Coverup of Antigravity: Problem of H-bar or the Reduced Planck's Constant: noncommutative coherence

"Further, by emphasising the constancy of h-bar in the relation [change of]X times [change of]P approximates h-bar one tends to be led to the notion that the 'disturbance' is dependent only on the size of the cell in phase space. In this way the overall experimental conditions were tacitly dismissed as irrelevant."
Emphasis on "size" in original, p. 186, B.J. Hiley, "Phase Space and Cohomology Theory" in 1971, Quantum Theory and Beyond,
What is Planck constant?
"This is made possible by exploiting sequential weak measurements, allowing to measure non-commuting observables in sequence on the same state, on each entangled particle.... dynamical nonlocality seems to manifest the system’s dependence on future configurations in a two-time picture."
"...this implies the possibility of gravitational repulsion rather than attraction within the weak reality. Moreover, not only the gravitational mass, but also the inertial mass will be shown to admit a negative sign."
From Basil J. Hiley: ""the Baker bracket [Jordan product] does not reduce to the usual commutative product. ...The bracket plays an important role when energy (Hiley 2015) is involved. A careful study of Pauli’s (1926) application of the algebraic approach to the energy level structure of the hydrogen atom shows how a Jordan product enters into the calculation.v. As we have already pointed out, one of the advantages of the Moyal approach is that it contains classical physics as a limiting case as is clearly seen from equation (12). There is no need to look for a one-to-one correspondence between commutator brackets and Poisson brackets, a process which fails as was demonstrated by the well-known Groenewold-van Hove “no-go” theorem (Guillemin and Sternberg 1984). "Proceedings of the Royal Society of New South Wales Journal Article December 2021
The Moyal-Dirac controversy revisited
B J Hiley "In conventional relativistic quantum mechanics, the Clifford algebra made its appearance indirectly as an attempt to remove the negative energy that arises in the relativistic expression for the energy, E = ±√p2 + m2. (We use natural units throughout).... However what Dirac had actually discovered was that α and β were elements of the Clifford algebra C1,3. The Pauli spin matrices had already alerted us to a possible role for the Clifford algebra, but the Schr¨odinger theory seemed not to require a Clifford algebra. . we see that the Schr¨odinger theory can also be discussed in terms of a Clifford algebra. ...instead use an element of a minimal left ideal to carry the information normally carried by the wave function. Thus once again we can work entirely within the algebra with no need to introduce an external Hilbert space structure."
This, of course, not only provides us with an alternative approach to the Dirac theory itself, but it also provides a way to generalise the Bohm model so that it can be applied to all relativistic particle situations."
"Here we have chosen to start this sequence with the conformal Clifford C2,4 since this contains the Penrose twistors [25]....This condition is sometimes known as the guidance condition, but here we have no ‘waves’, only process, so this phrase is inappropriate in this context."
And in relation to Penrose:
"this h-bar squared with a q and he calls this q the quantum potential"
"And Roger this talk is aimed at some of the work you are doing..."
"For a single particle it fails Einstein criteria of reality and completeness. The experiment proposed here requires heralded single photon counting."
Herbert J. Bernstein
" there are two topological types of closed curves γ on the surface of a sphere; those that encircle the rotation axis and those that do not. Since singularities are present, the above method of deriving the Lagrange bracket no longer holds and so any method using Poisson brackets will not hold." Hiley

[voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang]

World's "Carbon Budget" and it was revised to be only half the time due to the Aerosol Masking Effect hiding the temperature increase. World’s ‘carbon budget’ for key climate goal was halved in just three years: The U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had projected humans could burn only 500 billion more tons of CO2 to have a decent chance of hitting the climate target. Now there’s just half of that carbon to spare. But now, researchers estimate, in a new paper published Thursday, that the number has been cut in half — thanks to three years of high emissions and new scientific understanding of how particles of air pollution, known as aerosols, affect the climate. “This is unprecedented, ” Piers Forster, one of the authors of the paper and a climate scientist at the University of Leeds, said at a news conference in Bonn, Germany. “We have a quite significant update of the remaining budget for 1.5 degrees, ” Joeri Rogelj, one of the authors of the paper, said at the news conference. “Only 250 gigatons of CO2 left.”

[voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang]

"So once again a new potential energy will be produced, which in the case of the potential barrier obstruction, will affect the flow in two ways. The region in the symplectic cell that corresponds to the higher momentum part of will be affected by this additional potential and will ‘pass through’ the barrier. Consequently any particles with parameters

that are in this region of the cell will pass through the barrier. Once the obstruction has been passed all the energy appears as kinetic energy.

The region in the symplectic cell that corresponds to the lower momentum part of
will be ‘reflected’ by the barrier and so any particles with parameters

within that region of the cell will actually be reflected. In all cases the energy will be strictly conserved.

When the obstruction is provided by, say two slits, it looks as if the cell could be split into two individual cells. But this is not true as there is still continuity in the phase space cell because there is still continuity in the momentum degree of freedom. Thus the cell is not split into two disjoint regions in phase space and, because energy is additive, linear superposition follows. The result is a quantum potential of the type shown in the calculations of Philippidis, Dewdney and Hiley [69] and Dewdney and Hiley [70].

