**Jan 3, 2021**

**If you reject Einstein’s general relativity, I consider you to be not a serious theoretical physicist.**

**It’s clear to me that your understanding of Newton’s third law is superficial.**

**You do not seem to know about Noether’s theorem?**

**Newton’s third law is that total linear momentum of an isolated system is a constant of the motion if the total dynamical action is space-translation invariant.**

**You cannot apply Newton’s gravity theory to the Bondi mechanism because in Newton’s picture TEST particles move through RIGID space in a “force”field created by a SOURCE mass. That picture breaks down in Bondi’s case.**

**The Bondi mechanism is a primitive warp drive. The masses do not move through space like in Newton’s picture. The two source masses warp the space and time they are in and like in the Alcubierre case they each remain on their local zero G Force timelike geodesics that they self-consistently mutually create.**

**The “runaway solution” is a mirage because the masses are not moving through space at all in the Bondi mechanism.**

**Just as the fabric of space can move faster than light in the de Sitter /\ > 0 cosmological solution, so too in this case.**

**The restrictions on no FTL only applies to TEST PARTICLES remaining inside their local light cones in the classical limit. Similarly, in the Bondi gedankenexperiment.**

**Bondi case has to be solved with Einstein’s field equations because the two masses are sources and the emergent metric is non-trivial and needs to be solved with the algorithms developed by Kip Thorne’s group. This has never been done yet as far as I know.**

**But the main point is that this problem**

**Has been solved with elementary Einstein physics. No need for the kind of excess baggage you propose. Masses remain positive. Only a single metric is required as in Einstein 1916.**

**The anti-gravity arises from the dissipative inelastic photon-electron/ion phase shifts between the input EM field’s Tuv and the output Guv. The low power comes from resonances in the meta-material fuselage susceptibility response function. It’s basically that simple - conceptually.**

Jan 2, 2021

**There is no evidence for a double metric that has any relevance to metric engineering of Tic Tac UFOS.**

**The basic physics there is elementary mainstream no Rube Goldberg excess baggage like you suggest is needed to solve the problem.**

**You cannot apply alleged cosmological models (large scale) down at the nanometer scale relevant to metric engineering physics.**

**Jack: What you say is not true. There is no violation of action-reaction in the Bondi mechanism where negative masses universally repel and positive masses universally attract. That behavior is not in violation of Einstein’s field equations. The negative mass -M and the positive mass +m are considered as Tuv active sources not as passive test particles. You have failed to make this distinction leading to a false conclusion. There is nothing wrong with runaway solutions in general relativity. The accelerating universe /\ > 0 cosmological model is a runaway solution. The two sources -M and m move along zero G-Force timelike geodesics that they have mutually created and the metric is not space-translation invariant therefore their total linear momentum considered as a closed system need not be conserved because of Noether’s theorem connecting continuous symmetries to conservation laws, so there is no contradiction with Newton’s third law when properly understood. The Bondi mechanism is a primitive Alcubierre warp drive.**

**Actually no one has yet calculated the Bondi mechanism correctly. It requires the algorithms developed by Kip Thorne for colliding black holes et-al. The simple Newtonian “force” picture is not adequate.**

What you don’t seem to understand is that there is no need at all for your Janus model in either cosmology or Tic Tac Tech.

Dear Colleague,

I saw that you had formulated a very negative opinion concerning our work and our Janus model. Do not hesitate to address these criticisms to me, I will answer you. It is not a question of believing in a model or not believing. The right question is: "is it mathematically and geometrically correctly structured? »

The answer is positive. But this model is not part of general relativity because it is managed by two coupled field equations, each producing its own metric (with which one builds its Ricci tensor). Enstein's equation is one of the two. These equations satisfy Bianchi's identities. It is therefore a model with a single mayfold M4, with two metrics. Everything is "clean".

The interest is that it provides a lot of things that fit with many observations.

If you find serious flaws in this model, please write an article and publish it, anywhere. Same thing for a cosmologist of your knowledge who would have the same negative opinion on the Janus model. Theories are made to be criticized in broad daylight.

I know that it may seem very strange to see a Frenchman and a Belgian woman producing this. There are so many works that are not serious! Right now I have to give my referee report on an article like this. Instead of answering negatively, with a simple sentence, I will send the author a detailed report, showing him where it's not going.

About our work, if you have that opinion, you should put it in writing. Same thing if a fellow cosmologist reacts with a shrug. You have to make things clear.

The Janus model is quite complex and disconcerting. There are two antimatter. One that we know of, with a positive mass, is another, T-symmetric. This is because this time we manage T-symmetry, which inverts energy and mass.

Look at the article by Nathalie Debergh. The arguments invoked to reject negative energy states are based on an ad hoc hypothesis, concerning the time reversal operator. It is arbitrarily chosen to be anti-unitary so that these states do not appear. The answer is therefore introduced in the question :

- These negative energy states do not appear because I have made sure that it is so.

But if one chooses a unitary operator, then these states exist.

**Well done, Jack!**