You still have flow. Put a mesh in some sand, and move it around, you still have flow even though the sand is stationary. Gravity would still be a flow.
Aether Displacement
- Thread starter mpc755
- Start date
You still have flow. Put a mesh in some sand, and move it around, you still have flow even though the sand is stationary. Gravity would still be a flow.
The sand is displaced by the particles of matter the mesh consists of. Even when the mesh is stationary within the sand the particles which the mesh consists of displace the sand. If you take the mesh out of the sand the sand fills in where the mesh had been. This is evidence the sand exerts force toward the mesh even when the mesh is at rest within the sand. For a massive object in the aether this force exerted toward the matter by the aether displaced by the matter is gravity. Gravity exists whether an object is at rest with respect to the aether, or not.
The aether is, or behaves similar to, a superfluid with properties of a solid.
The aether is physically displaced by particles of matter.
If you are unable or unwilling to understand aether is physically displaced by particles of matter then start your own thread.
Last edited:
'A positive energy theorem for Einstein-aether and Horava gravity'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1108.1835
"it is the aether mass that is the physical mass of the spacetime"
http://arxiv.org/abs/1108.1835
"it is the aether mass that is the physical mass of the spacetime"
Well so far I think it is a tie...
Neither of you guys have a clue what you are talking about!
Aether has mass. Aether physically occupies three dimensional space. Aether is physically displaced by matter.
What is presently postulated as non-baryonic dark matter is aether.
The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether.
Force exerted toward the Milky Way by the displaced aether is gravity.
Force exerted toward matter by the aether displaced by the matter is gravity.
A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave.
Curved spacetime is displaced aether.
Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html
"the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places, ... disregarding the causes which condition its state."
The state of the aether at every place determined by its connections with the matter and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the state of displacement of the aether.
Well so far I think it is a tie...
Neither of you guys have a clue what you are talking about!
I know what I'm talking about. I test myself with Science News. I look at the picture on its own, and then I guess what the news is going to be about without reading it. I am nearly always right. Like last week there was a report on Gold Twinning at the quantum scale. I had already figured that reflective qualities of a material was a reverse energy propagation, so without reading the report I figured that they had found the reverse energy, and it would cause mirroring of the thin layers of molecules. When I read the news report I was right. And I do this a lot. Same a month ago, with photons entering thin cylinders of quantum material. I knew that photons are positioned to enter negative mass holes. These holes would be like streams for photons, and entropy is a rebound force which would direct the photons down the tube streams. My theory means that I don't need science to tell me things, I can tell them. And today, Supermassive black holes in small Galaxies... I have been posting that for years, that Galaxies are caused by the Aether folding in under its own energy collisions at a central point causing the kissing problem to collapse in on itself.
Last edited:
Or, you could correctly understand the following.
'A positive energy theorem for Einstein-aether and Horava gravity'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1108.1835
"it is the aether mass that is the physical mass of the spacetime"
Well you posted that quote before, and I already told you that I have spacetime as Aether already.
"it is the aether mass that is the physical mass of the spacetime"
This means aether physically occupies spacetime. This means aether physically occupies three dimensional space unoccupied by matter. This means aether is physically displaced by matter.
Force exerted toward matter by the displaced aether is gravity.
A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave.
Curved spacetime is displaced aether.
"it is the aether mass that is the physical mass of the spacetime"
That sentence means interchange them, not displace them.
In front of the Earth's path is space occupied by aether which has mass. What happens to the aether, which has mass, once the space is physically occupied the matter which the Earth consists of?
The aether, which has mass, is displaced by the matter which the Earth consists of.
Before the Earth became a planet, it was atoms. You say that atoms displace Aether at the nucleus. How do you think the atoms originated?
Matter is condensations of aether.
In front of the Earth's path is space occupied by aether which has mass. What happens to the aether, which has mass, once the space is physically occupied the matter which the Earth consists of?
The aether, which has mass, is displaced by the matter which the Earth consists of.
Do you agree with the above?
Now you have Aether displaces Aether. All that means is that two particles cannot share the same X/Y/Z, and that is true.
Last edited:
Does an ice cube in a glass full of water displace the water?
According to you the ice cube is Aether, the water is Aether. The Aether is displacing the Aether, no two particles can share the same X/Y/Z coordinate.
Best way to demonstrate a pair of religions are BS? Get two religious nuts to fight it out, the atheist doesn't have to do anything. Best way to demonstrate a pair of hacks are talking BS? Get them to argue who has the right model, the actual scientist doesn't have to do anything.
Well done guys, you're having a crank off.
Well done guys, you're having a crank off.
The ice cube and the water are both made of H2O.
Does an ice cube in a glass of water displace the water?
Why are you unable to answer such a simple question?
Answer the question yes or no only or start your own thread and never respond to my thread again.
Does an ice cube made of water in a drink of water displace the water?
You can only answer 'yes' or 'no'. Any other answer means start your own thread.
Last edited: