Note #13

Basic concepts in the gravitational physics of the quantum vacuum not included in the conceptions of NASA BPP or Puthoff & Co in their quest for "metric engineering."

What is the non-exotic or ordinary vacuum at a given scale of coarse-graining?

By "coarse-graining" I mean integrating out all the undetectable degrees of freedom that are outside the spatio-temporal response curves of the detectors. This means throwing away information on both very long and very short wavelengths and frequencies. Note that we are interested in both real and virtual processes. From the signal engineering POV a virtual process simply means a response function R(f,{k}) that has support all over the 4D space of frequency f and wave numbers k without any kind of dispersion constraint f = f({k}) where {k} = (kx,ky,kz). It's the dispersion constraint that defines "real" , i.e. "on-mass-shell" elementary emergent "more is different" excitations of a complex system's "effective field theory" for poles of the single-particle 2 point Green's function Feynman propagator. Poles of the 4 point pair propagator are called "collective modes" in the "many-body problem."

The non-exotic vacuum has no gravitational properties at all! This is the common sense idea of the vacuum. However, what is not understood, by even mainstream physicists today, is that this means that the non-exotic vacuum is optimally macro-quantum coherent with no trace of random micro-quantum energy density at all from any quantum field on the smooth curved space-time of Einstein's theory of gravity. Indeed, this makes the solution of the cosmological constant problem in the large-scale structure of the Universe essentially trivial. What is missing from the conceptualizations of All The King's Men is the role of macro-quantum "more is different" coherence of the physical vacuum. You can think of the physical vacuum in terms of the old Tiza "two fluid model" with the jagged edge of incoherent random micro-quantum zero point vacuum fluctuations as the "normal fluid" on the smooth coherent non-random "superfluid." The total density is fixed by the loop "quantum of area" th

Loop quantum of area = hc(String theory tension)^-1

Note that string theory tension has dimensions Energy/Length

(Quantum of Area)(String Tension) ~ hc

hc has the physical dimensions of (electric charge)^2, which is the same as (Gravity coupling)(mass)^2

The simple two-fluid formula

total density = superfluid density + normal fluid density

is equivalent to

(Quantum of Area)^-3/2 = |Vacuum Coherence|^2 + /\zpf(Quantum of Area)^-1/2

Einstein's local principle of equivalence of gravity as acceleration + Heisenberg's micro-quantum uncertainty principle imply that the equation for the direct gravity or anti-gravity influence of zero point energy density is the exotic vacuum local field equation

Guv + /\zpfguv = 0

In the weak tidal curvature field quasi-Newtonian limit, Einstein's exotic vacuum local field equation is the Poisson equation

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

The RHS source term is a special case of (G*/c^2)(exotic vacuum local energy density)(1 + 3w)

where

w = 0 for ordinary matter in the Hubble flow

w = +1/3 for real photons forming far-field radiation like the CMB, or like starlight.

w = -1 for unbalanced zero point energy density.

This choice gives c^2/\zpf above

-1/3 > w > -1 for a quintessent field

-1 > w for the phantom energy field which allows the Big Rip that can destroy the whole Universe in a Doomsday WMD of Apocalypse Now.

w = -1 puts us right on the cutting edge of the possibility of total annihilation within the power of some mad man like Osama Bin Laden if he had the physics smarts. See Sir Martin Rees's "Our Final Hour" for those gruesome details that Andrei Sakharov worried about 20 + years ago.

The NASA SNAP probe will measure the w of the anti-gravity cosmic dark energy field to better precision. Right now we know from Type 1a supernovae that w = -1 to 2% error.

The Blackett effect is the conjecture that for the real on-mass-shell lepto-quarks:

(electric charge)^2 = (Zero point energy induced strong-short range gravity coupling)(rest mass)^2

However, at the level of Gm^2 gravity as a quantum theory is not renormalizable.

It is renormalizable at the level of a gauge theory. A similar thing happens in the weak force. However, the gauge bosons are not spin 2 gravitons but are spin 1 quanta from locally gauging the translation subgroup of the conformal group. They correspond to quanta of string length that are dual to the quantum of area. This duality gives the world hologram idea of t'Hooft and Susskind that generalizes the Bekenstein-Hawking "black hole thermodynamics." Essentially, the independent geometrodynamic degrees of freedom of a 3D slice of space-time are 2D. Take a chunk of 3D hypersurface of 3D volume V with 2D boundary area A. The number of geometrodynamic degrees of freedom or BITS is not V/(Planck volume) but is A/Quantum of Area).

