PS
Everyone, except perhaps Jim, agrees that a retarded EM OFFER wave from Alice falling on a hovering detector Bob very close to any future horizon of area-entropy A either black hole or de Sitter or Rindler will blue shift. According to Jim the return advanced CONFIRMATION wave to Alice will blue shift even more! Hence, a HANDSHAKE is impossible due to the enormous frequency mismatch in Jim's way of thinking.
i.e.
fret(Alice) ---> fret(Bob) ~ (A^1/4/Lp^1/2)fret(Alice)
According to Jim,
fadv(Alice) = (A^1/4/Lp^1/2)fret(Bob) = (A^1/2/Lp)fret(Alice)
fadv(Alice) >> fret(Alice)
violates TI
On Jun 6, 2013, at 12:52 PM, JackSarfatti <JackSarfatti@comcast.net> wrote:
Jim's scheme violates TI because Jim if he worked out his idea in detail would have advanced offer wave at a higher frequency than the retarded confirmation wave at the PAST absorber in the retrocausal case.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 6, 2013, at 12:35 PM, Ruth Kastner wrote:
"The only reason I replied was because of your claim that Jim's model 'violates Cramer's TI' -- to point out that your debate with Jim has no bearing on TI. Nor does my model obscure any important conceptual insights.
Best wishes"
RK
http://www.academia.edu/36632/Debate_on_cosmology_Sarfatti_vs_Woodward_Part_1
Jim also confuses the Hubble sphere where expansion speed is that of light with the cosmic horizons.
if you use static coordinates
gtt = 1 - r^2/A
1 + z = [gtt(receiver)/gtt(source)]^1/2
use r ~ A^1/2 - Lp in gtt(source) and r = 0 for gtt(receiver)
for advanced offer wave in the Cramer transaction
result is (first order Taylor series)
1 + z ~ (1/(Lp/A^1/2)^1/2) = (A^1/2/Lp)^1/2
---> infinity as Lp ---> 0
My argument in co-moving Friedmann coordinates below is consistent with the in static coordinates above.
As above
So below ;-)
Indeed Tamara Davis in her PhD says what I say about the change of distance to our past and future horizons It's obvious from her diagram (Fig 1.1)
We recede from our past particle horizon, we approach our future dark energy de Sitter horizon.
1) In a Cramer transaction a retarded offer wave to us from near our past horizon is redshifted.
An advanced confirmation wave from us to near our past particle horizon is blue shifted.
Our relative space is effectively expanding forward in time in this transaction with our past horizon.
2) In a Cramer transaction an advanced offer wave to use from our future horizon is redshifted.
A retarded confirmation wave from us to it is blue shifted.
Our relative space is effectively contracting forward in time in this transaction with our future horizon.
Therefore, it is effectively expanding backwards in time for a back from the future advanced wave to us.
Advanced Wheeler-Feynman Hawking black body radiation of peak energy hc/Lp is then redshifted down to hc/(LpA^1/2)^1/2 at our detectors.
From Stefan-Boltzmann T^4 law this gives energy density hc/Lp^2A, which happens to agree with the actual dark energy density accelerating out causal diamond observable patch of the multiverse.
A = area of our future horizon at intersection with our future light cone.
Jack Sarfatti proper acceleration in a static coordinate metric
ds^2 = gttdt^2 - grrdr^2 - r^2(spherical coordinate metric)
is
g(r) ~ gtt^-1/2d(g00/dr)
the two metrics of interest are
gtt = 1 - A^1/2/r black hole of area entropy A
we at r ---> infinity outside black hole
gtt = 1 - r'^2/A de Sitter horizon
we at r' = 0
inside cosmological horizon
use
1 + z = femit/fobserve f = frequency
1 + z = [gtt(observe)gtt(emit)]^1/2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift
Quantum gravity says horizons gtt = 0 are really Lp thick.
so for both metrics above using
r = A^1/2 + Lp for black hole
&
r' = A^1/2 - Lp
get same factors (Lp/A^1/2)^1/2 redshift of radiation emitted from A
(A^1/2/Lp)^1/2 blue shift of radiation falling into A.
Now the Hawking black hole radiation temperature at A is
T ~ h(A^1/2/Lp)c^2/cA^1/2kB ~ hc/kB(LpA^1/2)^1/2
and this redshifts down to hc/A^1/2kB ~ Newtonian horizon surface gravity just as Hawking says.
In contrast, for the new quantum gravity radial oscillations of the thickness of the horizon
T' ~ hc/LpkB
which redshifts down to us to T' ~ hc/kB(LpA^1/2)^1/2
by Stephan Boltzman T^4 law
this gives hc/Lp^2A
both for anomalous w = +1/3 radiation from black holes whose horizon is not observer dependent
& also dark energy density from future horizon which looks like w = -1 virtual photon vacuum energy peaked at c/(LpA^1/2)^1/2 frequency whose horizon is observer dependent.
We need to use John Cramer's TI here.
om an object that is moving away is proportionally increased in wavelength, or shifted to the red end of the spectrum. More generally, when an observer detects electromagnetic radiation outside the visible spectrum, "red...
In physics (especially astrophysics), redshift happens when light seen coming fr