EXPERIMENTAL ARGUMENTS AGAINST SPECIAL RELATIVITY?
in [Physics]
|
From: NoEinstein on 27 Jul 2008 08:45 On Jul 23, 7:35 pm, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote: > On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 16:05:38 -0700 (PDT), NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> > wrote: > > > > > > >On Jul 20, 11:50 pm, maxwell <s...(a)shaw.ca> wrote: > >> On Jul 16, 2:56 am, John Kennaugh <J...(a)notworking.freeserve.co.uk> > >> wrote:>... > > >> Hello John: > >> I have been meaning to write to you now for some time, as you seem to > >> be a fellow 'old-timer' who is totally dissatisfied with the direction > >> of modern physics. I share this viewpoint & would guess that it > >> reflects our common UK education that views physics from a Newtonian/ > >> philosophical perspective rather than the Cartesian/Continentalist > >> approach that has continued for 2500 years to push the Pythagorean/ > >> Platonic mathematical view. > > >> I have been following your recent efforts in this thread and others, > >> to get the current revisionist view of SR corrected: a most valiant > >> effort but one that cannot overcome the lack of historical or > >> philosophical knowledge demonstrated by your antagonists (and almost > >> all theoretical physicists in the last 50 years!). > > >> It still seems astonishing to me that students today do not realize > >> that SR is grounded in Maxwell's EM aether theory. The attempt to > >> retain his wave theory while dropping the aether could only be > >> acceptable to mathematicians who have no physical intuition. You give > >> theoretical physics too much credence: it almost never makes > >> predictions but tries very hard to generate accurate retrodictions to > >> fit with numbers already derived from experiments. The philosophical > >> naievety of today's physicists is repeatedly demonstrated when they > >> claim that any of these retrodictive agreements proves that their > >> theory is 'true', instead of simply accurate: multiple theories can > >> come up with similar results, e.g. Ptolemy. > > >> My studies of Maxwell indicate that he was opposed to Newton's inter- > >> particle action-at-a-distance metaphysics (as used in his theory of > >> gravity). Maxwell's religious views needed ALL of space filled with > >> God's immanence: the field was the mathematical representation of this > >> universal 'force', a direct update of Descartes' rival view of contact > >> force filling all of space. Newton was always intensely opposed to > >> DesCartes' aether type theories. > > >> L. V. Lorenz proposed an inter-charge action-at-a-distance theory of > >> EM in 1867 that Maxwell reluctantly acknowledged in a short note in > >> his 1873 Treatise as equally capable of predicting all the results > >> that Maxwell had achieved with his own field theory. You were quite > >> right: Maxwell never renounced his aether theory, even though his > >> Lagangian approach (in the Treatise) tried to hide the aether > >> connection. Those people (like PD = Peter Draper) who think experiment > >> confirms Maxwell's theory have it backwards, Maxwell developed a > >> micro theory to be compatible with all the known macroscopic > >> experiments (like Faraday's Law). > > >> I loved your 'Lesson in Spin'. This accurately reflects the mental > >> gymnastics that have beeen used to convert the classical EM theories > >> of circa 1900 into today's orthodoxy. I would highly recommend Harvard > >> science historian Stanley Goldberg's 'Understanding Relativity' as a > >> solid review of how Einstein's SR was initially rejected & finally > >> accepted over the following 40 years (as his critics died off). > > >> I have investigated Ritz's emission/ballistic theory & eventually > >> found it inadequate. The sticking point for all these 'classical' EM > >> theories is the electron - the experimental evidence that all > >> electricity is materially discrete. This blows the 'charge-density' > >> model out of the window and returns physics to Newton's particulate > >> view of the world. > > >> My own research indicates that an asynchronous action-at-a-distance > >> inter-electron model is a more powerful basis for a complete theory of > >> modern physics. In this theory, the only ontological entity required > >> is the electron; there is no need for an additional object (photon or > >> wave) to 'carry' the EM interaction. > >> Enough for now. Good luck with your rearguard defence of British > >> 'commonsense'. > >> Herb Spencer ('Maxwell') PhD, DIC, BSc > > >Dear Maxwell: Your namesake, (James Clerk) Maxwell proposed to A. A. > >Michelson that his new interferometer might be able to detect the > >slowing of light caused by the Earth passing through the supposed, but > >unverified, luminiferous ether. The