istanbul evden eve nakliyat
eşya depolama
uluslararası nakliyat
uluslararası evden eve nakliyat
evden eve nakliyat
istanbul ev taşıma
istanbul nakliye firması
evden eve nakliyat istanbul
ev eşyası depolama
istanbul depo kiralama
gebze nakliyat
taraftarium24
netspor
justin tv
selçuksports
Home
Back
Privacy, Cookies and Terms
Login
Blog
Science News
Weird Desk
Archive
John Cramer's paper in Jim Woodward's Starship book
Details
Category:
Jack Sarfatti Blog
Published: 15 August 2013
Jack Sarfatti
2 seconds ago
John Cramer's paper in Jim Woodward's Starship book
Like
·
·
Share
Jack Sarfatti
1) Cramer continues: “The propulsion effects observed so far are quite small, but not so small as to be useless … because of the G-in-denominator and their strong frequency dependence, the inertial transients can in principle produce very large propulsion forces. … Personal flying cars and reactionless heavy-lift Earth-to-orbit space vehicles cannot be ruled out …” That is precisely, what the good flying saucer evidence suggests. “ … the most interesting inertial transient … is the ‘second term,’ which is always negative and can in principle drive the inertial mass to zero or negative values … needed to stabilize wormholes and produce superluminal warp drives.” OK, here is the crux of Woodward’s conjectures that are beyond the fringe of mainstream physics today. For a long time I have wrestled with this. It seems obviously crackpot, so how can John Cramer take it seriously. Also Woodward is not a crackpot. So what was I missing? As Richard Feynman told me in his Cal Tech office in the late 1960’s. “What you cannot calculate yourself, you do not understand.” I saw a lot of nonsense about the reduction of inertial mass from the material binding energy, but of course, that really is nonsense, since it would destroy the material. Then it struck me. Analogous to Lenny Susskind’s “horizon complementarity” in his world hologram model, it all depends on who is looking. For example in the Alcubierre toy model for warp drive, Alice inside the warp bubble is not moving at all. More precisely, Alice is on a local timelike weightless zero g-force geodesic in her local tensor curvature field. In contrast, Bob outside the warp bubble of the starship “sees” superluminal speed of the starship. Similarly, in horizon complementarity, Bob far away from the black hole’s surface horizon never sees weightless Alice freely fall into the black hole on her radially inward timelike geodesic. Indeed, Alice’s image will appear to Bob to spread out all over the surface of the black hole. There is also the issue of a redshift.[i] Alice, however, will not feel anything unusual at the horizon if the classical equivalence principle[ii] is correct. – unless there is a firewall. Therefore, the apparent change in the inertia of the starship should only be seen by the external observer outside the warp bubble. Everything should appear quite normal inside the warp bubble. More precisely it is the nonlocal Mach screening factor C that changes not the intrinsic local inertia from the Higgs-Goldstone coherent vacuum superconductor field plus the confined real quarks in the virtual gluon/quark-antiquark plasma of SU3 quantum chromodynamics.[iii]
[i] The gravity redshift only should apply for static LNIF emitters, for example, excited atoms of essentially fixed position (static equilibrium) in the Sun or emitters fixed in the Harvard tower etc.. Therefore, photons emitted by LIF electrons falling through the black hole surface horizon should not redshift if the equivalence principle is correct. A locally coincident static LNIF in the gravity curvature field outside the horizon will redshift.
[ii] Special relativity works in a LIF.
[iii] P = CmV = 4-momentum of center of mass of starship seen by external observer
F = DP/ds = CDP/ds + PdC/ds Newton’s 2nd law of motion
D/ds is the covariant derivative relative to the starships invariant proper time along its local worldline
F = external real 4-force on starship’s center of mass
The Woodward propellantless propulsion term is PdC/ds as far as I can make sense of his proposal. Propellantless propulsion corresponds to F = 0.
In contrast, the observer inside the warp bubble sees C = 1 and dC/dt = 0.
a few seconds ago
·
Like
Previous article: EEG resonant 10 Hertz advanced radiation from our back from the future dark energy horizon
Prev
Next article: John Cramer on James Woodward's Mach Thruster for Spaceships
Next
© 2024 - 2020 Internet Science Education Project