The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Is there any evidence for aether?  (Read 11642 times)

Offline stacyjones

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 194
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #25 on: 27/04/2016 23:44:24 »
Aether has mass
What is the mass or density of aether?

Do you need to know the mass density of the water in order to understand a boat has a bow wave?
« Last Edit: 28/04/2016 06:52:05 by stacyjones »
 

Offline McQueen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 545
  • Thanked: 6 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.geocities.com/natureoflight/pgindex
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #26 on: 28/04/2016 03:38:43 »
I understand that electromagnetism has a particularly simple structure in 5 dimensions.
I understand that gravity has a particularly simple structure in 10 dimensions.
But my 5 & 10 dimensional maths is non-existent, so I will have to take the word of others for it.
Extra dimensions work well as a mathematical tool; what we lack is some experimental evidence for them (or some theoretical solution that can't be obtained in other ways).

The problem with the  concept of 'understanding' is defined by your own definition;  it can sometimes be 'non-existent'.  IF an empirical solution is available why go into these esoteric solutions. Take wave-particle duality as a starting point, this is where extra dimensions and all the other eerie concepts came into physics. What if wave particle duality does not exist and other simpler alternative explanations do exist, how is it possible to go on believing in '5 dimensions and 10 dimensions' but also to try and convince others to believe in the same thing.  Not only do proponents of extra dimensions try to convince others about these highly improbable scenarios  but they are rabid in their efforts to do so and also unfortunately are in the majority. A Swift like situation that is so improbable as to be amusing.

Now that you have come to accept the existence of extra dimensions in Quantum Mechanics, it is time to remind you that Schrodinger's wave function equation implies the existence of 276 extra dimensions. What a crazy beginning for a crazy theory!

« Last Edit: 28/04/2016 03:56:24 by McQueen »
 

Offline McQueen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 545
  • Thanked: 6 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.geocities.com/natureoflight/pgindex
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #27 on: 28/04/2016 03:47:55 »
What is the mass or density of aether?

Although I do not prescribe to stacy jones assertion that the aether and matter waves are the same or to several of his other ideas, I do believe in the concept of an aether and can also give some idea of its mass. According to the Gestalt Aether Theory, a 'virtual photon' of the 'virtual photon aether' has an energy of about 10 -50 J. If one considers mass energy equivalence it is possible to see that the aether must have mass, further if the energy of a single 'virtual photon' is multiplied by the volume of the Universe, it will even be possible to calculate the effect that this mass has on the Universe.  The 'dimensions' of these virtual photons can be taken as  (10-6m)2
« Last Edit: 28/04/2016 03:50:40 by McQueen »
 

Offline stacyjones

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 194
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #28 on: 28/04/2016 06:55:13 »
What is the mass or density of aether?

Although I do not prescribe to stacy jones assertion that the aether and matter waves are the same or to several of his other ideas, I do believe in the concept of an aether and can also give some idea of its mass. According to the Gestalt Aether Theory, a 'virtual photon' of the 'virtual photon aether' has an energy of about 10 -50 J. If one considers mass energy equivalence it is possible to see that the aether must have mass, further if the energy of a single 'virtual photon' is multiplied by the volume of the Universe, it will even be possible to calculate the effect that this mass has on the Universe.  The 'dimensions' of these virtual photons can be taken as  (10-6m)2.

No need for 'virtual' photons. You can consider the aether.to be a sea of photons which are displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4714
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #29 on: 28/04/2016 07:16:19 »
Do you need to know the mass density of the water in order to understand a boat has a bow wave?
If I want to calculate the bow wave, yes. And if I assert that something has mass, I expect my customers to ask me how much.

As you are putting forward the notion of an aether wave being predictive of electron diffraction (which I can measure precisely) and gravitation (which I can measure precisely) you must have a very precise idea of the density and compressive modulus of aether. Please tell us.

And whilst you are at it, perhaps you can explain the  difference betweenthe bow wave of a boat, which is determined by the speed and direction of the boat, and the pilot wave of your particles: how does the wave know how fast to travel? What happens to the wave when a particle annihilates?

If the pilot wave precedes the particle, it must anticipate the position of a photon. Relativity says you can't anticipate the position of a photon. So you can't use the aether theory to marry relativity with quantum mechanics. This is a pity as relativity gives us some very useful and precisely predictive insights into gravitation, nuclear physics, and navigation. Unlike aether theory whcih gives us nothing. 
 

Offline stacyjones

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 194
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #30 on: 28/04/2016 07:39:08 »
Do you need to know the mass density of the water in order to understand a boat has a bow wave?
If I want to calculate the bow wave, yes. And if I assert that something has mass, I expect my customers to ask me how much.

