Aether Displacement is the most correct physical unified theory to date
in [Physics]
|
From: NoEinstein on 29 Dec 2009 14:40 On Dec 22, 9:04 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Dear mpc755: (1.) Light can travel for median distances at velocities above or below 'c'. Random contacts with the IOTAs (smallest energy units) of the etherwhich have a universal tangential velocity of 'c'will either speed-up slower light, or slow down faster light... unless the faster light is of such high energy as to tunnel through the ether, and keep such outside of the light path. Laser type light concentrations can tunnel; and those will allow high speed communications at velocities several times 'c'. The communication we seek from other intellegent beings in the Universe won't be manifested by radio waves, but by light concentrations that contain messages. (2.) Atomic clocks, and all motions within matter, can be slowed by ether flow pressure. That's why clocks of any type, on jets or the space shuttle, slow down. Einstein's... "relativity" has nothing to do with it; but the ether flow and pressure does. (3.) LOOSE that word displacement! Ether travels through matter with a resistance that is proportional to the mass. Simply stated: "Gravity is the flow of ether through matter that imparts a motion to the matter that is in the direction of the ether flow." (4.) You are obviously preoccupied by that C-60 molecule experiment. The churning of the ether due to the passage of those C-60 molecules is insignificant for affecting any of the observed interference. The latter interference could only be caused by the bending of the path of the C-60 molecule due to the electrical attraction to the ether that is more dense close to the edges of the slits. Some types of matter impacts can excite photonic effects on a surface. All photonic effects can be cancelled by other "impacts" that or out-of-phase. This explains the observed interference. I don't know how common it is for matter impacts to can cause photonic effects. Who should care? (5.) Forget about... relativity. I have disproved Einstein! Understanding relative motions requires only that a person visualize spaces in-slow-motion. Successfully doing that proves nothing, except to show that very few people have excellent space-visualizing abilities. Most architects DO!. (6.) The ether travels in the same general directions as the massive objects. According to Einstein (ha!) all light emits at velocity 'c' (actually, 'c' plus of minus v). A spinning galaxy that is fairly close to the Milky Way will have Blue shifted and red shifted light. All Blue shifted light has to be traveling faster than 'c'; and red shifted light, slower than 'c'. But at very great distances a "funny thing" happens: The light looses the shifts. The reason: the ether through which the light passes in coming to the Earth slows down the faster light and speeds up the slower light. So that the rotational characteristics of the galaxy can't be determined. The latter doesn't confirm... relativity, it confirms the tangential velocity of the IOTAs that compose the ether! NoEinstein > > On Dec 22, 8:24 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > On Dec 13, 8:55 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Dear mpc755: Matter does NOT displace ether! Like I've explain over > > and over, ether fills the spaces inside atoms and matter! With each > > photon emitted (infrared, generally), matter becomes deficient in > > ether which must be made up by in-flow from outside. That is the > > MECHANISM of gravity! I commend you for sticking to your guns for 20 > > years. But when a true explanation of the nature of the Universe > > comes along, you should learn a little. Your ego has you arguing > > against truths. Twenty plus years, or a hundred, can never counter a > > scientific truth! NE > > > > On Dec 13, 8:42 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 10, 11:01 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Dear mpc755: Some of your quickly-scanned mumblings sound like a vain > > > > attempt to paraphrase what I myself have said, and to put your own > > > > spin on my new science TRUTHS. Some people might be flattered by such > > > > imitation. But when science is explained in its simplest and most > > > > easily understood form, no variant explanations are needed. > > > > NoEinstein > > (1.) Light travels at 'c' with respect to the aether. > > (2.) An atomic clock 'ticks' with respect to the aether pressure. > > (3.) The aether pressure associated with the aether displaced by massive > objects is gravity. > > (4.) 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. > > (5.) 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_experi... > > (6.) 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.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: mpc755 on 29 Dec 2009 14:53 On Dec 29, 2:40 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > On Dec 22, 9:04 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear mpc755: > > (1.) Light can travel for median distances at velocities above or > below 'c'. Random contacts with the IOTAs (smallest energy units) of > the etherwhich have a universal tangential velocity of 'c'will > either speed-up slower light, or slow down faster light... unless the > faster light is of such high energy as to tunnel through the ether, > and keep such outside of the light path. Laser type light > concentrations can tunnel; and those will allow high speed > communications at velocities several times 'c'. The communication we > seek from other intellegent beings in the Universe won't be manifested > by radio waves, but by light concentrations that contain messages. > > (2.) Atomic clocks, and all motions within matter, can be slowed by > ether flow pressure. That's why clocks of any type, on jets or the > space shuttle, slow down. Einstein's... "relativity" has nothing to > do with it; but the ether flow and pressure does. > > (3.) LOOSE that word displacement! Ether travels through matter with > a resistance that is proportional to the mass. Simply stated: > "Gravity is the flow of ether through matter that imparts a motion to > the matter that is in the direction of the ether flow." > > (4.) You are obviously preoccupied by that C-60 molecule experiment. > The churning of the ether due to the passage of those C-60 molecules > is insignificant for affecting any of the observed interference. The > latter interference could only be caused by the