More on NASA Space-Probe Pioneer 10/11 Anomaly Data

From: Jack Sarfatti (sarfatti_at_pacbell.net)
Date: 10/17/04 

Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 00:45:25 GMT

On Oct 16, 2004, at 4:53 PM, Tony Smith wrote:

Jack, when you say
"... the spherically symmetric exotic vacuum halo ZPF field
concentric with the center of mass of the Sun ... is analogous
to the dark matter halo concentric with the allegedly super
massive black hole at the center of our galaxy ..."
are you saying that
the Pioneer anomaly is due to a Dark Matter Halo around the sun
and
that the Dark Energy component of /\ is not directly involved ?

Good question: No. We have to be very careful on how we use the terms
"dark energy" and "dark matter". Both are forms of "exotic vacuum".
Whether or not the zero point pressures of the exotic vacuum are
positive or negative and whether or not they give attractive gravity or
repulsive antigravity depends on several environmental factors: the
local intensity of the Higgs Ocean and, in the static Newtonian
approximation at least, the power law spatial distribution of the /\zpf
field. It is not as simple as I first thought in 2002. It's a bit more
subtle. I did not realize that until I worked on Ken Shoulders
laboratory "cold fusion" EVOs. The key is my table:

Ordinary vacuum has /\zpf = 0 zero ZPF pressure

Dark energy exotic vacuum has /\zpf > 0 negative ZPF pressure

Dark matter exotic vacuum has /\zpf < 0 positive ZPF pressure

If /\zpf > 0 and /\zpf ~ r^-|n| we have anti-gravity repulsion.

If /\zpf > 0 and /\zpf ~ r^+|n| we have gravity attraction

If /\zpf < 0 and /\zpf ~ r^-|n| we have gravity attraction

If /\zpf < 0 and /\zpf ~ r^+|n| we have anti-gravity repulsion

/\zpf = (Mc/h)^2[(h/Mc)^3|Higgs Ocean|^2 - 1]

h/Mc = a = short-wave cutoff of the effective ODLRO macro-quantum vacuum
local field theory.

In the case of the Pioneer 10/11 anomalies we have

V(t,r) ~ [c^2/LpR(t)]r = c^2/\zpfr^2

 From the spherically symmetric exotic vacuum halo ZPF field concentric
with the center of mass of the Sun. This is analogous to the dark matter
halo concentric with the allegedly super massive black hole at the
center of our galaxy. These are all WMAP type primordial exotic vacuum
landscape attractors from the Big Bang.

/\zpf(t,r) ~ 1/(LpR(t)r) when R(t) >> 1 and r/Lp >> 1

with /\zpf > 0, i.e. the positive zero point dark energy density with
negative pressure actually gives a constant attractive retarding
acceleration ~ c^2/LpR(t) when it is inhomogeneously distributed as 1/r
because its potential energy then increases linearly with r. Note, this
is not a harmonic oscillator potential like you get for a uniform /\zpf
field distribution. We do not have enough information yet to decide if
the Galactic Halo is dark energy with negative pressure or dark matter
with positive pressure. It could be either! We do not have enough
observations yet as we do for the Solar Exotic Vacuum Halo from Pioneer
10/11. All we can say is that ALL Halo effects on all scales from the
Galaxy to the Sun to Ken Shoulders mesoscopic "cold fusion" EVO bottles
of exotic vacua made on his lab bench with microwave klystron tubes come
from exotic vacuum regions where the total zpf stress-energy density
tensor tuv(ZPF) does not vanish.

The would your solar system picture be something like
a thin shell of Dark Matter at about 100 AU,
so that
the Pioneers would not feel them while inside the shell
but
as soon as the Pioneers passed through the shell the
Dark Matter shell mass would look as though it were
a point mass at the center of the sun ?

NO! I computed the /\zpf field distribution

/\zpf = c^2/(LpR(t)r) ~ 1/r i.e. r^-1

That gives an effective Newtonian gravity potential field per unit test
mass

V(r) ~ +c^2r/LpR(t) ~ r i.e. r^+1

Note

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

But /\zpf is NOT uniform in the Solar case according to the Pioneer data!

