Prev: Collatz conjecture
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
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Collatz conjecture
Next: Einstein was right - The state of the ether is determined by its connections with the matter