Apparently we can feasibly get warp drives

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Postby GIThruster » Wed Jan 23, 2013 8:26 pm

My understanding is that Sonny's calculations concerning warp are not dependent upon his QVF model. If that's true they may indeed be useable by M-E warp technology to reduce the negative mass necessary for a warp drive.

My only trouble with Sonny's warp model is it hasn't been published for proper review. So we don't know if the math is right. I have caught Sonny's math mistakes in the past myself, and someone here already posted about what they thought was an error. This is why you really do want to publish before you start fundraising. I am hoping Sonny's warp calculations are correct, but there is no way to know until they go through proper review.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

Nydoc
Posts: 40
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:45 am

Postby Nydoc » Wed Jan 23, 2013 11:28 pm

GIThruster wrote:Emm. . .pretty sure in this case they're not. Wheeler proposed a definition for Quantum Foam that yes, addresses a different topic, but this experiment was looking at the primary ZPF conjecture
Ok. I was thinking 'quantum fluctuation' might be a broader term for other things in quantum physics besides just quantum foam.

GIThruster wrote:These theories are PATHOLOGICAL SCIENCE that almost no mainstream physicists pay attention to because it is so obviously wrong.
Ahhh. That might explain some things. I had noticed that one of the researchers had been a guest on Coast to Coast AM in the past and that raised a red flag for me. Then later I was watching a presentation from another of the researchers on youtube and I noticed the video was hosted by american antigravity (AAG). I started poking around on americanantigravity.com and saw words of praise for AAG from Richard Hoagland.

I'm still eagerly awaiting the publication of Sonny's work, but I suppose if the topic is warp drives then you can't help but attract the attention of strange people.

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Postby GIThruster » Wed Jan 23, 2013 11:52 pm

There are some people involved in ZPF who have my respect, especially including Sonny, Eric Davis and Hal Puthoff. They are however not responding to the objections to the theory they hold.

Tim Ventura at AAG has no critical thinking skills and posts up anything he can get from any crackpot who will spend time on the phone. Hoagland. . .isn't he the guy who says there was a civilization complete with pyramids on Mars or some such? I don't recall Ventura ever being that off his rocker.

Not familiar with Coast to Coast.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

Nydoc
Posts: 40
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:45 am

Postby Nydoc » Thu Jan 24, 2013 6:20 am

Coast to Coast is a radio show for conspiracy theorists, out of body experiences, alien abductions, time travel, ghosts, crystal skulls, vampires... basically anything anyone wants to talk about. It's been running since 1984 and Richard Hoagland has been a frequent guest on the show. Hoagland is the guy that came up with the face on Mars, the pyramids on Mars, and the NASA conspiracy to doctor photos to hide evidence of foliage and buildings on Mars. He also thinks Phobos is an alien spaceship and that Saturn's third largest moon contains the ruins of a space elevator.

I have respect for Sonny and Eric Davis as well. I can see how the people of Coast to Coast would want them as guests on the show, but they should be cautious.

paulmarch
Posts: 155
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 7:06 pm
Location: Friendswood, TX USA

Postby paulmarch » Fri Jan 25, 2013 5:08 am

Nydoc wrote:Coast to Coast is a radio show for conspiracy theorists, out of body experiences, alien abductions, time travel, ghosts, crystal skulls, vampires... basically anything anyone wants to talk about. It's been running since 1984 and Richard Hoagland has been a frequent guest on the show. Hoagland is the guy that came up with the face on Mars, the pyramids on Mars, and the NASA conspiracy to doctor photos to hide evidence of foliage and buildings on Mars. He also thinks Phobos is an alien spaceship and that Saturn's third largest moon contains the ruins of a space elevator.

I have respect for Sonny and Eric Davis as well. I can see how the people of Coast to Coast would want them as guests on the show, but they should be cautious.


