The Sarfatti Lectures in UAV Metric Engineering Physics

jacksarfatti@icloud.com

May 25, 2020

President Trump is among the Americans amazed by the out-of-this-world goings-on in a trio of
videos recently released by the military showing apparent unidentified flying objects.

“I just wonder if it’s real,” the president lightheartedly told Reuters during a White House
interview. “That’s a hell of a video.”1

1
https://nypost.com/2020/04/30/trump-calls-military-ufo-footage-a-hell-of-a-video/
See endnote.i
 Prediction of Warp Drive Reverse Doppler Effect2

The key idea behind this discovery3

µαβγδ = δ αγ δ βδ − δ αδ δ βγ + 4πχ αβγδ

Define the generalization of Maxwell's
1
c2 =
εµ
as
⌢⌢
εµ
≡ µαβγδ µ αβγδ
ε 0 µ0

The Ansatz is then that the matter gravity coupling is the local frame-invariant spin zero zero-
⌢⌢
rank tensor field εµ 4

Einstein's 1916 General Relativity Field Equation

Gαβ = κ Tαβ
Tαβ ≡ mass-energy stress tensor source of gravity input
Gαβ ≡ Einstein's gravity warp field tensor output
⌢⌢ 2
κ ≡ 8π G ( εµ ) Local frame invariant controllable
scalar field coupling
ε 0 and µ0 come mostly from
random zero point vacuum
fluctuations of virtual electron-positron pairs
inside the quantum vacuum plasma.
The 4th rank tensor susceptibility fields
come from the response of real charges
in matter to the applied EM pump fields.

2
Reported by Dr. Bruce Cornet for sound coming from Flying Saucers.
3
Professor Keith Wanser (Cal State Fullerton) and I essentially simultaneously and independently (discounting
Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen post-quantum entanglement telepathic connection) realized this on the night of May 12,
2020 – our emails on this technical point crossing.
4
More details below. It should be understood that we mean (ε⌢µ⌢ ) below in all equations with εµ .
 My Gedanken ExperimentTic Tac Engine “Rod”5

5
Color graphics by Julien Geffray. Second picture warp drive switched off, third picture warp drive switched on in
2D+1 spacetime, e.g. “Flatland” Edwin Abbott (1884)
Imagine these units as very tiny as meta-atoms in a meta-material lattice network tiling the Tic
Tac fuselage.

Metamaterials with interacting "meta-atoms" ii... The building blocks of metamaterials are
resonant elements much smaller than the wavelength of the electromagnetic wave and can be seen as
“artificial atoms” with strong electric and/or magnetic response to the electromagnetic radiation.

Metamaterials with interacting "meta-atoms" | University of ...

 ABSTRACT

In Part 1 I discuss the blueshift, the causal horizon and the energy problems associated with the
Alcubierre Warp Drive Toy Model only. I am not suggesting these are problems for the actual
Tic Tac.6 In Part 2 I discuss how meta-materials modify Eric Davis’s estimates from his 2009
book.7

I am only including parts of Loup’s writing8 that are of immediate interest to my own research in
low energy metric engineering UFO/UAV/Tic Tac Tech.9

There is no global superluminal barrier to low-energy warp drive from quantum inequalities
when the effect of meta-material resonances in the fuselage is included.

Einstein said that any physicist who has not made mistakes has never done anything original of
any importance. John Wheeler defined physics genius as making mistakes faster than the
ordinary physicist, but of course correcting his/her errors as quickly (I presume). Arthur Koestler
who I met during the Uri Geller tests in London with Bohm and Hasted (1974) wrote a book
“Sleepwalkers” about this. Some historical background is in the endnotes.iii

Alcubierre’s UFO warp drive metric field is

dt 2
+ ⎡⎣ dz − vs f ( rs ) dt ⎤⎦ + dx 2 + dy 2
2
ds = −
2
(1.1)
εµ

6
https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Releases/Release/Article/2165713/statement-by-the-department-of-
defense-on-the-release-of-historical-navy-
videos/fbclid/IwAR1rtXFoaQB8iI3Y861lqDPx5t0hekjDqACDMfsfErJA9LwqGbDAztmr2XA/
7
“Frontiers of Propulsion Science, Ch 15, Faster-than-Light Approaches in General Relativity.
8
Fernando Loup “Warp Drive Basic Science” 2010. Loup is not a native English writer. I make minor notation
changes to be consistent with my papers.
9
https://www.navair.navy.mil/foia/sites/g/files/jejdrs566/files/2020-04/1%20-%20FLIR.mp4
https://www.navair.navy.mil/foia/documents
 dzs
vs = = speed of UFO located at z s ( t ) along z-axis
dt
seen by observer outside its warp field

rs ( t ) = ( z − z ( t )) + x + y
2
2 2
s

tanh ⎡⎣δ ( r ( t ) + R ) ⎤⎦ − tanh ⎡⎣δ ( r ( t ) − R ) ⎤⎦

(
f rs ( t ) ) =
s

2 tanh ⎡⎣δ R ⎤⎦
s
(1.2)

1
= proper thickness of meta-material shell of proper radius R
δ
measured in the Zero G-Force Local Inertial Frame (LIF) at z s ( t )
with time t measured by a clock in that LIF.

( ( ))
1) Warp drive field shape function f rs t = 1 everywhere inside the UFO cabin where
rs ( t ) < R and ε → ε 0 , µ → µ0 10

2) Shape function inside the meta-material spherical shell fuselage 0 < f rs t < 1 where ( ( ))
( )
ε ( x ) µ ( x ) = ε 0 µ0 1+ Χ ( x ) is now a locally-changing but locally frame invariant scalar
()
field coupling of source stress energy tensor Tαβ x to the warp field tensor Gαβ x () at
different locations and times x inside the meta-material fuselage
3) Shape function outside the meta-material fuselage f rs t = 0 ( ( ))
Einstein’s gravitational field equation is

( )
Gαβ ( x ) = 8π G ⎡⎣ε 0 µ0 1+ Χ ( x ) ⎤⎦ Tαβ ( x )
2
(1.3)

The meta-material modified stress-energy tensor inside the meta-material is, therefore

T 'αβ ( x ) = ⎡⎣1+ Χ ( x ) ⎤⎦ Tαβ ( x )

2

(1.4)
X ( x ) = spin 0 scalar electromagnetic susceptibility response field.

εµ ≡ ε ( x )αβγς µ ( x )
αβγς
10
is a locally-frame invariant spin 0 scalar field inside material all symmetries obeyed.

I will be cavalier in flinging around ε and µ in numerators and denominators in what follows in the notation
to save space. Later, we can be more precise following Medina and Stephany.
 !
X ( x ) ≠ 0 only when 3-vector magnitude rs part x
1 (1.5)
of event x obeys R + ≥r ≥R
δ s

This simple Alcubierre metric describes the motion of the point center of the meta-material
spherical shell fuselage. The interior is flat 4D Minkowski spacetime.

Alice is located at the center of the spherical shell. Bob is located outside the spherical shell.

The metric field for Alice is

dt 2 2
ds 2 = − + ⎡⎣ dz − vs dt ⎤⎦ (1.6)
ε 0 µ0

dt 2 2 dt 2
ds = −
2
+ ⎡ dz − dzs ⎤⎦ = −
ε 0 µ0 ⎣ s ε 0 µ0
(1.7)
dt
ds =
ε 0 µ0

Bob’s metric field outside the warp field is

dt 2
ds = 2
− dzs2 (1.8)
ε 0 µ0

If Alice and Bob’s clocks were initially synchronized, they will remain so. Therefore, there is no
relative time dilation between Alice and Bob if they start off at rest relative to each other
weightless in space in the same LIF and then Alice steps inside the Tic Tac before switching on
the “engine”. If they start off together on surface of Earth, then we must redo the calculation as a
homework problem.
 This is the Revolutionary concept of the Warp Drive as a Dynamical Spacetime
introduced by Alcubierre in 1994
1) Motion Faster Than Light
2) No limitations from Special Relativity.
3) No time dilation.
4) Both observers remain synchronized between themselves

However, it was discovered that the Alcubierre Warp Drive has serious problems and drawbacks
that from a realistic point of view can poses serious obstacles to its physical feasibility

• 1) Horizons - Causally Disconnected portions of Spacetime

• 2) Doppler Blueshifts and Impacts with hazardous objects11

• 3) Enormous energy densities required to create it12

11
The gravitational redshift in the nose of the Tic Tac contracting space can cancel the Doppler blueshift for
outgoing far field radiation from the Tic Tac. However, since the Tic Tac in warp drive is not actually moving
through space, but is folding space asymmetrically inside its metamaterial fuselage shell, it is not at all clear that
particles it encounters in front of its motion will even be blue shifted since there is no relative motion in the usual
sense. This is an open problem that needs careful investigation.
12
The meta-material electromagnetic susceptibility resonances Χ ( x ) ≫ 1 solve the energy problem.
 Horizons: Causally Disconnected Pieces of Space-Time?

⎡1
(
ds 2 = − ⎢ − vs ( t ) f rs ( t ) ( )) ⎤⎥⎦ dt ( )
− 2vs ( t ) f rs ( t ) dtdz + dz 2
2
2
(1.9)
⎣ εµ

For far field classical light rays (photons in quantum picture)

2
⎡1
( )) dz ⎛ dz ⎞
2⎤

⎣ εµ
(
0 = − ⎢ − vs ( t ) f rs ( t ) ⎥ − 2vs ( t ) f rs ( t )
⎦
+
dt ⎜⎝ dt ⎟⎠
( )
dz
= c' = effective speed of photon along z-axis direction of motion of Tic Tac
dt
1
εµ = 2
c
⎡
( ⎤
( ))
0 = − ⎢1− εµ vs ( t ) f rs ( t ) ⎥ − 2εµvs ( t ) f rs ( t ) c' + εµc'2 ( )
2

⎣ ⎦
(
A2 ≡ vs ( t ) f rs ( t ) εµ )
2 2

2
⎛ c' ⎞ ⎛ c' ⎞
0 = 1− A + 2 A ⎜ ⎟ − ⎜ ⎟
2

⎝ c⎠ ⎝ c⎠
⎛ c' ⎞ 2 A ± 4 A2 − 4 A2 + 4
⎜⎝ c ⎟⎠ = = A ±1
2
⎛ c' ⎞ vs ( t )
⎜⎝ c ⎟⎠ = c f rs ( t ) ± 1( ) (1.10)

Remember, the warp field is confined inside a meta-material spherical shell fuselage with Alice
at the center. The times T± it takes for light inside the sphere where f rs = 1 and X = 0 to ( )
reach the sphere is

R R
T± = = (1.11)
c'± vs ± cvacuum
Now imagine the Tic Tac starts at vs = 0 passing through c to superluminal speed . There is only a
transient horizon T− → ∞ at vs = cvacuum where the light stops never reaching the interior surface
of the Tic Tac fuselage. True, there may be a period of loss of control, but this need not be
insurmountable with a conscious AI alive and well inside the meta-material fuselage not
needing to communicate with the occupants inside – if any. Furthermore, there is no horizon
issue for T+ that can always reach the rear fuselage shell to keep command-communication-
control with the warp drive mechanism inside the fuselage.iv

Figure 1 Spherical Star Gate Portal reported by US Navy and in Episode 3 “Skinwalker Ranch”
Episode 3 History Channel
 The Casimir ZPF energy density must be positive on the red half and negative on the blue half.
This may be possible with squeezed coherent vacuum states
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squeezed_coherent_state

My idea does not use ZPF it uses resonantly pumped meta-material as also shown in the
graphic. It may be possible to use both effects together.

Eric Davis wrote:

“To counteract or otherwise reduce gravity merely requires the deployment of a thin spherical
shell (bubble) of negative energy around an aerospace vehicle.” P. 190 Frontiers Propulsion
Science.

Eric Davis has no mention of meta-materials in his 2009 book. Regarding his “Generating
Negative Energy in the Lab. The QED vacuum electric field breakdown density in meta-material
becomes13

13
I make the approximation for simplicity of notation of static homogeneity and isotropy – not really true of
course.
 2m *2e
Ec = 3
also Bc = εµ Ec
(εµ ) 2 !e
m *e = effective mass of electron quasi-particle
εµ
= 1+ Χ ( x ) → X ( x ) ≫ 1 in a resonance
ε 0 µ0
X( x) = X ( x) e
arg Χ( x )
(1.12)
Im X ( x )
(
tan arg X ( x ) = ) Re Χ ( x )
Therefore, breakdown happens at lower EM field strengths
in resonance.

Gravitationally Squeezed Electromagnetic Zero Point Fluctuation

I modify Eric Davis’s eq (3)14 for the Tic Tac metamaterial propulsion units

⎛ 2π 2 hG 2 ⎞
ρ E−gsmeta−mat ≈ − ⎜ 7
T00 ⎟ T00
⎝ c' ⎠
⎛ 2π 2 hG 2 ⎞
⎜⎝ c'7 T00 ⎟⎠ is a dimensionaless pure number.
7
1
c' 7
= ( εµ ) 2

! ! (1.13)
T00 ≈ ε E 2 + µ H 2
! !
( )
7
ρ E−gsmeta−mat ≈ −2π hG ( εµ ) ε E 2 + µ H 2
2
2 2 2

!2 !2
(εµ ) (ε E + µ H )
7 2
ρ E−gsmeta−mat 2
=
ρ E−gsvac ! !
(ε µ ) (ε E + µ H )
7 2
2 2 2
0 0 0 0

Therefore, the self gravitationally squeezed EM zero-point energy density is greatly magnified in
a meta-material resonance.

14
L. H. Ford (2007)
 Negative Energy from the Casimir Effect

h
ρCE ≈ → 0 in meta-material resonance (1.14)
εµ d 4

Casimir Negative Energy for Spherical Traversable Wormhole Star Gate Portals15

Spherical cavity radius R of concentric thin plates separated by d = δ −1

3
d ≈ RLp = R !G ( εµ ) 2 (1.15)

The meta-material resonance makes this technologically plausible. Indeed, the spherical UAVs
reported by the US Navy and other military units suggests that these hovering portals sketched
in Figure 1 exist. The separation between the concentric spherical plates that is the geometric
mean of the size of the portal with the Planck length is the same that appears in the anti-gravity
cosmological dark energy density

hcvac hc
T00 = − 4
= − 2 vac2
d R Lp
≈ critical density boundary between open and closed universe
R = 10 28 cm
Lp = 10−33 cm (1.16)
5
−

d ≈ 10
2
cm
ω c ≈ 3 3 × 1012 Hz =3 3 × THz
seen in microtubule generation of consciousness
according to Hameroff and Penrose

15
Skinwalker Ranch, Episode 3, History Channel reports possible portal altitude 1000 ft enhanced gamma rays
vertically downward suggests antigravity blue shift of ambient IR heat allowing stationary hovering.
 −6
Let d = 10 meters, R = 10 meters

h
Lp' = 10−13 meters = 10−11 cm =
mecvac
Lp' 10−11
= = 1022
Lp 10−33
3/2 (1.17)
⎛ εµ ⎞
⎜ε µ ⎟ = 10 22

⎝ 0 0⎠
⎛ εµ ⎞
⎜ ε µ ⎟ ≈ 10
14

⎝ 0 0⎠

On the other hand, if d is 10 nanometers, then the resonance need only be 105 equally in
permittivity and permeability and there are known artificial material broad band resonances of
ε ε 0 = 3.24 ×106 on the shelf.v Although the electrical Casimir force may be attractive needing
charges on the concentric metallic spheres to stabilize, it induces anti-gravity if it’s negative
energy density. These are separate effects. This Casimir effect is different from the main design
I prefer with small pixel LCR forced oscillators.

