Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: liquidspacetime on 25/10/2014 18:50:46
-
Aether has mass. Aether physically occupies three dimensional space. Aether is physically displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.
The Milky Way's halo is not a clump of stuff anchored to the Milky Way. The Milky Way is moving through and displacing the aether.
The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether.
The Milky Way's halo is the deformation of spacetime.
What is referred to geometrically as the deformation of spacetime physically exists in nature as 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 wave in the aether passes through both.
Q. Why is the particle always detected traveling through a single slit in a double slit experiment?
A. The particle always travels through a single slit. It is the associated wave in the aether which passes through both.
What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment; the aether.
Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality; both are waves in the aether.
Aether displaced by matter relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.
-
Aether has mass. Aether physically occupies three dimensional space. Aether is physically displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.
The Milky Way's halo is not a clump of stuff anchored to the Milky Way. The Milky Way is moving through and displacing the aether.
The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether.
The Milky Way's halo is the deformation of spacetime.
What is referred to geometrically as the deformation of spacetime physically exists in nature as the state of displacement of the aether.
On what basis are you making such assertions? There is absolutely no basis to assume that anything like an aether exists. So what are you basing its existence on?
A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave.
Do you have anything to justify such a claim? What has ever been observed for you to make such a claim?
In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and the associated wave in the aether passes through both.
According to quantum mechanics it's impossible to say which slit a particle travels through unless you either measure which one it came through or block the other one off. However, when you measure which one it goes through the interference pattern disappears. If you block one of them then it's no longer a double slit experiment.
Q. Why is the particle always detected traveling through a single slit in a double slit experiment?
That's wrong. The only time a particle is detected traveling through a slit is when an experiment is constructed to detect it and when that's done the experiment no longer behaves like a double slit experiment and the interference pattern disappears.
-
On what basis are you making such assertions? There is absolutely no basis to assume that anything like an aether exists. So what are you basing its existence on?
"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
That's wrong. The only time a particle is detected traveling through a slit is when an experiment is constructed to detect it and when that's done the experiment no longer behaves like a double slit experiment and the interference pattern disappears.
Detecting the particle strongly causes the particle to lose its cohesion with its associated wave, the particle continues on the trajectory it was traveling and it does not form an interference pattern.
See the 2:40 mark of the following video for a macro version of a double slit experiment where the associated wave guides the particle.
Yves Couder . Explains Wave/Particle Duality via Silicon Droplets [Through the Wormhole]
There is evidence of the aether every time a double slit experiment is performed; it's what waves.
-
'EPR program: a local interpretation of QM'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.5612
"Wave particle duality is described as the compound system of point particle plus accompanying wave (in the æther)."
-
Aether has mass. Aether physically occupies three dimensional space. Aether is physically displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.
The Milky Way's halo is not a clump of stuff anchored to the Milky Way. The Milky Way is moving through and displacing the aether.
The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether.
The Milky Way's halo is the deformation of spacetime.
What is referred to geometrically as the deformation of spacetime physically exists in nature as 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 wave in the aether passes through both.
...
What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment; the aether.
Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality; both are waves in the aether.
Aether displaced by matter relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.
What evidence do you have to support any and all of your assertions? It's of no use to anybody to merely go to a forum and make claims like this. Anybody can do that. The only ones of interest to science are those which you can demonstrate and so far all you've done has been to make unsupported claims and those are of no interest to anybody.
-
What evidence do you have to support any and all of your assertions? It's of no use to anybody to merely go to a forum and make claims like this. Anybody can do that. The only ones of interest to science are those which you can demonstrate and so far all you've done has been to make unsupported claims and those are of no interest to anybody.
Every time a double slit experiment is performed the particle is always detected traveling through a single slit. This is evidence the particle always travels through a single slit. When the particle is not detected it forms an interference pattern. This is evidence of the associated wave in the aether.
-
Liquidspacetime ,
You may enjoy this , May 4, 2011 Nasa along with Stanford University, sent a GPB probe out and they actually mapped the spacetime (distortion) that your looking for, which also verified one of Einstein's prediction's in regard to what your looking for.
https://einstein.stanford.edu/highlights/status1.html
-
Liquidspacetime ,
You may enjoy this , May 4, 2011 Nasa along with Stanford University, sent a GPB probe out and they actually mapped the spacetime (distortion) that your looking for, which also verified one of Einstein's prediction's in regard to what your looking for.
https://einstein.stanford.edu/highlights/status1.html
Yup. Watch the following video starting at 0:45. 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.
'NASA's Gravity Probe B Confirms Two Einstein Space-Time Theories'
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/gpb/gpb_results.html
""Imagine the Earth as if it were immersed in honey. As the planet rotates, the honey around it would swirl, and it's the same with space and time," said Francis Everitt, GP-B principal investigator at Stanford University."
Honey has mass and so does the aether. The swirl is the state of displacement of the aether.
-
What is described is the profile of the gravitational field of a rotating body. This is the type of vortex described by Einstein and nothing to do with an ether. It is like a spiral generated over time via the rotation of the source. Except the spiral formed does not spin it is the distribution of the field and the vectors that describe its directionality that show this. The curves will look like they intersect, criss-crossing each other. This is spacetime curvature.
-
What is described is the profile of the gravitational field of a rotating body. This is the type of vortex described by Einstein and nothing to do with an ether. It is like a spiral generated over time via the rotation of the source. Except the spiral formed does not spin it is the distribution of the field and the vectors that describe its directionality that show this. The curves will look like they intersect, criss-crossing each other. This is spacetime curvature.
'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html
"Think of waves on the surface of water. Here we can describe two entirely different things. Either we may observe how the undulatory surface forming the boundary between water and air alters in the course of time; or else-with the help of small floats, for instance - we can observe how the position of the separate particles of water alters in the course of time. If the existence of such floats for tracking the motion of the particles of a fluid were a fundamental impossibility in physics - if, in fact nothing else whatever were observable than the shape of the space occupied by the water as it varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that water consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise it as a medium."
if, in fact nothing else whatever were observable than the shape of the space occupied by the aether as it varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that aether consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise it as a medium having mass which is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.
"According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable" - Albert Einstein
The following article describes the aether as an incompressible fluid resulting in what the article refers to as gravitational aether caused by pressure (or vorticity).
'Phenomenology of Gravitational Aether as a solution to the Old Cosmological Constant Problem'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1106.3955
"One proposal to address this puzzle at the semi-classical level is to decouple quantum vacuum from space-time geometry via a modification of gravity that includes an incompressible fluid, known as Gravitational Aether. In this paper, we discuss classical predictions of this theory along with its compatibility with cosmological and experimental tests of gravity. We argue that deviations from General Relativity (GR) in this theory are sourced by pressure or vorticity."
The following article describes gravity as a pressure exerted by aether toward matter.
'The aether-modified gravity and the G ̈del metric'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.5654
"As for the pressure, it is equal to p = 53−αg,6a2 so, it is positive if αg < 3 which is the weaker condition than the previous one. One notes that the results corresponding to the usual gravity are easily recovered. Also, it is easy to see that the interval αg < 15 corresponds to the usual matter."
The following article describes a gravitating vacuum where aether is the quantum vacuum of the 21-st century.
'From Analogue Models to Gravitating Vacuum'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1155
"The aether of the 21-st century is the quantum vacuum, which is a new form of matter. This is the real substance"
-
What is incorrect in mainstream physics is the notion dark matter is anchored to matter.
Dark matter is now understood to fill what would otherwise be considered to be empty space.
'Cosmologists at Penn Weigh Cosmic Filaments and Voids'
http://www.upenn.edu/pennnews/news/cosmologists-penn-weigh-cosmic-filaments-and-voids
"Dark matter ... permeate all the way to the center of the voids."
'Physicists find dark matter: It's everywhere'
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/46387769/ns/technology_and_science-space/t/physicists-find-dark-matter-its-everywhere/#.VKlLjt_08WM
"their model shows that dark matter extends from each galaxy far into intergalactic space, overlapping with the dark matter from adjacent galaxies to form a pervasive web that envelops the whole universe."
'No Empty Space in the Universe --Dark Matter Discovered to Fill Intergalactic Space'
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2012/02/no-empty-space-in-the-universe-dark-matter-discovered-to-fill-intergalactic-space-.html
"A long standing mystery on where the missing dark matter is has been solved by the research. There is no empty space in the universe. The intergalactic space is filled with dark matter."
Dark matter which fills 'empty' space is otherwise known as the aether. Aether has mass, physically occupies three dimensional space and is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it. Including 'particles' as large as galaxies and galaxy clusters.
'The Milky Way's dark matter halo appears to be lopsided'
http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.3802
"the emerging picture of the dark matter halo of the Milky Way is dominantly lopsided in nature."
The Milky Way's halo is not a clump of dark matter traveling along with the Milky Way. The Milky Way's halo is lopsided due to the matter in the Milky Way moving through and displacing the aether.
'Offset between dark matter and ordinary matter: evidence from a sample of 38 lensing clusters of galaxies'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.1475
"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 offset is due to the galaxy clusters moving through and displacing 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 as the galaxy clusters move through and displace the aether.
'Galactic Pile-Up May Point to Mysterious New Dark Force in the Universe'
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/01/musket-ball-dark-force/
"The reason this is strange is that dark matter is thought to barely interact with itself. The dark matter should just coast through itself and move at the same speed as the hardly interacting galaxies. Instead, it looks like the dark matter is crashing into something — perhaps itself – and slowing down faster than the galaxies are. But this would require the dark matter to be able to interact with itself in a completely new an unexpected way, a “dark force” that affects only dark matter."
It's not a new force. It's the aether displaced by each of the galaxy clusters interacting analogous to the bow waves of two boats which pass by each other.
-
'Physical vacuum is a special superfluid medium'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1501.06763
" Another interpretation was proposed by Louis de Broglie [18], which permits to explain such an experiment. In de Broglie’s wave mechanics and the double solution theory there are two waves. There is the wave function that is a mathematical construct. It does not physically exist and is used to determine the probabilistic results of experiments. There is also a physical wave guiding the particle from its creation to detection. As the particle moves from a source to a detector, the particle perturbs the wave field and gets a reverse effect from it. As a result, the physical wave guides the particle along some optimal trajectory, Bohmian trajectory [9, 10], up to its detection.
A question arises, what is the de Broglie physical wave? Recently, Couder and Fort [15] has executed the experiment with the classical oil droplets bouncing on the oil surface. A remarkable observation is that an ensemble of the droplets passing through the barrier having two gates shows the interference fringes typical for the two slit experiment. Their explanation is that the droplet while moving on the surface induces on this surface the weak Faraday waves. The latter provide the guidance conditions for the droplets. In this perspective, we can draw conclusion that the de Broglie physical wave can be represented by perturbations of the ether when the particle moves through it."
-
"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
What this guy wrote is did a disservice to the physics community because many people trying to learn physics, such as yourself, will inevitably get the wrong idea and think that an ether really does exist and there's absolutely no reason to believe that such an ether exists.
-
What this guy wrote is did a disservice to the physics community because many people trying to learn physics, such as yourself, will inevitably get the wrong idea and think that an ether really does exist and there's absolutely no reason to believe that such an ether exists.
In the following two articles it is the aether that waves in a double slit experiment.
'From the Newton's laws to motions of the fluid and superfluid vacuum: vortex tubes, rings, and others'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1403.3900
"This medium, called also the aether, has mass and is populated by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it" ...
... and displace it.
'EPR program: a local interpretation of QM'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.5612
"Wave particle duality is described as the compound system of point particle plus accompanying wave (in the æther)."
-
What this guy wrote is did a disservice to the physics community because many people trying to learn physics, such as yourself, will inevitably get the wrong idea and think that an ether really does exist and there's absolutely no reason to believe that such an ether exists.
In the following two articles it is the aether that waves in a double slit experiment.
'From the Newton's laws to motions of the fluid and superfluid vacuum: vortex tubes, rings, and others'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1403.3900
"This medium, called also the aether, has mass and is populated by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it" ...
... and displace it.
'EPR program: a local interpretation of QM'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.5612
"Wave particle duality is described as the compound system of point particle plus accompanying wave (in the æther)."
Don't believe everything that you read. There's a ton of nonsense on the internet. Even in physics textbooks. This is especially true if you merely take quotes out of context and/or don't follow them through. For example; in the first article all it does it state that this "thing" (whether it exists or not) has the name aether and refers to another article which describes it in a manner which has been disproven by experiments.