bending of the path of > the C-60 molecule due to the electrical attraction to the ether that > is more dense close to the edges of the slits. Some types of matter > impacts can excite photonic effects on a surface. All photonic > effects can be cancelled by other "impacts" that or out-of-phase. > This explains the observed interference. I don't know how common it > is for matter impacts to can cause photonic effects. Who should > care? > > (5.) Forget about... relativity. I have disproved Einstein! > Understanding relative motions requires only that a person visualize > spaces in-slow-motion. Successfully doing that proves nothing, except > to show that very few people have excellent space-visualizing > abilities. Most architects DO!. > > (6.) The ether travels in the same general directions as the massive > objects. According to Einstein (ha!) all light emits at velocity > 'c' (actually, 'c' plus of minus v). A spinning galaxy that is fairly > close to the Milky Way will have Blue shifted and red shifted light. > All Blue shifted light has to be traveling faster than 'c'; and red > shifted light, slower than 'c'. But at very great distances a "funny > thing" happens: The light looses the shifts. The reason: the ether > through which the light passes in coming to the Earth slows down the > faster light and speeds up the slower light. So that the rotational > characteristics of the galaxy can't be determined. The latter doesn't > confirm... relativity, it confirms the tangential velocity of the > IOTAs that compose the ether! NoEinstein > > > > > On Dec 22, 8:24 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > On Dec 13, 8:55 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Dear mpc755: Matter does NOT displace ether! Like I've explain over > > > and over, ether fills the spaces inside atoms and matter! With each > > > photon emitted (infrared, generally), matter becomes deficient in > > > ether which must be made up by in-flow from outside. That is the > > > MECHANISM of gravity! I commend you for sticking to your guns for 20 > > > years. But when a true explanation of the nature of the Universe > > > comes along, you should learn a little. Your ego has you arguing > > > against truths. Twenty plus years, or a hundred, can never counter a > > > scientific truth! NE > > > > > On Dec 13, 8:42 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > On Dec 10, 11:01 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Dear mpc755: Some of your quickly-scanned mumblings sound like a vain > > > > > attempt to paraphrase what I myself have said, and to put your own > > > > > spin on my new science TRUTHS. Some people might be flattered by such > > > > > imitation. But when science is explained in its simplest and most > > > > > easily understood form, no variant explanations are needed. > > > > > NoEinstein > > > (1.) Light travels at 'c' with respect to the aether. > > > (2.) An atomic clock 'ticks' with respect to the aether pressure. > > > (3.) The aether pressure associated with the aether displaced by massive > > objects is gravity. > > > (4.) 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. > > > (5.) 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_experi... > > > (6.) 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.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Some of the things we are saying are similar, but Aether Displacement and Entrainment is more correct in several ways. Take for instance, the double slit experiment with C-60 molecules. The displacement wave the C-60 molecule creates in the aether fits with Einstein's concept of the aether being connected to matter and the connections determining the state of the aether. It also fits with deBroglie's concept of every moving object has an associated wave, where that definition is modified to be a moving object has an associated aether wave. Curvature of light, gravity, and the list goes on and on where Aether Displacement and Entrainment is what is occurring in nature.
From: Inertial on 29 Dec 2009 18:08 "NoEinstein" <noeinstein(a)bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:37a79526-19f7-4184-861c-87f9b91b6752(a)f5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... > On Dec 22, 8:59 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: >> > Dear Inertial: Nothing that I say is for your amusement. But its all so incredicly funny.. you pretend to be a scientist and you'r just a comedian > If you > disagree with my New Science truths, begin at any point and explain > why you think I'm wrong. So many many places > Can't do that? Couse I can .. but its so much funnier to laugh at you > Then, you should not be > judging the works of yours truly, a scientist, because, clearly, you > are a non-scientist. � NoEinstein � BAHAHAHAHAHHA .. you're hilarious !!!!
From: NoEinstein on 31 Dec 2009 18:40 On Dec 29, 6:08 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > Dear Inertial: I asked you to select any issue of disagreement with my science and to state your counter-arguments. Since you can't do thaton any point of my sciencethen it is YOU who are being laughed at, fellow!! NoEinstein > > "NoEinstein" <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote in message > > news:37a79526-19f7-4184-861c-87f9b91b6752(a)f5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... > > > On Dec 22, 8:59 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > > Dear Inertial: Nothing that I say is for your amusement. > > But its all so incredicly funny.. you pretend to be a scientist and you'r > just a comedian > > > If you > > disagree with my New Science truths, begin at any point and explain > > why you think I'm wrong. > > So many many places > > > Can't do that? > > Couse I can .. but its so much funnier to laugh at you > > > Then, you should not be > > judging the works of yours truly, a scientist, because, clearly, you > > are a non-scientist. NoEinstein > > BAHAHAHAHAHHA .. you're hilarious !!!!
From: Inertial on 31 Dec 2009 19:18
"NoEinstein" <noeinstein(a)bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:71ebfad3-6bb2-4e82-b634-ed8c22649fe5(a)h9g2000yqa.googlegroups.com... > On Dec 29, 6:08 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: >> > Dear Inertial: I asked you to select any issue of disagreement with > my science and to state your counter-arguments. I did > Since you can't do > that�on any point of my science�then it is YOU who are being laughed > at, fellow!! � NoEinstein � So that laugh is on you |