0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

"This medium, called also the aether, has mass and is populated by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it"

"Wave particle duality is described as the compound system of point particle plus accompanying wave (in the æther)."

Among such models are vector-tensor theories with preferred direction established at every point of spacetime by a fixed-norm vector field. The dynamical vector field defined in this way is referred to as the aether. In this work, we study plane wave metrics in such a theory ... The field equations reduce to two coupled scalar field equations and one of the scalar fields represents the massive spin-0 aether field.

Just as soon as you answer my very simple question. You repeatedly assert that the aether has mass, and I ask you "how much". You say it supports waves, and I ask you for its elastic modulus.

Since the ether is probably a superfluid it would make more sense to find its bulk modulus rather than the elastic modulus. I suspect the people studying superfluid vacuum theory would have decent information on this. Or, since the folks studying condensed matter have found transmission of transverse waves in their superfluid helium they may also have respective models of the properties you seek.

"Superfluid dark matter is reminiscent of the aether and modeling the universe using superfluid aether is compatible."

We speculate that the universe may be filled with a visco-elastic continuum which may be called aether. Thus, the Maxwell’s equations in vacuum are derived by methods of continuum mechanics based on a continuum mechanical model of vacuum and a singularity model of electric charges.

We show that the linearized equations of the incompressible elastic medium admit a ‘Maxwell form’ in which the shear component of the stress vector plays the role of the electric field, and the vorticity plays the role of the magnetic field. Conversely, the set of dynamic Maxwell equations are strict mathematical corollaries from the governing equations of the incompressible elastic medium. This suggests that the nature of ‘electromagnetic field’ may actually be related to an elastic continuous medium

In this article we propose to add stress-energy tensor to the Einstein equations, assuming that the matter-energy and the metric space-time is nothing but a continuous medium with some elastic properties. We first give a general expression of the stress tensor which is linearly related to the strain tensor. Then, we give the particular expression of the stress tensor for a spatially homnogeneous and isotropic cosmological medium. After that we derive the modified Friedmann equations. In first approximation, we end up with the usual term Λgμν , where the cosmological constant Λ=Kε is related with the bulk modulus K and the relative variation of volume (dilatation). Then we derive corrections to the standard model in second approximation, which depend on these two new parameters.

Since the ether is probably a superfluid it would make more sense to find its bulk modulus rather than the elastic modulus.

OK, let's have it. Can't be difficult to calculate if you know the density, which SJ claims, and the speed of light, which we all know.

We present an elastic constitutive model of General Relativity where we identify the vacuum of three-dimensional space with a Cosmic Fabric embedded in four-dimensional spacetime and having a small thickness along the time dimension. We show a correspondence between the gravitational phenomena described by General Relativity and the kinematic and kinetic properties of the Cosmic Fabric. We propose, in agreement with modern cosmological observations (Collier, 2012; Perlmutter et al., 1999; Riess et al., 1998) and with theoretical results from Quantum Field Theory (Rugh and Zinkernagel, 2002), that the space vacuum is really not a vacuum in the purest sense but is a Cosmic Fabric that has energy density and as such mass density. We further propose that the Cosmic Fabric deforms due to matter in space, which acts as inclusions, in a manner analogous to the deformation of a conventional thin plate (Efrati et al., 2008). By introducing a constitutive model for General Relativity, we lay the groundwork for subsequently applying Solid Mechanics concepts to Cosmology. In particular, we show that strain along the time dimension manifests as a gravitational potential and contraction along the time dimension as gravitational time dilation. By identifying the action integral based on the elastic energy density of the Cosmic Fabric with the Hilbert-Einstein action integral, we derive an expression for the Cosmic Fabric's elastic modulus in terms of its thickness. Assuming a thickness about a Planck's length, we calculate the elastic modulus and density to be about 10113Nm−2, and 1096kgm−3, respectively.

Consider the use of the term "water" for the complex molecule of H2O. It is an ancient term which at one time was considered an element. Except that today we know that it is not an element, but rather it consists of a molecule composed of two hydrogen atoms and an oxygen atom. In its liquid form it can contain ions and sometimes other impurities.... I can go on, but my point is that we should be using its more modern name: "Dihydrogen Monoxide", instead of the older more taboo term "water" so that people don't confuse it with its ancient elemental form.Things tend to follow a cycle of nonsense when you introduce demagoguery into the path of people searching for answers.

Thank you. Using those figures we can calculate the speed of light as 3.04 meters/second, only a factor of 100,000,000 too low. And the density of 1096 kg/cubic meter is slightly greater than that of water, as against the measured value of zero.I think that ends this correspondence.

In the above expressions, ℏ is the reduced Planck constant, 𝐺 is the gravitational constant, and 𝑐 is the speed of light. The computation of the density 𝜌 of the Cosmic Fabric uses the formula for the shear wave speed 𝑐 = √𝜇⁄𝜌 and the fact that shear waves in the Fabric propagate at the speed of light (see §4.6).

SJThe luminiferous aether that Maxwell knew was a theoretical nonrelativistic aether, it was defined and described as such. The expected light to behave in the same way as sound behaves in air, hence the controversy at the time. That was the reason for Michelson Morley experiment, to detect a change in the speed of light due to the motion of an observer through the aether.https://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/philosop/ether.htm

Robert B. Laughlin, Nobel Laureate in Physics, endowed chair in physics, Stanford University, had this to say about ether in contemporary theoretical physics:The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo.

"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.

Quote from: arcmetal on 08/05/2016 19:40:01Consider the use of the term "water" for the complex molecule of H2O. It is an ancient term which at one time was considered an element. Except that today we know that it is not an element, but rather it consists of a molecule composed of two hydrogen atoms and an oxygen atom. In its liquid form it can contain ions and sometimes other impurities.... I can go on, but my point is that we should be using its more modern name: "Dihydrogen Monoxide", instead of the older more taboo term "water" so that people don't confuse it with its ancient elemental form.Things tend to follow a cycle of nonsense when you introduce demagoguery into the path of people searching for answers.Ok, we are getting close to understanding this naming issue. I did explain why this is so, but perhaps it was not clear enough. I'll give another try.I agree, what you call a medium doesn't change its properties. However, if you use the same word to describe mediums with different properties you create confusion.

I am very happy to use the ancient term water to describe the medium H2O, but I refuse to reuse it to describe H2SO4.Tools and weapons used to be made of bronze, today we use high speed steel, I refuse to use the ancient term for a tool medium for HSS. They are different.

If you must use the word aether you have to differentiate them. You could call one luminiferous aether and the other vacuum aether, or even better embed the properties in the name eg nonrelativistic aether and relativistic aether. Then I personally would have no problem with that, but others might say that it could still cause confusion.

SJThe luminiferous aether that Maxwell knew was a theoretical nonrelativistic aether, it was defined and described as such. The expected light to behave in the same way as sound behaves in air, hence the controversy at the time. That was the reason for Michelson Morley experiment, to detect a change in the speed of light due to the motion of an observer through the aether.

Quote from: arcmetal on 09/05/2016 01:16:24Since the ether is probably a superfluid it would make more sense to find its bulk modulus rather than the elastic modulus. OK, let's have it. Can't be difficult to calculate if you know the density, which SJ claims, and the speed of light, which we all know.