Lee Smolin Debates Leonard Susskind on the Cosmic Landscape: Lecture 1
Sarfatti Commentary on the Susskind-Smolin Debate on Background Independence

Lecture 1

Excerpted

arXiv:hep-th/0507235 v1 25 Jul 2005

Comments by Jack Sarfatti on Jan 21, 2006
*
“The case for background independence

Lee Smolin†
Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics,
35 King Street North, Waterloo, Ontario N2J 2W9, Canada, and
Departmentof Physics, University of Waterloo,
Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1, Canada

December 13, 2005

Abstract
The aim of this paper is to explain carefully the arguments behind the assertion that the correct quantum theory of gravity must be background independent. We begin by recounting how the debate over whether quantum gravity must be background independent is a continuation of a long-standing argument in the history of physics and philosophy over whether space and time are relational or absolute. This leads to a careful statement of what physicists mean when we speak of background independence. Given this we can characterize the precise sense in which general relativity is a background independent theory. The leading background independent approaches to quantum gravity are then discussed, including causal set models, loop quantum gravity and dynamical triangulations and their main achievements are summarized along with the problems that remain open. Some first attempts to cast string/M theory into a background independent formulation are also mentioned. The relational/absolute debate has implications also for other issues such as unification and how the parameters of the standard models of physics and cosmology are to be explained. The recent issues concerning the string theory landscape are reviewed and it is argued that they can only be resolved within the context of a background independent formulation. Finally, we review some recent proposals to make quantum theory more relational.
*
This is partly based on the text of a talk given to a meeting of the British Association for the Philosophy of Science, in July 2004, under the title ”The relational idea in physics and cosmology.”
†Email address: lsmolin@perimeterinstitute.ca
…

1 Introduction
During the last three decades research in theoretical physics has focused on four key problems, which, however, remain unsolved. These are

1. The problem of quantum gravity.”

Comment 1: In my condensed matter analogy based on emergent ODLRO spontaneous symmetry breaking cohering of random vacuum fluctuations of spin ½ & spin 1 quantum fields, the c-number Einstein geometrodynamic field guv emerges from two macro-quantum Cartan 0-form Goldstone phases theta & phi of a local Higgs inflation field that forms at the ‘edge of the ledge” at the Planck scale 10^-33 cm in the formation of Max Tegmark’s “Level 1” Hubble “pocket universe” (Lenny Susskind) when a single Level 2 inflation bubble forms in the eternal inflation of chaotic cosmology. This Planck Higgs field is not the electro-weak Higgs field given masses to leptons and quarks. That Higgs field splits off at ~ 10^-16 cm. Our expanding accelerating pocket universe inside of which we are trapped like Edwin Abbott’s “Flatlanders” is a local minimum in the “cosmic landscape” in which the height function is /\, i.e. Einstein’s cosmological constant. This is not the total energy including gravity degrees of freedom. Total energy is not fundamental in background independent 1915 general relativity (GR) except in special solutions with timelike Killing vector field symmetries. The “energy” generates translations along the timelike Killing vector field.

The local invariant Einstein-Cartan CURVED tetrad gravity field is the LINE FLUX DENSITY 1-form

L = (hG/c^3)^1/2{(dtheta)(phi) – (theta)(dphi)}

Lp = (hG/c^3)

*There is no Einstein gravity when h -> 0 and/or c -> infinity even if G =/= 0.

Vacuum Manifold = G(pre-inflation)/H(post-inflation) ~ S2 + internal Calabi-Yau landscape string theory parameters

Einstein’s geometrodynamic tensor field g(curved) is given by the local equivalence principle (suppressing indices) by

g(curved) = (1 + L)(flat)(1 + L)

L = 0 in a finite space-time region of physical events, i.e. Diff(4) equivalence classes with redundant gauge freedom from localizing T4 moded out, is globally flat space-time without gravity.

Note that L is not a closed 1-form. Its non-vanishing local “curl” is the exterior product

dL = 2Lp(dtheta)/\(dphi)

The geometrodynamic area flux density operator is the closed 2-form

A = LpdL = 2Lp^2(dtheta)/\(dphi)

dA = 0

i.e. locally vanishing 3-form analog of vanishing magnetic field in the Bohm-Aharonov effect outside the solenoid.

The second homotopy group of the vacuum manifold S2 is Z the group of integers. The single-valuedness of the LOCAL vacuum coherent order parameter, i.e. Planck Higgs field with Goldstone phases theta & phi implies stable point defects. Therefore, the surface DeRham integral of A on surrounding surface S around singular point defects where the Planck Higgs field vanishes and theta & phi are undefined is

= 2Lp^2Integer

Integer = 2D Winding Number = Spherical Wrapping Number ~ number of Hawking-Bekenstein BITS.

S is closed, i.e. it has no boundary, but it is not itself a boundary. However, we define the nonlocal Bohm-Aharonov volume integral BY DEFINITION as

The World Hologram

= = “Volume without volume” = 2Lp^2Integer

V is the singular interior to the surrounding surface S.

This is a singular extension of Gauss’s theorem applied to Wheeler’s geometrodynamics rather than Maxwell’s electrodynamics.

That is the geometrodynamic information is all in the non-vanishing area flux density. The “volume” is simply a holographic image of that non-bounding but surrounding closed surface. You can think of a non-bounding closed surface as a wormhole mouth.

Now is my theory FIXED “background dependent” or MUTABLE “background independent” as defined by Lee Smolin below? I can make a case that it is background independent because the c-number Einstein gravity field from the vacuum condensate Goldstone phases is a “condensate” dynamical field that is coupled to the “normal fluid” quantized vacuum fluctuations. These zero point fluctuations are locally random but are nonlocally Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen correlated to each other such that they form part of the total superfluid density when added to the locally non-random condensate density. The locally nonrandom condensate density is a dynamical source and sink for the locally random zero point vacuum fluctuations. Therefore, everything is self-consistently dynamical. There is no non-dynamical fixed background in my theory that I can see. When we look at the total Higgs field the residual zero point fluctuations are from the spin ½ and spin 1 quantum fields of the pre-inflation false vacuum at the “edge of the ledge” as explained by Lenny Susskind in “Cosmic Landscape.” However, when we look only at the Goldstone phase fluctuations then they are the locally random spin 2 “gravitons” on the curved background that is dynamically evolving with them in a globally self-consistent whole. Therefore, my theory here is more “relational” than “absolute” as Smolin defines below. Note also that the idea of nonlocally coherent zero point fluctuations that a locally incoherent, like the pair photon states in the Aspect experiment, was first suggested by Robert Becker.

Back to Lee Smolin:

“2. The problem of further unifying the different forces and particles, beyond the partial unification of the standard model.

3. The problem of explaining how the parameters of the standard models of particles physics and cosmology, including the cosmological constant, were chosen by nature.

4. The problem of what constitutes the dark matter and energy, or whether the evidence for them are to be explained by modifications in the laws of physics at very large scales.”

Comment 2. In my theory dark matter is w = -1 negative zero point energy density with positive pressure that gravitates. Therefore dark matter particle detectors will not click with the right stuff to explain Omega(DM) ~ 0.23. Dark energy is w = -1 positive zero point energy with negative pressure that anti-gravitates. Note, in anisotropic distributions w can increase up to w < - 1/3 for this interpretation to work.

Back to Smolin:
“One can also mention a fifth unsolved problem, that of resolving the controversies concerning the foundations of quantum mechanics. All five problems have remained unsolved, despite decades of determined effort by thousands of extremely talented people. While a number of approaches have been studied, most expectations have been put on string theory as it appears to provide a uniquely compelling unification of physics. Given that the correct perturbative dynamics for gauge fields, fermions and gravitons emerges from a simple action expressed in terms of world-sheets and that, in addition, there are strong indications that the quantum corrections to these processes are finite to each order of string perturbation theory[3], it is hard not to take string theory seriously as a hypothesis about the next step in the unification of physics. At the same time, there remain open problems.

Despite knowing a great deal about the different perturbative string theories and the dualities that relate them, it is widely believed that a more fundamental formulation exists. This would give us a set of equations, solutions to which would give rise to the different perturbative string theories. While there is a lot of evidence for the existence of this more fundamental formulation, in the dualities that relate the different string perturbation theories, there is as yet no agreed upon proposal as to either the principles or the equations of this formulation.

It is also unfortunately the case that the theory makes, as yet, no falsifiable predictions for doable experiments, by which the applicability of the theory to nature could be checked. This is because of the landscape of discrete vacua which have been uncovered in the last few years. Powerful effective field theory arguments have made it plausible that the theory comes in an infinite number of versions[4]. These appear to correspond to an infinite number of possible universes and low energy phenomenologies. Even if one imposes the minimal phenomenological constraints of a positive vacuum energy and broken supersymmetry, there are argued to be still a vast (> 10^300) number of theories[5]. There thus appears to be no uniqueness and no predictability so far as observable parameters are concerned, for example, one can get any gauge group and many different spectra of Higgs and fermions.

Of course, these two issues are related. It seems very likely that the challenge posed by the landscape would be resolved if we had a more fundamental formulation of string theory. This would enable us to establish which of the vacua described by effective field theory are truly solutions to the exact theory. It would also allow us to study the dynamics of transformations between different vacua.

Another striking feature of the present situation is that we have no unique predictions for the post-standard model physics which will be explored in upcoming experiments at the LHC. This is true in spite of the fact that we have had three decades since the formulation of the standard model to discover a convincing theory that would give us unique predictions for these experiments. The theory many of our colleagues believe, the supersymmetric extension of the standard model, has too many parameters to yield unique predictions for those experiments.

It is beyond doubt that research in string theory has nonetheless led to a large number of impressive results and conjectures, some of great mathematical beauty. Several mathematical conjectures have been suggested by work in string theory, that turned out to be provable by more rigorous means. A number of interesting conjectures and results have been found for the behavior of supersymmetric gauge theories. All of this suggests that string theory has been worth pursuing. At the same time, the present situation is very far from what was expected when people enthusiastically embraced string theory 20 years ago.

If so much effort has not been rewarded with success, it might be reasonable to ask whether some wrong assumption was made somewhere in the course of the development of the theory. The purpose of this paper is to propose such an hypothesis. This hypothesis is made with an open-minded spirit, with the hopes of stimulating discussion.

To motivate my hypothesis, we can start by observing that theorists’ choices of how to approach the key issues in fundamental physics is largely determined by their views on three crucial questions.
•
Must a quantum theory of gravity be background independent, or can there be a sensible and successful background dependent approach?

•
How are the parameters of the standard models of physics and cosmology to be determined?

•
Can a cosmological theory be formulated in the same language we use for descriptions of subsystems of the universe, or does the extension of physics from local to cosmological require new principles or a new formulation of quantum theory?


It is the first issue that divides most string theorists from those who pursue alternative approaches to quantum gravity.

The second issue determines the attitude different people take to the landscape. There are, roughly, three possible approaches: 1) a unique theory leading to unique predictions. 2) Anthropic approaches, according to which our universe may be very different from a typical member of an ensemble or landscape of theories (A critique of the attempts to resolve the landscape problem through the anthropic principle is given in [6]) 3) Dynamical, or evolutionary approaches, according to which the dynamics of reproduction of universes results in our universe being a typical member of the ensemble[17]. The first has been, traditionally, the basis of the hopes for a unified theory, but the recent results suggest that unification leads not to a single, unique theory, but a multitude of possible theories. This leaves the other two options. The third issue has been long appreciated by those who have attempted to formulate a sensible quantum theory of cosmology, but it recently has been raised in the contexts of attempts to resolve the problems of the landscape in terms of cosmological theories and hypotheses. In this paper I would like to make two observations and a hypothesis about these issues. These three debates are closely related and they are unlikely to be resolved separately. These three debates are aspects of a much older debate, which has been central to thinking about the nature of space and time going back to the beginning of physics. This is the debate between relational and absolute theories of space and time. In particular, as I will explain below, background dependent attempts at quantum gravity and anthropic approaches to the landscape are the contemporary manifestations of the absolute side of the old debate.”


Comment 3: Lenny Susskind is a Newtonian “absolutist” according to Smolin.

Back to Smolin:
“Similarly, background independent approaches to quantum gravity and dynamical or evolutionary approaches to the landscape are firmly within the relational tradition.

Now here is my thesis, which it is the task of this essay to support:
The reason that we do not have a fundamental formulation of string theory, from which it might be possible to resolve the challenge posed by the landscape, is that it has been so far developed as a background dependent theory. This is despite there being compelling arguments that a fundamental theory must be background independent. Whether string theory turns out to describe nature or not, there are now few alternatives but to approach the problems of unification and quantum gravity from a background independent perspective. This essay is written with the hope that perhaps some who have avoided thinking about background independent theories might consider doing so now. To aid those who
might be so inclined, in the next section I give a sketch of how the absolute/relational debate has shaped the history of physics since before the time of Newton. Then, in section 3, I explain precisely what is meant by relational and absolute theories. Section 4 asks whether general relativity is a relational theory and explains why the answer is: partly. We then describe, in section 5, several relational approaches to quantum gravity. There have been some remarkable successes, which show that it is possible to get highly nontrivial results from background independent approaches to quantum gravity [7]. At the same time, there remain open problems and challenges. Both the successes and open problems yield lessons for any future attempt to make a background independent formulation of string theory or any other quantum theory
of gravity. Sections 6 to 8 discuss what relationalism has to offer for the problems in particle physics such as unification and predictability. It is argued that the apparent lack of predictability emerging from studies of the string theory landscape is a symptom of relying on background dependent methodologies in a regime where they cannot offer sensible answers. To support this, I show that relationalism suggests methodologies by which multiverse theories may nevertheless make falsifiable predictions.

Many theorists have asserted that no approach to quantum gravity should be taken seriously if it does not offer a solution to the cosmological constant problem. In section 9 I show that relational theories do offer new possibilities for how that most recalcitrant of issues may be resolved.

Section 10 explores another application of relationalism, which is to the problem of how to extend quantum theory to cosmology. I review several approaches, which have been called ”relational quantum theory.” These lead to formulations of the holographic principle suitable for quantum gravity and cosmology.

2 A brief history of relational time
The debate about whether space and time are relational is central to the history of physics. Here is a cartoon sketch of the story 2.
2A full historical treatment of the relational/absolute debate is in Barbour’s book, [10]


Debate about the meaning of motion go back to the Greeks. But the issues of interest for us came into focus when Newton proposed his form of dynamics in his book Principia Mathematica, published in 1687. Several of his rough contemporaries, such as Descartes, Huygens and Leibniz espoused relational notions of space and time, according to which space and time are to be defined only in terms of relationships among real objects or events. Newton broke with his contemporaries to espouse an absolute notion of space and time, according to which the geometry of space and time provided a fixed, immutable and eternal background, with respect to which particles moved. Leibniz responded by proposing arguments for a relational view that remain influential to this day 3.
3 Some essential texts, accessible to physicists, are [11].


Leibniz’s argument for relationalism was based on two principles, which have been the focus of many books and papers by philosophers to the present day. The principle of sufficient reason states that it must be possible to give a rational justification for every choice made in the description of nature. I will refer the interested reader to the original texts [11] for the arguments given for it, but it is not hard to see the relevance of this principle for contemporary theoretical physics. A theory that begins with the choice of a background geometry, among many equally consistent choices, violates this principle. So does a theory that allows some parameters to be freely specified, and allows no mechanism or rational argument why one value is observed in nature. One circumstance that the principle of sufficient reason may be applied to is space-times with global symmetries. Most distributions of matter in such a space will not be invariant under the symmetries. One can then always ask, why is the universe where it is, rather than ten feet to the left, or rotated 30 degrees? Or, why did the universe not start five minutes later? This is sometimes called the problem of under determination: nothing in the laws of physics answers the question of why the whole universe is where it is, rather than translated or rotated.

As there can be no rational answer why the universe is where it is, and not ten feet to the left, the principle of sufficient reason says this question should not arise in the right theory. One response is to demand a better theory in which there is no background spacetime. If all there is to space is an emergent description of relations between particles, questions about whether the whole universe can be translated in space or time cannot arise. Hence, the principle of sufficient reason motivates us to eliminate fixed background spacetimes from the formulation of physical law.”

Comment 4: Real particles on mass shell and classical near EM field configurations outside the vacuum are not the only sources of curvature and possibly torsion. Locally random virtual zero point fluctuations inside the vacuum are also “wood” (Einstein’s term) sources of curvature according to the LOCAL equivalence principle. The vacuum condensate Goldstone phases make the curved geometry, therefore we do not count it as the “wood”, but, rather, as the “marble” (again Einstein’s term). This SOLVES THE COSMOLOGICAL CONSTANT MYSTERY – what Lenny Susskind calls “The Mother of All Physics Problems” because the locally random zero point energy density is absorbed into the locally non-random vacuum condensate that is the “marble” out of which the curved geometrodynamic field is sculpted.

To be continued in Lecture 2.

Trix Clever Alien on the 1947 War of America with the Flying Saucer Enemy


Message: 2
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 10:31:44 -0000
From: "trixcleverspacealien"
Subject: BISMUTH Magneto and the Magnetic Men April,1996, Sarfatti Tucson II, WW Synch.

[Time posted on SSS: 01-21-2006 at: 04:31a.m.]

[This is the short version]

Note:

None of this will make any sense unless you have followed my
"Telephone call from outer space" story.

APPLY:

Incommensurability, Orthodoxy and the Physics of High
Strangeness:


A 6-layer Model for Anomalous Phenomena

by

Jacques F. Vallee and Eric W. Davis
National Institute for Discovery Science
Las Vegas, Nevada


TO:


COMIC RELIEF:

Jack Sarfatti meets Wonder Woman late
1980s early 1990s. Introduced to Jack by CIA's
Harold Chipman.

WONDER WOMEN, Links to "BISMUTH" Magneto and the Magnetic Men, April,
1996 coincidentally, non-locally, connects to Anyon Superconductor:
DIA Doc: "Roswell 1947 ET Energy Device BINGO! Bismuth

Wonder Woman (first series) 21, January-February 1947, page 13C

"Ruler of the Atom World"


COINCIDENTALLY CONNECTS TO JACK SARFATTI'S:


http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SarfattiScienceSeminars/message/8976


"This 'coincidence', together with the fact that both the cuprate and
the BISMATE high temperature superconductors are strongly
two-dimensional and highly magnetically correlated,



From: Jack Sarfatti
Date: January 19, 2006 11:14:02 PM PST
To: figaro

"Bismuth" mentioned in Collins-Doty Fig 1b p. 163 on the propulsion
system also in the DIA document p. 168 on the power supply. John
Dering also emphasized it in his research on the Nazi devices. Well
Nobel Prize (2004) physicist Frank Wilczek writes:

"it is interesting that the above estimate [1000 deg Kelvin] of the
gap is of a reasonable order of magnitude for a high temperature
superconductor" intimately connected to Robert Laughlin's wave
function for fractional quantum "Hall Effect" (mentioned in by LANL
Spook "Mr C" et-al) and "This 'coincidence', together with the fact
that both the cuprate and the BISMATE high temperature
superconductors are strongly two-dimensional and highly
magnetically correlated, so that they may well support CHIRAL SPIN
ORDERING" p. 79 in Wilczek.




+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



SEQUENCE:



[01-20-06 at: 11:16p.m.]

Tonight I checked SSS for updates, there are new ones, the last time I
checked SSS was: 8975


THEN:

[01-20-06 at: 11:19:52p.m.]


I opened SSS Yahoo Groups! and when I saw the word BISMUTH in the
subject line I recalled that Rita Hayworth's movie GILDA mentioned
either the Nazi's, tungsten or Bismuth, next I decided to do a search
which resulted in tungsten and not Bismuth, so much for the Rita
Hayworth connection.


After that I ran the Rita search I next:


Google Search: Wonder Women", Bismuth, Moulton Marston


FOUND:


http://www.google.com/search?hs=sj&hl=en&lr=&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial_s&q=%22Wonder+Women%22%2C+Bismuth%2C+Moulton+Marston&btnG=Search

Note Linda Moulton Howe coincidence.

Wonder Woman Script: William Moulton Marston (as Charles Moulton) ...
Astonishingly, there is
also a "Wonder Women of History" story about Annie Oakley, ...
www.uky.edu/Projects/Chemcomics/html/ww_21_c13_h.html - 28k - Cached -
Similar pages


NO WHERE ON THAT PAGE IS "BISMUTH" MENTIONED EXCEPT AT THE TOP OF THE
PAGE WHERE IT SAYS:


These search terms have been highlighted: wonder women bismuth
moulton marston,


When I selected BISMUTH it took me to:


http://www.uky.edu/Projects/Chemcomics/html/bismuth.html


BISMUTH:

Is April 1996 significant on Jack Sarfatti's worldline?

I think I recall that 1996 is meaningful to Jack, I'll check after
List the Magneto and the Magnetic Men Apirl ,1996 incidents on the
page linked to Wonder Women 01-21-2006.


http://www.uky.edu/Projects/Chemcomics/html/mm3_4_96_23.html

http://www.uky.edu/Projects/Chemcomics/html/mm3_4_96_cf_bi.html

http://www.uky.edu/Projects/Chemcomics/html/mm3_4_96_6.html




NEXT SEARCH FOR APRIL 1996 AND JACK SARFATTI:


[01-21-06 at: 12:52a.m.]

I did a Google Search: "Magneto and the Magnetic Men", Sarfatti

http://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial_s&hl=en&q=%22Magneto+and+the+Magnetic+Men%22%2C+Sarfatti&btnG=Google+Search


with nada, no results.


BUT IS THERE ANYTHING IN JACK'S SSS POST MENTIONING MAGNETICS?


From: Jack Sarfatti
Date: Fri Jan 20, 2006 7:25 am
Subject: Fwd: Anyon Superconductor: DIA Doc: "Roswell 1947 ET Energy
Device BINGO! Bismuth

etc,

"This 'coincidence', together with the fact

that both the cuprate and the BISMATE high temperature
superconductors are strongly two-dimensional and highly
magnetically correlated, so that they may well support CHIRAL SPIN
ORDERING" p. 79 in Wilczek.


etc,

Fig 1a p. 162 describes what purports to be a secondary

"conventional" electromagnetic (giant capacitor) propulsion
system needing air that would not work in vacuum and is not a
"silent running" zero g-force warp drive that is my primary
interest.




[at 01:01:35a.m. on 01-21-06]


NEXT SEARCH FOR A CONNECTION BETWEEN JACK SARFATTI AND THE DATE APRIL
1996:


Google Search_Jack Sarfatti, April 1996


http://www.google.com/search?hs=OBC&hl=en&lr=&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial_s&q=Jack+Sarfatti%2C+%22April+1996%22&btnG=Search



http://www.qedcorp.com/pcr/pcr/parsifal.html

The Parsifal Effect

THE DESTINY MATRIX


O Regan and I were at Cambridge attending a meeting on psychic
research sponsored, if I remember correctly, by Ted Bastin's group of
new age physicists and computer scientists. Nobel prize physicist
Brian Josephson 34 was there. After the meeting a sprightly Englishman
walked up to me and introduced himself as Dennis Bardens 35. He said:

"Dr. Sarfatti, may I take you to dinner?"

Fred Wolf was there and he suggested I go with Bardens. We had a good
dinner of duck in cherry sauce at the Blue Boar Inn. After dinner,
over brandy and cigars, Bardens leaned towards me with a
conspiratorial wink and said:

"First, I want you to know that I am a Cabalist." After a dramatic
pause he continued in a more officious tone: "Dr. Sarfatti, it is my
duty to inform you of a psychic war raging across the continents
between the Soviet Union and your country and you are to be in the
thick of it!"

35 Peter Maddock, who was also at the Cambridge meeting told me, years
later, "Oh yes, Bardens, he was a part-time stringer for British
Intelligence". Maddock resurfaced at the Tucson II meeting in April
1996 where he presented a paper on telepathy (abstract # 418)

AND:


http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/hambone/people1.html

For seven years employed C.B. Scott Jones as an aide. (Gardner,
Martin, "Clairborne Pell: The Senator From Outer Space", Skeptical
Inquirer, March/April 1996) Chairman of the Foreign Relations
Committee. Pell was a close friend of BCCI figure Clark Clifford.

SARFATTI IS MENTIONED ON THIS PAGE:

Brendan O'Regan
Deceased. Former consultant to the Center for the Study of Social
Policy at SRI, associate editor of the International Journal of
Psychoenergetic Systems, research coordinator for Buckminster Fuller,
and research director of the Institute of Noetic Sciences.

According to Jack Sarfatti, he was part of a "very very sophisticated
and successful covert psychological warfare operation run by the late
Brendan O Regan of the Institute of Noetic Sciences and the late
Harold Chipman who was the CIA station chief responsible for all
mind-control research in the Bay Area in the 70's." (Sarfatti, Jack,
"Quantum Quackers")


AND:

http://www.qedcorp.com/pcr/pcr/mmqguide.html


Quantum Back-Action, Tucson II, April 1996

http://www.qedcorp.com/pcr/pcr/backact.html

On The Road

Jack Sarfatti's version of the Tucson II Conference on Consciousness
(April 8-13).