This is my last post in this thread. I don't like chasing down and reading papers which haven't been published. A great deal of the time they're garbage. Many times that's why they're not published. Why do you think those papers you quoted haven't been published?
-
This is my last post in this thread. I don't like chasing down and reading papers which haven't been published. A great deal of the time they're garbage. Many times that's why they're not published. Why do you think those papers you quoted haven't been published?
The following is an updated/revised version of the first article.
'Physical vacuum is a special superfluid medium'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1501.06763
" Another interpretation was proposed by Louis de Broglie [18], which permits to explain such an experiment. In de Broglie’s wave mechanics and the double solution theory there are two waves. There is the wave function that is a mathematical construct. It does not physically exist and is used to determine the probabilistic results of experiments. There is also a physical wave guiding the particle from its creation to detection. As the particle moves from a source to a detector, the particle perturbs the wave field and gets a reverse effect from it. As a result, the physical wave guides the particle along some optimal trajectory, Bohmian trajectory [9, 10], up to its detection.
A question arises, what is the de Broglie physical wave? Recently, Couder and Fort [15] has executed the experiment with the classical oil droplets bouncing on the oil surface. A remarkable observation is that an ensemble of the droplets passing through the barrier having two gates shows the interference fringes typical for the two slit experiment. Their explanation is that the droplet while moving on the surface induces on this surface the weak Faraday waves. The latter provide the guidance conditions for the droplets. In this perspective, we can draw conclusion that the de Broglie physical wave can be represented by perturbations of the ether when the particle moves through it."
Why do you think you are unable to understand the particle always detected traveling through a single slit in a double slit experiment is evidence the particle always travels through a single slit?
You are able to understand in a boat double slit experiment the boat travels through a single slit even when you close your eyes, correct?
The medium the boat moves through and displaces is the water. The medium the particle moves through and displaces is the aether.
-
Why ...
Tell me something. When I decide that nothing good can come from further participation in a thread I let people know that by stating so such as when I said in my last post This is my last post in this thread.. So why is it that people such as yourself post again asking more questions like this one? To me that's nothing but trolling and I'll thank you to not do it.
-
Why ...
Tell me something. When I decide that nothing good can come from further participation in a thread I let people know that by stating so such as when I said in my last post This is my last post in this thread.. So why is it that people such as yourself post again asking more questions like this one? To me that's nothing but trolling and I'll thank you to not do it.
You make a statement saying there is no reason for there to be an aether. The aether is what waves in terms of wave-particle duality. The aether is what waves in a double slit experiment.
It's as simple as understanding in a boat double slit experiment the boat always travels through a single slit and the associated bow wave passes through both.
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.
The reason why the particle is always detected traveling through a single slit in a double slit experiment is because it always travels through a single slit; just as the boat always travels through a single slit in a boat double slit experiment.
-
'Pilot-wave hydrodynamics
John W.M. Bush
Department of Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology'
http://dspace.mit.edu/openaccess-disseminate/1721.1/89790
"Pilot-wave theory was first proposed by de Broglie (1923), who envisaged microscopic particles being guided by an accompanying wave field, pushed in a direction perpendicular to surfaces of constant phase (de Broglie 1926, de Broglie 1930, Bacchiagaluppi & Valentini 2009). His original conception, his ‘double solution theory’ (de Broglie 1956), involved two waves, a real pilot wave centered on the particle, and the statistical wave predicted by standard quantum theory"
"The walker system is closer to de Broglie’s double-solution theory than to Bohmian mechanics (Couder & Fort 2012). In the double-solution theory, as in this hydrodynamic system, the statistical wave must be augmented by the real pilot wave: the standard wave–particle duality must be extended to the wave–particle–pilot-wave trinity."
What waves in a double slit experiment is the aether.
-
You make a statement saying there is no reason for there to be an aether. The aether is what waves in terms of wave-particle duality. The aether is what waves in a double slit experiment.
I'm bored so I thought I'd chat with you for a little while.
You're asserting that The aether is what waves in terms of wave-particle duality. What you haven't done is to justify this statement. You're assuming that there must be something physical in nature that is undergoing oscillations. That's simply not true. Have you ever actually studied quantum mechanics? It doesn't appear so because in quantum theory the exists having to do with waves is the wave function, not a physical wave. There is nothing in the theory of quantum mechanics that suggests that something is actually waving. The wave function is merely a computational tool which is used to calculate the probability density of a particle and other things. It's a very powerful tool in fact because it contains all the information that anybody would want to know about the system that it's describing. But as I said, it has nothing to do with any physical "waving". Since you have a problem in understanding this part of quantum mechanics please read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_function
If your really want to be knowledgeable about your hypothesis then you should at least be knowledgeable about the terms that you're using. In particular see the part where it says
This explains the name "wave function", and gives rise to wave–particle duality. The wave of the wave function, however, is not a wave in physical space; it is a wave in an abstract mathematical "space", and in this respect it differs fundamentally from water waves or waves on a string.
It's as simple as understanding in a boat double slit experiment the boat always travels through a single slit and the associated bow wave passes through both.
You don't have to explain how waves work. I'm a physicist, remember?
A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave.
Nope. Mainstream physics has no such aether in it. And for good reasons in fact. This interpretation was due to De Broglie. It was one of the first attempts at a hidden variable theory, which have all been rejected on physical grounds. E.g. if nature really worked by pilot waves then it would be deterministic and particles really would have classical trajectories. Therefore when electrons moved around in atoms they'd radiate. However we don't observe any such radiation. Therefore the theory fails.
-
You're asserting that The aether is what waves in terms of wave-particle duality. What you haven't done is to justify this statement. You're assuming that there must be something physical in nature that is undergoing oscillations. That's simply not true. Have you ever actually studied quantum mechanics? It doesn't appear so because in quantum theory the exists having to do with waves is the wave function, not a physical wave. There is nothing in the theory of quantum mechanics that suggests that something is actually waving. The wave function is merely a computational tool which is used to calculate the probability density of a particle and other things. It's a very powerful tool in fact because it contains all the information that anybody would want to know about the system that it's describing. But as I said, it has nothing to do with any physical "waving".
Which is why in de Broglie's double solution theory there are two waves. There is the statistical wave function wave which is used to determine the probabilistic results of experiments and the physical wave which guides the particle.
