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: Huang on 17 Dec 2009 08:31 On Dec 16, 12:32 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 16, 12:05 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Dec 16, 11:46 am, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > On Dec 16, 9:10 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >< Since we are talking about the substance of space, > > > > > please answer my question: 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"? > > > > glird > > > Yes, I think matter is TOTALLY uncompressed when it is uncompressed. > > > But that is not the main issue here. It may be the main issue for you, > > but I think it loses the bigger picture. > > > 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). > > > I think all that is needed is the property of the aether to not be at > > rest when displaced and the more displaced the aether is from its > > state of rest the more pressure it exerts back towards its 'place of > > rest'. > > > Take for example the Sun. Let's say the Sun does not exist for a > > second and there is aether where the Sun 'should be'. Now we put the > > Sun back into its location in three dimensional space. The matter > > which is the Sun is displacing the aether which would otherwise exist > > where the Sun is. There is aether between the nuclei of the atoms > > which is the matter which is the Sun, but the aether which would exist > > where the nuclei has been displaced and this aether displaces the > > neighboring aether, which displaces the neighboring aether, and so on. > > > Eventually the aether is displaced which exists outside of the matter > > which is the Sun. This is the 'most displaced' aether. This 'most > > displaced' aether displaces the neighboring aether, which is slightly > > less displaced, which displaces the neighboring aether, which is > > slightly less displaced, and so on... > > > What you refer to as the 'density' of the uncompressed matter > > (aether), is better described as the pressure exerted back towards the > > matter which is displacing the aether. The more displaced the aether > > is from its 'rest position' the more pressure it exerts back towards > > its 'rest position'. > > > There is no need to add the property of 'density' to the state of the > > displaced uncompressed matter (aether). > > Should have ended with: > > At this time, there is no need to add the property of 'density' to the > state of the displaced uncompressed matter (aether).- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Im still not understanding your views. Look - you have an interfence pattern. As soon as you ask "which way" the particle went the interference pattern disappears. How does knowing or not knowing which way information ........how does that cause the interference to disappear ? What if you did the same experiment with sound waves or golf balls. Do you think you could reproduce that same effect ? Interference patterns simply disappearing ?
From: mpc755 on 17 Dec 2009 08:42 On Dec 17, 8:31 am, Huang <huangxienc...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Dec 16, 12:32 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 16, 12:05 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Dec 16, 11:46 am, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 16, 9:10 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >< Since we are talking about the substance of space, > > > > > > please answer my question: 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"? > > > > > glird > > > > Yes, I think matter is TOTALLY uncompressed when it is uncompressed. > > > > But that is not the main issue here. It may be the main issue for you, > > > but I think it loses the bigger picture. > > > > 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). > > > > I think all that is needed is the property of the aether to not be at > > > rest when displaced and the more displaced the aether is from its > > > state of rest the more pressure it exerts back towards its 'place of > > > rest'. > > > > Take for example the Sun. Let's say the Sun does not exist for a > > > second and there is aether where the Sun 'should be'. Now we put the > > > Sun back into its location in three dimensional space. The matter > > > which is the Sun is displacing the aether which would otherwise exist > > > where the Sun is. There is aether between the nuclei of the atoms > > > which is the matter which is the Sun, but the aether which would exist > > > where the nuclei has been displaced and this aether displaces the > > > neighboring aether, which displaces the neighboring aether, and so on.. > > > > Eventually the aether is displaced which exists outside of the matter > > > which is the Sun. This is the 'most displaced' aether. This 'most > > > displaced' aether displaces the neighboring aether, which is slightly > > > less displaced, which displaces the neighboring aether, which is > > > slightly less displaced, and so on... > > > > What you refer to as the 'density' of the uncompressed matter > > > (aether), is better described as the pressure exerted back towards the > > > matter which is displacing the aether. The more displaced the aether > > > is from its 'rest position' the more pressure it exerts back towards > > > its 'rest position'. > > > > There is no need to add the property of 'density' to the state of the > > > displaced uncompressed matter (aether). > > > Should have ended with: > > > At this time, there is no need to add the property of 'density' to the > > state of the displaced uncompressed matter (aether).- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Im still not understanding your views. > > Look - you have an interfence pattern. As soon as you ask "which way" > the particle went the interference pattern disappears. How does > knowing or not knowing which way information ........how does that > cause the interference to disappear ? > > What if you did the same experiment with sound waves or golf balls. Do > you think you could reproduce that same effect ? Interference patterns > simply disappearing ? Do you understand what 'asking "which way"' means? It means physically detecting the particle. When you physically detect the particle you destroy the cohesion the particle has with its displacement wave. You have a boat and its bow wave. The bow wave enters and exits both slits. The bow wave exiting the slit the boat does not is going to knock the boat off course. If, while the boat is in the slit, you block the exit to the other slit, the bow wave will not exit the other slit and the direction the boat is traveling will not be altered. Yes, the experiment can be performed with other particles and objects in other mediums besides the aether. That is what the whole boat analogy is about. Now, it will be difficult for the boat to create an interference pattern due to friction, but there will definitely be different result if you allow the bow wave to exit both slits then if you place buoys at the exits to physically 'ask "which way"'.
From: mpc755 on 17 Dec 2009 08:45 On Dec 17, 8:42 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 17, 8:31 am, Huang <huangxienc...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 16, 12:32 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Dec 16, 12:05 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 16, 11:46 am, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Dec 16, 9:10 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > >< Since we are talking about the substance of space, > > > > > > > please answer my question: 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"? > > > > > > glird > > > > > Yes, I think matter is TOTALLY uncompressed when it is uncompressed.. > > > > > But that is not the main issue here. It may be the main issue for you, > > > > but I think it loses the bigger picture. > > > > > 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). > > > > > I think all that is needed is the property of the aether to not be at > > > > rest when displaced and the more displaced the aether is from its > > > > state of rest the more pressure it exerts back towards its 'place of > > > > rest'. > > > > > Take for example the Sun. Let's say the Sun does not exist for a > > > > second and there is aether where the Sun 'should be'. Now we put the > > > > Sun back into its location in three dimensional space. The matter > > > > which is the Sun is displacing the aether which would otherwise exist > > > > where the Sun is. There is aether between the nuclei of the atoms > > > > which is the matter which is the Sun, but the aether which would exist > > > > where the nuclei has been displaced and this aether displaces the > > > > neighboring aether, which displaces the neighboring aether, and so on. > > > > > Eventually the aether is displaced which exists outside of the matter > > > > which is the Sun. This is the 'most displaced' aether. This 'most > > > > displaced' aether displaces the neighboring aether, which is slightly > > > > less displaced, which displaces the neighboring aether, which is > > > > slightly less displaced, and so on... > > > > > What you refer to as the 'density' of the uncompressed matter > > > > (aether), is better described as the pressure exerted back towards the > > > > matter which is displacing the aether. The more displaced the aether > > > > is from its 'rest position' the more pressure it exerts back towards > > > > its 'rest position'. > > > > > There is no need to add the property of 'density' to the state of the > > > > displaced uncompressed matter (aether). > > > > Should have ended with: > > > > At this time, there is no need to add the property of 'density' to the > > > state of the displaced uncompressed matter (aether).- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Im still not understanding your views. > > > Look - you have an interfence pattern. As soon as you ask "which way" > > the particle went the interference pattern disappears. How does > > knowing or not knowing which way information ........how does that > > cause the interference to disappear ? > > > What if you did the same experiment with sound waves or golf balls. Do > > you think you could reproduce that same effect ? Interference patterns > > simply disappearing ? > > Do you understand what 'asking "which way"' means? > > It means physically detecting the particle. > > When you physically detect the particle you destroy the cohesion the > particle has with its displacement wave. > > You have a boat and its bow wave. The bow wave enters and exits both > slits. The bow wave exiting the slit the boat does not [go through] > is going to knock the boat off course. > > If, while the boat is in the slit, you block the exit to the other > slit, the bow wave will not exit the other slit and the direction the > boat is traveling will not be altered. > > Yes, the experiment can be performed with other particles and objects > in other mediums besides the aether. That is what the whole boat > analogy is about. Now, it will be difficult for the boat to create an > interference pattern due to friction, but there will definitely be > different result if you allow the bow wave to exit both slits then if > you place buoys at the exits to physically 'ask "which way"'. Correction: The bow wave exiting the slit the boat does not [go through] is going to knock the boat off course.
