Sunday, December 31, 2006

Alleged Advances in Exotic Torsion Field Propulsion in Russia

Akimov in Moscow, and others even more recently connected with Russian Intelligence, has made many claims on the weapons related applications of Gennady Shipov's torsion field theory.
We were tasked (with plausible denial) at ISSO Science 1999-2000 by USG Intelligence to evaluate the threat potential of these allegations. We had a budget of several million dollars to explore a few different avenues on how the alien ET flying saucers were powered with Shipov's theory as the main contender followed by Jim Corum's. To that end we invited Gennady Shipov from Moscow to San Francisco more than once including such experts as R. Kiehn (Strategic Air Command retired), R. Hammond, Hal Puthoff, Bernie Haisch, J.P. Vigier, Bill Page, Vladimir Poponin, Saul-Paul Sirag, John Brandenburg, John Dering and others under Creon Levit's project management of the Task Force. Creon on leave from NASA Ames.

Our results were inconclusive at the time primarily because we did not understand the key role that dark energy would play. The dark energy was only then beginning to be discovered in 1999 - 2000 and its relevance to Shipov's torsion field theory did not become clear to me until the end of 2002.

Now at the beginning of 2007 it is obvious to me that Akimov's claims must be taken seriously in a general way noting that specifics may be disinformation i.e. truth wrapped in a bodyguard of lies.

Shipov's theory has been debunked by unknown Russians using false names. The debunking does not hold up under close analysis and is essentially polemics without substance. The theoretical background for Shipov's theory is respectable starting with T.W.B. Kibble's 1961 paper that derives Einstein's 1915 theory of curvature only plus the Russian torsion field from the battle-tested principle of local gauge invariance on the 10-parameter special relativity Poincare space-time symmetry group that all non-gravity field actions must be invariant under. Kibble showed that the compensating gauge potentials were 16 warped spin 1 tetrad field components for the curvature from locally gauging the 4-parameter translation subgroup alone plus 24 spin connection components for the Russian torsion fields from locally gauging the 6-parameter Lorentz subgroup of the Poincare group. One gets non-dynamical spin connections for the curvature rotations of vectors around shrinking closed loops without torsion gaps to second order from the 16 tetrad components alone. However, there are no independent torsion field in that case from which it follows that the Einstein cosmological constant for the observed cosmic repulsive dark energy must really be constant and uniform in that limit. That would preclude bottling the dark energy for weightless warp drive and star gate wormhole time machines. For the latter metric engineering of Kaku's higher type civilizations whose saucers we see in our skies we need the Russian torsion fields IMHO.

The Shipov theory is a pre-string theory because the 4 coordinates of the center of mass of an extended test particle, which is all that we have in Einstein's 1915 GR of curvature alone, is supplemented by 6 new angular coordinates of 4D orientation like a relativistic rigid body. These 6 new anholonomic degrees of freedom lead to Calabi-Yau space of string theory after the additional step of making the extended test body non-rigid with local vibrations that are essentially the compensating torsion fields.

Shipov postulates an additional constraint of teleparallelism i.e. the total 10D curvature is zero. This gives a relationship between the 6D torsion fields and the 4D curvature. However, I am not yet sure if we need this constraint or even if it is consistent. I simply do not know yet. I see problems with it. More on that later as tonite is New Years Eve and I have to meet some people shortly. It's almost 10 PM in San Francisco.

On Dec 31, 2006, at 8:19 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

To make this clearer.

"curvilinear" means pure 100% local frame-dependent inertial force effect from non-geodesic motion of the local detectors that define the local frames. In this case there is always a non-gravity force pushing the massive on-mass-shell detector off its natural timelike geodesic inside the local light cone.

"warp" means either intrinsic objective local frame invariant curvature or torsion or both.

There are two kinds of curvature "Ricci" + "Weyl conformal"

Ricci contraction & expansion from a local non-gravity source including virtual zero point quanta of non-gravity fields i.e. both dark energy of negative pressure and dark matter of positive pressure. The latter has w = -1 in isotropic distribution but seen from a distance it gravity lenses light rays just like w = 0 CDM.

Weyl conformal stretch-squeeze. Gravity waves are ripples in the Weyl tensor.

ds^2 = guv(curvilinear + warp)dx^udx^v = (I^a(curvilinear) + A^a(warp))((Ia(curvilinear) + Aa(warp))

Note the cross term between inertial force and intrinsic warp effects. Since the geometrodynamic connection field is essentially for the spin 1 renormalizable e^a fields


it's obvious that one cannot eliminate the cross terms between inertial forces and intrinsic warps at the spin 0,1, 2 geometrodynamic level. Therefore, Zielinski's claim that the 1915 GR symmetric zero torsion LC connection splits into

(LC) = (LC|non-tensor inertial force) + (LC|tensor warp force)


(LC|tensor warp force) =/= 0

is obviously false. The real situation is

(LC) = (LC|non-tensor inertial force) + (LC|tensor warp force) + (LC|tensor warp-inertial force)


(LC|tensor warp force) = 0

because by going to local geodesic coordinates both

(LC|non-tensor inertial force) -> 0

(LC|tensor warp-inertial force) -> 0

separately and independently

and the total (LC) -> 0 from the equivalence principle.

However a tensor = 0 in all components is a local frame-invariant property.

This completes the proof refuting Zielinski's conjecture.

On Dec 31, 2006, at 7:27 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

Zielinski wrote incorrectly crossing out my correct equation:

> F^aFa torsion field Lagrangian density is local in this Minkowskiab
> space.
> Note that the geometrodynamics will still be nonlocal I think.!

Meaning what exactly?
> ds^2 = guvdx^udx^v = e^aea = (Minkowski)abe^ae^b

There is no such relationship between the Minkowski and Riemann
metrics. All you can say, even in a completely flat spacetime, is that
at any giv! en space time point both metrics have the same matrix value
*in Lorentz coordinates*.

ds^2 = guv(curvilinear)dx^udx^v = e^aea = (Minkowski) abe^ae^b

is exact and it is local FRAME invariant.

On Dec 31, 2006, at 6:56 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
It is not possible to define it inside of 1915 GR as anything other than zero.

I gave the proof that you cannot follow. It can be non-zero in Shipov's theory
BUT there will still be a NONLOCAL component even then.


Weyl curvature part of gravity vacuum energy is nonlocal, i.e. zero local density yet non-zero global integral even when there is a non-zero local torsion field contribution from FaF^a in the Lagrangian density where

F^a = de^a + W^ac/\e^a

Jack Sarfatti
"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?"
- Albert Einstein
http ://

No comments: