forwarded
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
DATE:	21/08/97 14:09
RE:	P.S. on Proposed Priore Mechanism
Sender: Tebearden@aol.com
	Thu, 21 Aug 1997 14:07:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: Tebearden@aol.com
Received: (from root@localhost)

Dear Myron,
I left out one MOST important difference between signal and vacuum engine
in general.  That is this: To reach an internal part of the receiver, the
signal is blocked by any intervening interactions, since it is propagated
forward through/along/on the envelope of spacetime.  On the other hand,
the infolded template of internal wrinkles does NOT propagate (i.e., the
individual wrinkles do not propagate) through spacetime as envelope
disturbances!

Instead, they are longitudinal and hence more like "velocity modulations"
or some such.  The transverse wave never gets "born" because gradients of
the potential are not produced.  To carry such in an EM wave, one merely
regards the wave as two potentials (superpotential theory) and the
internal structuring (longitudinal wave components) being introduced into
one or both of the potentials.

The point is, that signal propagation cannot precisely and easily target
precise points within a material object such as a cell, but will have all
sorts of intervening and upsetting and ruinous interactions.

On the other hand, the individual components of the vacuum engine ARISE
directly within the local vacuum/spacetime of the receiver and all its
internal components, no matter how tiny.

Thus you can precisely target and correct (reverse) a disease in the cell,
including at every level and for every part of the disease delta.  You
simply cannot do this with a normal gross "signal" which does not contain
a deterministic "information content" (a deterministic vacuum engine in
its infolded domain).

So normal biophysicists were completely bumfuzzled when confronted by the
Priore results in the late 1960s and early 70s.  As you recall, at that
time nonlinear optics was just being born, so to speak, dating from a 1972
presentation at LLNL by visiting Russian scientists.

Cheers,
Tom Bearden