Aether Wave Theory - a new approach to the contemporary physics understanding

[zephir]

..You just make observations and say "This is what my theory says".

Compare the LeSage model of gravity.

..So you don't know what a local symmetry is then?..

This is somewhat premature question, don't u think? Try to explain "local" term first, so we can decide, if we're able to define, what the "local @&%*$" means, after then. Why not to think by logical way at least single-times?

..the mass of the object drops out of the equation..

LOL.. ONLY and just only if you KNOW, the gravity force IS proportional to mass and inversely proportional to square of distance. But HOW the heck can you know about it, if we CANNOT determine the mass of planets directly?

The approach of yours is a typical demo of "formal education" in contemporary schools. Just math and only math - no abstract logic in thinking, until you get the formalized predicate in the form of formula. By such way, the formal physicists cannot see the connections in reality, even if such understanding is quite trivial.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

Compare the LeSage model of gravity.

Falsified.

This is somewhat premature question, don't u think?

So explain it.

Try to explain "local" term first, so we can decide

I asked you first. As usual, you try to turn it around so you don't have to display your lack of understanding.

, if we're able to define, what the "local @&%*$" means

Of course physicists can. They came up with the meaning! It's like asking a biologist if he's able to explain the meaning of 'cardovascalor"

LOL.. ONLY and just only if you KNOW, the gravity force IS proportional to mass and inversely proportional to square of distance.

You don't need to measure the mass of planets for that. Infact, the only way you can do that with planets is to assume the result! :roflmao:

Come on, can you do the equations for simple Newtonian orbits?

he approach of yours is a typical demo of "formal education" in contemporary schools.

And you're the 'typical demo' of no education at all.

Are you having fun wasting your life on AWT? How many years has it been now and you've gotten nowhere?

 

[zephir]

Falsified.

Yep, "falsified" by the same way, like the Aether concept itself by M-M experiment. Show us, how you can falsify it!

.Can you do the equations for simple Newtonian orbits?

Indeed. Without knowledge of ISL you cannot derive it. Show us, how you can derive 3rd Kepler law without ISL!

Are you having fun wasting your life on AWT?

Of course. And you?

 

[AlphaNumeric]

Yep, "falsified" by the same way, like the Aether concept itself by M-M experiment. Show us, how you can falsify it!

I suggest you read your own link.

Indeed. Without knowledge of ISL you cannot derive it. Show us, how you can derive 3rd Kepler law without ISL!!

Proof you not only don't know the maths of it, you don't even know history. Kepler died in 1630. Newton wasn't even born till 1643.

So tell me, how did Kepler manage to derive his work at least 30 years before Newton came up with his model of gravity, if you cannot do it without it? Was Kepler a time traveller?

There's a nice derivation, using Newton's laws, and there's a less pleasant and less general derivation from geometric properties of ellipses, as Kepler did it.

Of course. And you?

The tiny tiny fraction of my life I've spent showing you for an idiot has been entertaining.

 

[zephir]

..how did Kepler manage to derive his work at least 30 years before Newton came up with his model of gravity....

It's not my problem... It was you, who claimed, the "posting a picture isn't deriving something". Now you can see. the Kepler has managed its laws from "geometric properties of ellipses", i.e. without any knowledge of some ISL.

.. for an idiot has been entertaining....

It's possible, I'm idiot - even Galileo was considered an idiot, so I've no problem with such denomination (...after all, the worst for mainstream science, if it cannot understand the things, which idiots can manage without problem). But I'm able to explain the formation of strings, while you cannot. You've any explanation for string theory, by the same way, like the Kepler, who derived his laws by assumption, the Earth is revolving around Sun and not vice-versa. But it was just Galileo, who has supported this assumption by qualitative evidence with no math, not Kepler. Without Galileo evidence the Kepler laws would remain only a hypothesis.

This is how the science is working, face it...

