Aether Displacement

. . .aether = subquantum reality (SQR; on the order of Planck length) = Quark Gluon Plasma (QGP). SQR permeates BOTH the vacuum and matter. SQR does NOT interact with matter (that is why it is undetectable) . . . it is the stuff from whence matter evolves via virtual particles from the 'vacuum'. A left-over from this process is CMB. This continuous process drives universe expansion. This process is 'locally' reversed at black holes.

Search wlminex Sciforum archives for details. Or, better yet, email me (wlminex@msn.com) for a detailed narrative+illustrative figures of this hypothesis.

wlminex
 
. . .aether = subquantum reality (SQR; on the order of Planck length) = Quark Gluon Plasma (QGP). SQR permeates BOTH the vacuum and matter. SQR does NOT interact with matter (that is why it is undetectable) . . . it is the stuff from whence matter evolves via virtual particles from the 'vacuum'. A left-over from this process is CMB. This continuous process drives universe expansion. This process is 'locally' reversed at black holes.

Search wlminex Sciforum archives for details. Or, better yet, email me (wlminex@msn.com) for a detailed narrative+illustrative figures of this hypothesis.

wlminex

'Virtual' in physics means I don't have a clue as to what occurs physically in nature so I will just make stuff up.

Answer the following 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.
 
. . . . under gravity, less dense matter partially displaces more dense matter . . . to a limited extent . . . . ice displaces approximately 9/10ths of the water in which it resides . . . under 1G of gravitational force. The same is true for lithosphere partially displacing asthenosphere . . the process is called isostasy.

wlminex
 
. . . . under gravity, less dense matter partially displaces more dense matter . . . to a limited extent . . . . ice displaces approximately 9/10ths of the water in which it resides . . . under 1G of gravitational force. The same is true for lithosphere partially displacing asthenosphere . . the process is called isostasy.

wlminex

Ice displacing water is an analogy.

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.
 
Ah yes! . . .the "analogy" . . .there are a lot of them (analogies) 'out there' . . . the problem seems to be able to pick the correct one (analogy) . . . your's, in my opinion (opinions are analogous to assholes . . everyone has one!) is incorrect.

wlminex
 
Last edited:
Ah yes! . . .the "analogy" . . .there are a lot of them (analogies) 'out there' . . . the problem seems to be able to pick the correct one (analogy) . . . your's, in my opinion (opinions are analogous to assholes . . everyone has one!) is incorrect.

wlminex

Aether has mass. Aether is physically displaced by matter. There is all sorts of evidence aether is physically displaced by matter.

'Offset between dark matter and ordinary matter: evidence from a sample of 38 lensing clusters of galaxies'
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16739.x/abstract

"We compile a sample of 38 galaxy clusters which have both X-ray and strong lensing observations, and study for each cluster the projected offset between the dominant component of baryonic matter centre (measured by X-rays) and the gravitational centre (measured by strong lensing). Among the total sample, 45 per cent clusters have offsets [greater than]10 arcsec. The [greater than]10 arcsec separations are significant, considering the arcsecond precision in the measurement of the lensing/X-ray centres. This suggests that it might be a common phenomenon in unrelaxed galaxy clusters that gravitational field is separated spatially from the dominant component of baryonic matter. It also has consequences for lensing models of unrelaxed clusters since the gas mass distribution may differ from the dark matter distribution and give perturbations to the modelling. Such offsets can be used as a statistical tool for comparison with the results of Lambda cold dark matter ( CDM) simulations and to test the modified dynamics."

The offset is due to the galaxy clusters moving through the aether. The analogy is a submarine moving through the water. You are under water. Two miles away from you are many lights. Moving between you and the lights one mile away is a submarine. The submarine displaces the water. The state of displacement of the water causes the center of the lensing of the light propagating through the water to be offset from the center of the submarine itself. The offset between the center of the lensing of the light propagating through the water displaced by the submarine and the center of the submarine itself is going to remain the same as the submarine moves through the water. The submarine continually displaces different regions of the water. The state of the water connected to and neighboring the submarine remains the same as the submarine moves through the water even though it is not the same water the submarine continually displaces. This is what is occurring physically in nature as the galaxy clusters move through
the aether.

The galaxy clusters in the following article are not traveling with dark matter. The galaxy clusters are moving through the aether. The galaxy clusters displace aether.

'Hubble Finds Ghostly Ring of Dark Matter
'http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/news/dark_matter_ring_feature.html

"Astronomers using NASA's Hubble Space Telescope got a first-hand view of how dark matter behaves during a titanic collision between two galaxy clusters. The wreck created a ripple of dark mater, which is somewhat similar to a ripple formed in a pond when a rock hits the water."

The 'pond' consists of aether. The moving 'particles' are the galaxy clusters. The 'ripple' is a gravitational wave. The 'ripple' is an aether displacement wave.

The above is physical evidence of a moving 'particle' having an associated aether displacement wave.

In a double slit experiment, the particle travels a single path and enters and exits a single slit. It is the associated aether displacement wave which enters and exits both slits. The aether displacement wave creates wave interference upon exiting the slits. As the particle exits a singel slit, it is this interference which alters the direction the particle travels. Detecting the particle causes a loss of coherence of the associated aether displacement wave, there is no wave interference, and the direction the particle travels is not altered.

The aether is detected every time a double slit experiment is performed.

Aether has mass. Aether physically occupies three dimensional space. Aether is physically displaced by matter. Aether is not at rest when displaced. Displaced aether exerts force towards matter. Force exerted towards matter by aether displaced by matter is gravity.

Aether Displacement explains why the shape of the Milky Way's 'dark matter' is in the shape of a squished beach ball.

'Dark Halo Around Our Galaxy Looks Like Squished Beach Ball'
http://www.space.com/7746-dark-halo-galaxy-squished-beach-ball.html

"Dark matter seems to shroud the remaining visible matter in giant spheres called haloes."

The Milky Way's halo is displaced aether.

"But the new study found that the Milky Way's halo isn't exactly spherical, but squished. In fact, its beach-ball form is flattened in a surprising direction perpendicular to the galaxy's visible, pancake-shaped spiral disk."

All of the aether displaced by the Milky Way matter exerts force towards the matter. The force exerted toward the matter by the aether displaced perpendicular to the plane of the galaxy's spiral disk offset. It is the aether which is displaced outward relative to the plane of the spiral disk which exerts force toward the center of the galaxy. This force, along with the force associated with the state of the aether determined by the motion of the matter of the Milky Way, forces the matter closer together which results in the displaced aether looking like a squished beach ball.
 
Is this thread still open?
The majority of mpc755's posts are verbatim duplicates.
 
No you didn't.
You posted observations that you claim is evidence.
Not the same thing at all.

Of course all of the above is evidence of aether displacement.

Why don't you explain the following then if you know so much.

Explain why the Milky Way's halo is in the shape of a squished beach ball.

Explain why there is an offset between the light lensing through the space neighboring a moving galaxy cluster and the galaxy cluster itself.
 
Of course all of the above is evidence of aether displacement.
According to you.

Why don't you explain the following then if you know so much.
Explain why the Milky Way's halo is in the shape of a squished beach ball.
Explain why there is an offset between the light lensing through the space neighboring a moving galaxy cluster and the galaxy cluster itself.
Yep, diversions again.
You can't even explain the discrepancy between your claims and observation. :rolleyes:
 
Asking you to explain something is a diversion?
Correct.
You're asking me to explain things while refusing to address the failures in your claims.

You can't answer anything yet you think you know every thing.
And you're also dishonest in that this has previously been explained to you.
 
Correct.
You're asking me to explain things while refusing to address the failures in your claims.


And you're also dishonest in that this has previously been explained to you.

I have explained to you using mass per volume was an analogy to explain it is the aether which is physically displaced by matter which exerts force toward the matter which is gravity.

