I am here giving Hal's remarks without detailed comment. I will comment
in detail in Part II after I have had a chance to think about what he
says here.

From Hal Puthoff

In a message dated 8/30/2004 7:19:16 PM Central Daylight Time,
asks several questions, all of which are answered he

[Hal] "I have spotted your source of confusion, so I will carry you
through the arguments in detail in order to clear up the confusion.
They are implicit in http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0408114 , but
apparently it was not transparent.

The source of confusion is this: Since Casimir suggested the model I
evaluate, you may have assumed that we are talking about the (relatively
weak) "Casimir force" model. We are not. Just because Casimir
suggested this model and therefore his name is associated with it, this
does not mean it has anything to do with the "Casimir force." It does
not. The so-called "Casimir force" has to do with partially canceling
vacuum fluctuation fields determined by cavity geometries. This other
Casimir-suggested model I'm dealing with has essentially nothing to do
with cavity characteristics. This should all become transparent as we
walk through the math.

BTW, I acknowledge that you offer a cosmological model for charge
cluster formation, and that is OK, but this is something different. I
am not offering an alternative cosmological model, different from
yours. This is a different kind of model, a quantum physics model. In
the real world of empirical results my quantum physics model may apply,
your vacuum cosmology model may apply, or a combination of both may
apply. I have no argument with your claim that my model may not apply.
I do have an argument with your claim that I have not done my model
correctly because it does not coincide with your take on the problem at
hand.

[Jack now] Not "cosmological model" but "cosmological motivated model" OK.

Ansatz: Wheeler's "geometrodynamics" as a model for elementary particles
as spatially-extended "Mass without mass" purely vacuum "micro-geons"
works because the effective strength of gravity in exotic vacua is large
on short scales. This is a new micro-physics that demands Bohm's pilot
wave - hidden variable interpretation of micro-quantum theory. Quantized
charges are quantized fluxes from single-valuedness of the macro-quantum
LOCAL order parameter out of which Einstein's LOCAL smooth c-number
exotic vacuum field equation

Guv + /\zpfguv = 0

EMERGES. This equation is assumed to be valid down to at least 10^-16 cm.

The FRW homogeneous isotropic cosmological metric of course does not
hold at this scale. Instead something like the purely vacuum Kerr-Newman
metric is expected generalized for /\zpf =/= 0.

[Jack] You seem to be saying, correct me if I am wrong, that the POSITIVE
virtual photon ZPF energy density is

u(virtual photon) ~ hc(h/mc)^-4 ~ 10^-27 10^10 (10-11)-4 ~
(10^-17)(10^44) ~ 10^27 ergs/cc

Yes? No?

[Hal] Yes on equation, though for magnitude I get 1.8 x 10^23 ergs/cc.
(Not a big issue here.)

[Jack now] Where is that 10^3 from? A fine structure constant factor? I
was basically only doing a dimensional analysis in the
back-of-the-envelope estimate above.

[Jack] You next say that the POSITIVE virtual photon pressure is

P(virtual photon) ~ (1/3)u(virtual photon)

[Hal] Yes

[Jack now] OK so one definite point of real disagreement here is that
you say

P(virtual photon) ~ (1/3)u(virtual photon) Puthoff

I say

P(virtual photon) ~ - u(virtual photon) Sarfatti

[Jack] That's a very BIG PRESSURE of course

[Hal] "Yes, indeed. That's why it has the potential to balance the the
large coulomb pressure."

[Jack] You have ZERO VACUUM COHERENCE here in the sense that I mean it.

[Hal] "Definitely. This is the standard, random vacuum EM ZPF quantum
fluctuation field."

[Jack] OK, a typical EVO has an electron shell of radius a ~ 10^-5 -
10^-6 cm
says Ken Shoulders.

[Hal] "Actually, for the witness marks it's 1 - 10 microns, or 10^-5 -
10^-6 m; however, the "bomb" that caused the crater may be more on the
order of the dimensions you give, so that's OK (a minor point here)"

[Jack now] OK that's a factor of 10^2 larger in size, i.e. N ~ 10^16 not
10^12 for the smaller EVOs.