Folks:

Ron's comment about the Quantum Mechanics (QM) folks never addressing the predicted QM vacuum energy density over-estimate problem is not really the case, for I've been told that the QM community has done so a number of times, but they just can't reach a consensus on how best to fix the problem. My understanding of this issue can be stated by asking what should be the actual cutoff frequency of the Dirac sea quantum vacuum plasma frequency today. (Electrical plasmas can conduct all E&M radiation frequencies from dc up to the plasma’s cutoff frequency, which is determined by the charge density and magnetic field conditions of the plasma in question.) The outrageously high vacuum energy density predictions quoted in the popular press for the QM vacuum plasma come about by assuming that that the Plank frequency (1.86x10^43 Hz) should be used for this vacuum plasma cut-off frequency because that is the highest frequency obtainable in this universe as predicted by QM. However and IMO that is an idealized case that probably has more to say about the universe’s vacuum plasma conditions at the instant of the big bang, than it says about the current state of the universe’s vacuum plasma state. If we assume that the big bang plasma density has cooled and dispersed from its original idealized QM value that it was some 13.7 billion years ago, which I believe is a reasonable surmise from our observed astonomical situation, today’s measured cosmological QVF vacuum density of ~9.9x10^-27 kg/m^3 is fairly close to what one would expect in the space between the galaxies. Of course the problem is proving this surmise beyond a reasonable level of doubt in a room full of contrarian physicists. I for one do not have the stomach for such a fight…
Paul March
Friendswood, TX

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Postby GIThruster » Fri Jan 25, 2013 4:37 pm

Paul,

There are more than a dozen standing objections to ZPF theory that have never been addressed. You're talking about one of them and I will remind you, not even that one has been fully addressed.

Bernie Haisch has been the main salesman for ZPF theory since he, Hal and Rueda came out with it in the 90's, and he can't even answer the other physics profs at Cal Tech. They think he's nuts. In fact I posted up a rubuttal of ZPF theory written by the folks at Cal Tech about a year ago--something like 5 pages of line after line objections--on Jim's mailing list just so Jack would have his hands full. Jack never answered a single point because there are no legitimate answers.

Haisch and Rueda did post a rebuttal to someone objecting to ZPF theory, (or better HRP for Haisch, Rueda and Puthoff) back in the late 1990's but that rebuttal was answered in the Astrophysical Journal and to the best of my knowledge Haisch then dropped the issue and has not answered his critics since that time. I think that was 1997.

It's not just that ZPF gives a cosmological constant that is "the worst prediction in the history of physics" but it's that it proposes all sorts of nutty things. How can the vacuum be so full of "virtual particles" and these particles be able to mediate momentum transfer and yet, they don't gravitate? Makes no sense they can convey momentum and yet not gravitate, but one of the first objections to ZPF was that the mass of these proposed particles would cause the universe to collapse from their gravity. So far as I know, the supposition that they do not gravitate was invented in response to the first objections made to Haisch at Astrophysical Journal, and his response was basically to say "well gee, then they don't gravitate" which is not how science is done.

There are lots of other objections. ZPF gives the wrong mass for the proton, by many orders of magnitude. ZPF proposes gouts of photons constantly popping into existence and yet these are never found by photodetectors. Life would not be what we have if ZPF were true. You wouldn't be able to take a still or moving picture of any kind.

There are lots of reasons the main stream objects to ZPF as a theory and until there is a serious effort to answer these objections, it shall remain pathological science. This doesn't mean that a positive experiment wouldn't be useful. Certainly it would. There are many instances in the history of science that this is just what it takes to get people to pay enough attention to do the careful analysis needed. But just saying, Haisch has had his hands on the money for such an experiment, and a patent to secure his supposed IP, for more than half a decade.

So where are the test results?
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

AcesHigh
Posts: 644
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 3:59 am

Postby AcesHigh » Fri Jan 25, 2013 5:19 pm

@GiThruster: plus the recent experiment finding evidence the universe is smooth?

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Postby GIThruster » Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:21 pm

Yes, certainly that's another issue that has yet to be answered by the ZPFers, though I would not fault them for this since it's so recent. I doubt that experiment has found its way into the peer reviewed journals yet.

Just try to have a big picture conceptual grasp of the trouble here. Sonny's explanation for thrust out of the Shawyer resonator was that it was pushing on virtual particles in the QVF. For this to generate thrust, those particles have to be able to transfer momentum, but for them to exist at all, they can't gravitate. Makes no sense.

For the ZPF argument to obtain for energy from the field, virtual particles need to be able to have their energy harvested, but this recent experiment says they don't interact with matter at all. So how does one harvest virtual energy?

