Text Size

Tag » Star Gate
Oct 08

## My torsion field warp drive-stargate time travel equations

Posted by: JackSarfatti |
Tagged in: Warp Drive, Star Gate, Making Starships and Star Gates, 100 Year Star Ship

##### Jack Sarfatti
My torsion field warp drive-stargate time travel equations.
• Jack Sarfatti On Oct 7, 2013, at 6:42 PM, jacksarfattiwrote:

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 7, 2013, at 5:51 PM, Paul Zelinsky <yksnilez@gmail.com> wrote:

Thus by 1920 Einstein had understood that the g_uv were dynamical properties of a physical vacuum that are not fully determined by matter stress-energy.

It's the curvature R that is dynamical (also possibly torsion K in Einstein-Cartan)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_form

That is the transverse curl part of the spin connection that describes disclination defects aka curvature

The exact part of the spin connection 1-form

Sexact = df

f = 0-form

(actually a set of 0-forms fIJ where I,J are the LIF indices.

It's really SIJ and RIJ , but KI and eI

corresponds to artificial Newtonian gravity fields in Minkowski space

Technically GR in a nutshell

e is set of four tetrad Cartan 1-forms

S is the spin connection 1-form

The affine metric connection in general is

A = S + K

K = De = de + S/e

= torsion 2-form - corresponding to dislocation defects in Kleinert's world crystal lattice

R = DS = dS + S/S
= curvature 2-form

Einstein's 1916 GR is the limit

K = 0

Which gives LC = 0 in LIF EEP

&

D*R = 0 Bianchi identity

*R + A^-1e/e/e = k*T = Einstein field equation

* = Hodge duality operator

D*(T - A^-1e/e/e) = 0 is local conservation of stress-energy current densities

Note if there is torsion De = K =/= 0 then we have a direct coupling between matter fields T and the geometrodynamic field K - for warp drive & stargate engineering?

Einstein Hilbert action density including the cosmological constant A^-1 is the 0 form

*R/e/e + *A^-1e/e/e/e

A = area-entropy

of our dark energy future cosmological event horizon bounding our causal diamond.

Gauge transformations (corresponding to general coordinate transformations) are

d^2 = 0

S -> S' = S + df'

S/f = 0

R = DS --> R' = DS'

R' = dS' + S'/S'

= dS + d^2f' + (S + df')/(S + df')

= dS + S/S + S/df' + df'/S + df'/df'

/ is antisymmetric

df'/df' = 0

(analogous to AxA = 0 in 3-vector analysis cross-product)

R' = R CURVATURE 2-FORM INVARIANT

Physically, the GR gauge transformations are

LNIF(Alice) < ---> LNIF(Bob)

where Alice and Bob are "coincident" i.e. separations small compared to radii of curvature.

Zielinski wrote:

He tried to call this new ether "Machian", but it is hard to see what is Machian about it, other than that the g_uv field is at least partially determined by T_uv. But that is an action-reaction principle, not a Machian relativity of inertia principle. So if this new ether is at all
"Machian", it is only in the very weak sense that the spacetime geodesics depend on the distribution of matter according to the GR field equations (plus boundary conditions).

Right.

On 10/7/2013 2:46 PM, jack quoted Harvey Brown et-al
"The growing recognition, on Einstein’s part, of the tension between the field equations in GR and his 1918 version of Mach’s Principle led him, as we have seen, to effectively assign genuine degrees of freedom to the metric field in the general case (not for the Einstein universe). This development finds a clear expression in a 1920 paper,62 where Einstein speaks of the electromagnetic and the gravitational “ether” of GR as in principle different from the ether conceptions of Newton, Hertz, and Lorentz. The new, generally relativistic or “Machian ether”, Einstein says, differs from its predecessors in that it interacts (bedingt und wird bedingt) both with matter and with the state of the ether at neighbouring points.63 There can be little doubt that the discovery of the partial dynamical autonomy of the metric field was an unwelcome surprise for Einstein; that as a devotee of Mach he had been reluctant to accept that the metric field was not, in the end, “conditioned and determined” by the mass-energy-momentum Tμν of matter."
en.wikipedia.org
In the mathematical fields of differential geometry and tensor calculus, differential forms are an approach to multivariable calculus that is independent of coordinates. Differential forms provide a unified approach to defining integrands over curves, surfaces, volumes, and higher dimensional manifo...
Aug 14

## My review of James Woodward's Making Starships and Star Gates V1 under construction

Posted by: JackSarfatti |
Tagged in: Warp Drive, UFO, time travel, Star Gate, NASA, James Woodward, DARPA, 100 Year Star Ship

##### Jack Sarfatti
My review of Jim Woodward's Making Starships book - V1 under construction
• Jack Sarfatti Sarfatti’s Commentaries on James F. Woodward’s book
Making Starships and Star Gates
The Science of Interstellar Transport and Absurdly Benign Wormholes

The book has many good insights except for some ambiguous statements regarding:

1) The equivalence principle that is the foundation of Einstein’s theory of the gravitational field. This seems to be due to the author’s not clearly distinguishing between local frame invariant proper acceleration and frame dependent coordinate acceleration. Thus, the author says that Newton’s gravity force is eliminated in an “accelerating frame.” In fact, it is eliminated in a Local Inertial Frame (LIF) that has zero proper acceleration, though it has coordinate acceleration relative to the surface of Earth for example. All points of the rigid spherical surface of Earth have non-zero proper accelerations pointing radially outward. This violates common sense and confuses even some physicists as well as engineers not to mention laymen. It is a fact of the Alice in Wonderland topsy-turvy surreal world of the post-modern physics of Einstein’s relativity especially when combined with the faster-than-light and back from the future entanglement of particles and fields in quantum theory and beyond.
2) I find the author’s discussion of fictitious inertial pseudo forces puzzling. I include the centripetal force as a fictitious force in the limit of Newton’s particle mechanics sans Einstein’s local inertial frame dragging from rotating sources. That is, every local frame artifact that is inside the Levi-Civita connection is a fictitious inertial pseudo force. This includes, Coriolis, centrifugal, Euler, and most importantly Newton’s gravity force that is not a real force. The terms inside the Levi-Civita connection are not felt by the test particle under observation. Instead, they describe real forces acting on the observer’s local rest frame. A real force acts locally on a test particle’s accelerometer. It causes an accelerometer’s pointer to move showing a g-force. In contrast, Baron Munchausen sitting on a cannonball in free fall is weightless. This was essentially Einstein’s “happiest thought” leading him to the equivalence principle the cornerstone of his 1916 General Relativity of the Gravitational Field.
3) A really serious flaw in the book is the author’s dependence on Dennis Sciama’s electromagnetic equations for gravity. In fact, these equations only apply approximately in the weak field limit of Einstein’s field equations in the background-dependent case using the absolute non-dynamical globally-flat Minkowski space-time with gravity as a tiny perturbation. The author uses these equations way out of their limited domain of validity. In particular, the Sciama equations cannot describe the two cosmological horizons past and future of our dark energy accelerating expanding observable universe. What we can see with our telescopes is only a small patch (aka “causal diamond”) of a much larger “inflation bubble” corresponding to Max Tegmark’s “Level 1” in his four level classification of the use of “multiverse” and “parallel universes.” Our two cosmological horizons, past and future, that are thin spherical shells of light with us inside them at their exact centers may in fact be hologram computer screens projecting us as 3D images in a virtual reality quantum computer simulation. This is really a crazy idea emerging from Gerardus ‘t Hooft, Leonard Susskind, Seth Lloyd and others. Is it crazy enough to be true?