Spherically Symmetric Static “Orb” Traversable Wormhole Star Gate Portals

For off-geodesic static LNIF observers

e ()
2φ r
1
ds 2 = − dt 2 + dr 2 + r 2 dΩ2 (1.18)
ε (r ) µ (r ) ⎡ b( r ) ⎤
⎢1− ⎥
⎢⎣ r ⎥⎦

The electromagnetic susceptibility fields modify the effective redshift function e ( ) .16
2φ r

16 b ( r ) is the shape function for the Star Gate Portal’s Tunnel Throat to even walk through to the Moon, Mars a
different time past and future or exoplanet for Space Migration, Intelligence Increase, Life Extension (aka SMI2LE)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmqfM6dlcx8 Kim Burrafato describes one of my meetings with Timothy
Leary on SMI2LE.
 Warp Drives

dt 2 ⎡
( )
+ ⎣ dz − vs ( t ) f rs ( t ) dt ⎤⎦ + dx 2 + dy 2
2
ds 2 = − (1.19)
εµ

York extrinsic time

ϑ = vs ε ( rs ) µ ( rs )
zs d
rs drs
(
f ( rs ) ) (1.20)

“The ϑ behavior of the warp drive bubble provides for the simultaneous expansion of space
behind the spacecraft and a corresponding contraction of space in front of the spacecraft.”
Eric Davis
Davis’s “x” is my “z”. The above picture is for constant susceptibility fields that may be much
larger than their vacuum value of zero. Again, this toy model is not adequate for the real Tic
Tac.
Short throat wormhole in thin shell formalism (Eric Davis’s “eq 8) becomes

⎛ε µ ⎞ ℓ
M wh = −
ℓ throat
G ( εµ )
( )
= − 0.71M Jupiter ⎜ 0 0 ⎟ throat
⎝ εµ ⎠ 1 meter
However, actual observations from US Navy Close Encounters
and Skinwalker Ranch lead me to infer the existence of
artificial metamaterials obeying (1.21)
εµ = εµ e Z

Z = X + iY
X >0

For Warp Drive Eric Davis’s eq (9) becomes

2
vwarp R 2σ ⎛ε µ ⎞ 2
Ε warp = −
G ( εµ )
( )
= − 1.21× 1044 ⎜ 0 0 ⎟ vwarp
⎝ εµ ⎠
R 2σ Joules

1
σ=
d
Again we need the exponential dependence of electrical permittivity (1.22)
and magnetic permeabilities on their dimensionless suceptibilities
to explain the observed facts.
 Quantum Inequalities and Spatial Distributions of Negative Casimir ZPF Energy17

Eric Davis’s eq. (11) modified by the meta-material medium is in best case scenario indicated by
the observational facts

⎛ M ship d ⎞
(7.28 × 10 ) ⎜⎝
X
−28
vwarp ≤ e 2 ⎟
R2 ⎠
X
(1.23)
e 2 ≫ 1 in a meta-material resonance
X is the dimensionless electromagnetic susceptibility
response field of the metamaterial

Therefore, there is no global superluminal barrier to low-energy warp drive from quantum
inequalities when the effect of meta-material resonances in the fuselage are included.

17
This is only for the random vacuum electromagnetic zero-point fluctuation energy not for my independent
coherent near field effect. The two processes are independent operating side by side. The ZPF virtual photons are
in the Gaussian ground state of the radiation oscillator. The near field virtual photons are in a displaced Glauber
coherent state is a driven dissipative nonlinear non-equilibrium state analogous to a Bose-Einstein condensate in
thermal equilibrium. The relation of Harold Puthoff’s random ZPF to my coherent near field responses to the
applied Frohlich (“Floquet”) pump electromagnetic field from real meta-material electric charges is analogous to
the two-fluid model of superfluid He4 with Puthoff’s ZPF as the “normal fluid” and my near fields as the
“superfluid” (ODLRO first reduced density matrix L. Onsager, O. Penrose).
 Review of Gravity Control within Newtonian and General Relativistic Physics

“Gravity is a pervasive force that we are unable to affect.”18

Gravity is not a real force in the same sense of the electromagnetic force. Gravity is a pseudo-
force depending on the rest mass m of the test particle with universal apparent acceleration g.19
In contrast, the real electromagnetic force depends on the charge e with acceleration
proportional to the charge to mass ratio e m . In fact, Einstein’s classical gravitational field
determines time like geodesics for weightless real force free motion inside the local light cone.
Secondly, it’s easy to affect the gravitational field with small amounts of energy using meta-
material resonances. Finally, US Navy Close Encounters with “Tic Tac” UAVs officially
reported by the Pentagon April 2020 is smoking gun proof for my second statement. To
paraphrase Richard Feynman “A beautiful theory is murdered by an ugly fact.”

Eric Davis in 2008: “Gravity remains an immutable force … gravity itself cannot be modified.”
Jack Sarfatti in 2020: “Not anymore on the first, it can now on the second.”vi

Gravity Control Within General Relativity: Antigravity via Gravimagnetic Lense-Thirring Effect
(Think Nazi Bell Device in Nick Cook’s “Hunt for the Zero Point) Robert Forward’s Dipole
Gravitational Field Generator Enhanced using Meta-Material Resonances.

18
Eric Davis, Ch 4, “Frontiers of Propulsion Science”
19
The Astronauts on International Space Station are weightless on a closed timelike geodesic orbit around the
Earth. They appear to be accelerating using far field light rays coming from them to our detectors stationary on
Earth’s surface. This is because we are really accelerating “proper tensor acceleration” radially outward on an off-
timelike geodesic worldline in curved spacetime caused by the Earth’s mass-energy. This local proper acceleration
is measured by near electromagnetic fields in contrast to the apparent global acceleration measured by far
electromagnetic fields. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_and_far_field
Eric Davis’s equation on p.185 for the electric dipole field magnetic generator using the right
metamaterial toroidal core is

⎛ µ0 Nr 2 d 2Q ⎞
E = −e ⎜
X
2 ⎟
at center of the torus
⎝ 4π Rt dt ⎠
2

µ Nr 2 !
e X 0 2 ≡ ∇L
4π Rt
L ≡ Tesla Inductance Field
X ≡ dimensionless magnetic susceptibility field of metamaterial (1.24)
X ≫ 1 in metamaterial resonance
N windings around meta-material torus
Inner torus radius r, outer radius Rt ,electric charge Q

Note that the pumped nonlinear optics exponential amplification meta-material resonance effect
that I am predicting does not rely on negative susceptibility that works in the linear
approximation. The production of anti-gravity in this case comes from the dissipation demanded
by the Kramers-Kronig causal dispersion relations. This produces a relative phase shift between
the applied Frohlich electromagnetic field pump input and the geometrodynamic field output.
When that relative phase is between 90 and 270 degrees, we get repulsive anti-gravity, otherwise
attractive gravity. This is the case in the Tic Tac.
 The role of irreversible dissipation generating exotic matter inside meta-material

ε = ε eiarg ε µ = µ eiarg µ

(εµ ) = εµ e ( )
2 2 2i arg ε +arg µ

(εµ ) T = εµ T e ( )
i ⎡⎣ 2 arg ε +arg µ +argTab ⎤⎦
2 2
ab ab
(1.25)
Re ( εµ ) T = εµ T cos ⎡⎣ 2 ( arg ε + arg µ ) + argT ⎤⎦
2 2
ab ab ab

cos ⎡⎣ 2 ( arg ε + arg µ ) + argT ⎤⎦ > 0 induces attractive gravity contracting 3D space
ab

cos ⎡⎣ 2 (arg ε + arg µ ) + argT ⎤⎦ < 0 induces repulsive antigravity expanding 3D space
ab

In Newtonian limit of Einstein’s GR geometrodynamic field equation with stress-energy source,

for a parallel plate capacitor with metamaterial dielectric between conducting plates.20

20
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG06YzTvdaI
 2
⎛V ⎞
= 4π G ( εµ ) ε ⎜ ⎟
2
εµ∇ U capacitor
2

⎝ d⎠
2
⎛V ⎞
∇ U capacitor
2
= 4π Gε µ ⎜ ⎟
2

⎝ d⎠
2
⎛V ⎞ ⎛ ε µ⎞
∇ U capacitor
2
= 4π G ε µ ⎜ ⎟ cos ⎜ 2arg + arg ⎟
2

⎝ d⎠ ⎝ ε0 µ0 ⎠
Q
V=
C
2
⎛ Q⎞ ⎛ ε µ⎞
∇ U capacitor
2
= 4π G ε µ ⎜
2
⎟ cos ⎜ 2arg + arg ⎟
⎝ Cd ⎠ ⎝ ε0 µ0 ⎠
⎛ ε ⎞ Im ε
tan ⎜ arg ⎟ =
⎝ ε 0 ⎠ Re ε
⎛ µ ⎞ Im µ
tan ⎜ arg ⎟ =
⎝ µ0 ⎠ Re µ
⎛ ε µ⎞
cos ⎜ 2arg + arg ⎟ < 0
⎝ ε0 µ0 ⎠
induces a static repulsive anti-gravity field with a
universal blue shift from time compression (1.26)
with space expansion.

The metamaterial resonance for the electrical permittivity is21

ε
≫1
ε0
allowing a small voltage V to generate a strong gravity field U
that is attractive or repulsive depending on the phase shift (1.27)
ratio of inelastic to forward elastic scattering of virtual photons
in the applied voltage with the real electric charges of the
meta-material.

21
Similarly, for the magnetic permeability.
 2
⎛ N dQ ⎞
= 4π G ( εµ ) µ ⎜
2
εµ∇ U coil
2

⎝ ℓ dt ⎟⎠
2
⎛ N dQ ⎞
∇ U coil = 4π Gεµ ⎜
2 2

⎝ ℓ dt ⎟⎠
2
⎛ N dQ ⎞ ⎛ µ ε⎞
∇ U coil = 4π G εµ ⎜
2 2
⎟ cos ⎜ 2arg + arg ⎟
⎝ ℓ dt ⎠ ⎝ µ0 ε0 ⎠
⎛ ε ⎞ Im ε
tan ⎜ arg ⎟ =
⎝ ε 0 ⎠ Re ε
⎛ µ ⎞ Im µ
tan ⎜ arg ⎟ = (1.28)
⎝ µ0 ⎠ Re µ
⎛ µ ε⎞
cos ⎜ 2arg + arg ⎟ < 0
⎝ µ0 ε0 ⎠
induces a static repulsive anti-gravity field with a
universal blue shift from time compression
with space expansion.

ρℓ ℓ
R= =
A σA (1.29)
!
(
σ → σ! ω , k )
Electromagnetic field local energy conservation

! !
! dB ! dD ! ! ! ! !
H⋅
dt
+ E⋅
dt
+ E⋅ J +∇⋅ E × H = 0 ( ) (1.30)

!
J !
=E
σ
2 (1.31)
εµ ! 2 εµ ⎛ dQ ⎞
T00( R) = J = 2 R⎜
σ A ⎝ dt ⎟⎠

εµ∇ 2U = 4π G ( εµ ) ⎡T00(C ) + T00( L) + T00( R) ⎤

2

⎣ ⎦
⎡ ⎛ Q ⎞2 εµ ⎛ dQ ⎞ ⎤
2 2
⎛ N dQ ⎞
∇ U = 4π Gεµ ⎢ε ⎜
2
⎟ + µ ⎜⎝ ℓ dt ⎟⎠ + A2 R ⎜⎝ dt ⎟⎠ ⎥
⎢⎣ ⎝ Cd ⎠ ⎥⎦
⎧ ⎡ ⎛ Q ⎞2 ⎛ ⎛ N ⎞2 εµ ⎞ ⎛ dQ ⎞ ⎤ ⎫⎪
2
⎪
∇ U = Re ⎨4π Gεµ ⎢ε ⎜
2
⎟⎠ + ⎜⎜ µ ⎜⎝ ℓ ⎟⎠ + A2 R ⎟⎟ ⎜⎝ dt ⎟⎠ ⎥ ⎬
⎪⎩ ⎢ ⎝ Cd ⎝ ⎠ ⎥⎪
⎣ ⎦⎭
(1.32)
⎡ ⎛ Q ⎞2 ⎤
⎢ε ⎜ ⎟ cos ( 2arg ε + arg µ ) ⎥
⎢ ⎝ Cd ⎠ ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢ ⎛ ⎛ N⎞
2
⎞ ⎥
∇ U = 4π G εµ ⎢ ⎜ µ ⎜ ⎟ cos ( 2arg µ + arg ε ) ⎟
2
2⎥
⎝ ℓ ⎠ ⎟ ⎛ dQ ⎞ ⎥
⎢+ ⎜
⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎟
⎢ εµ ⎛3 ⎞ ⎟ ⎝ dt ⎠ ⎥
⎢ + 2 Rcos ⎜ ( arg ε + arg µ )⎟
⎜ ⎥
⎢⎣ ⎜⎝ A ⎝2 ⎠ ⎟⎠ ⎥⎦

A
L= µN 2
ℓ (1.33)
!
(
µ → µ! ω , k )
 dQ dQ Q
L 2
+R + = V (t ) (1.34)
dt dt C
 V!ω
Q!ω =
⎡ 1⎤
⎢ L ( iω ) + R ( iω ) + C ⎥
2

⎣ ⎦
→
V!ω
Q!ω =
(
L ω 02 − ω 2 + iγω )
1 ℓ2 ℓ2 c'2
ω 02 = = = (1.35)
LC εµ AN 2 AN 2
R ℓ ℓ ℓ2
γ= = =
L σ A µ AN 2 µσ A2 N 2
⌣ ω
Figure of merit Q = 0
γ
⎛ 1 ⎞ dQ!ω ! dQ!ω
V!ω = ⎜ iω L + R + = Zω
⎝ iω C ⎟⎠ dt dt