[Jack] Now you and I both agree that

N^1/2(h/mc) ~ a

[Hal] "OK, within an order of magnitude."

[Jack] Let's take a ~ 10^-5 cm, h/mc ~ 10^-11 cm

Therefore N ~ 10^12 electrons close-packed to make a thin spherical
shell 100 nanometers across that is 10^-4 nanometers thick. Right? Yes?
No? Are we on the same page here?

[Hal] "You will note from my paper
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0408114 , 5th equation in Section 3, that
for 10^12 electrons, the diameter d ~ N^1/2 x (h-bar/mc) ~ 400 nm, close
enough."

[Jack] The electrostatic self energy is

U(self-energy) ~ +(Ne)^2/a ~ N^2(1/137)hc/a ~
(10^24)(10^-2)(10^-27)(10^10)(10^5) ~ (10^39)(10-29) ~ 10^10 ergs ~ 1
kilojoule.

[Hal] "OK, I get about half that, close enough."

[Jack now] I am ignoring factors of pi, 1/2 etc. This is only rough.

[Jack] Now what virtual photon modes are allowed outside the spherical
shell,

[Hal] "Essentially all, not constrained outside to first order."

[Jack now] Yes I agree with that.

[Jack] and what modes inside the shell are allowed according to you?

[Hal] "In Casimir's "Model 2" -- see paper -- only those modes whose
frequency Compton frequency cutoff."

[Jack now] OK, I do not understand the physical plausibility for that
assumption. Thinking of a closed cavity of radius a ~ 10-5 cm -- 10^-5
meters (depending on conditions of EVO manufacture), wavelengths larger
than "a" should be cut off by the boundary conditions. I do not
understand why you only will permit wavelengths less than 10^-11 cm
inside a cavity that is from one million to a one hundred million times
larger? Please explain this mystery.

BTW Do you assume f = ck here? Of course that is not really true for
virtual photons. It would be possible to have both

f mc^2/h = Compton low frequency cutoff

and

k pi/a

Since f =/= ck for virtual ZPF photons.

However

f mc^2/h = Compton low frequency cutoff

is not physically obvious to me and needs justification.

In contrast

k pi/a

is physically obvious, i.e. one cannot fit wavelengths into the cavity
larger than roughly the diameter of the cavity.

Hal: "This cutoff model is not according to me, it's according to Casimir."

Jack: "Then maybe this is Casimir's greatest blunder?" ;-)

Note Einstein called his cosmological constant his "greatest blunder" -
in fact it wasn't. I think Hawking's latest flip-flop on information
loss down a black hole at GR 17 really is his greatest blunder. But I
could be wrong.

Hal" Unlike the "Casimir force" model ("Model 1" that you have
considered) where interior modes that satisfy the boundary conditions
are permitted and thus the problem can be treated as a cavity boundary
value problem, Casimir's "Model 2" is one in which cavity modes play no
role. Rather, it is a model in which individual electron-ZPE
interactions on the surface of the sphere is where the action is, and
for the close-packed shell (each surface electron taking up a
Compton-sized disk), interior EM modes are taken to be shielded up to
the Compton cutoff frequency. Realize that this is Casimir's model, not
mine. Don't shoot the messenger! :-)"

[Jack now] Well you explained it a little, but I still do not understand
it. I cannot instantly picture what Casimir was seeing when he suggested
this. It makes no instant sense to me at this moment. It would make some
sense if it was the virtual electron-positron pairs that dominated and
there was some kind of plasma frequency shielding effect over the scale
h/mc? Some kind of virtual plasma shield? But I would need to see the
detailed equations.

[Jack] The radial outward electrostatic force F is therefore

10^10 ergs/10^-5 cm ~ 10^15 dynes

Your EXTRAORDINARY claim is that dP(virtual photon) cancels this radial
outward force of ONE THOUSAND TRILLION DYNES!

[Hal] "Force?"

[Jack now] I simply took the spherically symmetric Coulomb self-energy
for 10^12 electrons in a shell of radius 10^-5 cm and divided by another
10-5 cm to get the radial gradient at the shell.

[Hal] "ZPE force/unit area ~ 10^23 dynes/cm^2 to balance coulomb pressure."

