Prev: Aether time flow rate in math
Next: Einstein was right - The state of the ether is determined by its connections with the matter
From: Arindam Banerjee on 14 Jun 2010 18:57 On Jun 15, 8:53 am, Arindam Banerjee <adda1...(a)bigpond.com> wrote: > On Jun 14, 10:46 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 14, 8:35 am, Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1...(a)gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > On Jun 14, 10:31 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jun 13, 4:57 pm, use...(a)mantra.com and/orwww.mantra.com/jai(Dr.. > > > > > Jai Maharaj) wrote: > > > > > Einstein was right: space and time bend > > > > > > Ninety years after he expounded his famous theory, a $700m Nasa probe > > > > > has proved that the universe behaves as he said. Now the race is on > > > > > to show that the other half of relativity also works > > > > > > By Anushka Asthana and David Smith > > > > > The Observer, U.K. > > > > > guardian.co.uk > > > > > Sunday, April 15, 2007 > > > > > > Under his name in the Oxford English Dictionary is the simple > > > > > definition: genius. Yet for decades physicists have been asking the > > > > > question: did Albert Einstein get it wrong? After half a century, > > > > > seven cancellations and $700m, a mission to test his theory about the > > > > > universe has finally confirmed that the man was a mastermind -- or at > > > > > least half proved it. > > > > > > The early results from Gravity Probe B, one of Nasa's most > > > > > complicated satellites, confirmed yesterday 'to a precision of better > > > > > than 1 per cent' the assertion Einstein made 90 years ago -- that an > > > > > object such as the Earth does indeed distort the fabric of space and > > > > > time. > > > > > > But this -- what is referred to as the 'geodetic' effect -- is only > > > > > half of the theory. The other, 'frame-dragging', stated that as the > > > > > world spins it drags the fabric of the universe behind it. > > > > > > Francis Everitt, the Stanford University professor who has devoted > > > > > his life to investigating Einstein's theory of relativity, told > > > > > scientists at the American Physical Society it would be another eight > > > > > months before he could measure the 'frame-dragging' effect precisely. > > > > > > 'Understanding the details is a bit like an archeological dig,' said > > > > > William Bencze, programme manager for the mission. 'A scientist > > > > > starts with a bulldozer, follows with a shovel, then finally uses > > > > > dental picks and toothbrushes to clear the dust away. We're passing > > > > > out the toothbrushes now.' > > > > > > The Gravity Probe B project was conceived in the late 1950s but > > > > > suffered decades of delays while other scientists ran tests > > > > > corroborating Einstein's theory. It was Everitt's determination that > > > > > stopped it being cancelled. The joint mission between Nasa and > > > > > Stanford University uses four of the most perfect spheres -- ultra > > > > > precise gyroscopes -- to detect minute distortions in the fabric of > > > > > the universe. Everitt's aim was to prove to the highest precision yet > > > > > if Einstein was correct in the way he described gravity. > > > > > > According to Einstein, in the same way that a large ball placed on a > > > > > elasticated cloth stretches the fabric and causes it to sag, so > > > > > planets and stars warp space-time. A marble moving along the sagging > > > > > cloth will be drawn towards the ball, as the Earth is to the Sun, but > > > > > not fall into it as long as it keeps moving at speed. Gravity, argued > > > > > Einstein, was not an attractive force between bodies as had been > > > > > previously thought. > > > > > > Few scientists need the final results, which will be revealed in > > > > > December, to convince them of Einstein's genius. 'From the most > > > > > esoteric aspects of time dilation through to the beautiful and simple > > > > > equation, e=mc2, the vast bulk of Einstein's ideas about the universe > > > > > are standing up to the test of time,' said Robert Massey, from the > > > > > Royal Astronomical Society. > > > > > > He said the mission was 'legitimate science' to test a theory and > > > > > confirm its brilliance, but others have criticised the costs and > > > > > length of the study, claiming that what was announced had already > > > > > been shown. Sir Martin Rees, the Astronomer Royal, said the > > > > > announcement would 'fork no lightning'. > > > > > > The theory explained > > > > > > When Einstein wrote his general theory of relativity in 1915, he > > > > > found a new way to describe gravity. It was not a force, as Sir Isaac > > > > > Newton had supposed, but a consequence of the distortion of space and > > > > > time, conceived together in his theory as 'space-time'. Any object > > > > > distorts the fabric of space-time and the bigger it is, the greater > > > > > the effect. > > > > > > Just as a bowling ball placed on a trampoline stretches the fabric > > > > > and causes it to sag, so planets and stars warp space-time -- a > > > > > phenomenon known as the 'geodetic effect'. A marble moving along the > > > > > trampoline will be drawn inexorably towards the ball. > > > > > 'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html > > > > > "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections > > > > with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places, .... > > > > disregarding the causes which condition its state." > > > > > The state of the aether as determined by its connections with the > > > > matter and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the > > > > aether's state of displacement. > > > > > Aether and matter are different states of the same material. > > > > The material is maether. > > > > Maether has mass. > > > > Aether and matter have mass. > > > > Aether is uncompressed maether and matter is compressed maether. > > > > Aether is displaced by matter. > > > > The aether is not at rest when displaced and 'displaces back'. > > > > The 'displacing back' is the pressure exerted by the aether. > > > > Gravity is pressure exerted by displaced aether towards matter. > > > > > Just as a bowling ball placed in a tank of water displaces the water, > > > > so does matter displace the aether. > > > > No. Aether permeates everything. Everything moves in aether, and > > > aether is in everything. > > > > Cheers, > > > Arindam Banerjee > > > Correct. > > Good. > > > The aether permeates everything except the nuclei of an atom. > > The volume of actual matter in any atom is very small as a percentage > value of the atom size, going by fundamental atomic theory. Matter > being defined as a substance capable of being affected by forces, > though this is tautological as force is also defined in terms of > matter. So ultimately we do not know very much about matter. The > most powerful microscopes shows any atom as just a blob. > > > Each and every nuclei which an object consists of displaces the > > aether. > > Aether by definition is a solid, which cannot be displaced like a gas > or liquid. However, it can be twisted (sheared) and perhaps this is > what you mean. Let us say a nucleus shears aether. This may be, or > may not be. We cannot know. The aether may also fill the nuclei, which > could be porous to the aether. > > > The bowling ball analogy is more accurate if you consider the bowling > > ball to consist of millions of tiny particles separated by springs. > > Or held together? > > In > > > this analogy each of the particles which constitute the bowling > > displaces the water at the same time the water exists throughout the > > bowling ball. The bowling ball which consists of millions of tiny > > particles separated by springs still displaces the water. > > Firstly the aether is solid, so it does not get displaced. For a > solid is a solid if its components do NOT get displaced with respect > to each other - save for temporaray shears. So the analogy is more > like putting a sieve with very fine mesh through potato mash. So fine > that as the sieve goes through the potato mash, the potato mash > remains undisturbed. A bit of mash may twist a bit as the mesh > presses it, but reforms after the mesh has passed through. Matter is > the sieve, and aether the mash, in this analogy. It is not a good > analogy, for potato mash is not that convincing a solid, but may do > for the purpose. > > > Just as a bowling ball, consisting of millions of tiny particles > > separated by springs, placed in a tank of water displaces the water, > > as does matter, which consists of nuclei separated by aether, > > displaces the aether. > > No. See above. Solids cannot be displaced, only sheared. > > Just as a void does not remain in the displaced > > > water when the bowling ball is removed due to the pressure exerted by > > the water towards the bowling ball, the displaced aether exerts > > pressure towards the matter > > The sheared ether is what carries all radiant energies, and this is > what we all must accept when we throw out the quantum theoretic > nonsense (along with entropy and relativity). By concentrating and > basing all future physics upon: > > c(v=V) = c(mu,ep) + V and > e=0.5mVV(N-k) > > Once reputed institutes allow me to lecture how right the above are, > and how wrong e=mcc is, I can publish my book "The Principles of > Motion". One step at a time! Let us throw e=mcc out first, by going > through > > http://adda-enterprises.com/MMInt/MMint.htm where the extraordinary > bungle made by Einstein is clearly exposed. > > Cheers, > Arindam Banerjee Correcting the title, and posting to sci.math to show how a couple of new equations will change human destiny... Cheers, Arindam Banerjee
From: spudnik on 14 Jun 2010 20:49
time obviously doesn't bend, except in a subjective sense of living & dying, sleeping & waking ... it's too bad about Schroedinger's joke-cat, though ... Schroedinger's cat is dead; long-live Schroedinger's cat! the curvature of space was dsicovered with "synchronized sundails" by Aristarchus; it was measured in Alsace-Lorraine by Gauss, with his theodolite & trigonation. thus&so: Dear Editor; It is apparent from the City ordinance, proposed to ban high-density polyethylene (HDPE) bags -- excepting take-out at restaurants -- that it will be a state-wide eco-tax. The "green fee" is slated to be 25 cents for any paper bag from the retailer, grocer or farmer at the market. This is unfortunate for two reasons, although, as I stated a year ago in Council, when it first came-up, the super-light-weight & super-inexpenseve bags (much less than the Staff Report was willing to concede) are so good at what they do, before they inevitably break-up & decompose (but , according to the apocrypha & studies of Heal the Bay etc., HDPEbagsR4ever) that coastal cities may be justified in a ban, to prevent stormdrain blockages. Firstly, just like with "hemp for haemarrhoids," it is not a panacea or much of an economic stop-gap, if only because "only criminals & baby-smotherers will have HDPE bags." Really, there are plenty of natural plastics; "plastic" is really an adjective, as in the plastic arts! Note also that even plant-derived plastic bags will be banned, although they are acknowledged to biodegrade. Secondly, a very small Carbon Tax would be much more realistic than simply allowing Waxman's CO2 cap & trade nostrum, of letting the abitrageurs & daytraders raise the price of our energy as much as they can in the "free market" -- with no provision whatever for government revenue (contrary to the slogan of "cap & tax" used by Tea Partiers, "Republicans," and the WSUrinal). As with the much-greater amount of materiel & energy that is required for the paper bags, we might do better to ban *low* density polypropolene bags at department & boutique stores, which are many times heavier than the HDPE bags. It is surprising that a fifth of the HDPE bags are recycled, considerng that a) they're only good for garbage, if they get dirty, and b) they are quite often re-used by folks; recycling them is an unsanitary joke, though composting might be educational fun. The retailers would get ten of the 25 cents, which seems to be a quite an incentive for the overhead. However, has anyone seen any analysis on the energy requirements for the "reusable" replacement, and their importation? --Sincerely, Brian H. --Stop BP's and Waxman's arbitragueur-daytripper's delight of cap&trade, not Captain Tax per Tea Partiers, "republicans R us," and the WSUrinal! http://wlym.com |