1
Q!ω =
( ) +γ ω
2
L2 ω 2 − ω 02 2 2

(1.36)
γω
tan ( arg Q! ) = −
ω
(ω − ω ) 2
0
2

However, the above equations for the SERIES forced LCR oscillator` from Feynman’s Lectures
in Physics Ch 23 are not adequate for inhomogeneous, anisotropic, dynamic “space-time
metamaterials”, the required equations will be much more complicated involving convolution
integrals of the phase space wavelet transforms beyond the scale-independent Fourier transforms
used here in these introductory remarks.vii

Note that in a meta-material electromagnetic susceptibility resonance the AC LCR oscillator

resonance line width narrows and the resonant circuit frequency limits to the DC zero frequency
static limit – which is good for our purpose Tic Tac flight. Of course, most humans from this
time period have been dumbed down, including even some physicists who should know
better, and will not be able to properly process the obvious. However, those who do
understand will control a military hardware super-technology rendering conventional jet fighters
like the F35 impotent and obsolete as seen in the USS Nimitz and USS Roosevelt Close
encounters with Tic Tac, Gimbel – all the same advanced metric engineering technology.
 Dispersion in a homogeneous isotropic material

ε ( x ) µ ( x ) → ε ( x,k,ς ) ⊗ µ ( x,k,ς )
⎡ ⎛ Q ⎞2 ⎤
⎢ε ⎜ ⎟ cos ( 2arg ε + arg µ ) ⎥
⎢ ⎝ Cd ⎠ ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢ ⎛ ⎛ N⎞
2
⎞ ⎥
∇ U = 4π G εµ ⎢ ⎜ µ ⎜ ⎟ cos ( 2arg µ + arg ε ) ⎟
2
2⎥
⎝ ℓ⎠ ⎟ ⎛ dQ ⎞ ⎥
⎢+ ⎜
⎢ ⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎟
εµ ⎛3 ⎞ ⎟ ⎝ dt ⎠ ⎥
⎢ + 2 Rcos ⎜ ( arg ε + arg µ )⎟
⎜ ⎥
⎢⎣ ⎜⎝ A ⎝2 ⎠ ⎟⎠ ⎥⎦
→
⎡ ⎛ Q! ⎞
2
⎤
⎢ ε! ⊗ ⎜ cos ( 2arg ε! + arg µ! ) ⎥
⎢ ⎝ Cd ⎟⎠ ⎥
⎢ ⎥
!2 ⎢ ⎛ ⎛ N⎞
2
⎞ ⎥
k U = 4π G ε ⊗ µ ⊗ ⎢ ⎜ µ ⎜ ⎟ cos ( 2arg µ" + arg ε" )
! ! ! ! ⎟ ⎥
⎜ ⎝ ℓ⎠ ⎟
⎢+ ( ) ⎥
2
!
⎢ ⎜ ⎟ ⊗ ωQ ⎥
ε ⊗µ
! ! ⎛3 ⎞
⎢ ⎜+ Rcos ⎜ ( arg ε! + arg µ! )⎟ ⎟ ⎥
(1.37)
⎢ ⎜⎝ A2
⎝2 ⎠ ⎟⎠ ⎥
⎣ ⎦

Even though (1.37) is already very complicated for scalar susceptibilities, the complexity for
practical computation of real space-time meta-materials requires orders of magnitude more
complex super-computations in numerical relativity and meta-material design because the
equations are relativistically covariant 4th rank susceptibility tensor field equations.

1
1. arXiv:1905.00560 [pdf, other]

physics.optics
Spacetime Metamaterials
Authors: Christophe Caloz, Zoé-Lise Deck-Léger
Abstract: This paper presents the authors' vision of the emerging field of spacetime metamaterials in a
cohesive and pedagogical perspective. For this purpose, it systematically builds up the physics, modeling and
applications of these media upon the foundation of their pure-space and pure-time counterparts.
Submitted 5 May, 2019; v1 submitted 1 May, 2019; originally announced May 2019.
Comments: 28 pages, 19 figures, invited by IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag
2. arXiv:1904.12959 [pdf, ps, other]
 physics.optics
Scattering at Interluminal Interface
Authors: Zoé-Lise Deck-Léger, Christophe Caloz
Abstract: Interest for spacetime structures has recently been revived, following developments
in metamaterials and ultrafast optics. Such structures essentially consist of successions of space-time
interfaces for which the theory is still incomplete, in particular in the regime where the interface velocity lies
between the wave velocities in the two media involved. This paper addresses this `interluminal' regime,
providing exact scattering solutions for both approaching and receding interfaces. The solutions are verified to
be consistent with the transmission matrix perspective and to be continuous at the limits of the subluminal and
superluminal regimes

The “Nazi Bell” gravity22 analog is23

η0 Nr 2 d 2 M
G=e X

4π Rt2 dt 2
16π GNewton
η0 =
cvacuum 2
(1.38)
e X = exponential amplification of the electromagnetic
susceptibility fields in the electromagnetically pumped
charged metamaterial flowing liquid M and also in the solid
toriodal core.

22
A flowing meta-material liquid through the hollow pipes around the solid meta-material torus.
23
I am not claiming that the actual Nazis described in Nick Cook’s book had such metamaterial liquids and solids in
their arsenal, only that if they did, that such a “flying saucer” might have been possible. So, this particular example
is merely a sci-fi gedanken-experimental fantasy.
There are issues with Eric Davis’s equations (7) to (12) pp 191 to 193 involving the proper way
to get to the Newtonian weak field Poisson equation approximation when the source is an
electromagnetic field and not the usual fluid equation of state. I will come back to that after
resolving the still controversial issue of the gravitating source electromagnetic field stress-energy
tensor inside complex matter where pump photons merge with different kinds of material quasi-
particles and collective modes especially in edge 2D quantum well, 1D quantum wire, 0D
quantum dot as well as 3D bulk nano-technology relevant to Tic Tac Tech.24 Indeed, the relation
of 0D to 1D, 1D to 2D, 2D to 3D may show a new nested Russian Doll “Hologram Principle.”25

24
Rodrigo Medina, J. Stephany, “The energy-momentum tensor of electromagnetic fields in matter”
arXiv:1703.02109v1 [physics.class-ph] 6 Mar 2017, “Momentum exchange between and electromagnetic wave and
a dispersive medium” arXiv:1801.09323v1 [physics.class-ph] 29 Jan 2018
25
Consult papers by Leonard Susskind on arXiv.
First, we need to understand the meaning of the stress-energy tensor for all possible cases.

Feynman’s Lectures on Physics Volume II26

31–8 The four-tensor of electromagnetic momentum

All the tensors we have looked at so far in this chapter relate to the three dimensions of
space; they are defined to have a certain transformation property under spatial rotations. In
Chapter 26 we had occasion to use a tensor in the four dimensions of relativistic space-
time—the electromagnetic field tensor Fμν. The components of such a four-tensor transform
under a Lorentz transformation of the coordinates in a special way that we worked out.
(Although we did not do it that way, we could have considered the Lorentz transformation
as a “rotation” in a four-dimensional “space” called Minkowski space; then the analogy with
what we are doing here would have been clearer.)

As our last example, we want to consider another tensor in the four
dimensions (t,x,y,z) of relativity theory. When we wrote the stress tensor, we defined Sij as
a component of a force across a unit area. But a force is equal to the time rate of change
of a momentum. Therefore, instead of saying “Sxy is the x-component of the force across a
unit area perpendicular to y,” we could equally well say, “Sxy is the rate of flow of the x-
component of momentum through a unit area perpendicular to y.” In other words, each term
of Sij also represents the flow of the i-component of momentum through a unit area
perpendicular to the j-direction. These are pure space components, but they are parts of a
“larger” tensor Sμν in four dimensions (μ and ν=t,x,y,z) containing additional components
like Stx, Syt, Stt, etc. We will now try to find the physical meaning of these extra components.

We know that the space components represent flow of momentum. We can get a
clue on how to extend this to the time dimension by studying another kind of “flow”—the
flow of electric charge. For the scalar quantity, charge, the rate of flow (per unit area
perpendicular to the flow) is a space vector—the current density vector j. We have seen that
the time component of this flow vector is the density of the stuff that is flowing. For
instance, j can be combined with a time component, jt=ρ, the charge density, to make the
four-vector jμ=(ρ,j); that is, the μ in jμ takes on the values t, x, y, z to mean “density, rate of
flow in the x-direction, rate of flow in y, rate of flow in z” of the scalar charge.

Now by analogy with our statement about the time component of the flow of a scalar
quantity, we might expect that with Sxx, Sxy, and Sxz, describing the flow of the x-component
of momentum, there should be a time component Sxt which would be the density of
whatever is flowing; that is, Sxt should be the density of x-momentum. So, we can extend
our tensor horizontally to include a t-component.

26
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_31.html Feynman’s “S” will be replaced by “T” in most exposition
as in Tuv in Einstein’s gravity field equation.

We have

Sxt = density of x-momentum
Sxx = x-flow of x-momentum = pressure force/area along x normal yz area element
Sxy = y-flow of x-momentum = shear force/area along normal xz area element
Sxz = z-flow of x-momentum = shear force/area along normal xy area element

First tensor index is direction of force component. Second tensor index is direction of
normal to the small area element.

Similarly, for the y-component of momentum we have the three components of flow—
Syx, Syy, Syz—to which we should add a fourth term:

Syt=density of y-momentum.

And, of course, to Szx, Szy, Szz we would add

Szt=density of z-momentum.

In four dimensions there is also a t-component of momentum, which is, we know,
energy.

So, the tensor Sij should be extended vertically with Stx, Sty, and Stz, where

Stx = x-flow of energy
Sty = y-flow of energy
Stz = z-flow of energy
(31.28)

That is, Stx is the flow of energy per unit area and per unit time across a surface
perpendicular to the x-axis, and so on.

Finally, to complete our tensor we need Stt, which would be the density of energy.

We have extended our stress tensor Sij of three dimensions to the four-dimensional stress-
energy tensor Sμν. The index μ can take on the four values t, x, y, and z, meaning,
respectively, “density,” “flow per unit area in the x-direction,” “flow per unit
area in the y-direction,” and “flow per unit area in the z-direction.” In the
same way, ν takes on the four values t, x, y, z to tell us what flows, namely,
“energy,” “momentum in the x-direction,” “momentum in the y-direction,”
and “momentum in the z-direction.”
 Feynman here discusses the electromagnetic field only in classical vacuum not inside a
complex material.

“As an example, we will discuss this tensor not in matter, but in a region of free space
in which there is an electromagnetic field. We know that the flow of energy is the Poynting
vector S=ϵ0c2E×B. So, the x-, y-, and z-components of S are, from the relativistic point of
view, the components Stx, Sty, and Stz of our four-dimensional stress-energy tensor. The
symmetry of the tensor Sij carries over into the time components as well, so the four-
dimensional tensor Sμν is symmetric:27
Sμν = Sνμ. (31.29)

In other words, the components Sxt, Syt, Szt, which are the densities of x, y,
and z momentum, are also equal to the x-, y-, and z-components of the
Poynting vector S, the energy flow—as we have already shown in an earlier chapter
by a different kind of argument.

The remaining components of the electromagnetic stress tensor Sμν can also be
expressed in terms of the electric and magnetic fields E and B. That is to say, we must admit
stress or, to put it less mysteriously, flow of momentum in the electromagnetic field. We
discussed this in Chapter 27 in connection with Eq. (27.21), but did not work out the details.

Those who want to exercise their prowess in tensors in four dimensions might like to
see the formula for Sμν in terms of the fields:

Sμν=ϵ0/2(∑αFμαFνα−(1/4)δμν∑α,βFβαFβα),

where sums on α, β are on t, x, y, z but (as usual in relativity) we adopt a special
meaning for the sum sign ∑and for the symbol δ. In the sums the x, y, z terms are
to be subtracted and δtt=+1, while δxx= δyy= δzz= −1and δμν=0 for μ≠ν (c=1).

Can you verify that it gives the energy density Stt=(ϵ0/2)(E2+B2) and the Poynting
vector ϵ0E×B? Can you show that in an electrostatic field with B=0 the
principal axes of stress are in the direction of the electric field, that there is
a tension (ϵ0/2)E2 along the direction of the field, and that there is an
equal pressure in directions perpendicular to the field direction?”

27
Not always in exotic materials.
Consider the Medina-Stephany electromagnetic field stress-energy tensor inside matter as a
source of an induced gravity field. They use Gaussian not SI unit convention in which

1
cvacuum = 1 =
ε 0 µ0
ε = (1+ χ ε )
(
µ = 1+ χ µ ) (1.39)
χ are the dimensionless homogeneous isotropic static susceptibility fields
in this simplified model.

1 1 µ να
TFµν = − Fαβ F αβη µν + F H
16π 4π α
H µν = F µν − 4π D µν
−1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0
η µν = in Local Inertial Frame (LIF) (1.40)
0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1
1
f dµ = Dαβ ∂ µ F αβ = force density on electric charges
2
inside the material
The electromagnetic field energy density in matter is therefore

1 !2 !2 ! !
uF = TF00 = (8π
)
E + B + E⋅P
! ! !
D = E + 4π P
! !
ρ B = −∇ ⋅ P = 3D volume density of bound charges
!
σ b = P ⋅ n̂ = 2D bound charge surface density
! ! !
B = H + 4π M
! ∇× M
jm = = magnetic current density
εµ
!
! ! dP
jm = jb −
! ! dt
Δd = PdV = electric dipole moment in volume element dV
! !
dP ∂ P ! ! !
= + v ⋅ ∇P convective derivative
dt ∂t
!
for volume element of fluid velocity v
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_derivative
! !
! M ×n
σm =
εµ (1.41)
! !
Δm = MdV = magnetic dipole moment in volume element

! !
! E×H
T =S=
0i
= Poynting's vector electromagnetic energy flow current density
F
4π
! ! ! !
D× B ! E×H
= εµ S = εµ = Electromagnetic mass flow current density
4π 4π
1
εµ = 2 James Clerk Maxwell unification light electricity magnetism (1.42)
! !c
D× B
= g F = Electromagnetic momentum flow current density
4π εµ
TF0i = TFi0
The 3D spacelike stress sub-tensor of the 4D stress-energy tensor of the electromagnetic field in
matter is

1 ! 2 ! 2 ij ! ! ij 1
TFij =
8π
( )
E + B δ − B ⋅ Mδ −
4π
(
EiD j + H iB j ) (1.43)

! !
TF00 − Tvacuum
00
= P⋅ E (1.44)

“There is no similar magnetic term.”

TF = ηµν TFµν = −TF00 + TF11 + TF22 + TF33 only in an LIF rest frame of the material
an accelerating LNIF will have i0 cross terms.
1 !2 !2 ! ! 3 !2 !2 2 ! ! ! ! ! !
=−
8π
( )
E + B − E⋅P+
8π
(
E +B −
8π
) ( )
E ⋅ D + H ⋅ B − 3B ⋅ M (1.45)

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
=+
1
4π
(
E 2 + B2 −) 1
4π
( )
E ⋅ D + H ⋅ B − 3B ⋅ M − E ⋅ P

Therefore, in vacuum TF = 0 because all the susceptibility fields χ from real electric charges
vanish.