1. April 9, 1996 3pm.

etc,

These commentaries, dedicated to, Rashi De Troyes (1040-1105) who is
my alleged ancestor according to a strange story told to me by my
cousin, David Padwa, started from brief notes made on the run between
meetings. I am now adding to them as my memory unfolds out of the
implicate into the explicate. Somewhere beyond spacetime, The Mind of
God hangs suspended in the Hilbert raum of Wheeler's superspace
guiding the evolution in time of the three-dimensional space geometry
of our Universe

THE CREATION OF ADAM PICTURE

-- at least in Bohm's pilot wave theory of quantum gravity that,
according to Penrose and Nanopoulos, forms the substratum of our
consciousness. Quantum back-action of the space geometry on the wave
function of the Universe would then provide a dialogue or
feedback-control loop between Man and God. Like My Father's House, in
this meeting there are many parallel sessions -- if not worlds.
Hameroff has done a good job organizing the conference.

etc;

2 April 10, 1996 1pm

I am sitting next to Brian Josephson at a bank of computers. Brian is
defending the reality of parapsychology experiments in the Times
Higher Educational Supplement.

etc,

3. April 11, 1996 9:30 am.

etc,

4. April 12, 1996, 9am

Nanopoulos emphasized several incredible facts in his talk yesterday.
A microtubule is essentially an Ising lattice of 2-state systems
rolled into a hollow tube. This is a many-body system that can be
treated by standard methods.

[01-21-06 at: 01:50a.m. t.c.s.a comment:

Note that the tubulins in the microtubule are arranged according to
the Fibonacci series which equates approximately to the Golden Section
1.618033989

SEE: http://www.tony5m17h.net/QuanCon2.html

The 5+8=13 Fibonacci-number Golden Mean structure of microtubules may
be useful in such information signal transmission and processing. etc,

If the human brain is then viewed as a quantum computer, perhaps
quantum superpositions could resolve the problem of how a brain
capable of understanding and appreciating the beauty and truth of such
things as mathematical structures, music, and art could be based on a
finite computing machine.]


The first amazing coincidence is that there is a mathematical
isomorphism between this Ising model and the string-induced quantum
friction of the Nanopoulos gravity-collapse theory.

The second synchronicity is the actual tiling of the 2-state dimers
around the tube which corresponds to the most efficient
error-correction code derived from the close-packing of hyperspheres.
There is a connection of this microtubule spatial-coding scheme and
the DNA spatial code. This is a clue that the microtubules form a
quantum computer that cannot be ignored.

The third coincidence noted by Nanopoulos is that his "bottom-up"
string-virtual blackhole quantum friction addition to quantum theory
is formally identical in structure to the top-down phenomenology of
Ilya Prigogine's irreversible thermodynamic theory of the
self-organization of open systems.

The fourth amazing coincidence is that Nanopoulos derived Avogadro's
number of 10^24 as the effective quantum-classical divide for protons
from his string formula using the coupling constants from standard
gauge force theory.

In addition, I note the fifth amazing coincidence that my quantum
back-action theory (see below) based on extending the Bohm pilot-wave
theory to include a reaction force of particle on its attached wave is
a general template into which the Nanopoulos, like the GRW theory,
fits. As seen below, Bohm shows that these GRW-type theories, in which
the rate of decoherence increases with the number of particles forming
the complex quantum structure, can be generally derived in the
pilot-wave picture by making the collective pilot wave depend directly
on the actual positions of its attached particles. This gives an
extension of quantum mechanics corresponding to Penrose's
"orchestrated reduction" (OR). As Nanopoulos said, one cannot use a
"pure" state wavefunction for complex systems over long times because
of quantum foam friction. One must use a "mixed" density matrix theory
with an "extra" (i.e., my "back-action") term. The numerical
coefficients in this back-action term are computed explicitly by
Nanopoulos's superstring theory. Physically then, the massive
superstring states at 10^19 Gev reach down into the 1ev level of our
biology to form a feedback control loop between our quantum minds and
the material motions in our bodies. Nanopoulos describes this effect
as a "global" or "nonlocal hidden variable". The extra back-action
term in the density matrix equation for the complex open quantum
computing system also provides the "friction" that accounts for our
experience of the flow or arrow of time. This arrow is negligible for
single elementary particles, but dominates at our level of complexity.

etc,

5. April 12, 1996, 2:30 pm

etc,

6. Monday April 16, 1996. 3pm

etc,

7 Wednesday, April 17, 1996

etc,


8 Saturday, April 20, 1996 (San Diego)


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


CONCLUSION:

trixcleverspacealien Comment:




SO YES I GUESS YOU COULD SAY THAT "APRIL 1996" WAS A SIGNIFICANT YEAR
FOR JACK SARFATTI, so Jack must be a Magneto Man ;-)


So:


http://www.uky.edu/Projects/Chemcomics/html/bismuth.html


BISMUTH'S Magneto and the Magnetic Men April, 1996 coincidentally
connects to Sarfatti and Tucson April 1996 etc, and thus scores a
significant synchronicity hit, plus all the more so because BISMUTH'S
Magneto and the Magnetic Men, April, 1996 is a direct link off from
the WONDER WOMEN January 21, 1947 link;-) and tonight is 01-21-2006 59
years after the fact, which may make Jack's post and my discovering
this "Close encounter of an information Kind" an example of Jack's
backacting from the future etc.


[recall my 12-17-1987 01:20a.m. telephone call "from outer space"]



COINCIDENCE ELEMENTS:

January 21st 2006 is 59 years after January 21st 1947 and 154 days
before Kenneth Arnold's Flying Saucer sighting that started it all,
and 162 days to July 2th 1947, the approximate date of the Roswell
Incident.


[1] the date of the WONDER WOMEN comic: Wonder Woman (first series)
21, January-February 1947, page 13C


[2]Title of the Wonder Women comic seems relevant: the year is 1947,
but not: June - July 1947,


[3] And Mental Radio, [Sinclair] which recalls: Remote Viewing.



Wonder Woman (first series) 21, January-February 1947, page 13C

© DC Comics

Editor: Sheldon Mayer

"Ruler of the Atom World"

Script: William Moulton Marston (as Charles Moulton)
Penciler: Harry G. Peter
Inker: Harry G. Peter
Colorist: Unknown
Letterer: Harry G. Peter?

Wonder Woman 21 provides a good example of the bizarre, fanciful
stories written by Marston and illustrated by long-time associate
Harry G. Peter in the 1940s. The atomic bomb blasts that ended World
War II were clearly still on the minds of the American public in 1947.

In Part 2, "Tide of Atomic Fire," ended, Paula used Gerta's Enlarging
Machine to return Wonder Woman, Steve, Queen Atomia and a pair of
neutron robots to full size. As Part 3, "Ruler of the Atom World,"
opens, Wonder Woman "makes her captive comfortable" (bound, of course)
on the Amazon plane en route to Transformation Island. By telepathic
control, she orders the two neutron robots to overpower Steve, who was
left in charge of guarding them. The robots carry their Queen away,
as Wonder Woman makes a spectacular mid-air rescue of the overpowered,
injured Steve.

etc,

[NOTE: t.c.s.a comment: William Moultan Marston's use of "MENTAL
RADIO" harkens forward in time to REMOTE VIEWING.
Also note that Queen Atomia is very clearly from the Universe Next
Door. This is art imitating reality, in this case a Comic book
imitating reality, that is IF Lenny Susskind's et - al theories of the
Multiverse are in fact true.

SEE:


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial_s&q=%22Mental+Radio%22%2C+Ingo+Swann&btnG=Search


http://www.uri-geller.com/geller-effect/tge15.htm


Upton Sinclair's Mental Radio (1930) and Rene Warcollier's Mind to
Mind (1948) would have provided enough teaching material for a trial
course in applied telepathy for civil or military purposes. This, they
may have decided, is something we can work with.


htp://www.mindspring.com/~txporter/bibl.htm#mrus


"Mental Radio" by Upton Sinclair


MacMillan, 1971, {no ISBN}

This book, originally published in 1930, reviews over 100 'picture
drawing' experiments conducted with his wife. These experiments are
very similar in content to Puthoff & Targ's Remote Viewing
experiments, although the experimental protocols were very different.
Best serves as more anecdotal evidence of persistent demonstrations of
Remote Viewing capabilities having taken place many times in the past.
Great book to get if you can find it. Excellent in its revelation of
Upton Sinclair's psychological state: "I don't know why or how this is
happening, but I have seen my wife do this _so_ often, with so many
other related phenomena, that I _know_ there is something unexplained
going on, and I think people ought to know about it."]

Mala mental-radios Wonder Woman, who speeds to the rescue and
squelches the brutal revolt. Queen Atomia has clearly "lost [her]
desire to become a decent human being," so she is re-fitted with a
secure Venus Girdle and taken to the Amazon Temple on Paradise Island.
Wonder Woman implores the goddess Aphrodite to use her wisdom.
Aphrodite "welds thy Venus Girdle on thee with the rays of eternal
love!… Thou shalt ever be devoted to the worship of love, beauty and
humanity!' Wonder Woman serves the reformed Queen a flask of "liquid
hydroxo gas" [!] as shown above, and shoots her with a telescopic gun
back to her atomic world in the stratosphere. She arrives on her
world and calls off the invasion of earth. She navigates all the atom
planets in her universe south-southeast to the Starr Sanitarium. In
an eerie final panel , the crippled children are running and playing
as the Queen announces, "—the Atomic Universe shall ever shine to help
humanity – its radio rays healing children's diseases – its brightness
a symbol of Atomia's devotion to serving those in need."

etc

http://www.uky.edu/Projects/Chemcomics/html/ww_21_b7_h.html


http://www.uky.edu/Projects/Chemcomics/html/ww_21_ad_ca.html


Wonder Woman (first series) 21, January-February 1947, last page

© DC Comics

Editor: Sheldon Mayer

"Chemcraft ad"


[01-21-06 at: 02:14a.m.]


AND:

Note the link below shows W.W. flying in a stealthy aircraft and she
is communicating using MENTAL RADIO, also note the
obvious reference to "Operation Crossroads" [where on the 06-30-1946
test was stencilled Rita Hayworth's moive name GILDA] Wonder Woman is
investigating the Pacific island site of an atomic bomb test.



http://www.uky.edu/Projects/Chemcomics/html/ww_21_a5.html


Wonder Woman (first series) 21, January-February 1947, page 5A


"M'Gosh whats happening to the law of GRAVITY"?!?! [01-21-06 at:
02:16a.m.]


[01-21-06 at: 02:22a.m. t.c.s.a comment: Queen Atomia appears to be a
Metric Engineer ;-)]


Queen Atomia rules the planet, and Wonder Woman and her friends tune
in just as she is planning revenge on "the miserable mortals" of the
outside world for "defying Queen Atomia [by] capturing the universe I
was building!"



+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



AND HERE IS JACK'S POST THAT COSMIC TRIGGERED MY SEARCH TONIGHT:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SarfattiScienceSeminars/message/8976


Message 8976 of 8979

From: Jack Sarfatti
Date: Fri Jan 20, 2006 7:25 am
Subject: Fwd: Anyon Superconductor: DIA Doc: "Roswell 1947 ET Energy
Device BINGO! Bismuth


Begin forwarded message:


From: Jack Sarfatti
Date: January 19, 2006 11:14:02 PM PST
To: figaro

"Bismuth" mentioned in Collins-Doty Fig 1b p. 163 on the propulsion
system also in the DIA document p. 168 on the power supply. John
Dering also emphasized it in his research on the Nazi devices. Well
Nobel Prize (2004) physicist Frank Wilczek writes:

"it is interesting that the above estimate [1000 deg Kelvin] of the
gap is of a reasonable order of magnitude for a high temperature
superconductor" intimately connected to Robert Laughlin's wave
function for fractional quantum "Hall Effect" (mentioned in by LANL
Spook "Mr C" et-al) and "This 'coincidence', together with the fact
that both the cuprate and the BISMATE high temperature
superconductors are strongly two-dimensional and highly
magnetically correlated, so that they may well support CHIRAL SPIN
ORDERING" p. 79 in Wilczek.

Compare to DIA document of Collins-Doty p. 168 Exhibit 2a

"The interior contained 6,366 small black circular objects (.003
cm) that SPINS CLOCKWISE ... when a demand for electricity is
placed on the device."

