Prev: Quantum Gravity 357.91: Croatia Shows That Probability of Vacuum Energy Density is More Important than its Vacuum Expectation Value (VEV) of the Hamiltonian Density, in line with Probable Causation/Influence (PI)
Next: Hubble Views Saturn's Northern/Southern Lights
From: Paul Stowe on 7 Mar 2010 22:28
On Mar 7, 7:20 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote:
> "Paul Stowe" <theaether...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:f0ae8888-de0b-4d93-862b-9b1d2cd005f3(a)k6g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 7, 7:04 pm, Paul Stowe <theaether...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Mar 7, 6:52 pm, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> > > LET is as possibly valid as SR .. Neither is refuted experimentally.
> >> > > I
> >> > > just don't think it is the correct physical explanation.  LET is not
> >> > > compatible AFAIK with GR .. so is a bit of a dead end .. and has the
> >> > > assumption of an undetectableaetherwith properties that don't make
> >> > > sense.
>
> >> > The experimental support for a fixed ether in SR is comparable to the
> >> > experimental support for unicorns in zoology. Lots of luck proving
> >> > either
> >> > exists.
>
> >> What is a 'fixed ether'?
>
> >> Paul Stowe
>
> > Oh, and BTW, please derive the physical basis of the LTE within the
> > framework of SR.
>
> LTE?

Lorentz Transform Equation => Sqrt(1 - [v/c]^2)

Paul Stowe
From: BURT on 7 Mar 2010 22:37
On Mar 7, 7:04 pm, Paul Stowe <theaether...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 7, 6:52 pm, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au>
> wrote:
>
> > > LET is as possibly valid as SR .. Neither is refuted experimentally.  I
> > > just don't think it is the correct physical explanation.  LET is not
> > > compatible AFAIK with GR .. so is a bit of a dead end .. and has the
> > > assumption of an undetectableaetherwith properties that don't make
> > > sense.
>
> > The experimental support for a fixed ether in SR is comparable to the
> > experimental support for unicorns in zoology. Lots of luck proving either
> > exists.
>
> What is a 'fixed ether'?
>
> Paul Stowe

Its the space frame and its aether.

Mitch Raemsch; changing position is the element of aether creating
motion in its space
From: Paul Stowe on 7 Mar 2010 22:44
On Mar 7, 7:37 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 7, 7:04 pm, Paul Stowe <theaether...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 7, 6:52 pm, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au>
> > wrote:
>
> > > > LET is as possibly valid as SR .. Neither is refuted experimentally..  I
> > > > just don't think it is the correct physical explanation.  LET is not
> > > > compatible AFAIK with GR .. so is a bit of a dead end .. and has the
> > > > assumption of an undetectableaetherwith properties that don't make
> > > > sense.
>
> > > The experimental support for a fixed ether in SR is comparable to the
> > > experimental support for unicorns in zoology. Lots of luck proving either
> > > exists.
>
> > What is a 'fixed ether'?
>
> > Paul Stowe
>
> Its the space frame and itsaether.
>
> Mitch Raemsch; changing position is the element ofaethercreating
> motion in its space

Well it's no more 'fixed' that the atmosphere is around us. And, just
like it, c varies with position and conditions which, of course, is
the real reason the SR is only special for local regions...

Paul Stowe
From: FrediFizzx on 7 Mar 2010 22:48
"Inertial" <relatively(a)rest.com> wrote in message
news:4b945dcc$0$8789$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com...

> LET is as possibly valid as SR .. Neither is refuted experimentally.
> I just don't think it is the correct physical explanation. LET is not
> compatible AFAIK with GR .. so is a bit of a dead end .. and has the
> assumption of an undetectable aether with properties that don't make
> sense.

http://www.ilja-schmelzer.de/papers/glet.pdf "A GENERALIZATION OF THE
LORENTZ ETHER TO GRAVITY
WITH GENERAL-RELATIVISTIC LIMIT"



From: Peter Webb on 7 Mar 2010 23:10

"Paul Stowe" <theaetherist(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:720fa6a7-6744-4bf7-85fe-6050215ee277(a)k5g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 7, 6:52 pm, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au>
wrote:
> > LET is as possibly valid as SR .. Neither is refuted experimentally. I
> > just don't think it is the correct physical explanation. LET is not
> > compatible AFAIK with GR .. so is a bit of a dead end .. and has the
> > assumption of an undetectableaetherwith properties that don't make
> > sense.
>
> The experimental support for a fixed ether in SR is comparable to the
> experimental support for unicorns in zoology. Lots of luck proving either
> exists.

What is a 'fixed ether'?

_______________________
Non-existent.




First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207
Prev: Quantum Gravity 357.91: Croatia Shows That Probability of Vacuum Energy Density is More Important than its Vacuum Expectation Value (VEV) of the Hamiltonian Density, in line with Probable Causation/Influence (PI)
Next: Hubble Views Saturn's Northern/Southern Lights