This is simple empirical curve fitting.

If so, then what is your reasoning for the Dark Matter being
concentrated in a thin shell at 100 AU ?

It's not a thin shell. You did not look at my actual equations carefully
enough. It's a sphere of zero point energy density extending out beyond
the Sun falling off as 1/r in this static first Newtonian approximation
that is good enough for the actual data.

On Oct 16, 2004, at 2:18 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

On Oct 16, 2004, at 11:54 AM, Tony Smith wrote:

Jack, OK I will for the sake of trying to grok your big picture
ignore the 4 pi stuff, and I will try to focus on the physical
orgin of the c^2 factor. You say
"... The c^2 factor comes from replacing the on mass shell G(mass density)
source by the virtual exotic vacuum source c^2/\zpf. It's one of my [Jack's]
"Feynman rules of thumb" I [Jack] have developed since 2002. ...".

Is the physical motivation based on E = m c^2 applied
to interpretation of the Dark Energy/Matter cosmological
"constant" /\ as a mass m instead of an energy E ?

The formal basic argument is given in Chapter 1 of John Pea***'s
"Cosmological Physics" p. 26.

The physical idea is very simple. The equivalence principle requires
that ALL forms of energy density and pressure, both real and virtual,
bend space-time. That is fundamentally why the c^2. It is simply another
facet of the cosmological constant paradox. You cannot simply hand wave
zero point energy away by say a normal ordering argument as one appears
to be able to do in globally flat quantum field theory.

The classical vacuum equation

Ruv = 0

must be replaced by

Guv + /\zpfguv = 0

Guv = Ruv - (1/2)Rguv

The weak field SLOW SPEED static limit of

Guv + /\zpfguv = 0

is simply

Laplacian of the exotic vacuum gravity potential per unit test particle
mass ~ c^2/\zpf

Both sides of this equation have dimensions (1/time)^2.

I am not worrying about factors of pi here.

The ordinary vacuum, of course, corresponds to /\zpf = 0.

The Question is: What is /\zpf under what conditions and WHY? That's
where the Higgs Ocean comes in to save the day.

The choppy random residual total zero point stress-energy density tensor is

tuv(ZPF) ~ (c^4/G)/\zpfguv

Note that

mpc^2/Lp ~ Muc^2/LpR(t) ~ c^4/G = String Tension = Macro Quantum
Coherent Phase Rigidity of the Higgs Ocean

Where in Carlos's terms

c^2/Lp = MAX acceleration at Big Bang singularity 13.7 billion years ago

c^2/LpR(t) = current stretched out cosmologically redshifted remnant of
that same MAX acceleration at

t = t' - f(h/kBoltzmannTcbr(now)) is one convenient arbitrary measure
(choice of temporal gauge) of global cosmic time in the FRW metric. t =
0 means NOW. t' = 0 is the Big Bang when Tcbr = mpc^2/kBoltzmann.

Now it is not at all clear from Carlo's picture whether mpc^2/Lp was an
acceleration or a deceleration? It should appear as a constant in the
deceleration parameter for the FRW equations of motion for R(t).
Observation of Pioneer suggest it is a deceleration. My model, of
course, gives the same c^2/LpR(t), but using a very different physical
picture in which the Sun has a concentric dark energy halo with exotic
vacuum potential energy per unit test mass

V(t,r) ~ [c^2/LpR(t)]r = c^2/\zpfr^2

 From the spherically symmetric exotic vacuum halo ZPF field concentric
with the center of mass of the Sun. This is analogous to the dark matter
halo concentric with the allegedly super massive black hole at the
center of our galaxy. These are all WMAP type primordial exotic vacuum
landscape attractors from the Big Bang.

/\zpf(t,r) ~ 1/(LpR(t)r) when R(t) >> 1 and r/Lp >> 1

where r is the distance from field point to center of Sun under the
static approximation of Newton's potential theory.