'Physical vacuum is a special superfluid medium'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1501.06763
"Another interpretation was proposed by Louis de Broglie [18], which permits to explain such an experiment. In de Broglie’s wave mechanics and the double solution theory there are two waves. There is the wave function that is a mathematical construct. It does not physically exist and is used to determine the probabilistic results of experiments. There is also a physical wave guiding the particle from its creation to detection. As the particle moves from a source to a detector, the particle perturbs the wave field and gets a reverse effect from it. As a result, the physical wave guides the particle along some optimal trajectory, Bohmian trajectory [9, 10], up to its detection."
'Pilot-wave hydrodynamics
John W.M. Bush
Department of Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology'
http://dspace.mit.edu/openaccess-disseminate/1721.1/89790
"Pilot-wave theory was first proposed by de Broglie (1923), who envisaged microscopic particles being guided by an accompanying wave field, pushed in a direction perpendicular to surfaces of constant phase (de Broglie 1926, de Broglie 1930, Bacchiagaluppi & Valentini 2009). His original conception, his ‘double solution theory’ (de Broglie 1956), involved two waves, a real pilot wave centered on the particle, and the statistical wave predicted by standard quantum theory"
"The walker system is closer to de Broglie’s double-solution theory than to Bohmian mechanics (Couder & Fort 2012). In the double-solution theory, as in this hydrodynamic system, the statistical wave must be augmented by the real pilot wave: the standard wave–particle duality must be extended to the wave–particle–pilot-wave trinity."
What waves in a double slit experiment is the aether.
-
Which is why in de Broglie's double solution theory there are two waves. There is the statistical wave function wave which is used to determine the probabilistic results of experiments and the physical wave which guides the particle.
You can't prove that he was right merely by saying so. In the first place the consensus is overwhelmingly against that theory for very good reasons, reasons you keep ignoring when I post them. In the second place that's a very old paper written in a time when quantum mechanics was young. Things have changed and many experiments have been done which indicate that he's wrong. Also you keep ignoring the meaning of the wave function.
Your references aren't worth anything in this thread. It's not even clear to me that you read and understood them.
Do you have anything else to say other than to repeat your opinion? Opinions aren't very useful and we're not too interested in them. However it you have a theorem you can prove or have done and experiment whose results you've published which are consistent with predictions made by your theorem then let me know. So far you haven't made any predictions with your theory and as such you haven't set it off from the current theory.
I think you really need to study the philosophy of physics to get a full understanding of how physics works. I'd give you some references online which you can read which are superb but I don't believe that you'd read them. Would you?
-
You can't prove that he was right merely by saying so. In the first place the consensus is overwhelmingly against that theory for very good reasons, reasons you keep ignoring when I post them. In the second place that's a very old paper written in a time when quantum mechanics was young. Things have changed and many experiments have been done which indicate that he's wrong. Also you keep ignoring the meaning of the wave function.
I agree Pete........... It's amusing how people come to our forum quoting outdated material to support their ideas when current experiments has proven such things to be incorrect. These men were giants in their day but knowledge has moved beyond their place in history today. We should always honor these great men of science but also remember that just because, "so and so said" or "such and such was written" don't mean that they were 100% right about everything. Facts will change as new knowledge is gathered and if we don't stay current with the latest science, we might find ourselves in error as well.
-
In the second place that's a very old paper written in a time when quantum mechanics was young.
5 Feb 2015 is an old paper?
'Physical vacuum is a special superfluid medium'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1501.06763
January , 2015 is an old paper?
'Pilot-wave hydrodynamics
John W.M. Bush
Department of Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology'
http://dspace.mit.edu/openaccess-disseminate/1721.1/89790
-
I agree Pete........... It's amusing how people come to our forum quoting outdated material to support their ideas when current experiments has proven such things to be incorrect. These men were giants in their day but knowledge has moved beyond their place in history today. We should always honor these great men of science but also remember that just because, "so and so said" or "such and such was written" don't mean that they were 100% right about everything. Facts will change as new knowledge is gathered and if we don't stay current with the latest science, we might find ourselves in error as well.
5 Feb 2015 is outdated material?
'Physical vacuum is a special superfluid medium'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1501.06763
January , 2015 is outdated material?
'Pilot-wave hydrodynamics
John W.M. Bush
Department of Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology'
http://dspace.mit.edu/openaccess-disseminate/1721.1/89790
-
In the second place that's a very old paper written in a time when quantum mechanics was young.
5 Feb 2015 is an old paper?
'Physical vacuum is a special superfluid medium'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1501.06763
January , 2015 is an old paper?
'Pilot-wave hydrodynamics
John W.M. Bush
Department of Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology'
http://dspace.mit.edu/openaccess-disseminate/1721.1/89790
I'm talking about the original paper which you're basing it on. I'm not convinced that the papers you quote say what you think they're saying. People who don't have a good grasp of physics often resort to quote mining which means that they look for papers which have words they want and appear to use them to support what they claim. I don't think those papers claim what you claim they do. Have you actually read them in full? Did you understand them 100%.
I'll read them this week some time and contact the authors to see if they mean what you claim they do.
-
I'm talking about the original paper which you're basing it on. I'm not convinced that the papers you quote say what you think they're saying. People who don't have a good grasp of physics often resort to quote mining which means that they look for papers which have words they want and appear to use them to support what they claim. I don't think those papers claim what you claim they do. Have you actually read them in full? Did you understand them 100%.
What do you think, "There is the wave function that is a mathematical construct. It does not physically exist and is used to determine the probabilistic results of experiments. There is also a physical wave guiding the particle from its creation to detection. As the particle moves from a source to a detector, the particle perturbs the wave field and gets a reverse effect from it. As a result, the physical wave guides the particle along some optimal trajectory, Bohmian trajectory [9, 10], up to its detection." and "His original conception, his ‘double solution theory’ (de Broglie 1956), involved two waves, a real pilot wave centered on the particle, and the statistical wave predicted by standard quantum theory" ... In the double-solution theory, as in this hydrodynamic system, the statistical wave must be augmented by the real pilot wave" mean?
I'll read them this week some time and contact the authors to see if they mean what you claim they do.
You are going to read the articles before commenting on them further?
-
You are going to read the articles before commenting on them further?
First off, yes. I'm going to read at least one of them and speak to the author. But do you really think that just because someone wrote a paper using the concept that it means that it must be true when in fact it's rejected by the majority of the quantum mechanics community? Why would you make such an assumption? What facts do you have to support your claim other than it sounds nice?
