Jim Roy The Heretic

The Published Warp Drive Metrics Are The Right Answers to The Wrong Question Alcubierre made a significant step forward thirty years ago in our understanding of flying saucer propulsion as a low-energy warp drive. The idea of 3D space contracting at the nose and 3D space expanding at the tail along the instantaneous forward direction as seen by the outside observer led to my phrase “warp drive is motion without motion”, echoing John Archibald Wheeler’s geometrodynamic catchphrases “mass without mass”, “charge without charge”, “spin without spin”, “law without law” and the first version of Leonard Susskind’s universe as a world hologram image quantum computer simulation from Stephen Hawking’s “Mind of God”, “ER = EPR” as “IT FROM BIT.” Alcubierre’s paper is purely kinematical, providing no solution to the space-time stiffness problem given by Einstein’s 1915 coupling of input source active stress-energy tensor current densities T_μυ to the output warp bubble Einstein tensor field G_μν as K ≡ 8π (G/c^4 )10^(-43) (1/Newtons) In Einstein’s gravity field equation G_μν = KT_μυ Where G is Isaac Newton’s gravitational constant and as shown by James Clerk Maxwell c^2=1/(ε_0 μ_0 ) c is the 3D coordinate vacuum phase speed of light as measured in non-accelerating Local Inertial Frames (LIF) of reference defined by tiny particle detectors on slower than light zero gravity “timelike geodesics” inside their local light cones with ε_0 〖 and μ〗_0 the vacuum dielectric permittivity from the space separation between virtual electrons and virtual positron electric dipole moments and their vacuum permeability from their rotating magnetic dipole moments. In terms of Richard P. Feynman’s Quantum Electro-Dynamics (QED), c is a contingent dynamical emergent parameter derived from the forward S-Matrix elastic scattering amplitude of real on mass-shell spin 1 photons interacting with an electrically neutral plasma of off-mass-shell virtual electron-positron pairs in the “Dirac Sea” (quantum vacuum). This vacuum phase speed of light need not be the same number 300 million meters/sec in different locations and times in the evolution of our accelerating expanding observable ER universe bounded by our observer-dependent past particle history event horizon from the initial singularity of the Big Bang and our dark energy de Sitter future destiny EPR “Mind of God” event horizon that the Jesuit Teilhard de Chardin called “The Omega Point.” Special relativity does not require that the vacuum speed of light is “constant”. That is sloppy thinking rubbish. In modern language, Einstein said, paraphrased by me, that two inertial observers, Alice and Bob, in a vacuum using photon detectors measuring the speed of light connecting two closely spaced events will get the same number. The vacuum speed of light in a small, fixed region of 4D spacetime is an invariant. It can be a different invariant number ≠ 300 million meters/sec in different disjoint 4D spacetime regions. Note also that the two future light cones of the remotely sensed null geodesic differential interval ds=0 must intersect the past light cones of Alice’s and Bob’s photon detectors at their respective moments of irreversibly amplified detections in accord with John Archibald Wheeler’s Bohr Copenhagen “No quantum phenomenon is a real phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon.” None of this would work if the vacuum had dispersion, i.e., if the phase speed of light depended on the frequency of light in the given inertial frame of the detector. In that case, there would be a different group speed of light for the transport of energy as well as a wavefront signal velocity of light, as first noted by my Cornell tutor Hans Bethe’s tutor Arnold Sommerfeld in Munich and later by Leon Brillouin and even later by Ray Chiao and his student Aephraim Steinberg in Berkeley. Therefore, how to apply relativity inside matter with large dispersion is still an open question at the core of metric engineering physics of warp drive technology. What “c” should be used inside dispersive matter in Einstein’s coupling? Phase speed, group speed, signal speed? Using the vacuum speed inside matter seems suspect in light of QED and the Unruh effect that the boundary separating real from virtual charges changes as the gravity field changes. Finally, in this introduction, we note that the vacuum coordinate speed of light is not invariant in the presence of gravity fields. Therefore, Einstein’s c is not invariant, and this is a mathematical inconsistency in the Group Think Conventional Wisdom of General Relativity Pundits like Malcolm Perry, for example, in a recent discussion with Brian Josephson as interlocutor. References [1] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubi… [2] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomet… [3] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hologr… [4] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mi… [5]en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ER_%3D… [6] johnhorgan.org/cross-check/p… [7]en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electr… [8]en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einste… [9] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavend… [10]en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_… [1]1 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_… [12] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_… [13]en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geodes… [14] plato.stanford.edu/entries/s… [15]en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantu…. [16]sciencedirect.com/science/ar… [17]en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_she…. [18] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_… [19] arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/04022… [20] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omega_… [21] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_B… [22] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold… [23] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Léon_B… [24] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymon… [25]en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aephra… [26] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unruh_… [27]en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malcol… [28] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_…