last sentence shows Maxwell, and > >all who have supported Lorentz and Einstein since, to have been > >lacking in fundamental common sense. > > >To wit: The concept that light can be slowed in passing through the > >ether, also, must suppose that light can be slowed much more in > >passing through a lot of ether. The M-M experiment had a maximum path > >length of less than 100 feet (using multiple reflections of the > >light). It was supposed by Michelson that multiple fringe shifts > >should be detectedbut none were. If light had been detected as > >"being slowed", then the rate of slowing over, say, the distance to > >the Sun would be such that no light would reach the Earth. No light > >equals no life on Earth Because of that simple reasoning, the M-M > >experiment is invalidated as a 'concept'. I have also invalidated > >such because I realized that M-M didn't have a CONTROL, or unchanging > >light course. > > >The above two paragraphs disproves Maxwell, Lorentz and Einstein, and > >disproves SR and GR. But the ether is alive and well! Ether NURTURES > >light on its course, because light and ether are the same 'stuff'. > >Varying ether density and flow explains every single observation in > >nature. Ether is the 'stuff' of all matter, and the mechanism of all > >forces. Understand ether, and you understand creation! NoEinstein > > There is no single absolute aether. > Throughout the whole of space there are regions that behave like weak 'local > aethers' where any EM passing through TENDS TOWARDS a uniform speed wrt that > region. A consequence of this is that the speed of all light moving in a > particular direction in space tends towards (but by no means reaches) > uniformity. > Also, there appears to be an aetherlike 'sphere of EM influence' around all > large masses, such that the speed of light escaping from such objects is > unified to varying degrees. > > > > > >Where Angels Fear to Fall > >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/1e3e4... > >Cleaning Away Einsteins Mishmash > >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/5d847... > >Dropping Einstein Like a Stone > >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/989e1... > > Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm > > All religion involves selling a nonexistant product to gullible fools. Einstein cleverly exploited this principle with his second postulate.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Dear Henri: When many hear the word "ether" they think: a homogeneous fluid of some kind. Also, people have to referred to the ether as if it is some sort of 3D grid that moving objects must be referenced to. Actually, ether is just the stuff of matter and energy. Ether is concentrated near where the matter is concentrated. Stars draw in ether (the force of their gravity), then replace that ether with their emitted radiant energy and expelled high energy particles. Think of that process as being like people traveling in a busy airport concourse. Half of the people are going one way; half the other. If either of those two directions of travel stopped, the people available to keep the "flow" going would stop. THAT is what happens in a Black Hole. Matter becomes so compacted that there isn't any wiggle room to maintain temperature. So, there is no light, nor particles, going out. When such happens, the ether pressure that had caused the pre Black Hole's gravity just shuts off. And the star distribution data for Andromeda shows just that! There is a gap in the stars near the center where the stars went flying off on their tangentsjust like a spinning stone on a string would fly out if the string broke. Ether varies from zero density to pre black hole density. Because ether and light are the same thing, the ether through which light passes will NURTURE the light on its path. If, say, an exploding star sends out light as it explodes, the velocity of the light is 'c' plus 'v'. The reason most light gets to us at just... 'c', is because the ether will act as a drag on light traveling faster than 'c'. The lone exception is when the concentration of light is so strong that it pushes the ether out of the way, and TUNNELS through. The latter is like big football player muscling-through a throng of people. If there is enough pressure, the players can get through. You are one of the few people on the groups who actually think. I hope my explanations will be useful to you. NoEinstein
