Topics in New Physics
From: Jack Sarfatti (sarfatti_at_pacbell.net)
Date: 03/20/05
- Next message: Creighton Hogg: "Re: Lab fireball 'may be black hole'"
- Previous message: zzbunker_at_netscape.net: "Re: Lab fireball 'may be black hole'"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 19:23:09 GMT
re: http://qedcorp.com/APS/Cosmology2005.pdf
http://stardrive.org/ now at 2000 visitors/day average (visitors not
hits) including its associated qedcorp.com
New Scientist got it wrong. Nature got it right. More on 13 anomalies below.
Note the rough back-of-the-envelope estimates below for the gravity
potential energy per unit test mass of exotic vacuum (dark
energy/matter) distributions in space need to be done more rigorously
using the multi-pole expansion
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/MultipoleExpansion.html
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/GravitationalMultipoleExpansion.html
Caveat: However, we are here not interested in the field far from the
exotic vacuum source, but the field inside the exotic vacuum source. For
example, the Pioneers are INSIDE the exotic vacuum zero point energy
density field /\zpf(x) in the hedgehog region starting at 20 AU from
Sun. The key problem to keep in mind is dropping a ball through a hole
drilled through a uniform density sphere where the interior potential is
like a 3D spherical harmonic oscillator.
In weak field exotic vacuum problems Newtonian G(mass density) is simply
replaced by c^2/\zpf(r) in static Newtonian gravity potential theory as
a starting approximation.
Also remember a positive energy potential V of form 1/r^n, n > 0 is
repulsive, but one with r^n is attractive because F = -dV/dr. Similarly
a negative energy potential of form 1/r^n is attractive, but one with
r^n is repulsive. Interior potentials are of the form r^n not 1/r^n.
/\zpf can have either sign! it depends on local vacuum condensate order
parameter Higgs intensity.
/\zpf = Lp^-2[1 - Lp^n'|Higgs Field|^2]
Lp^2 = hG/c^3
n' = 2 if world hologram, otherwise n' = 3 , i.e.normalization of local
Higgs field. Do you normalize it on the screen, i.e. DeSitter horizon or
by volume? If Hawking-Bekenstein-t'Hooft-Susskind AdS correct then n' = 2.
On Mar 20, 2005, at 9:46 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Yes, so I had it correct, Nature had it correct, but New Scientist has
it wrong in their latest issue on 13 things that don't make sense.
On Mar 19, 2005, at 10:36 PM, Gary S Bekkum / SSR wrote:
Study of the Pioneer Anomaly: A Problem Set
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/physics/0502123
Analysis of the radio-metric tracking data from the Pioneer 10 and
11 spacecraft at distances between 20--70 astronomical units (AU) from
the Sun has consistently indicated the presence of an anomalous,
small, constant Doppler frequency drift. The drift is a blue-shift,
uniformly changing at the rate $\dot{\nu} \sim (5.99 \pm 0.01) \times
10^{-9}$ Hz/s. The signal also can be interpreted as a constant
acceleration of $a_P = (8.74 \pm 1.33) \times 10^{-8}$ cm/s$^2$
directed towards the Sun. This interpretation has become known as the
Pioneer anomaly.
The nature of this anomaly remains unexplained. That is to say, up
to now no unambiguous explanation of the anomalous signal has been
found. To reach this conclusion a complicated interplay between
experiment and theory is needed to rule out systematics. However, in
the end many of the necessary calculations are amenable to students.
To elucidate this students would have a deeper understanding of the
workings of physics in space systems. We give a problem set devoted to
this cause.
On Mar 19, 2005, at 6:10 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Hi I have been in LA at Paul Harris's Time & Wonder Seminar at Loyola
and need to catch up with e-mails. I literally just rolled in - been
driving all day.
1. Reg where can I see a detailed derivation of your key n(n^2 - 1)
equation from special relativity upon which your key claim rests?
2. Which way does the Pioneer Anomaly point, radially in or out? New
Scientist in 13 things that don't make sense, March 19 - 25 says it's a
repulsion of one nanometer per second per second. So I may have had it
pointing wrong way in my earlier remarks. I need to check the original
papers. Does anyone know for sure? Neither, Carlos nor Tony, nor Creon
caught me on that error, if it is one? In any case I can model it as a
hedgehog defect either way.
If it points out then /\zpf < 0 i.e. positive pressure. If it points in
then /\zpf > 0 negative pressure.