 

[zephir]

OK, back to reality. How the Aether Wave Theory can help us to understand the deepest connections between space-time compactification and hidden dimensions and the ancient concept of five elements and the esoteric geometry based on platonic solids?

By Aether Wave Theory, the Aether structures are given by probability laws inside the inertial chaos, composed of many states (virtual particles). The less or more deterministic fluctuations of chaos density (i.e. the chaos density gradients) are having a structure of scale invariant Perlin noise, which we can perceive as a foam from local perspective. This structure can be derived from number theory, if we realize, the repeating sequences in random numbers are the less frequent, the more deterministic states (i.e. the similar numbers, the linearly increasing serii, etc.) they contain.

This mechanism is quite similar to formation of foamy density fluctuations inside of condensing supercritical liquid, so we can say, the observable reality has a structure of nested foam. This is because, the density fluctuations are everything, what we can see from inertial chaos and the density fluctuations is the only way, how the energy/information can propagate at distance. So when the density of system increases, the foamy character of Perlin noise will become a clearly pronounced, so we can approximate all Aether structures by nested foam.

 

[zephir]

How the hidden dimensions arises from Aether foam model? A quite easily by introducing of the phase transition concept. Every foam gets more dense after increasing the mass or energy density, by the same way, like the soap foam. Whenever critical energy density is reached, the spontaneous symmetry breaking will occur and we can observe a formation of dense droplets (i.e. the real particles) in the structure of foam. Under further mass/energy density increasing, the newly created particles will form another generation of foamy density fluctuations similar to foam and whole the condensation process will repeat by fractal nested way. The animation bellow demonstrates, how such process will appear in real condensing supercritical fluid of CO2 under pressure:

After while, the supercritical fluid will be formed by many density fluctuations, which will have a structure of nested aggregates of particles, which are forming the density fluctuations of nested foam. Inside of such nested foam, every object can undulate in many spatial directions at the same moment - its motion will be multidimensional, and the number of space-time levels will correspond the number of levels of foam condensation.

 

[zephir]

It's evident, after a certain level of nested condensation, the density fluctuations will be a quite similar on each level, because every level of nested foam is formed by the same mechanism. Is the number of condensation levels limited inside of such foam? If yes, by which way?

For answer we should analyze the general way of space-time compactification inside of foam, i.e. the general way, by which the foam is condensing into more dense state. During shaking of soap foam, the newly created density gradients are formed in the corners of existing ones and this process is completely reversible, if the foam bubbles are filled just by their own vapor:

As we can see, the foam bubbles can be approximated by platonic solids, where the dodecahedron is the most complex one in 3D space. In higher or lower dimensional spaces the number of such regular structures is much more limited, so they don't enable rich evolution. Therefore the real foam is close to dodecahedron structure. The important point si, the another condensation inside of dodecahedron will lead to the cubic structure again. Therefore the dodecahedron foam is the most regular lattice, which we can met inside of our Universe and the number of condensation steps required for its formation is quite limited. It still doesn't fit the 3D space completely, though, which is the reason, why the M-theory is operating in 10-dimensional space.

 

[zephir]

The theory of five elements, adopted from ayurveda by Aristotle (who learned Alexander the Great the eastern philosophy) and the esoteric geometry derived from it on the background of Platonic solids structure is in deep agreement with the proposed mechanism of space-time compactification. This theory is assuming, every observable reality is composed by heterosis of five fundamental structures, which are having a gauge boson (male) and fermion (female) character and which can be expressed by nested Platonic solids. The cube/octahedron heterosis is described by E7 group, while the icosahedron/dodecahedron one is described by octonionic E8 group. And the Aether (prana) structure corresponds the most complex, the dodecahedron one, which has an ambivalent male/female character of graviton foam (the gravitons are both bosons, both fermions at the same time). Note the Penrose tilling and Golden Ratio which follows from dodecahedral symmetry and the icosahedral symmetry of water clusters - this model goes really deep in its consequences.

