Aether Displacement is the most correct physical unified theory to date
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Anitmatter in Thunderbolts??
Next: Why Pendulum as a clock do not shows, what General Theory of Relativity predicts?
From: BURT on 2 Dec 2009 21:49 On Dec 2, 2:30 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 2, 3:37 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Dec 2, 11:00 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Dec 2, 1:16 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 1, 10:05 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Nov 30, 10:40 am, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 6:01 am, mpc755 wrote: > > > > > > >< glird, > > > > > > The denser the local material is per volume, the stronger the > > > > > > reactive aether pressure will be. > > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > >< The displacement wave the C-60 molecule creates in the aether exists prior to the C-60 molecule entering a slit.> > > > > > > Yes. (The molecule travels far slower than the wave, which travels > > > > > > in air at c.) > > > > > > ><The aether displacement wave created by the C-60 molecule enters available slits. The observed behaviors of a double slit experiment with a C-60 molecule is more a > > > > > > function of the moving C-60 molecule having an associated aether > > > > > > displacement wave and this wave enters available slits than it is the > > > > > > C-60 molecule affecting the material which separates the slits. > > > > > > > Yes; BUT the molecule also affects the material filling the slit and > > > > > > that of the wall. In effect, the wall becomes asymmetrically charged. > > > > > > It is stronger on one side of the slit and the walls than in and on > > > > > > the other. > > > > > > Although that has a negligible affect on subsequent wave systems, it > > > > > > has a measurable affect on the relatively slow moving molecules that > > > > > > subsequently traverse each slit. THAT'S what causes the resulting > > > > > > pattern that appears in such experiments. > > > > > > glird > > > > > > I disagree with the last sentence. The C-60 molecule interacting with > > > > > the single slit could be shown to be incorrect by placing a barrier in > > > > > front of one of the slits. Send the C-60 molecule multiple times > > > > > through the unblocked slit. Then switch which slit is blocked and re- > > > > > execute the test so the C-60 molecule enters and exits the other slit, > > > > > which is now unblocked, multiple times. There will not be an > > > > > interference pattern because the displacement wave was not allowed to > > > > > physically enter and exit the available slits, create interference, > > > > > and alter the direction the C-60 molecule travels. > > > > > > The distance the slits are apart will effect the pattern. > > > > > > The red and blue lines in the image on the right here represents the > > > > > paths the photon wave travels:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#The_experi... > > > > > > The photon wave is physically traveling the available paths and when > > > > > the red and blue paths are combined, interference occurs, altering the > > > > > direction the photon 'particle' travels. This is misinterpreted as > > > > > something is being erased. > > > > > > Something similar is occurring when a C-60 molecule is used in a > > > > > double slit experiment. The displacement wave the C-60 molecule > > > > > creates in the aether physically enters and exits the available slits, > > > > > creating interference, altering the direction the C-60 molecule > > > > > travels. This is functionally the same as a boat and its bow wave.. If > > > > > there is only a single slit the bow wave the boat is creating will not > > > > > greatly alter the direction the boat is traveling upon exiting the > > > > > slit. If there are multiple slits, the bow wave enters and exits the > > > > > multiple slits. The bow waves exiting the slits the boat does not > > > > > travel through will cross out ahead of the boat's path and interfere > > > > > with the bow waves exiting the other slits, including the bow wave > > > > > riding out ahead of and along with the boat through the slit the boat > > > > > travels through, and alter the direction the boat travels. > > > > > You may be right. :-) > > > > > glird > > > > There is no right or wrong. Only correct and incorrect. Right and > > > wrong are final. Correct and incorrect can change as experimental > > > evidence is re-evaluated (like delayed choice experiments better > > > interpreted as physical waves in the aether traveling available > > > paths). > > > > What we need is evidence of physical waves in the aether traveling > > > available paths. > > > > We need a modified version of:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#The_experi... > > > > Where the downgraded mirror-image photons interact in such a way that > > > the aether wave of one photon (not containing the photon 'particle') > > > interacts with the aether wave of the other photon (containing the > > > photon 