Einstein’s gravity tensor field equation can be written as28

2⎛ 1 ⎞
R µν = 8π G ( εµ ) ⎜ T µν − g µν T ⎟ (1.46)
⎝ 2 ⎠

We now have a mathematical dilemma because the source tensors in the input RHS depend on
the output LHS, so an exact solution requires non-perturbative self-consistency. In practice, at
least in weak field case, we use an iterative perturbation technique like in Feynman diagrams.
Furthermore, in canceling the Earth’s gravity, we cannot use the Minkowski metric as a start
because we are in a static LNIF approximate Schwarzschild still diagonal metric. If we add the
Earth’s rotation, then we have off-diagonal terms that affect T. In practice, this is a small
correction because the Earth’s gravity radius is only about half a centimeter.
Using the fluid equation of state

28
The Greek µ is used in two different meanings as the magnetic permeability tensor field and as a 4D tensor
index. It is obvious from context which meaning applies in each instance.
 ( )
T µν = ρ + p ( εµ ) U µU ν − pg µν
ρ = fluid mass density
p = pressure
ρ
T= − 3p
(εµ )
R00 ≈ ( εµ ) ∇ 2φ weak gravity field approximation
φ = Newton's gravity potential energy per unit test mass
(
∇ 2φ = 4π G ρ + 3( εµ ) p )
⎛ p⎞
∇ 2φ = 4π G ρ ⎜ 1+ 3( εµ ) ⎟
⎝ ρ⎠
p
w ≡ ( εµ )
ρ
Exotic phase of vacuum for virtual particles
and meta-materials for real particles
1+ 3w < 0
1
w<− (1.47)
3
1
w ≪ − in a negative resonance
3

Therefore, such a metamaterial fluid can become exotic matter in a negative near EM field
resonance where the effective speed of virtual photons is an imaginary number.

εµ
≪0 (1.48)
ε 0 µ0

This would be like a Nazi-Bell with flowing meta-material in applied electromagnetic fields.
In addition, there is the phase shift effect from dissipative heat in the metamaterial.

(
∇ 2φ = 4π G ρ + 3 εµ cos ( arg ε + arg µ ) p )
Im ε / µ
tan ( arg ε / µ ) =
Re ε / µ
3 εµ cos ( arg ε + arg µ ) p
w ≡ 1+ <0 (1.49)
ρ
for repulsive antigravity blue shift
1D time contraction, 3D space expansion
Note problem with Eric Davis’s eq. (7) p.191

4π G
− R00 = T (1.50)
c4

Is simply wrong, because in fact

8π G
R= T
c4
p.24 Cosmological Physics, John Peacock (1.51)
Cambridge 1999

!2 ! ! !
TF00 =
1
8π
(E )
+ B2 + E ⋅ P
!2 ! 1 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
TF = +
1
4π
(E + B2 −
4π
) (
E ⋅ D + H ⋅ B − 3B ⋅ M − E ⋅ P )
2⎛ 1 ⎞
R µν = 8π G ( εµ ) ⎜ T µν − g µν T ⎟
⎝ 2 ⎠
Using LIF Minkowski metric approximation g 00 = −1
1
T 00 − g 00T
2
1 !2 !2 ! ! ⎛ 1 !2 !2 1 ! ! ! ! 3 ! ! 1 ! !⎞
=
8π
(
E + B + E⋅P+⎜) ⎝ 8π
E +B −
8π
( ) (
E ⋅ D + H ⋅ B − B ⋅ M − E ⋅ P⎟
2 2 ⎠
)
1 !2 !2 1 ! ! ! ! 1 ! ! 3! !
=
4π
(
E +B − )
8π
(
E ⋅ D + H ⋅ B + E ⋅ P − B⋅ M
2 2
)
2⎛ 1 ! ! 1 ! ! ! ! 1 ! ! 3 ! !⎞
R00 = 8π G ( εµ ) ⎜
⎝ 4π
E 2 + B2 − (
8π
) (
E ⋅ D + H ⋅ B + E ⋅ P − B⋅ M⎟
2 2 ⎠
)
Poisson weak field equation for the Frohlich EM Pump Source in simple matter
⎛ 1 !2 !2 1 ! ! ! ! 1 ! ! 3 ! !⎞
∇ 2φ = 4π G ( εµ ) ⎜
⎝ 4π
E +B −
8π
( ) (
E ⋅ D + H ⋅ B + E ⋅ P − B⋅ M⎟
2 2 ⎠
)
(1.52)
In vacuum
! !
1
(
∇ 2φ = G ( ε 0 µ0 ) E 2 + B 2
2
)
Including dissipation in matter

1 !2 !2 1 ! ! ! ! 1 ! ! 3! !
∇ 2φ = 4π G εµ
4π
(E +B −
8π
) ( )
E ⋅ D + H ⋅ B + E ⋅ P − B ⋅ M cosΘ
2 2
Θ is the total relative dissipative phase shift between input electromagnetic
oscillating near field stress-energy electric and magnetic dipoles et-al and
the output gravitational field. We get attraction or repulsion depending on
the sign of the cosine. Tic Tac evidence further indicates (1.53)
εµ = e Re Χ

where ReΧ is the real part of the composite susceptibility tensor field.
We are using Gaussian units c vacuum = 1, ε &µ are dimensionless complex
functions of real variables.

Vacuum ZPF decreases inside a meta-material resonance and it can act either as repulsive dark
energy or attractive dark matter. The vacuum itself may have different meta-material lattice
structures.

Λ
µν
Tvac = 2
cos ( 2arg ε + 2arg µ ) g µν (1.54)
8π G εµ

Pauli/Levi-Civita/Puthoff Effect29

Static, uniform, cylindrically symmetric electric or magnetic field input induced near field
gravity. The constant radius of spacetime curvature of the output geometrodynamic warp near
field is

µ
amag = !2 !
( )
2
4π G εµ B cos 2arg ε + arg µ + 2arg B

ε
aelec = !2 !
( )
2
4π G εµ E cos 2arg µ + arg ε + 2arg E
a → 0 in meta-material resonance - strong induced gravity (1.55)
a is imaginary when net dissipative phase shift is
between 90 and 270 degrees (negative curvature).

29
Eric Davis Op.cit, pp. 198-200 eqs. (25) – (27)
We can do this with small amounts of electrical energy. To make a hovering Skinwalker Ranch
portal at 1000 feet altitude in Earth’s surface gravity needs a = 1013 cm .

The critical vacuum breakdown in meta-material is

2m * Volts
Ec = 3
(SI)
meter
(εµ ) 2 he (1.56)
m * is effective mass of charged quasi-particle

Gravitational Wave Rocketviii

Will g-forces be felt inside this “rocket”? Or is it a form of weightless free float timelike geodesic
warp drive? If the rocket moves on a local geodesic it is controlling, then no g-forces.

Loss of mass30 with the meta-material correction is

7
⎛ εµ ⎞ 2 1 ⎡ t 2 +∞
⎤
(
ΔM = − 1.02 × 10 ⎜ −71
) ⎟ ⎢ ∫ ret ∫t
⎝ ε 0 µ ⎠ 2 ⎢⎣ −∞
!
j dt − !j 2 dt ⎥ Kg
adv
⎥⎦
I add the advanced destiny Dirac-Hoyle-Narlikar correction
to Davis's retarded-only eq.
3
!j = d j (1.57)’
dt 3
Q = minitialℓ2 j quadrupole gravity wave emission
So in this case positive resonance peak no good, we want opposite zero
where effective speed of light is infinite.
That is a negative resonance that stops short of zero.

It’s a tradeoff, low mass loss means smaller final velocity. Eric Davis seems to think there is g-
force “thrust.” In any case, this is a dumb idea to begin with.

30
Eq. (29), Eric Davis, Op.cit
 Quantum Electro-Gravity31

Production cross section of gravitons by uniform static EM near fields

2
⎛ εµ ⎞
(
σ ≈ 6.50 × 10 −43
) ⎜ ε µ ⎟ ℓΕ Coulomb Energy meter
⎝ 0 0⎠
2

ℓ size of meta-material target in direction of pump (1.58)’

far field real photon propagation

Gertsenshtein Effect32

−2
The GW luminosity scales as ⎡⎢( εµ ε 0 µ0 ) − 1⎤
2
and, therefore is of no interest to us at this
⎣ ⎥⎦
time.

Quantum EM Zero Point Fluctuation Induced Anti-Gravity33

εµ
Fanti-grav ≈ ... Davis (38) p. 213 (1.59)’
ε 0 µ0

Van Der Waals Dispersion Anti-Gravity34

Somewhat better, a εµ ε 0 µ0 amplification of predicted levitation.

31
Eq. (34), ibid
32
Eric Davis, ibid, eqs. (35), (36) pp.209-211 mixes near and far field EM pumps.
33
Eric Davis, ibid, eqs. (38)-(41) pp.213-215
34
Eric Davis, ibid, eqs. (42), (43), pp.215-218
 Sarfatti’s Anzatz
Coupling of Matter to Gravity
jacksarfatti@comcast.net
May 12, 2020

Smoking Gun evidence of US Navy Close Encounters with UAVs justifies what you see below.
There is no alternative explanation of the facts that affect US National Security.

The 4D susceptibility 4th rank tensor field response of real charges to input EM pump fields is
defined by the fully covariant “eq (17)”35 constitutive equation

1
Dαβ = χ F γδ 4D GR & SR covariant
2 αβγδ ! !
The 4D tensors include both 3D E and B fields (1.1)’
that are not 4D invariants.

χ αβγδ vanishes in vacuum.

Similarly, the 4D unified permittivity/permeability 4th rank tensor field is defined by the fully
covariant MS “eq (25)” constitutive equation

1
Hαβ = µαβγδ F γδ 4D covariant (1.2)’
2

MS “eq (26)” is

µαβγδ = δ αγ δ βδ − δ αδ δ βγ + 4πχ αβγδ

Define the generalization of Maxwell's
1
c2 = (1.3)’
εµ
as
⌢⌢
εµ
≡ µαβγδ µ αβγδ
ε 0 µ0

These 4th rank tensor fields are pure complex functions of real spacetime events for the
material susceptibility responses with no physical dimensions. The imaginary parts are from
irreversible heat dissipation as well as laser-type amplification in pumped materials above

35
arXiv:1703.02109v1 [physics.class-ph] 6 Mar 2017, “The energy-momentum tensor of electromagnetic fields in
matter,” Rodrigo Medina, J. Stephany (aka MS) p.7
threshold. They determine relative phase shifts between input applied fields and the output
responses of real charges in the material.36

The Kronecker deltas δ αβ in µαβγδ

represent the homogeneous, isotropic, stationary
quantum vacuum plasma dominated by virtual
electron-positron pairs. The cross-terms in the (1.4)’
tensor contraction represent coupling of real and
virtual charges that mix together in LNIF transformations
known, e.g., as the Hawking evaporation of black holes.

The Ansatz is then that the matter gravity coupling is the local frame-invariant spin zero zero-
rank tensor field 37

Einstein's 1916 General Relativity Field Equation

Gαβ = κ Tαβ
Tαβ ≡ mass-energy stress tensor source of gravity input
Gαβ ≡ Einstein's gravity warp field tensor output
⌢⌢ 2
κ ≡ 8π G ( εµ ) Local frame invariant controllable
scalar field coupling
ε 0 and µ0 come mostly from (1.5)’
random zero point vacuum
fluctuations of virtual electron-positron pairs
inside the quantum vacuum plasma.
The 4th rank tensor susceptibility fields
come from the response of real charges
in matter to the applied EM pump fields.

The 3D components of these 4D tensors appear in the source stress-energy tensors, but the
coupling in (1.5) applies universally in matter.ix

36
The unit conventions in classical electrodynamics are especially confusing and frustrating. I write the equations
independent of which convention SI or Gaussian is used. See endnote (1) for details.
37
The spin zero field coupling is squared if we use energy density in the source term, otherwise its linear if we use
mass density as is usually done in the 3D scalar Newtonian limit Poisson equation for Einstein’s 4D GR tensor field
equations.
Details of the Material 4th Rank Susceptibility Response Tensors to Electromagnetic Pump Fields

4D Tensor Maxwell Electromagnetic Field Equations

⎡1 ⎤ α
∂ β H αβ = 4π εµ cos ⎢ ( arg εµ ) ⎥ jfree charges
⎣2 ⎦
Ampere's Law + Gauss's Law
d * F = * j exterior forms * = Hodge dual
εµ ≡ ε α ' β 'γ 'δ ' µ α ' β 'γ 'δ ' = εµ eiarg εµ
Im εµ
tan ( argεµ ) =
Re εµ
∂α Fβγ + ∂ β Fγα + ∂γ Fαβ = 0
Bianchi Identity dF = 0
Faraday's Induction and no magnetic monopoles
H αβ = F αβ − 4π Dαβ

∂ β F αβ = 4π
⎡1
⎣2
⎤ α
εµ cos ⎢ ( arg εµ ) ⎥ jfree
⎦
charges (
α
+ jbound charges )
In LIFs. In LNIFs (1st order gravity EEP) replace ∂
by D = ∂− Γ Levi-Civita Connection (1.6)’
1
Dαβ = χ αβγδ F γδ
2
∂ Aγ ∂ Aδ
F γδ = δ − γ
∂x ∂x
3D sub-tensors under rotation group O ( 3)
Pi=1,2,3 = χ ij( ) E j + χ ij( ) B j
e−e e−m

M i = χ ij(
m−m)
B j + χ ij( ) E j
m−e

χ ij( ) = χ 0i0 j ε
e−e

1
χ ij(
m−m)

4
={ilm}{ jfg } χ lmfg
1
χ ij( ) = { jfg } χ 0ifg
e−m

2
1
χ ij( ) = {ifg } χ fg 0 j
m−e

2 (1.7)’
“The proper way of treating the transformation of the susceptibilities when the frame of reference is changed is
by transforming the four-tensor. When matter is at rest and the material is centrosymmetric the mixed pseudo
tensors vanish, χ(e−m) = χ(m−e) = 0. This property is lost in other frames of reference”

These are the more important equations than the above

1
Hαβ = µ F γδ (1.8)’
2 αβγγ

Di = ε ij E j + ξ ij B j
H i = ζ ij B j + ηij E i (1.9)’
ηij = −ξ ji

For homogeneous isotropic dielectric with LIF rest frame S’ (Einstein’s notation 1905 SR)
! ! ! !
D ' = ε E ' B' = µ H '
ε = ε 0 µ0i0 j
µ0 (1.10)’
µ=
4
{ilm}{ jfg } µlmfg
i, j,l,m, f , g = 1,2,3

Under a Lorentz transformation in Einstein’s 1905 Special Relativity LIF ' ↔ LIF

ε jk ⎡ ⎛ ε β 2 µ0 ⎞ ⎛ ε µ0 ⎞ ⎤
= γ 2 ⎢⎜ − δ − − β β ⎥
ε0 ⎢⎣⎝ ε 0 µ ⎟⎠ jk ⎜⎝ ε 0 µ ⎟⎠ j j ⎥⎦
ζ ⎡⎛ µ ε ⎞ ⎛ε µ ⎞ ⎤
= γ 2 ⎢⎜ 0 − β 2 ⎟ δ jk − ⎜ − 0 ⎟ β j β j ⎥
µ0 ⎢⎣⎝ µ ε 0 ⎠ ⎝ ε0 µ ⎠ ⎥⎦
⎛ε µ ⎞
ξ jk = −η jk = γ 2 ⎜ − 0 ⎟ { jlk } β l (1.11)’
⎝ ε0 µ ⎠
1
γ =
1− εµv 2
v = speed of chunk of solid metamaterial
 Medina-Stephany’s “True” EM Stress-Energy Tensor in Matter

Without Frohlich Non-Equilibrium Coherence

1 1 µ να
TFµν = − Fαβ F αβ g µν + F H
16π 4π α
Fαβ = ∂α Aβ − ∂ β Aα
F 0i = − F i0 = Ei
⎪⎧ ij ⎪⎫ k
F ij = ⎨ ⎬B
⎪⎩ k ⎪⎭
H µν = F µν − 4π D µν
1
Dαβ = χ αβγδ F γδ
2
Dij = {ijk } M k
D0k = − Dko = Pk
µ ∂ν D µν
jbound = ⌢⌢
εµ
⌢⌢
∂ β H αβ = 4π εµ jαfree
⌢⌢ µ
∂ν F µν = 4π εµ jfree ( µ
+ jbound ) (1.12)’

With Frohlich “Room Temperature Superconductivity”

(1.13)’
⌢⌢ 2
µν 1 1 µ να εµ ⎛ h ⎞ ⎡ µ ν 1 µν ⎤
T( Frohlich )=− Fαβ F αβ g µν + F H + ⎜ ⎟ ⎢ A A − g Aγ Aγ ⎥
16π 4π α 16π ⎝ ℓ ⎠ ⎣ 2 ⎦
ℓ ≡ Non-Eq "Meissner Effect" analog "penetration depth"
Higgs-Brout-Englert-Anderson-Schwinger Mechanism.
Near field virtual Frohlich pump photons acquire effective rest mass
combining with Goldstone collective spontaneous broken symmetry quanta.
PS. Robert Brout was one of my Cornell tutors along with Hans Bethe (1960).
The effective analog dark matter/dark energy “cosmological term” in Einstein’s gravitational
field equation is

⌢⌢ ⌢ ⌢
εµ cos ( arg ε + arg µ ) ⎛ h ⎞
2
1
Λ≡− αβ
Fαβ F − ⎜ ⎟ ⎡ Aγ Aγ ⎤
16π 32π ⎝ ℓ⎠ ⎣ ⎦
ℓ → ∞ in thermodynamic equilibrium with Frohlich pump (1.14)’
switched off

(1.15)’
µν µ
∂ν T F
=−f
Force density EM field
exerts on matter

The EM field stress-energy current density tensor in matter has components

(1.16)’
1 !2 !2 ! !
TF00 = (
8π
E + B + E⋅P)
! ! i
⌢⌢ i ⎛ E × H ⎞
TF = εµ S = ⎜
0i

⎝ 4π ⎟⎠
!
S ≡ Poynting vector EM field energy current density
! ! i
gi ⎛ D × B⎞
TF = ⌢ ⌢ = ⎜
i0
⎟
εµ ⎝ 4π ⎠
!
g ≡ EM field momentum current density
⎡ 1 !2 !2 ! ! ⎤
TFij = ⎢
⎣ 8
(
π
)
E + B − B ⋅ M 3 ⎥ g ij −
⎦ 4
1
π
(
EiD j + H iB j )
Einstein’s strongly nonlinear set of gravity partial differential field equations with this EM field
source, neglecting other material dynamical degrees of freedom that have negligible effects in
the meta-material electromagnetic susceptibility resonance
(1.17)’
⌢⌢ 2 ⎛ 1 ⎞
R µν = −8π ( εµ ) ⎜ T µν − g µν T ⎟
⎝ 2 ⎠
T ≡ g µν T µν
= g00T 00 + 2g0iT 0i + 3 g ijT ij
Exact solutions in strong fields are difficult because both sides of the field equation depend on
the metric tensor field g µν and its first and second order partial derivatives. The essential terms
in Alcubierre’s warp drive metric are the g oi terms.

Consider an electrostatic field in a parallel plate MIM nanocapacitorx filled with isotropic meta-
material dielectric with uniform electric field along 3-axis in a zero G-Force Minkowski LIF
metric field.

(1.18)’
1
( ) (1+ χ )
2
TF00 = E3
8π 33

TF = 0
0i

TFi0 = 0

( E ) (1− 2 χ )
2
3

Tij
=
F
8π 3

Therefore,

(1.19)’
T = −T + T 00 33

1
( )
E 3 ⎡⎣ − (1+ χ 33 ) + (1− 2 χ 3 ) ⎤⎦
2
=
8π
3χ
( )
2
= − 33 E 3
8π

T = 0 in vacuum, but not in the dielectric.

( )(
2
E3
1 00
T − Tg =
00

2 16π
2 (1+ χ 33 ) − 3χ 33 )
(1.20)’
( E ) (2 − χ )
2
3

=
16π 33
Therefore, in the Newtonian weak field limit the Poisson equation for the induced near
gravistatic field inside the dielectric between the conducting plates of the capacitor is

2
1 ⌢⌢ ⎛ V ⎞
∇ φ = G ( εµ ) ⎜ ⎟ ( 2 − χ 33 )
2

4 ⎝ d⎠
2
⎛V ⎞
1
(
≈ Gε 0 µ0 ⎜ ⎟ ( 2 − χ 33 ) (1+ χ 33 ) cos 2argV + arg ( 2 − χ 33 ) (1+ χ 33 )
4 ⎝ d⎠
)
(1.21)’
ε
V=
Q
C
(
C = 0 1+ Re ⎡⎣ χ 33 ⎤⎦ A
d
)
V = voltage difference across plates
of area A, separation d, charge Q
Note the phase modulation control of gravity or anti-gravity.

The induced space-time curvature is

( )
2

(ε⌢µ⌢ ) ∇2φ ≈ G4 (ε 0 µ0 ) ⎛⎜⎝ Vd ⎞⎟⎠ ( 2 − χ 33 )(1+ χ 33 ) cos 2argV + arg ( 2 − χ 33 )(1+ χ 33 )

2 2 2

In a meta-material resonance χ 33 ≫ 1
2

(ε⌢µ⌢ ) ∇2φ ≈ − G4 (ε 0 µ0 ) ⎛⎜⎝ Vd ⎞⎟⎠ χ 333 cos 2argV + 3arg ( χ 33 )

( )
2
(1.22)’

to cancel Earth's surface gravity requires

2
G ⎛V ⎞
⎜ ⎟ χ 333 ≈ 10−26 cm −2
c( vacuum ) ⎝ d ⎠
4
 2
G ⎛V ⎞
⎜ ⎟ χ 333 ≈ 10−26 cm −2
c( vacuum ) ⎝ d ⎠
4

V Volts
= 106
d cm
G cm
= 7.4 × 10−50
4
c( vacuum ) ergs (1.23)’

7.4 × 10−50 × 1012 χ 333 ≈ 10−26

1012
χ 333 ≈
7.4
104
χ 33 ≈
2

Distortion of York Time Inside Meta-Material

jacksarfatti@comcast.net

May 25, 2020

(
ds 2 = − α 2 − β i β i ) dt 2
εµ
+ 2β i dx i
dt
εµ
+ γ ij dx i dx j
(1.24)
dx i
β i = εµ
dt

α =1
β x = − εµ vs f
βy = βz = 0
γ ij = δ ij (1.25)
f = induced warp drive propulsion field
shape function confined to the interior of
the meta-material fuselage of the Tic Tac UAV

dt 2
+ ( dx − vs fdt ) + dy 2 + dz 2
2
ds = −
2
(1.26)
εµ
 ( ) ( )
1 ⎡ dx j dxi ⎤
Κ ij = ⎢ ∂ εµ f + ∂ εµ f ⎥
2 ⎢⎣ dt i dt j ⎥⎦
∂i ( )
εµ f = εµ ∂ i ( f ) + f ∂ i ( εµ )
( εµ ) + f dxdt ∂ ( εµ )⎥⎥⎦
1 ⎡ dx ⎤
Κ ij = K ij + ⎢ j f ∂ i i
j
(1.27)
2 ⎢⎣ dt
xs df x d εµ
Θ = vs εµ + vs s f
rs drs rs drs
vs xs d ( εµ )
=θ + f
εµ rs drs

More details at arXiv:gr-qc/0009013v1 5 Sep 2000 M. Alcubierre

Skinwalker Ranch Evidence for a Traversable Wormhole Portal

jacksarfatti@comcast.net
May 24, 2020 V3

I predict that the inhomogeneities and anisotropies in the electromagnetic susceptibility complex
function responses of the meta-material to the external Frohlich photon pump driving it beyond
the critical point threshold for its non-equilibrium nonlinear dissipative macro-quantum coherent
active matter phase function as Matt Visser’s phantom/ghost scalar field with negative kinetic
energy via dissipative phase modulation supporting the stability of the Skinwalker Star Gate
Portal hovering 1000 feet over a place in the Ranch.38

The exponential metric represents

a traversable wormhole39
Petarpa Boonserm 1;2, Tritos Ngampitipan 3,
Alex Simpson 4, and Matt Visser 4
arXiv:1805.03781v1 [gr-qc] 10 May 2018

38
The phantom field quanta acquire rest mass in the macro-quantum phase (Higgs mechanism).
39
https://www.quantamagazine.org/newfound-wormhole-allows-information-to-escape-black-holes-20171023/
https://www.quantamagazine.org/newfound-wormhole-allows-information-to-escape-black-holes-20171023/
 2Gε ( r )µ( r ) M
ε 0 µ0
n(r ) = =e r
ε (r ) µ (r )
4Gε ( r )µ( r ) M
ε 0 µ0
=e r
ε (r ) µ (r )
(
4GM ε ( r ) µ ( r ) = r log e ε 0 µ0 − log e ε ( r ) µ ( r ) )
Solved self-consistent analog computer graphical solution. (1.1)
Adding dissipation
n ( r ) = Re ⎡⎣ n ( r ) ⎤⎦ + i Im ⎡⎣ n ( r ) ⎤⎦

(
4GM ε ( r ) µ ( r ) eiϑ = r log e ε 0 µ0 − log e ε ( r ) µ ( r ) + iϑ )
tan ϑ ( r ) =
{
Im ε ( r ) µ ( r ) }
Re {ε ( r ) µ ( r )}
The controllable meta-material electromagnetic susceptibility resonance spin zero scalar field
coupling between matter and gravity that I have introduced for the first time in the history of
physics is precisely the “ghost” /” phantom” field explaining all the mysteries of flying saucers
and the Skinwalker Portal.
I combine the above Star Gate Portal metric with the Alcubierre Warp Drive “Tic Tac” Toy
Model Metric inside meta-material – for now as an exercise - more realistic attempt later.
 The warp drive: hyper-fast travel
within general relativity.
Miguel Alcubierre∗
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Wales,
College of Cardiff, P.O. Box 913, Cardiff CF1 3YB, UK.
arXiv:gr-qc/0009013v1 5 Sep 2000

Abstract
“It is shown how, within the framework of general relativity and without the introduction of wormholes,
it is possible to modify a spacetime in a way that allows a spaceship to travel with an arbitrarily large
speed. By a purely local expansion of spacetime behind the spaceship and an opposite contraction in front
of it, motion faster than the speed of light as seen by observers outside the disturbed region is possible.
The resulting distortion is reminiscent of the ‘warp drive’ of science fiction. However, just as it happens
with wormholes, exotic matter will be needed in order to generate a distortion of spacetime like the one
discussed here.”
Graphics by Julien Geffrey showing Jack Sarfatti’s prediction of reverse gravity “Doppler Shift”
from UAVs in weightless ZERO G-FORCE low energy low speed warp drive as seen in US
Navy Close Encounters with “Tic Tac” and other UAVs.
Alcubierre: “When we study special relativity, we learn that nothing can travel faster than the
speed of light. This fact is still true in general relativity, though in this case one must be
somewhat more precise: in general relativity, nothing can travel locally faster than the
speed of light.

Since our everyday experience is based on a Euclidean space, it is natural to believe

that if nothing can travel locally faster than light then given two places that are separated
by a spatial proper distance D, it is impossible to make a round trip between them in
a time less than 2D/c (where c is the speed of light), as measured by an observer
that remains always at the place of departure. Of course, from our knowledge of special
relativity we know that the time measured by the person making the round trip can be
made arbitrarily small if his (or her) speed approaches that of light. However, the fact
that within the framework of general relativity and without the need to introduce nontrivial
topologies (wormholes), one can actually make such a round trip in an arbitrarily
short time as measured by an observer that remained at rest will probably come as a
surprise to many people.
Here I wish to discuss a simple example that shows how this can be done. The
basic idea can be more easily understood if we think for a moment in the inflationary
phase of the early Universe, and consider the relative speed of separation of two comoving
observers. It is easy to convince oneself that, if we define this relative speed as the rate
of change of proper spatial distance over proper time, we will obtain a value that is much
larger than the speed of light. This doesn’t mean that our observers will be travelling
faster than light: they always move inside their local light-cones. The enormous speed of
separation comes from the expansion of spacetime itself. 1
1 This superluminal speed is very often a source of confusion. It is also a very good example of how
an intuition based on special relativity can be deceiving when one deals with dynamical spacetimes.

The previous example shows how one can use an expansion of spacetime to move away
from some object at an arbitrarily large speed. In the same way, one can use a contraction
of spacetime to approach an object at any speed. This is the basis of the model for hyper fast
space travel that I wish to present here: create a local distortion of spacetime that
will produce an expansion behind the spaceship, and an opposite contraction ahead of
it. In this way, the spaceship will be pushed away from the Earth and pulled towards a
distant star by spacetime itself. One can then invert the process to come back to Earth,
taking an arbitrarily small time to complete the round trip.

