21

New Theories / Re: How physics came to wrongly discard the ether

« on: 17/05/2016 18:14:15 »

The Michelson-Morley experiment looked for an absolutely stationary space the Earth moved through. The aether is not an absolutely stationary space. The aether is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.

'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 particles which can be individually tracked through time. 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.

22

New Theories / Re: What makes the idea of an aether so attractive?

« on: 17/05/2016 17:43:22 »

The speed of light is the same in all references. On the other hand, the wavelength and frequency of light can change between references; red and blue shift.

Since the speed of a wave is dependent on the density of the medium, while the speed of light does not change with changes in space-time, then the aether needs to be something different from space-time. If the medium was connected to space-time, the speed of light would change with reference, since the density of the aether would change as time and distance changes the density of the medium. This is not observed.

For light to always propagate at the same speed, through an aether, that aether would need to be something that is not impacted by relativity, since the speed within the medium always holds constant regardless of relative reference. The one thing that comes to mind is the aether has a speed of light reference; same in all references. Photons are not really moving in the aether, since the aether is also at the speed of light.

Everything is with respect to the state of the aether in which it exists, including the rate at which the atomic clocks tick which are used to determine the speed of light.

A "relativistic aether" is one in which everything is relative to it. That is why the speed of light is always determined to be 'c'.

23

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Is there any evidence for aether?

« on: 17/05/2016 17:30:47 »

Physics is obviously a hobby horse with this poster! What absolute twaddle to think that a photon interacts with millions of atoms in a plate and that it does so as a wave. Or don't hold your breath a " manifestation of wave/particle duality! Hahaha....... ho ho!

Maybe they don't understand the interference pattern builds up over time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment#/media/File:Double-slit_experiment_results_Tanamura_2.jpg

As the particle exits a single slit it is guided by the interference created by its associated wave in the aether exiting both.

24

New Theories / Re: Does Laughlin's relativistic ether 'stuff' relate GR and QM?

« on: 16/05/2016 17:33:06 »

No.

Assuming Laughlin is correct and that the relativistic ether is 'stuff' and a further assumption that the 'stuff' is what waves in terms of Einstein's gravitational wave and de Broglie's wave-particle duality wave then does this relate general relativity and quantum mechanics?

25

New Theories / Does Laughlin's relativistic ether 'stuff' relate GR and QM?

« on: 16/05/2016 15:55:22 »

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_theories#Quantum_vacuum

Robert B. Laughlin, Nobel Laureate in Physics, endowed chair in physics, Stanford University:
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..

Are Einsteins gravitational wave and de Broglie's wave-particle duality wave both waves in the 'stuff'?

26

New Theories / If Einstein's gravitational wave and de Broglie's wave-particle duality wave ...

« on: 15/05/2016 21:21:47 »

... are both waves in the 'stuff' which fills the space unoccupied by particles of matter then does this relate general relativity and quantum mechanics?

For those incapable of considering the possibility that the space unoccupied by particles of matter consists of 'stuff' there is no reason for you to respond.

27

New Theories / Re: What makes the idea of an aether so attractive?

« on: 15/05/2016 02:01:33 »

Repeating nonsense does not turn it into sense. Why not learn some physics instead of wasting your life peddling outdated nonsense? Or join a church and get paid for it!

Wave-particle duality is a moving particle and it's associated wave in the aether whether you choose to understand it, or not.

28

New Theories / Re: What makes the idea of an aether so attractive?

« on: 15/05/2016 01:05:14 »

In fact the aether turns up in respectable electromagnetics textbooks until the 1950s because it's an easy concept for teaching military technicians, along with the Bohr atom and a few other tricks needed to bring conscripts up to speed for modern warfare. But in this more relaxed arena I think we would do better to avoid the absurdities inherent in both models.

There is evidence of the aether every time a double slit experiment is performed, it's what waves.

Q. Why is the particle always detected traveling through a single 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.

29

New Theories / Re: What if an aether existed ......?

« on: 14/05/2016 23:20:06 »

In space, we do see a sea of photons - it is variously called the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) or Sunlight, depending on its spectrum and source.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background

The CMB is a cosmic background radiation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_background_radiation

Cosmic background radiation is electromagnetic radiation

I am not referring to photons traveling at 'c'. I am referring to the sea of photons which fill 'empty' space analogous to the H2O molecules which fill the oceans.

It is the sea of photons filling 'empty' space which are displaced by the particles of matter the Earth consists of. It is the sea of photons displaced by the Earth pushing back and exerting pressure toward the Earth which is gravity.

30

New Theories / Re: What if an aether existed ......?

« on: 14/05/2016 21:41:36 »

After all these years of trying to figure out what electricity is made of, I am finding this idea of it being photons rather interesting.

One way to conceptualize the aether is to consider it to be a sea of photons which are displaced by the matter.

The Milky Way's halo is lopsided due to the matter in the Milky Way moving through and displacing the sea of photons analogous to a submarine moving through and displacing the water.

What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment, the sea of photons filling 'empty' space.

Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality, both are waves in the sea of photons.

The sea of photons displaced by matter relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.

31

New Theories / Re: What makes the idea of an aether so attractive?

« on: 14/05/2016 21:31:35 »

I have enjoyed reading Einstein's earlier papers.  One can see hints of his thoughts evolving and progressing.

If Einstein had maintained his correct notion that the aether has mass and its state is determined by its connections with the matter we never would have needed the notion of dark matter.

The "missing mass" is the mass of the aether connected to and neighboring the matter which is displaced by the matter.

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.

What is referred to geometrically as curved spacetime physically exists in nature as the state of displacement of the aether.

The aether displaced by the Earth pushing back and exerting pressure toward the Earth is gravity.

The state of displacement of the aether is gravity.

32

New Theories / Re: Does spacetime have mass?

« on: 14/05/2016 20:41:58 »

If it was filled with stuff, it wouldn't be empty.

The space unoccupied by particles of matter has mass.

33

New Theories / Re: Does spacetime have mass?

« on: 13/05/2016 22:40:24 »

''Empty'' space is surely massless....

The 'stuff' which fills 'empty' space has mass.

34

New Theories / Re: Does spacetime have mass?

« on: 13/05/2016 20:13:32 »

Please define stuff

That which physically occupies three dimensional space.

35

New Theories / Re: Does spacetime have mass?

« on: 13/05/2016 12:57:24 »

In Special Relativity, changes in space-time, due to velocity, will generate changes in relativistic mass.

'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.

36

New Theories / Re: Does spacetime have mass?

« on: 13/05/2016 12:49:36 »

This implies that the Earth is orbiting through this spacetime, and pushing this spacetime aside keeps you and the atmosphere fastened to the Earth (what we call "gravity").

But here in the antipodies, I have a problem. If this spacetime is pushing you towards the center of the Earth, then it must be sucking me off the Earth (and sucking away the atmosphere over my head, too).

But when my class did the experiment in high school, we worked out that objects fell with an acceleration of about 10m/s² (with a significant measurement error, as I recall). But pretty much what you would measure other places on the Earth.

So I don't see how pushing spacetime aside can account for gravity... (unless you also believe in a flat Earth?)

The following video represents the state of displacement of the aether.

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.

37

New Theories / Re: Does spacetime have mass?

« on: 13/05/2016 12:46:44 »

Note: Your question is very poorly worded. So bad that its hard for me to understand what you're asking. Can you please reword it for me? Thanks!

Does the 'stuff' that fills 'empty' space have mass?

Yes.

Is it displaced by matter?

Yes.

Is what is referred to geometrically as the curvature of spacetime physically exist in nature as the state of displacement of the 'stuff' which fill 'empty' space?

Yes.

Is the "missing mass" the mass of the 'stuff' which fills 'empty' space connected to and neighboring the matter which is displaced by the matter?

Yes.

Are Einstein's gravitational wave and de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality both waves in the 'stuff' which fills 'empty' space.

Yes.

Does the 'stuff' which fills 'empty' space displaced by matter relate general relativity and quantum mechanics?

Yes.

38

New Theories / Re: What if an aether existed ......?

« on: 13/05/2016 12:44:02 »

The gravitational constant is also involved in a circular calculation with various Planck values. So what? That is simply another indication that general relativity is right.

What is referred to geometrically as curved spacetime physically exists in nature as the state of displacement of the aether.

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.

The aether displaced by the Earth pushing back and exerting pressure toward the Earth is gravity.

The state of displacement of the aether is gravity.

39

New Theories / Re: What if an aether existed ......?

« on: 13/05/2016 12:37:42 »

AND if the speed of light is constant because it propagates through a medium, then a lot of the premises of special relativity and general relativity in particular will no longer hold true.  In the same way the holy grail of Quantum Mechanics , namely the principle of wave/particle duality will be out of the window.

The speed of light is always determined to be 'c' because the aether is relativistic. Meaning, the atomic clocks used to determine the speed of light tick at the rate they do due to the state of the aether in which they exist.

The wave of wave-particle duality is a wave in the aether. In a double slit experiment the particle always travels through a single slit, it is the associated wave in the aether which passes through both.

40

New Theories / Re: What makes the idea of an aether so attractive?

« on: 13/05/2016 12:33:11 »

“What is the reason that Einstein gives for the speed of light being constant?”

Everything is with respect to the state of the aether in which it exists, including the rate at which the atomic clocks tick which are used to determine the speed of light. This is why the speed of light is always determined to be 'c'.