• Jack Sarfatti 4) John Cramer’s Foreword: I agree with Cramer that it’s too risky in the long run for us to be confined to the Earth and even to this solar system. British Astronomer Royal, Lord Martin Rees in his book “Our Final Hour” gives detailed reasons. Of course if a vacuum strangelet develops like Kurt Vonnegut’s “Ice-9”, then our entire observable universe can be wiped out, our causal diamond and beyond shattered, and there is no hope. That is essentially the apocalyptic worst-case scenario of the Bible’s “Revelations” and we will not dwell on it any further. Let’s hope it’s not a precognitive remote viewing like what the CIA observed in the Stanford Research Institute studies in the 1970’s.  Cramer cites the NASA-DARPA 100 Year Star Ship Project that I was involved with in the first two meetings. Cramer’s text is in quotes and italics. There is “little hope of reaching the nearby stars in a human lifetime using any conventional propulsion techniques … the universe is simply too big, and the stars are too far away. … What is needed is either trans-spatial shortcuts such as wormholes to avoid the need to traverse the enormous distances or a propulsion technique that somehow circumvents Newton’s third law and does not require the storage, transport and expulsion of large volumes of reaction mass.”
Yes, indeed. I conjecture as a working hypothesis based on the UFO evidence that traversable wormhole stargate time travel machines are the only way to go with warp drive used only as a secondary mechanism at low speeds mainly for silent hovering near the surfaces of planets and for dogfights with conventional aerospace craft. The stargates do not have the blue shift problem that the Alcubierre warp drive has although the Natario warp drive does not have the blue shift problem (high-energy collisions with particles and radiation in the path of the starship). Newton’s third law that every force acting on a material object has an equal and opposite inertial reaction force on the source of that force is a conservation law that follows from symmetry Lie groups of transformations in parameters of the dynamical action of the entire closed system of source and material object. This is a very general organizing principle of theoretical physics known as Noether’s theorem for global symmetries in which the transformations are the same everywhere for all times in the universe. For example:
Space Translation Symmetry Linear Momentum Conservation
Time Translation Symmetry Energy Conservation
Space-Space Rotation Symmetry Angular Momentum Conservation
Space-Time Rotation Symmetry
Internal U1 EM Force Symmetry Conserve 1 Electric Charge
Internal SU2 Weak Force Symmetry Conserve 3 Weak Flavor Charges
Internal SU3 Strong Force Symmetry Conserve 8 Strong Color Charges
• Jack Sarfatti In a propellantless propulsion system without the rocket ejection of real particles and/or radiation one must include the gravity curvature field (dynamical space-time itself) as a source and sink of linear momentum. Furthermore, if we include quantum corrections to the classical fields there is the remote possibility of using virtual particle zero point fluctuations inside the vacuum as a source and sink of linear momentum. However, the conventional wisdom is that this kind of controllable small-scale metastable vacuum phase transition is impossible in principle and to do so would violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics (extracting work from an absolute zero temperature heat reservoir). Even if we could do the seemingly impossible, propellantless propulsion while necessary is not sufficient for a true warp drive. A true warp drive must be weightless (zero g-force) timelike geodesic and without time dilation for the crew relative to the external observer outside the warp bubble that they were initially clock synchronized with. Localizing global symmetries requires the addition of compensating gauge connections in a fiber bundle picture of the universe. Indeed, the original global symmetry group is a smaller subgroup of the local symmetry group. The gauge connections define parallel transport of tensor/spinor fields. They correspond to the interactions between the several kinds of charges of the above symmetries. I shall go into more details of this elsewhere. Indeed localizing the above spacetime symmetries corresponds to generalizations of Einstein’s General Relativity as a local gauge theory. For example, localizing the space and time global translational symmetries means that the Lie group transformations at different events (places and times) in the universe are independent of each other. If one believes in the classical special relativity postulate of locality that there are no faster-than-light actions at a distance, then the transformations must certainly be independent of each other between pairs of spacelike separated events that cannot be connected by a light signal. However, the local gauge principle is much stronger, because it applies to pairs of events that can be connected not only by a light signal, but also by slower-than-light timelike signals. This poses a paradox when we add quantum entanglement. Aspect’s experiment and others since then, show that faster-than-light influences do in fact exist in the conditional probabilities (aka correlations) connecting observed eigenvalues of quantum observable operators independently chosen by Alice and Bob when spacelike separated. I shall return to this in more detail elsewhere. Finally, we have the P.W. Anderson’s anti-reductionist “More is different” emergence of complex systems of real particles in their quantum ground states with quasi-particles and collective mode excitations in soft condensed matter in which the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. This corresponds to spontaneous symmetry breaking of the quantum vacuum’s virtual particles, in its high energy standard model analog, to the Higgs-Goldstone “God Particle” now found at ~ 125 Gev in CERN’s LHC that gives rest masses to leptons and quarks as well as to the three weak radioactivity force spin 1 gauge W-bosons though not to the single spin 1 photon gauge boson and the eight spin strong force gluon gauge bosons. In this quantum field theory picture, the near field non-radiating interactions among the leptons and quarks are caused by the exchange of virtual spacelike (tachyonic faster-than-light off-mass-shell) gauge bosons continuously randomly emitted and absorbed by the leptons and quarks. To make matters more complicated unlike the single rest massless U1 photon, the three weak rest massive SU2 W bosons and the eight strong rest massless SU3 gluons carry their respective Lie algebra charges, therefore, they self-interact. A single virtual gluon can split into two gluons for example. The SU3 quark-quark-gluon interaction gets stronger at low energy longer separations. This is called quantum chromodynamic confinement and it explains why we do not see free quarks in the present epoch of our causal diamond observable universe patch of the multiverse. Free quarks were there in a different quantum vacuum thermodynamic phase shortly after the Alpha Point chaotic inflation creation of our observable universe that we see with telescopes etc. Indeed, most of the rest mass of protons and neutrons comes from the confined Heisenberg uncertainty principle kinetic energy of the three real confined up and down quarks and their plasma cloud of virtual zero point gluons and virtual quark-antiquark pairs. The Higgs Yukawa interaction rest masses of three bound real quarks is about 1/20 or less than the total hadronic rest masses.

