One things for sure you don't know what's going on. Your explanation is pseudo-unscientific nonsense. The same crap you've been posting for years.
Luminiferous Aether Exists!
- Thread starter Mazulu
- Start date
One things for sure you don't know what's going on. Your explanation is pseudo-unscientific nonsense. The same crap you've been posting for years.
The understanding is that there is no such thing as non-baryonic dark matter.
Aether has mass.
Matter moves through and displaces the aether.
Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward matter is gravity.
A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and the associated wave in the aether passes through both.
There is baryonic dark matter and non-baryonic dark matter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter#Baryonic_and_nonbaryonic_dark_matter
"A small proportion of dark matter may be baryonic dark matter: astronomical bodies, such as massive compact halo objects, that are composed of ordinary matter but which emit little or no electromagnetic radiation."
What is postulated as non-baryonic dark matter is aether. Non-baryonic dark matter has been shown not to be anchored to matter. This means particles of matter move through and displace 'non-baryonic dark matter'. If non-baryonic dark matter is not anchored to matter, which has been shown to be the case, then what particles of matter are moving through is the aether.
Aether has mass. Aether physically occupies three dimensional space. Aether is physically displaced by matter.
The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether.
The Milky Way's halo is what Einstein referred to as curved spacetime.
Curved spacetime physically exists in nature as displaced aether.
That was the thinking in the mid-18th century. It was nixed by Michelson-Morley.
By definition, mass does not displace mass without exchange of momentum. But zero momentum exchange is observed. Therefore both of your beliefs collide with the actual way nature works.
That is disproved by law of gravitation, which relates the amount of force entirely to the amount of mass and distance between the bodies is question.
No, there is no relation between velocity and frequency, phase or amplitude, which don't correlate to anything except the observable phenomena.
No, the interference patterns are entirely consistent with wave propagation, nothing more.
Watch the following video starting at 0:45 to see a visual representation of the state of the aether. What is referred to as a twist in spacetime is the state of displacement of the aether. What is referred to as frame-dragging is the state of displacement of the aether.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9ITt44-EHE
The analogy is putting a mesh bag full of marbles into a superfluid and spinning the bag of marbles. If you were unable to determine if the superfluid consists of particles or not you would still be able to detect the state of displacement of the superfluid.
The superfluid connected to and neighboring the mesh bag of marbles is in the same state throughout the rotation of the bag in the superfluid.
The aether connected to and neighboring the Earth is in the same state, or almost the same state, throughout the Earth's rotation about its axis and orbit of the Sun.
This is the reason for the near-null Michelson-Morley experimental result.
The state of which as determined by its connections with the Earth and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the state of displacement of the aether.
The aether is, or behaves similar to, a supersolid.
Whatever energy the object requires to displace the aether the aether returns to the object as the aether 'displaces back'.
Is the object displacing the aether or is the aether displacing the object? Both occur simultaneously with equal force.
If that were the case there would be no need for non-baryonic dark matter.
What is presently postulated as non-baryonic dark matter is aether. Aether has mass.
Non-baryonic dark matter is not anchored to matter. There is no such thing as non-baryonic dark matter. Matter moves through and displaces the aether.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13626587
'For his part, Professor Steinberg believes that the result reduces a limitation not on quantum physics but on physicists themselves. "I feel like we're starting to pull back a veil on what nature really is," he said. "The trouble with quantum mechanics is that while we've learned to calculate the outcomes of all sorts of experiments, we've lost much of our ability to describe what is really happening in any natural language. I think that this has really hampered our ability to make progress, to come up with new ideas and see intuitively how new systems ought to behave."'
http://www.scientificamerican.com/a...-slit-experiment-skirts-uncertainty-principle
"Intriguingly, the trajectories closely match those predicted by an unconventional interpretation of quantum mechanics known as pilot-wave theory, in which each particle has a well-defined trajectory that takes it through one slit while the associated wave passes through both slits."
What waves in a double slit experiment is the aether.
"It is ironic that Einstein's most creative work, the general theory of relativity, should boil down to conceptualizing space as a medium when his original premise [in special relativity] was that no such medium existed [..] The word 'ether' has extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics because of its past association with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because, stripped of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum. . . . Relativity actually says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading the universe, only that any such matter must have relativistic symmetry. [..] It turns out that such matter exists. About the time relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids. Subsequent studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian emptiness. It is filled with 'stuff' that is normally transparent but can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo." - Robert B. Laughlin, Nobel Laureate in Physics, endowed chair in physics, Stanford University
GA's: "Aether has mass"
GA: Ever thought about aether as 'mass-equivalent' energy, and that 'energy' is subquantum in scale (but NOT in magnitude)
- and therefore undetectible (so far!)?
H-m-m-m-m . . . another thought . . . . is "time" a dimensional manifest at subquantum (subplanckian) scales?