In agreement with this it was discovered recently, the dark matter of Universe fits the dodecahedron symmetry quite closely. But how the ancient philosophers could know about all these connections? This remains a true mystery, if we consider, the ancient Aether concepts (aksha, vyoma, prana, plenum) weren't analyzed more thoroughly. But what if the Aether Wave Theory is just rediscovering the connections, which the ancient civilizations have understood before many thousands of years? Note that concept of heterosis was adopted by so called heterotic string theories, and the mechanism of spin foam compactification was adopted in so called spin-foam simplex models by LQG theorists.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

It's not my problem... It was you, who claimed, the "posting a picture isn't deriving something". Now you can see. the Kepler has managed its laws from "geometric properties of ellipses"

Kepler used drew the system and then used logic and mathematics to derive his rules. He ended up with a quantative description he could test against reality.

You haven't.

, i.e. without any knowledge of some ISL.

Err... you're the one who said he needed to know Newton's work! Yet more contradiction!

It's possible, I'm idiot - even Galileo was considered an idio

It's not just possible, it's certain you're an idiot. And stop comparing yourself to Galileo. He started the whole "You need to test your theories against reality in careful measurements" concept. It's the Church you're like. You don't understand something so you deny it and you're too scared to learn.

I'm still waiting for you to derive a single result.

, i.e. without any knowledge of some ISL.

You have never done science in your life.

What about my challenge? I bet £100 you cannot get your work published in a reputable journal. Want to put your money where your mouth is or are you going to continue wasting vast amounts of your life claiming you've got all the answers on internet forums but are too scared to actually challenge physicists?

 

[zephir]

...He ended up with a quantitative description he could test against reality...

Which was based on the ad-hoced assumption (the planets are moving along ellipses around Sun). Just Galileo was, who confirmed this abstract model by real non-formal connections and observations (the Venus craters, Lunar shadows, etc..) I'm not in role of Kepler in understanding of Aether concept, but the Galileo - by the same way, like the string theorists didn't finished their model, because they didn't explained the existence of strings by logical model. From string theorists perspective, the string model is ad-hoced by the same way, like the Kepler model.

Can you understand this analogy? Every - even the prettiest - formal model is requiring the logical proof at its very end. This is why most of theorems in math were proved less or more lately by rigorous proof based on logic. If the physics wants to become a truly rigorous science by the same way, like the math, it would require the logical proof of all their conjectures as well. Without it the causal process of human understanding can be never considered finished.

...you cannot get your work published in a reputable journal...

By the same way, like the Galileo wasn't allowed to publish his conclusions in mainstream press of his time by Holy Church..:shrug: With compare to Galileo, I've no problem with this in the era of Internet. The reputable journals are heavily censored by peer-review approach, they're expensive and as such they're not publicly available. I'm not required to use them at all, if I want to spread my ideas freely.

Of course, some mainstream science proponents are unhappy from such development, because they want to retain the Universe understandable just by mainstream science approach, i.e. by using of complex math to support the importance of their existence by the same way, like the Holy Church proponents at theirs times. It's all about freedom of information spreading and money support by rest of society. The mainstream science just replaced the role of Holy Church, so the history with proponents of new ideas just repeats: the prohibiting of ideas spreading and ignorance.

But who cares about them? You cannot stop the evolution of human understanding.

...you're the one who said he needed to know Newton's work...

Nope, on the contrary, you liar... It was you, who introduced the ISL into discussion to support your claim, the picture isn't enough in derivation of Kepler's law. It was you, who asked me to derive it by using of ISL. It was you, who didn't realize, the ISL isn't possible to use for derivation of Kepler's laws at all, because we cannot weight the mass of planets directly.

As we can see, by strictly rigorous approach of modern science, neither Galileo, neither Kepler wouldn't be allowed to publish their ideas in contemporary mainstream press, simply because of lack of formal derivation of their finding. And the mainstream science would never accept the introduction of heliocentric concept into physics by such "picture based" way by the same way, like the Holy Church did in Galieo times (..yes, fifty years after Kepler!).

