Element 115 and ZPF: how it might work, and it is a revolution.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Ok, I rewrite that sentence for a better understanding:

Because Gravitons (quanta of gravitational waves) are NOT photons, the general conclusions applicable to the photon rocket are not applicable to gravitons if not for some special configurations).
Gravitons can acquire mass!

WOW

a reply to: Dineutron

Well i guess it boils down to energy in energy out regardless of how its converted and whether thats useful. I suspect its not, and the energy required is obscenely high. But what do i know. i still haven't understood the whole photons not the same as gravitons thing.

Well now to bring up what were all thinking. The MEM generator thingy. Don't it look just like the cutaway in bob lazars depiction of the gravity amplifiers in the sport model. Smoking gun people. Bob lazar was right!

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: Dineutron

Well i guess it boils down to energy in energy out regardless of how its converted and whether thats useful. I suspect its not, and the energy required is obscenely high.

Can't speak for any of the other stuff discussed but Pais proposes creation of an artificial imbalance in space time using EM agitation of positively charged none linear mediums - this none equilibrium state is then spontaneously offset by a flood of virtual electrons and positrons from Dirac's sea as nature balances the books.

The fact you'd need a GOD level command and control system to operate such a contraption in areas of non homogeneity (i.e space or the atmosphere) doesn't escape me - but for the purposes of this discussion we can overlook.

The real Brucey bonus seems to be that if you can maintain the correct resonant frequencies/perturbation in your none linear positively charged medium- it causes an avalanche effect of virtual energy which keeps infilling the virtual imbalance you have created.

Space hasn't got time to do the maths - so it just self corrects the averages around the "anomaly" and in the process allows non classical quantum mechanics (superposition, tunnelling, phase space probability etc) to be experienced as macro effects.

I know it's all probably misdirection.....but it's elegant AF

originally posted by: Jukiodone
a reply to: BASSPLYR

Rightly sceptical IMO... the paper is purposefully unintelligible ..
If I had to bet- there is no Sal Pais and if there were - he wouldnt use the Haisch/Puthoff PV model as the "proof" citation.


TBF- it was a bit of a joke bait post to see if mbkennel would do the leg work of looking into it - as I've already worn out the Pais welcome mat with Arbi....

yeah, the paper is about 5 pages when it would need to be about 300.


like for example:

Close inspection of equation (2) results in an important realisation, namely: strong
local interaction with the high energetics of the quantum vacuum fields’ fluctuations
superposition (macroscopic vacuum energy state) is possible in a laboratory environment,
by application of high frequency gyration and/or high frequency vibration of minimally
charged objects (order of unity), in an acceleration mode.

Huh? It vaguely described some sort of electromagnetic device but not really and then waltz over to some assertion of magic physics by dint of proclaiming "close inspection of equation (2)" which offers nothing relating to "high energetics of quantum vacuum field's fluctuation". Which are in fact pretty low damn energy because vacuum is dark.

Enrico Fermi demonstrated a nuclear reactor by a making a nuclear reactor.

and the very next assertion is:

Local polarisation of the vacuum in the close proximity of a spacecraft equipped with
an HEEMFG system would have the effect of cohering the highly energetic and random
quantum vacuum fields’ fluctuations, which virtually block the path of an accelerating
spacecraft, in such a manner that the resulting negative pressure of the polarised vacuum
allows less laboured motion through it (Froning, 2009).

Uh, like how does
"effect of cohering the highly energetic and random
quantum vacuum fields’ fluctuation"

work?

and how does "which virtually block the path of an accelerating
spacecraft, in such a manner that the resulting negative pressure of the polarised vacuum
allows less laboured motion through it" work?

DP.

a reply to: mbkennel

Appreciate the response .....The issue with the Pais piece is the lack of criticism from people who know how to deconstruct falsified theory.
Saying something doesnt appear to be recognisable physics (as per thedrives pet physics bod) makes no sense to me when the author has provided more than enough information for people to specifically identify the falsified bits.

So in terms of:

originally posted by: mbkennel
Uh, like how does
"effect of cohering the highly energetic and random
quantum vacuum fields’ fluctuation"

work?

and how does "which virtually block the path of an accelerating
spacecraft, in such a manner that the resulting negative pressure of the polarised vacuum
allows less laboured motion through it" work?

Agree...so I go away and read Fronings talk and it looks like he's proposing creation of some sort of scalar potential gradient in the required direction of motion.
I cross reference the basic claims and because we're clearly in none fully understood physics territory with a lot of this- I dont see anything falsified....just debatable interpretations of debatable observations.

To then completely confuse matters- randomly click on a recent article aboutquantised gravity and what do you know...they're using Aharanov Bohm (is that scalar potential???) "shielding" to do the measuring.

Found an abstract here: sites.google.com...

a reply to: AndyMayhew

No, you gotta shoot the laser at it the 0.65 seconds it exists. Can't imagine how they stockpiled it.



They were so sure that stable island was going to show up by 114.

Now the magic number is 126, with lots of promise for Unbihexium. Currently predicted to have a 100 year Half-Life.

Yet they cant get past Element 121 with current technology. So its an inaccessible island. Can't find a heavy and stable enough projectile to reach that level of energy. Or any "stable" superheavy element.

Really cool stuff though.

Lazar knew enough to pull it off and at the time they hadn't even got to element 110 yet, which wasn't confirmed until 1994. So for 12 years there the of island of stability was top of the list of what was coming next.

Every time superheavy elements are used for anything I can't help but ask, "Where do they put the particle accelerator?"

originally posted by: Jukiodone
a reply to: mbkennel

Appreciate the response .....The issue with the Pais piece is the lack of criticism from people who know how to deconstruct falsified theory.
Saying something doesnt appear to be recognisable physics (as per thedrives pet physics bod) makes no sense to me when the author has provided more than enough information for people to specifically identify the falsified bits.

I don't think Pais has provided anywhere near enough information or a clear enough theory, it's barely step above Geordi LaForge trek TV-engineering word babble.

Agree...so I go away and read Fronings talk and it looks like he's proposing creation of some sort of scalar potential gradient in the required direction of motion.

Well that's not Pais. Potential gradient in *what*? A scalar is a mathematical attribute of something, not physics.

I cross reference the basic claims and because we're clearly in none fully understood physics territory with a lot of this- I dont see anything falsified....just debatable interpretations of debatable observations.

Contemporary researchers in quantum gravity propose all sorts of exotic unverified theories but at least they are usually reasonably comprehensible to experts in the field (which takes tremendous effort), based on substrates of known physical theory and reality, and with some mathematical precision to define exactly what they are proposing, and which parts are speculative hypotheses and which parts are solidly accepted physics.

To then completely confuse matters- randomly click on a recent article aboutquantised gravity and what do you know...they're using Aharanov Bohm (is that scalar potential???) "shielding" to do the measuring.

The Aharonov-Bohm idea (Aharonov is apparently still alive and working solidly in advanced quantum mechanics measurement theory even though the original paper was 1957!!) was a demonstration that in quantum mechanics/quantum field theory, the mathematical potential functions, could have some physically observable effects, while they were only mathematical constructions in classical physics while the field values themselves (gradients of potentials) were the 'physically real' objects which controlled real physical consequences. The potential in the original AB concept was the classical electromagnetic vector potential commonly written A from which its curl gave the physical magnetic field: B = del x A.

Now, here’s where it gets interesting: You can have a non-zero electric and/or magnetic potential in a region even where the electric and magnetic fields are both zero. For a long time, physicists wondered whether the potential was actually a physical thing, since it appears to be the fields, not the potentials, that affects the motions of particles in a measurable way. This is true in classical physics, but not exclusively in quantum physics. In particular, the potential couples to the phase of a charged particle’s wavefunction, and if you measure the phase of that charged particle — which you typically do with interference experiments — you’ll find that it does depend on the electromagnetic potential, not just on the electric and magnetic fields.

That was still classical EM, not quantum field theory EM (which we know is actually true) so there have been advances since then. The quoted article referenced suggested that there may be gravitational equivalent to the AB effect which was known to be about magnetic fields/potentials.

The article in bigthink.com is pretty good and deals with actual physics, not mumbo jumbo.

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: Dineutron

Well i guess it boils down to energy in energy out regardless of how its converted and whether thats useful. I suspect its not, and the energy required is obscenely high. But what do i know. i still haven't understood the whole photons not the same as gravitons thing.

Electromagnetism is believed to be entirely linear, but curvature in gravitation is not. Simplest electromagnetic radiation is dipole, but it is quadrupole for gravitation. There appears to be no 'negative' mass-energy possible while there are symmetrical positive and negative charges whose motion is the source of electromagnetic fields.

But the 'strong curvature regime' (nonlinear effects) in gravitation will only matter in extreme immense physically exotic circumstances like black hole collisions seen by LIGO.

a reply to: mbkennel

Fair points in there.
Can you give an example of Startrek speak or mumbo jumbo in any of Pais published articles/works?

I know what you mean (obfuscated, weird interpretations etc) but I cant find any made up words or citations of theories which dont exist (Pais effect OK - but Pais admits this is the classified element).

I included Froning because that's what Pais cited (also in interview interview - well worth a watch if you havent seen it).

Aharonov-Bohm /Quantum Gravity article was fascinating ...Think I recall a self confessed SSP'er calling their spaceship propulsion an "Aharonov-Bohm drive" in one of their past musings.

originally posted by: Jukiodone
a reply to: mbkennel

Fair points in there.
Can you give an example of Startrek speak or mumbo jumbo in any of Pais published articles/works?

I know what you mean (obfuscated, weird interpretations etc) but I cant find any made up words or citations of theories which dont exist (Pais effect OK - but Pais admits this is the classified element).

Startrek speak doesn't necessarily imply made up words. "Heisenberg Compensator" is one of my favorite star trek expressions, which explains how the transporter overcomes the problem that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle means the transporter has limitations in how accurately it can scan something to transport it. Both Heisenberg and Compensator are perfectly valid words and not made up. But, conceptually, with our current limited understanding, Heisenberg uncertainty is a fundamental limit. When you ask the star trek writer how it works, his answer is "very well, thank you". He has no idea how it works because it may be impossible to overcome such a fundamental limitation in physics, according to our present theoretical understanding.

Nor does mumbo jumbo necessarily imply made-up words.

TheDrive article refers to the Pais patents as containing mumbo jumbo and "sophisticated babble", which it would have to be to accomplish the objective that makes the most sense to me, misdirection.

An intimidating river of mumbo-jumbo and sophisticated babble

I spoke with Dr. Mark Gubrud...

"Pais's patents flow as an intimidating river of mumbo-jumbo that most trained physicists would recognize as nonsense, although many might simply disengage in confusion, and there are always some who might even be credulous. Of what, however, is hard to say, as it is not really clear what Pais is even claiming, apart from the room-temperature superconductor which, if it were true, would be huge news.

"Pais deploys fairly sophisticated babble to make this sound plausible to those who know what real physics sounds like, but don't understand much of it. Which is likely to include most patent examiners, journalists, and Pais's own enablers in the Navy."

So that's the assessment from Dr. Mark Gubrud about the "fairly sophisticated babble" etc, though I'm also interested in mbkennel's thoughts.

However I must say again I think you're asking the wrong questions. You're apparently interested in the technical details and appear to be overlooking that they appear to be irrelevant given the whole thing doesn't make any sense from a non-technical perspective.

There are some PhD's discussing the implausibility of the patents in this discussion which then steers to the point about what is more relevant than the technical details:

Navy Got 'UFO' Patent Granted by Warning of Similar Chinese Tech Advances (thedrive.com)

georgeburdell on June 29, 2019

As a PhD in physics, this just sounds like nonsense to me....

With that being said, the most likely reason for this patent filing, as others have noted, is misdirection.
---------
keldaris on June 29, 2019

...The polarization they're talking about is just the vacuum polarization in the standard QED sense. The funny stuff starts when the patent assumes that you can automagically generate fields close to or over the Schwinger limit.

As a fellow physics PhD, I recommend reading the actual patent for comic relief [1]. It has no other use as far as I can tell.
[1] patentimages.storage.googleapis.com...
---------
jrs235 on June 30, 2019

This whole story is complete nonsense. First off, if the US military was in possession of such technology they would NEVER submit a patent for it. Why would they publish the technology to enable others (foreign governments and entities) to easily copy it?

The main clarification I'd make to the comment by jrs235 is that the word "public" should be inserted in front of "patent". They might use a secret patent, but there's no reason to make such a patent public except misdirection, and lots of reasons to not make it public. So the PhD's in Physics, while admitting the technical implausibility, still seem to be able to identify the main reason the technical details aren't the most important thing, asking if the whole idea of putting such a game-changing technology in a public patent is the right question, and they seem to realize the most plausible answer is that the only reason that would be done is for misdirection.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

We sort of know they arent going to seek public patents on such useful technology, and we sort of know Puthoff's PV theory isnt Noble worthy, and just to make sure - Pais then admitted he left out the secret sauce- but qualified further by categorising as not disinformation.

Accordingly- I'm not really interested in the technical details because I realise this is one of those situations where it's impossible to discern truth....but I am interested in how 4 credible PhD's (Pais, Sheehy, Davis and Puthoff) all randomly decided this pumped metamaterial/space perturbation method is precisely how UFO's work.

Even if you look past the astronomical odds of them reaching this strange consensus....when the other guy humming the same tune is an LM Advanced Projects Engineering exec. who is selling none man made materials which "seem to act as sub critical waveguides" -note the loaded terminology- this is clearly fishy AF.

ETA: Although possible- the "patents are a wild goose for thicko forintel scientists to waste time on" theory seems counter-intuitive when A: no one believes Pais and B: the information was disseminated in a way seemingly designed to attract attention.

On the concept that a "very special" nuclear species with dineutron(s) could convert electromagnetic ZPF to real gravitational waves as proposed at the biginning of this thread.

In this video:

www.youtube.com...

You can observe a classical analogy for non-linearly coupled oscillators with different resonant frequencies. Remember that a pendulum is a non linear oscillator for large angles. Following the video you will see that energy (proportional to amplitude of the oscillations) will move from one pendulum to the other and back. This behavior is a common behavior for non-linear coupled oscillators. Our core/dineutron model will enter a similar dynamic where the core will transfer energy to the dineutron that, at some point, will spin and will radiate the energy as gravitational waves, so that vibrational energy will not come back to the core, then the core will restore its zero point energy state, very simple.

The classical sistem shown in the video is obviously affected by air friction and classical damping and after some time all movements end, this is not the case for a quantum sistem.

Variant of "Occam's razor": "A valid solution is the one that you can understand"

Could be interesting to revive this thread.
Recently some objects in the sky have been documented, that are not baloons. This thread discusses potential technologies that could replicate the observed performances of those objects.

a reply to: Dineutron

Really?
IMO these inflatable objects have nothing to do with UFO's/UAP's except to highlight the people who are supposed to be on top of all domain unidentified anomalies (AARO) clearly weren't.

Weirdly....(blue beam fans might say predictably) NORCOM was.

a reply to: Dineutron
To be up to date, this is the technical part.

"Gravitational Wave Discovery Leads to Greater Understanding of the Fabric of Our Universe"

"Albert Einstein theorized that as heavy objects move through space and time, they create ripple effects in the fabric of our universe. Now an international team of scientists have detected new evidence of that. Researchers found new signs of gravitational waves that are affected by huge movements such as the collision of black holes."

This site:
sites.google.com...
Seems to have some updates.

Electricity
Dynamo
Magnetic

If we think of the layers of the earth sliding all over each other it is a wheel within a wheel within a wheel the atmosphere is one of the wheels the earth around the sun is one of those wheels and the core of the planet is one of those wheels.

A black hole is just residual spin so say a body was out there spinning as a wheel for however long as a dynamo spinning and turning like a spoon in water once the spoon leaves the water... The water still spins.

So say you have a standard Mickey Mouse hydro oxy bond for water... Before coming together the hydro has a spin the oxy has a spin the vehicle you mentioned in the OP would be the water as the third spin as a bond between those two spins or wheels. The life of those based on decay are different so in the three wheeled bond known as water... which one is likely to lose spin first the hydrogen or the oxygen? Once that occurs water ceases to be the lost particle inverts into an anti particle and the other is shot off back to it's original paired bond before the catalyst that made water and pow what Einstein would have called a big bang although the irony is that it is on such a small scale as just sitting there where is the oxygen where is the hydrogen as particles? can't see them unless they are bonded as water.

Water is just such a vehicle as you mention though when looking at hydrogen and oxygen shouldn't exist but it does all over the place since it is summer? Humidity is the first glimpse that this process of hydrogen and oxygen is taking place on all scales from sub atomic with the anti particle to bonded product with the contact of water.