I will now introduce a simple metric that has precisely the characteristics mentioned
above. I will do this using the language of the 3+1 formalism of general relativity [1, 2],
because it will permit a clear interpretation of the results. In this formalism, spacetime
is described by a foliation of spacelike hypersurfaces of constant coordinate time t. The
geometry of spacetime is then given in terms of the following quantities: the 3-metric ij
of the hypersurfaces, the lapse function _ that gives the interval of proper time between
nearby hypersurfaces as measured by the “Eulerian” observers (those whose four-velocity
is normal to the hypersurfaces), and the shift vector _i that relates the spatial coordinate
systems on different hypersurfaces. Using these quantities, the metric of spacetime can
be written as:
I combine Alcubierre’s warp drive metric tensor equation (8) with Visser’s exponential
traversable wormhole metric and my meta-material resonance ANSATZ40

{( }
2Gεµ M 2Gεµ M
dt 2
)
dx − vs f ( rs ) dt + dy 2 + dx 2
− 2
ds 2 = −e r
+e r
εµ
2Gεµ M 2Gεµ M 2Gεµ M
dt 2
+ e r vs2 f ( rs ) dt 2 − e r {
2vs f ( rs ) dxdt − dx 2 − dy 2 − dx 2 }
− 2
= −e r
εµ
⎛ − 2Gεµr M ⎞ (1.2)
2Gεµ M 2Gεµ M
=− ⎜ e
⎜ εµ
−e r
vs f ( rs ) ⎟ dt 2 − e r
2 2

⎟ {
2vs f ( rs ) dxdt − dx 2 − dy 2 − dx 2 }
⎝ ⎠

( )
rs2 ( t ) = x − xs ( t ) + y 2 + z 2
2

⎛ − 2Gεµr M 2Gεµ M
⎞ 2Gεµ M
ds = − ⎜
2 e
⎜ εµ
− e r vs f ( rs ) ⎟ dt 2 − e r
2 2

⎟ {
2vs f ( rs ) dxdt − dx 2 − dy 2 − dx 2 }
⎝ ⎠
For dx = dy = dz = 0
⎛ − 2Gεµr M 2Gεµ M
⎞
e
ds = − ⎜ − e r vs f ( rs ) ⎟ dt 2
2 2 2

⎜ εµ ⎟
⎝ ⎠
Time distortion factor can be controlled.
e.g. require
2Gεµ M 2Gεµ M
εµ
+ εµvs2 f ( rs ) e
− 2
−e r r
=
ε 0 µ0
1
c(2vacuum ) = Maxwell's 1865 unification light, electricity, magnetism
ε 0 µ0
In a dissipative resonance
2
⎛ v ⎞ 2GM εµ cos ϑ

⎟ f ( rs ) e
2
⎜ r
≈1 (1.3)
⎜⎝ c( vacuum ) ⎟⎠

(1.4)

40
Both Alcubierre and Visser et-al make the unfortunate choice G = c = 1 thus missing the greatest discovery in the
history of physics – the control of space and time with small amounts of energy – the secret of the Time Lords.
 2
⎛ v ⎞ 2GM εµ cos ϑ

⎟ f ( rs ) e
2
⎜ r
≈1
⎜⎝ c( vacuum ) ⎟⎠

⎛ v ⎞ 2GM εµ cos ϑ
2log e ⎜ ⎟ + 2log e f ( rs ) + =0
⎜⎝ c( vacuum ) ⎟⎠ r
Zero time distortion between crew in Tic Tac/Star Gate Portal
and Commander Fravor, or Brandon Fugel et-al outside warp field.

εµ → εµ cos ( arg ε + arg µ )

arg ε + arg µ ≡ ϑ
Im ε / µ
tan ( arg ε / µ ) ≡
Re ε / µ (1.5)
⎛ − 2Gεµr M 2Gεµ M
⎞ ⎛ − r 2G cos ϑ M
2G εµ cos ϑ M
⎞
e e
⎜ − e r vs f ( rs ) ⎟ → ⎜ vs f ( rs ) ⎟
2 2
2
−e r 2
⎜ εµ ⎟ ⎜ εµ cos ϑ ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎜⎝ ⎟⎠

( )
The area A M of the hovering portal at 1000 feet at Skinwalker in this model is

A( M ) = 4π e2G 2 εµ cos 2 ( 2ϑ ) M 2
4
(1.6)

Neglecting inhomogeneous gradients and directional anisotropies in the electromagnetic

susceptibility response fields to external pumping, the tidal/compression Riemann-Christoffel
curvature tensor at the wormhole star gate portal “orb” mouth is
 Rtrtr ( M ) = −2Rttθθ ( M ) = −2Rttφφ ( M ) = 0
e−2
Rrrθθ = Rrrφφ = −
(G εµ cosϑ M )
2

θφ e−2
Rθφ =+
(G εµ cosϑ M )
2

(1.7)
e = 2.72
In a metamaterial resonance
εµ
≫ 1 when cosϑ ≠ 0
ε 0 µ0
the tidal stretch-squeeze and compression/expansion
are neglible for travel to future or past etc.

The conformal Weyl (non-zero in vacuum) tensor at the Star Gate portal mouth is

Ctrtr ( M ) = −2Cttθθ = −2Cttφφ − 2Crrθθ = −2Crrφφ = Cθφ

θφ

2e−2 (1.8)
= → 0
3( Gεµ M )
2 εµ→∞
The Ricci (compression/expansion zero in vacuum) and Einstein tensors are

2e−2
Rba ( M ) = − diag {0,1,0,0}b
a

(Gεµ M )
2

2e−2
R( M ) = −
(Gεµ M )
2

2e−2 (1.9)
Gba ( M ) = diag {1,−1,1,1}b
a

(Gεµ M )
2

All decrease in susceptibility resonance peak.

Including dissipation (Kramers-Kronig dispersion relations)
εµ → εµ cos ϑ

Local frame curvature invariants

12e−4
Rabcd R abcd
(M)=
(Gεµ M )
4

16e−4
Cabcd C abcd ( M ) = (1.10)
3( Gεµ M )
4

4e−4
Rab R ab ( M ) = R 2 ( M ) =
(Gεµ M )
4
 The Phantom Ghost Field

More realistically, the inhomogeneities and anisotropies in the electromagnetic susceptibility

response fields are essentially Matt Visser’s fields needed for stability of the traversable
wormhole Star Gate Portal Time Travel Machine (aka Tic Tac)

⎛ ε ( r ) µ ( r ) ⎞ − 2(Gεµ M )
Φ(r ) ≡ ⎜ ⎟e
r
≡ Phantom/Ghost Field Potential
⎝ ε 0 µ0 ⎠
⎛ ε (r ) µ (r )⎞
Z (r ) ≡ ⎜ ⎟
⎝ ε 0 µ0 ⎠
pure complex function of real variables no physical dimensions
⎡ − 2(Gεµ M ) a 2( Gεµ M )
⎤
∇ Φ(r ) = ⎢e ∇ Z (r ) + Z (r )∇ e r ⎥
−
a r a

⎢⎣ ⎥⎦
−
2( Gεµ M )
−
2( Gεµ M )
2 ( Gεµ M )
∇ a e r = +e r
r2
2( Gεµ M )
⎡ 2GM ε 0 µ0 Z ( r ) a ⎤
∇ Φ ( r ) = 2e r ⎢∇ a Z ( r ) +
−
a
x ⎥
⎢⎣ r3 ⎥⎦
1
Rba ( r ) = − ∇ a Φ ( r ) ∇ bΦ ( r )
2
1⎧ ⎫
2⎩
1
2
(
Gba ( r ) = − ⎨∇ a Φ ( r ) ∇ bΦ ( r ) − g ba g cd ∇ c Φ ( r ) ∇ d Φ ( r ) ⎬
⎭
) (1.11)

The dissipative effect required by causality Kramers-Kronig dispersion relations41 is even more
important than the real part of the meta-material susceptibility going negative. It took me awhile
to realize this. The locally frame invariant spin zero/zero rank SR/GR tensor “scalar field”
coupling of matter to gravity

Z ( r ) ≡ ε ( r ) µ ( r ) ≡ µαβγδ
(
( r ) µ(
Medina-Stephany ) αβγδ
Medina-Stephany )
(1.12)
Z ( r ) = X ( r ) + iY ( r )

Is a complex spin zero tensor field with real elastic scattering and imaginary inelastic scatter part.
Therefore, I predict a compensating U (1) spin 1 vector local gauge field V a r similar to Frank ()
Wilczek’s anyon gauge fields in 2D quantum wells and edge states in candidate topological
computing materials with hologram duality with the bulk states.

41
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kramers–Kronig_relations
 2( GM εµ )

Φ ( r ) ≡ 2Ζ ( r ) e
−
r
≡ Phantom/Ghost Field Potential
Φ(r ) = Φ(r ) e ( )
iφ r

φ ( r ) = arctan ⎢
⎡ Im Φ ( r ) ⎤
⎥
{ }
⎢⎣ Re Φ ( r ) ⎥⎦ { }
ε ( r ) µ ( r ) ε ( r ) µ ( r ) iϑ
Ζ (r ) = = e
ε 0 µ0 ε 0 µ0

−
2( Gεµ M )
−
(
2 GM εµ eϑ )
e r
=e r

iϑ
e = cos ϑ + isin ϑ
(1.13)

2( GM εµ )
⎡ a 2G ( ε 0 µ0 ) Z ( r ) M a ⎤
∇ Φ(r ) = e ⎢∇ Z ( r ) +
−
a r
x ⎥
⎢⎣ r3 ⎦⎥
(
2 GM εµ e ( )
iϑ r
)⎡ ⎤ 2GM ( ε 0 µ0 ) Z ( r ) e ( )
iϑ r

∇ Φ(r ) → e
a
−
⎢∇ Z ( r ) e
⎢
r
+ a
(
r3
x a
⎥
⎥
iϑ ( r )
)
⎣ ⎦
The rule is to compute all intermediate steps using the complex functions
with their accumulating total phases Θ ( r ) . Then at the very end take the
real part with the cosΘ ( r ) . We also need the internal U(1) symmetry connection
spin 1 field for local gauge invariance of the global action ∇ a → D a = ∇ a − V a (1.14)
where
D a Φ ( r ) = e ( ) D a Φ' ( r )
iϕ r

Φ ( r ) → Φ' ( r ) = e ( )Φ ( r )
iϕ r

V ( r ) → V ' ( r ) = V ( r ) + i∇ aϕ ( r )
D a Φ' ( r ) = e ( )∇ a Φ ( r ) + i∇ aϕ ( r ) Φ ( r ) e ( ) − V a ( r ) e ( )Φ ( r ) − i∇ aϕ ( r ) e ( )Φ ( r )
iϕ r iϕ r iϕ r iϕ r

The Frohlich resonant electromagnetic pumping of the meta-atom neural network suggests that
we treat the collective emergent spin zero coupling field as a Landau-Ginzburg order parameter.
This would be a thermodynamic non-equilibrium dissipative structure analog of a
superconductor at ambient room temperature especially if we add the net charge on the capacitor
in a previous model for a meta-atom as a nano-LCR oscillator as in the Reissner-Nordstrom
metric.
 2GM ( εµ ) ⎛ Q2 ⎞
⎜ 1+ ⎟
2GM ( εµ ) r ⎝ 4 πε Mr ⎠
± ±
e r →e for unbalanced charge Q
r

more realistic is Tic Tac fuselage network of electric dipoles with zero net charge
The electric dipole potential energy of the meta-atom is
1 Q 2 ℓcosθ
U ( E dipole) =
4πε r2
The effective mass is
µ Q 2 ℓcosθ
4π r2
The gravity radius of this mass of electromagnetic origin is
Q 2 ℓcosθ
rQ = Gεµ 2

r2
The Reissner-Nordstrom electric dipole correction to the metric field is

(Gεµ Q ℓcosθ )
2
2 2
rQ2
=
r2 r4
(1.15)
(Gεµ Q ℓcosθ )
2
2GM ( εµ ) 2GM ( εµ )
2 2

± ± ±
e r
→e r
e r4

If we imagine that Visser’s phantom field is the Frohlich non-equilibrium analog to the
thermodynamic equilibrium Landau-Ginzburg local order parameter for a superfluid or
superconductor42 with Oliver Penrose-Lars Onsager ODLRO macro-quantum coherence, we then
have the semi-phenomenological field equation

Non-equilibrium Prigogine dissipative structure Frohlich Free Energy Density

β 4 ! ! 2 ! !2 (1.16)
2
F ⎡⎣ Φ,V ⎤⎦ = F(equilibrium ) + α Φ + Φ + γ i∇ − V Φ + δ ∇ × ΦV
2
( )
The compensating vector field here is what I suggested43 in my 1969 Ph.D. dissertation with
F.W. Cummings and (informally) Herbert Frohlich. It is a transverse flow/elastic whose curl is
vorticity in the fluid case and a kind of twisting torsion in the elastic solid meta-material.

From the Lagrangian formulation Legendre transformation of the Free Energy Density, the
Euler-Lagrange field equations are

42
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ginzburg–Landau_theory In addition, we expect global heat resistant topological
terms e.g. anyons, edge states.
43
Rather unsuccessfully in 1969 when I was precognitively remote viewing now in 2020 with a bad signal to noise
ratio in a Novikov loop in time. ;-)
 ! ! ! ! !
∇ × ΦV = Φ∇ × V + ∇Φ × V
! ! 2 ! ! ! !
! ! ! !
2
( ) ( )(
αΦ + β Φ Φ + γ i∇ − V Φ + 2δ Φi∇ × V + i∇Φ × V ⋅ ∇ × V = 0
! !
)
−∇ × ∇ × V = J + δ∇Φ × V (1.17)
! ! ! ! ! ! !
(
∇ × ∇ × V = ∇ ∇ ⋅ V − ∇ 2V )
! !
{ ( ) }
!
J = γ Re Φ * i∇ − V Φ

In the static homogeneous limit

!
V = 0, ∇Φ = 0
2
αΦ + β Φ Φ = 0
Φ = 0 is the thermodynamic equilibrium state
below the critical Frohlich pump "laser" (1.18)
threshold for onset of macro-quantum phase coherence.
Above non-equilibrium "lasing" threshold
2 α
Φ =−
β

Landau et-al had a different physical situation, thermodynamic equilibrium for a superconductor
and even a superfluid (He4). Landau posited empirically

α (T ) = α 0 (T − Tc )
α0
>0
β
Therefore (1.19)
T > Tc ⇒ Φ = 0 incoherent locally random
T < Tc ⇒ Φ ≠ 0 coherent locally non-random
Mathematical Model of the Frohlich Pumped Coherent Non-Equilibrium Phase Transition.