Note I'm not here saying virtual particles don't have being in some sense. They are a useful accounting measure. Unfortunately, they can't be measured unless one invests serious energy into them at which point they're no longer virtual, and certainly not a source of energy. And this is the crazy nonsense that has surrounded ZPF since it's original conception. Virtual particle production entails a violation of conservation of energy for an extremely short period of time and during that time they can't interact or they are not virtual and would form a real violation of conservation. So pretending to get energy or propulsion from the vacuum has always been wrong headed and something the mainstream has known better than to attempt.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

hanelyp
Posts: 2179
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:50 pm

Postby hanelyp » Fri Jan 25, 2013 7:16 pm

My understanding of ZPF theory is that Heisenberg uncertainty allows fluctuations so long as the duration and magnitude combined don't exceed a level that allows clear detection. That such fluctuations might add to a total that is orders of magnitude above detection doesn't make sense to me. There's also the question of why fluctuations should be only of positive magnitude.

kcdodd
Posts: 722
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 3:36 am
Location: Austin, TX

Postby kcdodd » Sat Jan 26, 2013 1:58 am

I have dabbled in thinking about such things. There are several constraints the vacuum must obey. If I remember correctly last time I tried to understand it, the stress-energy tensor of the vacuum field must follow a specific form to be invariant under transformations, otherwise universal physics would look different in every reference frame. The Minkowski space metric tensor works, but I'm not sure if that is the only one that does. What that means is the positive energy density component, the T_00 term, would have to be balanced by a negative pressure, or the diagonal terms T_ii = -T_00 (no sum). I don't know the GR consequence of that, but my guess is it would not cause gravitation. If someone could illuminate I'd be interested.
Carter

MSimon
Posts: 14310
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Sun Jan 27, 2013 12:07 pm

Hal Puthoff?

Are you serious? I know of his work from fixing an EKG machine for a guy who was into ESP. (nice guy - Psychologist Norman Don - I got paid)

Hal Puthoff is Beyond the Fringe.

Now he may be right in this case. But he doesn't inspire confidence in me. Just the opposite.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
http://protonboron.com/
THE OPEN POLYWELL FUSION CONSORTIUM

AcesHigh
Posts: 644
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 3:59 am

Postby AcesHigh » Tue Jan 29, 2013 3:14 pm

I posted on another forum about Dr Sonny White´s work.

a reply from someone there

"in order to warp drive to work
you would have to be able to interfer with strings directly
we have no evidence for this theory

there is also need to supersymetry to exist and work
on idea if true

and a bran theory to work.

because its a recalculation of Alcubierre Drive, and Alcubierre Drive needs all that to work."

kcdodd
Posts: 722
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 3:36 am
Location: Austin, TX

Postby kcdodd » Tue Jan 29, 2013 8:14 pm

I don't understand how someone can know what must be known if it's not known. lol
Carter

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Postby GIThruster » Thu Jan 31, 2013 7:12 pm

MSimon wrote:Hal Puthoff?

Are you serious? I know of his work from fixing an EKG machine for a guy who was into ESP. (nice guy - Psychologist Norman Don - I got paid)

Hal Puthoff is Beyond the Fringe.

Now he may be right in this case. But he doesn't inspire confidence in me. Just the opposite.

Hal is hardly fringe. He's very highly respected both in the physics community and in the US intelligence community. If you're casting offhand judgements at him based upon his connections with ESP stuff, I would just remind you that Hal was chosen when at NSA to spearhead the precursur to what became CIA's psychic spying program, or the "Stargate" program. It was the specific protocols developed by Hal, Kit Green and Russel Targ that later gave birth to the Stargate investigation.

I have it from Hal himself, that this stuff while insightful, was never reliable and hence why it was abandoned and declassified. You can read all about it in dozens of books. However, Hal certainly did apply the tools of science to a field with no real scientific investigation before him, save the boneheaded Soviet research at the time and that at Princeton's PEAR center, which never much endorsed adequate protocols and thus ended up making all sorts of vacuous claims.

Now, Hal runs one of the most highly respected private physics labs in the world. Earthtech down in Austin still regularly does government contract work especially on sensitive issues. You'd do well to avoid slandering a guy like Hal Puthoff.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis


Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest