Puthoff - Sarfatti Debate on Metric Engineering To The Stars
Jack Sarfatti
re: March 1, 2004, Aviation Week and Space Technology "To The Stars"
by William Austin
In a message dated 5/8/04 11:51:02 AM, sarf...@pacbell.net writes:
<<Meantime unless you have PV version of Kerr solution you got nothing
really. Why is this such a hard problem for you to solve?>>
Who says it's hard? It just takes the inclusion of off-diagonal terms
in the vacuum dielectric tensor (i.e., go from scalar PV to tensor PV).
It's essentially done in other publications, both for standard
Einsteinian GR metrics and for more general metrics. See, e.g.,
F. de Felice, "On the gravitational field acting as an optical
medium," Gen. Rel. and Grav., vol. 2, pp. 347-357 (1971)
A. M. Volkov, A. A. Izmest'ev, and G. V. Skrotskiy, "The propagation
of electromagnetic waves in a Riemannian space," Sov. Phys. JETP, vol.
32, pp. 686-689 (1971).
Hal Puthoff
Then spell it out in detail in your terms if it's so easy.
Solve the Podkletnov/Ning Li problem of rotating superconducting disks
in terms of PV.
Also show PV prediction of NASA EINSTEIN for gravimagnetic inertial
frame drag in terms of PV vs GR.
PV is a covering theory for GR not other way round as you claimed.
Those are real experiments right?
What are you waiting for?
You have redone Dicke's original 1961 work a jillion times in very
similar papers all over the place, so why are you so reluctant to write
a relevant PV paper on rotating disks now if the above authors already
have done the hard part for you?
Clearly the Podkletnov and Ning Li allegations are relevant to metric
engineering right? In that case what does PV say about that?
Spell it out in detail and soon, say from the next STAIFF meeting?
I have shown my theory for this Podkletnov stuff. Now let's see yours.
John Smith
<snip>