Newton's Rotating Bucket, Mach & NASA Gravity B Space Probe

Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Wheeler's solution to my EEP question is also below.

One of the first theorems of Newton's 17th century Principia is that
a
test particle inside a uniform density hollow spherical mass shell
does
not sense this outer shell. Not so when the shell rotates according
to
Einstein's GR. Remember there are no Shipov torsion effects here in
this
model. That is a larger theory than the 1916 GR considered here where

only T4 is locally gauged to Diff(4) to get the
coordinate-independent
objectively real LOCAL B compensating connection field 1-form whose
self-covariant exterior derivative 2-form is

B ~ Lp(Goldstone Phase),u of the post-inflation Higgs field from
ODLRO
vacuum coherence ABSORBING most of the random ZPF of ALL fields
explaining the small cosmological constant at large-scales.

Lp^2 - hG/c^3

,u = ordinary partial derivative

There are non-trivial winding number effects in the line integrals of
B
from multiple-connectedness non-contractible loops. More on that
later.

S = DB = dB + B/\B is an ANTISYMMETRIC Cartan 2-form

S = A&P "torsion" =/= Shipov torsion from locally gauging O(1,3).

DS = 0 is Bianchi identity for local current conservation of the
"torsion" current

D*S = *J is the source "field equation"

*J is a 3-form source

D*J = 0 is local conservation of the torsion source currents

None of the above should be confused with the Einstein
geometrodynamic
picture.

To get from this gauge force picture to Einstein's 1916 traditional
picture one MUST use the TETRAD EEP as the connecting bridge

g(LNIF) = (I + B)(LIF)(I + B)

Within this geometrodynamic pictu

"Inside a hollow, static spherically symmetric distribution of
matter,
in vacuum, we have the flat metric (Mink)uv. Therefore, in the weak
field and slow motion limit,the metric INSIDE A SLOWLY ROTATING
MASSIVE
SHELL may be written guv = (Mink)uv + huv.... Inside a thin shell of
total mass M and radius R rotating with angular velocity dW/dt ... by

substituting in the geodesic equation ... the acceleration of a test
particle INSIDE the rotating shell: G = c = 1 rotation axis is z

d^2x/dt^2 = -(8/3)(M/R)(dW/dt)(dy/dt) + (4/15)(M/R)(dW/dt)^2x

d^2y/dt^2 = +(8/3)(M/R)(dW/dt)(dx/dt) + (4/15)(M/R)(dW/dt)^2y

d^z/dt^2 = -(8/15)(M/R)(dW/dt)^2z "

6.1.38 p. 323

Note that the equation for a simple 1D harmonic oscillator is

V = (1/2)kz^2

F = ma = -dV/dz = - kz

dz^2/dt^2 + (k/m)z = 0

k/m = f^2

So that there is a natural frequency of oscillation here for the test

particle along the axis of rotation direction of the vacuum cyclone
in
the interior of the rotating shell

f^2 = (8/15)(GM/c^2R)(dW/dt)^2

The signs are wrong for the x & y degrees of freedom that are not
oscillatory, but are "Coriolis" in the velocity dependent terms and
"centrifugal" ~ f^2r

EEP QUESTION
AHA! on bottom of p. 323 Wheeler shows how to get h'0i = 0 by a
counter
rotation

phi' = phi - (4/3)(GM/c^2R)dW/dt

about the axis "and by a suitable redefinition of t and r one gets
the
FLAT MINKOWSI METRIC INSIDE THE SHELL". So this conforms to g = (I +
B)(Flat)(I + B)

Wheeler also cautions on p. 324 "despite the beautiful ... analogies
between classical electrodynamics and classical geometrodynamics, the

two theories are fundamentally different ... even for weak fields ...

[because of] the equivalence principle." See 6.11 for more details.

6.2 discusses Mach's principle in the form that "centrifugal forces
are
due to rotational motion of a system relative to other matter".

However, one cannot deduce the rest masses of the lepto-quark as any
kind of Mach Principle effect. Also the "matter" may be "VIRTUAL"
i.e.
exotic vacua of both dark matter and dark energy that is 96% of the
stuff of the world.