In either case
|/\zpf| = H(t)/cr for r > 20 AU
r = radial distance to Sun
The Poisson eq. Green's function is 1/r, the volume element is r^2dr
Therefore, the integral for the gravity potential energy per unit test
particle of the exotic vacuum is approximately
V(zpf) ~ c^2/\zpfr^2 ~ cHr = cv
v = Hubble velocity of recession from the expansion of space R(t) in
FLRW even at 20AU!
a_g = - dV(zpf)/dr ~ cH ~ 1 nanometer per second per second pointing
either way depending on sign of /\zpf.
Think of dropping a ball through hole drilled through center of the Earth.
3. Note for the Galactic dark matter halo, also an exotic vacuum effect
/\zpf = (v/c)1/r^2
V(zpf) ~ cv
a_g = 0
here v is the constant circulating speed of a star in flat part of the
stellar rotation curve.
4. What about ultra-energetic cosmic rays above the GZK limit = 5x10^19
ev? Some kind of anti-gravity dark energy acceleration?
5. The little black holes - a triumph for string theory at last and for
Hawking radiation?
On Mar 18, 2005, at 1:46 PM, Reg Cahill wrote:
Jack,
Ben Varcoe in the UK is setting up just such a Bose-Einstein experiment.
However the problem is that no one knows how the refractive indices in
the two orthogonal directions changes under rotation in such a system.
In a gas we know they are uncorrelated. But in a transparent solid they
are related, as one would expect. As well the problem with the
Michelson interferometer is that it is a 2nd order device..the fringe
shifts vary as (v/c)^2. Then various effects all compete: geometrical
effects, length contractions, Fresnel drag, correlated refractive index
effects,.. This is why we are setting up a coaxial cable experiment.
The time variations are first order in v/c, and so relativistic effects
are not important, there are no moving parts, and the effect is easily
computer recorded. As well we can record in three orthogonal directions,
which means a component of the absolute motion velocity in the vertical
direction. No one has ever operated a Michelson interferometer in a
vertical plane. The need for this vertical measurement is that we need
to determine the in-flow component associated with the earth's gravity.
This has a speed of 11km/s at the earth's surface. The inflow towards
the sun has already been extracted from the Miller data..that speed is
some 42 km/s.
Reg
Well clearly the logical foundations of special relativity need to be
reexamined in case these data prove plausible & compelling. Suppose
Lorentz was really right that length contractions and time dilations
need to be referred directly to the Eve frame of absolute rest. Is there
a way of seeing that directly in the rest frame of a uniformly moving
nano-structure (uniformly moving relative to Eve frame)? After all, your
alleged effect is a rest frame effect for the interferometer. The only
frame in which your alleged shift would not be seen would be the Eve
frame. Also, is the Eve frame, if it were to exist a spontaneous broken
vacuum symmetry in the rapidity boost piece of O(1,3) just as a finite
domain of a ferromagnet picks a preferred space direction for O(3) in
the ground state even though the O(3) symmetry is still intact in the
dynamical action and the local laws of nature?
On 19/03/2005, at 3:42 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
What about doing experiments with really large indices of refraction n
to see the alleged n(n^2 - 1) effect? Perhaps a gas atomic Bose-Einstein
condensate with n >> 1 in some kind of laser pulse experiment?
On Mar 20, 2005, at 10:56 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
The Higgs vacuum potential Goldstone phase is the source of the B-field
in the Einstein-Cartan tetrad that corresponds to local gauging both T4
and also O(1,3) the latter for Gennady Shipov's torsion S at the gauge
force level not the geometrodynamic level.
That is, as Cartan 1-forms
B = dx^uBu^a(Pa/ih)(Goldstone Phase of Higgs Vacuum Condensate)
{Pa} is Lie algebra of T4, whose local phases are the tetrad components
Bu^a(x)
S = dx^ueu^c(Ac^a^bSab/ih)(Goldstone Phase ... )
{Sab} is Lie algebra of O(1,3) whose local phases are the Ricci rotation
coefficients Ac^a^b(x).
e = I + B = Cartan-Einstein tetrad as a 1-form
e' = I + B + S
But
guv = eMe = (Iu^a + Bu^a )(Minkowski)ab(Iv^b + Bv^b )
is still EEP even with torsion because there in NO Su^a object.
You get the Shipov torsion S* from e' however not from e.
- Next message: Creighton Hogg: "Re: Lab fireball 'may be black hole'"
- Previous message: zzbunker_at_netscape.net: "Re: Lab fireball 'may be black hole'"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
