The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Luminiferous Aether  (Read 461 times)

Offline JoeBrown

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 150
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • Does everything simple always gotta be so complex?
    • View Profile
Luminiferous Aether
« on: 24/09/2016 16:16:37 »
Been exploring the concept in my head.  Seems to me, many of us argue (within ourselves) about the need for a medium of space. 

Like myself, many suspect there must be a medium for light and/or gravity waves to propagate through space, but we cannot see it.  We can neither prove, nor disprove such quality, it has no tangible quality, other than taking/making up space.

The Michaleson Morely experiment (MME) is the most prominent example of the search for a definitive answer.  But the experiment was limited to being performed at the surface of the earth.

I postulate atomic structure (mass) displace aether.

If that postulation is correct, I conclude that solid mass displace most aether, followed by liquids then gas.  From the core of the earth to the outer most reaches of the atmosphere, it would be something of a sliding scale.

Iíve been struggling to contrive a method to detect it, but Iím coming up blank.

Even if there is such a quality, can we assume it doesnít interact with mass/matter?

Best Iíve got:  Its everywhere there isnít atoms, there is aether.  If there is aether around the sun and weíre orbiting the sun within itÖ  It stands to reason the aether would flow in a similar path around the sun, as the Earth.

Ė

Thatís explains to me, why MME and others fail to detect any aether quality of space.
« Last Edit: 24/09/2016 22:57:09 by JoeBrown »


 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
  • Thanked: 51 times
    • View Profile
Re: Luminiferous Aether
« Reply #1 on: 26/09/2016 12:50:40 »
The measured speed of light in a vacuum being the same in every frame disproves the logic of your suggestion. What moves the electrons and photon to be confounded in every frame? The answer to that will point you in the correct direction.
 

Offline JoeBrown

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 150
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • Does everything simple always gotta be so complex?
    • View Profile
Re: Luminiferous Aether
« Reply #2 on: 26/09/2016 14:34:38 »
The measured speed of light in a vacuum being the same in every frame disproves the logic of your suggestion. What moves the electrons and photon to be confounded in every frame? The answer to that will point you in the correct direction.

That would only defeat my logic if the vacuum is moving at a different rate of speed than the surface of the Earth, which I presume is where it was measured.

I've become inclined to believe that the "aether" does interact with mass and flows in the same general direction of mass.  A vacuum cannot be created on earth w/out mass surrounding it.  MME was designed with the ideas that the aether doesn't interact with mass and the Earth passes through it with no interaction, yet it may still have an effect on light.  I see that as a highly flawed concept.
 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
  • Thanked: 51 times
    • View Profile
Re: Luminiferous Aether
« Reply #3 on: 26/09/2016 22:35:15 »
  The directional path of light on the rotating Earth is c+v and c-v for a one way direction. The + and - cancel out when measuring the two way speed of light. This was proven with atomic clocks on airplanes one flying east and the other west.
 

Offline JoeBrown

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 150
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • Does everything simple always gotta be so complex?
    • View Profile
Re: Luminiferous Aether
« Reply #4 on: 28/09/2016 13:16:58 »
  The directional path of light on the rotating Earth is c+v and c-v for a one way direction. The + and - cancel out when measuring the two way speed of light. This was proven with atomic clocks on airplanes one flying east and the other west.

Okay, I assume that's accurate. 

What does that have to do with Luminiferous Aether and its detection?

I understand that the existence or non-existence of Luminiferous Aether has little or no bearing on earth bound calculations.

OTOH, it may explain the consistent speed phenomena of spiral galaxies, where "dark matter" proposedly fills the void.
 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
  • Thanked: 51 times
    • View Profile
Re: Luminiferous Aether
« Reply #5 on: 28/09/2016 14:28:05 »
It has everything to do with light. If there is a static Aether that was wrong by the MMX. On the other hand is the Aether is spinning than it is the cause of light and the entire spectrum. Light is what we use for measurement. You can never measure accurately when what you are measuring is part of the measuring system. You can only use an orthogonal system and there is none.
 

Offline JoeBrown

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 150
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • Does everything simple always gotta be so complex?
    • View Profile
Re: Luminiferous Aether
« Reply #6 on: 28/09/2016 16:12:30 »
I don't believe there is a "static" aether.  To my knowledge, it's been proven that simply does not exist.