That orbital rotational fluid motion is not "spin" of course, but
it is suggestive - also of the Victor Schauberger "Nazi Bell"
device reported by Nick Cook of Jane's Defence Weekly. Suggestive
clues. Nothing conclusive or rigorous of course - YET! ;-)

On Jan 19, 2006, at 10:48 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:


For "toy model" thin film anyon high Tc superconductor embedded in
fuselage of "saucer"
Surface density ~ 10^14 cm^-2 i.e. [1/(10^-7)]^2 cm^-2

Critical Tc ~ 10^3 Kelvin pp 78-9 Wilczek

In my model this means, best case scenario of good phase-locking
of anyon coherence to vacuum coherence

|/\| ~ [1/(10^-13x10^-7)]cm^-2 ~ 10^20 cm^-2

Theta ~ (effective charge of anyon)(effective anyon flux) in a
small "pixel" in the active thin film. Something like

Guv + |/\|cos(anyon phase shift)guv + k*Tuv(source EM fields &
currents) = 0

Where k* ~ 10^40 (8piG/c^4)

In the Best of All Possible Worlds (BPW) scenario. ;-)


On Jan 19, 2006, at 9:23 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:



On Jan 19, 2006, at 9:01 PM, Figaro wrote:


Jack Sarfatti wrote:

Preface, I have not yet read the Collins-Doty "Exempt from
Disclosure" from the beginning. I am only puttering around the
"physics" Ch 3 and will jump back to the beginning later. I am
also reading Frank Wilczek's "Fractional Statistics and Anyon
Superconductivity" at the same time as my "precognition" tells
me that is the relevant solid state physics for the energy
device as well as the propulsion. I could be wrong of course.

Fig 1a p. 162 describes what purports to be a secondary
"conventional" electromagnetic (giant capacitor) propulsion
system needing air that would not work in vacuum and is not a
"silent running" zero g-force warp drive that is my primary
interest. I am not suggesting that the description in the
document makes sense. It does not. Collins admits he does not
understand it. Apparently no one else in USG does either,
assuming it's not a forged document of course. Since the craft
is supposed to be empty inside (Col. Corso) either that is a
different craft or the document is disinformation fed to Collins.



The Craft have two propulsion systems according to the LANL
source. One for space and the other for planetary environments.
Don't try to make too much out of those notes. They are there
for information purposes only and are incomplete......Rmc


10-4. The propulsion notes are too incomplete, but the energy
device notes have some interesting clues that seem to tie in with
my metric engineering equations.


No pictures are provided.

Fig 1b p. 163 has more nuts and bolts detail (rotating
assembly) and mentions bismuth (also mentioned by SARA's John
Dering at ISSO in connection with alleged Nazi saucers) as well
as "lag currents" & megaHz pulses, "Hall Effect" and
"diamagnetism" - but no clear idea of the principle of the
purported electromagnetic propellentless propulsion. The report
is an incoherent hodgepodge that even Hal Puthoff could not
understand p. 164.



The notes are for information purposes only, you're trying to
make too much out of it..........Rmc


Depends what you mean by "information purposes". Either "Mr C" is
deliberately planting disinformation, or he is being honest
admitting that they haven't a clue how the EBEN technology works
- or both.


The alleged "LANL Spook" "Mr C" on p. 166 spouts more gibberish
trying to explain how the alien craft flies. But he does say
TWO different propulsion systems one is "anti-gravity," i.e. my
use of "warp drive" though no explanation is given.



He also says others or I wouldn't not understand the propulsion
system because they really don't understand it as he explained
on that page. He explained it the best way he could since the
thing is Alien.....Rmc


Right, but that simply means the guys tasked at LANL et-al are
not equipped to deal with it. The top physicists could figure it
out very quickly. The problem is clearly that the USG "Black Ops"
Boys have not tapped the top talent of the mainstream physics
community. I bet Murray Gell-Mann could figure it out in a single
afternoon! If not him, Susskind, or any number of top physicists
could do it. The Problem could be solved in a Project Jason
Workshop.


Then on p. 167 starts the discussion of the ED (below) that is
a bit more intelligible.



[01-21-06 at: 02:59a.m.]

OPENED:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SarfattiScienceSeminars/message/8977

From: Jack Sarfatti
Date: Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:31 pm
Subject: Fwd: Anyon Superconductor: DIA Doc: "Roswell 1947 ET Energy
Device BINGO! Bismuth

Begin forwarded message:


From: Jack Sarfatti
Date: January 20, 2006 1:30:07 PM PST
To: Bill Ryan

Subject: Re: Anyon Superconductor: DIA Doc: "Roswell 1947 ET Energy
Device BINGO! Bismuth


etc,

If theta & phi are the two vacuum Goldstone phase field, and chi is the anyon superconductor phase field, then the modulated gravity 1-form tetrad field is something like

L = Lp*{(theta - chi)d(phi - chi) - [d(theta - chi)](phi - chi)}


[01-21-06 at: 03:02a.m.]

+++++++++++++++++++


[01-21-06 at: 03:13a.m.]

Open:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SarfattiScienceSeminars/message/8979

From: Jack Sarfatti
Date: Sat Jan 21, 2006 5:00 am
Subject: Fwd: What are events?

etc,

On Jan 20, 2006, at 8:30 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:



This is violated in Hal Puthoff's PV theory:

"Events are not points of a manifold, they are identifiable ONLY
BY [LOCAL] COINCIDENCES between the values of fields preserved by
the actions of diffeomorphisms." p. 12 Lee Smolin



++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


THE END:

trixcleverspacealien

01-21-2006 at: 04:24a.m.]


59 years after 01-21-1947

"Ruler of the Atom World"

Wonder Woman (first series) 21, January-February 1947, page 13C



On Jan 21, 2006, at 10:51 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

re: http://www.coasttocoastam.com/ Jan 20, 2006 show
http://www.earthfiles.com/
"One of the many unanswered questions is how long was there an American military order to
shoot down the discs described as 'enemy weapon systems?'" - J. Andrew Kissner



Front page, Las Cruces Sun-News, June 1, 1947.


White Sands UFO Report
During the first two hours, reporter and editor for Earthfiles.com, Linda Moulton Howe, presented details on a 1947 UFO case involving peculiar aerial discs interfering with V-2 rocket launches from White Sands Proving Ground.



On Jan 21, 2006, at 10:39 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:


If you read Ch 1 of the Cal Tech textbook Cosmological Physics by John Peacock p. 26, the equivalence principle +local Lorentz invariance give a unique vacuum energy term /\guv.

The vacuum energy tensor is tuv(zpf) = (c^4/8piG)/\guv

[c^4/G] ~ "string tension" or stiffness of space i.e. Energy/Length

/\ = cosmological constant is curvature scale directly induced by zero point vacuum energy [/\] = 1/area

The vacuum energy tensor functional dependenct must be ~ guv = metric tensor itself

So that Einstein's eq is

Guv + /\guv + (8piG/c^4)Tuv(ordinary sources) = 0

Now /\ is a constant in 1915 GR, but when you extend the theory to include the Russian torsion fields then /\ is a local scalar variable field and that is how I get warp drive and explain the UFOs. Note new evidence from Linda Howe on George Noory last night of war in 1947 with saucers. 90 US planes shot down in 1947 by saucers - we lost pilots. Evidence is on her Earthfiles Website.

What are events?
Smolin's eq. 3 p. 15

guv = buv + huv 2 fluid model

huv is quantized in perturbation theory.

In my theory buv is a dynamical emergent ODLRO c-number field that obeys

Guv + /\buv + kTuv(source fields f) = 0

So it is still classically background independent. The huv spin 2 quantum field contributes to Robert Becker's locally random nonlocally coherent "dark energy" (negative pressure) or "dark matter" (positive pressure).

That is compute Guv' formally from huv and impose on the vacuum expectation value

<0|Guv'|0> = /\buv

buv = (1u + Lu)(flat)(1v + Lv) EEP

L = Lp*{theta(dphi) - (dtheta)phi]

for Planck vacuum manifold G/H = S2.


On Jan 20, 2006, at 8:30 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

This is violated in Hal Puthoff's PV theory:

"Events are not points of a manifold, they are identifiable ONLY BY [LOCAL] COINCIDENCES between the values of fields preserved by the actions of diffeomorphisms." p. 12 Lee Smolin

Let @ be such a diffeomorphism

@(M,g,f) -> (M'g'f')

M = Manifold with
fixed dimension
fixed topology
fixed signature

g = geometrodynamical field

g = (1 + L)(flat)(1 + L) = Einstein's Equivalence Principle (EEP)

L ~ exterior derivatives of 2 Goldstone phases of the Planck vacuum manifold G(False Vacuum)/H(Inflation)

point p in M ---> p' in M'

All dynamical fields f are DRAGGED along in the diffeomorphism

@.f(p) = f(@^-1p)

Principle of General Relativity is - the physical space time is the EQUIVALENCE CLASS {M,gf}. This is a gauge freedom redundancy removed by the Diff(4) group that is the local gauging of the global translation group T4.

Now R. Kiehn can generalize this.

Alien ET Technology with nano-engineered anyon thin films?

My conjecture is that both the ED device and the propulsion depend on different phases of "anyonic matter" in thin films nano-engineered into the alien ET machinery.

There are three phases of anyonic matter in nano-engineered thin films

1. Infinite speed of sound in the thin film gives an incompressible Fractional Quantum Hall liquid of anyons that are electrons with "flux points" attached (slice of a flux tube in a plane). There is a combination of "fictitious" as well as magnetic fluxes involved. It's quite subtle.

2. Finite speed of sound where the phonons do not decay into lower energy modes is the anyonic superconductor with a quasi-particle energy gap. Getting a macro-quantum coherent order parameter here is not straightforward as the mechanism is a generalization of ODLRO. This is also tricky. However, I am assuming here that there is a locally variable phase field that locks into the vacuum phase field that determines the gravity 1-form tetrad field. If theta & phi are the two vacuum Goldstone phase field, and chi is the anyon superconductor phase field, then the modulated gravity 1-form tetrad field is something like

L = Lp*{(theta - chi)d(phi - chi) - [d(theta - chi)](phi - chi)}

Berry control phase chi ~ (anyonic surface density)(area of control loop) eq. 50 p. 91 Wilczek

Note that the Einstein geometrodynamic field is

guv(curved) = (Iu^a + Lu^a)(Minkowski)ab(1v^b + Lv^b)

Given guv, calculate Guv and everything else in a kind of discrete lattice approximation.

But how does the dark energy come in? The dark energy is a universal repulsive field that increases linearly with the separation r of the anyons as explained, e.g. by Susskind in Cosmic Landscape. That is essentially

V = (1/2)c^2/\r^2

F/m = - dV/dr = c^2/\r = non geodesic g-field induced by zero point dark energy

"anyon superconducting states are stabilized by repulsive interactions" p. 88 Wilczek

Also

Guv + |/\|cos(chi)guv + kTuv = 0

3. Zero speed of sound gives a non-superconducting anyon metal where the gap vanishes.

Note this is not meant to be a coherent explanation - far from it at this point.

The "filling fraction" of Landau levels that is the control parameter switching among the 3 phases of anyonic matter in the thin films is 2pi(surface density)/(charge)(applied magnetic field normal to the thin film loop).

The basic ground state is the Laughlin wave function e.g. eq. 45 p. 89 Wilczek


On Jan 20, 2006, at 9:50 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

I am not a lab person, but there are many good ones. I would simply like to be in the Project Jason meetings and watch their jaws drop when they roll out the craft described in the book by Doty - if it's real, as well as the ED device. I have no doubt that collectively the Top Guns can figure it all out rather quickly. That was impossible in the 1950's of course. It is only possible now since ~ 2001 with the new technologies and the observations of WMAP, Type 1a supernovae, gravity lensing etc. Nanotechnology was unknown in the 50's and they did not have a good theory of superconductors till mid-50's and no concept of thin film anyons with generalized quantum statistics interpolating continuously between bosons and fermions - essential to the effect I suspect.

On Jan 20, 2006, at 9:20 AM, Bill Ryan wrote:

Jack, I just wanted to acknowledge you in public for being very fair to Bob. I know he worked pretty hard at the book and his intentions are the best. Kudos to you for looking closely at the data that he’s brought to the public’s attention.

Re your own comments, I do agree with the spirit of this:

> ...that simply means the guys tasked at LANL et-al are not equipped to deal
> with it. The top physicists could figure it out very quickly. The problem is
> clearly that the USG "Black Ops" Boys have not tapped the top talent of the
> mainstream physics community. I bet Murray Gell-Mann could figure it out in
> a single afternoon! If not him, Susskind, or any number of top physicists
> could do it. The Problem could be solved in a Project Jason Workshop.