As you are putting forward the notion of an aether wave being predictive of electron diffraction (which I can measure precisely) and gravitation (which I can measure precisely) you must have a very precise idea of the density and compressive modulus of aether. Please tell us.

And whilst you are at it, perhaps you can explain the  difference betweenthe bow wave of a boat, which is determined by the speed and direction of the boat, and the pilot wave of your particles: how does the wave know how fast to travel? What happens to the wave when a particle annihilates?

If the pilot wave precedes the particle, it must anticipate the position of a photon. Relativity says you can't anticipate the position of a photon. So you can't use the aether theory to marry relativity with quantum mechanics. This is a pity as relativity gives us some very useful and precisely predictive insights into gravitation, nuclear physics, and navigation. Unlike aether theory whcih gives us nothing.

Aether displaced by matter gives you what relates general relativity and quantum mechanics. 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.
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4714
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #31 on: 28/04/2016 08:36:59 »
Then please show us the numbers.
 

Offline stacyjones

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 194
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #32 on: 28/04/2016 12:38:30 »
Then please show us the numbers.

'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)."

 

Offline puppypower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
  • Thanked: 43 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #33 on: 28/04/2016 13:36:45 »
If you look at our universe there is a net conversion of matter to energy. Energy to matter may have been the case in the beginning of the universe. However, with the introduction of the forces of nature, after that, the opposite is true. Since energy moves at the speed of light and matter can't move at the speed of light, a net conversion of matter to energy, also implies a movement from inertial reference to the speed of light reference, with the speed of light, at lower potential. This is not tradition, but it follows from  relativity and observation.

The aether has a connection to the ground state; speed of light. Both camps of thought are correct. The aether is not a thing, per se, to be measured. Rather is it connected to the impact of the speed of light ground state on inertial reference. 

As an analogy, on earth we have the sea level, which is the place where all the atmospheric and land water goes. This is a place of lowest potential. The movement of all the surface and atmospheric water, whether it starts in the clouds, mountains, forest streams, rivers and lakes, moves in response to the potential with sea level. If this analogy, the different wavelengths of photon are analogous to the where the water begins; cloud = gamma. The sea level is not a medium, per se, but rather a destination for the lowering of the potential. The potential with sea level will allow some water to seep, tunnel, split and meander.

If you look at photons, they have two legs. Photons travel at the speed of light, while also showing finite expressions we call wavelength and frequency. The paradox this creates is, at the speed of light, the universe will appear contracted to a point-instant. The question is, how can photons generate finite wavelengths, if these will appear as a fraction of a point in its speed of light reference? A fraction of a point is not mathematically possible. Also how can we have a variety of wavelengths; EM spectrum, if the speed of light can only see one   reference; infinite wavelength? We know photons do this, but how?

It comes back to the speed of light ground state and the higher potential of inertial reference. Photons exist in both references. One leg is planted in the ground state, while the other is in the higher potential inertial references. Another analogy is a spring attached at one point, which is always the place of lowest potential. Inertial references will stretch the spring to define different wavelengths and potential with the ground state. Since C is the ground state, photons will lower potential; travel at C, while also being pulled to higher potential; wave.

In terms of a medium analogy, say we have a boat traveling on the water. The boat is like the particle and its wake is the wave. Since the medium will cause some drag on the boat, to maintain the wake we need to constantly add energy via engine. If we cut the engine, the particle; boat, will remain, but there is no wake. The engine of the photon boat is the connected to the constant potential between inertial and the speed of light ground state, with both persisting.

This medium analogy suggests that the neutrino is a just photon with the inertial engine turned off. It has lost most of its connection to matter and inertial reference. It is a particle boat stopped at C, with very few inertial interactions; wake. They are essentially one legged photons.
 

Offline McQueen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 545
  • Thanked: 6 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.geocities.com/natureoflight/pgindex
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #34 on: 28/04/2016 17:39:29 »
If you look at photons, they have two legs. Photons travel at the speed of light, while also showing finite expressions we call wavelength and frequency. The paradox this creates is, at the speed of light, the universe will appear contracted to a point-instant. The question is, how can photons generate finite wavelengths, if these will appear as a fraction of a point in its speed of light reference? A fraction of a point is not mathematically possible. Also how can we have a variety of wavelengths; EM spectrum, if the speed of light can only see one   reference; infinite wavelength? We know photons do this, but how?

To think of a 'particle' as having wave length and frequency is not such an insurmountable problem as you seem to  surmise. In lithotripsy for instance, where sound waves are used to create shock waves or vibrations that can shatter kidney stones, the sound waves have a frequency of between 100 KHz and 1 MHz. and a wave length of between 0.003 m and 0.0003 m. respectively. The conundrum here is that a wave (i.e., sound) can behave like a solid object and be used to shatter a stone, surely light must also exist in a similar form from all the evidence available. 
 