The main problem with you and your theory is that you keep ignoring the question I asked you. That's a sure sign of being a crackpot. See
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html
You fit the following:
1 point for every statement that is widely agreed on to be false.
5 points for each such statement that is adhered to despite careful correction.
10 points for each claim that quantum mechanics is fundamentally misguided (without good evidence).
Regarding 5 and 10 - I explained that according to your theory the electron should radiate while in the atom or while accelerating in the atom. Since it doesn't it can't be following a classical path, which is what you're theory is claiming that it's doing. You keep refusing to address this point making you a crackpot.
See also http://home.comcast.net/~peter.m.brown/ref/what_is_science.pdf
-
snip
There is evidence of the aether every time a double slit experiment is performed; it's what waves.
Science is being capable of understanding the particle always detected in a single slit is evidence the particle is always in a single slit. It is the associated wave in the aether which passes through both.
-
There is evidence of the aether every time a double slit experiment is performed; it's what waves.
You can't be serious!!!! That's not the way physics works. You can't use that as proof because you postulated it to explain it. The only evidence that counts are observations made when you used the theory to predict something never before observed. You have a lot to learn about the philosophy of science. And I can't see spending more time with you. There's no point to it. People such as yourself don't come here to learn. They have a pet theory that they want to paste on the forum so that others can admire them for it. It's like a religion in that nothing you can say will make them see that they're wrong regardless of how many holes are in their theory they simply do not have the background in physics to understand the explanations of their mistakes.
-
You can't be serious!!!! That's not the way physics works. You can't use that as proof because you postulated it to explain it. The only evidence that counts are observations made when you used the theory to predict something never before observed. You have a lot to learn about the philosophy of science. And I can't see spending more time with you. There's no point to it. People such as yourself don't come here to learn. They have a pet theory that they want to paste on the forum so that others can admire them for it. It's like a religion in that nothing you can say will make them see that they're wrong regardless of how many holes are in their theory they simply do not have the background in physics to understand the explanations of their mistakes.
Are you able to understand in a boat double slit experiment the boat travels through a single slit even when you close your eyes?
Why don't you read the articles.
-
Are you able to understand in a boat double slit experiment the boat travels through a single slit even when you close your eyes?
Why don't you read the articles.
You watch a boat double slit experiment performed hundreds of times. Each time the boat travels through a single slit. The next time the experiment is performed you close your eyes and open them to find the boat in the middle of one of the slits. Are you able to deduce the boat entered that slit?
-
You're doing it yet again. First off you never answer my question as to why you ask me questions after I say I won't answer anymore questions. That's an odd thing to do. It's like trolling. Then there's the fact that you never answered my question about the problem with that theory in that it implies electrons in atoms should radiate and yet we don't observe that.
What do you have to say for yourself?
-
You're doing it yet again. First off you never answer my question as to why you ask me questions after I say I won't answer anymore questions. That's an odd thing to do. It's like trolling. Then there's the fact that you never answered my question about the problem with that theory in that it implies electrons in atoms should radiate and yet we don't observe that.
Provide links.
What do you have to say for yourself?
It's a very simple question I am asking you. It's also rhetorical.
Are you able to understand if you open your eyes in the middle of a boat double slit experiment and observe the boat in the middle of one of the slits it's because it entered that slit?
It's no different for the particle in a double slit experiment. When you detect the particle in one of the slits it's because it entered that slit.
Did you read the articles yet?
-
Provide links.
Links to what???? I asked you the following: If there was such thing as the physical wave which guides particles then it would mean that the particle has a classical trajectory. If that's true then an electron moving in an atom will radiate energy and the atom will collapse in a fraction of a second. Since they don't if follows that your premise is false.
And I don't know what a boat double slit is. It sounds like a classical set up and as such its not about quantum mechanics. In any case I already told you that I'm not interested in this thread because (1) Its impossible for you to see your mistakes (e.g. such as you gave no reason why this version of QM should be the right one and the one used by 99.9% of the other physicists, etc.). I know what the papers are about. It's a hidden variable theory and those theories can't hold water for the reason I just gave you, i.e. electrons in atoms should radiate etc.
In any case you have a bad habit of not answering questions directed to you so I won't continue with this. E.g. I've asked you many times why you ask me questions when I say I will NOT post again and you ignore me. So how does it feel to be ignored? All I'm doing is giving you a taste of your own medicine.
There are plenty of other crackpots to talk to. I already gave you your share of my time. Now its time to show the other crackpots what they're doing wrong like that guy in the other forum who thought he proved Einstein wrong when in fact it was his ignorance of what relativity was all about that was the problem.
-
Provide links.
Links to what????
I take it you haven't read the articles I linked to previously where there is a particle and an associated wave in wave-particle duality.
Links as in:
The following article describes gravity as a pressure exerted by aether toward matter.
'The aether-modified gravity and the G ̈del metric'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.5654
"As for the pressure, it is equal to p = 53−αg,6a2 so, it is positive if αg < 3 which is the weaker condition than the previous one. One notes that the results corresponding to the usual gravity are easily recovered. Also, it is easy to see that the interval αg < 15 corresponds to the usual matter."
The following article describes the aether as an incompressible fluid resulting in what the article refers to as gravitational aether caused by pressure or vorticity.
'Phenomenology of Gravitational Aether as a solution to the Old Cosmological Constant Problem'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1106.3955
"One proposal to address this puzzle at the semi-classical level is to decouple quantum vacuum from space-time geometry via a modification of gravity that includes an incompressible fluid, known as Gravitational Aether. In this paper, we discuss classical predictions of this theory along with its compatibility with cosmological and experimental tests of gravity. We argue that deviations from General Relativity (GR) in this theory are sourced by pressure or vorticity."
The following article describes a gravitating vacuum where aether is the quantum vacuum of the 21-st century.
'From Analogue Models to Gravitating Vacuum'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1155
"The aether of the 21-st century is the quantum vacuum, which is a new form of matter. This is the real substance"
The aether is, or behaves similar to, a supersolid, which is described in the following article as the 'fluidic' nature of space itself. The article describes a 'back reaction' associated with the 'fluidic' nature of space itself. This is the displaced aether 'displacing back'.
