On Monday, July 7, 2003, at 12:41 AM, Eric Davis wrote:

....

You and I need to sit down and share a bottle of good French wine in
S.F. and have a nice long talk. ...
The National Security Space Architecture via DIA had no interest in
exploring UFOs and UFO propulsion, nor were "they" motivated at all or
in any way, shape or form by UFOs within the context of HFGW technology.

I simply do not believe that because you, Hal and Mark Millis, and a few
others were there and you are all closely associated with UFOs as I am.
Also, it is quite obvious that one of the applications of this sort of
"metric engineering" is UFOs so why try to deny it? Of course, such a
motive would be sub-rosa officially for DIA & Mitre, "plausible
deniability" and all that. Let Mark Millis beat his chest he is not into
UFOs yet he took Joe Firmage's UFO money for NASA BPP easily enough. ;-)

HFGWs don't play a role in UFOs anyway.

That is not obvious. The "HF" part is not that important perhaps, but
the general area of gravity control is germane and one cannot tell ahead
of time what may or may not play a role.

As you know, while at NIDS I proposed in 2001 that UFOs exploit the
principle of traversable wormholes.

I am showing exactly how all that really works.

Hal proposes that they exploit his PV model.

Sheer nonsense as I show in detail. PV will never work. Also it has now
been falsified in the micro-domain, which is progress. PV is dead in the
water. It predicts that lepto-quarks get larger in deep inelastic
scattering when in fact they get smaller effectively "point particles"
as one increases the resolving power of the virtual probe. Remember I
had a big debate with Ibison on this property when their r -- 0 in K =
e^2Gm/c^2r

dR = K^1/2dr

dC = 2piK^1/2dr

dC/dR = 2pi

in PV compared to Einstein's

dR = (1 - 2Gm/c^2r)^-1/2dr

dC = 2pidr

dC/dR = 2pi(1 - 2Gm/c^2r)^1/2

since Hal wrongly insists on using his isotropic r as if it were a
Schwarzschild r.

I further proposed bridging his proposal with mine since both are
based on a general relativity and both invoke general relativistic FTL
by separate means that could be the same, etc....and you already know
what Hal and I have had to say about the viability of his model.

Yes, sheer nonsense IMHO. I mean the theory not your description of the
UFO data in MUFON 2001


Regards,

Eric

Eric W. Davis
President & CEO
Warp Drive Metrics


The title of your company belies what you say above! UFOs have warp
drive. It's all the /\zpf field. It's quite obvious IMHO.

BTW I am beginning to work with the Kerr-Newman metric in
Boyer-Lindquist coordinates now with exotic vacuum zero point energy
density /\zpf sources. The lepto-quarks can be modeled that way since
now exotic vacuum G* G(Newton) at scales ~ 1 fermi.

A back-of-the-envelope Newtonian estimate for dynamical stability of the
lepto-quark, where the zero point energy induced strong short-range
gravity of the exotic vacuum dark matter stabilizing core, just like in
galaxies, starts as

G*m^2/r^2 = e^2/r^2 + 2J^2/mr^3

(G*m/c^2)^2 = G*e^2/c^4 + (2G*/c^4)J^2/mr

Note that J = h/2 for L Lp^2/3(c/Ho)^1/3 ~ 1 fermi

(2G*/c^4)J^2/mr = (1/2)(G*h/c^3)(h/mc)(1/r) = (1/2)Lp*^2(Compton/r)

to be applies to the Kerr-Newman metric where

h/mc = a

G*^1/2e/c^2 = Q

G*m/c^2 = M

in R+- = M +- [M^2 - a^2 - Q^2]^1/2

for the boundaries of the ergo-sphere etc.

BTW where is the PV version for the Kerr-Newman metric? After 20 years
Hal still cannot do a rotating charged vacuum solution in PV!

r ~ h/p

p = momentum transfer of the deep inelastic virtual photon scattering
probe in the Heisenberg microscope scan of the hadron bound state of
lepto-quarks.

Note further

m^2/m*p^2 ~ [Q^2 + a^2]|/\zpf|

m*p = h/cLp*