You also say:
"... Rest masses of particles ... require
the smooth non-random Higgs Ocean ...
which soaks up the choppy random troublesome zero point energy ...".

Does that mean that a region in which ordinary matter is dominant,
such as the sun and our solar system,
is a region in which the mass-giving action of the Higgs mechanism
"soaks up" the Dark Energy zero point degrees of freedom that
are dominant in low-ordinary mass regions of our universe (which
are roughly the intergalactic voids that occupy most of the volume
of our universe) ?

No. I do not really understand your question. Basically on mass shell
rest mass BCS energy gaps

~ |Higgs Ocean| as in standard model.

It's like the effective mass of a photon inside a superconductor giving
the Meissner effect excluding magnetic flux from the bulk except for
quantized flux stringy vortex defects in the Type II SC.

If so, then could you say that in the Dark Energy void regions
there are extra degrees of freedom that give rise to expansion
of our universe,
and
that those degrees of freedom are suppressed by the action
of the Higgs mass-giving in regions (like the sun) in which
ordinary matter is dominant ?

No, this is excess vague verbal baggage. No need to say that. Keep vague
ordinary words to a minimum. Use math notation to the max to express
ideas more precisely.

Ordinary vacuum has /\zpf = 0 zero ZPF pressure

Dark energy exotic vacuum has /\zpf > 0 negative ZPF pressure

Dark matter exotic vacuum has /\zpf < 0 positive ZPF pressure

If /\zpf > 0 and /\zpf ~ r^-|n| we have anti-gravity repulsion.

If /\zpf > 0 and /\zpf ~ r^+|n| we have gravity attraction

If /\zpf < 0 and /\zpf ~ r^-|n| we have gravity attraction

If /\zpf < 0 and /\zpf ~ r^+|n| we have anti-gravity repulsion

/\zpf = (Mc/h)^2[(h/Mc)^3|Higgs Ocean|^2 - 1]

h/Mc = a = short-wave cutoff of the effective ODLRO macro-quantum vacuum
local field theory.

M is a regulator mass.

If so, then that is somewhat similar to my model based on Segal's work,
in which those "extra degrees of freedom" are 5 of the 15 conformal
generators (4 special conformal and 1 dilation), with the
other 10 (antideSitter or Poincare, etc) being manifest in
matter-dominated regions such as where we live.

No, you are mixing apples with oranges.

So far my model to explain Pioneer anomaly only needs Einstein's
conventional 1915 theory, i.e. locally gauge only 4-parameter
translation group. These other gauge fields may be there, but not in
this phenomenon.

If you look closely at the difference between the metrics in
those two regions, you see that the full conformal Dark Energy
region gives an "extra acceleration" that acts as a
"quadratic in time term" that has been considered as an
explanation of the Pioneer effect by John D. Anderson,
Philip A. Laing, Eunice L. Lau, Anthony S. Liu, Michael Martin Nieto,
and Slava G. Turyshev in their paper at
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/0104064

I will also note that Carlos says that Nottale gets similar
results by also using two metrics, one of which has a
dilation-type factor.

You know Feynman seldom read other people's papers. He preferred to
invent it for himself in real time Socratic dialogue when possible. That
is what I am doing here. However, I will look at the papers if I can
prevent myself from going to sleep. :-)

It is interesting that your model using the c^2 factor seems
to give a similar result, and it seems to me that there might
be some deep connections here among the various concepts
used to get similar results.

As I say my model is simple visualizable Metric Engineering Physics 101
- you can easily picture it with battle-tested ideas. It may be wrong,
but that is a virtue in theoretical physics.

Tony

PS - Morse and Feshbach are big, green, and expensive,
but one of my Ga Tech professors (Hal Gersch, unfortunately
now deceased) told us (mostly then impoverished students)
that even if it cost a big chunk out of a small paycheck,
it would be a good investment as it contains (and explains,
sometimes with little 3-dim stereograms) more useful hard-core
physics-type math than anything else, so some of us bought
the books and as far as I know everybody who bought the
books is happy that they did so.

That's why I bought them.