Light travels with respect to the state of the aether in which it exists.
This might not be 100% correct but think of the light as traveling straight through the displaced aether.
Aether Displacement
- Thread starter mpc755
- Start date
Light travels with respect to the state of the aether in which it exists.
This might not be 100% correct but think of the light as traveling straight through the displaced aether.
You had stated that aether is like a super fluid and is distributed evenly through the universe. There should not be any displaced aether in the vicinity of the mass it should disperse through the rest of the aether. There should only be the same 'density' in high gravity areas as low gravity areas. Right?
Don't think of it as density. Think of it as the state of the aether. Think of the light as traveling straight through the displaced aether. Light travels with respect to the state of the aether.
Take a look at the image in the link below to see the state of the aether as determined by its connections with the Milky Way and the state of the aether in neighboring places.
'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 toward 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 as 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.
What is the difference between the states of the aether? Why does displaced aether affect light where normal aether does not? How does aether know it is displaced? Why doesn't the displaced aether disperse into the rest of the aether? Does the displaced state of the aether ever revert back to the normal aether state?
The aether is, or behaves similar to a superfluid with properties of a solid.
It does. When it is no longer displaced.
How can you explain the halo of aether around the galaxy? There is obviously intergalactic aether or light waves could not propagate through it and reach earth.. The halo seems to be able to be detected but the non-halo aether cannot be detected. It seems that the displaced aether is traveling with the galaxy through intergalctic space, which I think is counter to how you said it should be acting. I believe that you said that masses travel through the aether and the aether is not bound by a mass. Doesn't the halo refute this?
Not according to your description. What are the solid properties of the super fluid?
How does it know that it is displaced?
The galaxy clusters in the following article are not traveling with non-baryonic dark matter. The galaxy clusters are moving through the aether. The galaxy clusters displace aether.
'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.
"Our data strongly support the idea that the gravitational potential in clusters is mainly due to a non-baryonic fluid, and any exotic field in gravitational theory must resemble that of CDM fields very closely."
The non-baryonic fluid is the aether.
'Superfluid Is Shown To Have Property Of A Solid'
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/07/990730072958.htm
'Northwestern University physicists have for the first time shown that superfluid helium-3 -- the lighter isotope of helium, which is a liquid that has lost all internal friction, allowing it to flow without resistance and ooze through tiny spaces that normal liquids cannot penetrate -- actually behaves like a solid in its ability to conduct sound waves. ... "Faraday's finding was the first indication that light and magnetism were related," says William Halperin, professor of physics and astronomy at Northwestern. "I wouldn't say that our discovery is of that magnitude, but it is significant as the first observation of a previously unknown mode of wave propagation in a liquid -- one that is of the type you would expect to see in a solid."'
The aether is, or behaves similar to, a frictionless superfluid with properties of a solid.
In the same way that an explosion in space will send out dust and debris, the collision of galaxies sends matter and dark matter in all directions.
It does, it just doesn't interact enough to make any observable difference in lab experiments of that nature.
You obviously haven't understood what 'virtual' means. Clearly you didn't go and do any thinking or reading, even after I highlighted your ignorance and mistakes.
'Virtual' is a statement about whether or not a particle is obeying a specific relation between its mass, energy and moment. All particles can be both real and virtual, in the same way an object could be hot or cold, a photon can be both on-shell or off-shell, otherwise known as real or virtual.
You don't seem to grasp dark matter well either. Dark matter is particles which only interact via the weak force and gravity. We already know of such particles, the neutrinos. Thus the properties of dark matter aren't anything new, it's just there's more particles with such properties than thought in the 1950s.
Because galaxies have masses of trillions of stars and thus have lots of gravity to pull the dark matter around. In the lab the dark matter doesn't interact enough via the weak force to have an effect. For example, right now there's trillions of neutrinos passing through your body but they don't do anything because they only interact via the weak force and gravity. It takes huge experiments involving billions of tons of ice (like the neutrino telescope at the South Pole) to detect even a few dozen a year, that's how infrequently they interact with normal matter.
You haven't bothered to find out the details and you're getting indignant with me (and mainstream science in general) for your own failings. Grow up.
Neutrinos are non-baryonic matter which only interacts via weak and gravitational interactions and they can be gravitationally bound to baryonic matter.
Like I said, the properties of dark matter aren't new. We have examples of such properties in observed particles already. The novel issue is that originally they were thought to be only a small part of the universe, now it seems they are a significant part.