On Mar 28, 2005, at 1:06 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

Earth's J = 5.861 10^40 cm^2gramsec^-1 = 145 cm^2 Planck units

Earth's Mass M is 6x10^27 gm = 0.44 cm Planck units

Therefore J/Mc ~ 145/0.44 ~ 3 meters

For the Sun it's J/Mc ~ 1.6 x 10^48 gcm^2sec^-1 ~ 10^8 J(Earth)

M(Sun) ~ 10^6M(Earth)

So that only gives J/Mc ~ 300 meters for Sun - still too small.

Note that J/Mc GM/c^2 is a naked singularity for collapsed objects.

So the macro-quantum BE degeneracy effect, if any, would have to be
done
with black holes which are also identical for same mass & J if
no-hair
theorem is correct.

On Mar 28, 2005, at 10:21 AM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

Checking with Wheeler

g0phi = - (4JG/c^3r^2)sin(theta)

Should be

g0phi = - (4JG/c^3r^2)sin^2(theta)

The dipole pattern, i.e. the second factor of sintheta that I put in
the
base vector rsin(theta)dphi should be in g0phi.

This issue of the De-Broglie-Compton wavelength as J/Mc for giant
objects is curious.

V(Newton)rot = (J/Mc)(c^4/G)g0phi = (Macro-Quantum Compton
Wavelength)(String Tension)(Kerr Gravimagnetic Field)

is curious.

Imagine several identical giant rotating masses M separated by a
distance L J/Mc anything weird happen like in a Bose-Einstein
atomic
gas condensate? What about the Blackett effect here?

George Chapline says that the vacuum OLDRO field, central to my
theory,
can carry information like radio waves can. That is interesting also.

Chapline also says that Zurek is wrong about the emergence of
classical
physics from environmental decoherence super-selection, that it
really
comes from the generalized phase rigidity of the vacuum OLDRO Higgs
field. That basic idea is in PW Anderson's papers and I tend to agree

with it.

On Mar 27, 2005, at 6:32 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

Sufi Physics for Whirling Dervishes

The Shipov torsion field is zero here. The Brazilian (Arcos-Pereira)
"torsion" is simply the anti-symmetric Yang-Mills 2-form of the
non-trivial part of the Einstein-Cartan tetrad field and is,
therefore,
the "square root of the geometrodynamic tidal curvature". It's simply
a
neat Cartan form way of doing plain-vanilla 1916 GR with its
symmetric
metric g without the extensions to Shipov torsion from locally
gauging
O(1,3) in addition to locally gauging T4 to get Diff(4)xO(1,3) in the

tangent bundle.

Problem 1

Area = JG/c^3

The weak-field slow motion Kerr solution for a swirling whirling
gravimagnetic field vacuum tornado is

ds^2 ~ - (1 - 2GM/c^2r)(cdt)^2 + (1 - 2GM/c^2r)^-1dr^2 + r^2(dtheta^2
+
sin^2thetadphi^2)

- (4JG/c^3r^2)(sin^2theta)rdphi(cdt)

There there is only one dimensionless gravimagnetic field "dipole"
component in the spherical polar basis of Cartan 1-forms in R^3,
i.e.,
{dr, rdtheta, r(sintheta)dphi} with dimensions of length

g0phi = - (4JG/c^3r^2)sin(theta)

that is zero along the axis of rotation and maximum along the
equator.

(Note that in classical Newtonian mechanics J^2/Mr^2 is the
centrifugal
effective potential energy Vrot in the rotating non-inertial REST
frame
of the rotating body. Therefore, (J/Mc)(c^4/G)g0phi)= Vrot, where
J/Mc
is a kind of macro-quantum DeBroglie-Compton wavelength! )



Compute explicitly the Einstein-Cartan tetrads

eu^a = Iu^a + Bu^a

That obey the EEP, i.e.

(Weak Kerr Metric)uv = eu^a(Minkowski)abev^b

Is there a vacuum ODLRO Goldstone Phase for this Bu^a?


