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: spudnik on 2 May 2010 16:08 (momentum) p = mv; does it "dimensionally analyze" to units of force, as "ma" does? as for the rest, you don't make any quantitative claims, to uphold your so-called theory, perhaps as a matter of being unpracticed in English (so, try to read Shakespeare, dood .-) thus: one should read the acolyte of Hubbard at Shell; his two books on Peak Oil, really give a good precis of the whole business -- although they were published way too late, for him to say, I tol'y'so, as he did. the best theory of Earth processes is by a mechanical engineer, who worked at an America oil co. BP's mini-dysaster in the Gulf is certainly suspicsous, but keep in mind the quantification viz-a-vu the Exxxon spill by Puget Sound; the organic seeps in the Gulf are about one Valdez per annum -- with massive pumping. thus: the original "KE" equation is known as Leibniz' *vis viva*; whereas others had thought it was just the first power of speed (i.e. Galileo, I think). thus: he seems to be unaware of the neccesity in a"proof," of "neccesity AND sufficiency," as first stated by Leibniz (although having one or the other is, still, very good -- if actually so .-) > state of the aether, as determined by our inability to detect it. thus: so, you applied Coriolis' Force to General Relativity, and **** happened? > read more » --Light: A History! http://wlym.takeTHEgoogolOUT.com
From: NoEinstein on 2 May 2010 16:11 On Apr 26, 1:46 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Dear mpc755: The ether flowing toward the Earthas the mechanism of gravityis nearly vertical at the Earth's surface. Ether has ZERO drag on light! But ether will drag masses caught in the flow, in proportion to the mass of the object. Hawking pointed out on his 'Time Travel' show last week that the GPS clocks 'speed up' (he didn't say with respect to what). The ether density is greatest at the surface of the Earth and drops off, approximately, agreeing with the inverse square law. Satellites at higher altitudes will be encountering LESS ether than at lower altitudes. So there will be LESS time dilation. (Note: That's not a space-time effect, but an ether flow, pressure effect). Less time dilation means that the clock will speed up. Amazingly, Einsteins empirical equations for the orbit of the planet Mercury, are a close approximation of the forces of gravity for inverse-square-law-proportional ether flow and distance. That's why the "Lorentz transformation" works as a MATH correction, but doesn't work as a law of science. There are no velocity variant "rubber rulers" in Nature! NoEinstein > > On Apr 26, 12:09 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > On Apr 24, 2:39 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Dear mpc755: Ether has zero drag on LIGHT, but a mass-proportional > > drag on matter. You should understand that difference. NE > > Yes, I understand the difference you are referring to, however, aether > drag is the theory aether is dragged due to its proximity to matter. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_drag_hypothesis > > "According to the aether drag hypothesis light propagates in a special > medium, the aether, that remains attached to things as they move. If > this is the case then, no matter how fast the earth moves around the > sun or rotates on its axis, light on the surface of the earth would > travel at a constant velocity relative to the surface of the earth." > > > > > > > > On Apr 24, 12:54 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 24, 9:28 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Dear mpc755: If your agreeing with the science notions of A. A. > > > > Michelson makes you happy, BE happy. But you must realize that he was > > > > only speculating about how science MIGHT be, not saying how science > > > > IS. Like I explained, Michelson was a top technician of science, but > > > > NOT a top analyzer of the mechanisms of science. To his credit, > > > > Michelson, until his death, never accepted Lorentz's 'rubber ruler' > > > > velocity-transformation of all matter. Michelson had built enough > > > > things with his own two hands to KNOW that materials don't change > > > > lengths due to being exposed to various velocities. That said, > > > > Michelson was clueless to explain why his M-M experiment, and his mile- > > > > long Chicago interferometer experiment, got nil results. The REASON > > > > for the latter: Ether drag on light never occurs anywhere in the > > > > Universe! NoEinstein > > > > There does not seem to be much difference between aether drag and > > > aether 'slowing down' due to its interaction with matter. > > > > Either way, it doesn't make any difference until you are able to > > > describe what occurs physically in nature in order to cause