Pin It

 IT’S ONLY THE FAR FIELDS THAT WE SEE WITH THAT DEPEND ON BOTH RETARDED AND ADVANCED POTENTIALS. THE NEAR FIELDS THAT WE FEEL WITH (PARANORMAL?) DEPEND ON SPACELIKE INFLUENCES - CLASSICALLY NO QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT HERE YET APART FROM ER = EPR LURKING IN THE SHADOWS OF THE MIND SAYS SUSSKIND. ;-)

EINSTEIN’S FIELD EQUATION SPLITS INTO FAR FIELD WAVE SEEING METRIC SOLUTION OF HYPERBOLIC PDE + NEAR FIELD FEELING METRIC SOLUTION OF ELLIPTICAL PDE.

THE HYPERBOLIC ON MASS SHELL AND ELLIPTICAL OFF MASS SHELL METRICS ARE COMPLEMENTARY IN LENNY SUSSKIND’S SENSE. ELLIPTICAL FEELY METRICS HAVE NO EVENT HORIZONS. ONLY THE SEEING HYPERBOLIC METRICS HAVE EVENT HORIZONS.

Bob Oout has FAR FIELD HYPERBOLIC PDE SEEING METRIC WITH EVENT HORIZONS

Alice Oin has NEAR FIELD ELLIPTICAL PDE FEELING METRIC WITHOUT EVENT HORIZONS

“In the case of superluminal motion, the metric possesses a black hole-like event horizon behind the bubble and a white hole-like event horizon in front of it (Finazzi et al. 2009). These event horizons arise because timelike observers cannot exit the superluminal ship in the direction ahead of it and cannot enter it from behind. In both cases, the timelike observers would have to move superluminally when outside of the ship.”[1]

Alcubierre’s toy model metric in terms of Bob’s Oout static LNIF observers including the Dwarp region. This metric breaks down in Din because of Lenny Susskind’s “black hole complementarity/firewall” argument. That is, Alice’s interior Din metric field in the LIF rest frame of the Dwarp metamaterial UAV fuselage is complementary to Bob’s Oout metric. Oout sees a firewall black hole event horizon at the nose of the UAV on the right side of Alexey Bobrick’s Fig 1 below, and a white hole event horizon at the tail on the left side of the figure.  Alice Oin who is on a free-float time like geodesic of the metric field generated inside the asymmetric Dwarp sees nothing unusual no event horizons, no problem navigating the UAV.

[1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2102.06824.pdf Bobrick & Martire see their Fig 1 to understand my text.

Leonard Susskind[4] proposed a radical resolution to this problem by claiming that the information is both reflected at the event horizon and passes through the event horizon and cannot escape, with the catch being no observer can confirm both stories simultaneously. According to an external observer, the infinite time dilation at the horizon itself makes it appear as if it takes an infinite amount of time to reach the horizon. He also postulated a stretched horizon, which is a membrane hovering about a Planck length outside the event horizon and which is both physical and hot. According to the external observer, infalling information heats up the stretched horizon, which then reradiates it as Hawking radiation, with the entire evolution being unitary. However, according to an infalling observer, nothing special happens at the event horizon itself, and both the observer and the information will hit the singularity. This isn't to say there are two copies of the information lying about — one at or just outside the horizon, and the other inside the black hole — as that would violate the no cloning theorem. Instead, an observer can only detect the information at the horizon itself, or inside, but never both simultaneously. Complementarity is a feature of the quantum mechanics of noncommuting observables, and Susskind proposed that both stories are complementary in the quantum sense.

An infalling observer will see the point of entry of the information as being localized on the event horizon, while an external observer will notice the information being spread out uniformly over the entire stretched horizon before being re-radiated. To an infalling observer, information and entropy pass through the horizon with nothing strange happening. To an external observer, the information and entropy is absorbed into the stretched horizon which acts like a dissipative fluid with entropy, viscosity and electrical conductivity. See the membrane paradigm for more details. The stretched horizon is conducting with surface charges which rapidly spread out over the horizon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_complementarity

On Mar 18, 2021, at 3:45 PM, Jack Sarfatti <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.> wrote:

Here it is from John Archibald Wheeler. By “ inertia" is meant spacetime geometry, more specifically the rest mass independent (EEP) timelike geodesics on which Local Inertial Frames LIFs move with curvature as geodesic deviation. Neither Mach or Einstein ever thought distant matter could change binding energies of many-particle systems as Jim Woodward claims

The figure is a 2D slice of a 3D warp field rotated about the x-axis.

 Above is the Cauchy Problem example below of closed manifold Dwarp with interior Din.

Note that Dwarp’s inner 2D spacelike surface has no 1D boundary, but is the boundary of the 3D Dwarp.

[ THE BOUNDARY OF A BOUNDARY IS ZERO.

dd = 0  d =exterior derivative with dual & = boundary operator

EM in LIFs

 F = dA

 dF = 0 (no magnetic monopoles + Faraday’s law)

 * = Hodge dual corresponds to constituitive equations like electric polarization P and magnetization M in matter.

 d*F = j* (inside matter, Ampere and Gauss’s laws)

 dj*= 0 local conservation of current density

 EM in LNIFs with proper tensor acceleration

 Replace d by D = d + LC

LC = Levi Civita connection 1-form from local gauging Poincare group adding zero torsion constraint.

 D(LC) = space time geodesic deviation Riemann-Christoffel gravity warp field curvature  2-Form.

 D^2(LC) = 0 is the Bianchi identity

 D*(LC) = KT*

K = 8piGS/c^4

S = Sarfatti-Wanser scalar field.

 T* = source stress energy 2-form

 D(ST*) = (dS)T* + SD*T = 0  is conservation of stress-energy current densities ]

 We “SEE” with on-mass-shell/light cone far field transverse polarized EM/Gravity Waves.

 We “FEEL” with off-mass shell/light cone near fields with all 2S + 1 polarizations, S = 1 EM, S = 2 Gravity.

 Warp Drive is TOUCHY-FEELY NEAR FIELD NOT FAR FIELD.

OOUT SEES BUT OIN FEELS.

 IT’S ONLY THE FAR FIELDS THAT WE SEE WITH THAT DEPEND ON BOTH RETARDED AND ADVANCED POTENTIALS. THE NEAR FIELDS THAT WE FEEL WITH (PARANORMAL?) DEPEND ON SPACELIKE INFLUENCES - CLASSICALLY NO QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT HERE YET APART FROM ER = EPR LURKING IN THE SHADOWS OF THE MIND SAYS SUSSKIND. ;-)

Bob Oout has FAR FIELD HYPERBOLIC PDE SEEING METRIC WITH EVENT HORIZONS

Alice Oin has NEAR FIELD ELLIPTICAL PDE FEELING METRIC WITHOUT EVENT HORIZONS