And you have less evidence for this than dark matter physicists have for dark matter. You can't simultaneously whine about dark matter and virtual particles while claiming utterly unjustified, untestable things.
For which you can provide no model, no evidence, no testable predictions.
And Newton believed in Bible codes and alchemy, should we all too? Science moves on, evidence is gathered, predictions tested, models refined or remade.
You are intellectually dishonest for whining about things you don't understand and refuse to read about. You're hypocritical for whining about the supposed untestability of virtual particles while offering no testable predictions of your own claims. And finally you're just plain ignorant about science and the scientific method.
How do you know that? How do you know the moving particle does not have an associated non-baryonic dark matter displacement wave?
Non-baryonic dark matter is not pulled around with matter.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2011/05/03/dark-matter-is-just-messing-with-us-now/
"Dark matter is like an atmosphere through which we are moving; when we’re moving into a headwind, the rate of interactions should be slightly higher than when our relative speed through the ambient dark matter is smaller. The DAMA experiment was designed to look for such a modulation, and it certainly sees one."
How do you know that? How do you know the moving particle does not have an associated non-baryonic dark matter displacement wave?
Last edited:
This is a really lame reference. A blog with little in the way of traceable scientific reference. It is like saying, "because I said so!"
But that's mpc's entire support!
That is all well and good, but you cannot have it both ways. You have said that there is a halo of aether around the milkyway galaxy. There are 2 possibilities as far as I can see:
1. The halo of aether is moving with the milkyway galaxy.
2. The milkyway happens to have intersected a halo of aether at this point.
Which one is it? Or is there another explanation?
'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.
"Our data strongly support the idea that the gravitational potential in clusters is mainly due to a non-baryonic fluid, and any exotic field in gravitational theory must resemble that of CDM fields very closely."
The non-baryonic fluid is the aether.
I was referring to galaxy collisions, where the dark matter which is moving along with the visible matter continues to move through the colliding galaxy. The article you link to is about the motion of the Earth. You do realise there's a difference between the Earth an a galaxy, right?
Since there is no evidence for such a thing it is not considered, just like any other hypothetical process for which there is no evidence. If a discrepancy in the experiment between model and observation occurs then explanations would be proposed.
The original reason for hypothesising the existence of the neutrino was missing momentum in decay processes. If there were unobserved dark matter being pushed about by the particles in the double slit experiment we would observe a modification in the motion of the particles, ie missing momentum. Instead we see precisely what is to be expected if there is no interaction (or so close to zero as to be undetectable) between the particles in question and the surrounding dark matter.
Neutrinos were not hypothesised until the 1930s, because they played such a tiny role in particle physics up until then and are extremely hard to detect. It wasn't until decades later we could detect them and only because we knew precisely what we were looking for. Dark matter is even harder to produce than neutrinos and even harder to detect in the lab, the weak force is very weak. Only when there is a huge amount of it such that gravity becomes the dominating force does it become easily apparent.
There's more evidence for dark matter than your aether. Furthermore dark matter models make predictions, we can test them and reject those which fail to make the right precise predictions. You can't offer anything.
Every single model/concept in physics you've whined about, such as dark matter and virtual particles, is able to make more predictions, precise predictions, than you can about aether and all of them have more justification from evidence and observation than your aether. No matter how much whining you do about the mainstream and how much you proclaim about aether, that is not going to change.
Why don't you actually read the following post before responding?
'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.
"Our data strongly support the idea that the gravitational potential in clusters is mainly due to a non-baryonic fluid, and any exotic field in gravitational theory must resemble that of CDM fields very closely."
The non-baryonic fluid is the aether.
How is non-baryonic dark matter gravitationally bound to the Milky Way but not the solar system or the Earth?
It's not gravitationally bound to the Milky Way.
Being as mpc755 just repeats the same lines over, and over, let me try to explain what he is saying, and what he isn't understanding.
He says... The halo is a propagated displacement bubble. Propagated in the direction of the flat sides. A lot of the theory is OK. But somehow he allows the displacement to move inside the bubble, and sort of switch on, and off when he wants it to. He will never explain that, because he only knows the word displacement works sometimes.. and he is happy that it works SOMETIMES. His theory needs flow, and he just wants the word displacement. It's like some sort of dyslexic interpretation with missing parts.
My comment was as to the reference rather than mpc's beliefs.