Hal just replied (another e-mail program) that eq. 39 of his Foundations
of Physics paper has the metric he alludes to below.
I do not have that paper ready at hand, but some immediate remarks are
obvious.

OK just in
In a message dated 8/6/03 12:28:25 PM, writes:

It’s online right? What’s the URL?

It's on our website www.earthtech.org

Also attached here as a pdf file.

Proceeding below without looking at Hal's eq. 39 - will look at it later
to compare.

First Einstein's theory in the non-rotating SSS charged vacuum metric.
The only difference is that

(1 - rs/r) is replaced by (1 - rs/r + (rq/r)^2)

In the usual phenomenological theory

rs = 2G*m/c^2

rq^2 = G*e^2/c^4

because e^2 and G*M^2 have the same dimensions.

Note that's spacetime stiffness factor G*/c^4 multiplying e^2.

In the current theory G* G(Newton) at the micro-scale L* =
Lp^2/3(c/Ho)^1/3 ~ 1 fermi where Ho is the cosmological Hubble
parameter and Lp^2 is the quantum gravity exchange rate between IT
geometrodynamics and BIT in the holographic universe.

In Newtonian terms the effective potential is

-G*m^2/r + e^2/r

To balance the attractive gravity against the self charge repulsion
requires the Blackett equation (actually observed in astronomy e.g.
Sirag and also Wesson papers)

G*m^2 = e^2

In my new exotic vacuum theory the source geon "rest mass" is induced by
zero point energy "dark matter core" according to the formula

m = e^2|/\zpf|^1/2

Therefore

G*e^4|/\zpf| = e^2

G* = (|/\zpf|e^2)^-1

Note again a characteristic non-perturbative BCS superconducting
"singular limit" (Sir Michael Berry) non-analytic dependence of the zero
point energy induced Sakharov emergent gravity on the vanishing the
electromagnetic coupling and the dark matter exotic vacuum core.

In Einstein's theory, then

The effective image size lscattering of the spatially-extended electron
Bohm hidden variable (Wheeler's IT) in the micro-quantum Heisenberg
scattering microscope where

r ~ h/p

p ~ momentum transfer in the scattering imaging process

It is obvious intuitively (check algebra later)

rs ~ 2G*m/c^2 = 2|/\zpf|^-1/2

rq^2 ~ |/\zpf|^-1

a more precise analysis later will have the dimensionless self-energy
factor in eq. (1.8) of

http://qedcorp.com/APS/Vigier4.pdf

Therefore in Einstein's theory what we have is

lscattering = [1 - 2(|/\zpf|^-1/2p/h) + (|/\zpf|^-1/2p/h)^2]^1/2(e/mc^2)

where e/mc^2 = |/\zpf|^-1/2 ~ 1 fermi

z = |/\zpf|^-1/2p/h

This toy model event horizon polynomial is

1 - 2z + z^2 = 0

z = (2 +-[4 - 4]^1/2)/2 = 1

Puthoff has not escaped the problem since his model gives

lscattering = e^(2z + z^2)/2(e^2/mc)^2 --- infinity as p --- infinity!

There is the issue of the relation between r(isotropic) and r(curvature.)

I think Ibison showed

r(curvature) = r(isotropic)K(e(isotropic)^1/2

That must be looked at more closely, but it will not change the basic
result since the exponential factor will always be there.

On Tuesday, August 5, 2003, at 07:20 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:


On Tuesday, August 5, 2003, at 12:14 PM, wrote:


In a message dated 8/5/03 12:15:35 PM, writes:


Puthoff's theory without an event horizon predicts the electron should
grow larger as the imaging probe scale gets smaller. The opposite is
observed.

Ho hum. Nonsense as usual. The PV approach to the Reissner-Nordstrom
type solution for charged particles says no such thing.

Hal Puthoff

Maybe so. Where is your proof? Show us the math. What is your PV metric
explicitly with charge? You have no rotation as yet? Is that true? Where
is your paper with the metric - not just your old paper with the action
with the EM field. What is the metric form you use?

Will you be in Paris for Vigier IV?
RE-EDIT DELETE