GA: Ever thought about aether as 'mass-equivalent' energy, and that 'energy' is subquantum in scale (but NOT in magnitude)
- and therefore undetectible (so far!)?
H-m-m-m-m . . . another thought . . . . is "time" a dimensional manifest at subquantum (subplanckian) scales?
'Ether and the Theory of Relativity - Albert Einstein'
http://www.tu-harburg.de/rzt/rzt/it/Ether.html
"Since according to our present conceptions the elementary particles of matter are also, in their essence, nothing else than condensations of the electromagnetic field"
The electromagnetic field is a state of the aether. Matter is condensations of aether.
'DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT?' A. EINSTEIN
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf
"If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass diminishes by L/c2."
The mass of the body does diminish. However, the matter which no longer exists as part of the body has not vanished; it still exists, as aether. Matter evaporates into aether. As matter evaporates into aether it expands into neighboring places; which is energy. Mass is conserved.
When a nuclear bomb explodes matter evaporates into aether. The evaporation is energy. Mass is conserved.
Everything is with respect to the state of the aether in which it exists, including the rate at which atomic clocks tick.
You have an atomic clock at sea level. You take it to the top of a mountain. The atomic clock ticks at a different rate because the state of the aether in which it exists has changed.
I think that the right kind of aether might be able to fill the role as: ontological support structure for light.
I decided to elevate the wave-function to the status of an ontological phenomena. Then I gave it the characteristic of obeying $$c = \lambda f = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\epsilon_0 \mu_0}}$$. It obeys QM and SR down to the level of a single wave.
That is my idea of an aether.
I decided to elevate the wave-function to the status of an ontological phenomena. Then I gave it the characteristic of obeying $$c = \lambda f = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\epsilon_0 \mu_0}}$$. It obeys QM and SR down to the level of a single wave.
That is my idea of an aether.
They're talking about Gravity Probe B and its confirmation of GR, not aether.
It's the other way around. What is demonstrated as 3D rotation of spacetime and frame-dragging, you are referring to as the displacement of aether.
No, the analogy is this: the observer in one frame of reference sees the other frame as if it were a projection, in the way your body throws a shadow on the ground. At zero relative velocity, the shadow is equal to your actual height, as when the rays are impinging at 45°. As the sun ascends, and your shadow grows shorter, this sets up the analogy for length contraction, reaching a cliff when the sun is overhead (zero length, v=c). The analogy for time dilation works for angles of sunlight greater than 45° (from vertical) and descending, casting longer shadows as the sun descends, then finally an infinite shadow at 90° (from vertical), which is analogous to an infinitely long time between ticks, or a cessation of time, at v=c. Note, the Lorentz transformation accounts for three instances of this analogy, in angles of pitch, roll and yaw. So it works no matter how you rotate your chosen coordinate system. And the height of the sun corresponds to the relative velocity (i.e., SR), as a ratio of c, in determining the angle of projection.
You're replacing Lorentz's angular displacement with angular velocity, so the analogy breaks down. The particle interactions in a superfluid involve momentum, and the bizarre mutation on its direction at a given angular velocity. I can't find any common thread between this property and the more simple angular displacement explained by Lorentz.
Angular velocity doesn't apply.
If that were true, there would be no relativistic phenomena between earth frames and other frames, such the orbital frames of GPS satellites which have to correct for both SR and GR in order to enable the geolocations to work.
Aether theory stated that the corpuscles of light were carried on a luminiferous sea. This imputes a wind, which is proven not to exist in the null result. Therefore there is no aether.
No, aether can't simultaneously be the medium for EM wave propagation, and at the same time be without the luminiferous wind.
Except that spacetime shares nothing in common with superfluids, much less supersolids.
Displacement is a physical phenomenon between real objects. So there's no link here.
Except that no force is accounted for, nothing interacts with the real world emitter.
That need, to relate volume to an inferred energy content,
Then it's not interacting with EM emissions.
That does not address the volumetric energy issue that creates the need for baryonic dark meatter.
No, it's the intrinsic property of a wave to interfere with itself in a double slit.
What the Gravity Probe B detected is the state of displacement of the aether.
Everything is with respect to the state of the aether in which it exists, including the rate at which atomic clocks tick. That is why everything is relative.
There is no such thing as an absolutely stationary space the Earth moves through. The aether is, or behaves similar to, a supersolid.
That's because there is no such thing as a luminferous wind. Aether is displaced by matter.
Curved spacetime is a geometrical representation of gravity. Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward matter is gravity.
You are mistaking interaction with (i.e. emission and absorbtion), with carrier of.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter
"Dark matter cannot be seen directly with telescopes; evidently it neither emits nor absorbs light or other electromagnetic radiation at any significant level."
Non-baryonic dark matter does not emit nor absorb light. What is postulated as non-baryonic dark matter is aether. Light propagates through the aether.