The author, James F. Woodward (JFW), introduces Mach’s Principle though in an ambiguous way to my mind. He says that the computation of the rest mass from local quantum field theory as has been in fact accomplished for hadrons by MIT Nobel Laureate, Frank Wilczek et-al using supercomputers is not sufficient to explain the inertia of Newton’s Second Law of Particle Mechanics. This does sound like Occult Astrology at first glance, but we do have the 1940 Wheeler-Feynman classical electrodynamics in which radiation reaction is explained as a back-from-the-future retro causal advanced influence from the future absorber on the past emitter in a globally self-consistent loop in time. Indeed, Feynman’s path integral quantum theory grew out of this attempt. Hoyle and Narlikar, and John Cramer have extended the original classical Wheeler-Feynman theory to quantum theory. Indeed, the zero point virtual photons causing spontaneous emission decay of excited atomic electron states can be interpreted as a back from the future effect. The electromagnetic field in the classical Wheeler-Feynman model did not have independent dynamical degrees of freedom, but in the Feynman diagram quantum theory they do. However, the retro causal feature survives. Therefore the only way I can make sense of JFWs fringe physics proposal is to make the following conjecture. Let m0 be the renormalized rest mass of a real particle computed in the standard model of local quantum field theory. Then, the observed rest mass m0’ equals a dimensionless nonlocal coefficient C multiplied by the local m0 renormalized rest mass. Mach’s Principle is then C = 0 in an empty universe of only real test particles without any sources causing spacetime to bend. Furthermore, C splits into past history retarded and future destiny advanced pieces. Now is there any Popper falsifiable test of this excess baggage?
• Jack Sarfatti 1) Springer-Praxis Books in Space Exploration (2013)
2) Einstein in Zurich over one hundred years ago read of a house painter falling off his ladder saying he felt weightless.
3) I have since disassociated myself from that project, as have other hard
...See More
• Jack Sarfatti 4) Roughly speaking, for particle mechanics, the dynamical action is the time integral of the kinetic energy minus the potential energy. The classical physics action principle is that the actual path is an extremum in the sense of the calculus of variations relative to all nearby possible paths with the same initial and final conditions. Richard P. Feynman generalized this classical idea to quantum theory where the actual extremum path corresponds to constructive interference of complex number classical action phases one for each possible path. There are more complications for velocity-dependent non-central forces and there is also the issue of initial and final conditions. The action is generalized to classical fields where one must use local kinetic and potential analog densities and integrate the field Lagrangian density over the 4D spacetime region bounded by initial history and final teleological destiny 3D hypersurfaces boundary constraints. Indeed, Yakir Aharonov has generalized this to quantum theory in which there are back-from-the-future retro causal influences on present weak quantum measurements made between the past initial and future final boundary constraints. Indeed, in our observable expanding accelerating universe causal diamond, these boundary constraints, I conjecture, are our past cosmological particle horizon from the moment of chaotic inflation leading to the hot Big Bang, together with our future dark energy de Sitter event horizon. Both of them are BIT pixelated 2D hologram computer screens with us as IT voxelated “weak measurement” 3D hologram images projected from them. The horizon pixel BIT quanta of area are of magnitude (~10^-33 cm or 10^19 Gev)^2. The interior bulk voxel IT quanta of volume are of magnitude (~10^-13 cm or 1 Gev)^3. This ensures that the number N of BIT horizon pixels equals the number of IT interior voxels in a one-to-one correspondence. The actually measured dark energy density is proportional to the inverse fourth power of the geometric mean of the smallest quantum gravity Planck length with the largest Hubble-sized scale of our future de Sitter causal diamond ~ 10^28 cm. This, when combined with the Unruh effect, corresponds to the Stefan-Boltzmann law of black body radiation that started quantum physics back in 1900. However, this redshifted Hawking horizon blackbody radiation must be coming back from our future de Sitter cosmological horizon not from our past particle horizon.
• Jack Sarfatti 5) Localizing the four space and time translations corresponds to Einstein’s general coordinate transformations that are now gauge transformations defining an equivalence class of physically identical representations of the same curvature tensor field. However, the compensating gauge connection there corresponds to torsion fields not curvature fields. The curvature field corresponds to localizing the three space-space rotations and the three space-time Lorentz boost rotations together. Einstein’s General Relativity in final form (1916) has zero torsion with non-zero curvature. However, T.W.B. Kibble from Imperial College, London in 1961 showed how to get the Einstein-Cartan torsion + curvature extension of Einstein’s 1916 curvature-only model by localizing the full 10-parameter Poincare symmetry Lie group of Einstein’s 1905 Special Relativity. The natural geometric objects to use are the four Cartan tetrads that correspond to Local Inertial Frame (LIF) detector/observers that are not rotating about their Centers of Mass (COM) that are on weightless zero g-force timelike geodesics. Zero torsion is then imposed as an ad-hoc constraint to regain Einstein’s 1916 model as a limiting case. The ten parameter Poincare Lie group is subgroup of the fifteen parameter conformal group that adds four constant proper acceleration hyperbolic Wolfgang Rindler horizon boosts and one dilation scale transformation that corresponds to Herman Weyl’s original failed attempt to unify gravity with electromagnetism. The spinor Dirac square roots of the conformal group correspond to Roger Penrose’s “twistors.”
•

Oct 24

## Excerpts from my new book Star Gate under construction Oct 24, 2012

Posted by: JackSarfatti |
Tagged in: Star Gate

Star Gate

Making Star Trek Real

Jack Sarfatti

Preface

I assume, as a working hypothesis, that UFOs are real mechanical craft of an advanced intelligence that has been interfering in our history perhaps since the beginning of our species. The Garden of Eden story, for example, would have been how pre-scientific humans, our ancestors, would describe their own creation by an advanced intelligence using genetic engineering. Similarly, for the immaculate conception of Jesus Christ that would be an example of human cloning with the Star of Bethlehem being a UFO.  This advanced intelligence is most likely from our future descendants who have mastered time travel and are creating themselves in what Russian physicist Igor Novikov has called a “globally consistent loop in time.”

The Pentagon’s DARPA with NASA has launched a “100 Year Star Ship” project. I was one of the first thirty “visionaries” invited to formulate it in early 2011 near Sausalito, California. The distances and the Einstein time dilations to the stars and beyond are too big for conventional rocket propulsion. The only way such a goal can be achieved is with low power Star Gate Warp Drive super-technology. The UFOs have such super-technology already in my opinion – and also in NASA astronaut moon-walker Edgar Mitchell’s opinion. We simply have to catch up and catch up quickly to avert the impending destruction of civilization in a perfect storm of primitive tribalism, climate-change[1], political incompetence and organized crime destroying the world financial system.[2]

I will also assume, as part of this “war game,” that the advanced intelligence piloting us has sophisticated EMP rendering our conventional weapons impotent and obsolete including mind-control much more powerful than that envisioned in the “Manchurian Candidate” for example. There have been profound advances in “presponse” experiments and the CIA SRI Remote Viewing experimentson the brain showing that conscious experiences act backwards in time exciting neural activity precognitively. We now understand this as “signal nonlocality” that violates orthodox quantum theory in the same way that Einstein’s 1916 General Theory of Relativity of the gravitational field violates his earlier 1905 Special Theory of Relativity. All of this will be explained in detail in this book. That is, orthodox quantum theory is a limiting case of a larger post-quantum theory that explains the “hard” mind-matter problem of how we have inner conscious experiences (aka “qualia”).

Finally, I will show that the “Hermetic” idea that our observable universe is alive and conscious in a piece of the cosmic landscape multiverse, makes perfect sense in the new hologram virtual simulated Matrix reality theory of Lenny Susskind, Seth Lloyd and others in a way that is consistent with the latest accelerating universe dark energy observations of precision cosmology. In fact, just as the cooled black body retarded radiation from the hot Big Bang comes from close to our past cosmic horizon, so does the dark energy come as advanced Hawking cooled black body radiation back from our future cosmic horizon. This basic idea was already found in the work of John Archibald Wheeler and Richard P. Feynman at the start of World War II.

I am a “lazy dog” and I don’t want to waste time reinventing the wheel on the orthodox mainstream physics needed for you to get even a glimpse of what we must do in order to survive and fulfill our Manifest Destiny in our Matrix Reality. Therefore, I will refer the reader to easily accessed Wikipedia articles some of which I will modify to suit my objectives. Wikipedia got off to a rocky start especially in my case where my numerous enemies and detractors used it to make me look much more eccentric and out of the box than I am. It has gotten much better in recent years especially due to a secret group called “Slim Virgin” who totally changed the formerly libelous distortions about me into an accurate picture the last time I checked. Of course, MIT physics professor historian David Kaiser’s book “How the Hippies Saved Physics” has helped immensely. I am the most cited person in the index of that book which has been reviewed in all the major media including The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Nature, Scientific American, American Scientist, Physics Today et-al. Now that we have saved physics, it is time for us in true Super Hero style to save the planet! ;-)

[1] I am not endorsing the view that climate-change is primarily man-made here. It may be mostly caused by changes in the Sun’s activity. Whatever the cause, it is happening.

[2] September 15, 2008 collapse of the sub-prime mortgage bubble with global repercussions and a \$16 trillion US Debt (much of it from our Iraq and Afghanistan wars of course).

From quantum field theory we know that matter comes in two distinct forms real and virtual with qualitatively different effects on measurements. Virtual matter is inside the quantum vacuum in the form of zero point energy. Real matter forms are excited states outside the quantum vacuum. Technically, there is a tight constraint between energy, linear momentum and rest mass for real matter that is broken for virtual matter. If we ignore gravity then we can get away with ignoring virtual matter and sweep it under the rug to a great extent with the exception of small radiative corrections like the Lamb shift of spectral line in atomic hydrogen and the Casimir force between uncharged flat closely spaced conducting plates of metal. However, we cannot do so when we include gravity because then even virtual matter must warp spacetime in order to obey Einstein’s equivalence principle. It turns out that virtual light in three dimensions of space must anti-gravitate the way the dark energy accelerating the expansion of space in our observable universe does. Oddly enough, virtual electron-positron pairs in three dimensions must gravitate the way dark matter does. We will come back to this fascinating clue. However, the physics changes in unexpected ways if space is reduced to two dimensions. In fact, this is the case for both our observer-dependent past and future cosmological horizons that are spherical surfaces surrounding us at their centers. This gets us the idea that we are three-dimensional hologram image simulations projected from both our past and future two-dimensional horizons that are analogous to the hologram plates or “screens.” Indeed, MIT’s Seth Lloyd and others have argued that our cosmic horizons are quantum computers with us as the programs. This is a very crazy idea, but to paraphrase Niels Bohr to Wolfgang Pauli, is the hologram simulated reality idea crazy enough to be true? If so, it would give deeper meaning to John Archibald Wheeler’s “IT FROM BIT” provided we also add the inverse “BIT FROM IT” in an Oroborus “Law without law” “universe as a self-excited circuit” related to Novikov’s “globally self-consistent loop in time.” We will come back to this web of ideas when we also change “BIT” to “QUBIT.” The big problem here that Lenny Susskind calls the 800 lb gorilla in the room is that the dark energy density from virtual light in quantum theory is at least 120 powers of ten too big. My computation that the virtual light is maximally red-shifted advanced Wheeler-Feynman-Hawking black body radiation back-from-our-future cosmological horizon one Planck length thick solves that problem neatly using only orthodox mainstream elementary physics.

Although Einstein showed that space (-time) is warped (curved) by matter and the warping, in its turn, tells matter how to move in a two-way feedback loop, nevertheless, we will see in detail that Newton was correct that proper non-inertial accelerated motions are absolute deviations away from slower-than-light (timelike) inertial “geodesic” motions. The geodesics are the straightest paths in curved four-dimensional space-time. They can and do appear as curved orbits when projected down to three-dimensional space. Although, proper accelerations of objects are absolute essentially as Newton thought, the local laws of motion expressed as tensor differential equations from his calculus do not depend on the motion of the detectors that measure these motions. This is called the principle of general covariance. However, any theory of physics can be made “generally covariant.” However, Einstein’s General Relativity has a second independent idea known as the “equivalence principle” that a state of uniform proper acceleration, the same for all the particles in an extended object, cannot be locally distinguished from Newton’s gravity force. The key word here is “locally”. You know when you properly accelerate. You feel the g-force as “weight.” But we feel weight standing still here on the surface of Earth. Does that mean that we are continually really accelerating even though we are standing still? Yes, Dorothy, you are not in Kansas anymore. That’s the way it is in the topsy turvy curved spacetime we live in that defied common sense. We shall come back to this key idea of Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity of the gravitational field. In fact, we never feel a “gravity force” at all because in fact there is no such thing. What we feel as g-force are the quantum electrodynamic reaction forces needed to push us off a timelike geodesic in curved four-dimensional space-time. We are weightless on a geodesic as in the case of Felix Baumgartner’s Red Bull Stratos who was approximately in geodesic motion in the early part of his fall from the edge of Earth’s atmosphere thirteen miles up where and when air friction could be neglected to a good approximation. The space-time fabric warp (curvature) field is a dynamical field exactly like the electromagnetic field.  The curvature field consists in the patterns of neighboring geodesics that are influenced by local concentrations of energy, pressure and stresses of matter. Non-gravity forces pushing the test particles off their natural Aristotelian force-free geodesic motions cause Newton’s absolute proper accelerations of test particles of matter. Test particles are small pieces of low density matter that do not generate a self-gravity field to a good approximation as distinct from large and/or high density matter like the Earth that do generate significant amounts of spacetime curvature.