Isn't it silly and funny? But it's quite real with the approach of yours.

 

[zephir]

The single particles double slit experiment interpretation

By AWT (Aether Wave Theory) the vacuum is formed by scale invariant density fluctuations, which are similar to recursively nested foam and the particles are moving through such foam like dense undulating blobs of standing waves, so called wave packet. Every dense object, which is moving through foam creates a spatial undulations (so called de Broglie wave) of vacuum foam by the same way, like the fish swimming beneath water surface. Such undulation makes the foam more dense at this place, where the particle is moving by the same way, like the soap foam becomes dense during shaking in evacuated vessel.

The particle itself is pretty small, but the deBroglie wave isn't and it spreads by the speed of light, with compare to particle. Therefore it can advance the particle motion and it can interfere with the double slit by the same way, like all the other waves under formation of typical flagelliform patterns.


These patterns are making the foam more dense at the place, where the intensity of undulations is most pronounced, because - as we know already, the foam gets more dense temporarily, when shaken. Because the particle is moving along surfaces of foam like wave, it follows the more dense places of that foam, being focused into them.

We can say, the dense vacuum is a more conductive for particle waves, so they're attracted by it. After all, this is the reason, why the particles are attracted by massive objects, which are making the vacuum neighborhood more dense and why the space appears "curved", too. Therefore, the falling of matter in the presence of gravitational field gradient can be interpreted as a sort of optical phenomena.

Therefore in consecutive experiments the motion of every particle prefers the paths of flagelliform patterns, which are formed by quite deterministic way. Therefore we can say, the particle wave is interfering with its own advanced wave, which is created by particle movement through vacuum foam.

 

[Reiku]

Zeph... rally away from aether and work on something more topic for science and physics. It's not that the aether theory is false, but greatly misunderstood. You should try studying the zero-point field before working on this topic.

 

[zephir]

...it's not that the aether theory is false, but greatly misunderstood.....

LOL. By who? Why? Use arguments, when claiming something. Without arguments your claim cannot be tested as such. Untestable claims aren't worth reading at all.

 

[Reiku]

Ok wide mouth. Tell me what propogation phases do these spontaneous and yet inexorably strange bubbles form from, and what lifetime do they possess....

 

[zephir]

..what propogation phases .....

Don't try to change the subject, please. You told me, the Aether theory is "greatly misunderstood".

Can you substantiate/explain/withdraw such claim? If yes, how?
If you cannot explain your stance, I'm not obliged to explain you this mine.

 

[Reiku]

Easily. You could have answered by saying that the generalized lifetime of a phase of one of these bubbles are in fact of Planck Time.. $$5.3x10^{-35}$$ and yet you cannot even tell me whether the phases follow a pattern that is infinite; Do you know enough of the theory you talk about?

 

[zephir]

Easily. You could have answered by saying that the generalized lifetime of a phase of one of these bubbles are in fact of Planck Time.. $$5.3x10^{-35}$$ and yet you cannot even tell me whether the phases follow a pattern that is infinite.

I could answer by thousands of different ways, so this proves nothing.

 

[Reiku]

The answers stare at your face Zeph. They are, as what you said... ''futile'' to resist.

 

[Reiku]

In fact...

what's this supposed to mean?

''The particle itself is pretty small, but the deBroglie wave isn't and it spreads by the speed of light, with compare to particle. Therefore it can advance the particle motion and it can interfere with the double slit by the same way, like all the other waves under formation of typical flagelliform patterns.''

The Debroglie wave isn't small? But it spreds out at the speed of light... THAT'S AMAZING. It's learning about physics in a totally new language. Do you get a few theories together, add a bit of your strange thoughts then comprise it as one theory... ... ... because thats the impression i get.

Then you have that friggin fish above your remedial diagram. Does it end.