From: Dr. Henri Wilson on 27 Jul 2008 20:12 On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 05:45:20 -0700 (PDT), NoEinstein <noeinstein(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: >On Jul 23, 7:35�pm, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote: >> On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 16:05:38 -0700 (PDT), NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> >> >The above two paragraphs disproves Maxwell, Lorentz and Einstein, and >> >disproves SR and GR. �But the ether is alive and well! �Ether NURTURES >> >light on its course, because light and ether are the same 'stuff'. >> >Varying ether density and flow explains every single observation in >> >nature. �Ether is the 'stuff' of all matter, and the mechanism of all >> >forces. �Understand ether, and you understand creation! ��� NoEinstein >> >> There is no single absolute aether. >> Throughout the whole of space there are regions that behave like weak 'local >> aethers' where any EM passing through TENDS TOWARDS a uniform speed wrt that >> region. A consequence of this is that the speed of all light moving in a >> particular direction in space tends towards (but by no means reaches) >> uniformity. >> Also, there appears to be an aetherlike 'sphere of EM influence' around all >> large masses, such that the speed of light escaping from such objects is >> unified to varying degrees. >> >> >�� >> >> >Where Angels Fear to Fall >> >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/1e3e4... >> >Cleaning Away Einstein�s Mishmash >> >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/5d847... >> >Dropping Einstein Like a Stone >> >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/989e1... >> >> Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm >> >> All religion involves selling a nonexistant product to gullible fools. Einstein cleverly exploited this principle with his second postulate.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > >Dear Henri: When many hear the word "ether" they think: a homogeneous >fluid of some kind. Also, people have to referred to the ether as if >it is some sort of 3D grid that moving objects must be referenced to. >Actually, ether is just the stuff of matter and energy. Ether is >concentrated near where the matter is concentrated. Stars draw in >ether (the force of their gravity), then replace that ether with their >emitted radiant energy and expelled high energy particles. Think of >that process as being like people traveling in a busy airport >concourse. Half of the people are going one way; half the other. If >either of those two directions of travel stopped, the people available >to keep the "flow" going would stop. THAT is what happens in a Black >Hole. Matter becomes so compacted that there isn't any wiggle room to >maintain temperature. So, there is no light, nor particles, going >out. When such happens, the ether pressure that had caused the pre >Black Hole's gravity just shuts off. And the star distribution data >for Andromeda shows just that! There is a gap in the stars near the >center where the stars went flying off on their tangents��just like a >spinning stone on a string would fly out if the string broke. > Ether varies from zero density to pre black hole density. >Because ether and light are the same thing, the ether through which >light passes will NURTURE the light on its path. If, say, an >exploding star sends out light as it explodes, the velocity of the >light is 'c' plus 'v'. The reason most light gets to us at just... >'c', is because the ether will act as a drag on light traveling faster >than 'c'. The lone exception is when the concentration of light is so >strong that it pushes the ether out of the way, and TUNNELS through. >The latter is like big football player muscling-through a throng of >people. If there is enough pressure, the players can get through. > You are one of the few people on the groups who actually think. >I hope my explanations will be useful to you. � NoEinstein � You are getting there. We share many views. 'H-Aether' (Henri's aether) is nothing but the 'stuff fields are made of'. Local volumes of such H-aether exists to varying degrees throughout the universe, particularly around large masses. The speed of all light passing through is modified so that it TENDS TOWARDS a unified speed in any one direction. The equilibrium EM speed in any volume of H-aether is not necessarily c wrt little planet Earth. Light arriving here does so at virtually any speed before it is brought to near c by extinction in the atmosphere. An important feater of H-aether theory is that when light changes speed during transit, so does its intrinsic wavelength, in a way that maintains doppler shift as a true indicator of source speed relative to the observer. Doppler shift from an ACCELERATING source is a different matter that I wont go into here. Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T) www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm All religion involves selling a nonexistant product to gullible fools. Einstein cleverly exploited this principle with his second postulate.
From: NoEinstein on 29 Jul 2008 16:09 On Jul 27, 8:12 pm, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote: > On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 05:45:20 -0700 (PDT), NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> > wrote: > > > > > > >On Jul 23, 7:35 pm, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote: > >> On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 16:05:38 -0700 (PDT), NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> > >> >The above two paragraphs disproves Maxwell, Lorentz and Einstein, and > >> >disproves SR and GR. But the ether is alive and well! Ether NURTURES > >> >light on its course, because light and ether are the same 'stuff'. > >> >Varying ether density and flow explains every single observation in > >> >nature. Ether is the 'stuff' of all matter, and the mechanism of all > >> >forces. Understand ether, and you understand creation! NoEinstein > > >> There is no single absolute aether. > >> Throughout the whole of space there are regions that behave like weak 'local > >> aethers' where any EM passing through TENDS TOWARDS a uniform speed wrt that > >> region. A consequence of this is that the speed of all light moving in a > >> particular direction in space tends towards (but by no means reaches) > >> uniformity. > >> Also, there appears to be an aetherlike 'sphere of EM influence' around all > >> large masses, such that the speed of light escaping from such objects is > >> unified to varying degrees. > > >> > > > >> >Where Angels Fear to Fall > >> >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/1e3e4.... > >> >Cleaning Away Einsteins Mishmash > >> >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/5d847.... > >> >Dropping Einstein Like a Stone > >> >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/989e1.... > > >> Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm > > >> All religion involves selling a nonexistant product to gullible fools. Einstein cleverly exploited this principle with his second postulate.- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > >Dear Henri: When many hear the word "ether" they think: a homogeneous > >fluid of some kind. Also, people have to referred to the ether as if > >it is some sort of 3D grid that moving objects must be referenced to. > >Actually, ether is just the stuff of matter and energy. Ether is > >concentrated near where the matter is concentrated. Stars draw in > >ether (the force of their gravity), then replace that ether with their > >emitted radiant energy and expelled high energy particles. Think of > >that process as being like people traveling in a busy airport > >concourse. Half of the people are going one way; half the other. If > >either of those two directions of travel stopped, the people available > >to keep the "flow" going would stop. THAT is what happens in a Black > >Hole. Matter becomes so compacted that there isn't any wiggle room to > >maintain temperature. So, there is no light, nor particles, going > >out. When such happens, the ether pressure that had caused the pre > >Black Hole's gravity just shuts off. And the star distribution data > >for Andromeda shows just that! There is a gap in the stars near the > >center where the stars went flying off on their tangentsjust like a > >spinning stone on a string would fly out if the string broke. > > Ether varies from zero density to pre black hole density. > >Because ether and light are the same thing, the ether through which > >light passes will NURTURE the light on its path. If, say, an > >exploding star sends out light as it explodes, the velocity of the > >light is 'c' plus 'v'. The reason most light gets to us at just... > >'c', is because the ether will act as a drag on light traveling faster > >than 'c'. The lone exception is when the concentration of light is so > >strong that it pushes the ether out of the way, and TUNNELS through. > >The latter is like big football player muscling-through a throng of > >people. If there is enough pressure, the players can get through. > > You are one of the few people on the groups who actually think. > >I hope my explanations will be useful to you. NoEinstein > > You are getting there. We share many views. > > 'H-Aether' (Henri's aether) is nothing but the 'stuff fields are made of'.. > Local volumes of such H-aether exists to varying degrees throughout the > universe, particularly around large masses. The speed of all light passing > through is modified so that it TENDS TOWARDS a unified speed in any one > direction. The equilibrium EM speed in any volume of H-aether is not > necessarily c wrt little planet Earth. Light arriving here does so at virtually > any speed before it is brought to near c by extinction in the atmosphere. > > An important feater of H-aether theory is that when light changes speed during > transit, so does its intrinsic wavelength, in a way that maintains doppler > shift as a true indicator of source speed relative to the observer. > > Doppler shift from an ACCELERATING source is a different matter that I wont go > into here. > > Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm > > All religion involves selling a nonexistant product to gullible fools. Einstein cleverly exploited this principle with his second postulate.