of course, other possibilities exist. I can (and already done more than 20 years ago) describe the gravitational filed in a geometry with a non null non metricity tensor. Which geometry to use? The one it is more convenient. This is exactly what Poincaré said in his book Hypothesis and Science (read by Einstein…) a long long time ago.

Eventually it is time for more people to read Poincaré.

I will try to do so in Paris next month.

4) Another comment. Of course, since Cartan it is well known that the equations satisfied by the tetrads have some similaritiy to Maxwell equations.

I discovered that independently as I do not read much literature.

However, what are the currents J_a? Here only intuitive ideas are of no help. You need a Lagrangian. In my theory there is one. The interesting aspect of that Lagrangian is that besides the Yangs-Mills and gauge fixing terms there is an auto-interacting term involving the vorticities of the tetrads.

Yes, I am well aware of that intuitively.

Kiehn already verified that these objects are important for all known solutions of the Einstein equations, although he did not discovered how to write a Lagrangian.

I observe moreover that for the electromagnetic field the majority of solutions that you found in textbooks have null vorticity A’^DA’.

However many of the extraordinary solutions (sub and super c) that I found in 95 have non zero vorticities…

Yes, this is important. So this is how you get SUPERLUMINAL WARP DRIVE?

5) Last comment. My theory explains all known experimental facts described by GR. Moreover, in it there are fidedigne conservation laws, which is not the case of GR. You do not need exotic topologies to explain data associated to what people call “black-holes” and also as I already said you do not need such topologies to travel fast…. More on this and on “Hilbert error” some of these days.

Please hurry. :-)

-----Mensagem original-----

De: Jack Sarfatti [mailto:sarfatti@pacbell.net]

Enviada em: sábado, 5 de agosto de 2006 22:29

Para: Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars

Assunto: Waldyr Rodrigues responds on "Hilbert's Error" & my objections

On Aug 5, 2006, at 5:07 PM, Waldyr A. Rodrigues Jr. wrote:

> 1) Universe eventually is really boring.

But UFOS prove that the universe, i.e. MEGAVERSE of parallel pocket

universes is not boring. My God Waldyr, if I thought we lived in a

boring universe I would have given up this infernal physics nonsense!

> What can I do?

Remember that Brazilian Army General you took me and Fred Alan Wolf

to see in 1984 and he showed us the bent metal from the kids in the

Amazon who had been zapped by UFOs like Uri Geller - right? Well

that's hardly a boring universe - eh?

George Chapline Jr agrees with you that there is no time travel.

> My theory seems to indicate that nature has used a good idea many

> times … I recall that now it is Einstein’s equations that are put

> in Maxwell-like form and I already showed that Dirac equation can

> be written as a Maxwell equation (see. e.g., Maxwell-Dirac

> Equivalence of the First and Second Kinds and the Seiberg-Witten

> Equations on Minkowski Spacetime, International Journal of

> Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences 2003, 2707-2734 (2003), RP

> 61/02 IMECC-UNICAMP, math-phys/0212034. MR2004136 )

But Maxwell's first rank tensor equations are spin 1 quantum fields

and Einstein's second rank tensor equations are spin 2 which is why

you have universal attraction for positive masses as shown by Feynman

for example. But of course on tetrad level what you say is perfectly

obvious. I said it before you in fact! The tetrads are spin 1 and

they live in flat Minkowski space - but it's only local tangent fiber

space so Einstein's curved spacetime is still needed globally with

wormhole topologies. I get your theory in essence trivially in a few

lines without all that math in your paper.

e = 1 + A at SUBSPACE spin 1 tetrad level "square root" of Einstein

geometrodynamic level.

F = dA is analog of Maxwell field tensor

dF = 0 Faraday's law & no magnetic monopoles law

d*F = *J Ampere's law and Gauss's law in SUBSPACE

d*J = 0 local conservation

There you have it.

Now we do nonlinear map to Einstein's 1915 geometrodynamics using the

EQUIVALENCE PRINCIPLE

guv(CURVED) = eu^a(FLAT)abev^b

The local scalar invariant is

ds^2 = guvdx^udx^v

The torsion 2-form is

T = De = 0 in 1915 GR

D = d + S/

S is spin connection 1-form local scalar invariant

S = S^a^b&a&b

S^a^b = - S^b^a

S^a^b = Su^a^bdx^u

The Riemann curvature 2-form is

R = DS

The Einstein-Hilbert Action Density is

~ R/\e/\e

The vacuum Euler-Lagrange field equation is

R/\e = 0

Note that

D(R/\e) = DR/\e + R/\De = 0

DR/\e + R/\T = 0

if torsion T is not zero, then

DR =/= 0

When T = 0

then

DR = 0

>

> 2) There is not a single evidence for nontrivial topologies until now.

UFOs are such evidence. Blackhole data are such evidence.

> But do not get boring. There are other ways to travel fast in our

> big universe which do not implies the existence of exotic topologies….

So you say there are warp drives but no stargates?

> 3) Moreover, my theory can be formulated in topological spaces

> different form R^4 with some small changes if experimental evidence

> shows up. However this is not necessary at present time.