Consider the Universe we can see with our telescopes. We are looking at the cosmic past light cone. We can see back, in principle, to a distance of the order of c/Ho where Ho is now measured accurately to 2% to correspond to Ho^-1 = 13.7 billion years. This gives c/Ho ~ 10^28 cm.
The area A of the volume V that we can see in the retarded signals from the past is therefore of the order of 10^56 cm^2. The thermodynamic entropy S of the entire Universe in this past light cone 3D chunk (it is not a space-like chunk) is

S = kB (c/H)^2/(Quantum of Area)

Ho is H at this moment in the cosmic expansion that is accelerating from the anti-gravity field of dark energy. This explains the irreversible arrow of time of the Second Law of Thermodynamics in terms of the expansion of the the 3D space of the Universe's past light cone because H is a function of the global cosmic time t that can be parametrized by the cosmic black body radiation temperature T whose correlation function spherical harmonic power spectrum over the celestial sphere (sky) is measured with the NASA WMAP space probe.

So the ordinary non-exotic vacuum obeys

/\zpf = 0

Its vacuum coherence is optimal at

(Quantum of area)|Vacuum Coherence|^2 = 1

sitting in the metastable bottom of the well of the Mexican Hat potential for the covariant Landau-Ginburg field equation for the vacuum coherence field. You find none of these ideas in Hal Puthoff's PV theory, which is a puny "100 lb weakling" construction (compared to this Charles Atlas model :-)) based on the incomplete analogy of the metric with the path of light through an inhomogeneous dielectric. Hal is not even able to solve the problem of the gravity field of a rotating mass and he has no explicit description of zero point energy density in his PV model which has no black hole event horizons and no way to metric engineer with small applied electromagnetic energy densities.

From Modanese's work we know that the ground state coherence of a real superconductor also contributes to the /\zpf term.

Therefore, the basic way to metric engineer without needing huge electromagnetic energy densities is to start with the /\zpf = 0 non-exotic vacuum. Have it overlap with a real superconductor. The induced /\zpf away from zero is then the Josephson effect

/\zpf(induced by the real superconductor) ~ (Quantum of Area)^-1[|Vacuum Coherence||Superconductor Coherence|cosine(relative phase difference between vacuum and superconductor)

Rotating the superconductor will induce such a phase difference as a kind of Berry phase. The rotation of the superconductor requires a Kerr metric with goi =/= 0 and although this is very weak it may have significant phase interferometry effects. This is simply a guess at this time. Hal's PV model so far is not able to describe the equivalent of goi =/= 0, which is the key field in Ray Chiao's "gravity radio" that is a clue.

If one makes a Josephson interferometer enclosing area A, perhaps rotating like in the Sagnac effect

One gets for example cosine(Flux through A/(Quantum of Flux))

This flux need not be only dynamical gauge force flux, but as in Foucault's pendulum described by Sir Michael Berry it can be a topological phase effect from cycling nondynamical anholonomic control parameters, which is what you get with rotation from the non-commutativity of Lorentz boosts pointing in different directions, from frame-drag (Lense-Thirring).

Ray Chiao's "gravity radio" is a Lense-Thirring anholonomic frame drag effect in the far field of both real photons and real gravitons.

We want instead, for metric engineering, to couple virtual photons in macro-quantum states (induction near fields from coils and capacitors) to the near gravity fields (not so much virtual spin 2 gravitons as their spin 1 square root gauge bosons to make a renormalizable quantum gravity i.e. spin 2 virtual gravitons as an EPR triplet pair of spin 1 gauge force bosons of Kleinert's "world crystal lattice" distortion field ~ (Quantum of area)^1/2 string link BITs,

On Apr 4, 2004, at 9:12 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

Note #12

Nick Cook, in 2002, writes that Podkletnov was virtually burned at the stake (p. 103) fired from his job, his paper pulled like what Paul Ginsparg has done on the LANL-Cornell archive to a growing number of dissident physicists, because the Sunday Telegraph used the word "antigravity" in 1996. My, how things have changed since the discovery of Type 1a supernovae, but to look at the March 1, 2004 Aviation Week "To the Stars" one would never know it. There is no mention of anti-gravity dark energy in that article even though the term "antigravity" is now commonplace in Physics Today and in the mainstream journals. The left hand does not know what the right hand is doing.