'Quantum mechanics rule 'bent' in classic experiment'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13626587
'For his part, Professor Steinberg believes that the result reduces a limitation not on quantum physics but on physicists themselves. "I feel like we're starting to pull back a veil on what nature really is," he said. "The trouble with quantum mechanics is that while we've learned to calculate the outcomes of all sorts of experiments, we've lost much of our ability to describe what is really happening in any natural language. I think that this has really hampered our ability to make progress, to come up with new ideas and see intuitively how new systems ought to behave."'
http://www.scientificamerican.com/a...-slit-experiment-skirts-uncertainty-principle
"Intriguingly, the trajectories closely match those predicted by an unconventional interpretation of quantum mechanics known as pilot-wave theory, in which each particle has a well-defined trajectory that takes it through one slit while the associated wave passes through both slits."
'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 ether at every place determined by its connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighboring places is the state of displacement of the ether.
A particle physically displaces the aether. A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle enters and exits a single slit. It is the associated aether displacement wave which enters and exits both slits. As the aether wave exits the slits it creates wave interference. As the particle exits a single slit the direction it travels is altered by the wave interference it encounters. This is the wave piloting the particle of pilot-wave theory. Strongly detecting the particle turns the associated wave in the aether into chop. The particle gets knocked around by the chop and continues on the path it is traveling.
What waves in a double slit experiment is the aether of relativity.
I agree with Newton, Maxwell, de Broglie, Einstein and Laughlin.
"Doth not this aethereal medium in passing out of water, glass, crystal, and other compact and dense bodies in empty spaces, grow denser and denser by degrees, and by that means refract the rays of light not in a point, but by bending them gradually in curve lines? ...Is not this medium much rarer within the dense bodies of the Sun, stars, planets and comets, than in the empty celestial space between them? And in passing from them to great distances, doth it not grow denser and denser perpetually, and thereby cause the gravity of those great bodies towards one another, and of their parts towards the bodies; every body endeavouring to go from the denser parts of the medium towards the rarer?" - Newton
Newton is referring to the state of displacement of the aether.
The aether does not grow denser and denser. The aether is, or behaves similar to, a supersolid. However, Newton is correct, displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward matter is gravity.
""In several parts of this treatise an attempt has been made to explain electromagnetic phenomena by means of mechanical action transmitted from one body to another by means of a medium occupying the space between them. The undulatory theory of light also assumes the existence of a medium. We have now to shew that the properties of the electromagnetic medium are identical with those of the luminiferous medium." - Maxwell
Maxwell's displacement current is a physical displacement of the aether.
'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html
"space without ether is unthinkable"
"the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places"
The state of the aether at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the state of displacement of the aether.
'Interpretation of quantum mechanics by the double solution theory - Louis de BROGLIE'
http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-classiques/aflb124p001.pdf
“When in 1923-1924 I had my first ideas about Wave Mechanics I was looking for a truly concrete physical image, valid for all particles, of the wave and particle coexistence discovered by Albert Einstein in his "Theory of light quanta". I had no doubt whatsoever about the physical reality of waves and particles.”
“any particle, even isolated, has to be imagined as in continuous “energetic contact” with a hidden medium”
The hidden medium of de Broglie wave mechanics is the aether. The “energetic contact” is the state of displacement of the aether.
A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and the associated aether wave through both.
"It is ironic that Einstein's most creative work, the general theory of relativity, should boil down to conceptualizing space as a medium when his original premise [in special relativity] was that no such medium existed [..] The word 'ether' has extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics because of its past association with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because, stripped of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum. . . . Relativity actually says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading the universe, only that any such matter must have relativistic symmetry. [..] It turns out that such matter exists. About the time relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids. Subsequent studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian emptiness. It is filled with 'stuff' that is normally transparent but can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo." - Robert B. Laughlin, Nobel Laureate in Physics, endowed chair in physics, Stanford University
Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward matter is gravity.
That makes absolutely no sense. Please try to explain how that could possibly be. How do you suppose that displace aether would cause 2 bodies to orbit each other?
The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether.
The Milky Way's halo is what Einstein referred to as curved spacetime.
The aether displaced by the Milky Way is pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward the Milky Way. This is the reason why the speed at which the Milky Way rotates can not be explained by the matter the Milky Way consists of.
'NASA's Voyager Hits New Region at Solar System Edge'
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2011/dec/HQ_11-402_AGU_Voyager.html
"Voyager is showing that what is outside is pushing back. ... Like cars piling up at a clogged freeway off-ramp, the increased intensity of the magnetic field shows that inward pressure from interstellar space is compacting it."
It is not the particles of matter which exist in quantities less than in any vacuum artifically created on Earth which are pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward the solary system.
It is the aether, the particles of matter exist in, which is the interstellar medium. It is the aether which is displaced by the matter the solar system consists of which is pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward the solar system.
