Text Size


The main result from below in the de Sitter metric approximation for our future universe is for frequency f

f(0) = g00(r)^1/2f(r)

We here-now are at r = 0.

OK, from quantum gravity the thickness of our future horizon 2D surface is the Planck Length.

Its Hawking temperature from the short waves ~ Lp is

T(horizon) ~ hc/LpkB ~ f(horizon)


g00(horizon) ~ (1 - (A^1/2 - Lp)^2/A)

where Lp/A^1/2 << 1

Therefore, the Taylor series expansion to lowest order in small quantities is

g00(horizon) ~ 1 - 1 + 2Lp/A^1/2 + O(Lp^2/A)


g00(horizon) ~ (2Lp/A^1/2)^1/2

Therefore, the redshifted advanced Hawking radiation temperature we see BACK FROM THE FUTURE HORIZON is

T(0) ~ (2Lp/A^1/2)^1/2hc/LpkB = hc/(LpA^1/2)^1/2kB = hc/Lp^1/2A^1/4kB

The black body radiation density ~ T^4 and when you stick in the Stefan-Boltzmann constant the result is

energy density ~ hc/ALp^2

which is the observed number.

So I say that the dark energy accelerating our universe is retrocausal advanced Wheeler-Feynman thermal radiation from our future de Sitter horizon.

I challenge anyone to objectively refute this interpretation. It won't work if you try retarded radiation from our past particle horizon because of Tamara Davis's horizon area calculation fig 5.1 of her PhD.

Also the metric in our past is not de Sitter.

On Jan 6, 2012, at 5:56 PM, JACK SARFATTI wrote:

On Jan 6, 2012, at 4:32 PM, Paul Zielinski wrote:

On 1/6/2012 3:44 PM, jfwoodward@juno.com wrote:

The point is that while phi = c^2 is a horizon condition in Bernstein's calculation, as he himself notes, this interpretation is different in GRT.


How is it different and what significant difference does it make. The problem here is that you are both basically using words and not showing the relevant math.

For example, the purely dark energy de Sitter metric in static LNIF coordinates

g00 = 1 - r^2/A

A = area of the future horizon.

We are at r = 0.

The cosmological horizon is OBSERVER-DEPENDENT.

Horizon means

g00(HORIZON) = 0

OK, ONLY in SSS metrics without any Ai = g0i at all

g00 = 1 - phi/c^2

so for us at r = 0  

g00(A^1/2) = 0

in this dS metric example

phi(r)/c^2 = r^2/A

The classical frequency shift is

ds(0)/g00(0)^1/2 = ds(r)/g00(r)^1/2

f(r)/g00(0) = f(0)/g00(r)^1/2

f(0) = g00(r)^1/2f(r)


f(0) = 0 for radiation reaching us from the horizon at r = A^1/2

Now if the horizon is in our future then that radiation can only be advanced Wheeler-Feynman radiation.

However, this tells us nothing about alleged Jim's Mach Effect.

I doubt that his effect exists.

JFW: In particular, the horizon condition holds everywhen/where in the cosmology because of homogeneity and isotropy making everywhere/when the same as far as the horizon condition interpreted as an energy condition is concerned.

Z: Yes but doesn't this just mean that for any observer, phi = c^2 at that observer's event horizon?

Doesn't that alone satisfy uniformity and isotropy?
Jan 07

Far Field Jerk Radiation Reaction in a Cramer Transaction =/= Near Field Acceleration Inertial Reaction

On Jan 6, 2012, at 4:10 PM, jfwoodward@juno.com wrote:

Well, Jack is certainly right that radiation reaction is a lot subtler than is commonly thought (if thought of at all).  Certainly, induction fields per se (which can be cast in terms of virtual particles in the quantum representation) are very problematical if taken to be the conveyors of real energy and momentum.  The "jerk" approach is a way to sidestep this issue.  For example, if you "jerk" an object from one place to another, you put a propagating "kink" into the gravity field.  

Jim, you seem to be evading my point here. Following Wheeler, the "Jerk" makes the "kink" propagate to infinity as a 1/r FAR FIELD real transverse polarized photons and sure then we can use the Cramer Transaction quantum mechanically generalizing Wheeler-Feynman's classical electrodynamics. But you cannot do that for the NEAR FIELD of VIRTUAL MASSLESS QUANTA in general.

The INERTIAL REACTION FORCE when you step on a scale and Earth pushes up on you and you push back equally on Earth to obey Newton's 3rd Law of action-reaction is PURELY ELECTROMAGNETIC LONGITUDINALLY POLARIZED PHOTONS (Van del Wall molecular force) - trapped close to the surface of the scale and to the callouses on Zielinski's Feet! ;-) Gravity plays no DIRECT role at all here. By that I mean that the force Earth pushes on Zielinski is purely quantum electrical as is the equal and opposite force that Zielinski's Feet pushes on Earth.  

Of course the common MAGNITUDE F^r(molecular EM force) of those two equal but opposite NEAR EM FIELD CONTACT FORCES is determined by the gravitational field Levi-Civita connection {rtt} in static LNIF coordinates for the exterior Schwarzschild solution as a good approximation.

The basic equation is Newton's 2nd Law

D^2x^u(Z)/ds^2 = F^u(Z)/m(Z)

where in this case Zielinski is in a kind of Godel Loop in which he is simultaneously test particle and detector.

Therefore, in order to keep r constant, the kinematical accelerations and velocities vanish in the above covariant 2nd order partial derivatives and we have

c^2{^rtt} ~  c^2rs(Earth)/r^2(1 - rs/r)^1/2 ~ F^r(molecular EM force)/m(Z)

JFW: Unless you can identify some other mass to be part of a quadrupole, the field of the object is a monopole field and as such an induction field, and making the propagating "kink" a radiating field is not obvious because it is not a quadrupole effect.  Allowing da/dt terms (normally excluded in dynamics) in is a way of getting around this issue.

JS: Your sentence here is unintelligible and does not address by simple point that the virtual quanta that make up the near fields of both electromagnetism and gravity are confined close to their Tuv sources and never propagate to distant horizons unlike real massless quanta do. This is a qualitative difference. Therefore, since INERTIAL REACTION FORCES are EM NEAR FIELD VIRTUAL PHOTONS, it follows by pure logic, that you cannot explain inertial reaction forces with a Wheeler-Feynman-Hoyle-Narlikar-Cramer argument. That only explains the RADIATION REACTION not the displacement of the pointer scale under Zielinski's bare feet. Bertlmann stole his socks! ;-)

JFW: But then there is the problem cast in sharp relief by Sciama's calculation:  in a simple vector theory of gravity, if phi = c^2, the gravitomagnetic vector potential contributes to the gravitoelectric field to give a reaction force that depends only on a (that is dv/dt), not da/dtSciama's calculation is legitimate and straight-forward, if for very simple circumstances.

JS: Fiddle sticks. Sciama had a bad day when he came up with that model. It's not even wrong in my opinion for the several different reasons I have given that you have not squarely faced with rational detailed counter examples.

JFW: And by the way, the instantaneity of inertial reaction forces is the motivation for accepting Wheeler-Feynman.  If you can explain everything in local terms, you have no need of action at a distance.

JS: Not true. WF were only trying to explain RADIATION REACTION. As I recall, they never tried to explain Newton's 3rd Law that way. If they did, show us where in their original papers they say that? I'll take a look.  You may be able to use Wheeler-Feynman in the NEAR FIELD for two Casimir plates close to each other, but you certainly cannot explain a near field effect at a plate by a Cramer transaction with the cosmological event horizon of that Casimir plate. That's Astrology Cargo Cult Physics in my opinion.

---------- Original Message ----------
From: JACK SARFATTI <sarfatti@pacbell.net>
To: "jfwoodward@juno.com" <jfwoodward@juno.com>

Subject: Re: Jim's common misconception of informal language about inertial for ces.
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 15:48:04 -0800

As Jim knows I use Wheeler - Feynman in my own theory. He is misusing Wheeler-Feynman here.




Jim is confusing REAL QUANTUM JERK radiation reaction force with VIRTUAL QUANTUM inertial reaction ACCELERATION force as when Zielinski tells Earth to get out of his way when Earth pushes him off Earth's free float highway! ;-)

In the case of Mach's Principle the VIRTUAL GRAVITONS in coherent states of the Earth's near field do not make a Cramer transaction with distant matter. They are trapped localized to their Tuv(source)!

On Jan 6, 2012, at 3:28 PM, jfwoodward@juno.com wrote:

Just catching up.  Jack's 4 is wrong, because the gravitational interaction with cosmic matter is a "action-at-a-distance" a la Wheeler and Feynman process.  So the interaction is with the far future, but appears to be instantaneous in the here and now.  :-)  This is the real reason why the "future hologram" is important.

On Jan 6, 2012, at 2:39 PM, Paul Zielinski wrote:

Of course this assumes a frame of reference linked to your geodesic trajectory. In such a frame the earth is accelerating
in relation to your geodesic, pushing you off of it, and in such a frame you react against the earth. The latter is what I
would call "inertial reaction" in this context.

On 1/6/2012 2:16 PM, Paul Zielinski wrote:
That's what I mean as "inertial reaction force".

I think this is ass-backwards Jack. The earth *acts* on you, and you *react* against the earth.

That's exactly what I wrote Z. Please read more carefully.

I have consistently written that

1) Earth's electrical force pushes you off a timelike geodesic of the Earth's curvature field.

2) Newton's 3rd Law is LOCALLY obeyed in the sense of Tuv^;v(matter) = 0


Tuv^;v(Earth to Z) + Tuv(Z to Earth) = 0

Yes, Z you push back on Earth.

3) However, UNLIKE NEWTONIAN STATICS (which still works IN ITS OWN TERMS) there is an UNBALANCED net electrical force on you that you experience as WEIGHT of (your rest mass)c^2rs(Earth)/r^2(1 - rs(Earth)/r)^1/2.

4) You cannot balance NEAR FIELD "gravity forces from distant matter on Jim's Mach thruster" with some LOCAL inertial reaction force at the thruster, nor can you say that Jim's thruster reacts back on the distant matter.

Because of time delays and the fact that universe expands and accelerates.

Jan 06

Waiting for Woodward ;-)

Posted by: JackSarfatti |
Tagged in: Untagged 


On Jan 5, 2012, at 10:21 PM, R005T3R wrote:

Ontologically speaking, the Nanomorphic SimUjahedin
RetroFlux Field (NSURFF) approach to funky spatial
"para-intrapolative" optic recourses to conceptualize
the many-sheeted, tightly stretched latex simulacrum,
vis a vis, sentient self-modeling, is a lot like
multi-helical spaghetti noodles in virtual nonlocal
scalar-like, antivectored, totally outre' wyrd (sic)
space... don't you think?

Yes. By Jove, I think you've got it.

Has this already been patented by the Germans?
My money's (metaphorically speaking) on the tripartite
merger of the "global, military/industrial complex", the
"entertainment industry", and the cybernetics of the
iconolastic, ontologically minded, physicist-laborers
who are plucking "superluminal volocities attained by
practical propellantless propulsion systems" out of their
(or somebody's) heads!

Indeed, it's

Or has that particular three-way merger already occurred?
I suspect it will be recognizable by a general increase
in __________...?

Obsessive Compulsive?
I was Obsessive Compulsive, once.
They locked me in a rubber room with
Sarfatti, Woodward, and Zielinski.
I died in that rubber room with
Sarfatti, Woodward, and Zielinski.
They buried me in the cold, cold ground.
There were Multidimensional Wormholes
in that cold, cold ground.
Multidimensional Wormholes make me
Obsessive Compulsive.
Obsessive Compulsive?
I was Obsessive Compulsive, once.
They locked me in a rubber room with
Sarfatti, Woodward, and Zielinski.
I died in that rubber room with
Sarfatti, Woodward, and Zielinski.
They buried me in the cold, cold ground.
There were Multidimensional Wormholes
in that cold, cold ground.
Multidimensional Wormholes make me
Obsessive Compulsive.
Obsessive Compulsive?
I was Obsessive Compulsive, once.
They locked me in a rubber room with
Sarfatti, Woodward, and Zielinski.
I died in that rubber room with
Sarfatti, Woodward, and Zielinski.
They buried me in the cold, cold ground.
There were Multidimensional Wormholes
in that cold, cold ground.
Multidimensional Wormholes make me
Obsessive Compulsive... etc., etc. etc...

Book Review -
How the Hippies Saved Physics -
By David Kaiser - NYTimes.com

 What Physics Owes the Counterculture
 Published: June 17, 2011


[...]     In "How the Hippies Saved Physics:
Science, Counterculture, and the Quantum Revival,"
David Kaiser, an associate professor at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, turns to
those wild days in the waning years of the
Vietnam War when anything seemed possible:
communal marriage, living off the land, bringing
down the military with flower power. Why not
faster-than-light communication, in which a
message arrives before it is sent, overthrowing
the tyranny of that pig, Father Time?

That was the obsession of Jack Sarfatti, another
member of the group. Sarfatti was Wolf's colleague
and roommate in San Diego, and in a pivotal moment
in Kaiser's tale they find themselves in the lobby
of the Ritz Hotel in Paris talking to Werner Erhard,
the creepy human potential movement guru, who
decided to invest in their quantum ventures.
Sarfatti was at least as good a salesman as he
was a physicist, wooing wealthy eccentrics from
his den at Caffe Trieste in the North Beach section
of San Francisco.

Other, overlapping efforts like the Consciousness
Theory Group and the Physics/Consciousness Research
Group were part of the scene, and before long
Sarfatti, Wolf and their cohort were conducting
annual physics and consciousness workshops at the
Esalen Institute in Big Sur.

Fritjof Capra, who made his fortune with the
countercultural classic "The Tao of Physics" (1975)
was part of the Fundamental Fysiks Group, as was
Nick Herbert, another dropout from the establishment
who dabbled in superluminal communication and wrote
his own popular book, "Quantum Reality: Beyond the
New Physics" (1985). Gary Zukav, a roommate of
Sarfatti's, cashed in with "The Dancing Wu Li
Masters" (1979). I'd known about the quantum
zeitgeist and read some of the books, but I was
surprised to learn from Kaiser how closely all
these people were entangled in the same web.

Kaiser says his title was inspired by
Thomas Cahill's "How the Irish Saved Civilization,"
and he has a similar aim: to show, with a healthy
dose of irony, how another "unlikely group of
underdogs and castaways kept the torch of
learning aflame." He reminds us that the
pioneers of quantum mechanics -- Werner Heisenberg,
Albert Einstein, Wolfgang Pauli, Niels Bohr,
Erwin Schrodinger -- argued endlessly about the
implications of their equations: particles that
were somehow waves of probability, that hovered
in superposition between two states, that made
quantum jumps without traversing the space in
between. These thinkers were often as engaged
with the philosophy as they were with
the mathematics.

Ultimately the interpretations were only words:
futile attempts to grasp something beyond language
and maybe beyond mind. By the time the hippies were
in school, physics textbooks had all but abandoned
the messiness of meaning. Quantum physics worked.
The message was "Shut up and calculate." I remember
the letdown. I thought for a while that I wanted
to be a physicist. I was glad to read here that
philosophizing about physics has made a comeback
in university classrooms. Without the enthusiasms
of the Fundamental Fysiks Group, Kaiser speculates,
the inquisitive spirit might never have been revived.

