Jack Sarfatti and Leonard Susskind at Cornell 1962

On Dec 12, 2004, at 9:03 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:


On Dec 12, 2004, at 1:51 AM, iksnileiz@earthlink.net wrote:

This pretty much sums up Jack's position: any person who proposes an interpretation of GR that is not fully consistent with the Einstein equivalence hypothesis -- whatever that may have been -- is "ipso facto off his rocker".

Indeed, Paul your writing "the Einstein equivalence hypothesis -- whatever that may have been" says it all. It is very revealing. You have not connected the dots properly. You are missing what Michael Polyani calls "tacit knowing" a kind of subconscious heuristic probably connected with "signal nonlocality" - what Bierman measures as "presponse".

GODD (I.J. Good's version of P.K. Dick's VALIS) is subtle but not malicious and moves in strange ways such as my discovery of Martin Nieto's 1993 paper from Los Alamos describing my role with Lenny Susskind and Johnny Glogower (who I brought to Cornell) in the discovery of the C & S operators for micro-quantum phase.
Click NOW on the very important http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/9304036
That's an order soldier! ;-)
I am now able to look on the first really important problem I worked 40 years ago with a new perspective! The issue is what the nonunitarity of the time evolution operator for quantum phase is really telling us - especially in the macro-quantum case of spontaneous broken ground state symmetry with the Goldstone phase and the Higgs field that controls the dark energy of the universe! "Signal nonlocality" is the clue. More on that anon.

BTW Nieto's history is incomplete. I was also working on the quantum phase operator problem BEFORE returning to Cornell in the Autumn of 1962 when, with Phil Morrison's help, I brought Johnny Glogower with me and rightaway "The Three Stooges" Lenny Susskind, Johnny and me became a team. We were all equally dysfunctional megalomaniacs who complimented each other with the whole greater than the sum of its parts. I had been in George Parrent's Jr Tech/Ops group on spy satellites, either NSA or CIA, in a building shared with Mitre on Route 2, Burlington, Mass in early 1962. George was a student of Emil Wolf's and we also spent a lot of time in the Boston University physics department. Roy Glauber was developing quantum coherence theory at Harvard and George assigned me to learn all that stuff to develop the quantum version of Wolf's classical partial coherence theory. Also lasers were still in their infancy right then. George was more a hands on guy and I was his resident boy genius theorist. They did not want me to leave Tech/Ops and go back to Cornell. I was guaranteed a fast PhD at BU if I stayed and high pay in defense work. But then I never would have met Lenny Susskind. Indeed, Carruthers probably posed the problem because of me. I think Nieto put the cart before the horse.

On Dec 12, 2004, at 1:51 AM, iksnileiz@earthlink.net wrote:

"This pretty much sums up Jack's position: any person who proposes an interpretation of GR that is not fully consistent with the Einstein equivalence hypothesis -- whatever that may have been -- is "ipso facto off his rocker"."

Yes, exactly. The probability of your success is ZERO. Meantime there are many more interesting problems and you are wasting your time completely - other than sharpening my pedagogy in how to write about relativity in my books, which is why I kept at this. No one responded to you because most of them cannot understand what your point is, and those that do think you are off your rocker. This includes Alex who does not agree with you. Puthoff's PV is also inconsistent with the LOCAL equivalence principle Visser et-al agreed. Even Hal's colleague Ibison agrees since he wrote no GCT in PV. But Hal at least has a real theory that can be falsified and has. You have nothing but words with unfulfilled promises of a proof. Who do you think you are? Ed Witten?
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/07/science/07stri.html ;-)

Meantime read that Nieto paper linked below if you want some interesting lessons in publish or perish. Also the physics is important. One can see how my first interest led to what I am doing now on deriving Einstein's GR from the macro-quantum vacuum phase - as well as my paper with Stoneham at Harwell on Goldstone theorem in 1966 on emergent order. Also PW Anderson's role is interesting synchronicity. Nieto's paper is very interesting both in terms of the history (my role) and the physics.


From: sarfatti@pacbell.net
To Martin Nieto
Subject: Re: Discovery of quantum phase operator at Cornell: http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/9304036
Date: December 11, 2004 8:52:33 PM PST

PS You also make the comment that I added an i to my name. That is not true. My family name is "Sarfatti".My father's name is Hyman Sarfatti. Our Sarfatti cousins were largely responsible for Benito Mussolini coming to power as told in the book by CIA historians P. V. Cannistraro & B.R. Sullivan "Il Duce's Other Woman" (W. Morrow, 1993). Because of that fact my mother left the "i" off my birth certificate on Sept 14, 1939 when war was obviously coming and the association with Mussolini was not wise.. My father officially restored the "i" to my birth certificate in 1974 with the Department of Records in Brooklyn, New York. In any case "Sarfatti" is my birthright. My real identity was hidden as a child of WWII.

On Dec 11, 2004, at 8:33 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

To Martin Nieto
Hi Martin

re: http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/9304036 I have just come across this for first time in 2004.

I never received the 1968 letter Peter Carruthers wrote to me mentioned in your historical review of the history of quantum phase operators at Cornell in 1963-4. If it was 1968 I was at both UCSD physics department and also teaching at San Diego State. At least I do not remember it. If Carruthers received a reply from me I would like to see it.

Thanks

Jack Sarfatti
:-)

"Also as I was a student at the time it was more important for me to receive my proper share of the credit for a paper that proved to be important than for Carruthers - addressing myself to Carruthers remark that you cited. Note that I also participated as equal co-author in another important paper on spontaneous symmetry breakdown in solid state physics 1966 that is cited in APS Resource Letter on Symmetry in Physics with A.M. Stoneham on the Goldstone Theorem and the Jahn-Teller Effect in Proceedings of the Physical Society of London."

Jack Sarfatti wrote:

Newton's "gravity force" is replaced by Einstein's "gravity force without force".

On Dec 11, 2004, at 5:12 PM, iksnileiz@earthlink.net wrote:

"Do you think I ever denied that my model is inconsistent with Einstein equivalence? Of course it is."

I am glad you admit that. Ipso facto you are off your rocker!