A More Precise Picture

What we might be looking at is e+,e-_ collisions with selectron production that can decay into gravitinos, The threshold behavior of selectron production for the case (m~eR;m_) = (150 GeV; 100 GeV) for both e+,e- and e+e_ modes works well within the energy band here..

Once produced, selectrons must decay. In supergravity frameworks, they typically decay via

As mentioned, in theories with low-energy supersymmetry breaking, selectrons may decay to gravitinos. These particles are interesting in that they behave like gravitons and have charge and mass. In supergravity models, which we will focus on here, the selectron signal is Their signal in either high energy beam production or out in nature is two like-sign electrons, each with energy bounded by

This is what the selectrons would appear as. Now if these decay into gravitinos it could be the gravitinos that perform local brane lensing. In that case we’d be after modeling them. They only have spin 3/2.

Supersymmetric partners Standard model particle

Supersymmetric partner

Name

Type

Spin Name

Type

Spin

Electron

fermion 1/2

Selectron boson

0

Neutrino fermion 1/2

Sneutrino boson

0

Quark

fermion 1/2

Squark

boson

0

Photon

boson

1

Photino

fermion 1/2

W

boson

1

Wino

fermion 1/2

Z

boson

1

Zino

fermion 1/2

Gluon

boson

1

Gluino

fermion 1/2

Higgs

boson

0

Higgsino

fermion 1/2

Graviton boson

2

Gravitino fermion 3/2

In the field quantum -- the graviton -- needs to have a spin of 2. (It can also be shown that any force which is mediated by a boson whose spin is an odd number must be repulsive between like particles, but gravity is an attractive force.). We are after here the opposite of the graviton. It could have odd number spin. Given the larger group of supersymmetry operations, which contains the Poincaré group, it's only natural to ask what happens when that is regarded as a local symmetry group. The answer is that you get a really strange field whose quantum is a particle with a spin of 3/2. Since the Poincaré group is a subgroup, you get the gravitational field and the graviton too. And the graviton and that spin-3/2 particle are supersymmetric partners, so the latter has to be called a gravitino. The theory of the graviton and the gravitino that results is called supergravity. Gravitinos are the only particles that can be said to come up "naturally" with a spin of 3/2. That makes them fermions, so they are also the only quanta of a symmetry-induced field that aren't bosons. Normally it is assumed because they obey the Pauli exclusion principle, they do not combine to be force carriers. However, in our case I do not believe they have to combine to produce brane lensing. They simply need to impart their charge and energy into local Israel condition modifications.

The superstring theory is based on the introduction of a world sheet super-symmetry that relates the space-time coordinates Xμ(ι,τ) to a fermionic partners ψμ (ι,τ), which are twocomponent world sheet spinors. The action S consists of three parts: S = S0 + S1 + S2 ---------In that equation

if the transformation is local (i.e., it is a function of τ and σ, it introduces an extra term, which is cancelled by S1

where the two-dimensional supergravity "gravitino" is related to the local supersymmetry transformation by the formula This cancellation scheme in turn gives another extra term, which is finally cancelled by S2 –

But we could have a case where there is no direct cancellation scheme. In this case they would be eventually cancelled out by shedding their charge and energy into brane lensing. The result is the same with no long existing supersymmetry partners. But in this

case they become a force carrier indirectly. Their existence time span on our 3-brane would be governed by how long range brane lensing effects are. For that aspect the brane tension and the two cosmological constants are inter-related as

The Friedmann equation gives the Hubble parameter to Δ,, m, m, the scale factor a and the matter energy density p, on the brane:

In the matter dominated era the brane is dominated by dust, obeying the continuity equation