So you are saying that you cannot answer the question?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_effect#Vacuum_energy
"a "field" in physics may be envisioned as if space were filled with interconnected vibrating balls and springs, and the strength of the field can be visualized as the displacement of a ball from its rest position"
A 'field' in physics is space filled with aether and the strength of the field is the displacement of the aether from its rest position.
Each of the plates in the Casimir effect displace the aether. The displaced aether which exists between the plates is pushing back toward each of the plates which causes the aether displaced by each of the plates which exists between the plates to offset. This aether is more at rest than the aether which is displaced by the plates which encompasses the plates. The reduced force associated with the aether which exists between the plates along with the displaced aether which encompasses the plates which is pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward the plates causes the plates to be forced together.
What occurs physically in nature in the Casimir effect is the same phenomenon as gravity.
There is no such thing as non-baryonic dark matter. Aether has mass and physically occupies three dimensional space. Aether is physically displaced by matter.
Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward matter is gravity.
The aether which exists between the Earth and the Moon is displaced by both the Earth and the Moon and is pushing back toward the Earth and toward the Moon. This displaced aether offsets and cancels each other out to some degree. This aether is more at rest than the aether which encompasses the Earth and the Moon.
The aether which encompasses the Earth and the Moon is able to exert more pressure on the solid matter Earth than it can the liquid oceans. This causes the solid matter Earth to be pushed closer to the Moon than the ocean water opposite the Moon. This causes the ocean to 'rise' opposite the Moon. The aether displaced by the Earth which exists between the Earth and Moon exerts less pressure on the liquid ocean water than it can the solid matter Earth. This causes the ocean to rise between the Earth and Moon.
So displaced aether is displaced by displaced aether?
Why would aether exert more or less pressure on water versus land?
Did you really just say, "This causes the solid matter Earth to be pushed closer to the Moon" AND " This causes the ocean to rise between the Earth and Moon", in the same paragraph?
This is about the most absurd hand waving crap I have seen here in a while. It is just plain silly. I am convinced you are a sock puppet of a banned memeber, this all sounds to appallingly familiar.
So displaced aether is displaced by displaced aether?
When you throw a stone into the ocean where does the displacement of the ocean end? What if there were no shore? What if you throw two stones into the ocean? Does the displacement of the water by one stone stop when it reaches the other? Are you able to understand when you place two bricks into a bathtub full of water, even if the bricks are separated, all the water in the tub is displaced by both bricks?
Because the Earth is denser than water.
If you actually made an attempt to understand what I posted then you would know the above sentence is incorrect.
The solid matter Earth is pushed closer to the Moon than the water which exists OPPOSITE the Moon.
The aether displaced by the Earth which exists BETWEEN the Earth and the Moon applies more pressure toward the solid matter Earth than it does the ocean water which exists BETWEEN the Earth and the Moon causing the ocean which exists BETWEEN the Earth and the Moon to rise more so than the ocean water on the sides of the Earth because this aether is more at rest.
You have no intention of attempting to understand anything which is being posted.
When you throw a stone into the ocean where does the displacement of the ocean end? What if there were no shore? What if you throw two stones into the ocean? Does the displacement of the water by one stone stop when it reaches the other? Are you able to understand when you place two bricks into a bathtub full of water, even if the bricks are separated, all the water in the tub is displaced by both bricks?
The displaced water of one brick has no affect on the other brick does it?
Oh I see so your aether gravity gibberish says that a denser object is effect more by gravity than a less dense object? Really?
It is very easy to understand what you are attempting to say, it is just that it is wrong. It is like reading a 12 year olds understanding of the physics.
Are you able to understand the water displaced by one brick is also displaced by the other?
If you take the bricks out to the vacuum of space, since the bricks exist in the aether and the aether is, or behaves similar to, a supersolid the aether displaced by the bricks which exists between the bricks is more at rest than the aether displaced by the bricks which encompasses the bricks.
Aether exists where matter does not. The more particles of matter which exist within a volume the less aether the volume contains the greater the displacement of the aether from the volume.
Let's start with the basics. Are you able to understand there is an ether in general relativity?
'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html
"According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable"
Are you able to understand Nobel laureate Laughlin says a relativistic ether physically exists?
"It is ironic that Einstein's most creative work, the general theory of relativity, should boil down to conceptualizing space as a medium when his original premise [in special relativity] was that no such medium existed [..] The word 'ether' has extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics because of its past association with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because, stripped of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum. . . . Relativity actually says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading the universe, only that any such matter must have relativistic symmetry. [..] It turns out that such matter exists. About the time relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids. Subsequent studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian emptiness. It is filled with 'stuff' that is normally transparent but can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo." - Robert B. Laughlin, Nobel Laureate in Physics, endowed chair in physics, Stanford University