I bet you’d love to get your hands on some hardware like that in a good lab... =)

Best to all, Bill


From: Figaro
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:46:03 -0500
To: Jack Sarfatti
Cc: (88 people)
Subject: Re: Anyon Superconductor: DIA Doc: "Roswell 1947 ET Energy Device BINGO! Bismuth

Now, that coming from Jack Sarfatti is a real compliment which just floored me, can hardly believe what you just said! And yes, I don't expect any reader to accept what's in the book at face value, taking anything in Science at face value just shows a lack of critical thinking IMHO.....As for Rick yes, he has been acting funny lately, not the Rick I use to know....Robert C


Jack Sarfatti wrote:
That's what we PhD theoretical physicists from good universities generally do. It's called working on a problem. In this case it's also detective work and MASINT intelligence analysis . In any case I do what I want thank you. Your book BTW is much better in terms of content than your friends and co-authors gave you credit for. Obviously Doty was ordered to deny what is in the book? Of course, Eric Davis is correct that no fact alleged in the book must be taken at face value without independent corroboration, but you do give a lot of details, which I like.
On Jan 20, 2006, at 7:41 AM, Figaro wrote:


Without further details from sources, which stopped in May of 2004 this is all speculation....Robert C

Jack Sarfatti wrote:

"Bismuth" mentioned in Collins-Doty Fig 1b p. 163 on the propulsion system also in the DIA document p. 168 on the power supply. John Dering also emphasized it in his research on the Nazi devices. Well Nobel Prize (2004) physicist Frank Wilczek writes:

"it is interesting that the above estimate [1000 deg Kelvin] of the gap is of a reasonable order of magnitude for a high temperature superconductor" intimately connected to Robert Laughlin's wave function for fractional quantum "Hall Effect" (mentioned in by LANL Spook "Mr C" et-al) and "This 'coincidence', together with the fact that both the cuprate and the BISMATE high temperature superconductors are strongly two- dimensional and highly magnetically correlated, so that they may well support CHIRAL SPIN ORDERING" p. 79 in Wilczek.

Compare to DIA document of Collins-Doty p. 168 Exhibit 2a

"The interior contained 6,366 small black circular objects (.003 cm) that SPINS CLOCKWISE ... when a demand for electricity is placed on the device."

That orbital rotational fluid motion is not "spin" of course, but it is suggestive - also of the Victor Schauberger "Nazi Bell" device reported by Nick Cook of Jane's Defence Weekly. Suggestive clues. Nothing conclusive or rigorous of course - YET! ;-)

On Jan 19, 2006, at 10:48 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:


For "toy model" thin film anyon high Tc superconductor embedded in fuselage of "saucer"
Surface density ~ 10^14 cm^-2 i.e. [1/(10^-7)]^2 cm^-2

Critical Tc ~ 10^3 Kelvin pp 78-9 Wilczek

In my model this means, best case scenario of good phase-locking of anyon coherence to vacuum coherence

|/\| ~ [1/(10^-13x10^-7)]cm^-2 ~ 10^20 cm^-2

Theta ~ (effective charge of anyon)(effective anyon flux) in a small "pixel" in the active thin film. Something like

Guv + |/\|cos(anyon phase shift)guv + k*Tuv(source EM fields & currents) = 0

Where k* ~ 10^40 (8piG/c^4)

In the Best of All Possible Worlds (BPW) scenario. ;-)


On Jan 19, 2006, at 9:23 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:



On Jan 19, 2006, at 9:01 PM, Figaro wrote:


Jack Sarfatti wrote:

Preface, I have not yet read the Collins-Doty "Exempt from Disclosure" from the beginning. I am only puttering around the "physics" Ch 3 and will jump back to the beginning later. I am also reading Frank Wilczek's "Fractional Statistics and Anyon Superconductivity" at the same time as my "precognition" tells me that is the relevant solid state physics for the energy device as well as the propulsion. I could be wrong of course.

Fig 1a p. 162 describes what purports to be a secondary "conventional" electromagnetic (giant capacitor) propulsion system needing air that would not work in vacuum and is not a "silent running" zero g-force warp drive that is my primary interest. I am not suggesting that the description in the document makes sense. It does not. Collins admits he does not understand it. Apparently no one else in USG does either, assuming it's not a forged document of course. Since the craft is supposed to be empty inside (Col. Corso) either that is a different craft or the document is disinformation fed to Collins.




The Craft have two propulsion systems according to the LANL source. One for space and the other for planetary environments. Don't try to make too much out of those notes. They are there for information purposes only and are incomplete......Rmc


10-4. The propulsion notes are too incomplete, but the energy device notes have some interesting clues that seem to tie in with my metric engineering equations.



No pictures are provided.

Fig 1b p. 163 has more nuts and bolts detail (rotating assembly) and mentions bismuth (also mentioned by SARA's John Dering at ISSO in connection with alleged Nazi saucers) as well as "lag currents" & megaHz pulses, "Hall Effect" and "diamagnetism" - but no clear idea of the principle of the purported electromagnetic propellentless propulsion. The report is an incoherent hodgepodge that even Hal Puthoff could not understand p. 164.




The notes are for information purposes only, you're trying to make too much out of it..........Rmc


Depends what you mean by "information purposes". Either "Mr C" is deliberately planting disinformation, or he is being honest admitting that they haven't a clue how the EBEN technology works - or both.



The alleged "LANL Spook" "Mr C" on p. 166 spouts more gibberish trying to explain how the alien craft flies. But he does say TWO different propulsion systems one is "anti- gravity," i.e. my use of "warp drive" though no explanation is given.




He also says others or I wouldn't not understand the propulsion system because they really don't understand it as he explained on that page. He explained it the best way he could since the thing is Alien.....Rmc


Right, but that simply means the guys tasked at LANL et-al are not equipped to deal with it. The top physicists could figure it out very quickly. The problem is clearly that the USG "Black Ops" Boys have not tapped the top talent of the mainstream physics community. I bet Murray Gell-Mann could figure it out in a single afternoon! If not him, Susskind, or any number of top physicists could do it. The Problem could be solved in a Project Jason Workshop.


Then on p. 167 starts the discussion of the ED (below) that is a bit more intelligible.

New Scientist and AIAA goof on Heim-Hauser Hyperspace Drive

7 Month 2006 - issue number 2533
New Scientist Reader,
Welcome to the New Scientist print-edition e-zine - our weekly online newsletter bringing you content highlights from the latest issue of New Scientist.
All of the content featured in this week's magazine is available online and is free to magazine subscribers.
If you would prefer not to receive this service, please click here to unsubscribe.



A leap into hyperspace
Fancy a trip to Mars but don't want to spend six months or more holed up in a rocket? Soon you may be able to leave Earth at lunch time and reach the red Planet in time for dinner, thanks to an astonishing new type of engine which apparently would propel a craft through another dimension at enormous speeds. There's just one catch: the machine relies on an obscure and largely unheard of kind of physics. If the experiment gets the go-ahead and works, it could reveal new interactions between the fundamental forces of nature that would change the future of space travel...more

Warp Drive Equations

Forget the Heim-Hauser nonsense from AIAA. You all saw what Nobel Laureate G. 't-Hooft thinks of it. The following is mainstream and is much more likely to point in the correct direction to understand anomalous observed UFO/Skinwalker phenomena of interest to CIA, DIA, NDI et-al. See remark on rotating conducting plates at end.

On Jan 8, 2006, at 5:06 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:


1. We take the condensed matter approach that "More is different" (P.W. Anderson) and so Einstein's 1915 theory of gravity as smooth curved spacetime is an emergent collective low energy effective c-number local field theory very much like superfluid helium and the BCS theory of superconductivity using the Landau-Ginzburg local order parameter. The latter systems are for the ground states of real on-mass-shell particles. In our problem we are dealing only with the vacuum states of virtual off-mass-shell particles.

2. What is new about this paper is the idea that Einstein's field equations are a trivial consequence of the modulation of the Goldstone phases in the inflation Higgs field in the first 10^-44 seconds of the chaotic creation of our pocket universe.

3. This is prior to the splitting off of the electroweak Higgs that gives the leptons and quarks mass at ~ 10^-17cm. It is prior to the heating of the Big Bang whose surface of last scattering is seen in the WMAP NASA data.

4. Guided by

4a. Hawking-Bekenstein conjecture

Entropy of black hole/k = (Area of Event Horizon)/4Lp^2

4b. 't-Hooft/Susskind world hologram conjecture

i.e. the geometrodynamic field is fundamentally 2 + 1 with the 3 + 1 Einstein theory as a kind of "holographic image"

we are led to a simple toy model of three real Higgs scalar fields that Bose-Einstein condense in the first 10^-44 sec causing inflation.

This is V(Planck 10^-33 cm) = G(False Vacuum)/H(True Vacuum) = S2

with 2 0-form Goldstone phases theta & phi defining the locus of minima in the effective Higgs potential at 10^-33 cm. We leave open the possibility that Lp* >> Lp = 10^-33 cm from extra space dimensions of brane theory.

5. The pre-inflation false vacuum is not a pre-geometry, it is not a spin-foam, it is simply the globally flat standard model U(1)xSU(2)xSU(3) or its GUT or maybe string theory type extensions. The details of that do not matter. It is of course sans gravity and sans mass in the unstable false vacuum.

6. We also make an analogy with the Bohm pilot-wave guidance constraint

v(IT particle) = (h/m)grad(phase of pilot BIT wave)

becomes (I change notation)

L/Lp = (dtheta)(phi) - (theta)(dphi) = Geometrodynamic LINE FLUX DENSITY 1-FORM

7. V(Planck) = G/H = S2

8. Equation of the locus of minima for 3 real Higgs scalar field h1, h2, h3 is

cos^2theta + cos^2phi + cos^2chi = 1

taking theta & phi as the 2 independent Goldstone phases where the Higgs potential

U(h1, h2, h3) has a stable locus of degenerate minima on the unit spherical surface in a fiber space.

9. Therefore, the geometrodynamic area flux density 2-form is

A/Lp^2 = dL/Lp^2 = 2(dtheta)/\(dphi)

10. Obviously the geometrodynamic volume flux density 3-form is locally zero

V = dA/Lp^3 = 0 This is "volume without volume" i.e. 't-hooft/Susskind hologram

Think Bohm-Aharonov effect where

curlvs = 0 locally but loop integral of vs round a line vortex defect is quantized Nh/m

Similarly for magnetic flux.

Closed (nonbounding) surface integral of A is quantized to integer x Lp^2

from second homtopy group(S2) = Z

11. Finally derivation of 1915 GR in a few lines directly from EEP

guv(curved) = eu^anab(flat)ev^b

eu^a = 1u^a + Lu^a

ds^2 = guvdx^udx^v

e = 1 + L

e = eu^adx^u&a

dx^u is a local 1-form basis in base space

&a is a local 1-coform basis in tangent space fiber

Symbolically in local frame invariant form

ds^2 = (1 + L)n(1 + L)

L = 0 is globally flat special relativity, but with no gravity and NO masses!

12. It's Bohm hidden-variable Wheeler micro-geon "Mass without mass", but only when the electroweak Higgs field splits off from the Planck Higgs field to give the lepton-quark plasma masses before confinement as the hot Big Bang cools down to the surface of last scattering seen in WMAP.

13. The effective G for the lepton & quark micro-geons is strong at short-range because the cosmological constant /\ is itself a local scalar field /\zpf that is both + and - at short scales.

For example, for a thin weakly rotating spherical shell of effective charge Q, angular momentum J, the effective Newtonian limit potential energy per unit mass M is V, where dimensionless V/c^2 is


V/c^2 = -(1/2)/\zpfr^2 + (hc + Q^2)/Mc^2r + (J/Mc)^2(1/r^2)

The force per unit mass is

F/M = - dV/dr = +c^2/\zpfr + (hc + Q^2)/Mr^2 + 2(J/M)^2(1/r^3)

Equilibrium happens for /\zpf < 0 and

F/M = 0

Stability is

dV/dr^2 > 0


i.e.

-c^2/\zpf + 2(hc + Q^2)/Mr^r + 6(J/M)^2(1/r^3) > 0

This is trivially true since /\zpf < 0 i.e. negative zero point energy density with positive pressure. In this spherically symmetric problem w = (pressure)/(energy density) = - 1 (unlike anisotropic QED Casimir plates for effective ).

14. Note for Casimir plates, the longitudinal pressure perpendicular to the plates is negative. This gives simultaneously an attractive electrical force, but a repulsive gravity "force" on the plates, of different strengths of course. The transverse pressure is positive giving a repulsive electrical force and an attractive gravity "force" all assuming a positive energy density of course.