>

> 3) The “evidence” for black holes can be easily simulated in my

> theory. Beckwith as many other physicists always forget to say that

> the experimental evidence is also compatible with alternative

> explanations and with other theories. By the way, many know only a

> single theory and do not even have imagination to develop

> alternative theories with different ontologies, yet mathematically

> equivalent to some standard one.

>

> 4) I will discuss ‘Hilbert error’ in another paper. I studied a

> lot the issue in the last few weeks.

Is there one or not?

>

> -----Mensagem original-----

> De: Jack Sarfatti [mailto:sarfatti@pacbell.net]

> Enviada em: sábado, 5 de agosto de 2006 20:28

> Para: Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars

> Assunto: I don't agree with Waldyr's new paper

>

>

> Look at the Conclusion attached. No black holes, no non-trivial

> toplogy, no time travel - in fact a boring humdrum universe Waldyr

> has constructed. As Andy Beckwith showed there is evidence for

> black holes so that Waldyr's "correct math" is of no physical

> interest. I will learn some of the differential forms and Clifford

> bundle techniques from it.

>

>

> Also I suspect the claims that David Hilbert made an error in

> Schwarzschild solution are most likely bogus. I can't prove that

> right now - only my instinct.

>

>

> On Aug 5, 2006, at 2:53 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

>

>

>

>

> bcc

On Aug 5, 2006, at 5:55 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

> Delusional metanoids are very "logical" Paul. :-)

> You have constructed a Rube Goldberg skyscraper on shaky ground.

> In fact on a swamp.

> It's not even wrong Paul.

> You cannot construct a local frame invariant scalar field from the

> non-tensor connection field. Therefore it has no objective

> footprints as it were.

> You can do it for any tensor field like the metric field and the

> curvature field.

> That you cannot do it for any connection field even in internal

> symmetries like EM is called gauge freedom Paul!

>

> The GR connection field {uvw} is analogous to the EM vector

> potential Au.

>

> Both are 1-forms i.e. the spin-connection underlying {uvw} is Sab

> where

>

> S^a^b = Su^a^bdx^u = - S^b^a SPIN 2

>

> compare to

>

> A = Audx^u in U(1) EM SPIN 1

>

> & Yang-Mills

>

> A^a = Au^adx^u SPIN 1

>

> where a is internal fiber index of SU(2) or SU(3)

>

> a = 1,2,3 for SU(2) weak radioactivity force

>

> a = 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 for SU(3) sub-nuclear force

>

> The Bohm-Aharonov effect is that the loop integrals of the

> connection 1-form A are quantum phase observables and when the

> "charged" source order parameter is single-valued those loop

> integrals are quantized and are non-zero around line vortex defects

> in the phase of the order parameter. In those cases the closed loop

> has no boundary but is itself not a boundary of an area because of

> the enclosed phase singularity.

>

> Because of the equivalence principle you cannot do this the same

> way on this spin 2 tensor geometrodynamical level.

>

> All that Waldyr et-al has rediscovered is that you do have a

> Minkowski field theory at the tetrad level. That's already in my

> archive paper and it's in my book Super Cosmos!

>

> The tetrads are "square roots" of the metric tensor that is spin 2

> as a NONRENORMALIZABLE quantum field. Therefore, the tetrads as

> quantum fields are spin 1 renormalizable and they only have the

> FLAT MINKOWSKI METRIC nab - but this is like Star Trek "subspace" -

> I have that alluded to already in my first page of Super Cosmos.

>

> The local frame-invariant scalar invariant contraction of the 4

> tetrad fields e^a is

>

> e = 1 + A = e^a&a

>

> A is the truly intrinsic curved part of the subspace tetrad field

>

> dA ~ d(Theta)/\d(Phi) ~ analog of EM field is what I call the

> subspace area flux density.

>

> This is actually the key idea in loop quantum gravity in much

> simpler more physical form.

>

> Quantization of magnetic flux in loops in EM becomes quantization

> of areas on closed non-bounding surfaces that enclose the point

> singularity of the two vacuum Goldstone phases of the single valued

> ODLRO parameter in subspace geometrodynamics where we associate 1 c-

> bit per quantum of area.

>

> Theta and Phi are Goldstone phases associated with the Higgsian

> type vacuum ODLRO coherent inflation field whose random residue is

> either anti-gravitating negative pressure dark energy or

> gravitating positive pressure dark matter. This has a point defect

> with quantized area consistent with Bekenstein-Hawking black hole

> entropy and t'Hooft-Susskind world hologram. Event horizons are

> here to stay Paul and any theory like Waldyr's and those who say

> Hilbert made an error are wrong physically even if their math is

> not "nonsense"! As Feynman said a beautiful math theory is murdered

> by an ugly fact. Here is my beautiful physical idea:

>

> (Quantum of Area)^-1 = |Vacuum ODLRO Condensate|^2 + /

>

> /\ > 0 is dark energy exotic vacuum state

>

> /\ < 0 is dark matter exotic vacuum state - no on-mass-shell exotic

> particles in LHC.

## Sunday, August 06, 2006

Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

## No comments:

Post a Comment