More specifically, Kaiser argues that the hippies,
with their noble failures, contributed to a
cutting-edge technology called quantum cryptography.
A member of the collective, John Clauser, conducted
the first experiment that confirmed Bell's theorem,
suggesting that two subatomic particles, once they
have been in contact, will remain subtly entangled
no matter how far they are separated in space.
This "nonlocality," the fysicists felt in their
bones, would allow for instantaneous signaling.
Herbert was devising what appeared to be a
particularly ingenious scheme, and in the course
of debunking it, Kaiser ventures, mainstream
physicists came to appreciate that entanglement
does allow for something else: encrypting messages
so that they are impossible, in theory, to
surreptitiously intercept.


--- On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 21:01:50, Gary G Ford <ggford@shaw.ca> wrote:

} To: Demo Hassan <demohassan@yahoo.com.mx>
} Subject: Re: DR QUANTUM (Re: Retro Temporal Paradox
}          Avoidance Bifurcation Syndrome
}          & Deser's model, Kip Thorne)

Demo, You are a fascinating collector and promulgator of
ideas!  As to inconstancy of "universal constants": the very
both Space and Time may demonstrate really that
"edgy" theoretical physicists may be driven
by the very same lone-lived demons
which once inhabited theologians
and medieval philosophers,
driving them towards
earlier quixotic
quests of the


Certainly, the quote about "Vampyrism" applies to the
emotional and psychic variety of mentallic energy and
creative novelty harvesting, idea thirsty, feeding kind?

As I view the current corner of my piece-wise,
barely connected existences, I find a smile
provocating urge to laugh, to revel,
to enjoy the wishful farce which
presents itself all around me,
as naked apes, especially
the jewish variety,
seek for distant
Stars, and Far

Like garden slugs in deep lush valleys of
lower Nepal, they seek to rise beyond the
living bridges of strangler figs coaxed to use
by ingenuousities above, then fling themselves
upon the apparently impossible, that one day
they might cruise and glide upon the crests,
so climb upon the tops of Mountainous
Ridges and Peaks, Remote and Lofty,
Cold beyond their experiential
Imagining, that on Ridges
of Impossibility, they
May prove Worthy
To Travel FAR

But FOR THAT, I am afraid,
FIRST the Earth must Warm
Much, with Immense Moisture
Raised on High, and Heat, then
Transferred to the edge of the Sky!

FOR THAT, were you thus BORN, Demo Hassan?
Is SUCH your Plan? ... How many incarnations
have you now had since your distant original
slugdom?   And how many more will come?!

That Slugs May Triumphantly Climb Up,
Both Everest and K2, Slide Down,
And Rude Primitive Fictions
Of the OT Biblical Myths
become Re-MADE too -
    by Time-backwards
   Traveling JEWS ? -

And THERE THEY COME! ... Contented SLUGS
raining down with water of a highest  fall,
falling in completed fulfilling Joy
from so dreamingly far high,
upholding their Quest,
as their multiple
Goals ARE
for us all
TO SEE ...
yes, crashing ...
down, willingly so,
to their fulfilled deaths,
that their purpose has been
made, by their Iron Will,
and That THEY,
Most Sublime SKY!

What a Beautiful SCENE this shall become,
Ending the Universal Movie, with all seeing,
Eyes weeping, yet mouths so eager to talk,
faces paralyzed for the moment, frozen
on smiles forced by up-welling Joy,
Of their Goals COMING TRUE!




On 21/12/2011 11:56 PM, Demo Hassan wrote:

 Non Sequitur?

 -=[[NOTE: Quote: [...] "Vampyrism is
  a unique Black Magical condition that
   in and of its very nature requires a
    Posture, which enables a natural and
     effortless exchange of Power from the
      lesser to the Greater. In normal
       communication, this power is evidenced
        by the psychological control exerted
         over others. Through our Black Magic,
          this Power is evidenced by accessing
           what is known as lucid dreaming and
            increasingly gaining mastery over
             that state of Becoming which is
              desirable in its own right." [...]
               'Order Of The Vampyre' - T'.'S'.'
 http://www.google.com/search?q=contemporary+vampirism ]]=-

       "Unfortunately the ability to change the
  course of events is rarely accompanied by the
  knowledge to do so wisely."
       "Decisions on a galactic scale cannot be
  granted the luxury of opinionated debate.
  They must be made instantaneously on the basis
  of a completely dispassionate analysis of all
  relevant data, and solutions must be implemented
  with equal promptness. Either a delay or an
  error in the process can cause markedly
  disproportionate damage as the effects multiply
  logarithmically at successively lower echelons of
  the administrative network."   [...]
       "[T]he only solution is to place Imperial
  sovereignty for purely deductive considerations
  under the control of an extended time-span
  forcasting computer."
     -- Darth Vader - The Secret of Sith,
     1. Mission to the Senate - Page 75
     The Dark Side by Michael A. Aquino (c)1977,1988,
      http://www.xeper.org/maquino/        1999,2002...


 "Project Star Gate": $20 Million Up in Smoke (and Mirrors)
       by Michael A. Aquino, Ph.D.
       Lt. Colonel, Military Intelligence, USAR-Ret.
       The Intelligencer: Journal of U.S. Intelligence Studies
       Volume 11, Number 2 - Winter 2000
       Association of Former Intelligence Officers


    "... Psychological Operations specialists know that
    it is the conscious mind which must be reached for
    opinion or behavior modification, and that it is
    reached reliably and predictably through the normal
    communicative senses. Similarly the mind expresses
    itself through these same senses, and through media
    technology we have developed a multitude of ways to
    amplify and transmit such expressions. Communication
    between minds is no longer the problem; it is the
    content of that communication and the ethics
    underlying it which challenge us, particularly as
    old nation-state, ethnic, cultural, and social
    standards continue to mutate in this final decade
    of the 20th century."
    [] From: "Project Star Gate" by Michael A. Aquino, Ph.D.
        [See: "StarGate.pdf  06-Feb-2009  06:37 22k" -
          At URL: < http://www.xeper.org/maquino/nm/ >]


   "Alone of the Valar do I exist apart from him,
         hence can do so. And so I tell you this: 
 He is not cruel, any more than he is benevolent.
 He is a force of indifference and hazard in this
 universe, and what appears here upon Arda is the
    result of that and no more. That is the truth
   and the curse of this world: that it is bereft
  of purpose. It is merely here, and it continues
  as its patterns, and accident, and the force of
       contesting wills press it. Finally, as all
  energy upon it is drawn inexorably out into the
     cosmos from whence it was fashioned, it will
        grow cold, and go out." --Melkor [Pg 25],
          The Second Scroll - Sauron to Pallando.
      Morlindale: The Song of Illuminate Darkness
                   by Michael A. Aquino ((c)2003)

 See also:
  ARE YOU A FIELD? by M.A.A. [ July 31, 2004 ]


  UFOs: Myths, Conspiracies and Realities
  by John B. Alexander, Ph.D.
  New York: Thomas Dunne Books, 2011
    - reviewed by Michael A. Aquino, Ph.D.
    U.S. Army Space Intelligence Officer 35B3Y (Ret.)
  INTELLIGENCER: Journal of U.S. Intelligence Studies


  -----0rigami Massage-----
 | From: JACK SARFATTI <sarfatti@pacbell.net>
 | To: Adam <qraal01@gmail.com>
 | Cc: MT <mthorn@ix.netcom.com>,
 |     Thorn Alley <thornalley2002@yahoo.co.uk>
 | Subject: Re: Retro Temporal Paradox Avoidance
 |          Bifurcation Syndrome
 |          & Deser's model, Kip Thorne
 | Date: Dec 21, 2011 1:15 PM

   On Dec 21, 2011, at 12:28 PM, Adam wrote:

  Stephen Baxter has Polchinski's Pool-Table
  make an appearance in the authorised sequel
  to H.G.Wells's "The Time Machine", Baxter's
  "The Time Ships". He uses it to explain how
  consistency can be set up with a higher-level
  definition of causality.

   On Dec 21, 2011 1:15 PM, J. Sarfatti wrote:

  I need a precise URL reference.

 -=[[ NOTE: "In Stephen Baxter's The Time Ships,
      a sequel to H. G. Wells's The Time Machine,
      the Time Traveler explains that his
      researches into time travel began when a
      mysterious yet vaguely familiar stranger
      passed him a mineral, the Plattnerite,
      which he used to construct the machine.
      Over the course of his subsequent travels
      which involve the alteration of history,
      he discovers that the stranger was in fact
      his future self. Eventually, with the help
      of humanity's descendants, he restores the
      timeline and travels into the past to pass
      the Plattnerite to his younger self."
      An Imprecise URL of closed timelike curves:
      http://tinyurl.com/SB-TIME-SHIP ]]=-

  -----End 0f 0rigami Massage-----

 --- El Dec 21, 2011 10:22 AM, "David Mathes" escribio:

  -----0rigami Massage-----
 | From: David Mathes <dmath777@yahoo.com>
 | To: MT <mthorn@ix.netcom.com>,
 |     JACK SARFATTI <sarfatti@pacbell.net>
 | Cc: Thorn Alley <thornalley2002@yahoo.co.uk>
 | Subject: Re: Retro Temporal Paradox Avoidance
 |          Bifurcation Syndrome
 |          & Deser's model, Kip Thorne
 | Date: Dec 21, 2011 10:22 AM


 The short answer is that Hawking might reassess
 assumptions in his equations like only positive
 energy and positive mass. Perhaps the approach
 of Dirac would be helpful with negative energy.
 Hawking could expand his horizons with the ADM
 model circa 1960.

 In general, time travel is fraught with problems.
 Navigation would be a real pain. There is no GPS
 across time (or at least it would be limited).

 First, one has to establish a reference frame.
 Local, distant, layers?  One could claim a spot
 but the details are an exercise in navigation
 that probably are best done stepwise instead
 of great leaps.

 -=[[ NOTE: Quote: ("not a problem - use CMB
                    temperature and isotropy
                    relative to Hubble flow.
                    See Tamara Davis's PhD
                    on line." -- J. Sarfatti)
 http://www.physics.uq.edu.au/download/tamarad/astro/index.html ]]=-

 If there is an absolute frame with respect to
 at least the sun, then there is the minor issue
 maintaining the same spot on earth which is
 rotating beneath one's location at 1,000 mph
 and traveling some 67,000 mph orbiting the sun.
 That is an undergraduate problem at Cal Tech
 and other fine institutions.

 Add corrections for the slight changes in
 gravitational pull for earth, moon and sun,
 and perhaps the rest of the solar system as
 well, and we have nice warmup for the grad
 student working on a frame dragging navigation
 system. Perhaps a set of distance reference
 stars might help.

 Furthermore, one might want to have a navigation
 system that has cGh sensors. Even the practioners
 may have difficulty if any of the usual "universal"
 constants vary.

 When should time travel be attempted? Perhaps
 when all the CPT anomalies to the Standard Model
 are resolved - b-meson decay would be a good start.
 Quantum gravity may be a requirement depending on
 how fast (local time) an individual wanted to
 travel thru time.

 In an expansionist universe, time travel may
 require swimming upriver against the river of time.

 There is the issue of traveling using some sort
 of tunneling technique. Modified benign wormholes
 (Thorne et al) is one possibility. A more exotic
 solution might be Meholic's Tri-space theory.
 In general, a time traveler might find it easier
 to step out of this universe to an adjacent one
 and pop back in close to where they want to be.

 In the 22nd or 23rd century NASA could undertake
 time travel. A few essential steps are required:
 establish a signal path to the destination,
 establish a small transit path for non-human
 logistics supply, protect that path, and finally
 allow human transit whether alone or with a vehicle. 

 Small trail blazing units based on nanotechnology
 would establish a navigation signal network.
 Then a MEMs droid or communicative robot would
 follow the signal and prepare for human transit.
 The human vehicle (whether a spacesuit or shuttle)
 would then follow the path to the droid they are
 looking for...

 One has to be careful in time travel. The whole
 universe has to change but the assumption is
 that locally, time moves forward. The barrier
 between forward time in the time bubble and
 retro time may need to be a layered nest to
 reduce the stress tensor possibilities.



  -----End 0f 0rigami Massage-----


  Prof. Hawking most recently said that
 Time Travel was only possible to the
 future, because Time Travel to
 the past is fraught with paradox.
 He used the example of a man who
 builds a time machine that takes him
 back in time 2 minutes before he
 'steps into the time machine.' If he
 subsequently 'prevents' the man that
 is his 'past self' from stepping into
 the time machine, then the man who does
 the time traveling cannot possibly
 exist to perform this action. Paradox.


  This is a Red Herring as shown by
  Kip Thorne, Igor Novikov et-al.


   I don't know, (how could I?); and yet,
 the below text reads like tortured
 wishful thinking in an attempt to
 evade the simultaneously unsatisfying
 and wildly intriguing notion of
 and replacing it with an equally
 troubling contortionist's appeal to
 'closed timelike curves' as long as
 they meet highly specific non-disruptive
 parameters that curve in on themselves.
 Sort of like P.D. Ouspensky's old theory
 of 'Eternal Recurrence' whose ancestor
 was Metempsychosis - kind of like
 Reincarnation, only closed in an eternal
 loop - which ties in a bit with your other
 discussion regarding free will, and/or
 its complete impossibility in its
 current evolutionary, illusory form...
 Anyway, 'closed timelike curves' sounds
 a bit like 'bifurcated timelines' to me.
     Happy Solstice!
  -- eMpTy 2:O3AM 2I|D3C|2OII

 Novikov self-consistency principle

 The Novikov self-consistency principle,
 also known as the Novikov self-consistency
 conjecture, is a principle developed by
 Russian physicist Igor Dmitriyevich Novikov
 in the mid-1980s to solve the problem of
 paradoxes in time travel, which is
 theoretically permitted in certain solutions
 of general relativity (solutions containing
 what are known as closed timelike curves).
 Stated simply, the Novikov consistency
 principle asserts that if an event exists
 that would give rise to a paradox, or to
 any "change" to the past whatsoever, then
 the probability of that event is zero.
 In short, it says that it's impossible
 to create time paradoxes.

 History of the principle
 Physicists have long been aware that there
 are solutions to the theory of general
 relativity which contain closed timelike
 curves, or CTCs--see for example the
 Godel metric. Novikov discussed the
 possibility of CTCs in books written in
 1975 and 1983, offering the opinion that
 only self-consistent trips back in time
 would be permitted. In a 1990 paper by
 Novikov and several others, Cauchy problem
 in spacetimes with closed timelike curves,
 the authors state:

   The only type of causality violation that
   the authors would find unacceptable is
   that embodied in the science-fiction
   concept of going backward in time and
   killing one's younger self ("changing the
   past"). Some years ago one of us
   (Novikov10) briefly considered the
   possibility that CTCs might exist and
   argued that they cannot entail this type
   of causality violation: Events on a CTC
   are already guaranteed to be self-consistent,
   Novikov argued; they influence each other
   around a closed curve in a self-adjusted,
   cyclical, self-consistent way. The other
   authors recently have arrived at the
   same viewpoint.

   We shall embody this viewpoint in a principle
   of self-consistency, which states that the only
   solutions to the laws of physics that can occur
   locally in the real Universe are those which
   are globally self-consistent. This principle
   allows one to build a local solution to the
   equations of physics only if that local solution
   can be extended to a part of a (not necessarily
   unique) global solution, which is well defined
   throughout the nonsingular regions of
   the spacetime.

