0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
The luminiferous aether was originally proposed as the medium necessary for the propagation of light and other em waves with the analogy to sound waves and other mechanical wave phenomena. Since no proof or disproof of the existence has ever been demonstrated it has no place in real science. Yet it remains a core belief with many who hold what I would call scientific beliefs rather than scientific rationality. When will it be consigned to the dustbin?
I personally use the conservation of zero point energy .
How does your model explain the behavior of light as it is observed from various moving bodies?
How's it different from various aether models? Which one is closer to your model?
Quote from: DarkKnight on 09/12/2022 12:26:03I personally use the conservation of zero point energy . How does your model explain the behavior of light as it is observed from various moving bodies? How's it different from various aether models? Which one is closer to your model?
I observe that Newton suggested an ether
There could be differing schools of thought on such diverse subjects as pink unicorns or flying pigs but they do not belong in science. Aether was a misconceived idea to begin with for which there is zero evidence and debating it's properties is utterly futile. And it's aether and not ether. Ether is a chemical term.
Quote from: paul cotter on 24/10/2022 09:54:51The luminiferous aether was originally proposed as the medium necessary for the propagation of light and other em waves with the analogy to sound waves and other mechanical wave phenomena. Since no proof or disproof of the existence has ever been demonstrated it has no place in real science. Yet it remains a core belief with many who hold what I would call scientific beliefs rather than scientific rationality. When will it be consigned to the dustbin? If you really want to answer the question, you need to recognize that there are many schools of thought trying to describe the behavior of aether. They need to be addressed separately. They even argue with one another.There's a hypothesis of universal static ether. Some think that it's entrained by the sun. Some others think that it's entrained by the earth. There's also difference thoughts whether the entrainment is total or partial. Here's an article about it. Is the aether entrained by the motion of celestial body?https://arxiv.org/abs/1204.1885QuoteEinstein himself around 1916 changed his mind as regards the hypothesis of the aether. In a lecture given at the University of Leiden he declared [13]:According to the general theory of relativity, space without aether is unthinkable for, in such space,there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards ofspace and time (measuring rods and clocks). A proof of the undeniable existence of the aether was given in ref [14]. Thus, the question to be answered today is not to verify its existence, but rather to specify its nature and its properties, and, in the first place, to determine if it is entrained (or not) by the translational motion of celestial bodies due to gravitation.
Einstein himself around 1916 changed his mind as regards the hypothesis of the aether. In a lecture given at the University of Leiden he declared [13]:According to the general theory of relativity, space without aether is unthinkable for, in such space,there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards ofspace and time (measuring rods and clocks). A proof of the undeniable existence of the aether was given in ref [14]. Thus, the question to be answered today is not to verify its existence, but rather to specify its nature and its properties, and, in the first place, to determine if it is entrained (or not) by the translational motion of celestial bodies due to gravitation.
Do you think that Einstein's understanding of light in 1905 is better than 1916?
Are you joking ? All of science still uses different variations of an aether so why wouldn't people just call it an aether ?Higgs used a Higgs field , Einstein used space-time curvature etc .
Higgs used a Higgs field , Einstein used space-time curvature etc .
Ψ
The essence of good science is to assume nothing.
Quote from: DarkKnight on 09/12/2022 12:26:03Higgs used a Higgs field , Einstein used space-time curvature etc .Neither of which are aether. Aether is supposed to be a substance that acts as a transmission medium for light. We now know that no such thing is necessary.
When we don't know anything about aether, by what proof we can say that there is no aether.
When we don't know anything about aether
Quote from: pasala on 10/12/2022 05:17:18When we don't know anything about aetherIf we no nothing about the aether, then it is simply a meaningless word.I can speculate about a thing I will call "worteni". It is important to physics, but unfortunately we don't know anything about it.