'An Extended Dynamical Equation of Motion, Phase Dependency and Inertial Backreaction'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1208.3458
"We hypothesize that space itself resists such surges according to a kind of induction law (related to inertia); additionally, we provide further evidence of the “fluidic” nature of space itself. This "back-reaction" is quantified by the tendency of angular momentum flux threading across a surface."
The following article describes the aether as that which produces resistance to acceleration and is responsible for the increase in mass of an object with velocity and describes the "space-time ideal fluid approach from general relativity."
'Fluidic Electrodynamics: On parallels between electromagnetic and fluidic inertia'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1202.4611
"It is shown that the force exerted on a particle by an ideal fluid produces two effects: i) resistance to acceleration and, ii) an increase of mass with velocity. ... The interaction between the particle and the entrained space flow gives rise to the observed properties of inertia and the relativistic increase of mass. ... Accordingly, in this framework the non resistance of a particle in uniform motion through an ideal fluid (D’Alembert’s paradox) corresponds to Newton’s first law. The law of inertia suggests that the physical vacuum can be modeled as an ideal fluid, agreeing with the space-time ideal fluid approach from general relativity."
The relativistic mass of an object is the mass of the object and the mass of the aether connected to and neighboring the object which is displaced by the object. The faster an object moves with respect to the state of the aether in which it exists the greater the displacement of the aether by the object the greater the relativistic mass of the object.
The incompressible fluid described in the following article is the gravitational aether which "the theory reduces to GR coupled to an incompressible fluid."
'Empty Black Holes, Firewalls, and the Origin of Bekenstein-Hawking Entropy'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1212.4176
"But why an incompressible fluid? The reason comes from an attempt to solve the (old) cosmological constant problem, which is arguably the most puzzling aspect of coupling gravity to relativistic quantum mechanics [13]. Given that the natural expectation value for the vacuum of the standard model of particle physics is ∼ 60 orders of magnitude heavier than the gravitational measurements of vacuum density, it is reasonable to entertain an alternative theory of gravity where the standard model vacuum decouples from gravity. Such a theory could be realized by coupling gravity to the traceless part of the quantum mechanical energy-momentum tensor. However, the consistency/covariance of gravitational field equations then requires introducing an auxiliary fluid, the so-called gravitational aether [14]. The simplest model for gravitational aether is an incompressible fluid (with vanishing energy density, but non-vanishing pressure), which is currently consistent with all cosmological, astrophysical, and precision tests of gravity [15, 16]:
__3__
32πGN Gμν = Tμν − Tα gμν + Tμν ,
Tμν = p (uμ uν + gμν ), T μν;ν = 0,
where GN is Newton’s constant, Tμν is the matter energy momentum tensor and T'μν is the incompressible gravitational aether fluid. In vacuum, the theory reduces to GR coupled to an incompressible fluid."
The following articles describe what is presently postulated as dark matter is aether.
'Quantum aether and an invariant Planck scale'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1110.3753
"this version of aether may have some bearing on the abundance of Dark Matter and Dark Energy in our universe."
"mass of the aether"
'Scalars, Vectors and Tensors from Metric-Affine Gravity'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1110.5168
"the model obtained here gets closer to the aether theory of , which is shown therein to be an alternative to the cold dark matter."
'Unified model for dark matter and quintessence'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1209.4758
"Superfluid dark matter is reminiscent of the aether and modeling the universe using superfluid aether is compatible."
'Vainshtein mechanism in Gauss-Bonnet gravity and Galileon aether'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1107.1892
"the perturbations of the scalar field do not propagate in the Minkowski space-time but rather in some form of ”aether” because of the presence of the background field"
'On the super-fluid property of the relativistic physical vacuum medium and the inertial motion of particles'
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0701155
"In this paper we shall show that the relativistic physical vacuum medium as a ubiquitous back ground field is a super fluid medium."
-
'The Other de Broglie Wave'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1503.02534
The other wave is an 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.
-
Call it whatever you want, 'empty' space has mass which physically occupies three dimensional space and is physically displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.
In a double slit experiment it is the mass which fills 'empty' space that waves.
The Milky Way's halo is not a clump of dark matter traveling along with the Milky Way. The Milky Way is moving through and displacing the mass which fills 'empty' space.
The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the mass which fills 'empty' space.
The state of displacement of the mass which fills 'empty' space is the deformation of spacetime.
The Milky Way's halo is the deformation of spacetime.
-
Who in the hell are you talking too? I realized months ago how much of a crackpot you are and as such you can't be taught or helped. There hasn't been any comment by me since Feb. 12th! Don't you understand that it means that nobody cares about your nonsense anymore? We know that you're a crackpot already so give it up.
-
The Milky Way's halo is the deformation of spacetime.
-
'Is dark matter a FLUID?'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3013284/Is-dark-matter-FLUID-Mystery-particles-mapped-galaxy-clusters-results-suggest-not-particles-all.html
"This suggests dark matter may not actually be composed of particles. It could instead be like a 'fluid', or something else entirely"
'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html
"Think of waves on the surface of water. Here we can describe two entirely different things. Either we may observe how the undulatory surface forming the boundary between water and air alters in the course of time; or else-with the help of small floats, for instance - we can observe how the position of the separate particles of water alters in the course of time. If the existence of such floats for tracking the motion of the particles of a fluid were a fundamental impossibility in physics - if, in fact nothing else whatever were observable than the shape of the space occupied by the water as it varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that water consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise it as a medium."
if, in fact nothing else whatever were observable than the shape of the space occupied by the aether as it varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that aether consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise it as a medium having mass which is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.
-
Still talking to yourself, huh?
-
The Milky Way's halo is the deformation of spacetime.
-
'Variations on an aethereal theme'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1503.08911
"so that µ acts like a “dark matter” source of gravity that can be interpreted as the internal energy density of a ponderable aether."
The Milky Way's halo is not a clump of dark matter traveling along with the Milky Way.
The Milky Way is moving through and displacing the aether.
The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether.
The Milky Way's halo is the deformation of spacetime.
-
Again with the talking to yourself, huh?
-
'Variations on an aethereal theme'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1503.08911
"the “aethereal dark matter fluid” has pressure"
There is no such thing as dark matter anchored to matter. Matter moves through and displaces the aether. The aether 'displaces back'. This is the pressure exerted by the displaced aether toward the matter.
Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward matter is gravity.
The state of displacement of the aether is gravity.
The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether.
The Milky Way's halo is the deformation of spacetime.
-
'DARK ENERGY/DARK MASS: THE SILENT TRUTH'
https://tienzengong.wordpress.com/2015/04/22/dark-energydark-mass-the-silent-truth/
"Matt Strassler: “But if it [dark matter] is something about space itself, I would say that that effect isn’t what we would call dark matter. Rather, it’s an alternative explanation for what we observe."
"That is, all that we are certain about [is] the dark mass, not dark matter, let alone to say about the dark ‘particle’."
The Milky Way moves through and displaces the dark mass.
The state of displacement of the dark mass is curved spacetime.
The Milky Way's halo is curved spacetime.
-
'Hubble Scientists Map a Massive Halo of Gas Around Andromeda Galaxy'
http://www.nbcnews.com/science/space/hubble-team-maps-huge-halo-gas-around-andromeda-galaxy-n355521
"The nearly invisible halo has half as much mass as all the stars in Andromeda combined, and perhaps more — so could such halos account for the mysterious dark matter that astronomers have been puzzling over? Not even close, Lehner said. "It's a very massive halo, but it's still less than a tenth the mass of the dark matter," he told NBC News."
Physicists are starting to realize the notions of dark matter and the dark matter particle are incorrect. They are referring to the mass which fills 'empty' space as the 'dark mass' in order to distinguish it from the baggage associated with dark matter.
'Dark Energy/Dark Mass: The Slient Truth'
https://tienzengong.wordpress.com/2015/04/22/dark-energydark-mass-the-silent-truth/
"That is, all that we are certain about [is] the dark mass, not dark matter, let alone to say about the dark 'particle'."
Particles of matter move through and displace the dark mass, including 'particles' as large as galaxies and galaxy clusters.
The Andromeda Galaxy is not traveling with a clump of dark matter analogous to the gas in its halo.
The Andromeda Galaxy is moving through and displacing the dark mass.
The state of displacement of the dark mass is curved spacetime.
-
'Maybe dark matter is not made up of heavy particles after all'
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/05/150515083408.htm
"These rare, extreme examples of clusters caught in the act of colliding seem to be challenging the accepted view that dark matter is made up of heavy particles, since no such particles have actually been detected yet, despite the efforts being made to find them by means of the LHC (Large Hadron Particle Collider) accelerator in Geneva and the LUX (Large Underground Xenon Experiment), an underground dark matter detector in the United States. In Tom Broadhurst's opinion, "it's all the more important to find a new model that will enable the mysterious dark matter to be understood better." Broadhurst is one of the authors of a wave-dark-matter model published in Nature Physics last year."
The first thing they need to do is to stop referring to it as 'dark matter'. 'Empty' space has mass which physically occupies three dimensional space and is physically displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.
The Milky Way moves through and curves spacetime.
The Milky Way moves through and displaces the 'dark mass'.
The state of displacement of the dark mass is curved spacetime.
-
the empty space is the medium of em force, em forces/charges vibrate in the medium to produce em wave.
the force between all matter/body/charge is already/always there, the pause/wave takes time to propagate.
remember, there is force connected all matter/charge in the space/universe. electrostatic force extends to infinite distance,
-
the empty space is the medium of em force, em forces/charges vibrate in the medium to produce em wave.
the force between all matter/body/charge is already/always there, the pause/wave takes time to propagate.
remember, there is force connected all matter/charge in the space/universe. electrostatic force extends to infinite distance,
'Empty' space has mass which is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it. I use the term 'dark mass' to describe the mass which fills 'empty' space. Particles of matter move through and displace the dark mass, including 'particles' as large as galaxies and galaxy clusters.
In the following two articles the aether is what waves in a double slit experiment. In the first article the aether has mass. In other words, it is the dark mass that waves in a double slit experiment.
'From the Newton's laws to motions of the fluid and superfluid vacuum: vortex tubes, rings, and others'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1403.3900
"This medium, called also the aether, has mass and is populated by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it" ...
... and displace it.
'EPR program: a local interpretation of QM'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.5612
"Wave particle duality is described as the compound system of point particle plus accompanying wave (in the æther)."
Q. Why is the particle always detected traveling through a single slit in a double slit experiment?
A. It always travels through a single slit. It is the associated wave in the dark mass that passes through both.
The wave of wave-particle duality is a wave in the dark mass.
'The Milky Way's dark matter halo appears to be lopsided'
http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.3802
"the emerging picture of the dark matter halo of the Milky Way is dominantly lopsided in nature."
The Milky Way's halo is not a clump of dark matter traveling along with the Milky Way. The Milky Way's halo is lopsided due to the matter in the Milky Way moving through and displacing the dark mass.
The Milky Way moves through and curves spacetime.
The Milky Way moves through and displaces the dark mass.
The state of displacement of the dark mass is curved spacetime.
What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment; the dark mass.
Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality; both are waves in the dark mass.
Dark mass displaced by matter relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.
-
if there is dark matter in space, all moving matters/bodies will experience resistance.
how could particles/photons travel light years to reach us? why is earth orbit stable?
without charges there is no matter. all charges carry infinite force fields, space is fill with em force, that force is the medium for light, gravity is net em force of all charges between bodies.
-
if there is dark matter in space, all moving matters/bodies will experience resistance.
how could particles/photons travel light years to reach us? why is earth orbit stable?
without charges there is no matter. all charges carry infinite force fields, space is fill with em force, that force is the medium for light, gravity is net em force of all charges between bodies.
The dark mass is, or behaves similar to, a supersolid.
You are in a bowling alley filled with a supersolid. You roll the bowling ball. By definition, the bowling ball rolls forever through the supersolid.
Q. Is the bowling ball displacing the supersolid or is the supersolid displacing the bowling ball.
A. Both are occurring simultaneously with equal force.
-
i like to try your weed...
-
jccc - Please tell me that you're not taking him seriously. It's bad enough as it is here with nothing sound being discussed. Don't make it worse by encouraging him.
-
i like to try your weed...
'Dark matter' is now understood to fill what would otherwise be considered to be empty space.
'Cosmologists at Penn Weigh Cosmic Filaments and Voids'
http://www.upenn.edu/pennnews/news/cosmologists-penn-weigh-cosmic-filaments-and-voids
"Dark matter ... permeates all the way to the center of the voids."
'No Empty Space in the Universe --Dark Matter Discovered to Fill Intergalactic Space'
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2012/02/no-empty-space-in-the-universe-dark-matter-discovered-to-fill-intergalactic-space-.html
"A long standing mystery on where the missing dark matter is has been solved by the research. There is no empty space in the universe. The intergalactic space is filled with dark matter."
I use the term 'dark mass' to describe the mass which fills 'empty' space. Particles of matter move through and displace the dark mass, including 'particles' as large as galaxies and galaxy clusters.
In the following two articles the aether is what waves in a double slit experiment. In the first article the aether has mass. In other words, it is the dark mass that waves in a double slit experiment.
'From the Newton's laws to motions of the fluid and superfluid vacuum: vortex tubes, rings, and others'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1403.3900
"This medium, called also the aether, has mass and is populated by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it" ...
... and displace it.
'EPR program: a local interpretation of QM'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.5612
"Wave particle duality is described as the compound system of point particle plus accompanying wave (in the æther)."
Q. Why is the particle always detected traveling through a single slit in a double slit experiment?
A. It always travels through a single slit. It is the associated wave in the dark mass that passes through both.
The wave of wave-particle duality is a wave in the dark mass.
Here are some articles where the observed physical phenomenon is correctly described by the matter moving through and displacing the dark mass.
'Galactic Pile-Up May Point to Mysterious New Dark Force in the Universe'
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/01/musket-ball-dark-force/
"The reason this is strange is that dark matter is thought to barely interact with itself. The dark matter should just coast through itself and move at the same speed as the hardly interacting galaxies. Instead, it looks like the dark matter is crashing into something — perhaps itself – and slowing down faster than the galaxies are. But this would require the dark matter to be able to interact with itself in a completely new an unexpected way, a “dark force” that affects only dark matter."
It's not a new force. It's the dark mass displaced by each of the galaxy clusters interacting analogous to the bow waves of two boats which pass by each other.
'Offset between dark matter and ordinary matter: evidence from a sample of 38 lensing clusters of galaxies'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.1475
"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 offset is due to the galaxy clusters moving through and displacing the dark mass. 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 as the galaxy clusters move through and displace the dark mass.
'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 matter, which is somewhat similar to a ripple formed in a pond when a rock hits the water."
The 'pond' consists of dark mass. The galaxy clusters are moving through and displacing the dark mass. The ripple created when galaxy clusters collide is a dark mass displacement wave.
'The Milky Way's dark matter halo appears to be lopsided'
http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.3802
"the emerging picture of the dark matter halo of the Milky Way is dominantly lopsided in nature."
The Milky Way's halo is not a clump of dark matter traveling along with the Milky Way. The Milky Way's halo is lopsided due to the matter in the Milky Way moving through and displacing the dark mass.
The Milky Way moves through and curves spacetime.
The Milky Way moves through and displaces the dark mass.
The state of displacement of the dark mass is curved spacetime.
What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment; the dark mass.
Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality; both are waves in the dark mass.
Dark mass displaced by matter relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.
-
thanks!
do you believe what you quote/read?
i don't.
-
thanks!
do you believe what you quote/read?
i don't.
If you insisted boats do not move through and displace the water there is no amount of evidence that would convince you otherwise.
-
The following is an interesting read.
'The new wave of pilot-wave theory'
John W. M. Bush
http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/magazine/physicstoday/article/68/8/10.1063/PT.3.2882
I disagree with John on the following.
John said, "The walker thus interacts with both slits because of the spatial delocalization of its pilot wave."
The walker does not interact with both slits and it's not the delocalization of its pilot wave which causes the interference pattern.
'Empty' space has mass. The aether has mass. Particles of matter move through and displace the aether.
In a double slit experiment the particle travels a well defined path which takes it through one slit. The associated wave in the aether passes through both. As the 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. This is the wave guiding the particle. Detecting the particle strongly exiting a single slit destroys the cohesion between the particle and its associated wave in the aether, the particle continues on the trajectory it was traveling and does not form an interference pattern.
John said, "De Broglie did not specify the physical origins of the pilot wave"
'NON-LINEAR WAVE MECHANICS A CAUSAL INTERPRETATION by LOUIS DE BROGLIE'
“Since 1954, when this passage was written, I have come to support wholeheartedly an hypothesis proposed by Bohm and Vigier. According to this hypothesis, the random perturbations to which the particle would be constantly subjected, and which would have the probability of presence in terms of W, arise from the interaction of the particle with a “subquantic medium” which escapes our observation and is entirely chaotic, and which is everywhere present in what we call “empty space”.”
'Interpretation of quantum mechanics by the double solution theory Louis de BROGLIE'
http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-classiques/aflb124p001.pdf
"any particle, even isolated, has to be imagined as in continuous “energetic contact” with a hidden medium"
"This hypothesis was brought forward some fifteen years ago by Bohm and Vigier [6], who named this invisible thermostat the “subquantum medium”."
"If a hidden sub-quantum medium is assumed, knowledge of its nature would seem desirable."
The "hidden sub-quantum medium" is the aether.
The wave of wave-particle duality is an aether displacement wave.
John is still stuck on this being non-local.
I prefer John's use of the term "exposed variable theory" from his video. I recommend watching all of the following video. The part having to do with 'exposed variable theories' is at the 2:10 mark.
'The pilot-wave dynamics of walking droplets'
Due to conservation of momentum the downconverted pair are propagating with opposite angular momentums. Each of the pair can determine the position and momentum of the other based upon their own position and momentum.
Entanglement is each of the pair being able to determine the position and momentum of the other based upon their own position and momentum.
Each of the pair can determine the state of the other.
Pilot-wave theories are exposed variable theories.
'The Milky Way's dark matter halo appears to be lopsided'
http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.3802
"the emerging picture of the dark matter halo of the Milky Way is dominantly lopsided in nature."
The Milky Way's halo is not a clump of dark matter traveling along with the Milky Way. The Milky Way's halo is lopsided due to the matter in the Milky Way moving through and displacing the aether, analogous to a submarine moving through and displacing the water.
The Milky Way moves through and displaces the aether.
The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether.
The Milky Way moves through and curves spacetime.
The Milky Way's halo is curved spacetime.
The state of displacement of the aether is curved spacetime.
What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment; the aether.
Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality; both are waves in the aether.
Aether displaced by matter relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.