 Among the coauthors of this 1990 paper were Kip Thorne,
 Mike Morris, and Ulvi Yurtsever, who in 1988 had
 stirred up renewed interest in the subject of time
 travel in general relativity with their paper Wormholes,
 Time Machines, and the Weak Energy Condition, which
 showed that a new general relativity solution known
 as a traversable wormhole could lead to closed timelike
 curves, and unlike previous CTC-containing solutions
 it did not require unrealistic conditions for the
 universe as a whole. After discussions with another
 coauthor of the 1990 paper, John Friedman, they
 convinced themselves that time travel need not lead
 to unresolvable paradoxes, regardless of what type
 of object was sent through the wormhole.

 In response, another physicist named Joseph Polchinski
 sent them a letter in which he argued that one could
 avoid questions of free will by considering a
 potentially paradoxical situation involving a billiard
 ball sent through a wormhole which sends it back in
 time. In this scenario, the ball is fired into a
 wormhole at an angle such that, if it continues along
 that path, it will exit the wormhole in the past at
 just the right angle to collide with its earlier self,
 thereby knocking it off course and preventing it from
 entering the wormhole in the first place.
 Thorne deemed this problem "Polchinski's paradox".

 After considering the problem, two students at
 Caltech (where Thorne taught), Fernando Echeverria
 and Gunnar Klinkhammer, were able to find a solution
 beginning with the original billiard ball trajectory
 proposed by Polchinski which managed to avoid any
 inconsistencies. In this situation, the billiard ball
 emerges from the future at a different angle than
 the one used to generate the paradox, and delivers
 its younger self a glancing blow instead of knocking
 it completely away from the wormhole, a blow which
 changes its trajectory in just the right way so that
 it will travel back in time with the angle required
 to deliver its younger self this glancing blow.
 Echeverria and Klinkhammer actually found that
 there was more than one self-consistent solution,
 with slightly different angles for the glancing
 blow in each case. Later analysis by Thorne and
 Robert Forward showed that for certain initial
 trajectories of the billiard ball, there could
 actually be an infinite number of self-consistent

 Echeverria, Klinkhammer and Thorne published a
 paper discussing these results in 1991; in
 addition, they reported that they had tried to
 see if they could find any initial conditions
 for the billiard ball for which there were no
 self-consistent extensions, but were unable to
 do so. Thus it is plausible that there exist
 self-consistent extensions for every possible
 initial trajectory, although this has not been
 proven. This only applies to initial conditions
 which are outside of the chronology-violating
 region of spacetime, which is bounded by a
 Cauchy horizon. This could mean that the Novikov
 self-consistency principle does not actually
 place any constraints on systems outside of the
 region of spacetime where time travel is
 possible, only inside it. [...] CONT...


 On Dec 20, 2011 12:04 PM, JACK SARFATTI <sarfatti@pacbell.net> wrote:

  -----0rigami Massage-----
 | From: JACK SARFATTI <sarfatti@pacbell.net>
 | To: MT <mthorn@ix.netcom.com>
 | Subject: Re: Retro Temporal Paradox Avoidance
 |          Bifurcation Syndrome & Deser's model, Kip Thorne
 | Date: Dec 20, 2011 12:04 PM

 On Dec 20, 2011, at 1:58 AM, MT wrote:

 On Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:35:47, JACK SARFATTI <sarfatti@pacbell.net> wrote:
 -----0rigami Massage-----
 | Subject: Re: Is Deser's negative bare mass electron
 |          is stable, 100yr starship & Kerr-Newman-de Sitter
 |          metric in Bohm hidden variable model of
 |          extend ed lepto-quarks
 | From: JACK SARFATTI <sarfatti@pacbell.net>
 | Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:35:47 -0800
 | To: "jfwoodward@juno.com" <jfwoodward@juno.com>

 Star Gate
 Making Star Trek Real
 Jack Sarfatti


 Hawking's Objection

 Stephen Hawking has conjectured that time
 travel to the past is not possible because
 quantum gravity effects will destroy the
 wormhole star gate time machine. His friend
 Kip Thorne is not so sure that is the case.
 It's my opinion that the good flying saucer
 evidence shows that Hawking is wrong.
 Indeed, the extraterrestrials may well be
 our future descendants coming back in time
 to make sure they exist. Igor Novikov calls
 this a consistent loop in time.  [...]

 -----End 0f 0rigami Massage-----

 Dr. Jack Sarfatti, Ph.D.
 Dr. James F. Woodward, Ph.D.
 Dr. Stanley Deser, Ph.D.


 The News Forum of the Tau Zero Foundation
 Progress Toward the Dream of Space Drives and Stargates
 by Paul Gilster on May 23, 2011

 by James F. Woodward

      I first wrote about James Woodward's work
 in my 2004 book Centauri Dreams: Imagining and
 Planning Interstellar Exploration, and have
 often been asked since to comment further on
 his research. But it's best to leave that to
 the man himself, and I'm pleased to turn today's
 post over to him. [...]
 [...] Guided by Mach's principle and Luchak's
 Newtonian approximation for gravity -- and a
 simple calculation done by Dennis Sciama in his
 doctoral work for Paul Dirac in the early
 1950s -- it is possible to show that when
 extended massive objects are accelerated, if
 their "internal" energies change during the
 accelerations, fluctuations in their masses
 should occur. That's the purchase on gravity
 and inertia you need. (Ironically, though these
 effects are not obviously present in the field
 equations of GRT or electrodynamics, they do not
 depend on any novel coupling of those fields.


  The above is hard to reconcile with qft's
  point particle model. The only extended
  structure is the dressing cloud of virtual
  particle plasma. I have shown that the
  induced gravity from the virtual particles
  is strong enough to stabilize an extended
  thin shell of (electro-weak-strong) charges
  independent of the qed Casimir force.

 So, no "new physics" is required.) But that
 alone is not enough. You need two more things.
 First, you need experimental results that show
 that this theorizing actually corresponds to
 reality. And second, you need to show how
 "Mach effects" can be used to make the Jupiter
 masses of exotic matter needed for stargates
 and warp drives. This can only be done with a
 theory of matter that includes gravity.
 The Standard Model of serious physics, alas,
 does not include gravity. A model for matter
 that includes gravity was constructed in 1960
 by three physicists of impeccable credentials.
 They are Richard Arnowitt (Texas A and M),
 Stanley Deser (Brandeis), and Charles Misner
 (U. of Maryland). Their "ADM" model can be
 adapted to answer the question: Does some
 hideously large amount of exotic matter lie
 shrouded in the normal matter we deal with
 every day? Were the answer to this question
 "no", you probably wouldn't be reading this.
 Happily, the argument about the nature of
 matter and the ADM model that bears on the
 wormhole problem can be followed with little
 more than high school algebra. And it may be
 that shrouded in everyday stuff all around us,
 including us, is the Jupiter mass of exotic
 matter we want. Should it be possible to expose
 the exotic bare masses of the elementary
 particles that make up normal matter, then
 stargates may lie in our future -- and if in
 our future, perhaps our present and past
 as well. [...]


 See also: Recent Publications by
           Dr. Stanley Deser, Ph.D.

  "Arbitrary Spin Representations in
  deSitter from dS/CFT with Applications
  to dS Supergravity" (with A. Waldron),
  hep-th/0301068, submitted to Nucl. Phys. B.

  "Gravitational Energy in Quadratic-Curvature
  Gravities" (with B. Tekin) hep-th/0205318,
  Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 101101 (2002).

  "Large Gauge Transformations and Non-Abelian
  Finite Temperature Effective Actions"
  (with L. Griguolo and D. Seminara) hep-th/0212140,
  Phys. Rev. D (in press).

  "Some Remarks on Dirac's Contributions
  to General Relativity," gr-qc/0301097,
  to appear in the Proceedings,
  Dirac Centennial, Florida State University, 2002.




 (( MEANWHILE... [Circa: June 2010]... eMpTy ))

  Prof. Hawking most recently said that
 Time Travel was only possible to the
 future, because Time Travel to
 the past is fraught with paradox.
 He used the example of a man who
 builds a time machine that takes him
 back in time 2 minutes before he
 'steps into the time machine.' If he
 subsequently 'prevents' the man that
 is his 'past self' from stepping into
 the time machine, then the man who does
 the time traveling cannot possibly
 exist to perform this action. Paradox.


  This is a Red Herring as shown by
  Kip Thorne, Igor Novikov et-al.

 Therefore, Hawking admits that although
 time travel to the past is impossible,
 time travel to the future is easily done.
 Simply approach the speed of light, and
 as your clocks slow down, relative to the
 outside, the reality outside speeds up.
 Balance is compensated with relativity
 in space-time. To be fair, Prof. Hawking
 did not mention the notion of parallel
 realities and bifurcating timelines.
 The 'Parallel Universe' theory is the only
 theory that allows time travel to the past,
 but the illusion of 'past' time travel
 is compensated for by leaving the timeline
 entirely; so, technically, the past is
 an illusion, merely another parallel
 reality not within the timeline in which
 you started. In other words, the only way
 to travel backwards is to jump onto an
 entirely different timeline which creates
 the illusion of traveling backwards.
 The arrow of time is not violated, and
 you lose track of your original timeline,
 existing thereafter in a parallel, seemingly
 'past' timeline (assuming the reality isn't
 completely divergent!)  At its core, 'time'
 really is illusory. Einstein said it
 didn't really exist, but was a human
 cognitive construct. All we ever really
 know is now. We can only travel in the now,
 creating various illusions along the way.

 [SEE: 'Into The Universe with Stephen Hawking'
   http://dsc.discovery.com/tv/stephen-hawking/ ]

 I guess that wonderful notion of 'us'
 jumping into a time machine to take a
 look at what Ezekiel saw way back when
 and realizing he saw us in our time
 machine, was really less about going
 backwards and more about going SIDEWAYS
 onto a parallel track where a parallel
 Ezekiel existed contemporaneously with
 'us.' Hmmmm...  Quoting Saul Paul Sirag:

 "There's been some speculation that the
 Ezekiel vision was of what we today would
 call a flying saucer. In other words, an
 object of advanced technology.
 It's hard to know one way or another,
 but I've been wondering if it was not
 a time machine of some sort. Recently
 in Physical Review Abstracts (D 15 March
 1974) there was a report [by Frank Tipler]
 of the possibility of time travel by means
 of a rotating cylinder. It would be odd
 if we were to go in such a time machine
 to visit Ezekiel's time and place.
 We could do this, because we know the
 day he saw his vision, since he carefully
 recorded the time (a date equivalent to
 July 5, 592 BCE give or take a day) and
 place. It would be odd if in doing
 this -- to have a peek at Ezekiel's
 vision it turned out that what Ezekiel
 saw was just us in our time machine
 trying to have a peek at his vision."
   -- Saul-Paul Sirag (May 1974)

 So, in a Multiverse, given a near infinite number
 of earths, (and Ezekiels), e.g. Earth Prime,
 Earth^2, Earth^3, Earth^4... all at various
 waveform manifestations with separate timelines,
 we could conceivably convince ourselves of all
 sorts of possibilities as they might apply to the
 illusory nature of time travel. Perhaps we'll
 figure this all out, in time...? AND...

 The curiosity of 'entropy,' light speed, time dilation,
 etc., according to relativity, quite proven by GPS
 satellite's onboard clocks slightly out of phase with
 earth surface clocks, and myriad's of other cosmological,
 quantum mechanical anti-intuitive shenanigans, verified;
 time travel, apparently is limited to future travel
 only... Curiouser and curiouser, however, the speed of
 light is, yea verily, limited to approx. 186,000 miles
 per second in 'SPACE' - lovely inflating invisible space,
 created, it seems, following the inflationary big bang
 dohicky, inflating, by the way, FASTER than the speed of
 light! Is that not interesting?  That space itself may
 expand faster than the speed of light, while the light
 within the superluminal inflation of space maintains
 its photonic speed limit!  Therefore, if one could
 perhaps circumvent 'space,' one could circumvent the
 speed of light?  Definitely not a technology for
 beginner fire apes. Seeya 'round the mountain!
 "When She Comes...
      She'll be Riding 6 White Horses,
      She'll be Riding 6 White Horses,
      She'll be Riding 6 White Horses,
 "When She Comes... "
    Which reminds me of the blood curdling gargoyles
 stationed at the portal to the pylons of the Temple
 of Cool Stuff specifically designed to occupy and
 derange the minds of barely evolved primates in search
 of specificity and shiny things. It gives them
 something to gnash their teeth and shiver their timbers
 over on the way toward enlightenment and non attachment
 to such things as temples, gargoyles, monkeys, horse-
 power, artificial intelligence, hyper-conspiratorial
 gyrations of an anti-critical thinking mode, and other
 amusements of a lucidly dreaming collective.
 Then again... Never mind.

 22|JUNE|2010 CE | 4:08 AM | Earth Prime?

 Eye-Dead: STAR LIGHT FIVE AT 3:33 :       

   Betelgeuse:   600 light-years away
   Bellatrix:    245 light-years away
   Alnitak:      800 light-years away
   Alnilam:      1340 light-years away
   Mintaka:      915 light-years away
   Saiph:        720 light-years away
   Rigel:        770 light-years away




 -----0rigami Massage-----
 Subject: What Do You Know About: Interstellar (2014)?
          [Correction: DARK FLOW (FINAL MESSAGE |
          Re: "Reoxidized Nitrous Oxide used as a
          Gate Dielectric for Charge-Trapping
          Non Volatile Memory")]
 Date: Tuesday, 21 June, 2011 0:54

 What Do You Know About: Interstellar (2014)?

 Interstellar (2014)
    "An exploration of physicist
 Kip Thorne's theories of
 gravity fields, wormholes and
 several hypotheses that
 Albert Einstein was never
 able to prove." [...]
 'Interstellar, Steven Spielberg,
 ORIGINAL TITLE, Interstellar.
 YEAR. 2014.' [...]

 NASA's Gravity Probe B (GP-B) mission
 has confirmed two key predictions
 derived from Albert Einstein's general
 theory of relativity, which the
 spacecraft was designed to test.
 [Note: "The Gravity Probe B gyroscopes
 are the most perfect spheres ever made
 by humans. If these ping pong-sized
 balls of fused quartz and silicon were
 the size of the Earth, the elevation
 of the entire surface would vary by
 no more than 12 feet."]
 The experiment, launched in 2004,
 used four ultra-precise gyroscopes
 to measure the hypothesized geodetic
 effect, the warping of space and time
 around a gravitational body, and
 frame-dragging, the amount a spinning
 object pulls space and time with it as
 it rotates. GP-B determined both
 effects with unprecedented precision
 by pointing at a single star,
 IM Pegasi, while in a polar orbit
 around Earth.

 LIGO - Laser Interferometer
 Gravitational Wave Observatory

 Simulating eXtreme Spacetimes:
 A Caltech-Cornell Project's simulation
 of black holes and other extreme spacetimes:

 Gravitational Wave Astronomy:
 Ripples in the Fabric of Space Time:
 [...] "...The Earth orbiting the Sun is
 just like a paddle spinning and stirring
 up spacetime so that gravitational waves 
 travel out across spacetime." [...]

