0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
OK, fair enough, that I rescind.Which leaves me uncomfortable with 1)"Matter evaporates into aether."Einstein was talking about energy loss through radiation in the paper you quoted. So why do you need this bit of the theory? Is the displaced dark matter in halos not heavy enough that you need to generate more
2) The expansion of the universe must be resulting in a massive creation of energy as more massive aether?
3) On the scale of galaxies I don't think quantum effects would not apply due to de-coherence (the super-fluid opener was just an analogy, right). So what is causing the displacement between matter and dark matter which don't interact in any known way except (attractive) gravity?
4) "Aether is not at rest when displaced. Displaced aether exerts force towards matter. " - seems like there needs to be a theoretical mechanism by which displaced aether suddenly exerts gravity, but undisturbed aether distributes itself evenly throughout the universe?
1) so is matter "able to change into" aether or is it "continuously changing into aether everywhere throughout the universe" the word "evaporate" leads me to think you are talking about all matter having some kind of half-life.
3)OK, it's frictionless, so it just gets pushed out of the way without any work being done. But there must be a force doing the pushing, even so.
4) The gravitational attraction between two galaxies in orbit is stronger because of dark matter. How can aether displaced by one galaxy result in increased gravitational attraction towards a different galaxy (like its binary counterpart)?
So the aether act with a pressure?
Frames of reference and inertial frames?