Nick cites a 1993 paper by Torr and Li that I have not yet evaluated. There is also a paper by Giovanni Modanese that is consistent with my own model though not identical to it. Modanese uses a perturbation theory and shows that the ground state coherence of a real superconductor does contribute to the term /\zpfguv in Einstein's field equation. This is excellent for my theory. However, what Modanese does not have is the key idea that there is off-mass-shell vacuum coherence from a condensate of virtual electron-positron pairs that can beat against that superconducting ground state coherence from a condensate of on-mass-shell electron pairs. The attractive virtual photon exchange between the virtual electron-positron pairs inside the physical vacuum plays the same role as the attractive virtual phonon exchange between the real electrons forming a bound state pair. The emergent collective coherence fields do not remember their micro-dynamics at the lower level and Modanese's

This, in principle, can explain the sort of thing Podkletnov has reported. Whether or not his particular experiment is any good I do not know, but it does not matter since the flying saucer data show that what I am talking about has already been implemented in nuts and bolts technology, though probably not by men who are of women born.

PS. Modanese also does not realize that Einstein's field equations themselves can be mathematically derived from the "More is different" collective emergence of the physical vacuum coherence. My basic equation, in more specialized form, has also been independently derived from microscopic quantum dynamics of interacting bosons by a Russian physicist, G.E. Volovik and published in a book "The Universe in a Helium Droplet." These ideas are completely absent in the official NASA BPP "PV theory" by Hal Puthoff & Co.

See http://www.americanantigravity.com/podkletnov.html I am not, at this time, endorsing any of the claims or papers on this web page.

I am suspicious of Ning Li's "electro-gravitic" claims in http://popularmechanics.com/science/research/1999/10/taming_gravity/print.phtml

but I cannot dispute them because I have not yet carefully studied them. It sounds like a torsion field theory, i.e. influence of quantum spins of matter on the geometrodynamic field. This does happen when one locally gauges the Lorentz group in addition to the translation group. However what is suspicious in Ning Li's claim is that the strength of this spin-gravity coupling is so large.

Nick Cook cites some really strange extraordinary claims that I am extremely skeptical of at the moment of writing this:

"gravity reduction would not diminish with distance, that the effect had no limit. Podkletnov's gravity shield went on extending upward in a 30 cm diameter column - forever." p. 106

Podkletnov claims a 2% effect. Podkletnov does not seem to understand warp drive (Paul Hill's "acceleration field"), is thinking only of flight through air? That is,

"a vehicle equipped with gravity shielding would be able to levitate, buoyed up by the heavier air below" p. 106

This is not good enough. The real thing works in a vacuum and you do not need air. Furthermore, a real anti-gravity field from negative zero point quantum pressure will cause and anomalous blue shift. If this 2% effect is real such a blue shift should be detectable if the proper measurements are made from spectroscopy of excited atoms placed inside the alleged infinite 30 cm cylinder. Of course none of the people working on that thought of this prediction I have just made here for the first time in the context of those allegations reported by Nick Cook.

Podkletnov's claims about reflecting gravity waves (p. 106) appear to be nutty. Ask Kip Thorne at Cal Tech to explain why. Podkletnov's remark
"like UFOs, I have achieved impulse reflection" shows to my mind that he does not understand the weightless warp drive idea shown in George Trimble's "G-Engine" quote that Nick Cook cites, in Paul Hill's "acceleration field", in the Bondi-Terletskii "negative matter propulsion", in the timelike geodesic Alcubierre warp drive model all culminating in the bottled "dark" zero point energy of negative quantum pressure that I am talking about.

"Had Podkletnov tripped over the answer...? If anyone knew, it was Dr. Hal Puthoff ..." p. 107

Surely you must be joking Nick? I beg to differ. ;-)