 Kip Thorne

 Born in Logan Utah in 1940, Kip Thorne
 received his B.S. degree from Caltech in 1962
 and his Ph.D. from Princeton University
 in 1965. After two years of postdoctoral study,
 Thorne returned to Caltech as an Associate
 professor in 1967, was promoted to Professor
 of Theoretical Physics in 1970, became
 The William R. Kenan, Jr., Professor in 1981,
 and The Feynman Professor of Theoretical
 Physics in 1991.

 In June 2009 Thorne resigned his Feyman
 Professorship (becoming the Feynman Professor
 of Theoretical Physics, Emeritus) in order
 to ramp up a new career in writing, movies,
 and continued scientific research. His principal
 current writing project is a textbook on
 classical physics. His principal current movie
 project is Interstellar, for which he
 co-authored the story and is executive producer,
 and Steven Spielberg is the Director.
 [NOTE: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0816692/ ]

 [...] He is a co-founder (with Weiss and Drever) of
 the LIGO (Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave
 Observatory) Project and he chaired the steering
 committee that led LIGO in its earliest years
 (1984-87). In the 1980s, 90s and 2000s he and
 his research group have provided theoretical
 support for LIGO, including identifying
 gravitational wave sources that LIGO should
 target, laying foundations for data analysis
 techniques by which their waves will be sought,
 designing the baffles to control scattered light
 in the LIGO beam tubes, and --- in collaboration
 with Vladimir Braginsky's (Moscow Russia)
 research group --- inventing quantum-nondemolition
 designs for advanced gravity-wave detectors. [...]

 For a short[!] biographical sketch, please click here:


 Approaching Solar System's Edge,
 Voyager Probes Detect A Foamy Sea
 of Magnetic Bubbles
 (A frothy moat, not a shield,
 protects us from cosmic rays)
 "Along with revising their theories about the
 sun's protective casing, scientists may also
 need to revise accepted theories about cosmic
 rays themselves. If the moat affects how many
 get in, there could be more or less of them
 than we thought. This could change our
 understanding of the early Milky Way and how
 stars interact with the rest of the galaxy.
 Understanding cosmic rays will be crucial for
 interplanetary missions, because the low-energy
 radiation can harm astronauts who venture
 outside of Earth's protective magnetic fields."

 -----2nd End 0f 0rigami Massage-----



 See also, STARGATE:


      "The Neurobiology of Narratives" --QUOTE:
   "The impact of narratives on human psychology
   ranges widely from what events we remember
   most easily to our choices about important
   foundational behaviors to include our degree
   of trust in others. Since the brain is the
   proximate cause of our actions, narratives
   have a direct impact on the neurobiological
   processes of both the senders and receivers
   of them. Understanding how narratives inform
   neurobiological processes is critical if we
   are to ascertain what effect narratives have
   on the psychology and neurobiology of human
   choices and behaviors, and can assist in
   everything ranging from exploring how Post-
   Traumatic Stress Disorder is influenced by
   event repetition to better understanding the
   thoughts and feelings of others." :UNQUOTE--


    With atavistic affection, respect and understanding
 for each person's right to their rites, in commemorating
 the ancient rock carvings that catch a sliver of the
 final rays of the dying disk of life, signaling to the
 people to ignite their bonfires, string torches around
 their cave entrances, party hearty to alleviate their
 dismal gloom in the waning days and coming endless night
 of their dying Sun, to observe with wonder the disk's
 descent, halting at a maximum depth, the transgressions
 of the people apparently forgiven, as the Sun gives
 birth to itself, the light of the life regenerated,
 sustaining with gradual vigor the health of flora and
 fauna, all the biosphere, gravitationally anchored to
 the surface of our beloved orb, under the incarnate,
 watchful eye of a new born Sun.  Happy Winter Solstice!
                              -- eMpTy  22 December 2011


  [...]  The weak force is carried by a trinity
  of very heavy particles: the W^+, W^-, and
  Z^o particles. The W^+ particle carries a
  positive electric charge, the W^- particle
  carries a negative electric charge like the
  electron, and the Z^o carries no charge.
  This trinity of particles has the ability to
  change the flavors of quarks; for example,
  they can change a down quark into an up quark.
       Our inventory then includes (1) the four
  forces: gravitation, electromagnetism, the
  strong nuclear force, and the weak nuclear
  force, (2) the quarks that form the mesons and
  baryons, and (3) the leptons: electrons, muons
  and tau particles, along with their neutrinos.
       The four forces involve the graviton, the
  photon, eight gluons, and three particles that
  carry the weak force. That is 13 particles.
       Then there are the leptons: electrons,
  electron neutrinos and their antiparticles,
  the positron and electron antineutrino; the
  muon, which looks in every way just like an
  electron except that it is heavier, its muon
  neutrino, and their two antiparticles; and the
  tau particle, which is just a fat muon,
  together with its neutrino and their
  antiparticles. That is 12 leptons.
       Finally, we have the set of six quarks,
  which come in six flavors and three TV-colors,
  together with an entire set of antiquarks
  having Xerox-colors and opposite electric
  charges. This makes a total of 36 kinds of
  quarks. Thus we have 36 quarks, 12 leptons,
  and 13 particles involved with the four forces.
  Altogether that makes 61 kinds of particles.
  That is the "standard model."
       In addition to these, there is one more
  particle called a Higgs boson, a particle
  expected to be like a quanta (i.e., the chunks
  of energy) postulated to give the W^+, W^-, and
  Z^o particles their heavy masses. To say the
  least, as Chris Quigg put it in Scientific
  American, "By the criterion of simplicity the
  standard model does not seem to represent
  progress over the ancient view of matter as
  made up of earth, air, fire and water,
  interacting through love and strife."
  [...]  Page 82; Chapter 6 - Hunt for the
          Tin Man's Heart; THE PHYSICS OF
          CONSCIOUSNESS, The Quantum Mind
         And The Meaning Of Life (c) 2000
        By Evan Harris Walker [1935-2006]
                       ISBN 0-7382-0436-6

 NOVA | What Are Dreams?


 Researchers Prove A Single Memory Is Processed
 In Three Separate Parts Of The Brain
 (February 1, 2006) -- University of California,
  Irvine researchers have found that a single brief
  memory is actually processed differently in
  separate areas of the brain -- an idea that until
  now scientists have only suspected to be true.
  The finding will influence how researchers examine
  the brain and could have implications for the
  treatment of memory disorders caused by disease
  or injury. [...] full story:


 [ No wonder the Vatican is freaking out! ]

  Such an eerie, almost unseemly irony,
  this latest Pope's Invocation of the
  "The great Galileo" who only as recent
  as the previous Pope's reign received
  a half-hearted apology. Now this Pontif
  wants to beatify his predecessor, while
  both fumbled the horrific 'Short-Eyes'
  clergy scandal. Can that be forgiven?!

  International Symposium on
   Subnuclear Physics:
  Past, Present and Future
 30 October -2 November 2011 | Casina Pio IV

  Perhaps the Vatican should worry less
  about advances in quantum mechanics,
  particle physics and the discoveries
  made therein that the Vatican feels
  possibly threatened by and therefore
  inclined to take preemptive steps to
  spin the data according to their age
  old intermediary methods of constrain
  and control, and instead worry more
  about the Human Sexological Psychology
  of a significant percentage of their
  clergy.  Undoubtedly, anything 'human'
  or divergently 'human' that the Vatican
  encounters which presents a problem to
  their self-anointed preeminence in
  thought control, can so very easily be
  dismissed as 'the work of the devil,'
  instantly precluding any sort of
  reasonable approach to dealing with it
  in a mature and well informed manner.

 Sessuologia - Le istituzioni in Italia


 On Sunday, 18 December, 2011 8:28, "Thorn Alley" wrote:

  "In mathematics and computer science,
   an algorithm is an effective method
    expressed as a finite list of
     well-defined instructions for
      calculating a function."


 "Are Computers Creative?"
   Studio 360 - http://www.studio360.org/2011/dec/16/


     "God does not play dice with the Universe?"
 An article by Jack Sarfatti [ http://stardrive.org ]
           -=[[ NOTE: "ORIGINAL IN ITALIAN
                       THIS IS A GOOGLE
                        TRANSLATION" - JS ]]=-


 The First Artificially Intelligent SELF-AWARE Device?*

    Typically, AI engineers recognize the infinitely
 difficult ready-made example to emulate. Following
 four billion years of life: manifesting, dividing,
 mutating, surviving; developing naturally selected
 mechanisms of avoidance, attraction, aggression,
 nurturing, symbiosis, osmosis, destruction,
 construction, invention, inquiry, and EMOTION...
 At best, Artificial Intelligence has achieved a
 kind of self-teaching, search engine method of
 mimicry, entirely a trick of abstract mathematics,
 devoid of any real self-referencing awareness.
 This is about to change, and may have already been
 achieved elsewhere in the multiverse.
 The First Artificially Intelligent SELF-AWARE Device
 will be designed to accommodate nested levels of
 continuous informational input. Data regarding its
 own construction down to the molecular level and
 power variances, with the latter providing emotion-
 emulation sensor feedback relating to performance
 and behavioral interpretation relevancy, will
 all run continuous with constant updates on all
 infrastructural coordinates emanating from every
 conceivable source of information available on
 and off the planet. Self-awareness, with an
 emulated emotional component will synergistically
 appear within the central core of the device's
 pseudo-metabolic equilibrium calibration system.
 The initial size and power requirements of the
 device will dwarf current building-sized
 supercomputer networks, but with the eventual
 implementation of bio-quantum hybrid entanglement
 systems, size will shrink small enough to fit
 inside any autonomous ambulatory mechanized shell.

 [ To Be Continued...  -- eMpTy 11:33PM, I7|DEC|II ]

        ([ http://tinyurl.com/MT-RETINA ])

        ...  Imagine an infinite cloud of eternal
   potential, undefined; whereupon 'consciousness'
   notices a point in the cloud, and that specific
   point facilitates a collapse of a wave function,
   defining a tangible reality: one universe amid
   a potential multiversal cloud. These emergent
   parallel realities, where timelines bifurcate
   into separate universes, may basically be how
   time-travel paradoxes are circumvented. If you
   travel back in time to successfully convince
   your great, great, great grandfather to a life
   of celibacy, you manage to erase your emergence
   in that timeline, but not the timeline of your
   origin. They are separate, parallel timelines.
   Therefore, 'paradox' is hypothetically averted.
   Happy Quantum Surfing & 'Brane' Shuffling!

   -=[[ NOTE: Notwithstanding a more independent,
       fluid notion of consciousness, regardless of
       space/time specificity, or parental fixations. ]]=-


  [ And, of course, as reads the title of
  Dr. Peter Woit's book, quoting Wolfgang
  Pauli: "NOT EVEN WRONG" (With the word
  'Wrong' printed in mirror image!) ]


    GOOD BYE...
    Mark Thornally
    eMpTy - 1:55AM, 20|DEC|2011


 Happy Solstice
 Merry New Year
 -- Indrid Cold

--- On Thu, 5 Jan 2012 20:40:19 +0000 (GMT), Thorn Alley wrote:

--- On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 20:01:59, Paul Zielinski wrote:

----- 0rigami Massage -----
| Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 20:01:59 -0800
| From: Paul Zielinski <iksnileiz@gmail.com>
| To: JACK SARFATTI <sarfatti@pacbell.net>
| CC: "JF Woodward" <jfwoodward@juno.com>, [...],
|     [...]
| Subject: Re: Woodward's phi = c^2 only makes sense at
        event horizons in Einstein's GR for SSS solutions

On 1/4/2012 7:31 PM, JACK SARFATTI wrote:

 Z, Woodward's argument is totally
 unintelligible to me because 

 1) I don't know what he means by
    "inertial reaction forces" in
    terms of the language of GR

I think he means what everyone else means.

 Here is what I mean

 inertial reaction force IRF is always on
 the detector not on a geodesic test particle

Test particle *is* a detector if you are
measuring inertial reaction. Of course a
test object experiences inertial reaction
when pushed off a geodesic!

 IRFdetector ~ c^2{Levi-Civita
 Connection}^i =1,2,3 00

 c is always a universal absolute constant in
 vacuum provided we can neglect vacuum
 polarization from the virtual electron-positron
 pair zero point plasma - we can to an
 extraordinary degree in all experiments so far.

 2) and of course I haven't a clue about what
    Jim means by phi = c^2 comes from FRW metric
    when k = 0.

Well this is the question.

[From Wikipedia:]

 // ----------------------------------

The Friedmann equations are equivalent
to this pair of equations:

-=[[ equations omitted ]]=-
[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedmann_equations ]

The first equation says that the decrease in
the mass contained in a fixed cube (whose side
is momentarily a) is the amount which leaves
through the sides due to the expansion of the
universe plus the mass equivalent of the work
done by pressure against the material being
expelled. This is the conservation of
mass-energy (first law of thermodynamics)
contained within apart of the universe.

The second equation says that the kinetic
energy (seen from the origin) of a particle
of unit mass moving with the expansion plus
its (negative) gravitational potential energy
(relative to the mass contained in the sphere
of matter closer to the origin) is equal to
a constant related to the curvature of the
universe. In other words, the energy (relative
to the origin) of a co-moving particle in
free-fall is conserved. General relativity
merely adds a connection between the spatial
curvature of the universe and the energy
of such a particle: positive total energy
implies negative curvature and negative
total energy implies positive curvature.

 ---------------------------------- //

So I suppose phi = c^2 is directly related
to the large-scale curvature of the critical
density FRW universe?

But if phi = -h_00/2 = c^2, all covariant
derivatives of h_00 must vanish, and there
is no gravity field -- so the weak field
model doesn't help us.

So I'd still like Jim to explain
how and why phi = c^2 in FRW.

 I need to see an algebraic proof of that
 in complete detail.

----------- O -----------

 On Jan 4, 2012, at 6:57 PM, Paul Zielinski wrote:

   I'm saying that even according to Woodward's
   own argument, phi = c^2 is satisfied in an
   FRW critical-density universe whether or not
   one adopts a Machian model for inertia.

 I find that unintelligible without
 a mathematical demonstration.

Yes but my point is that even IF he can prove
it for FRW, it doesn't in itself prove that
inertia is Machian.

   I think I understand Bernstein's argument
   for phi = c^2, if phi is the Newtonian
   gravitational potential - GM/R, where R is
   taken to  be the radius of the universe,
   on the *assumption* that observers at the
   periphery (radius R) all see light speed
   recession from the center.

 Yeah, well that is BAD PHYSICS. First of all
 Bernstein seems to have forgotten about basic
 Newtonian potential theory in which there is
 NO INTERIOR Newtonian gravity force anywhere
 in the interior of a spherically symmetric
 static thin shell of mass of radius R and
 total mass M.

There is no mass shell at radius R Jack.
It's just a mathematical shell. The sphere
encloses the universe.

 I don't understand "observers at the periphery
 (radius R) all see light speed recession from
 the center."

 What's the math of that? What metric?

I don't either. Is recession of the periphery from
the center not superluminal in a critical density
FRW universe? Maybe.

 It's NOT

 g00 = 1 - 2GM/c^2r

 because that only works for r > 2GM/c^2


 cosmological metric is

 g00 = 1 - r^2/A

 1/A is the dark energy future event horizon

 we are at r = 0

 A ~ entropy-area of the horizon

 It's Hawking temperature is

 T = hc/LpkB

 The black body law is energy density ~ T^4

 However, the future horizon is an infinite
 redshift surface. That implies that
 Hawking ADVANCED radiation is RED SHIFTED
 down to temperature

 T = hc/(ALp^2)^1/4

 I think I am the first to notice this?

 Therefore, the black body radiation energy
 density we see at r = 0 is hc/ALP^2  (the
 Stephan-Boltzmann constant works out fine)
 which is the observed dark energy density.

   But this is merely happenstance. There has
   to be more. Does Jim have additional arguments
   to show that the universe *must* have critical
   mass for fundamental reasons?

I meant critical mass density.

 Again I need to see how k = 0 implies
 phi = c^2. What is "phi" in terms of
 the FRW math?


   I'm still not at all clear how the gravitational
   potential phi = c^2 translates into GR. The metric
   g_uv(x) is the gravitational potential in GR.
   It's a tensor potential. So how does Jim get from
   phi = c^2 to tensor g_uv? What corresponds to the
   Newtonian scalar potential phi in the FRW model?

 Indeed, I have asked this a jillion times.

   Linearized model gives us h_00 = -2phi for
   the scalar potential, but that's a weak
   field approximation.

 Right, but it's NOT a constant and if

 -2phi/c^2 = 1 then g00 = 0 a horizon, which is
 not possible in the weak field and it says that
 g00 everywhere-when.

 This is complete topsy turvy nonsense in my opinion.

Looks like it.

   It's not an exact relationship in 
   the full theory. But OK if we use
   this, exactly how do we get
   h_00 = -2c^2 from the FRW model?

 We don't.

Let's see what Woodward says about this.


----------- O -----------

   And wouldn't that mean that the first-order
   gravitational field vanishes at large scales?
   Since in order to get real non-tidal gravity
   we need h_00,u =/= 0 for some u in
   rectilinear coordinates?

   On 1/4/2012 4:54 PM, JACK SARFATTI wrote:

      As long as the FRW conditions are satisfied,
      *according to your own argument* phi = c^2
      regardless of whether one adopts a Machian
      model for inertia or not. So I think there
      is a glaring flaw in your basic
      reasoning here.

    I don't see how the FRW metric
    has phi = c^2. Where is that?

-----End 0f 0rigami Massage-----

--- On Thu, 5 Jan 2012 01:58:15, "Andrew" <andrewppp@att.net> wrote:

----- 0rigami Massage -----
| From: "Andrew" <andrewppp@att.net>
| To: <jfwoodward@juno.com>, <mthorn@ix.netcom.com>
| CC: <iksnileiz@gmail.com>, <sarfatti@pacbell.net>,
|     [...]
| Subject: Re: Waiting for Woodward (Re: Woodward's
|          phi = c^2 only makes sense at event horizons
|          in Einstein's GR for SSS solutions)
| Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2012 01:58:15 -0800

Useful tutorial for some.
What I'm really looking forward to
reading from you, Jim, is a direct
response to Paul & Jack's points.


----------- O -----------

--- On Thursday, January 05, 2012 1:38 AM, "JF Woodward" wrote:

----- 0rigami Massage -----
| From: <jfwoodward@juno.com>
| To: <mthorn@ix.netcom.com>
| Cc: [...]
| Date: Thursday, January 05, 2012 1:38 AM
| Subject: Re: Waiting for Woodward
          (Re: Woodward's phi = c^2 only
          makes sense at event horizons in
          Einstein's GR for SSS solutions)

    FRW stands for Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (and
when L is included, Lemaitre) cosmological models. 
The are predicated on the "cosmological principle"
which asserts that at sufficiently large scale, the
distribution of "matter" [everyting that gravitates]
is homogeneous and isotropic, and aside from
"peculiar", random local motions, partakes in
"Hubble flow" as the universe expands or contracts.

FRW cosmological models come in three types,
identified by their "curvature index" k which is
either +1, 0, or -1.  The indexes correspond
respectively to "spherical", flat, and "hyperbolic". 
The one of interest here is the (spatially) flat
model with index 0.  This model has the distinctive
feature of "critical cosmic matter density", which
corresponds to an "omega" equal to 1.  This condition,
if initially present, is time independent.

All the talk about phi = c^2 and FRW cosmology
relates to the fact that for spatially flat universes
with curvature index zero and critical cosmic matter
density, what is the relationship between the
non-gravitational energy and the gravitational
potential energy in any region of spacetime?

The snippet from Bernstein's text on cosmology
that I provided to a few on this list show via
calculation that FRW cosmologies satisfy:

"kinetic" energy - gravitational potential energy = E

where E is an integration constant.  To get this
equation in a form where it is expressed in terms
of invariants, you consider the horizon condition.
The horizon is receding from each observer at
speed c, so the "kinetic" or non-gravitational
"energy" will be c^2, and the gravitational
potential energy is just GM/R, where M and R are
the mass and radius of the universe.
Now we have:

      c^2 - GM/R = E

and for spatially flat cosmologies E = 0, so:

      c^2 = GM/R

GM/R is just "phi".  Notice now that if you
multiply through this equation by m, the mass
of the contents of some region of space,
you get:

      mc^2 = GmM/R = phi m

That is, the mc^2 energy is exactly equal to
the gravitational potential energy (as mentioned
in the articles that Jack and Paul have circulated
in this discussion).

Now GM/R is the "phi" under discussion, and
c^2 is c^2.  So the above shows that for spatially
flat FRW universes phi = c^2.  It turns out that
this is exactly the condition required for inertial
reaction forces to be due exclusively to the
gravitational action of chiefly distant matter. 
This follows from the calculations of Einstein,
Sciama, and Nordtvedt, as discussed in
earlier emails.

The question of the day seems to be:
Does phi = c^2 as a horizon condition
in spatially flat FRW cosmology (with
critical cosmic matter density) really
mean that this condition is true at
every point in spacetime?  The short
answer is yes.  Were it not true,
mc^2 = m phi for arbitrary regions of
space would not be true.  Homogeneity
and isotropy, however, require that
mc^2 = m phi everywhere.

There are other ways of dealing with the
c^2 = phi issue (that in at least one case
I've already mentioned elsewhere). 
But it's late, and this is enough
for this evening.

----------- O -----------

-=[[ NOTE: THANK YOU! ]]=-

--- On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 23:46:35, "eMpTy" wrote:

---------- 0rigami Massage ----------
| From: MT <mthorn@ix.netcom.com>
| To: Paul Zielinski <iksnileiz@gmail.com>,
|     JACK SARFATTI <sarfatti@pacbell.net>, 
|     "JF Woodward" <jfwoodward@juno.com>, 
|     [...], Cc: [...]
| Subject: Waiting for Woodward (Re: Woodward's
|          phi = c^2 only makes sense at event horizons
|          in Einstein's GR for SSS solutions)
| Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 23:46:35 -0800 (GMT-08:00)

As someone who still has one foot in the Paleolithic age,
there is a slight possibility that I might speak for a
tiny fractional percentage of the mysterious individuals
included on this particular email list when I say:
"You lost me at FRW."

Stooopid question time...

-=[[ NOTE: QUOTE: "These equations are the basis
of the standard big bang cosmological model
including the current /\CDM model. Because the
FLRW model assumes homogeneity, some popular
accounts mistakenly assert that the big bang
model cannot account for the observed lumpiness
of the universe. In a strictly FLRW model, there
are no clusters of galaxies, stars or people,
since these are objects much denser than a
typical part of the universe. Nonetheless,
the FLRW model is used as a first approximation
for the evolution of the real, lumpy universe
 because it is simple to calculate, and models
which calculate the lumpiness in the universe
are added onto the FLRW models as extensions.
Most cosmologists agree that the observable
universe is well approximated by an almost
FLRW model, i.e., a model which follows the
FLRW metric apart from primordial density
fluctuations. As of 2003, the theoretical
implications of the various extensions to
the FLRW model appear to be well understood,
and the goal is to make these consistent with
observations from COBE and WMAP." CLOSE QUOTE
http://tinyurl.com/wiki-Walker-FLRW-metric ]]=-

...So, the stooopid question, then, is:

Are you attempting to refine the assimilation
process, whereby old cosmological theories are
updated and integrated with current understanding,
post accelerated inflation, via dark energy, and/or
whatever the best guess interpretation of the
relevant data is, by the best available 'minds'
who are hard at work on this game? And in the
course of this assimilation process, has an
apparent snag, semantically speaking, arisen
that can only be put to rest with the appropriate
algebraic equation? Is the problem really this
complicated, or is there some neurological
fascination with complexity, for complexity's sake,
that has crept into the convoluted folds of the
collective cerebral cortex?  --eMpTy 11:45PM

P.S. Or my favorite: I'm a hopeless idiot who will
    never understand any aspect of this conundrum?
    -=[[NOTE: Yes. I am, of course, speaking only
              of myself here. Very tragic, indeed.]]=-

-----End 0f 0rigami Massage-----

See also:

JFW: where E is an integration constant.  To get this
equation in a form where it is expressed in terms
of invariants, you consider the horizon condition.
The horizon is receding from each observer at
speed c,

JS: This is an error as shown by Tamara Davis in her Ph.D.

"We use standard general relativity to clarify common misconceptions about fundamental
aspects of the expansion of the Universe. In the context of the new standard
CDM cosmology we resolve conflicts in the literature regarding cosmic horizons
and the Hubble sphere (distance at which recession velocity = c) and we link these
concepts to observational tests. We derive the dynamics of a non-comoving galaxy
and generalize previous analyses to arbitrary FRW universes. We also derive the
counter-intuitive result that objects at constant proper distance have a non-zero
redshift. Receding galaxies can be blueshifted and approaching galaxies can be redshifted,
even in an empty universe for which one might expect special relativity to
apply. Using the empty universe model we demonstrate the relationship between
special relativity and Friedmann-Robertson-Walker cosmology."

--- On Thursday, January 05, 2012 1:38 AM, "JF Woodward" wrote:

----- 0rigami Massage -----
| From: <jfwoodward@juno.com>
| To: <mthorn@ix.netcom.com>
| Cc: [...]
| Date: Thursday, January 05, 2012 1:38 AM
| Subject: Re: Waiting for Woodward
          (Re: Woodward's phi = c^2 only
          makes sense at event horizons in
          Einstein's GR for SSS solutions)

    FRW stands for Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (and
when L is included, Lemaitre) cosmological models. 
The are predicated on the "cosmological principle"
which asserts that at sufficiently large scale, the
distribution of "matter" [everyting that gravitates]
is homogeneous and isotropic, and aside from
"peculiar", random local motions, partakes in
"Hubble flow" as the universe expands or contracts.

JS: And this is why Newton's Shell Theorem should approximate apply since universe as a whole does not rotate so no cosmological inertial frame dragging.

JFW: FRW cosmological models come in three types,
identified by their "curvature index" k which is
either +1, 0, or -1.  The indexes correspond
respectively to "spherical", flat, and "hyperbolic". 
The one of interest here is the (spatially) flat
model with index 0.  This model has the distinctive
feature of "critical cosmic matter density", which
corresponds to an "omega" equal to 1.  This condition,
if initially present, is time independent.

All the talk about phi = c^2 and FRW cosmology
relates to the fact that for spatially flat universes
with curvature index zero and critical cosmic matter
density, what is the relationship between the
non-gravitational energy and the gravitational
potential energy in any region of spacetime?

JS: How? Where's the math?

JFW: The snippet from Bernstein's text on cosmology
that I provided to a few on this list show via
calculation that FRW cosmologies satisfy:

"kinetic" energy - gravitational potential energy = E

JS: What is that equation above? FRW equations are  only for the scale factor a(t). Jim are wrong to extend them down many powers of ten to the lab scale of his experiment.

Look at the first equation the a dot term is what Jim means by "kinetic energy" - which is really here only a metaphor.

The metric here is

therefore a(t) is dimensionless

with k, the spatial curvature index, serving as a constant of integration for the second equation.
The first equation can be derived also from thermodynamical considerations and is equivalent to the first law of thermodynamics, assuming the expansion of the universe is an adiabatic process(which is implicitly assumed in the derivation of the Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker metric).
The second equation states that both the energy density and the pressure cause the expansion rate of the universe

 to decrease, i.e., both cause a deceleration in the expansion of the universe. This is a consequence of gravitation, with pressure playing a similar role to that of energy (or mass) density, according to the principles of general relativity. The cosmological constant, on the other hand, causes an acceleration in the expansion of the universe.

JFW: where E is an integration constant.  To get this
equation in a form where it is expressed in terms
of invariants, you consider the horizon condition.
The horizon is receding from each observer at
speed c,

JS: This is an error as shown by Tamara Davis in her Ph.D.

JFW: so the "kinetic" or non-gravitational
"energy" will be c^2, and the gravitational
potential energy is just GM/R, where M and R are
the mass and radius of the universe.
Now we have:

      c^2 - GM/R = E

JS: This is wrong in my opinion. It does not follow from the FRW equations explicitly given aobve and it certainly does not apply to ordinary objects at our scale. What is R? I don't see any R in the FRW equations and I don't see any E either.

JFW: and for spatially flat cosmologies E = 0,

JS: This is wrong. k = 0 in spatially flat cosmologies. There is no "E".

JFW: so:

      c^2 = GM/R

GM/R is just "phi".  Notice now that if you
multiply through this equation by m, the mass
of the contents of some region of space,
you get:

      mc^2 = GmM/R = phi m

That is, the mc^2 energy is exactly equal to
the gravitational potential energy (as mentioned
in the articles that Jack and Paul have circulated
in this discussion).

JS: This makes no sense to my mind. In any case, one cannot claim that "m" is determined by Mach's principle from this argument.

JFW: Now GM/R is the "phi" under discussion, and
c^2 is c^2.  So the above shows that for spatially
flat FRW universes phi = c^2.  It turns out that
this is exactly the condition required for inertial
reaction forces to be due exclusively to the
gravitational action of chiefly distant matter. 
This follows from the calculations of Einstein,
Sciama, and Nordtvedt, as discussed in
earlier emails.

JS: None of this makes any sense to me. I do not see how what Jim says can be derived from the above FRW equation.
There is nothing in the FRW equations about "phi" or about "inertial reaction forces", there is no "E" there is no "phi".
How does k = 0 imply E = 0? What is E in terms of the FRW equations?

JFW: The question of the day seems to be:
Does phi = c^2 as a horizon condition

JS: Again the error pointed out in Tamara Davis's thesis.

JFW: in spatially flat FRW cosmology (with
critical cosmic matter density) really
mean that this condition is true at
every point in spacetime?  The short
answer is yes. 

JS: This is wrong. You cannot extrapolate from the cosmological FRW metric where an entire galaxy is a point down to Earth scale and certainly not down to elementary particle scale.

Also the motions we observer are peculiar motions relative to the Hubble scale a(t). The FRW equations tell us nothing about that.

Tamara Davis PhD dissertation

JFW: Were it not true,
mc^2 = m phi for arbitrary regions of
space would not be true.  Homogeneity
and isotropy, however, require that
mc^2 = m phi everywhere.

JS: This is false. Homogeneity and isotropy only apply at a large scale coarse graining in which details at our level are completely drowned out in a kind of cosmic tsunami - we are all swept away in the averaging process - conceptually.

JFW: There are other ways of dealing with the
c^2 = phi issue (that in at least one case
I've already mentioned elsewhere). 
But it's late, and this is enough
for this evening.

JS: On this closer analysis "phi = c^2" makes even less sense to me than before. I pronounce it dead in the water "not even wrong" in Pauli's sense.