We already have the other equations for how the weyl fluid behaves and the electrical aspect of it that effects the above. If we set the Hubble parameter at say just beyond the orbit of Mars we could use the above to model all this. I suspect we will find that the gravitinos are short lived and provide their brane lensing within near proximity to the Sun itself. I believe the range of the weyl fluid change here is the key. Moreover, in the equation of state

can be a variable

Where

Is defined in the bulk. We could then possibly consider this along the lines of Big Crunch to Big Bang, we the Sun fitting the singularity point. As such, the branes are given by an embedding

with a big crunch singularity in

From the modified Friedmann equation we shall deduce that the limit

exists and without loss of generality we shall suppose

We then shall define a brane

The two branes can be pasted together to yield at least a Lipschitz hypersurface in If this hypersurface is of class then we shall speak of a smooth transition from big crunch to big bang which in our case is from center of Sun to transition outward. If the transition is smooth, namely, the quantity

has to be a smooth and even function in the variable

in order that the transition flow is smooth, and a smooth and even function in the variable

if the joint embedding is to represent a smooth hypersurface in

The metric in the bulk space N is given by

Where

is the metric of an n- dimensional space form S0, the radial

coordinate r is assumed to be negative,

is defined by

where m > 0 and Λ ≤ 0 are constants, and κ = −1, 0, 1 is the curvature of S0. We note that we assume that there is a black hole region or center in our case, if Λ = 0, then we have to suppose ˜κ = 1. The relation between geometry and physics is governed by the Israel junction conditions

Where is the second fundamental form of N, H= . stress energy tensor of a perfect fluid with an equation of state

the

And the tension of the brane which we can show to be modified in this smooth Transition by a yet to be determined amount.

Which the limit needs in our case to be set at just beyond the orbital distance of Mars.

In all other cases it would not be constant.

Then N is ARW with respect to the future, if the metric is close to the Robertson-Walker metric

Near the center of the Sun

The Israel junction condition

With

Assuming the stress energy tensor to be that of a perfect fluid

satisfying an equation of state

We obtain

point out that this choice of τ implies the relation

since

where we use a dot or a prime to indicate differentiation with respect to τ unless otherwise specified. Since the time function in ARW spaces or in spaces of class (B) has a finite future range with the assumed limits above we can deduce that all the brane lensing takes place within the Sun itself and the effect is long range enough to cover a good percentage of our solar system. This also eliminates the need to consider these gravitinos as anything but short lived as required of most supergravity theory. This would also be good for our eventual field generator purposes since they would remain a very finite distance from the origin plasma field.

I have given all this as a way we could treat this whole field to get a better handle on it as far as modeling goes. We have to change the limit from infinity to that observational data gives us which actually requires a lot more experimental evidence to set an actual range on it. Right now we will just assume it drops off a bit beyond the orbit of Mars. The reason for this round about method utilizing modeling out of cosmology is that this effect does not seem to follow a general r^2 rule, but within the limits of our ability to measure any change in C it does seem to remain smooth or constant out to that orbital distance. The model here is one used to show brane transition from singularity to Big Bang. In essence, the planck point inside our Sun forms the singularity point and the brane is the field itself in this case formed by the gravitinos deep within the Sun’s confined plasma field. The model can be found at http://www.intlpress.com/ATMP/archive/2004/ATMP_8_319_343.pdf and is about as good a starting point as we can get here unless Fernando has any other to suggest. Almost all the math is taken from it, except the first part about supersymmetry and gravitinos. The reason I think we can assume the gravitinos stay confined is based upon supersymmetry requirements. This being the case we should be able with confined high energy plasma to reproduce this effect both in lab and eventually on a space craft. We need a way to alter the field range still. But this does possibly provide us with a way to generate a usable field. The question here is one of energy level. The plasma generating unit has to be high energy on the order of at least that found in the Sun. This leaves us with either Atomic Fusion or matter/anti-matter reactions. I might add that the input mass for fusion would require acceleration to develop even higher energy output. And interesting side line laugh here or blast from the past is: Yes, Scotty, you cannot mix matter/anti-matter cold considering acceleration of both to achieve higher energy combination rather implies heating them up. More or less proof that science fiction has a way of predicting the future. Our drive then becomes somewhat of a combination of particle accelerator and fusion reactor. Very high field strength superconductor magnetic containment systems would be required. We might get an advantage here if the gravitinos do not full shed their energy in brane lensing they decay into free electrons which would aid a MHD based power generation setup. I also believe we could harness the plasma, especially M/AM by products for thrust at the same time. Kind of an all in one drive system that generates the FL field and provides power and thrust.