In the Frohlich case I replace absolute equilibrium temperature T by an non-equilibrium

effective temperature T '
"
(
T! ' ω , k )=2T 1
Tc ⎛ " " " " ⎞
Tc
⎜ 1± " E ω
"
, (
k
"
× H ω
"
), k ( ⎟)
⎜
⎝ ( )
⎡E ω,k × H ω,k ⎤
⎣ ( ) ⎟
⎦( threshold ) ⎠
"
E ≡ driving pump electric field ( volts meter )
" (1.20)
H ≡ driving pump magnetic excitation ( charge meter × seconds )
ω ≡ Frohlich/Floquet driving pump frequency
"
k ≡ Frohlich/Floquet driving pump wave vector
" " charge × volts energy
⎡⎣ E × H ⎤⎦ = = ≡ Poynting vector energy flux
meter × sec
2
meter 2 × sec

The + sign in denominator of (1.20) is for continuous energy eigenvalues of the relevant quasi-
particles and collective modes forming the electromagnetic susceptibility response tensor field of
the medium (e.g., meta-material). The – sign is for discrete energy eigenvalues like for qubit
electric dipoles and magnetic dipoles.

In the continuous energy eigenvalue spectrum case of + sign, let Tc be the Landau-Ginzburg
critical temperature in thermodynamic equilibrium for a Bose-Einstein Condensate (BEC) to
form. When T! ' < Tc . The discrete energy eigenvalue spectrum case of – sign is like a laser with
negative spin/Jaynes-Cummings effective quantum temperature that happens at the critical point
when T! ' → ∞ when the denominator in (1.20) hits zero.

The equilibrium L-G phenomenological constitutive equations (1.19) hold in the non-equilibrium
case with T replaced by T! ' .44

The LG Onsager-Penrose “ODLRO” macro-quantum phase coherence length is

8γ
ξ= (1.21)
α

The “Meissner effect” penetration length is

44
Except of course in numerator on the RHS of first line in (1.20).
 β 1 1
λ≅ = =
γ α γ Φ
2
Φ γ (1.22)
Φ →0⇒λ→∞

The LG parameter is

λ
κ≡
ξ
1
0 <κ < Type I First Order Phase Transition
2 (1.23)
1
κ> Type II Second Order Phase Transition
2
Abrikosov lattice of quantized vorticity filaments.

“The interior of a bulk superconductor cannot be penetrated by a weak magnetic field, a phenomenon known
as the Meissner effect. When the applied magnetic field becomes too large, superconductivity breaks down.
Superconductors can be divided into two types according to how this breakdown occurs. In type-I
superconductors, superconductivity is abruptly destroyed via a first order phase transition when the strength
of the applied field rises above a critical value Hc. This type of superconductivity is normally exhibited by pure
metals, e.g. aluminium, lead, and mercury. The only alloy known up to now which exhibits type I
superconductivity is TaSi2.[1] The covalent superconductor SiC:B, silicon carbideheavily doped with boron, is
also type-I.[2]
Depending on the demagnetization factor, one may obtain an intermediate state. This state, first described
by Lev Landau, is a phase separation into macroscopic non-superconducting and superconducting domains
forming a Husimi Q representation.[3]
This behavior is different from type-II superconductors which exhibit two critical magnetic fields. The first,
lower critical field occurs when magnetic flux vortices penetrate the material but the material remains
superconducting outside of these microscopic vortices. When the vortex density becomes too large, the entire
material becomes non-superconducting; this corresponds to the second, higher critical field.
The ratio of the London penetration depth λ to the superconducting coherence length ξ determines whether a
superconductor is type-I or type-II. Type-I superconductors are those with 0 < λ/ξ < 1/√2, and type-II
superconductors are those with λ/ξ > 1/√2.[4]” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type-I_superconductor
Vortices in a 200-nm-thick YBCO film imaged by scanning SQUID microscopy[1]
“In superconductivity, an Abrikosov vortex (also called a fluxon) is a vortex of supercurrent in a type-II
superconductor theoretically predicted by Alexei Abrikosov in 1957.[2] Abrikosov vortices occur generically in
the Ginzburg–Landau theory of superconductivity, and can be explicitly demonstrated as solutions to that
theory in a general mathematical setting, viz. as vortices in complex line bundleson Riemannian manifolds.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abrikosov_vortex

The LG model does not have my δ “turbulence” term that I was looking for unsuccessfully in
my 1969 Ph.D. dissertation with Fred W. Cummings and (informally) Herbert Frohlich. I was
clearly precognitively remote viewing my work now in 2020 back in San Diego in 1968-9.

To be continued.
 i

From: Julien Geffray

Date: Monday, May 25, 2020 at 6:04 AM
To: Jack Sarfatti <jacksarfatti@hotmail.com>
Subject: Axisymmetric energy distribution in the Alcubierre-Natário warp drive & White's boost

Jack, I see you have included the attached picture in your latest paper update.

FYI, this one is not from me but is an excerpt from figure 1 in the following paper (see page 4):

Gabriele U. Varieschi, Zily Burstein (2013) "Conformal Gravity and the Alcubierre Warp Drive
Metric" ISRN Astronomy and Astrophysics. article ID 482734. DOI
10.1155/2013/482734. arXiv:1208.3706.

I attach the original paper below. It compares the theories of general relativity vs conformal
gravity for the Alcubierre warp drive metric.
Note that if conformal gravity holds, there would be no need for negative energy density to
produce antigravity. Yes, I know you work with "plain vanilla GR".

I didn’t understand at first how an axisymmetric distribution of energy density around the ship in
this diagram could produce asymmetric warping. Even so, how would the ship "know" the
direction of its apparent motion through space when energy is injected exactly the same way
according to the bow and the stern?

Then I read a 2003 peer-reviewed paper by Sonny White who addresses this very question; I
attached it too.

Harold G. White (Nov. 2003) "A Discussion of Space-Time Metric Engineering"

General Relativity and Gravitation, Vol. 35, No. 11, pp. 2025–2033. DOI
10.1023/A:1026247026218.

However, the presence of the "boost" directly proportional to the initial velocity of the ship, which
is the parameter giving the direction of spacetime warp and spaceship motion, needs an arbitrarily
high initial velocity (a least 0.1 c, and much more in order to lower the energy requirements to
acceptable levels).

Remember, I am only concerned with Tic Tac Close Encounters with US Navy operating at very low
speeds v/c << 1. Also, the energy estimates assumed by White are wrong because his coupling of matter to
gravity is wrong in my new modification of Einstein’s GR equation that does not really determine the
coupling – Einstein only used a dimensional argument and agreement with Newtonian gravity in to get the
form of the coupling in his original work. His argument was only SUFFICIENT NOT NECESSARY.

Fernando Loup demonstrated that the Natário warp drive (which is better than Alcubierre’s
interpretation as with Natário there is no inflation of the whole space behind the ship and its
counterpart space being "sucked in" in front of the ship: only a warp bubble that glides through
spacetime) would eventually need White's boost to work: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-
00786776/document

YES, I AM ABOUT TO GET TO THAT IN MY LECTURES.

Alcubierre is only a pedagogical toy model.

 Despite of this work, it seems your own solution has nothing to do with such boost nor shaping
this particular spatial energy distribution the way Alcubierre did for its superluminal v ≫ c warp
drive, i.e. along an axisymmetric (x-axis) toroid circling the ship. Your subluminal warp
drive v ≪ c is a lot more like a Bondi-Forward gravitational dipole, where positive or negative
energy densities are distributed right where one wants them to be at the bow and at the stern, to
produce gravity and antigravity, respectively. Then the gravitational field is macroscopically
shaped by varying the magnitude (gradient) of each tiny gravity/antigravity pixel generators
tessellating the whole fuselage.

Right you are.

Is that correct?

Julien

ii
Far field is a nuisance for low energy warp drive.
Far field gravity beams will be a weapon against conventional jet fighters, ships et-al.
Gravity analog to EMP??? Needs study.
The JASONs screwed up on all this 2008 General Atomics- I was there.
As Kim Burrafato pointed out we can use e.g. Apple WIRELESS near field charging technology instead of
19th century electrical wire connections.
This also makes miniaturization to micron and nanometer scales easier – chip technology.
iii
To Keith Wanser, May 5, 2020: I was confused myself. It’s been a gradual evolution – even at beginning
I was confused on slow light. I will write up the history of my confusions leading to enlightenment. 😉
Several ideas clinched it. I was also confused on slowing of speed of light in BECs as you pointed out.

My tensor calculus course with Wolfgang Rindler Fall Term 1959

On consistency of tensor field equations – balance the indices on both sides.

Why is speed of light in vacuum LT invariant in SR? It is because

c2 = 1/contraction of 4th rank electric and magnetic tensors from photons scattering off
virtual electron positron pairs.

Index of refraction in vacuum must be scalar since it is the inverse speed of light. (Maxwell)

From Hawking effect boundary between virtual and real charges is not invariant under
Accelerated frame transformations – hence we need to treat them equally.

Finally, I was confused on Kramers-Kronig causality dispersion relations since

(will use index n only for simplicity of notation I really mean (epsilon mu)1/2)

n = Re(n) + iIm(n)

As you say we take real part (classically)

(epsilon mu)2Tuv = Re{ (epsilon mu) 2Tuv} + iIm {(epsilon mu) 2Tuv}
 Therefore

Re(Guv) = G|(epsilonmu)| 2|Tuv|2 cos[2arg(epsilon) + 2arg(mu) + argTuv]

Antigravity when cos[2arg(epsilon) + 2arg(mu) + argTuv] < 0

Gravity when cos[2arg(epsilon) + 2arg(mu) + argTuv] > 0

So negative real part susceptibility not as important as I initially thought.

Jack, (although this is very simple, it is something I clearly had not thought about until I started doing it
explicitly, which is why I like to do things explicitly whenever possible)

The "math" is very simple. However, I would never have realized this is hidden, since we only have the
covariant components of the epsilon and mu 4th rank objects, p. 7-8 of Medina and Stephany, you need
the metric to get the contravariant components from the covariant ones. For very weak fields, the g
will just be the eta Minkowski metric. But something much more interesting when you start warping.

phi is the invariant scalar (field). Then you have on the right-hand side of the Einstein equation (below). It
occurs as the square since the index of refraction goes like sqrt[mu*epsilon] when isotropic, and would
have n^4 in numerator, becomes (epsilon*mu)^2 in numerator. Look at the slide, it is better and has one
additional essential equation to relate covariant and contravariant metric components.

Jack: Yes, and the INDUCED metric field is highly nonlinear in the EM fields Fuv inside the stress energy
tensor since the inverse metrics have EM field dependent terms in denominators!

Hope the images come thru in the email body. I attach a ppt slide separately in case the above images don't
come thru for some reason. I also put the inverse relation between covariant and contravariant metric
tensor components on the slide. Next job is to determine all the (covariant) tensor components for the
isotropic case, and also the boosted case. Then the fun can begin.

I have omitted the factor of 8Pi^2 or some such, focusing only on the modification due to the invariant
scalar.
Note that there are in general 8 factors of metric g in the numerator!!!!! Now clearly it will collapse down
if the metric is diagonal, since each one is then proportional to a number times a Kronecker delta for each
diagonal value. Also, the epsilon and mu tensors become much simpler in the case of an isotropic
material. I will have to do them for that case. The contravariant compoents of g are just the inverse
matrices of the covariant components, so easy to calculate, especially for diagonal metrics.

For the case of weak field, SRT limit, the g's just become the Minkowski metric, and nothing new happens
beyond the numerator 4 tensor factors.
Keith

Jack wrote:

Here I think is the key confusion

Conventional wisdom

G/c^4 coupling

Where it is assumed c = speed of far field EM radiation

But that has never been experimentally tested.

Einstein’s GR field equation in vacuum is

Guv = 0

There is no G/c^4 coupling when Tuv = 0

Mathematics requires

Second Rank Tensor = G(Zero Rank Tensor)(Second Rank Tensor)

Inside matter we cannot use

Gn^4/c^4 where n is the conventional index of refraction for far EM field

propagation because as you correctly point out it’s not a scalar under LTs.

I have sloppily used that in pop expositions but it’s not precisely true as you
point out.

What MUST be true is

Second Rank Tensor = G(Zero Rank Tensor)(Second Rank Tensor)

(Zero Rank Tensor) = contraction of the 4th rank permittivity and permeability
tensors.

This is like Dirac getting antiparticles from purely mathematical

consistency arguments.
iv
From: Eric Davis
Date: Tuesday, April 28, 2020 at 9:19 PM
To: Jack Sarfatti <jacksarfatti@hotmail.com>
Cc: JACK SARFATTI <jacksarfatti@icloud.com>
Subject: Re: I claim to have solved the blueshift, the causal horizon and the energy problems associated with the
Alcubierre Warp Drive Toy Model.

“Jack:

What was there to solve?

If you read the late-90s/early-2000s papers on this topic by Hiscock, Finazzi, Liberati, and their
list of collaborators, you would’ve discovered in the intro and conclusion sections of their papers
that 1) their calculations, which resulted in their discovery of the blueshift and warp bubble
horizon problem, were made only in a toy model (1+1)-dimensional spacetime in which the source
of negative energy is the trace anomaly of the massless scalar field (this is the source of quantum
negative energy density that produces the warp drive in this lower dimensional spacetime). And
2) their results cannot be extended up to the physical (3+1)-dimensional spacetime that we live
in. This is because the expectation value, taken over the vacuum state, of any matter field’s (EM
field, massless scalar field, etc.) stress-energy-momentum tensor will have tensor components that
are not calculable because they are nonlocal and components that are calculable because they are
the local quantum vacuum polarization (local negative Casimir-like vacuum energy density and
the related local vacuum polarization pressure components).”

Jack on April 29: Thanks Eric, I was only addressing the remarks in Fernando Loup’s paper. I will
make that clear in future versions and cite your text here. Note I have “Toy Model” in the subject
line.

There is also the issue whether the motional Doppler shift actually affects a ship in warp drive since
the ship is not literally moving through space-time it should only have gravitational shifts for
outgoing far-field radiation from the ship. For example, the Tic Tac apparently moving at huge
speeds and g-forces shows no heating from friction with the surrounding air as would be the case
with a rocket in re-entry.

“Also, Alcubierre’s warp drive is an unrealistic toy model because he used a massless point
starship. Visser and collaborators, and other investigators used a finite mass starship and showed
that it must gravitationally couple to the warp bubble in order to conserve energy such that the
quantum negative vacuum energy source (that produces the warp bubble) cannot have a rest-
energy that is greater than the rest energy of the starship itself. This constraint leads to a hard-
upper limit on the maximum warp speed that can be attained. This inequality depends upon the
starship mass, the warp bubble radius, and the thickness of the warp bubble wall.”

Of course, I agree with this. However, at one point I thought you said there really was an FTL problem in
the more realistic case? I was about to look at your book with Millis on this point when I got your email
just now.