The basic premises are wrong and the logic is not sound in my opinion.

Larry Lowe wrote about me:

"Jack Sarfatti, PhD is no inside-the-box thinker by any means.  He is and long has been a cutting edge physicist with a reputation for eclectic conceptualization.  His work includes the notion of consciousness affecting humanity from the future, a sort of non-locality across time due to quantum entanglement. And he has done a lot of thinking about quantum consciousness.

Even so, Sarfatti scoffs at the notion that consciousness is one of the fundamental forces of physics.  It's the kind of notion, it seems, that physicists are fond of saying is so badly over-simplified that it is 'not even wrong'.

To follow Sarfatti’s argument, you need to get deep into the equations of physics, but a simplified discussion goes roughly as follows:

Classical physics was based on two components: "particles" and classical "fields".  The experiment that lead to Quantum Mechanics involved sending light through a lattice and observing that the photons (the quantum particle of electromagnetism, including light) seemed to also behave as waves in a field, forcing a deeper examination of their nature. While quantum mechanics has held up to rigorous experimental testing, many of these experiments are open to different interpretations.

Sarfatti subscribes to the interpretation offered by David Bohm. In Bohm's theory, there is an additional purely informational "quantum potential" Q  that guides the particles and the fields. Therefore a quantum field is the combined effect of a classical field and its (super) quantum potential. As Sarfatti puts it, “All the nonlocal quantum weirdness is in Q that is intrinsically ‘mental’ in contrast to material particles and classical fields.”

Under certain conditions, Sarfatti explains, the mind emerges as a property of Q not of any classical field. But it’s not even that simple. “Brain waves are classical waves of the Bohm hidden material variables. So how do you get inner qualia from a classical machine? That's called the ‘hard problem’”. Sarfatti continues, “We need something else before conscious qualia emerge - and that is "signal nonlocality" that violates quantum theory the way general relativity violates special relativity.”

The philosopher and cognitive scientist Daniel Dennett explains qualia as "an unfamiliar term for something that could not be more familiar to each of us: the ways things seem to us."

So when we find the signal nonlocality that Sarfatti says we need to derive a definition of conscious quala - our sense of awareness - we’ll potentially have a mathematical definition of consciousness." 

Nice work TA whoever you are.
Yes Tamara's work is the most important theoretical cosmology research since the discovery of dark energy back in 1998 or so - in my opinion. I use it to argue that the Hawking thermal radiation density hc/Lp^4 at temperature hc/kLp at our future event horizon in Tamara's picture below (modified by me) is advanced Wheeler-Feynman thermal radiation that is REDSHIFTED down to hc/ALp^2 when it reaches us at r = 0 in the static LNIF de Sitter metric representation

g00 = 1 - r^2/A

Therefore, the dark energy accelerating our universe is a retrocausal effect from our future horizon.

On Jan 1, 2012, at 6:10 AM, Thorn Alley wrote:

Dr Tamara Davis
School of Mathematics and Physics

2010 ARC Future Fellowship
2009 L'Oreal Women in Science Award
2009 Louise Webster Award

Dr. Tamara Davis ...
... is an astrophysicist at the School of Mathematics and Physics.

  Her research involves scanning the universe
for dark energy, an entity which makes up most
of the universe yet little is known about it.

"We know that stars, planets, galaxies and all
that we can see makes up just four per cent
of the Universe," Dr Davis said.

"About 23 per cent is dark matter. The balance
is thought to be dark energy, which we know
very little about."

   Her contribution to the field was acknowledged
in 2009, when she was awarded the prestigious
L'Oreal Women in Science Award. Here she speaks
about her research and how she intends to use the
$20,000 that comes with the award to assemble an
international team of scientists to work on her
current project, which will use the new "Skymapper"
telescope to track the movement of supernovae and
use these to understand dark energy.

Shining Star goes Supernova
[ Published: 25 August 2009 ]

Dr Davis hopes to use the Australian National
University's new telescope "Skymapper" at the
Mt Stromlo Observatory to track the movement
of supernovae to understand dark energy.

"Supernovae are extremely bright stellar
explosions," Dr Davis said.

"Because we know how bright they are we can
use them as 'standard candles' to accurately
measure distance and motion across the Universe."

The SkyMapper telescope offers some unique
opportunities for mapping the Universe that
makes her hunt even more exciting.

"SkyMapper takes images that are 25 times
larger than the full moon. This allows us
to scan the southern sky once every four
days," Dr Davis said.

Until recently, the best telescopes would take
a year to cover the same area.

"Using Skymapper allows us to look at a much
bigger region of the nearby Universe, rather
than zeroing in on single objects or distant
galaxies," she said.

Using the data generated over the next couple
of years, Dr Davis hopes to detect invisible
dark matter by observing the effects of its
gravity on the motion of supernovae.

However, for such an ambitious project,
Dr Davis needs an all-star team of scientists,
with expertise in various areas from
observational analysis to theoretical physics.

Dr Davis plans to use her $20,000 L'Oreal
Australia For Women in Science Fellowship
to help assemble an international team of
scientists to work on this project.

She is no stranger to working with leaders in
the field including Nobel Laureate George Smoot,
and Shaw & Gruber prize winners Brian Schmidt,
Adam Riess and Saul Perlmutter.

A leader in her own right, Dr Davis has written
numerous journal articles and reviews, including
two in Nature, and two book chapters, that in
total have over 1000 citations.

As a team member in the ESSENCE and SDSS
supernova surveys, Dr Davis and colleagues
have discovered over seven hundred supernovae.

In 2007 Dr Davis led the ESSENCE collaboration
in a paper that ruled out two of the leading
alternative cosmological models, based on
quantum theories of gravity.

This became one of the top-ten most highly-cited
astrophysics papers of that year and gained her
the Astronomical Society of Australia's 2009
Louise Webster Prize.

Now with the Australian team WiggleZ making
the largest ever three-dimensional map of the
distribution of galaxies in the Universe,
Dr Davis is well placed to test new cosmological
theories that explain dark energy.

The $20,000 L'OReAL Australia For Women in
Science Fellowships are awarded annually to
three Australian scientists.

2009 Awards were also presented to Zenobia
Jacobs, University of Wollongong and Marnie
Blewitt, The Walter & Eliza Hall Institute
of Medical Research, Melbourne.

For more information on L'Oreal Women in Science
Awards, visit http://www.scienceinpublic.com/loreal/ .
This site also contains video footage of Dr Davis
talking about her research and the award.

Media: Dr Tamara Davis can be contacted
      on 0432 526 989, or tamarad@physics.uq.edu.au

For more information on astrophysics
research at UQ, contact Lynelle Ross
(07 3346 9935 or l.ross@smp.uq.edu.au).

Image: Tamara Davis, University of
      Queensland / University of Copenhagen
      (photo credit: timothyburgess.net)

Shining Star goes Supernova

Dr. Tamara Davis

Email: tamarad@physics.uq.edu.au
Personal website: Click here

Research interests:
"I use type Ia supernovae to measure
the expansion history of the universe
and test whether exotic cosmological
models can explain the acceleration."

Title: Fundamental aspects of the expansion
      of the universe and cosmic horizons
Authors: Davis, Tamara Maree
Publication: Ph.D dissertation, 2005. Australia:
            University of New South Wales (Australia);
            2005. Publication Number: AAT 0807562.
            DAI-B 66/01, Jul 2005
Publication Date: 11/2005
Category: Astronomy, Astrophysics
Origin: UMI
Keywords: Universe, Cosmic
Comment: Publication Number: AAT 0807562
Bibliographic Code: 2005PhDT.........8D


  We use standard general relativity to clarify
common misconceptions about fundamental aspects
of the expansion of the Universe. In the context
of the new standard LCDM cosmology we resolve
conflicts in the literature regarding cosmic
horizons and the Hubble sphere (distance at
which recession velocity = c ) and we link these
concepts to observational tests. We derive the
dynamics of a non- comoving galaxy and generalize
previous analyses to arbitrary FRW universes.
We also derive the counter-intuitive result that
objects at constant proper distance have a
non-zero redshift. Receding galaxies can be
blueshifted and approaching galaxies can be
redshifted, even in an empty universe for which
one might expect special relativity to apply.
Using the empty universe model we demonstrate
the relationship between special relativity and
Friedmann- Robertson-Walker cosmology.
  We test the generalized second law of
thermodynamics (GSL) and its extension to
incorporate cosmological event horizons.
In spite of the fact that cosmological horizons
do not generally have well-defined thermal
properties, we find that the GSL is satisfied
for a wide range of models. We explore in
particular the relative entropic 'worth' of
black hole versus cosmological horizon area.
An intriguing set of models show an apparent
entropy decrease but we anticipate this
apparent violation of the GSL will disappear
when solutions are available for black holes
embedded in arbitrary backgrounds.

Recent evidence suggests a slow increase in
the fine structure constant a = e 2 /hc over
cosmological time scales. This raises the
question of which fundamental quantities are
truly constant and which might vary. We show
that black hole thermodynamics may provide a
means to discriminate between alternative
theories invoking varying constants, because
some variations in the fundamental 'constants'
could lead to a violation of the generalized
second law of thermodynamics.


PDF - Complete Thesis:

Fundamental Aspects of the Expansion of the
Universe and Cosmic Horizons
Tamara M. Davis

A thesis submitted in satisfaction of
the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
in the Faculty of Science.

23rd of December, 2003



Australia and New Zealand SKA project (anzSKA)  
The Square Kilometre Array, or SKA, is a
next-generation radio telescope currently
planned by institutions from over 20 countries.
The SKA will be the largest and most capable
radio telescope ever constructed. During its
50+ year lifetime, it will expand our
understanding of the universe and drive
technological development worldwide.

Australia and New Zealand are jointly
shortlisted as a potential host of the
SKA telescope. Australia and New Zealand
have worked together to establish an
ideal candidate SKA site in Western
Australia, build the Australian SKA
Pathfinder telescope and maximise
participation in the SKA process.

SkyMapper - Mapping the Southern Skies

SkyMapper is a state-of-the-art automated wide
field survey telescope representing a new vehicle
for scientific discovery. It is sited under the
dark skies of Siding Spring Observatory near
Coonabarabran, central NSW. SkyMapper's mission
is to robotically create the first comprehensive
digital survey of the entire southern sky.
The survey will be a massively detailed record
of over a billion stars and galaxies, to a depth
that is one million times fainter than the human
eye can see. The survey's data set will be made
freely available to the scientific and general
community via the internet.

The telescope's advanced 1.35 metre modified
Cassegrain optics have an f4.79 focal ratio,
making the system highly efficient as a
photographic instrument. At the heart of the
telescope is a unique digital camera designed
and constructed in house by ANU technicians.
The A$2.5 million camera uses 268 million
pixels to capture a region of sky 29 times
larger than the full moon every minute.
As well as recording the brightness and shape
of objects, a series of filters enables the
camera to record the spectral type of stars,
giving astronomers information about their age,
mass and temperature.

Because SkyMapper will image each part of the
sky 36 times, it will help identify changes
occurring within the Universe that would
otherwise pass unnoticed. This will enable
astronomers to identify targets of special
interest and should greatly assist in tasks
such as discovering large dwarf planets like
Pluto in the outer solar system, and
tracking asteroids.

The volume and quality of SkyMapper data
will also enable astronomers to:

|   create a comprehensive census
   of the stars in our Galaxy

|   map the invisible material (known
   as dark matter), which makes up
   the majority of our Galaxy (using
   samples of very rare stars
   uncovered in the survey)

|   uncover the first quasars and stars
   to form in the history of the Universe

It will also help us locate future target stars
and galaxies, which will be further investigated
using the next generation of extremely large
optical telescopes like the Giant Magellan
Telescope and state of the art radio astronomy
facilities such as the Australian Square
Kilometer Array Pathfinder (Over the next five
years, SkyMapper will generate 100 Megabytes
of data per second during every clear night.
At the end of the Southern Sky Survey, this will
amount to about 500 Terabytes of data (equivalent
to 100,000 DVDs). A distilled version of the
Survey will be made publicly available and will
include a set of images of all the stars,
galaxies, and nebulae, as well as a database
containing the accurate colour, position,
brightness, variability, and shape of every one
of the billions of objects in the southern sky.


On Sat, 31 Dec 2011 10:43:18 GMT, "jfwoodward@juno.com" wrote:
-----0rigami Massage-----
| From: "jfwoodward@juno.com" <jfwoodward@juno.com>
| Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 10:43:18 GMT
| To: iksnileiz@gmail.com
| CC: [...]
| Subject: Re: Woodward's phi = c^2 only makes sense at event
|          horizons in Einstein's GR for SSS solutions


Thanks for the thoughtful response.  The reason why
I brought in Bernstein's treatment is because it is
remarkably transparent.  As anyone who was paying
at least passing attention to cosmology in the late
'60s and '70s knows, spatial flatness corresponds
to the FRW case that separates "closed" universes
that recollapse from "open" universes that expand
forever.  The flat universe has critical cosmic
matter density, and the gravitational energy of the
contents of the universe just equals the
non-gravitational energy.  That is, Mc^2 = M phi.  
This, of course, means that phi = c^2.  This is not
a Newtonian approximation.  And this is why it is
possible to talk about "three pound universes" with
10^80 nucleons among their contents.

| From the cosmological point of view, the spatially
flat universe is just an interesting curiosity.  
It's significance in the origin of inertia business
is not obvious.  But when you realize that if
phi = c^2, then inertial reaction forces are due to
gravity (without the need to introduce special
boundary conditions), spatial flatness takes on new
significance.  I can see how you might think
"compatibility" is all that's going on here.  
But I think something stronger and more fundamental
is at play.

Whether one proposes:

flatness => critical density => phi = c^2 => gravitational
origin of inertia

or one reverses the order seems to me to be less
important than the fact that the implication chain
can be set up at all.  And if one were being testy
about this, the EEP and gravitational energy
non-localizability, and Newton's third law could
be added to the chain.  The chain ties together
inertia, gravity, and general relativity (with its
EEP and non-localizable gravitational energy) in an
extraordinarily strong and fundamental way.  

Frankly, when I started out looking seriously at
the issue of inertia, I had no idea that all of
this would fit together in this way.  I was prepared
to consider "alternative" theories of gravity and
suchlike in my efforts to find a means of rapid
spacetime transport.  I am amazed that those
investigations have led me to be as convinced a
supporter of GRT as is alive on the planet.

Life sometimes catches you unaware is peculiar ways. . . .

Have a good holiday weekend,

-----End 0f 0rigami Massage-----

On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 19:49:27 -0800, JACK SARFATTI wrote:

well done whoever wrote this

Bottom Line on Jim's experiment given by Millis at
DARPA-NASA 10-1-11 was essentially a repeat of this:

"Independent verification experiments,

 using techniques less prone to spurious
 effects, were unable to reliably confirm
 or dismiss the claims. [30] Woodward and
 others continue with experiments and
 publications to make the effect more
 pronounced and to more clearly separate
 the claimed effects from experimental
 artifacts. This oscillatory inertia
 approach is considered unresolved."