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3918
  • Thanked: 53 times
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #35 on: 28/04/2016 19:46:46 »
Sound waves require a medium. Photons do not. In space no one can hear you scream.
« Last Edit: 28/04/2016 19:49:15 by jeffreyH »
 

Offline stacyjones

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 194
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #36 on: 28/04/2016 20:30:34 »
Aether has mass which is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.

Wave-particle duality is a moving particle and its associated wave in the aether.

There is evidence of the aether every time a double slit experiment is performed, it's what waves.
« Last Edit: 28/04/2016 20:34:22 by stacyjones »
 

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3918
  • Thanked: 53 times
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #37 on: 28/04/2016 21:00:17 »
Simply repeating something parrot fashion over and over again doesn't prove it to be a fact. Aether is a trendy fad that lots of people seem to be taking up like crusaders of physics. Crusaders tend to destroy rather than save. It will be something else next year.
 

Offline stacyjones

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 194
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #38 on: 28/04/2016 21:08:25 »
Or, you could correctly understand what occurs physically in nature. 'Empty' space has mass which is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it, including 'particles' as large as galaxies and galaxy clusters. What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment, the mass which fills 'empty' space. Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality, both are waves in the mass which fills 'empty' space. The mass which fills 'empty' space displaced by matter relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.
 

Offline evan_au

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4120
  • Thanked: 245 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #39 on: 28/04/2016 22:30:48 »
Quote from: alancalverd
The problem with wave-particle duality is that some people believe in it!
It's apparently official government policy in Canada....

See Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau explain:
 

Offline McQueen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 545
  • Thanked: 6 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.geocities.com/natureoflight/pgindex
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #40 on: 29/04/2016 02:19:07 »
I remember Pierre Trudeau.......
 

Offline McQueen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 545
  • Thanked: 6 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.geocities.com/natureoflight/pgindex
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #41 on: 29/04/2016 02:26:57 »
Sound waves require a medium. Photons do not. In space no one can hear you scream.

Sometimes you exceed all expectations with your brilliantly insightful statements! Yes, of course sound needs a medium  and light must do so too, which is the whole point of this discussion. An electron is a tiny particle about 10-16m in diameter, it has a limited charge 1.6 x 10-19 C. Yet here you are happily rounding on everyone else, claiming that the vibration of that tiny electron and that tiny charge can create a self sustaining wave that will travel for millions and billions of kilometres, while all the time  dispersing its energy in accordance with the inverse square rule. AND you see absolutely nothing wrong with this scenario ????
 

Offline stacyjones

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 194
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #42 on: 29/04/2016 02:37:34 »
Sometimes you exceed all expectations with your brilliantly insightful statements! Yes, of course sound needs a medium  and light must do so too, which is the whole point of this discussion. An electron is a tiny particle about 10-16m in diameter, it has a limited charge 1.6 x 10-19 C. Yet here you are happily rounding on everyone else, claiming that the vibration of that tiny electron and that tiny charge can create a self sustaining wave that will travel for millions and billions of kilometres, while all the time  dispersing its energy in accordance with the inverse square rule. AND you see absolutely nothing wrong with this scenario ????

All because, for some strange reason, 'they' can't bring themselves to understand 'empty' space has mass which is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it. The wave of wave-particle duality is a wave in the mass which fills 'empty' space.
 

Offline Arthur Geddes

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 60
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #43 on: 29/04/2016 04:24:02 »
From the perspective of the photon, it CAN'T disperse its energy; "dispersion" has no meaning in a non-temporal construct.

Absolute Relativity.
 

Offline Arthur Geddes

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 60
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #44 on: 29/04/2016 05:33:36 »
Relative to the photon; seeing as how the photon has no perspective.
 

Offline McQueen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 545
  • Thanked: 6 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.geocities.com/natureoflight/pgindex
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #45 on: 29/04/2016 06:13:56 »
From the perspective of the photon, it CAN'T disperse its energy; "dispersion" has no meaning in a non-temporal construct.
Absolute Relativity.

Forget about the photons perspective for the moment and think about your perspective. Do photons appear to disperse according to the inverse square law or is the wave function responsible for presenting an illusion that it appears to do so ?  Just asking. Further the word 'temporal' is defined as relating to time. This being so how  does a photon exist in a non temporal construct ?  In a more direct sense you are right of course the photon does retain its energy or identity I should have said intensity, not energy. The problem with this is that Quantum Mechanics insists that a single photon can be emitted from an electron and travel for ever or until it meets another electron that requires that particular energy and is absorbed. Take for instance the Voyager Transmissions, how does the radiation spread out so that it is detected at every point in the cone of transmission. To say that it is only present where it is detected is just clever (???) language in the end.  Would you agree with this ?
« Last Edit: 29/04/2016 06:41:12 by McQueen »
 

Offline McQueen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 545
  • Thanked: 6 times
    • View Profile
    • http://www.geocities.com/natureoflight/pgindex
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #46 on: 29/04/2016 06:20:27 »
All because, for some strange reason, 'they' can't bring themselves to understand 'empty' space has mass which is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it. The wave of wave-particle duality is a wave in the mass which fills 'empty' space.

Agreed, in fact to take it for granted that such vast spaces are completely void of anything is in itself quite remarkably short-sighted. It is only recently that this perspective is changing with the introduction of theories relating to dark matter and dark energy. Your theory of space having mass might have some merit but like any other theory it will need a lot of work and substantiation before it can win even token acceptance. Look at Newton and the care he took over his theories keeping them hidden and working on them for twenty years or more before finally publishing. Einstein of course was the exception, his ideas catching the public and scientific imagination as soon as he published them.
 

Offline stacyjones

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 194
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #47 on: 29/04/2016 12:12:47 »
Agreed, in fact to take it for granted that such vast spaces are completely void of anything is in itself quite remarkably short-sighted. It is only recently that this perspective is changing with the introduction of theories relating to dark matter and dark energy. Your theory of space having mass might have some merit but like any other theory it will need a lot of work and substantiation before it can win even token acceptance. Look at Newton and the care he took over his theories keeping them hidden and working on them for twenty years or more before finally publishing. Einstein of course was the exception, his ideas catching the public and scientific imagination as soon as he published them.

[0903.3802] The Milky Way's dark matter halo appears to be lopsided
http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.3802

Quote
"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.

'Offset between dark matter and ordinary matter: evidence from a sample of 38 lensing clusters of galaxies'
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1004/1004.1475v1.pdf

Quote
"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 physically in nature 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/

Quote
"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 the galaxies piling up as the galaxies pass by each other, analogous to the bow waves of two boats which pass by each other closely.
« Last Edit: 29/04/2016 12:17:39 by stacyjones »
 

Offline Arthur Geddes

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 60
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #48 on: 29/04/2016 16:39:18 »
From the perspective of the photon, it CAN'T disperse its energy; "dispersion" has no meaning in a non-temporal construct.
Absolute Relativity.

Forget about the photons perspective for the moment and think about your perspective.

Forget about neither; they are both valid if both are real *things:* so says A.R..

Quote
Do photons appear to disperse according to the inverse square law or is the wave function responsible for presenting an illusion that it appears to do so ?

It is an illusion not a delusion.  The point of "photon" is that it does not disperse; relative to the photon it's easy to see how that could be since there's no temporal dimension relative to the "dispersing E.M. field."  Relative to the photon there is only one "cycle" which presents to the photon as the photon structure.  Assuming a simple H atom's 1s2 to 1s1 "decay," do i see a curl?

Quote
Further the word 'temporal' is defined as relating to time. This being so how  does a photon exist in a non temporal construct ?

In spherical coordinates; there is no radius & no time: there's only a shell.  (The Tao!  ha ha, i jest ...?)

Quote
  In a more direct sense you are right of course the photon does retain its energy or identity I should have said intensity, not energy. The problem with this is that Quantum Mechanics insists that a single photon can be emitted from an electron and travel for ever or until it meets another electron that requires that particular energy and is absorbed. Take for instance the Voyager Transmissions, how does the radiation spread out so that it is detected at every point in the cone of transmission. To say that it is only present where it is detected is just clever (???) language in the end.  Would you agree with this ?

Is it any different than saying a particle takes two paths at once?  How to explain entanglement, though ..?  & what about relativity? There is still a quantization to be had; one electron per E.M. field shell.

Articulation is a test of language.
 

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3918
  • Thanked: 53 times
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #49 on: 29/04/2016 20:21:35 »
Sound waves require a medium. Photons do not. In space no one can hear you scream.

Sometimes you exceed all expectations with your brilliantly insightful statements! Yes, of course sound needs a medium  and light must do so too, which is the whole point of this discussion. An electron is a tiny particle about 10-16m in diameter, it has a limited charge 1.6 x 10-19 C. Yet here you are happily rounding on everyone else, claiming that the vibration of that tiny electron and that tiny charge can create a self sustaining wave that will travel for millions and billions of kilometres, while all the time  dispersing its energy in accordance with the inverse square rule. AND you see
Show
 nothing wrong with this scenario ????

Show me where on planet McQueen that I mentioned electrons. I did mention photons. Or are you trying to deliberately mislead your audience into thinking I said something that I definitely did not. That is not a very honest way to behave and says a lot about your approach to debate.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: Is there any evidence for aether?
« Reply #49 on: 29/04/2016 20:21:35 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums