There is no "pull" of gravity, only the PUSH of flowing ether!
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Was Einstein Guilty of Scientific Fraud?
Next: Question about energy eigenvalues of a Hamiltonian, in general
From: PD on 23 Apr 2010 13:45 On Apr 23, 12:24 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Apr 23, 12:01 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > On Apr 22, 10:32 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Dear mpc755: I read that delightful little book in which A. A. > > Michelson wrote the quote you cite. My "varying ether flow and > > density" is the unifying discovery in all of nature. Michelson would > > be thrilled that I found out why his experiment didn't work (no > > control), and thrilled that I have found the grand unification > > mechanism for all of nature. The latter is varying pressure and > > velocity, much like in weather systems on Earth. But the ether ISN'T > > displaced by matter! Ether flows THROUGH matter, only to be slowed by > > the nuclei, in proportion to the mass. When you can realize that > > fact, you and I will be on the same track. NoEinstein > > In the quote Michelson discuss aether displacement, "an aether > displacement to the electric current". This is conceptually the same > as Maxwell's displacement current. Actually, no. Displacement current and aether displacement have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Please return to the starting line and try again. > > If aether is 'slowed down' when it interacts with a nucleus then that > is due to its being displaced by the nuclei. > > A better term for the interaction of aether and matter is to describe > the aether as 'localized' by the matter. > > If a single nucleus is moving with constant momentum then the aether > is exerting equal pressure to each and every part of the nuclei. This > equal pressure is due to the nuclei displacing the aether. This equal > pressure is due to the aether 'displacing back'. The 'displacing back' > is the pressure the aether exerts towards the nuclei. > > The greater the constant momentum the more aether is displaced by the > nuclei the greater the aether 'displaces back'. This is what causes > the pressure to vary depending upon momentum. > > Once you add the concept of displacement to your theory you will then > understand what is causing the aether to 'slow down', or more > correctly to be more 'localized'. > > > > > > On Apr 22, 10:15 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 22, 6:39 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Dear mpc755: Other than the FACT that matter doesn't displace ether, > > > > you make several statements that are true. Give up that > > > > "displacement" idea of yoursit won't hold water (PUN intended!). > > > > NE > > > >http://home.netcom.com/~sbyers11/ > > > > Quote from Albert A Michelson's lecture circa 1899. > > > > "Suppose that an aether strain corresponds to an electric charge, an > > > aether displacement to the electric current, aether vortices to the > > > atoms; if we continue these suppositions, we arrive at what may be one > > > of the grandest generalizations of modern science, namely that all the > > > phenomena of the physical universe are only different manifestations > > > of the various modes of motion of one all-pervading (substance), the > > > aether. The day seems not to distant when the converging lines from > > > many apparently remote regions of thought will meet on some common > > > ground. Then the nature of the atom and the forces called into play in > > > their chemical union, the interactions between these atoms and the > > > non- > > > differentiated aether as manifested in the phenomena of light and > > > electricity , the structure of the molecule, the explanation of > > > cohesion, elasticity and gravitation, all of these will be marshaled > > > into a single compact and consistent body of scientific knowledge." > > > > I would modify the statement to read: > > > > "all the phenomena of the physical universe are only different > > > manifestations of the various states of one all-pervading (substance), > > > the aether." > > > >http://www.tu-harburg.de/rzt/rzt/it/Ether.html > > > > Albert Einstein: > > > > "the state of the former is at every place determined by connections > > > with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places" > > > > I would modify the statement to read: > > > > The state of the aether as determined by the connections with the > > > matter and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the > > > aether's state of displacement. > >
From: PD on 23 Apr 2010 14:01 On Apr 23, 12:57 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Apr 23, 1:45 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 23, 12:24 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Apr 23, 12:01 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 22, 10:32 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Dear mpc755: I read that delightful little book in which A. A. > > > > Michelson wrote the quote you cite. My "varying ether flow and > > > > density" is the unifying discovery in all of nature. Michelson would > > > > be thrilled that I found out why his experiment didn't work (no > > > > control), and thrilled that I have found the grand unification > > > > mechanism for all of nature. The latter is varying pressure and > > > > velocity, much like in weather systems on Earth. But the ether ISN'T > > > > displaced by matter! Ether flows THROUGH matter, only to be slowed by > > > > the nuclei, in proportion to the mass. When you can realize that > > > > fact, you and I will be on the same track. NoEinstein > > > > In the quote Michelson discuss aether displacement, "an aether > > > displacement to the electric current". This is conceptually the same > > > as Maxwell's displacement current. > > > Actually, no. Displacement current and aether displacement have > > absolutely nothing to do with each other. Please return to the > > starting line and try again. > > You must have missed this post: > You must have missed the point of my statement, which is that *Maxwell's* displacement current, which has nothing to do with anything that de Broglie ever did, also has nothing to do with aether displacement. So you are either wrong, or a bald-faced liar. Which is it?
From: john on 23 Apr 2010 15:03 On Apr 23, 12:01 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Apr 23, 12:57 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Apr 23, 1:45 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Apr 23, 12:24 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 23, 12:01 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > On Apr 22, 10:32 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Dear mpc755: I read that delightful little book in which A. A. > > > > > Michelson wrote the quote you cite. My "varying ether flow and > > > > > density" is the unifying discovery in all of nature. Michelson would > > > > > be thrilled that I found out why his experiment didn't work (no > > > > > control), and thrilled that I have found the grand unification > > > > > mechanism for all of nature. The latter is varying pressure and > > > > > velocity, much like in weather systems on Earth. But the ether ISN'T > > > > > displaced by matter! Ether flows THROUGH matter, only to be slowed by > > > > > the nuclei, in proportion to the mass. When you can realize that > > > > > fact, you and I will be on the same track. NoEinstein > > > > > In the quote Michelson discuss aether displacement, "an aether > > > > displacement to the electric current". This is conceptually the same > > > > as Maxwell's displacement current. > > > > Actually, no. Displacement current and aether displacement have > > > absolutely nothing to do with each other. Please return to the > > > starting line and try again. > > > You must have missed this post: > > You must have missed the point of my statement, which is that > *Maxwell's* displacement current, which has nothing to do with > anything that de Broglie ever did, also has nothing to do with aether > displacement. So you are either wrong, or a bald-faced liar. Which is > it?- Ridiculous. What is aether? No-one has the slightest idea. Maybe it's neutrinos of selected frequencies. How do you 'displace' that? You're arguing about the size of fairies' peckers. Maybe they don't have any! No-one's ever pissed beside one and looked. Describe your 'aether'. What is it made from? john
From: PD on 23 Apr 2010 15:09 On Apr 23, 2:03 pm, john <vega...(a)accesscomm.ca> wrote: > On Apr 23, 12:01 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 23, 12:57 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Apr 23, 1:45 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 23, 12:24 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Apr 23, 12:01 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Apr 22, 10:32 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Dear mpc755: I read that delightful little book in which A. A. > > > > > > Michelson wrote the quote you cite. My "varying ether flow and > > > > > > density" is the unifying discovery in all of nature. Michelson would > > > > > > be thrilled that I found out why his experiment didn't work (no > > > > > > control), and thrilled that I have found the grand unification > > > > > > mechanism for all of nature. The latter is varying pressure and > > > > > > velocity, much like in weather systems on Earth. But the ether ISN'T > > > > > > displaced by matter! Ether flows THROUGH matter, only to be slowed by > > > > > > the nuclei, in proportion to the mass. When you can realize that > > > > > > fact, you and I will be on the same track. NoEinstein > > > > > > In the quote Michelson discuss aether displacement, "an aether > > > > > displacement to the electric current". This is conceptually the same > > > > > as Maxwell's displacement current. > > > > > Actually, no. Displacement current and aether displacement have > > > > absolutely nothing to do with each other. Please return to the > > > > starting line and try again. > > > > You must have missed this post: > > > You must have missed the point of my statement, which is that > > *Maxwell's* displacement current, which has nothing to do with > > anything that de Broglie ever did, also has nothing to do with aether > > displacement. So you are either wrong, or a bald-faced liar. Which is > > it?- > > Ridiculous. > > What is aether? > No-one has the slightest idea. > Maybe it's neutrinos of selected frequencies. > How do you 'displace' that? > > You're arguing about the size of fairies' peckers. > Maybe they don't have any! > No-one's ever pissed beside one and looked. > > Describe your 'aether'. > What is it made from? > > john That is a question for MPC, since it's his aether he's describing. The statement he made is that his aether displacement is conceptually the same as Maxwell's displacement current. That statement is simply wrong. MPC probably doesn't have the foggiest idea what Maxwell's displacement current is in the first place.
From: mpc755 on 22 Apr 2010 19:45
On Apr 22, 6:48 pm, Raymond Yohros <b...(a)birdband.net> wrote: > On Apr 22, 5:39 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 22, 6:31 pm, Raymond Yohros wrote: > > > the funniest thing about this conversation is the > > > topics title! > > > Aether and matter are different states of the same material. > > Aether is displaced by matter. > > Displacements creates pressure. > > Gravity is pressure exerted by aether displaced by matter. > > > Aether is displaced based on mass per volume. The more massive an > > object is per volume the less aether it contains, the more aether is > > displaced. The more aether displaced the greater the pressure exerted > > by the aether displaced by the matter. > > > The 'push' in the title is the pressure exerted by the aether towards > > the matter. > > > Gravity is the pressure exerted by the aether towards the matter. > > i think i could understand better what you say without > that aether word. > im sorry. > i just dont buy it! > > r.y I originally called the theory Spacial Displacement. The spelling of Spacial was intentional to demonstrate it was space which was displaced by matter. The issue with 'Spacial' is it is not three dimensional space which is being displaced. It is the 'stuff' of space. It is the material of space which is being displaced by the matter. That is the reason I modified the name from Spacial Displacement to Aether Displacement. "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places" - Albert Einstein The state of the aether as determined by its connections with the matter is the aether's state of displacement. |