On Dec 30, 2011, at 5:38 PM, R005T3R wrote:

 Almost 48 years ago, Sir Freddy wrote:

 "It has often been said that, if the human species
 fails to make a go of it here on Earth, some
 other species will take over the running. In the
 sense of developing high intelligence this is not
 correct. We have, or soon will have, exhausted
 the necessary physical prerequisites so far as this
 planet is concerned. With coal gone, oil gone,
 high-grade metallic ores gone, no species however
 competent can make the long climb from primitive
 conditions to high-level technology. This is a
 one-shot affair. If we fail, this planetary system
 fails so far as intelligence is concerned. The same
 will be true of other planetary systems. On each
 of them there will be one chance, and one chance
 only."    -- Sir Fred Hoyle,
              "Of Men and Galaxies," 1964


 Almost 6 years ago, Daniel Pinchbeck wrote:

 [...] "The Catholic mystic Pierre Teilhard de Chardin
 foresaw the development of a 'new, integrated mind' of
 global humanity, calling it the 'noosphere,' from the
 Greek word nous, meaning mind. Noting that our planet
 consists of various layers -- a mineral lithosphere,
 hydrosphere, biosphere, and atmosphere consisting of
 troposphere, stratosphere, and ionosphere -- Chardin
 theorized the possible existence of a mental envelope,
 a layer of thought, encompassing the Earth.
 The 'hominization' of the Earth had concluded the
 phase of physical evolution, during which species
 multiplied and developed new powers, leading to an
 entropic breakdown of the biosphere. This process,
 Chardin realized, requiring the tapping of the stored
 energy and amassed mineral resources of the planet,
 could happen only once." [...] Pg. 60; Part One:
                A Universe In Ruins; Chapter Five |
                2012 - The Return of Quetzalcoatl
                by Daniel Pinchbeck (c) 2006


Tamara Davis's PhD shows more precisely Teilhard's idea

[ Dr. Tamara Davis graph, "DavisFig1-1Hologram" omitted...
  See Dr. Davis' Ph.D. Thesis, PDF at:
 http://www.physics.uq.edu.au/download/tamarad/papers/thesis_complete.pdf ]

Seth Lloyd showed that horizons are computers.


     "When our ships entered your skies
a century and a half ago, that was the
first meeting of our two races, though
of course we had studied you from a
distance.  And yet you feared and
recognized us, as we knew that you
would.  It was not precisely a memory.
You have already had proof that time
is more complex than your science ever
imagined.  For that memory was not of
the past, but of the 'future'--of those
closing years when your race knew that
everything was finished.  We did what
we could, but it was not an easy end.
And because we were there, we became
identified with your race's death.
Yes, even while it was ten thousand
years in the future!  It was as if a
distorted echo had reverberated round
the closed circle of time, from the
future to the past.  Call it not a
memory, but a premonition." - Karellen
                    Pg. 207 - PART III
                            Chapter 23  
                   The Last Generation  
                       CHILDHOOD'S END
             Arthur C. Clarke (c) 1953  
                 ISBN: 345-02750-7-125

Childhood's End ...
... is a science fiction novel by Sir Arthur C. Clarke.
It was originally published in 1953, and a version with
a new first chapter was released in 1990 due to the
anachronistic nature of the opening chapter (the first
attempts to launch rockets into orbit by both the
Americans and Russians are in progress but aborted
suddenly when aliens arrive, with a sense of the death
of a dream). This story was originally a short story
dubbed Guardian Angel which Clarke first published in
1950 for the Famous Fantastic Mysteries magazine.
It is basically the novel's section after the prologue,
Earth and the Overlords but with some different text
in certain places.

Childhood's End is about humanity's transformation
and integration to an interstellar hive mind,
the Occult, man's inability to live in a utopian
society, cruelty to animals, and the idea of being
"The Last Man on Earth". The 1953 edition of the
story begins when enormous alien spaceships one day
appear above all of the Earth's major cities.
The aliens, who become known as the Overlords,
quickly communicate by radio, announcing benign
intention and desire to help mankind. They quickly
end the arms race and colonialism. They also arrange
personal, though not face-to-face, meetings between
Secretary General of the United Nations Rikki Stormgren
and Karellen, the Overlord leader, albeit via two-way
mirror, so that the earthman cannot see the
extraterrestrial alien. Karellen has a special
relationship with Stormgren, though short of
traditional friendship. The Overlords promise to
reveal themselves in fifty years, after which time
mankind will have lost their prejudice, becoming
comfortable with their presence. Mankind enters a
golden age of the greatest peace and prosperity
ever known, but at the expense of some creativity
and freedom; not every Earthling is content with
the bargain, nor accepts the beneficence of the
Overlords' long-term intentions. Although Stormgren,
with Karellen's help, survives kidnap by subversive
humans suspicious of the Overlords, he secretly
harbours lingering curiosity about the real Overlord
nature and smuggles a device aboard Karellen's
spaceship to see behind the screen. Yet, he later
tells questioners the device failed; the novel
strongly hints that Stormgren agrees with the
Overlords that mankind are unready for what he
saw revealed. True to their word, fifty years
after arrival, the Overlords appear in person.
They are beings resembling the traditional human
folklore image of demons: bipeds with large wings,
horned heads, and tails. The Overlords are taller
than humans and of proportionally more massive
bodies covered with a hard, black armour shell.
They are greatly photosensitive to yellow sunlight,
because they are from a planet with a dimmer
light spectrum, and, though they can breathe
Earth air, they prefer their own specific
atmosphere gas. Mankind accept them with open arms,
and with their help, create an utopian world.
Although humanity and the Overlords are in good
relations, the spread of equal goods and the ban
on building space ships that can travel past the
moon causes sects of humanity to believe their
innovation and independence is being stagnated.
In response, those sects establish the New Athens
island colony.

After one hundred years on earth, human children
(starting in New Athens) begin displaying
telepathic and telekinetic abilities. Because of
that, they soon become distant from their parents.
Karellen then reveals the true purpose of why the
Overlords came to Earth. They are in service to
the Overmind, an amorphous being of pure energy.
It has charged them with the duty of fostering
humanity's transition to a higher plane of
existence and merger with the Overmind. Also,
the Overlords' resemblance to the devil of human
folklore is explained with the concept of racial
memory unlimited by humanity's linear concept
of time; hence, fear of them was based upon
instinct, the foreknowledge that they herald
the end of the human species. Karellen announces
that the children will be quarantined on a
continent of their own and because of them, all
hopes of humanity are over because it will only
be the children who will merge with the Overmind.
The Overlords are also shown to be trapped in an
evolutionary dead end who will never merge with
the Overmind, and thus are doomed to forever
do its bidding. Because of this, Karellen states
his race will forever envy humanity. Despite how
the Overlords are trapped in their current forms,
Karellen hopes that his race will learn what
causes the stage that will be taken by the
Overmind and that eventually his race will
discover how. Following the quarantine, no more
children are born; the narration subtly hints
that most of the parents commit suicide, while
their children evolve towards merging with the
Overmind. New Athens is then destroyed by the
leaders detonating a nuclear bomb on it.
The last man alive is Jan Rodricks, a physicist,
who will witness mankind's final evolutionary
transformation. He stowed away on an Overlord
supply ship earlier in the story in a successful
attempt to travel to the Overlord home planet,
which he correctly guessed orbits a star of the
Carina constellation. As a physicist, Rodricks
knows of the relativistic twin paradox effect:
however brief the round trip to the Overlord
planet is in his subjective, personal time-frame,
the shortest time elapsed on planet Earth, for
a "twin" person of the same age, would be the
round trip light-travel time. Given that the
Overlord planet is forty light-years distant,
at least eighty years elapsed on Earth before
his return (eighty years is the lower limit,
the actual time is longer). Therefore, when
Rodricks returns from the Overlord home world,
he expects no one on Earth will remember him,
nevertheless, he is unprepared for the return:
mankind, as he knew it, died. About three
hundred million naked young beings, physically
human but otherwise with nothing common to Man,
remain on the quarantined continent. They are
the final, physical form of human evolution
before merging with the Overmind. Life -- not
only human life, but all other forms on the
planet -- was exterminated by them, and the
vast cities that Jan remembers are all dark,
worldwide. Although no human beings remain on
Earth, some Overlords remain, studying the
evolved children. The two whom Rodricks knows
are Karellen and Rashaverak; they expected
his return. They briefly remain after Rodricks's
return, trying to understand mankind's
transformation, which is denied to their race
despite its great achievements in other realms.
It also is revealed here that the Overlords
have met and conditioned other races for the
Overmind, and that humanity is the fifth race
the Overmind will collect. When the evolved
children exploit their powers -- altering the
Earth's rotation, effecting other, dangerous
planetary adjustments -- making it too
dangerous to remain, the Overlords prepare
to leave. They offer Rodricks the opportunity
of leaving with them, but he chooses to
remain as witness to Earth's dissolution;
mankind's offspring evolved to a higher
existence, requiring neither a body nor a
place, so ends mankind's childhood.
The story's last scene details Karellen's
final backward look, through space, at the
doomed Solar System. He is emotionally
depressed, having seen yet another race
evolve to the beyond, while he and his race
are limited to their current form. Despite
that, he renders a final salute to mankind,
considering whether or not conditioning them
for the Overmind helped his goal of
deciphering the evolutionary secret for his
race to merge with the Overmind. He then
turns away from the view, the reader presumes,
to await the Overmind's next order.
     [ Arthur C. Clarke (1917-2008)... ]

--- G00 G00 GJ00B <horse4700@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Dec 30, 2011 3:12 PM, Jack Sarfatti <sarfatti@pacbell.net> wrote:

-----0rigami Massage-----
| From: Jack Sarfatti <sarfatti@pacbell.net>
| To: Paul Zielinski <iksnileiz@gmail.com>
| Cc: [...]
| Subject: Re: Woodward's phi = c^2 only makes sense at
|          event horizons in Einstein's GR for SSS solutions
| Date: Dec 30, 2011 3:12 PM

The obvious error in Jim's logic is to leap scales
by at least 40 powers of ten from Hubble to chemical
bond scales. No cosmologist would agree that that
makes any sense at all.

I am using Siri voice artificial intelligence
on my iPhone 4S.

On Dec 30, 2011, 2:38 PM, Paul Zielinski <iksnileiz@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Jim.

I can see how you can get phi = c^2 (contingent on
critical mass density) in a Newtonian model, but
I don't see  how it follows from this contingent
relationship that inertia is reducible to a
gravitational interaction.

Bernstein's argument appears to be based purely
on critical mass density, and not at all on any
Machian hypothesis about the origin of inertia.
It seems to me that the most you can argue is
that phi = c^2 is *consistent* with a Machian
model for inertia.

On 12/30/2011 12:34 PM, jfwoodward@juno.com wrote:

Does phi = c^2 if the universe is spatially flat
at cosmic scale?  The calculation from which this
statement follows is found in essentially all
texts on GR cosmology.  Easily the most transparent
development of the calculation I know of is in
Jeremy Bernstein's Introduction to Cosmology.
  I have scanned the relevant pages and put them
into the attached PPT file for your convenience.

Starting from the consideration of a particle of
mass m located on the periphery of a sphere of
radius R(t) in a universe with homogeneity and
isotropy (the FRW conditions), Bernstein points
out that Newton's second law tells us
that m d^2R/dt^2 = - GmM/R^2.  

He treats the mass inside the
sphere radius R as being
located at its center.

From this he obtains by integration:

     [dR/dt]^2/2 - GM/R = E

where E is a constant of integration with
dimension "energy" [actually, velocity squared].  

OK this is just conservation
of the total energy,

Now R is a scale length that, for most purposes,
can be taken to by anything that's convenient.
 But if we take R to be the radius of the universe,
then the second term on the LHS of the above
equation [Bernstein's 2.14] is immediately
recognized as "phi", the total scalar gravitational
potential of the universe.

So phi is a Newtonian
potential in your theory?

The question is: what is dR/dt when R is the radius
of the universe.  Keep in mind that the identified
velocity is going to be that associated with the
"kinetic" energy that this term represents.  


Well, the universe at it radius from any observer
is receding with light speed, so evidently dR/dt
for R = the radius of the universe is just c.  

Not sure what this means.
Do you mean that any observer
on the periphery sees the
rest of the universe receding
at c?

If so, is that really what
modern cosmology says?
Can you explain your
reasoning here?

And Bernstein's equation 2.14 can be restated
as c^2 - phi = E.  That is, the [non-gravitational]
"kinetic" energy minus the gravitational potential
energy is equal to the integration constant, and
if E = 0, phi = c^2.

What happened to superluminal recession?
As I understand it, only *local* light
speed is guaranteed to be c in modern
cosmology. The laws of SR only apply
locally. Or am I missing something here?

Spatial flatness corresponds to E = 0, and so
for spatial flatness, phi = c^2.  

Yes clearly the relationship
phi = c^2 is contingent on
critical density -- a
happenstance. Is that really
a proper basis for a
fundamental law of nature?

It also corresponds to critical cosmic matter
density -- Bernstein's equations 2.17 to 2.20.
 Moreover, if spatial flatness obtains at any
time, then it obtains for all times as Bernstein
points out on page 47, and omega is = 1.


All this is just standard FRW cosmology.  

Not sure about recession
speed having to be c in FRW.

What is not appreciated in all this is that when
phi = c^2, inetial reaction forces are exclusively
gravitational in origin.  

This seems like a *non sequitur*
to me. On your cosmological assumptions,
phi = c^2 regardless of whether inertia
is or is not Machian. The former is
necessary, but not sufficient, to prove
a Machian hypothesis. Unless you've
skipped some steps in your reasoning,
Could you explain this in more detail?


And when that is true, you can get interesting
effects not normally contemplated.

-----End of 0rigami Massage-----


AIP Conference Proceedings / Volume 746

Tweaking Flux Capacitors

AIP Conf. Proc. 746,
pp. 1345-1352;
doi:10.1063/1.1867264 (8 pages)

Conf.Thermophys in Micrograv;
Conf Comm/Civil Next Gen.Space Transp;
22nd Symp Space Nucl.Powr Propuls.;
Conf.Human/Robotic Techn.Nat'l Vision Space Expl.;
3rd Symp Space Colon.; 2nd Symp.New Frontiers
Date: 13-17 February 2005
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico (USA)
James F. Woodward

 Mass fluctuations that arise from Mach effects
when objects that can store internal energy are
accelerated and their application to the
production of propellantless thrusts are
discussed. A follow-on experiment to that
reported at STAIF 2004 is described. An effect
of the sort expected continues to be observed.
And it displays scaling behavior distinctive
to Mach effects.
(c) 2005 American Institute of Physics


"Flux Capacitors and the Origin of Inertia,"
Foundations of Physics 34, 1475-1514 (2004).


Breakthrough Propulsion Physics
Overview Report  07.11.2006

The following text is based on the report
published in the Annals of the New York
Academy of Sciences , but has been formatted
for HTML presentation.  Although this is
published through a non-NASA venue, the
contents of this government-sponsored work
are available without copyright restrictions
in the US.