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Dear Henri: The Earth's atmosphere can't be extrapolated to account for gravitational optical effects. The Sun has an analogous 'atmosphere'. But measurable optical effects begin like ten solar diameters away from the Sun. Ether is swirling down in that distance, and even as far out as the orbit of the planet Mercury, which the ether causes to precess. I know that you have your own explanations for the 'Doppler' shifts. Those might suggest that the Universe is expanding [from the Big Bang... Ha, ha!]. But the light simply AGES. Light is constantly crossing paths with other light, and such simply WEDGES the photons further apart. There is no need to consider EM fields. There are Swiss-cheese-like voids between the galaxies. Those voids contain ZERO ether, because ether tends to form meniscuses. In areas of very high light, and particle flow, the ether there gets jostled so much that meniscuses can't form. But when they do, and dilute ether inside the bubbles will eventually bump into the "fly-paper-like" meniscus and become part of such. The entire Universe is bounded by an electromagnetic meniscus of ether. Because of that, there could very well be other universes, too. Again, thanks for your replies, and for your agreements on some important aspects of science! NoEinstein
From: Matthew Johnson on 29 Jul 2008 20:18 In article <da040167-227c-4e21-94f8-a74d8be53370(a)d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, NoEinstein says... [snip] >> > =A0 =A0:}~ - ~ -- =A0 =97 NoEinstein =97 >> >> I'll take that as your answer: "No, I'm not prepared to answer >> question about my own model, and yes maybe I am keeping my model >> hidden in a little wooden box under my mattress. - NoEinstein - "- Hide q= >uoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > >Dear PD: NOW, you are guilty of fraud! What PD did was not 'fraud'. Not even close. Rather, it was a highly reasonable paraphrase of what you said and implied. > Don't start pretending to be >quoting me, fellow, That was not what he did. You are the one engaging in misrepresentation of your interlocutor, not PD. You misrepresent PD's words when you falsely accuse him of "pretending to be quoting" you. >or you could find yourself in court. Ha! No sober judge would take your case -- unless he's turned senile! >Not only are >you a jerk, you are a dishonest one, too! =97=97 NoEinstein =97=97 No, PD has done nothing dishonest in this thread. Don't be surprised to find, though, that third parties believe that you _have_ done something dishonest in this thread -- and have been doing it for a long time in this NG.
From: Dr. Henri Wilson on 29 Jul 2008 20:48
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 13:09:43 -0700 (PDT), NoEinstein <noeinstein(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: >On Jul 27, 8:12�pm, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote: >> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 05:45:20 -0700 (PDT), NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >On Jul 23, 7:35�pm, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote: >> >> On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 16:05:38 -0700 (PDT), NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> >> >> >The above two paragraphs disproves Maxwell, Lorentz and Einstein, and >> >> >disproves SR and GR. �But the ether is alive and well! �Ether NURTURES >> >> >light on its course, because light and ether are the same 'stuff'. >> >> >Varying ether density and flow explains every single observation in >> >> >nature. �Ether is the 'stuff' of all matter, and the mechanism of all >> >> >forces. �Understand ether, and you understand creation! ��� NoEinstein >> >> >> There is no single absolute aether. >> >> Throughout the whole of space there are regions that behave like weak 'local >> >> aethers' where any EM passing through TENDS TOWARDS a uniform speed wrt that >> >> region. A consequence of this is that the speed of all light moving in a >> >> particular direction in space tends towards (but by no means reaches) >> >> uniformity. >> >> Also, there appears to be an aetherlike 'sphere of EM influence' around all >> >> large masses, such that the speed of light escaping from such objects is >> >> unified to varying degrees. >> >> >> >�� >> >> >> >Where Angels Fear to Fall >> >> >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/1e3e4... >> >> >Cleaning Away Einstein�s Mishmash >> >> >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/5d847... >> >> >Dropping Einstein Like a Stone >> >> >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/989e1... >> >> >> Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm >> >> >> All religion involves selling a nonexistant product to gullible fools. Einstein cleverly exploited this principle with his second postulate.- Hide quoted text - >> >> >> - Show quoted text - >> >> >Dear Henri: When many hear the word "ether" they think: a homogeneous >> >fluid of some kind. �Also, people have to referred to the ether as if >> >it is some sort of 3D grid that moving objects must be referenced to. >> >Actually, ether is just the stuff of matter and energy. �Ether is >> >concentrated near where the matter is concentrated. �Stars draw in >> >ether (the force of their gravity), then replace that ether with their >> >emitted radiant energy and expelled high energy particles. �Think of >> >that process as being like people traveling in a busy airport >> >concourse. �Half of the people are going one way; half the other. �If >> >either of those two directions of travel stopped, the people available >> >to keep the "flow" going would stop. �THAT is what happens in a Black >> >Hole. �Matter becomes so compacted that there isn't any wiggle room to >> >maintain temperature. �So, there is no light, nor particles, going >> >out. �When such happens, the ether pressure that had caused the pre >> >Black Hole's gravity just shuts off. �And the star distribution data >> >for Andromeda shows just that! �There is a gap in the stars near the >> >center where the stars went flying off on their tangents��just like a >> >spinning stone on a string would fly out if the string broke. >> > � � Ether varies from zero density to pre black hole density. >> >Because ether and light are the same thing, the ether through which >> >light passes will NURTURE the light on its path. �If, say, an >> >exploding star sends out light as it explodes, the velocity of the >> >light is 'c' plus 'v'. �The reason most light gets to us at just... >> >'c', is because the ether will act as a drag on light traveling faster >> >than 'c'. �The lone exception is when the concentration of light is so >> >strong that it pushes the ether out of the way, and TUNNELS through. >> >The latter is like big football player muscling-through a throng of >> >people. �If there is enough pressure, the players can get through. >> > � � You are one of the few people on the groups who actually think. >> >I hope my explanations will be useful to you. � NoEinstein � >> >> You are getting there. We share many views. >> >> 'H-Aether' (Henri's aether) is nothing but the 'stuff fields are made of'. >> Local volumes of such H-aether exists to varying degrees throughout the >> universe, particularly around large masses. The speed of all light passing >> through is modified so that it TENDS TOWARDS a unified speed in any one >> direction. The equilibrium EM speed in any volume of H-aether is not >> necessarily c wrt little planet Earth. Light arriving here does so at virtually >> any speed before it is brought to near c by extinction in the atmosphere. >> >> An important feater of H-aether theory is that when light changes speed during >> transit, so does its intrinsic wavelength, in a way that maintains doppler >> shift as a true indicator of source speed relative to the observer. >> >> Doppler shift from an ACCELERATING source is a different matter that I wont go >> into here. >> >> Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm >> >> All religion involves selling a nonexistant product to gullible fools. Einstein cleverly exploited this principle with his second postulate.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > >Dear Henri: The Earth's atmosphere can't be extrapolated to account >for gravitational optical effects. The Sun has an analogous >'atmosphere'. But measurable optical effects begin like ten solar >diameters away from the Sun. Ether is swirling down in that distance, >and even as far out as the orbit of the planet Mercury, which the >ether causes to precess. > I know that you have your own explanations for the 'Doppler' >shifts. Those might suggest that the Universe is expanding [from the >Big Bang... Ha, ha!]. But the light simply AGES. Light is constantly >crossing paths with other light, a. nd such simply WEDGES the photons >further apart. There is no need to consider EM fields. There are >Swiss-cheese-like voids between the galaxies. Those voids contain >ZERO ether, because ether tends to form meniscuses. Yes. That's part of MY theory. At the WDT (Wilson density threshold) space starts to become holey. The holes contain absolutely nothing. The presence of fields destroys that nothingness. What you are refering to as aether is, in my opinion, the stuff that fields of all descriptions are made of. We don't know much about it but wherever there is significant gravity, magnetic or electrostatic action, light speed will experience some kind of modification. >In areas of very >high light, and particle flow, the ether there gets jostled so much >that meniscuses can't form. But when they do, and dilute ether inside >the bubbles will eventually bump into the "fly-paper-like" meniscus >and become part of such. I see space as like a very low density turbulent gas. Density refers to fields as well as ordinary matter.....which conceivably might amount to the same thing. > The entire Universe is bounded by an electromagnetic meniscus of >ether. Because of that, there could very well be other universes, >too. Agreed. >Again, thanks for your replies, and for your agreements on some >important aspects of science! � NoEinstein � Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T) www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm All religion involves selling a nonexistant product to gullible fools. Einstein cleverly exploited this principle with his second postulate. |