[Jack now] I do not understand what you mean by Coulomb pressure? Do you
compute the electric field E(a) at the shell at radius a, i.e. E(a) ~
(Ne)^2/a^2 and then compute the electrostatic energy density ~
E(a)^2/8pi? Is that what you mean? Even if that is what you mean, I do
not see how anything gets "balanced" here? You have a "classical"
electrostatic energy density and a micro-quantum ZPF virtual photon
density. Both are positive. In what sense do they balance? BTW the
"classical" electrostatic field is also made of virtual photons but they
are in macro-quantum coherent Glauber states (displaced minimum
number-phase uncertainty Gaussian wave packets in the phase space of
each mode oscillator).

What I was doing was looking for the virtual photon pressure
differential between inside and outside the shell and converting that to
a local radial force vector at each point on surface of the shell -
using the spherical symmetry. I.e. multiply the pressure differential
dP(virtual photons across shell) = dF/A by the area A of the shell to
get the net radial force dF of virtual photons at each point on the
surface of the shell.

[Jack] If the only virtual photon modes allowed inside the N-electron
shell
have wavelengths less than a = 10^-5 cm, then ... (snip) .......This is
very small Hal.

[Hal] "Your calculation here (yes, it is small) is based on the cavity
model of the Casimir force (Model 1) in which (to first order) only
long-wavelength cavity modes are cut off. For Casimir's Model 2 (which
is not the more familiar Casimir force cavity model) all modes below the
Compton frequency of individual electron-ZPF interactions are cut off.
With regard to charge clusters this model may be applicable, it may be
inapplicable.... but it IS the model! (And, as I point out in
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0408114 , it provides a reasonable match to
the charge cluster data. Your model may also. May the best model win!)"

[Jack now] Model II seems like pulling a White Rabbit out of the Top
Hat. I see no "there " there. No physical motivation. No plausible idea.

[Jack] Where does your
cutoff at h/mc even enter into the dP = P(Outside) - P(Inside) 0
computation? Please explain this mystery.

[Hal] "Hopefully this is now clear from the above discussion. The
basis for it derives from my Phys. Rev. paper:

H. E. Puthoff, "On the Source of Vacuum Electromagnetic Zero-Point
Energy," Phys. Rev. A 40, 4857 (1989); Errata and Comments, Phys. Rev. A
44, 3382, 3385 (1991)

wherein it is argued that the vacuum fluctuation fields are not
"hard-wired" into the fabric of spacetime, but rather are fields
generated by the quantum fluctuation motion of charged particles
distributed over cosmological space, and are therefore in principle
capable of being shielded from compact regions of space by (as in
Casimir's Model 2) electron-ZPF interactions."

[Jack now] This model is not at all even plausible because the fact is
that the number of charged particles (on mass shell) in the universe is
at most only ~ 4% of all the "stuff" in the universe. 96% of the stuff
of the universe is off-mass-shell virtual stuff that both gravitates and
anti-gravitates depending on the LOCAL intensity of vacuum coherence at
the given scale of phenomena. A kind of Wheeler-Feynman "total absorber"
condition model for the origin of say virtual photons from future
absorptions is no longer tenable. That model must be rejected.

[snip]



[Jack] Therefore, Hal your prediction is TOO WEAK BY 33 POWERS OF
TEN! As I said, the Casimir force is irrelevant to this problem!

[Hal] Indeed, your prediction is too weak, and the Casimir force cavity
model (Casimir Model 1) which you used is irrelevant to this problem.
Only a second model, also proposed by Casimir - - perhaps unfortunately,
given the confusion - - is relevant.

[Jack now] Again I say the second model is in sore need of heuristic
justification. It does not appear even plausible without more
explanation of what Casimir had in mind?

[Jack] OK, if I have done the numbers above WRONG, show us all how to do
it
right according to your idea!

[Hal] Done!

[Jack now] No because you have not clearly explained exactly what you
mean by:

[Hal] "ZPE force/unit area ~ 10^23 dynes/cm^2 to balance coulomb pressure."

[Jack now] This is very obscure.

Hal: "BTW, please forward to the yahoo groups in the header.

Collegially,

Hal"