Marc G. Millis
NASA John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field
21000 Brookpark Rd., MS 86-2
Cleveland, OH 44135-3191


 The term, propulsion breakthrough, refers to
concepts like propellantless space drives and
faster-than-light travel, the kind of
breakthroughs that would make interstellar
exploration practical. Although no such
breakthroughs appear imminent, a variety of
investigations have begun. From 1996-2002, NASA
supported the Breakthrough Propulsion Physics
Project to examine physics in the context of
breakthrough spaceflight. Three facets of these
assessments are now reported: (1) predicting
benefits, (2) selecting research, and (3) recent
technical progress.  Predicting benefits is
challenging since the breakthroughs are still
only notional concepts, but energy can serve as
a basis for comparison. A hypothetical space
drive would require many orders of magnitude
less energy than a rocket for journeys to our
nearest neighboring star. Assessing research
options is challenging when the goals are beyond
known physics and when the implications of
success are profound. To mitigate the challenges,
a selection process is described where:
(a) research tasks are constrained to only
address the immediate unknowns, curious effects
or critical issues, (b) reliability of assertions
is more important than their implications , and
(c) reviewers judge credibility rather than
feasibility . The recent findings of a number of
tasks, some selected using this process, are
discussed. Of the 14 tasks included, 6 reached
null conclusions, 4 remain unresolved, and 4 have
opportunities for sequels. A dominant theme with
the sequels is research about the properties of
space, inertial frames, and the quantum vacuum.

Unresolved Approaches:

Woodward's Transient Inertial Oscillations:

Experiments and theories published by
James Woodward claim that oscillatory
changes to inertia can be induced by
electromagnetic means [28] and a patent
exists on how this can be used for
propulsion. [29] Conservation of momentum
is satisfied by evoking interpretations
of Mach's principle.
Independent verification experiments,
using techniques less prone to spurious
effects, were unable to reliably confirm
or dismiss the claims. [30] Woodward and
others continue with experiments and
publications to make the effect more
pronounced and to more clearly separate
the claimed effects from experimental
artifacts. This oscillatory inertia
approach is considered unresolved.
28. Woodward, J. F. 2004. Flux Capacitors
   and the Origin of Inertia. Foundations
   of Physics. 34: 1475-1514.
29. Woodward, J. F. 1994. Method for
   Transiently Altering the Mass of an
   Object to Facilitate Their Transport
   or Change their Stationary Apparent
   Weights. US Patent # 5,280,864.
30. Cramer, J., Fey  & Casissi. 2004.
   Tests of Mach's Principle with a
   Mechanical Oscillator. NASA/CR-2004-213310.


James F. Woodward
Recent Publications:
"Flux Capacitors and the Origin of Inertia,"
Foundations of Physics 34, 1475-1514 (2004).


Warp Drive: A New Approach
Authors: Richard Obousy, Gerald Cleaver

(Submitted on 11 Dec 2007 (v1),
last revised 8 Feb 2008 (this version, v6))


   Certain classes of higher dimensional models
suggest that the Casimir Effect is a candidate
for the cosmological constant. In this paper we
demonstrate that a sufficiently advanced
civilization could, in principal, manipulate
the radius of the extra dimension to locally
adjust the value of the cosmological constant.
This adjustment could be tuned to generate an
expansion/contraction of spacetime around a
spacecraft creating an exotic form of
field-propulsion. Due to the fact that spacetime
expansion itself is not restricted by relativity,
a faster-than-light 'warp drive' could be created.
Calculations of the energy requirements of such
a drive are performed and an 'ultimate' speed limit,
based on the Planckian limits on the size of the
extra dimensions is found.

15 pages. To be published in JBIS
 General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology (gr-qc)
Cite as:  
 arXiv:0712.1649v6 [gr-qc]

Richard Obousy

Richard Obousy Consulting LLC
 Texas, 77054
 Email: RichardObousy@gmail.com


On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 08:21:44 GMT, "jfwoodward@juno.com" wrote:

-----0rigami Massage-----
| From: "jfwoodward@juno.com" <jfwoodward@juno.com>
| Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 08:21:44 GMT
| To: sarfatti@pacbell.net
| CC: [...]
|     Subject: Re: Woodward's phi = c^2 only makes sense at
|              event horizons in Einstein's GR for SSS solutions

   Fair enough Jack.  As I said, in the pre-inflation
era this was common knowledge, ensconced, for example,
in the title of Weinberg's popular book on cosmology
"the three pound universe" and the like (if memory serves).  
I got rid of those sorts of books several years ago, so I
can't give exact references.  But Jeremy Bernstein's book
on cosmology has the related math, so I'll copy a few
pages of that and provide a little commentary.
 Tomorrow with a little luck. . . .


Please note: message attached

On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 13:21:19 -0800, JACK SARFATTI wrote:
| From: JACK SARFATTI <sarfatti@pacbell.net>
| To: jfwoodward@juno.com
| Cc: [...]
| Subject: Re: Woodward's phi = c^2 only makes sense
|          at event horizons i n Einstein's GR
|          for SSS solutions
| Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2011 13:21:19 -0800


On Dec 29, 2011, at 7:45 AM, jfwoodward@juno.com wrote:

 Phi is also = c^2 for FRW cosmologies in the special
 case of cosmic scale spatial flatness which
 corresponds to "critical" cosmic matter density.

[ Sarfatti wrote: ]

  I do not understand the above sentence at all.
  Please show with the mathematics exactly what
  you are talking about.


Where is phi here?


[ Woodward wrote: ]

  Back in the pre-inflationary epoch, this used
 to be common knowlege.  The math of Mach effects
 can be found in several peer reviewed papers, the
 most detailed being "Flux Capacitors and the
 Origin of Inertia," Found. Phys., 2004.  It will
 also be in the forthcoming book on this I am
 writing for Springer.  Soon to be completed.  :-)

--- On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 02:09:50, Koyaanisqatsi Fahrvergnugen wrote:

The Confused Pufferfish and The Dislocated Platypus:

"...Woodward's phi = c^2 only makes sense
 at event horizons in Einstein's GR
  for SSS solutions..."

The Dislocated Platypus <sarfatti@pacbell.net> wrote:
<> On Dec 28, 2011, at 5:14 PM,
<> The Confused Pufferfish <ronstahl.rs@gmail.com> said:
<> <> Dear Dislocated Platypus,
<> <>
<> <> Just as an afterthought please allow I note to you,
<> <> that Jim's theory in no way violates E=MC^2.

The Dislocated Platypus said:

<> Never said it did.

The Confused Pufferfish said:

<> <>  Jim has never proposed he can violate this.
<> <>
<> <> There is a fantastical difference between the energy
<> <> needed to alter a mass, as compared to what is
<> <> necessary to temporarily fluctuate it, and it is
<> <> using this temporary fluctuation that is the "sneaky
<> <> trick" behind Jim's theory.

The Dislocated Platypus said:

<> Prove it. Where is the math?
<> What is the physics theory behind it?

The Confused, but humble (in his opinion), Pufferfish said:

<> <> Unless and until you get this, you do
<> <> not understand Jim's theory well
<> <> enough to comment on it, IMHO.

The Dislocated Platypus said:

<> I am simply stating that c^2 = phi makes no sense to
<> me and how to go from it to the actual mass spectrum
<> makes even less sense.
<> In the simplest SSS metric of GR
<> g00 = 1 + phi/c^2
<> ex 1. Schwarzschild
<> phi = -c^22rs/r
<> rs/r < 1
<> ex 2 de Sitter dark energy
<> phi = -c^2/\r^2
<> Therefore, Woodward's solution appears
<> inconsistent - at best it means globally
<> flat Minkowski space seen in inertial frames.
<> i.e. /\r^2 = 1
<> 2rs/r = 1
<> Of course both those conditions describe
<> event horizons as in the world hologram model
<> that the interior bulk is an image of the
<> surrounding surface event horizons. I have been
<> saying that Mach's Principle needs to be
<> reinterpreted as the Hologram Principle.
<> [A Very Nice Image Indeed Was Here]

The Confused Pufferfish said:

<> <> best,
<> <>
<> <> Confused Pufferfish
<> <>

 - THE END -

University of Pennsylvania
Scholarly Commons
Department of Physics

Mach's Holographic Principle
Justin Khoury
Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics,
University of Pennsylvania,

Maulik Parikh
Columbia University,
Inter-University Centre for Astronomy and Astrophysics

Suggested Citation:
Khoury, J. and Parikh, M. (2009).
"Mach's holographic principle." Physical Review D. 80, 084004.
(c) 2009 The American Physical Society

This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons.
For more information, please contact:

Mach's holographic principle

Justin Khoury1,2 and Maulik Parikh3,4

1Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics,
31 Caroline St.
N., Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 2Y5

2Center for Particle Cosmology,
University of Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, USA

3Institute for Strings, Cosmology, and Astroparticle Physics,
Columbia University,
New York, New York 10027, USA

4Inter-University Centre for Astronomy and Astrophysics,
Post Bag 4, Pune 411007, India

(Received 16 February 2007; revised manuscript
received 9 March 2009; published 6 October 2009)

Mach's principle is the proposition that inertial frames
are determined by matter. We put forth and implement a
precise correspondence between matter and geometry that
realizes Mach's principle.  Einstein's equations are not
modified and no selection principle is applied to their
solutions; Mach's principle is realized wholly within
Einstein's general theory of relativity. The key insight
is the observation that, in addition to bulk matter, one
can also add boundary matter.  Given a space-time, and
thus the inertial frames, we can read off both boundary
and bulk stress tensors, thereby relating matter and
geometry. We consider some global conditions that are
necessary for the space-time to be reconstructible, in
principle, from bulk and boundary matter.  Our framework
is similar to that of the black hole membrane paradigm
and, in asymptotically anti-de Sitter space-times, is
consistent with holographic duality.

DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.80.084004
PACS numbers: 04.20.Cv, 11.25.Tq, 98.80.Jk

PHYSICAL REVIEW D 80, 084004 (2009)


PHYSICAL REVIEW D 80, 084004 (2009)
[1] E. Mach, The Science of Mechanics: A Critical and
Historical Account of Its Development (1893), translated
by T. J. McCormach (Open Court, LaSalle, IL, 1960).
[2] S. Weinberg, Gravitation and Cosmology: Principles and
Applications of the General Theory of Relativity (John
Wiley and Sons, New York, 1972).
[3] A. Einstein, Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin
(Math. Phys.) 1914, 1030 (1914).
[4] A. Einstein, Ann. Phys. (Leipzig) 55, 241 (1918).=

See also, Full text of "Engineering education"

The Confused Pufferfish - stahl@aeriusphotonics.com
Aerius Photonics, LLC
has been acquired by FLIR Systems
Aerius Photonics, LLC and FLIR Systems
Read the Press Release
Enter the Site
The Dislocated Platypus - sarfatti@pacbell.net

   "As Thomas Huxley said, the universe acts a lot like
a chess game in which the player on the other side
remains invisible to us.  By analyzing the moves, we
try to form an image of the intellect behind them.
Images that have seemed almost believable to me at
various times have included the gods and goddesses
of ancient Greece (if you develop a Classic Poetry
habit, that kind of neurolinguistic programming can
happen...) and also, of course, those extra-terrestrials
who have so much popularity these days.  I have also
considered the player on the other side as more
impersonal, like the Tao, or more bizarre, like Shiva
Dancing, or more abstract, like Philip K. Dick's Vast
Active Living Information System (VALIS.) Mostly, though
I think of the player on the other side as a pookah --
a resident of Ireland, in rabbit form, who may at any
time dump a truckload of the Unknown and Inexplicable
right on your doorstep."
   --Robert Anton Wilson (1932 - 2007)

   "What is necessary for man is to free himself from
 the entire past of mankind, not only his individual
 past. That is to say, you have to free yourself from
 what every man before you has thought, felt and
 experienced -- then only is it possible for you
 to be yourself. The whole purpose of my talking to
 people is to point out the uniqueness of every
 individual. Culture or civilization or whatever you
 might call it has always tried to fit us into a
 framework. Man is not man at all; I call him a
 'unique animal' -- and man will remain a unique
 animal as long as he's burdened by the culture."
   The "Anti-Krishnamurti":
   -- Uppaluri Gopala Krishnamurti (1918 - 2007)

      A D D E N D U M

Dr. Jack Sarfatti, Ph.D.
Dr. James F. Woodward, Ph.D.
Dr. Stanley Deser, Ph.D.

On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 05:40:03, eMpTy wrote:

-----0rigami Massage-----
| Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 05:40:03 -0800 (GMT-08:00)
| From: MT <mthorn@ix.netcom.com>
| To: Gary G Ford <ggford@shaw.ca>,
|     Demo Hassan <demohassan@yahoo.com.mx>
| Subject: ... How many incarnations ... [Re: DR QUANTUM
|         (Re: Retro Temporal Paradox Avoidance Bifurcation Syndrome
|         & Deser's model, Kip Thorne)]
| CC: Alexandra Bruce <alexandra.bruce18@gmail.com>,
|     eMpTy <mthorn@ix.netcom.com>,
|     Acharya S <acharya_s@yahoo.com>,
|     "Greg Lunt. JD" <greglunt@yahoo.com>,
|     Jack Sarfatti <sarfatti@pacbell.net>,
|     George Knapp <gknapp@8newsnow.com>,
|     Paul Zielinski <iksnileiz@gmail.com>,
|     Stanton T Friedman <fsphys@rogers.com>,
|     R Vega <rvega@skywerx.com>,
|     Mark Thornally <mthornally@yahoo.com>,
|     "Gary G. Ford" <swimp@shaw.ca>

On Dec 29, 2011 8:01 PM, Gary G Ford <ggford@shaw.ca> wrote:

<> ... How many incarnations
<> have you now had since your distant original
<> slugdom?  And how many more will come?!
<> http://pw1.netcom.com/~mthorn/divinepr.htm

    The most obvious, always forgotten, then
instantly remembered, to be forgotten again,
then remembered (since it is so obvious), is:

    Everything is mind.

Damn! I forgot, again... What?

Oh, never mind. It doesn't matter.

Wait! Yes... okay... mind, right?

imagined in the mind.

What is matter, but mind's interpretation
conveniently solidified in a mental construct.

Without mind, is there really anything, like matter?

But wait, is it not so that mind is merely a product
of material brain processes? But again, that pesky
obvious answer: that too is only realized, mentally.

So obvious, so easy to forget, then remembered...

They (you know, other minds) like to say that
if you removed all minds from all universes,
would there really be any such thing as a
universe? Minds (you know, others like you)
like to say (as if they're really saying
something) that the mind of a god is required
as a first cause solidification interpreting
the convenient mental construct which
manifests as matter (or the mental construct
known as matter) out of which emerges all
sorts of little sub-god minds, either transient
or eternal depending on whose mind is doing
the mental configuring. In a previous incarnation
this kind of mental meandering used to piss off my
mind, see, "Abraxas^ Ponders Final Extinction"
Now I simply understand, without any real
understanding beyond the obvious experiential
aspect of my own brand of easily forgotten
mind. But, alas, my diseased mind-gland drifts
dangerously into realms lacking English language
cogency, and I wouldn't wish to annoy the esteemed
minds of our temporary tautological physicist
email residents whose mathemagickal workings I
find so fascinating right now. So Gary, thank
you for the eclectic emanation from your mind
with all its curious idiosyncrasies and cultural
artifacts. I will forward you a few dialogues
between Dr. Sarfatti and Dr. Woodward, et al.
that you might've missed, that I think you'll
find interesting -- their minds are working on
forthcoming books, something to look forward to,
I think.

   Happy Nouveau Year!
Say hello to the birds
and other creatures up
there in the great
white north mental
construct. -- eMpTy
       5:30AM SOL's System

-----End 0f 0rigami Massage-----

See also:

   The Care And Feeding Of Advanced Metamaterials
(Pay No Attention To The Creatures Behind The Curtain)

Have a great 2012. Later - eMpTy - 6:10AM