It must be stressed that the Gromov non-squeezing theorem was proved for classical physics. No interference phenomena will occur because in the classical domain there is no limit, in principle, to the size of a cell in phase space. In quantum mechanics this is no longer the case. The old quantum theory of Bohr already shows us that this cell has a minimum area of order

[voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang]

Frank M. Mitloehner, University of California, Davis, Professor of Animal Science and Air Quality Extension Specialist, University of California, Davis: A key claim underlying these arguments holds that globally, meat production generates more greenhouse gases than the entire transportation sector. However, this claim is demonstrably wrong, as I will show. And its persistence has led to false assumptions about the linkage between meat and climate change. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the largest sources of U.S. GHG emissions in 2016 were electricity production (28 percent of total emissions), transportation (28 percent) and industry (22 percent). All of agriculture accounted for a total of 9 percent. All of animal agriculture contributes less than half of this amount, representing 3.9 percent of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Even if Americans eliminated all animal protein from their diets, they would reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by only 2.6 percent. According to the FAO’s statistical database, total direct greenhouse gas emissions from U.S. livestock have declined 11.3 percent since 1961, while production of livestock meat has more than doubled.
FAO analysts used a comprehensive life-cycle assessment to study the climate impact of livestock, but a different method when they analyzed transportation. For livestock, they considered every factor associated with producing meat. This included emissions from fertilizer production, converting land from forests to pastures, growing feed, and direct emissions from animals (belching and manure) from birth to death.
However, when they looked at transportation’s carbon footprint, they ignored impacts on the climate from manufacturing vehicle materials and parts, assembling vehicles and maintaining roads, bridges and airports. Instead, they only considered the exhaust emitted by finished cars, trucks, trains and planes. As a result, the FAO’s comparison of greenhouse gas emissions from livestock to those from transportation was greatly distorted.
"By comparison, direct emissions from livestock account for 2.3 gigatons of CO2 equivalent, or 5% of the total. They consist of methane and nitrous oxide from rumen digestion and manure management. Contrary to transport, agriculture is based on a large variety of natural processes that emit (or leak) methane, nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide from multiple sources. While it is possible to “de-carbonize” transport, emissions from land use and agriculture are much more difficult to measure and control." Anne Mottet is a Livestock Development Officer with the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations in Rome, specialising in natural resource use efficiency and climate change. She has 15 years of work experience in research, quantitative analysis and strategic consulting to the agricultural sector.
Henning Steinfeld is head of the livestock sector analysis and policy branch at the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations in Rome, Italy. He has been working on agricultural and livestock policy for the last 15 years, in particular focusing on environmental issues, poverty and public health protection.

[voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang]

your point that two wrongs don't make a right is well-taken. The wrong of 1000 gigatons in 200 years when the background rate is only 12 gigatons is the lower end wrong if only we aggressively reduce co2 emissions now! We are no way close to that 1000 gigatons limit on the current trajectory of a supposed 45% reduction by 2030 - it's not happening at all. On the other hand the CO2- EQUIVALENT emissions is even worse and over 500 ppm already - and based on the 1750 baseline of anthropogenic increase from petrochemical burning (coal) we are already above 1.5 Celsius on Land for the temperature increase. This means the natural positive feedbacks are already kicking in. If we STOPPED ALL CO2 immediately right now - the Aerosol Masking Effect would go away causing the 1200 gigatons of methane to release as an "abrupt eruption" as is proven to have already happened in the past. Just a 5 gigaton release will double the atmosphere CO2 equivalent. In fact the 500 Zettajoules of heat in the ocean that is EXTRA since 1995 (compared to just 30 extra zettajoules in the atmosphere over the HOlocene 10, 000 years) - means that the Arctic ice is melting fast from BELOW. This means in the September minimum we already are at 1/2 meter to 1 meter thick with almost all the multiyear ice gone. This means once the ice is gone the albedo effect will vanish and again a serious temperature increase will occur. The interior of continents are five degrees Fahrenheit warmer than average - and that's where the "bread baskets" of the planet are to grow food at scale. So that means with increased drought and famine then we will activate the collapse of civilization causing CO2 emissions to drop and the Aerosol Masking Effect to also disappear.
So your claim that it is "ONLY the short term" IGNORES the East Siberian Arctic Shelf pressurized methane - in the largest ocean shelf in the world. This is documented in the 2021 PNAS article by Julia Steinbach but also discussed by Peter Wadhams in his latest powerpoint talk on youtube - Wadhams went to the arctic 50 times for his career - studying the ice while he shared his physics office at Cambridge with Stephen Hawking. So this is not some "scare tactic" of not taking the science seriously - on the contrary this is the real science that is in the top peer-reviewed journals like PNAS and Nature and out of Cambridge. IPCC is a political body that is censored easily and not the real science that's why the ESAS pressurized methane is not even discussed in the IPCC report of thousands of pages. Hilarious.

[voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang]

The Principles of Newtonian and Quantum Mechanics: The Need for Planck’s Constant,
(second ed.), Imperial College Press (2001)