Just as you can't explain or understand what occurs physically in nature to cause the Milky Way halo being in the shape of a squished beach ball or why there is an offset between the light lensing through the space neighboring moving galaxy clusters and the galaxy cluster themselves you are incapable of understanding using mass per volume was an analogy to help those who are not as ignorant as you to understand what occurs physically in nature to cause gravity.
 
I have explained to you using mass per volume was an analogy to explain it is the aether which is physically displaced by matter which exerts force toward the matter which is gravity.
No. You have CLAIMED this. And failed (multiple times) to explain the discrepancy between the results as predicted by you and the results as observed.

Just as you can't explain or understand what occurs physically in nature to cause the Milky Way halo being in the shape of a squished beach ball or why there is an offset between the light lensing through the space neighboring moving galaxy clusters and the galaxy cluster themselves you are incapable of understanding using mass per volume was an analogy to help those who are not as ignorant as you to understand what occurs physically in nature to cause gravity.
Blah blah blah.
 
'Virtual' in physics means I don't have a clue as to what occurs physically in nature so I will just make stuff up.
No, it doesn't. Obviously you never bothered to find out what it means and you're dishonest enough to pretend you understand it.

Relativity says that observable particles should obey the relationship $$E^{2} = (mc^{2})^{2} + \mathbf{p}\cdot \mathbf{p} c^{2}$$, ie a constraint relating their energy, rest mass and momentum. This is known as being 'on shell'. Quantum field theory allows particles to be 'off shell' but only if they are not directly observable. A particle which is 'off shell' is also known as a 'virtual' particle. It's a technical term which also happens to have an everyday meaning too. It happens all the time. 'Imaginary' numbers are not any more physically valid or invalid than 'Real' numbers. 'Complex numbers' aren't actually complex. A mathematical 'field' isn't actually an area cow graze. Ghost particles aren't actually spooky images of dead particles. Strange and charm quarks aren't literally strange and charming.

You want to present yourself as an open thinker, but you've just demonstrated you aren't interested in expanding your knowledge, being informed or even honest. You know you haven't looked up what 'virtual' means in particle physics but rather than keep your trap shut you make up a lie, a flat out lie.

No wonder you're such an epic failure at science.
 
No, it doesn't. Obviously you never bothered to find out what it means and you're dishonest enough to pretend you understand it.

Relativity says that observable particles should obey the relationship $$E^{2} = (mc^{2})^{2} + \mathbf{p}\cdot \mathbf{p} c^{2}$$, ie a constraint relating their energy, rest mass and momentum. This is known as being 'on shell'. Quantum field theory allows particles to be 'off shell' but only if they are not directly observable. A particle which is 'off shell' is also known as a 'virtual' particle. It's a technical term which also happens to have an everyday meaning too. It happens all the time. 'Imaginary' numbers are not any more physically valid or invalid than 'Real' numbers. 'Complex numbers' aren't actually complex. A mathematical 'field' isn't actually an area cow graze. Ghost particles aren't actually spooky images of dead particles. Strange and charm quarks aren't literally strange and charming.

You want to present yourself as an open thinker, but you've just demonstrated you aren't interested in expanding your knowledge, being informed or even honest. You know you haven't looked up what 'virtual' means in particle physics but rather than keep your trap shut you make up a lie, a flat out lie.

No wonder you're such an epic failure at science.

Stating something pops into and out of existence out of nothing is dogma. It isn't testable.

Simply because you are incapable of understanding what is presently postulated as non-baryonic dark matter is aether and aether is physically displaced by matter does not mean virtual particles physically exist.
 
Showing your dishonesty again?
You asked this the LAST time I raised the subject, which wasn't the first time.

Values for G vary with mass, not density.

And I have explained repeatedly why I used mass per volume.

Or are you suggesting a planet the same size as Jupiter completely made of lead will not have a greater gravitational force exerted toward it than the gaseous Jupiter?
 
Back
Top