What hasn't been established nor dispelled is that a fluid like aether may exist. 

I've been struggling with the concept internally and have yet to concoct proof or denial.

We apparently cannot detect such substance, its beyond our ability at present.  It seems there is evidence that suggests there are characteristics of such substance that have affect on mass.
 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
  • Thanked: 51 times
    • View Profile
Re: Luminiferous Aether
« Reply #7 on: 28/09/2016 17:40:15 »
   Yes, if we use an electro as or eyes what is below the electron in size is not detectable. The proof that it exists is the speed of light measured the same in every frame. By anyone's definition of logic when the electron expands its area by the gamma term in Relativity the photon travels further for your increased measuring stick. This compensates for the frames new tick rate of a second. They are confounded. This proves beyond a shadow of a doubt there is a control in space for the limit c affecting both the photon and electron. Since the standard model ignores this fact it will not be discussed in main stream science. Main stream science does not allow for a control mechanism. Reality forces one to the logic something is the cause of electron motion and control. Main stream voted against realty with the Copenhagen interpretation.

Mechanics or magic is the current choice of your understanding not that it really matters which you chose.
 

Offline Atkhenaken

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 147
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: Luminiferous Aether
« Reply #8 on: 01/10/2016 17:59:19 »
Been exploring the concept in my head.  Seems to me, many of us argue (within ourselves) about the need for a medium of space. 

Like myself, many suspect there must be a medium for light and/or gravity waves to propagate through space, but we cannot see it.  We can neither prove, nor disprove such quality, it has no tangible quality, other than taking/making up space.

The Michaleson Morely experiment (MME) is the most prominent example of the search for a definitive answer.  But the experiment was limited to being performed at the surface of the earth.

I postulate atomic structure (mass) displace aether.

If that postulation is correct, I conclude that solid mass displace most aether, followed by liquids then gas.  From the core of the earth to the outer most reaches of the atmosphere, it would be something of a sliding scale.

Iíve been struggling to contrive a method to detect it, but Iím coming up blank.

Even if there is such a quality, can we assume it doesnít interact with mass/matter?

Best Iíve got:  Its everywhere there isnít atoms, there is aether.  If there is aether around the sun and weíre orbiting the sun within itÖ  It stands to reason the aether would flow in a similar path around the sun, as the Earth.

Ė

Thatís explains to me, why MME and others fail to detect any aether quality of space.

You don't need an interferometer to detect aether. Aether is gravity, electricity and all forms of energy. The Earth floats with the aether like a piece of drift wood down a river. Thus, if you are trying to measure its velocity you wont get a big difference. Michaleson and Morley did measure a small difference but it wasn't the same as the Earth's speed around the Sun, so they dismissed it as a NULL RESULT. (a silly mistake of misunderstanding of the true nature of aether) lol!


Note - They were under instructions to find a NULL RESULT. In science you can always manipulate the results by manipulating the expectations! lol!
« Last Edit: 01/10/2016 18:05:28 by Atkhenaken »
 

Offline William McC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 158
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: Luminiferous Aether
« Reply #9 on: 01/10/2016 19:25:02 »
Been exploring the concept in my head.  Seems to me, many of us argue (within ourselves) about the need for a medium of space. 

Like myself, many suspect there must be a medium for light and/or gravity waves to propagate through space, but we cannot see it.  We can neither prove, nor disprove such quality, it has no tangible quality, other than taking/making up space.

The Michaleson Morely experiment (MME) is the most prominent example of the search for a definitive answer.  But the experiment was limited to being performed at the surface of the earth.

I postulate atomic structure (mass) displace aether.

If that postulation is correct, I conclude that solid mass displace most aether, followed by liquids then gas.  From the core of the earth to the outer most reaches of the atmosphere, it would be something of a sliding scale.

Iíve been struggling to contrive a method to detect it, but Iím coming up blank.

Even if there is such a quality, can we assume it doesnít interact with mass/matter?

Best Iíve got:  Its everywhere there isnít atoms, there is aether.  If there is aether around the sun and weíre orbiting the sun within itÖ  It stands to reason the aether would flow in a similar path around the sun, as the Earth.

Ė

Thatís explains to me, why MME and others fail to detect any aether quality of space.

"Space" is filled with hydrogen gas. That is how light, and gravity travel, through matter. But technically space is nothing it is a place for matter to exist.

Ambient radiation (particles of electricity) race through spherically shaped balls of or particles of electricity we call hydrogen atoms. All elements are just structures of hydrogen atoms, thus the hydrogen bomb. Each matter and ambient radiation respectfully, cannot exist without the other. There would be no movement of particles of electricity to create ambient radiation if there was no matter. And matter would disperse harmlessly without event, if ambient radiation stopped.

Time is the comparison of moving objects by a living observer who determines how much time has passed.

Matter even Tungsten is 90 percent space. We live in an electrical illusion. Ambient radiation is racing through matter from all directions at all times.

A bomb is just an area too abundant with particles of electricity, it has been proven but paranoid sorts hide it. But it is easily proven if you would like to know. A bomb is spread out dispersed or it would consume the entire universe. The dispersing of the bomb is what some find unpleasant. We live in a good simple universe, all the nonsense they teach you is to keep you from wielding said universe.

Sincerely,

William McCormick
 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
  • Thanked: 51 times
    • View Profile
Re: Luminiferous Aether
« Reply #10 on: 18/10/2016 13:52:06 »
The inability to measure an Ether type most likely has to do with c. How can you catch c by using c to try an catch it? We need orthogonal methods and we have them. We know the two way distance traveled of light is different in each direction east and west by the amount of spin speed of the earth. The disturbance of the ether is light.

I would add to your postulate that the matrix particles spin at c. I also postulate that the spin rotates electrons of mass. A spin of c can never be viewed but is the mechanical reason for relativity.
 

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
Re: Luminiferous Aether
« Reply #11 on: 19/10/2016 10:49:32 »
I don't believe there is a "static" aether.  To my knowledge, it's been proven that simply does not exist.

What hasn't been established nor dispelled is that a fluid like aether may exist. 

I've been struggling with the concept internally and have yet to concoct proof or denial.

We apparently cannot detect such substance, its beyond our ability at present.  It seems there is evidence that suggests there are characteristics of such substance that have affect on mass.
  The aether exists within the gravitational field and the electric field.The lowest quanta of the fields as per the Dot-wave theory is 2.698E-69kg with a charge of 4.745E-58 (From Relativity and the Dot-wave Theory Chapter 1)
   The bipolar dot-waves are low energy photons and small masses. In general many dot-waves make up the fundamental masses and photons of the aether. Interaction with our photons and particles is so slight that we only measure it as fields.
  The compression of the fields produce quarks and protons and electrons, etc. Since most of the energy we notice is at light speed C, the interaction tends to be equal in all directions.
   The MM experiment looked for a stationary aether as if some strange substance was stationary and that photons dropped from a source and into the stationary substance. However since most of the dot-waves are moving at C, they either add to the dropped photon or subtract from it.
   Photon + Aether photons =  more or less energy but speed is still C.
 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
  • Thanked: 51 times
    • View Profile
Re: Luminiferous Aether
« Reply #12 on: 19/10/2016 14:14:42 »
Jerrygg38,

     A dot wave is illogical and violates relativity math. Nature maximizes diversity with minimal material. A dot with velocity would have to come from mass reducing the atom somehow. Atoms all remain with the same mass when created. How would a dot mass move through the Aether? A virtual photon was invented by main stream to overcome the mass restriction by relativity. You want to change relativity for your theory. In the past if a theory did not follow math it had to be scrapped. This is still valid but not adhered to on a strict basis. Unless you can come up with the math to reduce atoms into dots moving through the universe that idea is invalid. Unless of course you do not believe in math, mechanics and relativity.

A more likely possibility is the Aether is energy c and the photon is a disturbance in that energy. That is the only way virtual photons can exist in reality. A wave on an existing Aether can transfer energy. This relieves the necessity of a dot moving through space magically moving at c. c being the spin state of stationary dots controlling c as a constant. So we transfer energy move the electrons in a confounded way with photons mechanically reproducing relativity observations. Disturbance of the Aether is the virtual photon but main stream is stuck on a dot the same as you currently believe because of your training. You need to see past your training. You do have a good mind.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: Luminiferous Aether
« Reply #12 on: 19/10/2016 14:14:42 »

 

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