ZPEnergy.com - Clusters of electron charge held together by the dark energy

From Sarfatti_Physics_Seminars yahoo group, Jack Sarfatti writes: Hal Puthoff today responded to:

In a message dated 1/18/2005 9:01:03 A.M. CST, "garysbekkum" writes: "The immediate issue that must be addressed is a "proof of concept" for the use of clusters of electron charge held together by the dark energy, as Rambaut's paper suggests the release of nuclear energy, perhaps even an electronic nuclear device scaled to catastrophic thermonuclear energy release. Such a "proof of concept" should also be considered highly sensitive or even secret given the potential for proliferation should such concepts come to fruition. This was the case, as I recall, for the proof of concept of the original fission device."

Hal: "My approach considers Casimir vacuum energy rather than dark energy as providing the binding force, but the implications are the same. See http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0408114 .

Collegially,

Hal"

Sarfatti: This proliferation of Hal's fundamental misunderstanding of the real problem here by journalists like Nick Cook and others is dangerous. I am not attacking Hal here. He is not alone in making this error. Clarity of thinking is my goal here.

The Casimir force is much too weak. FORGET IT! The dark energy is zero point energy! The zero point energy's electrical effect in the Casimir force ~ hcA/d^4 is really taping only the mutual induced electric dipole energy. The gravity influence of this zero point energy is a completely different physics from Einstein's

Guv + /zpfguv ~ 0

on a much more powerful scale.

Hal & Co have completely mis-identified the qualitative nature of the phenomenon.

On Jan 18, 2005, at 5:01 AM, Paul J. Werbos, Dr. wrote:

> Hi, Jack!
>
> ...

> In the previous email, I gently expressed some worry about your theory of gravity.
> If you require that the electron have a radius of 10**-13 cm, and if the scattering
> data put an upper limit of 10**-18, this suggests a need either to restructure
> the model or parameters -- or else a whole lot of explaining, a lot more than that
> last email you sent us. I understand that the mainstream 10**-18 view
> is not sancrosanct... but I wouldn't throw it out just on faith or personal authority.

No I am not doing anything of the kind. You (and probably others not just you :-)) do not understand my really NOVEL basic physical idea (conjecture) here of MICRO space warping. The "size" of the electron is not FIXED. It depends on how it is observed. It SHRINKS from variable space warping that is a function of the momentum transfer of the virtual photon probe. At low energy of chemistry and atomic physics it is 10^-13 cm with a plasma cloud reaching out to 10^-11 cm. But has you kick it with higher energy it SHRINKS down to 10^-18 cm! This is explained by Kip Thorne in his "Black Holes and Space Warps". The ratio of circumference C to physical Bohm hidden variable radius e^2/mc^2 ~ 10^-13 cm shrinks with increasing scattering momentum transfer p. The effective size of the electron to the virtual photon probe is (neglecting spin & charge - really need to use A. Burinski's Kerr-Newman micro-geon model) is roughly

C ~ (1 - (8pi/3)/zpf(e^2/mc^2)^3(p/h))^1/2(e^2/mc^2)

Note, that to get apparent measured scattering size = 0,

i.e. a "point"

(8pi/3)/zpf(e^2/mc^2)^3(p/h) = 1

i.e. ~ 10/zpf 10^-39 10^18 ~ 10^-22/zpf = 1

/zpf = (h/mc)^-2 ~ 10^22 cm^-2

That is, we have the beautifully consistent result that the plasma cloud of virtual electron-positron pairs (e+e-) at h/mc ~ 10^-11 cm is precisely what is needed to make the electron (also the quark) look like a "point particle" at scattering momentum transfers p ~ h/10^-18 cm, where the negative zero point energy density of the virtual e+e- plasma cloud is ~ (string tension)/zpf ~ (c^4/G)/zpf ~ 10^19Gev 1033 cm^-1 10^22 cm^-2 ~ -10^74 ergs/cc. But w = -1, there is equal and opposite positive quantum pressure. However the gravity influence of the ZPF is (energy density)(1 + 3w)

So this is

c^4/zpf = G*(energy density)

10^42 10^22 10^-74 ~ 10^-10 ~ G* ~ G in cgs units.

That is G stays invariant, but the zero point energy density is large enough to stabilize the extended electron Bohm hidden variable Wheeler micro-geon "Mass without mass".

>
> But the issue requires some precision in any case. The word "radius"
> is actually ambiguous, dangerously so -- and that might be our problem
> here. Maybe.
>
>


Create an account	Home · Topics · Downloads · Your Account · Submit News · Top 10


All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2002-2016 by ZPEnergy. Disclaimer: No content, on or affiliated with ZPEnergy should be construed as or relied upon as investment advice. While every effort is made to ensure that the information contained on ZPEnergy is correct, the operators of ZPEnergy make no warranties as to its accuracy. In all respects visitors should seek independent verification and investment advice. Keywords: ZPE, ZPF, Zero Point Energy, Zero Point Fluctuations, ZPEnergy, New Energy Technology, Small Scale Implementation, Energy Storage Technology, Space-Energy, Space Energy, Natural Potential, Investors, Investing, Vacuum Energy, Electromagnetic, Over Unity, Overunity, Over-Unity, Free Energy, Free-Energy, Ether, Aether, Cold Fusion, Cold-Fusion, Fuel Cell, Quantum Mechanics, Van der Waals, Casimir, Advanced Physics, Vibrations, Advanced Energy Conversion, Rotational Magnetics, Vortex Mechanics, Rotational Electromagnetics, Earth Electromagnetics, Gyroscopes, Gyroscopic Effects PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.