From: glird on 17 Dec 2009 13:16 On Dec 16, 12:05 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> 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. But that is not the main issue here. It may be the main issue for you, but I think it loses the bigger picture. > 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). I think all that is needed is the property of the aether to not be at rest when displaced and the more displaced the aether is from its state of rest the more pressure it exerts back towards its 'place of rest'. > Evidently you believe that 1 matter is TOTALLY uncompressed when it is uncompressed; 2 the property of 'density' does not apply to uncompressed matter (aether); and 3 all that is needed is the property of the aether to not be at rest when displaced and the more displaced the aether is from its state of rest the more pressure it exerts back towards its 'place of rest'. The following questions are relevant. How can the aether be compressible if its density is unchanged? WHY is the speed em waves travel in the aether slower when a few atoms are inserted into a space filled with aether? WHY does displaced aether exert an increasingly strong counter- pressure the more it is displaced? The main issue here is this: We seem to agree that the aether is the very same matter as any other states or forms of ordinary matter. Therefore, to me, there is no need to call it by two different names; "aether" when uncompressed in space, "matter" when in particles. It is "matter" in both places. Given that, then the only reason to retain the word "aether" (or "ether") is to distinguish between a continuous field of matter as compared to particles of matter that are discontinuous relative to each other. Accordingly I defined "ether" as denoting "the continuity aspect of a material field WHETHER OR NOT particles are part of that continuum". For example, if a radio wave travels through outer space and enters the atmosphere of Earth and then travels through a series of icebergs, the ether was its conducting medium in all those places even though the atoms of air are discontinuous RELATIVE TO EACH OTHER and so are the icebergs. Please bear with me, MPC, as I ask you some {misleadingly} "simple" questions. (It's for the sake of interested people who may be following our discussion.) 1. Without using the word "density", how do you define the quantity of aether per unit volume? 2. How do you measure a quantity of aether? 3. How do you measure a quantity of matter? glird
From: mpc755 on 17 Dec 2009 13:35
On Dec 17, 1:16 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > On Dec 16, 12:05 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> 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. > But that is not the main issue here. It may be the main issue for > you, but I think it loses the bigger picture. > > > 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). > I think all that is needed is the property of the aether to not be > at rest when displaced and the more displaced the aether is from its > state of rest the more pressure it exerts back towards its 'place of > rest'. > > > Evidently you believe that > 1 matter is TOTALLY uncompressed when it is uncompressed; > 2 the property of 'density' does not apply to uncompressed matter > (aether); and > 3 all that is needed is the property of the aether to not be at rest > when displaced and the more displaced the aether is from its state of > rest the more pressure it exerts back towards its 'place of rest'. > The following questions are relevant. > How can the aether be compressible if its density is unchanged? 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. > WHY is the speed em waves travel in the aether slower when a few > atoms are inserted into a space filled with aether? Because the aether is no longer at its rest state, it has been displaced by the nuclei which are the atoms. The aether exerts a pressure back towards the nuclei. Also, the light waves have to deal with the atoms themselves. This seems similar to asking why does light travel slower through water than it does through a vacuum. > WHY does displaced aether exert an increasingly strong counter- > pressure the more it is displaced? > Because it is further away from its rest state. The more the aether is displaced from its rest state the more energy is required to displace the aether the more the aether pushes back. The aether is an elastic medium. The more you stretch an elastic, the more energy the elastic 'pushes back' in an attempt to return to a state of rest. > The main issue here is this: We seem to agree that the aether is the > very same matter as any other states or forms of ordinary matter. > Therefore, to me, there is no need to call it by two different names; > "aether" when uncompressed in space, "matter" when in particles. It is > "matter" in both places. What do you call the different states of water? Do you use the helper terms, solid, liquid, and gas, and do you also use the helper term ice? When you are making someone a drink, do you ask them if they would like ice, or do you ask them if they would like 'solid water'? > Given that, then the only reason to retain the word "aether" (or > "ether") is to distinguish between a continuous field of matter as > compared to particles of matter that are discontinuous relative to > each other. > Accordingly I defined "ether" as denoting "the continuity aspect of > a material field WHETHER OR NOT particles are part of that > continuum". For example, if a radio wave travels through outer space > and enters the atmosphere of Earth and then travels through a series > of icebergs, the ether was its conducting medium in all those places > even though the atoms of air are discontinuous RELATIVE TO EACH OTHER > and so are the icebergs. > You used the term 'icebergs'. Why didn't you call them 'solid frozen water which exists in water and was the reason the Titanic sunk'? I use the term aether to describe the substance of space. Yes, I know, then I have to describe the substance of space as being matter which is uncompressed, and on, and on, it goes. I know you have a hangup about the term 'aether' and it would be helpful if you could just get over it. > Please bear with me, MPC, as I ask you some {misleadingly} "simple" > questions. (It's for the sake of interested people who may be > following our discussion.) > > 1. Without using the word "density", how do you define the quantity of > aether per unit volume? > 2. How do you measure a quantity of aether? A=Mc^2. > 3. How do you measure a quantity of matter? > The quantity of matter is determined by the amount of displaced aether. I know this is not what you are looking for but the amount of aether matter displaces is mass. |