0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
but EGWs do not affect the length of solid objects (& do not affect ticking). But EGWs do initially affect the length of objects & ticking (ie when the EGW first arrives), but not after the EGW establishes itself. Believe it or not.
Quote from: mad aetherist on 11/11/2018 22:51:42but EGWs do not affect the length of solid objects (& do not affect ticking). But EGWs do initially affect the length of objects & ticking (ie when the EGW first arrives), but not after the EGW establishes itself. Believe it or not.When you make statements like this you make it clear that you don't understand how gravitational waves are supposed to work. Yet you insist that you understand their properties better than the people who designed, built and run LIGO. Please do better research before pretending that you know more than physicists.
In answering the post, both. How can compression also be a bending?Take a "slinky" spring: you compress it, yet the structure also bends closer. The underlying idea of course is the idea of EM, a slinky wave, being associated to the idea of gravity, as a compression. I can provide further ideas here only if there a direct questions to the effect, don't really want to link long text.
“Waves is of course a misnomer -- they are gravity pulses (forced). Waves implies a natural harmonic property (no they aint waves). Ripples implies a natural harmonic property (no they aint ripples). So i say waves but i am talking about gravity pulses.”Pulses are waves. Not sure what you mean by “natural harmonic property“ but pulses are definitely waves.
I was having a discussing about my work with someone else, their own work, and they suggested my own work (see global icon if you need to) could be an "aether" model.I made it clear to them that the idea of "aether" is a concept of many years ago, thousands, the stuff the God's breathed beyond the atmosphere of this planet.Aetheric models are problematic; the idea of “aether” has been lost in time. I have read much of the ancients and their sciences, and “aether” to my interpretation from the classics is in fact “space”. As such, I don’t think it’s a corpuscular realm as it is considered in modern terms. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_(mythology). I could say I use the aether model according to the ancient description, as then the ancients had no understanding of pure space, and so the issue today in my thinking re. the issue of aether is a definition of the “terms” for the idea of “aether”. In giving the ancients the benefit of the doubt, I would suggest "aether" is a concept of empty space that conveys light, and here I am thinking about light as "time" associated to space.
(4) Do EGWs affect the size of a solid object (Einsteinians say no)
a solid object does change size but that change is very small
I have alluded to the fact that the idea of the ancients re. aether is another way of regarding time and space as one.Take yourself back to the definition of the aether, beyond the atmosphere of this planet.....all one has is light and space.The question is "how" light and space organise themselves.Using the term "aether" today is a nice way to bring to bear ancient sciences, yet the time line of that vernacular needs to be addressed, implemented. I think that's what you're trying to do, which is good.
I have alluded to the fact that the idea of the ancients re. aether is another way of regarding time and space as one.
Quote from: opportunity on 12/11/2018 07:15:50I have alluded to the fact that the idea of the ancients re. aether is another way of regarding time and space as one.The luminiferous ether ( to give it the full name) is not that ancient an idea.It wasn't "needed" until someone proposed the wave nature of light.
i think that a wave is (1) sinusoidal (2) going from plus to minus (3) equally & (4) repeating. ..........But praps i am wrong, ie praps a pulse is more correctly something that is either zero for a while then a fixed non-zero value for a while, etc, ie step pattern.
I dont understand much of physics, but i know a few buzzwords & sayings.
Yes -- that is IAAAD -- like i said.
Yes. The problem is "aether" as modern scientific syntax. It's not.As I said, someone who read my work said that my work was therefore in favour of "aether". I've never consider the idea of "aether". That has not been my schooling. It's semantics. It's like saying someone has had a big meal yet they are in fact pregnant. So much more can be going on. There are symptoms and signs in physical reality, yet like Medicine, there can be so much more going on.