Aether Displacement
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: LHC versus cranks : 1-0
Next: Higgs security
From: victoria Bippart on 15 Apr 2010 15:56 you are simply ignoring what a wave actually is, three-dimensionally, just like Broglie, Dirac et al (math, good; interpretation, less good). there is simply no need for the particle, at all, as proven abundatly by Young, Fresnel etc. etc. -- nevermind what the 2nd Church of England says about Einstein and Newton! the real question is not, How can C-60 do this without aethe?, but How does it do it within the confines of the experimental apparatus? > The 'particle' occupies a very small region of the aether wave. This > very small region of the aether wave is where the amplitude is very > large. thus: I always top-post my replies; the rest is simply misc.addendum.what.I.writ.today. it's funny, because you glom onto Newton's/Einstein's photon, but that is exactly the interpretation of the (merely instrumental) photo- electrical effect that supposedly alleviated any need for an aether; did they give E. the Nobel, just to validate N.?... well, whether there was any conspiracy (other than being at the Swedish Royal Palace, together), it certainly has made Newton's day -- and the Second (Secular) Church of England! thus: Finally, note that, in a sense, the whole world is going a) nuclear, and b) into space, while we are essentially frozen into '50s and '60s techniques in these crucial frontiers. (While some folks dither about Iran's nuke-weapons policy, they are rapidly achieving a full-scale nuke-e and process-heat capability for industry & infrastructure.) thus: I don't get his notation, either, but he must be trying to insert his "internal momentum" **** into some sort of mathematical form. so, when he patents his warp drive, he'll just have to be careful about travel "in" time -- and messing with his mama, before he was conceived! thus: is ten to the 500th power, like, longer than the volume of Known Universe Total Quanta? thus: the clocks are distorted by the curvature that was demonstrated by Aristarchus, and surveyed o'er Alsace-Lorraine by Gauss (with his theodolite .-) yes, time is not a dimension, or it is the only dimension, whereby we observe the others (Bucky's formulation). not only was Newton's law actually found by Hooke, but it was derived directly from Kepler's orbital constraints (and, Kepler thought that Sun was perhaps magnetic on planets, which may-well turn out to be more accurate than "gravitons" -- as long as you get rid of Newton's silly corpuscles, "photons" -- and his platonic ordering of the planets has alos proved to be more-or-less correct (if I could find that article, that gave a formula that was effective for all moons, as well). BTW, use quaternions for special rel., which shows the uniqueness of the "real, scalar, inner product" time/ dimension of Hamilton. --Light: A History! http://21stcenturysciencetech.com --yr humble servant, the Voting Rights Act o'65 (deadletter since March 27, 2000, when Supreme Court refuzed appeal in LaRouche v. Fowler ('96))
From: mpc755 on 15 Apr 2010 18:53 On Apr 15, 3:40 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > Inward radial space flow is the order of the strength of gravity. The > distance from the center determines the strength. > > Mitch Raemsch Gravity is pressure exerted by aether displaced by matter. The following image represents the aether's state of displacement as determined by its connections with the matter. The image would be more accurate if the grid connected to and through the Earth. This would more accurately reflect Einstein's concept of the state of the aether is determined by its connections with the matter and the state of the aether in neighboring places: http://science.nasa.gov/media/medialibrary/2005/11/16/16nov_gpb_resources/vortex1_crop.jpg
From: mpc755 on 15 Apr 2010 18:55 On Apr 15, 3:56 pm, victoria Bippart <vickybipp...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > you are simply ignoring what a wave actually is, > three-dimensionally, just like Broglie, Dirac et al > (math, good; interpretation, less good). > > there is simply no need for the particle, at all, > as proven abundatly by Young, Fresnel etc. etc. -- > nevermind what the 2nd Church of England says > about Einstein and Newton! > > the real question is not, > How can C-60 do this without aethe?, but > How does it do it within the confines of the experimental apparatus? > > > The 'particle' occupies a very small region of the aether wave. This > > very small region of the aether wave is where the amplitude is very > > large. > > thus: > I always top-post my replies; > the rest is simply misc.addendum.what.I.writ.today. > > it's funny, because you glom onto Newton's/Einstein's photon, but > that is exactly the interpretation of the (merely instrumental) photo- > electrical effect that supposedly alleviated any need > for an aether; did they give E. the Nobel, just to validate N.?... > well, > whether there was any conspiracy (other than being at the Swedish > Royal Palace, together), it certainly has made Newton's day -- and > the Second (Secular) Church of England! > > thus: > Finally, note that, in a sense, the whole world is going a) > nuclear, and b) into space, while we are essentially frozen > into '50s and '60s techniques in these crucial frontiers. (While some > folks dither about Iran's nuke-weapons policy, they are rapidly > achieving a full-scale nuke-e and process-heat capability > for industry & infrastructure.) > > thus: > I don't get his notation, either, but > he must be trying to insert his "internal momentum" **** > into some sort of mathematical form. > > so, when he patents his warp drive, > he'll just have to be careful about travel "in" time -- > and messing with his mama, before he was conceived! > > thus: > is ten to the 500th power, like, > longer than the volume of Known Universe Total Quanta? > > thus: > the clocks are distorted by the curvature that was demonstrated > by Aristarchus, and surveyed o'er Alsace-Lorraine by Gauss > (with his theodolite .-) yes, time is not a dimension, or > it is the only dimension, whereby we observe the others (Bucky's > formulation). > > not only was Newton's law actually found by Hooke, but > it was derived directly from Kepler's orbital constraints (and, > Kepler thought that Sun was perhaps magnetic on planets, > which may-well turn out to be more accurate than "gravitons" -- > as long as you get rid of Newton's silly corpuscles, "photons" -- > and his platonic ordering of the planets has alos proved > to be more-or-less correct (if I could find that article, > that gave a formula that was effective for all moons, as well). > > BTW, use quaternions for special rel., > which shows the uniqueness of the "real, scalar, inner product" time/ > dimension of Hamilton. > > --Light: A History!http://21stcenturysciencetech.com > > --yr humble servant, the Voting Rights Act o'65 > (deadletter since March 27, 2000, > when Supreme Court refuzed appeal in LaRouche v. Fowler ('96)) 'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein' "What is fundamentally new in the ether of the general theory of relativity as opposed to the ether of Lorentz consists in this, that the state of the former is at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places, which are amenable to law in the form of differential equations; whereas the state of the Lorentzian ether in the absence of electromagnetic fields is conditioned by nothing outside itself, and is everywhere the same. The ether of the general theory of relativity is transmuted conceptually into the ether of Lorentz if we substitute constants for the functions of space which describe the former, disregarding the causes which condition its state." http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html The cause with conditions its state is its displacement by matter.
From: mpc755 on 15 Apr 2010 19:03 On Apr 15, 3:56 pm, victoria Bippart <vickybipp...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > you are simply ignoring what a wave actually is, > three-dimensionally, just like Broglie, Dirac et al > (math, good; interpretation, less good). > > there is simply no need for the particle, at all, > as proven abundatly by Young, Fresnel etc. etc. -- > nevermind what the 2nd Church of England says > about Einstein and Newton! > > the real question is not, > How can C-60 do this without aethe?, but > How does it do it within the confines of the experimental apparatus? > > > The 'particle' occupies a very small region of the aether wave. This > > very small region of the aether wave is where the amplitude is very > > large. > > thus: > I always top-post my replies; > the rest is simply misc.addendum.what.I.writ.today. > > it's funny, because you glom onto Newton's/Einstein's photon, but > that is exactly the interpretation of the (merely instrumental) photo- > electrical effect that supposedly alleviated any need > for an aether; did they give E. the Nobel, just to validate N.?... > well, > whether there was any conspiracy (other than being at the Swedish > Royal Palace, together), it certainly has made Newton's day -- and > the Second (Secular) Church of England! > > thus: > Finally, note that, in a sense, the whole world is going a) > nuclear, and b) into space, while we are essentially frozen > into '50s and '60s techniques in these crucial frontiers. (While some > folks dither about Iran's nuke-weapons policy, they are rapidly > achieving a full-scale nuke-e and process-heat capability > for industry & infrastructure.) > > thus: > I don't get his notation, either, but > he must be trying to insert his "internal momentum" **** > into some sort of mathematical form. > > so, when he patents his warp drive, > he'll just have to be careful about travel "in" time -- > and messing with his mama, before he was conceived! > > thus: > is ten to the 500th power, like, > longer than the volume of Known Universe Total Quanta? > > thus: > the clocks are distorted by the curvature that was demonstrated > by Aristarchus, and surveyed o'er Alsace-Lorraine by Gauss > (with his theodolite .-) yes, time is not a dimension, or > it is the only dimension, whereby we observe the others (Bucky's > formulation). > > not only was Newton's law actually found by Hooke, but > it was derived directly from Kepler's orbital constraints (and, > Kepler thought that Sun was perhaps magnetic on planets, > which may-well turn out to be more accurate than "gravitons" -- > as long as you get rid of Newton's silly corpuscles, "photons" -- > and his platonic ordering of the planets has alos proved > to be more-or-less correct (if I could find that article, > that gave a formula that was effective for all moons, as well). > > BTW, use quaternions for special rel., > which shows the uniqueness of the "real, scalar, inner product" time/ > dimension of Hamilton. > > --Light: A History!http://21stcenturysciencetech.com > > --yr humble servant, the Voting Rights Act o'65 > (deadletter since March 27, 2000, > when Supreme Court refuzed appeal in LaRouche v. Fowler ('96)) 'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein' "What is fundamentally new in the ether of the general theory of relativity as opposed to the ether of Lorentz consists in this, that the state of the former is at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places, which are amenable to law in the form of differential equations; whereas the state of the Lorentzian ether in the absence of electromagnetic fields is conditioned by nothing outside itself, and is everywhere the same. The ether of the general theory of relativity is transmuted conceptually into the ether of Lorentz if we substitute constants for the functions of space which describe the former, disregarding the causes which condition its state." http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html The cause which conditions its state is its displacement by matter.
From: BURT on 15 Apr 2010 19:23
On Apr 15, 3:53 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Apr 15, 3:40 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > Inward radial space flow is the order of the strength of gravity. The > > distance from the center determines the strength. > > > Mitch Raemsch > > Gravity is pressure exerted by aether displaced by matter. > > The following image represents the aether's state of displacement as > determined by its connections with the matter. The image would be more > accurate if the grid connected to and through the Earth. This would > more accurately reflect Einstein's concept of the state of the aether > is determined by its connections with the matter and the state of the > aether in neighboring places: > > http://science.nasa.gov/media/medialibrary/2005/11/16/16nov_gpb_resou... Expansion of the universal aether is driven by emptiness 4D aether. Mitch Raemsch |