On Oct 9, 2005, at 8:28 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:



Begin forwarded message:




On Oct 9, 2005, at 7:28 PM, John B wrote:



"Aren't we all in some sort of birdcage here? and being fed chickenfeed?
That is , much knowledge is being hidden here."



No it's not. I have exposed it, but the Birds are not able to understand
it - Bird Brains! ;-)



"I interpret Hal's work as basically a weak field ( but useful)
description with GR being a complete, though mysterious description."



GR is un-mysterious to all mainstream physicists in the field. I, and
others as far back as 1960's, have shown that GR is simply a gauge
theory in exactly the same sense that EM theory is - only the group is
different. Nothing mysterious there.

Locally gauge U(1) to get Maxwell's EM field.

Locally gauge T4 to get Einstein's 1915 GR

Locally gauge T4xO(1,3) to get Gennady Shipov's torsion field theory.

A is the EM vector potential compensating field 1-form from localizing
the phase of U(1).

B is the curvature tetrad field 1-form from localizing the 4
displacements of T4 to Diff(4), where in addition

B = (hG/c^3)^1/2'd'(Phase of Higgs Field)

'd' indicates Phase Singularities

where on multiply-connected manifolds with topological obstructions
giving all the physics via "Flux without flux"

d'd' =/= 0 in deRham integrals over non-bounding cycles '&' where &'&' =/= 0

compared to

d^2 = 0 on bounding cycles where &^2 = 0 in Stokes theorem

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

From SU(2)weak

e^iTatheta^a is the SU(2) phase factor

{Ta} is Lie matrix algebra of SU(2) weak

Phase of Higgs Field = Trace{Tatheta^a} use the fundamental 2x2 rep.

Hence the Higgs field that gives intrinsic rest mass of quarks and
leptons also gives Einstein's gravity metric field as, the local frame
invariant

g = (1 + B)(Minkowksi)(1 + B)

g = guvdx^udx^v

as demanded by the Equivalence Principle

Diff(4) covariant derivative is

D = d + W/\

where the torsion field 2-form is

T = De = (d + W/\)(1 + B) = 0

defines W in terms of B.

The curvature 2-form is

R = DW = dW + W/\W

Einstein's vacuum field equations are

R = DW

DR = 0

D*R = *J

D*J = 0

In complete analogy to Maxwell's EM where

F = dA

dF = 0

d*F = *J

d*J = 0

Adding Einstein's cosmological constant of dark energy density /\zpf

D*R + /\zpf/\(1 + B)/\(1 + B) = *J

d/\zpf = 0

To get /\zpf a variable local field we need to add Gennady Shipov's
torsion field connection S

e' = e + S = 1 + B + S

T' = dS + W/\S + S/\(1 + B + S) =/= 0 when S =/= 0

T' = (hG/c^3)d'd'(

D' = d + W/\ + S/\

R' = D'(W + S) = (d + W/\ + S/\)(W + S)

The extended field equations are obviously

D'R' = 0

D'*R' = *J'

D'*J' = 0

But now the Bianchi identity is

D'R'= (d + W/\ + S/\)(d + W/\ + S/\)(W + S) = 0

Therefore, obviously,

(d + W/\)(d + W/\)W =/= 0

when S =/= 0

This translates to the local equation

Guv + (Effective Area)^-1cos(Vacuum Phase - Control Phase)guv = 0

as the fundamental equation for metric engineering of warp and wormhole.


"I can understand why some might prefer the Puthoff approach, because it
suggests possible EM technology to modify weak gravity, however, one can
probably not use it to make strong curvatures, such as black holes,
.....which is probably a good thing. Your work is more compatible with GR
but does it suggest EM technology that can create gravity modifcations?"


Of course it does and in a lot more detail than anything Hal & Co have
suggested.


"let us propose pudding recipes that can be tasted!I bet you these
theories will converge on the same recipe."



No sign of that at all. Hal needs huge fields to get very little. The
saucers obviously do not fly that way. The point is to explain the
observations of the saucers. I have done that at least qualitatively and
Hal & Co have not - not even close.

All my stuff with details is on the Discussion Forum of
http://stardrive.org & in Super Cosmos now on http://amazon.com et-al