'particle') and an interference pattern occurs. > > > > What has to happen is the photon 'particle' of one of the photons > > > needs to be detected and the photon 'particle' of the other photon > > > needs not to be detected. The photon aether wave of the detected > > > photon and the photon aether wave (along with the photon 'particle') > > > of the other photon are combined. > > > > An interference pattern should still be created in this scenario. > > > > I know of no way QM could account for this because after the one > > > photon 'particle' is detected, that is it. There is no associated > > > aether wave and the other photon 'particle' has nothing to interfere > > > with so an interference pattern should not be created. > > > > Now of course, since QM is very incorrect, something will be made up > > > about delayed choice or erasers or some other such nonsense. But, this > > > experiment will be more evidence of physical waves in the aether > > > traveling available paths. > > > > Thanks!- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Einstein was the right one about Quantum Mechanics. > > > Mitch Raemsch > > Yes, it is incomplete.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Every theory is incomplete. If you do not see this you are not objective about your own theory. Einstein knew that QM was wrong in many ways. That is what I am refering to. But science had to judge him and they were wrong. Mitch Raemsch
From: mpc755 on 2 Dec 2009 22:10 On Dec 2, 9:49 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Dec 2, 2:30 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 2, 3:37 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Dec 2, 11:00 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 2, 1:16 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Dec 1, 10:05 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 10:40 am, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 6:01 am, mpc755 wrote: > > > > > > > >< glird, > > > > > > > The denser the local material is per volume, the stronger the > > > > > > > reactive aether pressure will be. > > > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > >< The displacement wave the C-60 molecule creates in the aether exists prior to the C-60 molecule entering a slit.> > > > > > > > Yes. (The molecule travels far slower than the wave, which travels > > > > > > > in air at c.) > > > > > > > ><The aether displacement wave created by the C-60 molecule enters available slits. The observed behaviors of a double slit experiment with a C-60 molecule is more a > > > > > > > function of the moving C-60 molecule having an associated aether > > > > > > > displacement wave and this wave enters available slits than it is the > > > > > > > C-60 molecule affecting the material which separates the slits. > > > > > > > > Yes; BUT the molecule also affects the material filling the slit and > > > > > > > that of the wall. In effect, the wall becomes asymmetrically charged. > > > > > > > It is stronger on one side of the slit and the walls than in and on > > > > > > > the other. > > > > > > > Although that has a negligible affect on subsequent wave systems, it > > > > > > > has a measurable affect on the relatively slow moving molecules that > > > > > > > subsequently traverse each slit. THAT'S what causes the resulting > > > > > > > pattern that appears in such experiments. > > > > > > > glird > > > > > > > I disagree with the last sentence. The C-60 molecule interacting with > > > > > > the single slit could be shown to be incorrect by placing a barrier in > > > > > > front of one of the slits. Send the C-60 molecule multiple times > > > > > > through the unblocked slit. Then switch which slit is blocked and re- > > > > > > execute the test so the C-60 molecule enters and exits the other slit, > > > > > > which is now unblocked, multiple times. There will not be an > > > > > > interference pattern because the displacement wave was not allowed to > > > > > > physically enter and exit the available slits, create interference, > > > > > > and alter the direction the C-60 molecule travels. > > > > > > > The distance the slits are apart will effect the pattern. > > > > > > > The red and blue lines in the image on the right here represents the > > > > > > paths the photon wave travels:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#The_experi... > > > > > > > The photon wave is physically traveling the available paths and when > > > > > > the red and blue paths are combined, interference occurs, altering the > > > > > > direction the photon 'particle' travels. This is misinterpreted as > > > > > > something is being erased. > > > > > > > Something similar is occurring when a C-60 molecule is used in a > > > > > > double slit experiment. The displacement wave the C-60 molecule > > > > > > creates in the aether physically enters and exits the available slits, > > > > > > creating interference, altering the direction the C-60 molecule > > > > > > travels. This is functionally the same as a boat and its bow wave. If > > > > > > there is only a single slit the bow wave the boat is creating will not > > > > > > greatly alter the direction the boat is traveling upon exiting the > > > > > > slit. If there are multiple slits, the bow wave enters and exits the > > > > > > multiple slits. The bow waves exiting the slits the boat does not > > > > > > travel through will cross out ahead of the boat's path and interfere > > > > > > with the bow waves exiting the other slits, including the bow wave > > > > > > riding out ahead of and along with the boat through the slit the boat > > > > > > travels through, and alter the direction the boat travels. > > > > > > You may be right. :-) > > > > > > glird > > > > > There is no right or wrong. Only correct and incorrect. Right and > > > > wrong are final. Correct and incorrect can change as experimental > > > > evidence is re-evaluated (like delayed choice experiments better > > > > interpreted as physical waves in the aether traveling available > > > > paths). > > > > > What we need is evidence of physical waves in the aether traveling > > > > available paths. > > > > > We need a modified version of:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#The_experi... > > > > > Where the downgraded mirror-image photons interact in such a way that > > > > the aether wave of one photon (not containing the photon 'particle') > > > > interacts with the aether wave of the other photon (containing the > > > > photon 'particle') and an interference pattern occurs. > > > > > What has to happen is the photon 'particle' of one of the photons > > > > needs to be detected and the photon 'particle' of the other photon > > > > needs not to be detected. The photon aether wave of the detected > > > > photon and the photon aether wave (along with the photon 'particle') > > > > of the other photon are combined. > > > > > An interference pattern should still be created in this scenario. > > > > > I know of no way QM could account for this because after the one > > > > photon 'particle' is detected, that is it. There is no associated > > > > aether wave and the other photon 'particle' has nothing to interfere > > > > with so an interference pattern should not be created. > > > > > Now of course, since QM is very incorrect, something will be made up > > > > about delayed choice or erasers or some other such nonsense. But, this > > > > experiment will be more evidence of physical waves in the aether > > > > traveling available paths. > > > > > Thanks!- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > Einstein was the right one about Quantum Mechanics. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > Yes, it is incomplete.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Every theory is incomplete. If you do not see this you are not > objective about your own theory. > Einstein knew that QM was wrong in many ways. That is what I am > refering to. But science had to judge him and they were wrong. > > Mitch Raemsch I am simply referring to a common interpretation of Einstein's quote: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein "Quantum mechanics is certainly imposing. But an inner voice tells me that it is not yet the real thing. The theory says a lot, but does not really bring us any closer to the secret of the 'old one'. I, at any rate, am convinced that He does not throw dice."
From: BURT on 2 Dec 2009 22:26 On Dec 2, 7:10 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 2, 9:49 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Dec 2, 2:30 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Dec 2, 3:37 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 2, 11:00 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Dec 2, 1:16 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 10:05 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 10:40 am, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 6:01 am, mpc755 wrote: > > > > > > > > >< glird, > > > > > > > > The denser the local material is per volume, the stronger the > > > > > > > > reactive aether pressure will be. > > > > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > > >< The displacement wave the C-60 molecule creates in the aether exists prior to the C-60 molecule entering a slit.> > > > > > > > > Yes. (The molecule travels far slower than the wave, which travels > > > > > > > > in air at c.) > > > > > > > > ><The aether displacement wave created by the C-60 molecule enters available slits. The observed behaviors of a double slit experiment with a C-60 molecule is more a > > > > > > > > function of the moving C-60 molecule having an associated aether > > > > > > > > displacement wave and this wave enters available slits than it is the > > > > > > > > C-60 molecule affecting the material which separates the slits. > > > > > > > > > Yes; BUT the molecule also affects the material filling the slit and > > > > > > > > that of the wall. In effect, the wall becomes asymmetrically charged. > > > > > > > > It is stronger on one side of the slit and the walls than in and on > > > > > > > > the other. > > > > > > > > Although that has a negligible affect on subsequent wave systems, it > > > > > > > > has a measurable affect on the relatively slow moving molecules that > > > > > > > > subsequently traverse each slit. THAT'S what causes the resulting > > > > > > > > pattern that appears in such experiments. > > > > > > > > glird > > > > > > > > I disagree with the last sentence. The C-60 molecule interacting with > > > > > > > the single slit could be shown to be incorrect by placing a barrier in > > > > > > > front of one of the slits. Send the C-60 molecule multiple times > > > > > > > through the unblocked slit. Then switch which slit is blocked and re- > > > > > > > execute the test so the C-60 molecule enters and exits the other slit, > > > > > > > which is now unblocked, multiple times. There will not be an > > > > > > > interference pattern because the displacement wave was not allowed to > > > > > > > physically enter and exit the available slits, create interference, > > > > > > > and alter the direction the C-60 molecule travels. > > > > > > > > The distance the slits are apart will effect the pattern. > > > > > > > > The red and blue lines in the image on the right here represents the > > > > > > > paths the photon wave travels:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#The_experi... > > > > > > > > The photon wave is physically traveling the available paths and when > > > > > > > the red and blue paths are combined, interference occurs, altering the > > > > > > > direction the photon 'particle' travels. This is misinterpreted as > > > > > > > something is being erased. > > > > > > > > Something similar is occurring when a C-60 molecule is used in a > > > > > > > double slit experiment. The displacement wave the C-60 molecule > > > > > > > creates in the aether physically enters and exits the available slits, > > > > > > > creating interference, altering the direction the C-60 molecule > > > > > > > travels. This is functionally the same as a boat and its bow wave. If > > > > > > > there is only a single slit the bow wave the boat is creating will not > > > > > > > greatly alter the direction the boat is traveling upon exiting the > > > > > > > slit. If there are multiple slits, the bow wave enters and exits the > > > > > > > multiple slits. The bow waves exiting the slits the boat does not > > > > > > > travel through will cross out ahead of the boat's path and interfere > > > > > > > with the bow waves exiting the other slits, including the bow wave > > > > > > > riding out ahead of and along with the boat through the slit the boat > > > > > > > travels through, and alter the direction the boat travels. > > > > > > > You may be right. :-) > > > > > > > glird > > > > > > There is no right or wrong. Only correct and incorrect. Right and > > > > > wrong are final. Correct and incorrect can change as experimental > > > > > evidence is re-evaluated (like delayed choice experiments better > > > > > interpreted as physical waves in the aether traveling available > > > > > paths). > > > > > > What we need is evidence of physical waves in the aether traveling > > > > > available paths. > > > > > > We need a modified version of:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#The_experi... > > > > > > Where the downgraded mirror-image photons interact in such a way that > > > > > the aether wave of one photon (not containing the photon 'particle') > > > > > interacts with the aether wave of the other photon (containing the > > > > > photon 'particle') and an interference pattern occurs. > > > > > > What has to happen is the photon 'particle' of one of the photons > > > > > needs to be detected and the photon 'particle' of the other photon > > > > > needs not to be detected. The photon aether wave of the detected > > > > > photon and the photon aether wave (along with the photon 'particle') > > > > > of the other photon are combined. > > > > > > An interference pattern should still be created in this scenario. > > > > > > I know of no way QM could account for this because after the one > > > > > photon 'particle' is detected, that is it. There is no associated > > > > > aether wave and the other photon 'particle' has nothing to interfere > > > > > with so an interference pattern should not be created. > > > > > > Now of course, since QM is very incorrect, something will be made up > > > > > about delayed choice or erasers or some other such nonsense. But, this > > > > > experiment will be more evidence of physical waves in the aether > > > > > traveling available paths. > > > > > > Thanks!- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > Einstein was the right one about Quantum Mechanics. > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > Yes, it is incomplete.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Every theory is incomplete. If you do not see this you are not > > objective about your own theory. > > Einstein knew that QM was wrong in many ways. That is what I am > > refering to. But science had to judge him and they were wrong. > > > Mitch Raemsch > > I am simply referring to a common interpretation of Einstein's quote: > > http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein > > "Quantum mechanics is certainly imposing. But an inner voice tells me > that it is not yet the real thing. The theory says a lot, but does not > really bring us any closer to the secret of the 'old one'. I, at any > rate, am convinced that He does not throw dice."- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Right. But science had to judge. Nobody escapes it. Mitch Raemsch
From: mpc755 on 2 Dec 2009 22:27 On Dec 2, 10:26 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Dec 2, 7:10 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 2, 9:49 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Dec 2, 2:30 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 2, 3:37 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Dec 2, 11:00 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Dec 2, 1:16 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 10:05 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 10:40 am, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 6:01 am, mpc755 wrote: > > > > > > > > > >< glird, > > > > > > > > > The denser the local material is per volume, the stronger the > > > > > > > > > reactive aether pressure will be. > > > > > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > > > >< The displacement wave the C-60 molecule creates in the aether exists prior to the C-60 molecule entering a slit.> > > > > > > > > > Yes. (The molecule travels far slower than the wave, which travels > > > > > > > > > in air at c.) > > > > > > > > > ><The aether displacement wave created by the C-60 molecule enters available slits. The observed behaviors of a double slit experiment with a C-60 molecule is more a > > > > > > > > > function of the moving C-60 molecule having an associated aether > > > > > > > > > displacement wave and this wave enters available slits than it is the > > > > > > > > > C-60 molecule affecting the material which separates the slits. > > > > > > > > > > Yes; BUT the molecule also affects the material filling the slit and > > > > > > > > > that of the wall. In effect, the wall becomes asymmetrically charged. > > > > > > > > > It is stronger on one side of the slit and the walls than in and on > > > > > > > > > the other. > > > > > > > > > Although that has a negligible affect on subsequent wave systems, it > > > > > > > > > has a measurable affect on the relatively slow moving molecules that > > > > > > > > > subsequently traverse each slit. THAT'S what causes the resulting > > > > > > > > > pattern that appears in such experiments. > > > > > > > > > glird > > > > > > > > > I disagree with the last sentence. The C-60 molecule interacting with > > > > > > > > the single slit could be shown to be incorrect by placing a barrier in > > > > > > > > front of one of the slits. Send the C-60 molecule multiple times > > > > > > > > through the unblocked slit. Then switch which slit is blocked and re- > > > > > > > > execute the test so the C-60 molecule enters and exits the other slit, > > > > > > > > which is now unblocked, multiple times. There will not be an > > > > > > > > interference pattern because the displacement wave was not allowed to > > > > > > > > physically enter and exit the available slits, create interference, > > > > > > > > and alter the direction the C-60 molecule travels. > > > > > > > > > The distance the slits are apart will effect the pattern. > > > > > > > > > The red and blue lines in the image on the right here represents the > > > > > > > > paths the photon wave travels:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#The_experi... > > > > > > > > > The photon wave is physically traveling the available paths and when > > > > > > > > the red and blue paths are combined, interference occurs, altering the > > > > > > > > direction the photon 'particle' travels. This is misinterpreted as > > > > > > > > something is being erased. > > > > > > > > > Something similar is occurring when a C-60 molecule is used in a > > > > > > > > double slit experiment. The displacement wave the C-60 molecule > > > > > > > > creates in the aether physically enters and exits the available slits, > > > > > > > > creating interference, altering the direction the C-60 molecule > > > > > > > > travels. This is functionally the same as a boat and its bow wave. If > > > > > > > > there is only a single slit the bow wave the boat is creating will not > > > > > > > > greatly alter the direction the boat is traveling upon exiting the > > > > > > > > slit. If there are multiple slits, the bow wave enters and exits the > > > > > > > > multiple slits. The bow waves exiting the slits the boat does not > > > > > > > > travel through will cross out ahead of the boat's path and interfere > > > > > > > > with the bow waves exiting the other slits, including the bow wave > > > > > > > > riding out ahead of and along with the boat through the slit the boat > > > > > > > > travels through, and alter the direction the boat travels. > > > > > > > > You may be right. :-) > > > > > > > > glird > > > > > > > There is no right or wrong. Only correct and incorrect. Right and > > > > > > wrong are final. Correct and incorrect can change as experimental > > > > > > evidence is re-evaluated (like delayed choice experiments better > > > > > > interpreted as physical waves in the aether traveling available > > > > > > paths). > > > > > > > What we need is evidence of physical waves in the aether traveling > > > > > > available paths. > > > > > > > We need a modified version of:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#The_experi... > > > > > > > Where the downgraded mirror-image photons interact in such a way that > > > > > > the aether wave of one photon (not containing the photon 'particle') > > > > > > interacts with the aether wave of the other photon (containing the > > > > > > photon 'particle') and an interference pattern occurs. > > > > > > > What has to happen is the photon 'particle' of one of the photons > > > > > > needs to be detected and the photon 'particle' of the other photon > > > > > > needs not to be detected. The photon aether wave of the detected > > > > > > photon and the photon aether wave (along with the photon 'particle') > > > > > > of the other photon are combined. > > > > > > > An interference pattern should still be created in this scenario. > > > > > > > I know of no way QM could account for this because after the one > > > > > > photon 'particle' is detected, that is it. There is no associated > > > > > > aether wave and the other photon 'particle' has nothing to interfere > > > > > > with so an interference pattern should not be created. > > > > > > > Now of course, since QM is very incorrect, something will be made up > > > > > > about delayed choice or erasers or some other such nonsense. But, this > > > > > > experiment will be more evidence of physical waves in the aether > > > > > > traveling available paths. > > > > > > > Thanks!- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > Einstein was the right one about Quantum Mechanics. > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > Yes, it is incomplete.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > Every theory is incomplete. If you do not see this you are not > > > objective about your own theory. > > > Einstein knew that QM was wrong in many ways. That is what I am > > > refering to. But science had to judge him and they were wrong. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > I am simply referring to a common interpretation of Einstein's quote: > > >http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein > > > "Quantum mechanics is certainly imposing. But an inner voice tells me > > that it is not yet the real thing. The theory says a lot, but does not > > really bring us any closer to the secret of the 'old one'. I, at any > > rate, am convinced that He does not throw dice."- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Right. But science had to judge. Nobody escapes it. > > Mitch Raemsch That is the whole point of things being correct or incorrect, not right or wrong.
From: PD on 3 Dec 2009 10:03
On Dec 2, 9:10 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 2, 9:49 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 2, 2:30 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Dec 2, 3:37 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 2, 11:00 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Dec 2, 1:16 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 10:05 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 10:40 am, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 6:01 am, mpc755 wrote: > > > > > > > > >< glird, > > > > > > > > The denser the local material is per volume, the stronger the > > > > > > > > reactive aether pressure will be. > > > > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > > >< The displacement wave the C-60 molecule creates in the aether exists prior to the C-60 molecule entering a slit.> > > > > > > > > Yes. (The molecule travels far slower than the wave, which travels > > > > > > > > in air at c.) > > > > > > > > ><The aether displacement wave created by the C-60 molecule enters available slits. The observed behaviors of a double slit experiment with a C-60 molecule is more a > > > > > > > > function of the moving C-60 molecule having an associated aether > > > > > > > > displacement wave and this wave enters available slits than it is the > > > > > > > > C-60 molecule affecting the material which separates the slits. > > > > > > > > > Yes; BUT the molecule also affects the material filling the slit and > > > > > > > > that of the wall. In effect, the wall becomes asymmetrically charged. > > > > > > > > It is stronger on one side of the slit and the walls than in and on > > > > > > > > the other. > > > > > > > > Although that has a negligible affect on subsequent wave systems, it > > > > > > > > has a measurable affect on the relatively slow moving molecules that > > > > > > > > subsequently traverse each slit. THAT'S what causes the resulting > > > > > > > > pattern that appears in such experiments. > > > > > > > > glird > > > > > > > > I disagree with the last sentence. The C-60 molecule interacting with > > > > > > > the single slit could be shown to be incorrect by placing a barrier in > > > > > > > front of one of the slits. Send the C-60 molecule multiple times > > > > > > > through the unblocked slit. Then switch which slit is blocked and re- > > > > > > > execute the test so the C-60 molecule enters and exits the other slit, > > > > > > > which is now unblocked, multiple times. There will not be an > > > > > > > interference pattern because the displacement wave was not allowed to > > > > > > > physically enter and exit the available slits, create interference, > > > > > > > and alter the direction the C-60 molecule travels. > > > > > > > > The distance the slits are apart will effect the pattern. > > > > > > > > The red and blue lines in the image on the right here represents the > > > > > > > paths the photon wave travels:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#The_experi... > > > > > > > > The photon wave is physically traveling the available paths and when > > > > > > > the red and blue paths are combined, interference occurs, altering the > > > > > > > direction the photon 'particle' travels. This is misinterpreted as > > > > > > > something is being erased. > > > > > > > > Something similar is occurring when a C-60 molecule is used in a > > > > > > > double slit experiment. The displacement wave the C-60 molecule > > > > > > > creates in the aether physically enters and exits the available slits, > > > > > > > creating interference, altering the direction the C-60 molecule > > > > > > > travels. This is functionally the same as a boat and its bow wave. If > > > > > > > there is only a single slit the bow wave the boat is creating will not > > > > > > > greatly alter the direction the boat is traveling upon exiting the > > > > > > > slit. If there are multiple slits, the bow wave enters and exits the > > > > > > > multiple slits. The bow waves exiting the slits the boat does not > > > > > > > travel through will cross out ahead of the boat's path and interfere > > > > > > > with the bow waves exiting the other slits, including the bow wave > > > > > > > riding out ahead of and along with the boat through the slit the boat > > > > > > > travels through, and alter the direction the boat travels. > > > > > > > You may be right. :-) > > > > > > > glird > > > > > > There is no right or wrong. Only correct and incorrect. Right and > > > > > wrong are final. Correct and incorrect can change as experimental > > > > > evidence is re-evaluated (like delayed choice experiments better > > > > > interpreted as physical waves in the aether traveling available > > > > > paths). > > > > > > What we need is evidence of physical waves in the aether traveling > > > > > available paths. > > > > > > We need a modified version of:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#The_experi... > > > > > > Where the downgraded mirror-image photons interact in such a way that > > > > > the aether wave of one photon (not containing the photon 'particle') > > > > > interacts with the aether wave of the other photon (containing the > > > > > photon 'particle') and an interference pattern occurs. > > > > > > What has to happen is the photon 'particle' of one of the photons > > > > > needs to be detected and the photon 'particle' of the other photon > > > > > needs not to be detected. The photon aether wave of the detected > > > > > photon and the photon aether wave (along with the photon 'particle') > > > > > of the other photon are combined. > > > > > > An interference pattern should still be created in this scenario. > > > > > > I know of no way QM could account for this because after the one > > > > > photon 'particle' is detected, that is it. There is no associated > > > > > aether wave and the other photon 'particle' has nothing to interfere > > > > > with so an interference pattern should not be created. > > > > > > Now of course, since QM is very incorrect, something will be made up > > > > > about delayed choice or erasers or some other such nonsense. But, this > > > > > experiment will be more evidence of physical waves in the aether > > > > > traveling available paths. > > > > > > Thanks!- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > Einstein was the right one about Quantum Mechanics. > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > Yes, it is incomplete.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Every theory is incomplete. If you do not see this you are not > > objective about your own theory. > > Einstein knew that QM was wrong in many ways. That is what I am > > refering to. But science had to judge him and they were wrong. > > > Mitch Raemsch > > I am simply referring to a common interpretation of Einstein's quote: > > http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein > > "Quantum mechanics is certainly imposing. But an inner voice tells me > that it is not yet the real thing. The theory says a lot, but does not > really bring us any closer to the secret of the 'old one'. I, at any > rate, am convinced that He does not throw dice." Einstein himself proposed the experiment that proved him wrong. Unfortunately, this happened after his death. |