“The warp drive metric by Natário and Hart et al. get rid of the blueshift and horizon problems as
well as drop the magnitude of negative vacuum energy that is required to produce a warp
drive. Natário showed that Alcubierre’s interpretation of the warp bubble effect is not the correct
general description because Alcubierre relied on the York Time parameter that quantifies the
expansion of a volume of space behind and the contraction of a volume of space in front of the
warp bubble. This parameter is correct to use but its use to interpret the spacetime dynamics of
the warp bubble is not correct. So he used the Killing vector symmetry of the warp drive
spacetime to generate new basis vectors on the slice of hyperspace that the starship is at relative
 rest on, then he derived a new form of the warp drive metric, and showed that it’s spacetime
geometry describes a warp bubble that slides the starship from one point to another.”

Yes, I am aware of that. I haven’t gotten there yet in my pedagogical review.

Eric

Eric W. Davis, Ph.D., FBIS, AFAIAA

Adjunct Professor
Early Universe, Cosmology & Strings Group
Center for Astrophysics, Space Physics
& Engineering Research
Baylor University

v
https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms12661
Broadband giant-refractive-index material based on mesoscopic space-filling curves

• Taeyong Chang,
• Jong Uk Kim,
• Seung Kyu Kang,
• Hyowook Kim,
• Do Kyung Kim,
• Yong-Hee Lee &
• Jonghwa Shin

Nature Communications volume 7, Article number: 12661 (2016) Cite this article
o 1Abstract
The refractive index is the fundamental property of all optical materials and dictates Snell’s law,
propagation speed, wavelength, diffraction, energy density, absorption and emission of light in
materials. Experimentally realized broadband refractive indices remain <40, even with intricately
designed artificial media. Herein, we demonstrate a measured index >1,800 resulting from a
mesoscopic crystal with a dielectric constant greater than three million. This gigantic
enhancement effect originates from the space-filling curve concept from mathematics. The
principle is inherently very broad band, the enhancement being nearly constant from zero up to the
frequency of interest. This broadband giant-refractive-index medium promises not only enhanced
resolution in imaging and raised fundamental absorption limits in solar energy devices, but also
compact, power-efficient components for optical communication and increased performance in
many other applications.

vi
Jack Sarfatti1 second ago
Christopher Mellon is not a physicist. He has a BS from Colby College and a master’s in law from Yale
and he completely misinforms the public in this video that we have no idea how the technology
works. Meantime Putin's scientists have a very good idea because their agents interviewed me on this
years ago. I first explained how this works back in 2011 at the DARPA-NASA 100 Year Starship Meeting
when General Pete Worden paid my way to give a talk. I faced a lot of hostility from Eric Davis and John
Cramer for mentioning UFOs although Eric has now jumped on the UFO bandwagon. Only Doug Trumbull
(Special Effects Space Odyssey Kubrick) defended me.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20120321-searching-for-a-starship
http://www.starpod.us/2011/10/06/ufos-crash-and-burn-at-100-year-starship-symposium/

Read more
REPLY
Jack Sarfatti1 second ago
Here are some videos explaining the elementary physics behind the technology
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG06YzTvdaI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yR52W5d8qY8&feature=share
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROJ8hQBDHJM

Subject: Christopher Mellon on Fox News on Tic Tac

MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJQIL2XBEqE

Jack Sarfatti1 second ago

I informally advised Christopher Mellon on what to say on this show by telephone text
messages that I have copies of to prove what I say is true. Unfortunately, Chris went ballistic
on me when I reacted negatively to his Trump-bashing tirade on a public forum. Indeed, he sent
me the following: CHRIS MELLON <christophermellon1@xxxx> "Advances in AI have made it
possible for emails from Intolerant assholes to go directly to trash. If you are receiving this
message you must be one of them. Goodbye and good luck." Saturday, April 25, 2020 at 5:56 PM
As a matter of fact I have essentially solved the physics behind the technology.
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/weird-news/top-physicist-claims-uss-nimitz-21726921

Jack Sarfatti, PhD physics, MS physics University of California, BA physics Cornell University
featured in MIT David Kaiser's award-winning book "How the Hippies Saved Physics". CIA and
DOD asked me to work on this problem already back in 1974-76.

Text messages April 3, 2020

JACK SARFATTI:
Every object Gimbal, Tic Tac shows metric engineering spacetime manipulation without
event horizons.
In principle one can create an event horizon with metric engineering but that would not be a
good idea for the kind of low speed, low energy warp drive (spacetime manipulation) seen in ALL
the evidence for ALL objects Gimbal, Tic Tac, Triangles, Transparent Sphere encasing cube
Portal, Flying Saucers, USOs all use same metric engineering technology.
All objects Gimbal, Tic Tac, Saucers et-al use the same technology metric engineering low
energy manipulation of spacetime at subliminal speed less than light without event horizons.
Subluminal
Whoever told you that event horizons are inevitably generated in metric engineering
spacetime manipulation of all UAV (Tic Tac, Gimbal et-al) has misinformed you. Event horizons
are only a problem in global effective faster-than-light warp drive, but that’s not what is happening
in the Navy encounters - the vehicles while moving fast are moving much slower than light.
Did you get my message in time?

Chris Mellon:
Super. Thanks. I guess Dr. Travis Taylor is wrong then. He claims his analysis of Gimbal
shows an event horizon.

JACK SARFATTI:
Can you put me in touch with him an event horizon means a black hole arm Travis is an
experimental astronomer and if he said that then he does not really understand Einstein’s general
 theory of relativity but perhaps you misunderstood him because it’s a very strange thing for
anyone to say that that the gimbal was a black hole
I’m speaking to Siri hence some of the weird words
I would have to see the details of his analysis if he thinks it’s a flying black hole I suppose
that’s possible but very strange indeed

Chris Mellon:
I’m not in contact w him

JACK SARFATTI:
I’m pretty sure I can show that it cannot be a black hole using mainstream physics because the
gravitational field will be so strong it will destroy the Earth I’ll double check on the exact numbers
and get back to you by email

Chris Mellon:
not necessary thanks

JACK SARFATTI:
I just did a quick check with John Wheeler’s book and if the earth were a black hole the event
horizon would be less than a centimeter in size there for an event horizon the size of the gimbal
see a few meters whatever mess many times the mass of the earth and so I was right it will destroy
the earth
No event horizon there for sure😉

Chris Mellon:
OK Thanks

JACK SARFATTI:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG06YzTvdaI
Jack Sarfatti <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsH6Mc6a5TKWR1EDBle-Kfw>
7 minutes ago
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG06YzTvdaI&lc=Ugx7KbLLYs_TQcn55yJ4AaABAg>

I woke up just now remember the John Hutchison effect with huge Tesla EM fields causing
chunks of metal to fly across the room with even possibly lethal effect. This was a crude Tic Tac.
His huge electromagnetic near fields generated a Hermann Bondi effect gravitational dipole in the
metal. I was at Bondi's original lectures on this at Cornell Newman Lab nuclear studies when I
was. Hans Bethe's student.

vii
1. arXiv:1905.00560 [pdf, other]

physics.optics
Spacetime Metamaterials
Authors: Christophe Caloz, Zoé-Lise Deck-Léger
Abstract: This paper presents the authors' vision of the emerging field of spacetime metamaterials in a
cohesive and pedagogical perspective. For this purpose, it systematically builds up the physics, modeling and
applications of these media upon the foundation of their pure-space and pure-time counterparts.
Submitted 5 May, 2019; v1 submitted 1 May, 2019; originally announced May 2019.
Comments: 28 pages, 19 figures, invited by IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag
2. arXiv:1904.12959 [pdf, ps, other]
 physics.optics
Scattering at Interluminal Interface
Authors: Zoé-Lise Deck-Léger, Christophe Caloz
Abstract: Interest for spacetime structures has recently been revived, following developments
in metamaterials and ultrafast optics. Such structures essentially consist of successions of space-time
interfaces for which the theory is still incomplete, in particular in the regime where the interface velocity lies
between the wave velocities in the two media involved. This paper addresses this `interluminal' regime,
providing exact scattering solutions for both approaching and receding interfaces. The solutions are verified to
be consistent with the transmission matrix perspective and to be continuous at the limits of the subluminal and
superluminal regimes

viii
Pp.201 – 203 Eric Davis Op.cit
ix
in SI units from Arnold Sommerfeld’s “Electrodynamics” (Academic Press, 1964)

[permittivity ε ] = Charge2/Length x Energy

[permeability µ ] = Energy x Time2/Charge2 x Length

[D] = Charge/Area

[E] = Force/Charge

[H] = Pole Strength/Area = Charge/Length x Time

[B] = Force/Pole Strength

[Pole Strength] = Charge x Length/Time

In SI units epsilon(zero) ε 0 and mu(zero) µ0 for vacuum from random (mostly) virtual electron-
positron pair zero point ZPF quantum fluctuations have physical dimensions – nicely explained in
Arnold Sommerfeld’s ”Electrodynamics”

In Gaussian units c(vacuum) = 1 and epsilon and mu in vacuum have no physical dimensions.

Susceptibilities χ are always dimensionless.

x
“Nanostructures can improve the performance of electrical energy storage devices. Recently, metal–insulator–
metal (MIM) electrostatic capacitors fabricated in a three-dimensional cylindrical nanotemplate of anodized
aluminum oxide (AAO) porous film have shown profound increase in device capacitance (100× or more) over
planar structures. However, inherent asperities at the top of the nanostructure template cause locally high field
strengths and lead to low breakdown voltage. This severely limits the usable voltage, the associated energy density
(1/2CV2), and thus the operational charge–discharge window of the device. We describe an electrochemical
technique, complementary to the self-assembled template pore formation process in the AAO film, that provides
nanoengineered topographies with significantly reduced local electric field concentrations, enabling breakdown
fields up to 2.5× higher (to >10 MV/cm) while reducing leakage current densities by 1 order of magnitude (to ∼10–
10
A/cm2). In addition, we consider and optimize the AAO template and nanopore dimensions, increasing the
capacitance per planar unit area by another 20%. As a result, the MIM nanocapacitor devices achieve an energy
density of ∼1.5 Wh/kg—the highest reported.” https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/nn300553r#
 Nanocapacitors with Big-Energy Storage

Nanopore arrays combine high power and storage capacity.

by
• Katherine Bourzacarchive page
March 16, 2009

The ultimate electronic energy-storage device would store plenty of energy but also charge up rapidly and provide
powerful bursts when needed. Sadly, today’s devices can only do one or the other: capacitors provide high power,
while batteries offer high storage.

Nanopore power: Arrays of capacitors built inside nanopores are shown here in a scanning electron micrograph
image overlaid with an illustration that shows their design. The pores are etched into an aluminum substrate (dark
yellow). The capacitors form two thin layers of metal (blue) separated by a layer of insulating material (light
yellow).

Now researchers at the University of Maryland have developed a kind of capacitor that brings these qualities
together. The research is in its early stages, and the device will have to be scaled up to be practical, but initial results
show that it can store 100 times more energy than previous devices of its kind. Ultimately, such devices could store
surges of energy from renewable sources, like wind, and feed that energy to the electrical grid when needed. They
could also power electric cars that recharge in the amount of time that it takes to fill a gas tank, instead of the six to
eight hours that it takes them to recharge today.

There are many different kinds of batteries and capacitors, but in general, batteries can store large amounts of energy
yet tend to charge up slowly and wear out quickly. Capacitors, meanwhile, have longer lifetimes and can rapidly
discharge, but they store far less total energy. Electrochemists and engineers have been working to solve this energy-
storage problem by boosting batteries’ power and increasing capacitors’ storage capacity.

Sang Bok Lee, a chemistry professor, and Gary Rubloff, a professor of engineering and director of the Maryland
NanoCenter, created nanostructured arrays of electrostatic capacitors. Electrostatic capacitors are the simplest kind
of electronic-energy-storage device, says Rubloff. They store electrical charge on the surface of two metal electrodes
separated by an insulating material; their storage capacity is directly proportional to the surface area of these
sandwich-like electrodes. The Maryland researchers boosted the storage capacity of their capacitors by using
nanofabrication to increase their total surface area. Their electrodes work in the same way as ones found in
conventional capacitors, but instead of being flat, they are tubular and tucked deep inside nanopores.

The fabrication process begins with a glass plate coated with aluminum. Pores are etched into the plate by treating it
with acid and applying a voltage. It’s possible to make very regular arrays of tiny but deep pores, each as small
as 50 nanometers in diameter and up to 30 micrometers deep, by carefully controlling the reaction conditions.
The process is similar to one used to make memory chips. “Next you deposit a very thin layer of metal, then a thin
layer of insulator, then another thin layer of metal into these pores,” says Rubloff. These three layers act as the
nanocapacitors’ electrodes and insulating layer. A layer of aluminum sits on top of the device and serves as one
electrical contact; the other contact is made with an underlying aluminum layer.

This “fractal-like structure greatly increases the surface area,” says Joel Schindall, associate director of
MIT’s Laboratory for Electromagnetic and Electronic Systems, who was not involved in the work.

In a paper published online this week in the journal Nature Nanotechnology, the Maryland group describes making
125-micrometer-wide arrays, each containing one million nanocapacitors. The surface area of each array is 250
times greater than that of a conventional capacitor of comparable size. The arrays’ storage capacity is about 100
microfarads per square centimeter.

But surface area isn’t the only determinant of energy density. The Maryland group’s nanocapacitors also benefit
from the very small spacing between their electrodes, and the work is unique in this respect, says Robert Hebner,
director of the Center for Electromechanics at the University of Texas at Austin. Hebner was not involved in the
Maryland research.

If the electrodes are far apart, the like charges on their surfaces strongly repel each other. When the electrodes are
placed closer together, the negative and positive charges on either side balance out these repulsive forces, and more
total charge can be stored in a given area. The total thickness of each nanocapacitor is just 25 nanometers, and the
charges can pack very close together. “It’s impressive,” says Hebner. “I hope they can scale it up.”

So far, the nanocapacitor arrays can’t store much total energy because they’re so small. “Instead of making these
little dots, we want to make a large area that contains billions of nanocapacitors to store large amounts of energy,”
says Lee. Both he and Rubloff say that scaling up to a practical level is not trivial, but the pair is working together to
make larger arrays. “There are many scale-up issues,” says Rubloff. “We’ll look at how large we can make these
and still have all of them work.”

Even if this problem is solved, they’ll still have to make sure that they can effectively connect multiple arrays to one
another. But Hebner says that this problem is not intractable, and he points to devices on the market, including
sensitive magnetic detectors, that successfully overcome similar connectivity issues.

One advantage of the new fabrication method is that the nanopore dimensions and the respective thicknesses of the
electrode and insulator can be carefully controlled. “Regularity and uniformity are central to scaling
nanotechnologies up to something manufacturable and commercializable,” says Rubloff. “There are still major
hurdles, but we’re trying to decide how to commercialize this–there’s definitely a thirst to do so.”

https://www.technologyreview.com/2009/03/16/31989/nanocapacitors-with-big-energy-storage/