The track in question was produced by a tachyon condensate. In this case, the tachyon is an electron that has evolved into a polariton via entanglement with a photon that has been created under the influence of a superconductor. These superconductor seeded polaritons are called Cavity Higgs polaritons <https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020PhRvR...2a3143R/abstract> or (Bardasis-Schrieffer polaritons <https://s3.amazonaws.com/sf-web-assets-prod/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/30170003/Galitski_Flatiron_cavity_talk.pdf> ).
These polaritons modify the vacuum inside the condensate so that the space time inside becomes Anti de Sutter space. The vacuum within the tachyon condensate becomes a false vacuum because of the increment of Higgs potential each superconductive poloriton adds to the condensate. To learn about the details of this tachyon condensate, refer to all the string theory that has been developed to characterize it. for instance See https://online.kitp.ucsb.edu/online/chord18/tachycond/ On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 9:41 PM Vibrator ! <[email protected]> wrote: > ..i'll just repeat the same point here i made at ECW; the KE / momentum > derivations from the tracks alone proceed on an assumption of CoE and CoM, > hence the findings of stupendous mass / energies / superluminal values of > 'V'. > > Yet surely a saner explanation is that, rather than burning off a finite > reserve of momentum & energy in a closed, purely dissipative system, these > particles are continuously energised, active / open systems? > > They're most likely being driven by the system's PSU, no? Then we have > the 'other' alternative, that they're essentially self-contained > spontaneously-OU systems driven by a fundamental +/- dp/dt asymmetry / > h-bar from vacuum & time via ie. the EM constant, alpha. > > Treating the tracks as if they were made by passive ejecta when they > weren't is obvs gonna lead to crazy conclusions.. you assume car tracks > were powered, not that it must've begun its journey traveling at Mach 9.. > > The example shown in the first video was obvs moving at below the camera > framerate, thru free space.. > > And then from tachyons we progress to <strike>unicor</strike> i mean > 'monopoles'.. when i looked at Bob G's tracks supposedly evidencing > monopoles, all i saw was homopolar effects, which he (surprisingly) hadn't > yet considered, conceding it as a more likely explanation.. > > The apparent reality of robust EM OU from 'picometric aggregates' is > surely enough of a miracle to explain a whole raft of these EVO / SR > effects - or else, only Rossi's special brew are open systems, and everyone > else's are inert closed systems, albeit with apparently-superluminal > 'velocity' components, oh and 'scalar magnetic charge'.. <i>3 miracles</i>, > like buses they are eh.. > > The beastie shown in that first vid is certainly a beaut tho - just on 1st > principles, is it a charge component (such as an electron) orbiting a > proton (or many of each perhaps)? Or else if it's not electrically bound, > then what - gravitationally? Too extreme, surely (even 69 GeV wouldn't > have that kind of gravity); some kind of ZBW-entangled condensate, then? > Its radius is <i>massive</i> tho - some kind of long-range interaction? > There's no apparent counter-wobble of the linear trajectory (or is there?) > but given eg. the proton / electron mass ratio of over 1800:1 perhaps this > is to be expected.. Would a homopolar effect not also better fit here > tho? So eg. the orbital angular momentum is part & parcel of the system's > linear momentum, you have a dipole moving thru a magnetic field, LH rule > etc.. > > Besides, shouldn't tachyons interacting with (pummeling thru) ordinary > matter emit copious braking radiation? If they're dissipating finite > energy & momentum then they're constantly decelerating so can't stay > superluminal for long (just playing devil's advocate here, causality to the > wind) - do the tracks show such characteristics? > > The obviously-entangled pair of tracks from the slide presentation in the > 2nd vid is particularly striking - what would spawn such a pair of entagled > EVO's? Again, some kind of dipolar effect maybe, ie. one spawned from each > pole of the same progenator particle / event? Or were they chiral opposites > / matter-antimatter? Or how about opposing precessional moments of > protium-nucleated thermo-ZBW condensates? ;) > > Just trying to apply a bit of Occam here.. > >
