Aether Displacement Rebuttal
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: CERN is your potential killer. I’ll send my last 100 baxes to that CERN worker, who will destroy the LHC.
Next: Confirm or deny
From: glird on 23 Dec 2009 11:53 On Dec 13, 11:14 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: On Dec 23 mpc wrote: > >< I have tried to avoid it up to now, but since the faster an object moves with respect to the aether, the more aether pressure there is exerted on the object, it looks like the contraction is physical. > Why avoid that true statement? >< The density of the aether itself has not changed. The density of the stuff occupying three dimensional space where the stuff consists of H2O molecules and aether is denser.> Although the second sentence is correct, we disagree on the first one. Let's discuss it. You say that the aether presses back when displaced. If it remains uncondensed, so it density remains constant thus need not be considered, then how can even an atom's worth of its volume be displaced without displacing ALL the aether in the rest of the universe? If you think it DOES, but by such trifling amounts per unit distance thus per expanding volume, then how do you explain what happens when there are 10^16 atoms per c.c. even in a vacuum? More later. {My wife is impatiently waiting for me to take her shopping.} glird
From: glird on 22 Dec 2009 17:23 On Dec 17, 1:35 pm, mpc755 wrote: > On Dec 17, 1:16 pm, glird wrote: > > On Dec 16, 12:05 pm, mpc755 wrote: ><< On Dec 16, 11:46 am, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: glird: ><<<< Do you consider "the substance of space" compressible or incompressible? If the former, do you think it is TOTALLY uncompressed when in space, as compared to when it's in "matter"? > mpc: ><<< Yes, I think matter is TOTALLY uncompressed when it is uncompressed. > ... > << I asked TWO questions and you answered the second directly but the first only implicitly.> mpc: ><Properties should not be added to matter, or uncompressed matter (aether), unless absolutely necessary and I do not see a requirement for there to be the property of 'density' applied to uncompressed matter (aether). > .... glird: Evidently you believe that the property of 'density' does not apply to uncompressed matter (aether) ... How can the aether be compressible if its density is unchanged? > mpc: Because matter has two states. It has its uncompressed state (aether) and its compressed state. When we discuss the states of water, we discuss solid, liquid, and gas. We do not discuss the 'density' of the water between it being a solid or a liquid. Water is one or the other. > The reason that ice floats in water is because the density of ice is less than that of water. > > WHY is the speed em waves travel in the aether slower when a few atoms are inserted into a space filled with aether? > > ... This seems similar to asking why does >light travel slower through water than it >does through a vacuum. Because the DENSITY of water is much more than that of a vacuum full of "uncompressed matter" that you call "aether". glird
From: Inertial on 22 Dec 2009 18:54 "glird" <glird(a)aol.com> wrote in message news:d2d85f90-31be-46fe-bb3b-b11363d408fb(a)j4g2000yqe.googlegroups.com... > On Dec 13, 10:22 pm, BURT wrote: > >> Length contraction would flatten the atom. >> Mitch Raemsch > > As in "Our assumption amounts to saying that in an electrostatic > system Z, moving with a velocity v, all electrons {and atoms} are > flattened ellipsoids with their smaller axis in the direction of > motion." H. A. lorentz Yeup .. that's what happens in LET. Atoms get physically squashed depending on their absolute speed (ie speed in the aether) In SR there is no flattening of atoms (and there is no absolute speed) .. however, relatively moving observers will measure them as being 'flatter' using their synchronized clocks and rulers.
From: mpc755 on 23 Dec 2009 12:12 On Dec 23, 11:53 am, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > On Dec 13, 11:14 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 23 mpc wrote: > > >< I have tried to avoid it up to now, but since the faster an object > > moves with respect to the aether, the more aether pressure there is > exerted on the object, it looks like the contraction is physical. > > > Why avoid that true statement? > I was hoping Lorentz was incorrect. Just like time is a concept and doesn't 'change' because a clock 'ticks' slower, I was thinking Lorentz might have made the same mistake with length contraction. What I do think Lorentz is incorrect about is the relativity of length contraction. Length contraction is due to the objects speed relative to the aether, not another object. There is the 'famous' carriage in a garage scenario. The carriage is physically being contracted because it is moving with respect to the aether and the faster the carriage moves with respect to the aether the more aether it displaces the more aether there is pushing back against the carriage. When the carriage enters the garage, it will physically fit, but as it slows down it displaces less and less aether and there is continually less aether pressure against the carriage and the carriage physically expands. It doesn't matter if there are Observers watching this occur or not. > >< The density of the aether itself has not changed. The density of > the > stuff occupying three dimensional space where the stuff consists of > H2O molecules and aether is denser.> > > Although the second sentence is correct, we disagree on the first > one. Let's discuss it. > You say that the aether presses back when displaced. If it remains > uncondensed, so it density remains constant thus need not be > considered, then how can even an atom's worth of its volume be > displaced without displacing ALL the aether in the rest of the > universe? > If you think it DOES, but by such trifling amounts per unit distance > thus per expanding volume, then how do you explain what happens when > there are 10^16 atoms per c.c. even in a vacuum? > If I throw a bowling ball into the ocean isn't all of the water in the ocean displaced? If 'density' should be applied to the aether, then so be it. I have seen no compelling reason for it. The main properties associated with the aether are due to its connections with matter, and the main properties associated with the connections with matter are the properties of displacement and entrainment. The main property associated with displaced aether is that it is not at rest. When you put a bowling ball into a tank of water, do you discuss the density of the water or the pressure of the water against the bowling ball? Just like we have moved passed 'aether' vs. 'matter', or at least tabled it for now, I would prefer to do the same with the 'density' of aether. This is what I want to focus on: Light travels at 'c' with respect to the aether. An atomic clock 'ticks' with respect to the aether pressure. The aether pressure associated with the aether displaced by massive objects is gravity. When a double slit experiment is performed with a C-60 molecule the C-60 molecule enters and exits a single slit while the displacement wave the C-60 molecule creates in the aether travels through multiple slits. Einstein's train gedanken performed with any medium at rest with respect to the embankment and the light traveling through the medium travels from A and B to M'. Light travels with respect to the medium. Einstein's train gadenken performed with aether at rest with respect to the embankment and the light traveling through the aether travels from A and B to M'. Light travels with respect to the aether. In the image on the right here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#The_experiment There are physical waves in the aether traveling both the blue and red paths, while a photon 'particle' travels the blue or red path. Where the blue and red paths are combined in the image, the physical waves in the aether create interference which alters the direction the photon 'particle' travels. Once there is general acceptance of the above, we can move on. > More later. {My wife is impatiently waiting for me to take her > shopping.} > > glird
From: Autymn D. C. on 23 Dec 2009 06:21
On Dec 14, 9:08 pm, Huang <huangxienc...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > That is why such a length is not mathematics, and it is not nonsense. > It is on the boundary inbetween these things. It is conjectural. > > You have > Truth, Conjecture, and Nonsense. > > Truth corresponds to mathematics > Conjecture corresponds to the existentially indeterminate > Nonsense corresponds to things which are strictly nonexistent. There is no truth. There is trust and troth, that which is trowed. And there are truthe and sooth. Mathematics don't deal with truthe; theory does. Canonics deal with sooth. A "truth table" is a misnomer by dolts who can't English. > Truth, Conjecture, Nonsense > > Certainty, Uncertainty, Anti-Certainty > > If you think about this it is pretty amazing really............ un- -> de- anti- -> contra- -Aut |