The GR equation is for plates separated by a

Guv + (8piG/c^4)Tuv = 0

Where approximately (weak curvature perturbation of flat space-time)

Tuv ~ (pi^2/720)(h/2pi)a^-4[-1,+1,+1,-3}

only diagonal elements shown. All off-diagonal source stress-energy density components are zero.

This will change if the plates rotate!

High Strangeness
See my books on http://amazon.com for more information.

On Jan 6, 2006, at 11:22 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

High Strangeness, e.g. Skinwalker at the Sherman-Bigelow Utah Ranch and elsewhere.

There is also the metric engineering of warp drive and wormhole time travel from future to past and to parallel worlds in the megaverse. We have Gott's model of the self-creating universe with time travel to the past in the first time quanta of creation ensuring the arrow of time of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Well and good, but not good enough. Gott's theory however can explain the entire infinity of worlds as self-creating.

Certainly advanced intelligence, as seen in Skinwalker as one example, though it is malevolent, indeed Evil, plotting our destruction as in the very probable coming war with Iran, can fine tune our early universe. But there are an infinity of universes and it is not necessary to invoke a FAP. Whether or not there is an FAP is an empirical question.

AIAA Blunder: Heims Hyperspace Engine won't work

Prof. J. Hauser has received the AIAA 2004 best technical paper award for his paper on hyperdrive propulsion based on Heim's theory.

Eric


Hyperdrive Engine Interesting Experts. New Scientist (1/7 issue, Lietz) reports, "Every year, the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics awards prizes for the best papers presented at its annual conference. Last year's winner in the nuclear and future flight category went to a paper calling for experimental tests of an astonishing new type of engine. According to the paper, this hyperdrive motor would propel a craft through another dimension at enormous speeds. It could leave Earth at lunchtime and get to the moon in time for dinner. There's just one catch: the idea relies on an obscure and largely unrecognised kind of physics. Can they possibly be serious? The AIAA is certainly not embarrassed. What's more, the US military has begun to cast its eyes over the hyperdrive concept, and a space propulsion researcher at the US Department of Energy's Sandia National Laboratories has said he would be interested in putting the idea to the test."


Begin forwarded message:

From: Jack Sarfatti
Date: January 6, 2006 8:13:05 PM PST
To: Gary S Bekkum / SSR
Subject: Re: Scientists moot gravity-busting hyperdrive | The Register



I have been contacted by Sandia asking my opinion. I said "Thumbs down. No way Jose." Also the physics in the paper is almost certainly complete nonsense. No one I know understands it. It seems to be a variation on the Nazi Bell Experiment and the Podkletnov stuff that came from it as described by Nick Cook in "The Hunt for Zero Point" -- all very dubious stuff of course.



Obviously the Skinwalker high-strangeness reported by NIDS doesn't need any Z-Machine or humongous magnetic fields.


Bootnote

*A space propulsion researcher at Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico does think it might be possible, though, using an X-ray generator called the Z machine which "could probably generate the necessary field intensities and gradients".
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/06/hyperdrive/

Intelligent Design is in retreat


"How is it possible to have vitalism and teleology operating on all cosmic scales and yet disallow a cosmically creative intelligence? And what would be the benefit? How does this intransigence in the face of massive evidence reflect anything other scientific myopia?" Dan Smith

Vitalism is simply signal nonlocality. This includes Rupert Sheldrake's theory. It shows a violation of micro-quantum theory by macro-quantum theory in the same sense that general relativity shows a violation of special relativity.

In general relativity the laws of special relativity contract to being true only locally in the tangent fiber rather than globally.

In emergent post-quantum theory signal locality is only found in ensembles of simple pieces so small that they are "dead". Life, like superconductivity and gravity is an emergent collective phenomenon beyond mechanical reductionism, but certainly not beyond physics! The evidence for signal nonlocality is:

1. Mind-Brain experiments of Libet, Radin, Bierman.

2. SRI Remote Viewing e.g. Geller effect

3. NIDS High-Strangeness of the "Skinwalker"

...

*This means that the idea of secure untappable quantum cryptography is a chimera because signal locality, no-cloning can be broken. Don't bet on it. See the papers of Antony Valentini.

"ANTONY VALENTINI is a Research Associate, Department of Physics, at Imperial College in London. He received his PhD in Astrophysics at the International School for Advanced Studies in Trieste, Italy, under Dennis Sciama (whose former PhD students include Stephen Hawking, David Deutsch and Martin Rees). The Thesis develops the pilot-wave theory of de Broglie and Bohm into a complete, alternative approach to modern physics, with applications to quantum gravity and cosmology.

Dynamical Origin of Quantum Probabilities, Antony Valentini, Hans Westman, (2004), quant-ph/0403034.
Subquantum Information and Computation, Antony Valentini, quant-ph/0203049 To appear in 'Proceedings of the Second Winter Institute on Foundations of Quantum Theory and Quantum Optics: Quantum Information Processing', ed. R. Ghosh (Indian Academy of Science, Bangalore, 2002), Journal-ref: Pramana - J. Phys. 59 (2002) 269-277.
Signal-Locality and Subquantum Information in Deterministic Hidden-Variables Theories’ in ‘Non-Locality and Modality’, eds. T. Placek and J. Butterfield (Kluwer, 2002) pp. 81-103.
Influence of bias voltage on the stability of CsI photocathodes exposed to air, N. Cioffi, E. Nappi, M. A. Nitti, B. K. Singh, Antony Valentini, (2002).
Influence of the substrate reflectance on the quantum efficiency of thin CsI photocathodes, E. Nappi, M. A. Nitti, Antony Valentini, (2002).
Signal-Locality in Hidden-Variables Theories, Antony Valentini, (2002).
Universal Signature of Non-Quantum Systems, Antony Valentini, quant-ph/0309107."

On Jan 6, 2006, at 7:50 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

Dan you are writing silly stuff. Most of it is not even wrong. First read ALL of Lenny Susskind's "Cosmic Landscape." Then rethink what you are saying. It would be real easy for a physicist like Lenny Susskind to rip you to smithereens as simply another scientifically illiterate Clueless Country Bumpkin.

A few facts:

1. Stephen Weinberg predicted that the cosmological constant would be ~ 10^-120 (c^3/hG) back in the 1980s years before it was actually measured to be that in Type 1a supernovae.

How did he do it. WAP that's how. Weak Anthropic Principle that only really makes sense if we live in a multiverse or megaverse of an infinity of parallel universes.

2. Fred Hoyle did a similar thing in the nuclear physics of elements forming in the stars many years ago. Accurately predicting position of a nuclear reaction resonance in the carbon nucleus before it was measured.

3. The same number for the cosmological constant explains the anomaly in which it appeared that some stars were older than the universe. Once you add in the measured positive constant vacuum zero point energy with negative pressure w = -1, so that every two objects in space repel with a force ~ to their separation, the universe is older than the stars in question because it is accelerating in its rate of expansion.

4. The measured lumpiness in the surface of last scattering 10^-5 measured by the WMAP NASA probe is exactly what is theoretically predicted ahead of the measurement in order for the galaxies to form.

5. The collective plasma oscillations seen in the WMAP data show that 3D space is flat on a large scale to maybe 2% precision.

These are only a few triumphs of the past 5 years or so.

That said, the WAP is enough to explain the many fine tuning "coincidences" that suggest GOD to the Evangelical Born Agains.

The only Fly in the Soup here is Skinwalker! But not even that means The Rapture, The Second Coming and the Revelations of Saint John et-al.


On Jan 6, 2006, at 5:12 PM, Dan Smith wrote:


"Jack,

You may recall it was I who pointed you to Robert Laughlin's website some months ago.

You might wonder why Robert and I are both touting non-reductionism. And then what do you propose to do about this?

Robert's point is that irreducible structures are endemic to Physics, even on macro scales.

Why might anyone care about this fact?

One significant locus of concern would be the biologists. They care because they need to know if it is their responsibility to provide reductive explanations for the biological laws that they have discovered. According to Robert, they can afford to remain agnostic as to the source of their laws, simply because physicists are in the same predicament. They too have laws that are irreducible to the first principles of physics.

Both the biologists and physicists, however, are reluctant to make much of this, and this is almost entirely due to the politics. If religion and science are not supposed to mix, what about politics and science? Is this better or worse?

If the biological laws are irreducible, how does this differ from the biological mechanisms that appear to be irreducible? Do the irreducible laws not present even a bigger ontological problem than do the mechanisms?

The specter of teleology and vitalism in biology is greatly magnified. This specter then has to be added to the already existing Anthropic problem of physics.

The Weak Anthropic Principle utterly fails to account for the necessarily pre-extant irreducible biological laws. The best you could do is invoke Rupert Sheldrake's theory of Morphic Resonance, but I'm skeptical that this will benefit physicalism.

How is it possible to have vitalism and teleology operating on all cosmic scales and yet disallow a cosmically creative intelligence? And what would be the benefit? How does this intransigence in the face of massive evidence reflect anything other scientific myopia?


Dan"

The Einstein Option



Begin forwarded message:
From: Jack Sarfatti
Date: January 5, 2006 8:44:03 PM PST


Einstein's equivalence principle is like great art and music - deceptively simple, yet one sees more facets of it every time one looks at it again. All attempts to modify it fail. First they are clumsy conceptually and second they fail experimentally.
I know of no experiment that shows a violation of the equivalence principle - not even a quantum one. Does anyone have info to the contrary? Einstein's general theory of relativity of gravity is considered by all the top level theoretical physicists in the field who are big professors at the best universities and who control all the money in the field to be the most beautiful theory in all of physics. I agree with them on that point 100%. That is why the attempts to modify it are held in disrepute. Note I said "modify" I did not say "extend". What's wrong with Hal Puthoff's PV and with Heim, and with Yilmaz, not sure about Woodward, is that they attempt to modify Einstein's theory inside its battle-tested domain of validity. I am not talking now about extending it to say the torsion field theory. That simply means locally gauging a larger space-time symmetry group than is done in Einstein's 1915 theory. Einstein did not use modern ideas of local gauge invariance back then - they had not yet really been invented. At any rate Einstein did not understand that idea the way we do today. Lenny Susskind has a good discussion on this pp 114-16 of Cosmic Landscape including Feynman's approach explained nicely. One also sees why Puthoff's idea to use a background flat space-time co-existing with curved space-time is simply no good at all. The modern approach that Einstein did not use historically does prove a kind of uniqueness "that it could not have been otherwise" p. 116 Susskind.

Note the equivalence principle is that the force of gravity is locally indistinguishable from an inertial acceleration force that is felt when, for example, an elevator starts to move or stop, or you step on the gas of a powerful car. This is called universal g-force. All objects experience it the same way!

This also leads to the notion of the "geodesic" in which one is weightless or free-floating. That is, there are geodesic paths without the time dilation of special relativity in which one is continuously weightless! The time dilation (shortening) is only detected when observers take non-geodesic paths in which they feel weight at least on parts of the trip. The non-geodesic traveller always feels some non-gravity force whenever he/she feels weight. The best way to see the time dilation is when two observers start and end their trips in local coincidence. The observer who felt no weight ever will be older than the observer who did feel weight. That is time dilation. The effect is usually very tiny of course. If both observers feel weight there is no general rule who will be younger. It's all contingent on details of the applied forces on each of them. Also to measure the curvature of space-time we never should apply forces to the pairs of test particles used to measure components of the space-time curvature, i.e. geodesic deviation.

Now if you cannot understand everything I just said, you cannot understand what warp drive is all about and how the Skinwalker Ships really work.

As soon as I hear the word "thrustor" I take out my post-quantum eraser and DELETE it.

Heims Hyperdrive? NO!

On Jan 5, 2006, at 11:30 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:


On Jan 5, 2006, at 10:17 AM, PhD theoretical physicist, Andrew Beckwith wrote:

I read that paper. It is insane. For one thing, space is NOT eight dimensional. Also
formula 9 in the paper is flat out wrong.


Bernd Prager wrote:
"The Scotsman" today claims that US airforce and American Department
of Energy are interested in testing the possibility of "hyperspace"
propulsion device based on Burkhard Heim's theory.

Here's the article: http://news.scotsman.com/scitech.cfm?id=16902006

The paper describing the theory is here:
http://www.uibk.ac.at/c/cb/cb26/heim/theorie_raumfahrt/hqtforspacepropphysicsaip2005.pdf

What do you think?


On Jan 5, 2006, at 9:44 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

Just received

"The Scotsman" today claims that US airforce and American Department
of Energy are interested in testing the possibility of "hyperspace"
propulsion device based on Burkhard Heim's theory.

Here's the article: http://news.scotsman.com/scitech.cfm?id=16902006

The paper describing the theory is here:
http://www.uibk.ac.at/c/cb/cb26/heim/theorie_raumfahrt/hqtforspacepropphysicsaip2005.pdf

What do you think?"

I am still sure this Heim idea is not the way to go. I could be wrong and will look at the paper when I get a chance. Low priority.

On Jan 5, 2006, at 9:12 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

bcc
On Jan 5, 2006, at 8:50 AM, Dr. Eric Davis wrote:
Jack:

FYI!

Prof. J. Hauser has received the AIAA 2004 best technical paper award for his paper on hyperdrive propulsion based on Heim's theory.

Eric


I once tried to read a paper by Heims. It seemed nonsense to me like Yilmaz's papers. I could be wrong of course. Both theories seem ugly and contrived. Einstein's is simpler and does the job when applied correctly. What AIAA thinks has little credibility UNLESS Matt Visser, Bill Unruh, Kit Green, Roger Penrose et-al have vetted it and say it's kosher. The cognitive gap between the engineers and the relativity physicists is too large.

If you understand the stuff below please give us a lecture on it. Thanks. :-)

Another dimension? How do you get a ship through a tiny curled up dimension? Even if dimension is large, photons and leptons and quarks are stuck to the branes. Only gravity can travel in hyperspace. So the whole idea seems crackpot. Egg on face of the AIAA! Where is Robert Park? ;-)

Sandia?


Hyperdrive Engine Interesting Experts. New Scientist (1/7 issue, Lietz) reports, "Every year, the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics awards prizes for the best papers presented at its annual conference. Last year's winner in the nuclear and future flight category went to a paper calling for experimental tests of an astonishing new type of engine. According to the paper, this hyperdrive motor would propel a craft through another dimension at enormous speeds. It could leave Earth at lunchtime and get to the moon in time for dinner. There's just one catch: the idea relies on an obscure and largely unrecognised kind of physics. Can they possibly be serious? The AIAA is certainly not embarrassed. What's more, the US military has begun to cast its eyes over the hyperdrive concept, and a space propulsion researcher at the US Department of Energy's Sandia National Laboratories has said he would be interested in putting the idea to the test."


NASA Said To Be Interested. The (UK) Scotsman (1/5, Johnston) reports, "The hypothetical device, which has been outlined in principle but is based on a controversial theory about the fabric of the universe, ... works by creating an intense magnetic field that, according to ideas first developed by the late scientist Burkhard Heim in the 1950s, would produce a gravitational field and result in thrust for a spacecraft. Also, if a large enough magnetic field was created, the craft would slip into a different dimension, where the speed of light is faster, allowing incredible speeds to be reached. Switching off the magnetic field would result in the engine reappearing in our current dimension." The story adds, "Professor Jochem Hauser, one of the scientists who put forward the idea, told The Scotsman that if everything went well a working engine could be tested in about five years." He also said "'NASA have contacted me and next week I'm going to see someone from the [US] air force to talk about it further, but it is at a very early stage.'"


The (UK) Sun (1/5, Sutherland) reports, "The US military is probing the possibility of Captain Kirk-style "warp speed" using a concept called hyperdrive. ... A round trip to Mars would take five hours instead of 2½ years, according to scientists."

Seems crackpot to me. But what do I know? ;-)



FROM: http://news.scotsman.com/scitech.cfm?id=16902006


Welcome to Mars express: only a three hour trip


IAN JOHNSTON SCIENCE CORRESPONDENT

AN EXTRAORDINARY "hyperspace" engine that could make interstellar space travel a reality by flying into other dimensions is being investigated by the United States government.

The hypothetical device, which has been outlined in principle but is based on a controversial theory about the fabric of the universe, could potentially allow a spacecraft to travel to Mars in three hours and journey to a star 11 light years away in just 80 days, according to a report in today's New Scientist magazine.

The theoretical engine works by creating an intense magnetic field that, according to ideas first developed by the late scientist Burkhard Heim in the 1950s, would produce a gravitational field and result in thrust for a spacecraft.

Also, if a large enough magnetic-field was created, the craft would slip into a different dimension, where the speed of light is faster, allowing incredible speeds to be reached. Switching off the magnetic field would result in the engine reappearing in our current dimension.

The US air force has expressed an interest in the idea and scientists working for the American Department of Energy - which has a device known as the Z-Machine that could generate the kind of magnetic fields required to drive the engine - say they may carry out a test if the theory withstands further scrutiny.

Professor Jochem Hauser, one of the scientists who put forward the idea, told The Scotsman that if everything went well a working engine could be tested in about five years.

However, Prof Hauser, a physicist at the Applied Sciences University in Salzgitter, Germany, and a former chief of aerodynamics at the European Space Agency, cautioned it was based on a highly controversial theory that would require a significant change in the current understanding of the laws of physics.

"It would be amazing. I have been working on propulsion systems for quite a while and it would be the most amazing thing. The benefits would be almost unlimited," he said.

"But this thing is not around the corner; we first have to prove the basic science is correct and there are quite a few physicists who have a different opinion.

"It's our job to prove we are right and we are working on that."

He said the engine would enable spaceships to travel to different solar systems. "If the theory is correct then this is not science fiction, it is science fact," Prof Hauser said.

"NASA has contacted me and next week I'm going to see someone from the [US] air force to talk about it further, but it is at a very early stage. I think the best-case scenario would be within the next five years [to build a test device] if the technology works."

The US authorities' attention was attracted after Prof Hauser and an Austrian colleague, Walter Droscher, wrote a paper called "Guidelines for a space propulsion device based on Heim's quantum theory".

Related topic

* Space science
http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=6

This article: http://news.scotsman.com/scitech.cfm?id=16902006

Last updated: 05-Jan-06 01:16 GMT


Research price for Professor Dr. Jochem Häuser


SALZGITTER - The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) in Washington D.C. is well known for everyone involved in the aerospace industry. Experts from all over the world present their diversified findings in aerospace affairs at AIAA conferences. With more than 30 000 members the AIAA has evidenced to be a convincing organ in international aerospace.

The Institute multiplexes know-how in the range of aeronautics in numerous mixed teams since several decades now. Prof. Dr. Jochem Häuser (Photo) is Senior Member at the AIAA since 1988 and is elected member in the Nuclear and Future Flight Propulsion work group since 2004. The group aims at the development of physical principles with correspondent technologies of future astronautics drives, such as electromagnetic based space shuttles or fusion- and antimatter driving gear. The AIAA Technical Committee for Nuclear and Future Flight Propulsion awarded Häuser the AIAA research price 2004 for his publication "Guidelines for a Space Propulsion Device Based on Heim's Quantum Theory". This has already been officially communicated to Häuser. He will be in Tuscon/Arizona at July 13th in order to receive the honour - a certificate - in the presence of numerous colleagues. "I am very pleased about this high approval of our research work which has been jointly achieved in four years with our fellows from the IGW (Institut für Grenzgebiete der Wissenschaft) of the University Innsbruck" announced Häuser. The former head of the aero- and aerothermodynamics department at the space agency ESA is now busy at the Fachhochschule Braunschweig/Wolfenbüttel. He is Professor for high-performance arithmetic (computer simulation) at the Faculty "Karl-Scharfenberg" at the University location Salzgitter. Beyond that the scientist is engaged with a new research project dealing with physical fundamentals of non chemical astronautics drive. That venture is promoted by the task force innovative projects (AGIP) and the Ministry for Science and Culture in Lower Saxony.





30 March 2005

Prof. Jochem Hauser

Mr. Walter Droescher

University of Applied Sciences

Institut für Grenzgebiete der Wissenschaft (IGW),

Karl-Scharfenbergstr 55

Leopold-Franzens Universität Innsbruck

38229 Salzgitter / GERMANY

Innsbruck, Austria



Dear Authors:

It is my pleasure to inform you that your technical paper entitled "Guidelines for a Space Propulsion Device Based on Heim's Quantum Theory". AIAA Paper 2004-3700, has been named the 2004 AIAA Best Paper by the AIAA Nuclear and Future Flight Technical Committee. AIAA proudly presents Certificates of Merit to recognize such technical and scientific excellence.

You are cordially invited to receive your certificate at the awards luncheon on Wednesday, 13 July 2005, during the AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference at the Tucson Convention Center, Tucson, Arizona. Information about the conference can be found at www.aiaa.org . If you want to attend technical sessions or plenaries, you must register for the conference.

The corresponding author, Prof. Hauser, will receive one extra luncheon ticket if he registers for the conference. If you are not able to attend the conference, your certificate will be mailed to you.

May I request that each of you RSVP your attendance at the luncheon to me by 30 May 2005. Congratulations on this well deserved honor.

Sincerely,



Carol A. Stewart

Honors and Awards Liaison



On Jan 4, 2006, at 7:19 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:


Technique I (not the only way perhaps)

On Jan 4, 2006, at 6:34 PM, d14947 wrote:

Jack you (inadvertently:] point to an important issue.

It was advertent.

....
After all, if we already have precognition, PK and so on, we may also be able to operate the fields (Higgs electroweak?) that would allow us to have a warp drive, right? Then we could join the big kids in the galactic playground.

Lenny Susskind says one cannot manipulate the electroweak Higgs field over large volumes - it is too stiff at 10^40 Joules per cc. He is correct. However he means the Higgs intensity. I manipulate the Goldstone Phase. Of course, the two may be connected nonlinearly. However, there is more than one Higgs field. The electroweak Higgs field give the masses of the elementary leptons & quarks, but it's the Planck Scale Higgs field's 2 Goldstone phases that gives gravity.

In the simple case of n = 2 with only one Goldstone phase, toy model for simplicity.

Higgs Field = |Higgs Field|e^i(Goldstone Vacuum Phase)

For metric engineering we have

Higgs Field + Control Field

The important cross term is

2|Higgs Field||Control Field|cos[(Goldstone Vacuum Phase - Control Phase)

where |Higgs Field| STAYS CONSTANT as Lenny says.

&/\zpf ~ 2|Higgs Field||Control Field|cos[(Goldstone Vacuum Phase - Control Phase)

Goldstone Vacuum Phase - Control Phase = MODULATED VACUUM PHASE = Chi

BECAUSE the equilibrium Higgs field is very small, i.e. dark energy density ~ 0.73 critical density for flat space universe

(0.73)(8piG/c^4)(Critical Energy Density) = = (Quantum of Area Flux)^-1[|Higgs Field|^2 - 1]

Where Higgs Field is normalized to a pure number.

+ &/\zpf = (Quantum of Area Flux)^-1[|Higgs Field + Control Field|^2 - 1]

&/\zpf = (Quantum of Area Flux)^-1[2|Higgs Field||Control Field|cos(Chi) + |Control Field|^2 ]

where Higgs Field||Control Field| >> |Control Field|^2

i.e. |Control Field|/|Higgs Field| << 1

TINY CONTROL SIGNAL is AMPLIFIED!

Beyond Reductionism

On Jan 4, 2006, at 6:30 PM, Gary S. Bekkum wrote:
Dan has been big on Laughlin for a while.

If so, Dan should not downgrade physics!

Laughlin (Stanford) wrote:

"I have no idea whether the properties of the universe as we know it are fundamental or emergent,"

But I do have the idea! That's the whole point here!

Somewhat over simplified

e = 1 + Lp"d(Goldstone Vacuum Phase)" = LINE TETRAD = 1 + B

ds^2 = e(Flat)e = (1 + B)(Flat)(1 + B) is Einstein's 1915 NONLINEAR theory of gravity.

Note the B^2 nonlinearity

When the PLANCK COSMIC LANDSCAPE vacuum manifold is S2 rather than the above S1, then

B is not closed.

B = CURVED LINE 1-FORM

dB =/= 0 is the CURVED AREA 2-FORM

d^2B = 0 is the CURVED VOLUME 3-FORM

it is locally zero, but nonlocally non-zero in the DeRham Integral from the Higgs Field Goldstone Phase Singularities AKA topological defects.

This is the generalized NONLOCAL Bohm-Aharonov Effect (B-A).

Ordinary EM B-A is "Flux without flux" i.e. "Area without area" i.e. A is 1-form & B = dA is 2-form, but dA = 0 where the electrons are on the closed loop, nevertheless the dA =/= 0 far away inside the coil shifts the positions of the electrons on the screen. This is a string defect topology where the superconducting ground state manifold is S1.

For geometrodynamics we UP THE ANTE A NOTCH to S2

This gives QUANTIZED AREAS & VOLUMES WITHOUT VOLUMES

i.e. Hawking-Bekenstein entropy of black holes + 't Hooft-Susskind World Holography


"but I believe the mere possibility of the latter must give string theorists pause for it would imply that more than one set of microscopic equations is consistent with experiment—so that we are blind to the microscopic equations until better experi ments are designed—and also that the true nature of these equations is irrelevant to our world. So the challenge to conventional thinking about the universe posed by these small-science discoveries is actually troubling and very deep."

On Jan 4, 2006, at 2:07 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

The electroweak-Higgs field density is 10^40 joules/cc ~ 6 10^58 ev/cc

The electron mass is ~ 5x10^5 ev

(2x10^-18cm)^3 ~ 10^-53cm^3

Therefore, the electro-weak coherence length in the sense of the local nonlinear Landau-Ginzburg equation is ~ 2x10^-18cm

i.e. the point defect S2 core for leptons and quarks is a sphere ~ 2x10^-18 cm.

This means that the electro-weak Higgs field drops from its constant
value to zero inside each lepton and quark in a tiny sphere of ~
2x10^-18 cm.


On Jan 4, 2006, at 8:58 AM,

Correction of sign

/\zpf = (Quantum of Area)^-1(|Higgs Field|^2 - 1)

because a topological defect is where

|Higgs Field| -> 0

Goldstone Phases undefined (phase singularity)

In order that the defect be STABLE the zero point pressure must be POSITIVE, i.e.

/\zpf < 0

This is a kind of WIMP, i.e. a self-sustaining GLOB of dark matter.

The 10^-33 cm Planck-scale vacuum manifold G/H ~ S2 fiber also means that the non-bounding closed spacelike 2D surfaces in ordinary 3 + 1 space-time contain all the geometrodynamical degrees of freedom of the interior that contains the point defect phase singularity (Quantized World Hologram).

The t-Hooft-Susskind CONJECTURE is PROVED and Einstein's GR emerges from it.

On Jan 3, 2006, at 7:18 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:


On Jan 3, 2006, at 5:50 PM, Gary S. Bekkum wrote:

FYI

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4524132.stm

"Cern's chief theorist Professor John Ellis even thinks finding the Higgs could shed light on another great mystery in physics: dark energy.

Dark discovery

In 1998, two teams studying supernovae showed that this dark energy is accelerating the expansion of the Universe. Subsequent work revealed that dark energy may make up about 70% of the Universe, but the best theories could not explain it.

According to John Ellis, however, the Higgs field is the perfect candidate for the source of dark energy."

Yes, that is how it is in my theory where the nonrandom coherent vacuum Higgs fields (more than one) are sources and sinks of random zero point energy density ~ /\zpf (in geometrodynamic units of curvature i.e. 1/Area).

My ANSATZ is that only the locally "wood" random ZPF bends space time because the non random condensate Higgs field is the "marble" geometrodynamic field that is being bent!

/\zpf = (Quantum of Area)^-1[1 - |Higgs Field|^2]

Where the "Higgs field" is normalized to be a pure number.

/\zpf > 0 is repulsive virtual "dark energy" with positive zero point energy density, assuming w = - 1.

/\zpf < 0 is attractive virtual "dark matter" with negative zero point energy density, assuming w = - 1.

In the Newtonian static limit of general relativity Einstein's exotic vacuum field equation

Guv + /\zpfguv = 0

reduces to the Poisson equation for Vzpf the gravity potential energy per unit test mass m directly induced by zero point energy density ~ /\zpf.

Laplacian Vzpf = c^2/\zpf

Note, for a spherically symmetric uniform zero point energy density 3D harmonic oscillator potential

Vzpf = -(1/2)c^2/\zpfr^2

for test particle mass m

Fzpf/m = - dVzpf/dr = +c^2/\zpfr

This is a radial universal attractive confinement force for /\zpf < 0.
It is repulsive for /\zpf > 0

Laplacian of Vzpf = -c^2d^2V/dr^2 = -c^2/\zpf

Where the sign convention is that a positive source term is an attractive field.

If the Higgs field has n real components Hi, then

|Higgs Field|^2 = Sum of Hi^2, i = 1 to n

The number of Goldstone phases that defines the vacuum manifold "landscape" G(unordered)/H(ordered) as the unit sphere S^n-1 for fixed |Higgs Field| magnitude with n - 1 Goldstone phases.

n = 2 has 1 Goldstone phase

n = 3 has 2 Goldstone phases

n = 4 has 3 Goldstone phases ...

Note when n = 1, then we have S^0 i.e. +1 and -1 with discrete Goldstone phases 0 and pi.

The smooth curved space-time tetrad field in local frame invariant form is a Cartan 1-form B ~ d(Goldstone Phase)

d = exterior derivative

Lp^2 = hG/c^3

for n = 2 with only one Goldstone phase theta

B = Lpd(theta)

dB = Lpd^2(theta) = 0 locally

However, for a closed loop surrounding the string vortex defect where Higgs --> 0 and Goldstone phase is undefined

Line integral of B around the closed (non-bounding cycle) loop = Lp integer

integer = winding number

because first homotopy group ~ integers

It's AS IF "Stokes theorem" there is a "flux" "dB" through the loop.

This is the Bohm-Aharonov effect of "flux without flux" like Wheeler's "mass without mass" and "charge without charge"

Next n = 3 with Goldstone phases theta, phi

B/Lp = [(dtheta)(phi) - (theta)(dphi)]

note the - sign. If it were + what I want will not work.

dB/Lp = 2(dtheta)/\(dphi) =/= 0

d^2B = 0

This gives trivially for

A = dB/Lp^2 = Geometrodynamics Area Flux Density

1. Bekenstein-Hawking S ~ Area/Lp^2

2. 't-Hooft/Susskind hologram

i.e. Volume without volume since, for a non-bounding 2-cycle surrounding at least one "monopole" point defect, the non-trivial second homotopy

Closed Surface Integral of A ~ Lp^2(integer)

integer = sphere wrapping number i.e. 2D winding number from non- trivial 2nd homotopy group for stable defects.

Then use the singular AS IF Gauss theorem i.e.

dA is locally zero but not globally zero.

dA is the "Volume without volume" 3-form.


"The Higgs mechanism fills all of space with a field. Unlike the gravitational field, which is strong around the Sun and the centre of the galaxy, the Higgs field would have essentially the same value everywhere," he explains.

'It would give you dark energy, in the sense that dark energy is energy density in empty space a long way away from any matter.'

There's just a small problem with the idea, says John Ellis: it gives 120 orders of magnitude too much dark energy.

If we find the Higgs, it would corroborate this whole theory that there's this Higgs field sitting throughout the Universe providing dark energy. Then we can get on to the next question which is why it has the value it does."

Advanced Space Weapons Physics Principles Lecture 1

Technique I (not the only way perhaps)

On Jan 4, 2006, at 6:34 PM, d14947 wrote:

Jack you (inadvertently:] point to an important issue.

It was advertent.

....
After all, if we already have precognition, PK and so on, we may also be able to operate the fields (Higgs electroweak?) that would allow us to have a warp drive, right? Then we could join the big kids in the galactic playground.

Lenny Susskind says one cannot manipulate the electroweak Higgs field over large volumes - it is too stiff at 10^40 Joules per cc. He is correct. However he means the Higgs intensity. I manipulate the Goldstone Phase. Of course, the two may be connected nonlinearly. However, there is more than one Higgs field. The electroweak Higgs field give the masses of the elementary leptons & quarks, but it's the Planck Scale Higgs field's 2 Goldstone phases that gives gravity.

In the simple case of n = 2 with only one Goldstone phase, toy model for simplicity.

Higgs Field = |Higgs Field|e^i(Goldstone Vacuum Phase)

For metric engineering we have

Higgs Field + Control Field

The important cross term is

2|Higgs Field||Control Field|cos[(Goldstone Vacuum Phase - Control Phase)

where |Higgs Field| STAYS CONSTANT as Lenny says.

&/\zpf ~ 2|Higgs Field||Control Field|cos[(Goldstone Vacuum Phase - Control Phase)

Goldstone Vacuum Phase - Control Phase = MODULATED VACUUM PHASE = Chi

BECAUSE the equilibrium Higgs field (/\zpf ) is very small, i.e. dark energy density ~ 0.73 critical density for flat space universe

(0.73)(8piG/c^4)(Critical Energy Density) = (/\zpf) = (Quantum of Area Flux)^-1[|Higgs Field|^2 - 1]

Where Higgs Field is normalized to a pure number.

(/\zpf) + &/\zpf = (Quantum of Area Flux)^-1[|Higgs Field + Control Field|^2 - 1]

&/\zpf = (Quantum of Area Flux)^-1[2|Higgs Field||Control Field|cos(Chi) + |Control Field|^2 ]

where Higgs Field||Control Field| >> |Control Field|^2

i.e. |Control Field|/|Higgs Field| << 1

TINY CONTROL SIGNAL is AMPLIFIED!


On Jan 4, 2006, at 4:12 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:


On Jan 4, 2006, at 3:30 PM, rkiehn2352@aol.com wrote:



-----Original Message-----
From: Jack Sarfatti
To: ROBERT BECKER
Sent: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 20:15:17 -0800
Subject: Hal Puthoff's "Matrix" paper examined

JACK
BE CAREFUL
The curvature tetrad field as an invariant Cartan 1-form is

RMK SAYS:
in my experience
USUALLY TETRADS ARE MATRICES OF FUNCTIONS, (0-FORMS),

By tetrad as used in GR is meant eu^a

guv = eu^anabev^b

ds^2 = guvdx^udx^v

The 4 tetrad 1-forms are then

e^a = eu^adx^u

So you probably call these e^a "co-frames"?


CO-FRAMES ARE MATRICES OF 1-FORMS,
CURVATURES ARE MATRICES OF 2-FORMS,
TORSIONS ARE VECTOR ARRAYS OF 2-FORMS.
CURRENTS ARE VECTOR ARRAYS OF 3-FORMS.


The integral of dA over closed surfaces surrounding point defects in the Higgs field is quantized as integers x (Planck Area).

THE HIGGS FIELD ACCORDING T0 ATIYAH AND MASON AND WOODHOUSE
IS AN EXACT DIFFERENTIAL, AND THEREFORE IT IS HARD FOR ME
TO ASSOCIATED THE HIGGS WITH A CLOSED 2-FORM.

I never said that dA is the Higgs field.

In my model, there are 3 real Higgs fields with 2 independent Goldstone phases theta & phi

I define

B/Lp ~ (dtheta)(phi) - (theta)(dphi)

Therefore

dA/Lp^2 = dB/Lp = 2(dtheta)/\(dphi)


Note that d^2A = 0 but we define a NONLOCAL Bohm-Aharonov "flux without flux" as

BOHM AHARONOV IS due to a non exact but
CLOSED 1-FORM, NOT A 2-FORM

I know. That would be like "Area without area." I have generalized the idea up one step to a nonexact closed 2-form.

In geometrodynamics, the generalized B-A effect gives the quantized world hologram of "Volume without volume".

That is B is a geometrodynamics "line form".

dB is a geometrodynamics "area form"

d^2B = 0 would be the volume form, but it is locally zero. So I get QUANTIZED nonlocal "volume without volume"

i.e. integral of the geometrodynamic AREA FORM dA over closed non-bounding surface surrounding a point defect in the Higgs vacuum order parameter is Lp^2 Integer.

It is AS IF there were a volume 3-form d^2B - it's locally zero but nonlocally not zero - it's the ghostly volume integral of "zero" d^2B that I DEFINE as equal to the surface integral of dB in a "singular" extension of the Gauss theorem.

This is VOLUME WITHOUT VOLUME = World Hologram

Let d = exterior derivative on p-forms p -> p +1

& = boundary operator on p-coforms p -> p -1

Then in obvious Dirac notation where the "bra-ket" is a DeRham integral

(p|&p+)> = (dp|p+1)

OK I DEFINE

|&'p+1) to be a closed p coform that is not a boundary of a p+1 coform.

That is &|&'p+1) = 0

A stargate portal has this property where p = 2 because the p + 1 space is multiply connected with "wormholes".

BY DEFINITION

(p|&'p+1) = (d'p|p+1) ~ Integer

When the p-homotopy group is non-trivial

(dp| is locally zero

but

(d'p| is a GHOSTLY nonlocal "flux without flux" p+1 form that does not vanish in the DeRham integral sense.

This also explains why gravity energy is nonlocal and why the Yilmaz theory is wrong.

In ordinary vacuum the total gravity energy density is locally zero, but that does not prevent a non-zero Poynting flux of gravity wave energy flow through a closed non bounding surface surrounding the source of the gravity waves.