Aether Displacement is the most correct physical unified theory to date
in [Physics]
|
From: mpc755 on 5 Dec 2009 07:16 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_experiment 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. Anyone who chooses to believe a moving C-60 molecule, 60 interconnected atoms, enters, travels through, and exits multiple slits simultaneously without requiring energy, releasing energy, or having a change in momentum, is a more correct physical description of the observed behaviors of C-60 molecules in a double slit experiment vs. the moving C-60 molecule creates a displacement wave in the aether is incorrect. Anyone who chooses to believe a C-60 molecule will enter a single slit or multiple slits depending upon detectors being placed at the exits to the slits in the future (while the C-60 molecule is in the slit(s)) is a more correct physical description of the observed behaviors of a C-60 molecule in a double slit experiment vs. the moving C-60 molecule creates a displacement wave in the aether is incorrect. I originally called the concept Spacial Displacement. The spelling of Spacial was intentional to infer it was space that was being displaced. But then it was confusing to discuss the 'stuff of space' which was being displaced vs. three dimensional space and since the 'stuff of space' is most often referred to as ether, or aether, I decided to call the concept Aether Displacement.
From: mpc755 on 5 Dec 2009 17:52 On Dec 2, 1:16 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote: - Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > 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_experiment 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. Choosing to believe a moving C-60 molecule, 60 interconnected atoms, enters, travels through, and exits multiple slits simultaneously without requiring energy, releasing energy, or having a change in momentum, is a more correct physical description of the observed behaviors of C-60 molecules in a double slit experiment vs. the moving C-60 molecule creates a displacement wave in the aether is incorrect. Choosing to believe a C-60 molecule will enter a single slit or multiple slits depending upon detectors being placed at the exits to the slits in the future (while the C-60 molecule is in the slit(s)) is a more correct physical description of the observed behaviors of a C-60 molecule in a double slit experiment vs. the moving C-60 molecule creates a displacement wave in the aether is incorrect. Aether Displacement was originally called Spacial Displacement. The spelling of Spacial was intentional to denote it was space that was being displaced. But then it was confusing to discuss the 'stuff of space' which was physically being displaced vs. three dimensional space and since the 'stuff of space' is most often referred to as ether, or aether, the name was changed.
From: mpc755 on 5 Dec 2009 17:57 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_experiment 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. Choosing to believe a moving C-60 molecule, 60 interconnected atoms, enters, travels through, and exits multiple slits simultaneously without requiring energy, releasing energy, or having a change in momentum, is a more correct physical description of the observed behaviors of C-60 molecules in a double slit experiment vs. the moving C-60 molecule creates a displacement wave in the aether is incorrect. Choosing to believe a C-60 molecule will enter a single slit or multiple slits depending upon detectors being placed at the exits to the slits in the future (while the C-60 molecule is in the slit(s)) is a more correct physical description of the observed behaviors of a C-60 molecule in a double slit experiment vs. the moving C-60 molecule creates a displacement wave in the aether is incorrect. Aether Displacement was originally called Spacial Displacement. The spelling of Spacial was intentional to denote it was space that was being displaced. But then it was confusing to discuss the 'stuff of space' which was physically being displaced vs. three dimensional space and since the 'stuff of space' is most often referred to as ether, or aether, the name was changed.
From: Huang on 5 Dec 2009 23:01 > Choosing to believe a moving C-60 molecule, 60 interconnected atoms, > enters, travels through, and exits multiple slits simultaneously > without requiring energy, releasing energy, or having a change in > momentum, is a more correct physical description of the observed > behaviors of C-60 molecules in a double slit experiment vs. the moving > C-60 molecule creates a displacement wave in the aether is incorrect. C60 is neither wave nor particle. It is indeterminate whether it is one or the other. If you ASK "which way" then nature will tell you, simply because you modified the very nature of the experiment by asking such a question in the first place. It behaves like a particle because that is the FORMAT of the output required by the question "which way?" . If you do NOT ask which way, then it behaves like a wave. The experiments and the evidence has been repeated thousands of times in labs all over the world. C60 is not a wave, and is not a particle. It is indeterminately either one or the other. And if you ask a certain way, you will get a corresponding output. The only way to model this sensibly is by using a composition of existent magnitudes and nonexistent magnitudes. THAT makes sense where nothing else can.
From: mpc755 on 5 Dec 2009 23:10
On Dec 5, 11:01 pm, Huang <huangxienc...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > Choosing to believe a moving C-60 molecule, 60 interconnected atoms, > > enters, travels through, and exits multiple slits simultaneously > > without requiring energy, releasing energy, or having a change in > > momentum, is a more correct physical description of the observed > > behaviors of C-60 molecules in a double slit experiment vs. the moving > > C-60 molecule creates a displacement wave in the aether is incorrect. > > C60 is neither wave nor particle. It is indeterminate whether it is > one or the other. > > If you ASK "which way" then nature will tell you, simply because you > modified the very nature of the experiment by asking such a question > in the first place. It behaves like a particle because that is the > FORMAT of the output required by the question "which way?" . > > If you do NOT ask which way, then it behaves like a wave. > > The experiments and the evidence has been repeated thousands of times > in labs all over the world. C60 is not a wave, and is not a particle. > It is indeterminately either one or the other. And if you ask a > certain way, you will get a corresponding output. > > The only way to model this sensibly is by using a composition of > existent magnitudes and nonexistent magnitudes. THAT makes sense where > nothing else can. You do not ASK 'which way', you detect a particle. The particle is on a deterministic path. The C-60 molecule creates a displacement wave in the aether. It is no different than a boat in the water passing through one of multiple slits. The bow wave the boat creates in the water enters and exits the slits ahead of the boat. The waves that exit the slits the boat does not travel through will pass out ahead of the path the boat is traveling and create interference with all of the waves that are exiting all of the slits ahead of the boat. This interference will alter the direction the boat travels. If you place buoys at the exits to all of the slits and the buoys turn the bow wave into chop and interference does not occur and the direction the boat travels is not altered, do you say if you ASK 'which way' so the boat behaved like a particle? Do you say if you do not ASK 'which way' and the direction the boat travels is altered than the boat behaves like a wave? Of course not, you realize the boat is creating a bow wave in the water. There is a boat and a wave. There is a particle and a wave. The double slit experiment performed with C-60 molecules is no different than a boat in the water. The C-60 molecule creates a displacement wave in the aether. |