On Mar 27, 2005, at 5:16 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:


In fact, I have shown exactly how the Brazilian Yang-Mills "torsion"
connects the the geometrodynamic curvature and WHY exactly you cannot
write

(LC) = Inertial + Gravity

What you can do is write

Einstein-Cartan tetrad = Inertial + Gravity = e = I + B

You NEVER have e = 0 the way you have (LC) = 0 in the LIF!

(LC) is BILINEAR in the tetrads

In the simplest case of Minkowski space with Gravity B = 0 neglect
Goldstone phase origin of gravity & inertia

(LC) = Inertial

end of story

In the general case gravity B =/= 0

(LC) = Inertial + Inertial-Gravity + Gravity

There are always cross-terms when B =/= 0 in the Yang-Mills "torsion"

picture.

The EEP that (LC) = 0 locally in the LIF is not a simple cancellation

Inertial + Gravity = 0

Remember, I define these terms as pieces of tetrads and their is no
conflict with Newtonian gravity

i.e. B0^0 ~ V(Newton)/c^2 ~ (GM/c^2)(d/dr)log(r/Lp)

Goldstone Phase ~ log(r/Lp) for the ODLRO vacuum coherence Higgs
field
post-inflation.

in Newtonian weak field limit neglecting "geon" B^2 PLASTIC terms.

This is beautiful because it shows WHY the famous factor of 2 from
the
ELASTIC Yang-Mills gauge potential CROSS-TERMS!


On Mar 27, 2005, at 4:37 PM, wrote:

The idea is that the Einstein field and its energy-momentum can be
locally decomposed into inertial
and gravitational parts, in a frame-independent manner.


J: This is meaningless since you have no math. If by Einstein field
you
mean (LC) then you are wrong. The math says no!

Z: It seems to because of the "cross terms" in (LC).

J: I was doing the first non-trivial interesting problem in Minkowski

space with B = 0, NO CROSS TERMS to simply show you that the INERTIAL

ACCELERATION IN (LC) you asked about comes from the GCT Xu'^u
independent of B. Now, when B =/= 0 then you get cross terms, but the

extra g-force in (LC) you mentioned still comes from Xu'^u as before.

There is NO PROBLEM with Newtonian limit either!

When B =/= 0, in the Newtonian limit, with B I

g00 ~ (1 - 2V(Newton)/c^2) ~ (I0^a + B0^a)(Minkowski)ab(I0^b + B0^b)

-2V(Newton)/c^2 ~ B0^a(Minkowski)abI0^b + I0^a(Minkowski)abB0^b

= 2B0^0

Note the FACTOR OF 2

Ignore the PLASTIC term ~ B^2

V(Newton) = c^2B0^0

e.g. in Schwarzschild solution

V(Newton) = GM/r

B0^0 = GM/c^2r 1

Solves the Newtonian limit in terms of the non-trivial part of the
tetrad and its Goldstone Phase log(r/Lp).

Everything WORKS PERFECTLY!

LNIF = (FLAT + CURVED)(LIF)(FLAT + CURVED) = EEP

of course from this POV it's obvious there are g0i terms here in
general.

The issue is whether we can invert this relation to

(LIF) = (FLAT + CURVED)^-1(LIF)(FLAT + CURVED)^-1

Probably there is a simple general proof we can do that when guv is
non-singular?

xxein: Probably everything will fall into its simple place (wrt math
and symbology) when the nature of gravity is understood.

Think about E and B and how mysterious it was before the proper
relation of the em physical effects.

But gravity pervades and affects that realm. We guage with a guess
about the nature of gravity. An incorrect one; otherwise, there would
be absolutely no dissention, and formulas for prediction could follow a
simple scene to ~10^100 - except for our ability to 'compute' enough
amid the so-called 'chaos'.

If we fail to understand nature, we make chaos into chaos^3 or ^4
(depending upon which wrong understanding we use). And even 'that' can
exponentiate with the subsequent applications of belief.

In short form: I can't recall Wheeler's analogy of building a house
and what Einstein did, but he (AE) clearly used math to subvert the
proper foundation to fit the math rebuild upon it.

Don't fool with mother nature!!!