the aether > > > to 'slow down'. > > > > Aether is 'localized' with respect to the matter because it is > > > displaced by the matter. The aether 'displaces back'. The 'displacing > > > back' is the pressure the aether exerts towards the matter. The > > > pressure the aether exerts towards the matter is gravity. This > > > pressure causes the aether to be 'localized' with respect to the > > > matter. > > > > 'On the super-fluid property of the relativistic physical vacuum > > > medium and the inertial motion of particles'http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0701/0701155.pdf > > > > "Abstract: The similarity between the energy spectra of relativistic > > > particles and that of quasi-particles in super-conductivity BCS theory > > > makes us conjecture that the relativistic physical vacuum medium as > > > the ground state of the background field is a super fluid medium, and > > > the rest mass of a relativistic particle is like the energy gap of a > > > quasi-particle. This conjecture is strongly supported by the results > > > of our following investigation: a particle moving through the vacuum > > > medium at a speed less than the speed of light in vacuum, though > > > interacting with the vacuum medium, never feels friction force and > > > thus undergoes a frictionless and inertial motion." > > > > A particle in the super fluid medium displaces the super fluid medium, > > > whether the particle is at rest with respect to the super fluid > > > medium, or not. > > > > > > On Apr 24, 1:08 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Apr 23, 1:24 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Dear mpc755: Michelson was a very nice, detail-oriented man. But he > > > > > > lacked some critical analytical abilities. In Berlin, at Maxwell's > > > > > > urging, he 'tested' a low-cost version of his new interferometer > > > > > > design. Apparently, he lived next to a train station, so the > > > > > > interference fringes got obliterated by the vibrations, frequently. > > > > > > Michelson showed his general lack of analytical abilities by not > > > > > > realizing that the few seconds, to maybe a minute, in which he could > > > > > > see the interference rings (or bands) he should have been able to > > > > > > generalize that his design wasn't working as a detector of velocity. > > > > > > Instead, he figured that his instrument wasn't precise enough, or > > > > > > vibration free enough, to detect the supposed (sic) drag of the ether > > > > > > on the velocity of light. > > > > > > > That same book has an illustration in back that shows a professional > > > > > > quality pen-and-ink perspective drawing of the M-M apparatus, that is > > > > > > located in a basement of what is now Case Western Reserve University. > > > > > > Of course, the precise version of the interferometer didn't work to > > > > > > detect velocity changes in light, either. Michelsonbeing a basically > > > > > > naive mentalitydecided to construct a 'mile long' interferometer near > > > > > > the University of Chicago. That instrument, too, failed to detect > > > > > > velocity changes in the light. Michelson showed both his humor, and > > > > > > his deceptiveness, by taking advantage of the optics alignment issues > > > > > > with the mile-long, to create the illusion that he had... detected the > > > > > > 'sine curve' he hoped to see. The reason he could do so, was because > > > > > > the mile-long was at a fixed location that couldn't be rotated. He > > > > > > realized that by selecting the right times of the day or night to plot > > > > > > the oscillations of the fringe pattern about the optical center of the > > > > > > instrument, he could cause the plotted points to approximate a sine > > > > > > curve. Someone with my analytical ability easily realized that he had > > > > > > selected the times of day to FAKE getting positive results. But I'm > > > > > > not laughing that he was a deeply honest man, nor very smart.. I do > > > > > > applaud him for designing the Mt. Wilson interferometer to determine > > > > > > THE most accurate out-and-back measurement of the velocity of light > > > > > > (in air); and his most accurate measurement, in terms of the > > > > > > wavelength of light, of the length of the official METER stick in > > > > > > England. He would have been a great partner for constructing my own > > > > > > interferometer designs that DO detect Earth velocity in the cosmos. > > > > > > But not because of ether... drag on light. There is no such drag! > > > > > > NoEinstein > > > > > > Nothing you state above has anything to do with the quote where > > > > > Michelson discusses "aether displacement to the electric current".. > > > > > This is conceptually the same as Maxwell's displacement current. > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > What your 'theory' is incapable of doing is describing what occurs > > > > > physically in order for the aether to 'slow down'. It can't be > > > > > friction or there would be no momentum. It is pressure. How does the > > > > > aether exert pressure towards the nucleus? Because the aether is > > > > > displaced by the nucleus and the aether 'displaces back'. > > > > > > The analogy is a particle moving through a frictionless super fluid/ > > > > > solid. > > > > > > 'On the super-fluid property of the relativistic physical vacuum > > > > > medium and the inertial motion of particles'http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0701/0701155.pdf > > > > > > "Abstract: The similarity between the energy spectra of relativistic > > > > > particles and that of quasi-particles in super-conductivity BCS theory > > > > > makes us conjecture that the relativistic physical vacuum medium as > > > > > the ground state of the background field is a super fluid medium, and > > > > > the rest mass of a relativistic particle is like the energy gap of a > > > > > quasi-particle. This conjecture is strongly supported by the results > > > > > of our following investigation: a particle moving through the vacuum > > > > > medium at a speed less than the speed of light in vacuum, though > > > > > interacting with the vacuum medium, never feels friction force and > > > > > thus undergoes a frictionless and inertial motion." > > > > > > A particle in the super fluid medium displaces the super fluid medium, > > > > > whether the particle is at rest with respect to the super fluid > > > > > medium, or not. A moving particle creates a displacement wave in the > > > > > super fluid medium. > > > > > > A particle in the aether displaces the aether, whether the particle is > > > > > at rest with respect to the aether, or not. The particle could be an > > > > > individual nucleus. A moving particle creates a displacement wave in > > > > > the aether. > > > > > > Aether is displaced by an individual nucleus. When discussing gravity > > > > > as the pressure associated with the aether displaced by matter, what > > > > > is being discussed is the aether being displaced by each and every > > > > > nucleus which is the matter which is the object. > > > > > > Once you add the concept of displacement to your theory you will then > > > > > understand what is- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -... > > read more »
From: NoEinstein on 2 May 2010 16:24 On Apr 26, 10:54 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Dear mpc755: "Wrong is WRONG, no matter who said it!" NoEinstein > > On Apr 26, 10:49 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > On Apr 26, 1:46 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Dear mpc755: The discussions about the existence of an ether started > > because there was wrongly assumed to be some... 'medium' needed for > > light 'waves' (sic) to travel through. Any theory about matter > > dragging ether are your own concoction, having little if anything to > > do with the price-of-eggs-in-China. NE > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_drag_hypothesis > > "According to the aether drag hypothesis light propagates in a special > medium, the aether, that remains attached to things as they move." > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_luminiferous_aether > > " 1830 - Fresnel develops a formula for predicting and measuring > aether dragging by massive objects, based on a coupling constant. Such > dragging seems to be at odds with aberration however, which would > require the Earth not to drag the aether in order to be visible. > > George Gabriel Stokes becomes a champion of the dragging > theory."
From: mpc755 on 2 May 2010 21:18 On May 2, 4:11 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > On Apr 26, 1:46 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear mpc755: The ether flowing toward the Earthas the mechanism of > gravityis nearly vertical at the Earth's surface. Ether has ZERO > drag on light! But ether will drag masses caught in theflow, in > proportion to the mass of the object. Hawking pointed out on his > 'Time Travel' show last week that the GPS clocks 'speed up' (he didn't > say with respect to what). The ether density is greatest at the > surface of the Earth and drops off, approximately, agreeing with the > inverse square law. Satellites at higher altitudes will be > encountering LESS ether than at lower altitudes. So there will be > LESS time dilation. (Note: That'snota space-time effect, but an > etherflow, pressure effect). Less time dilation means that the clock > will speed up. Amazingly, Einsteins empirical equations for the > orbit of the planet Mercury, are a close approximation of the forces > of gravity for inverse-square-law-proportional etherflowand > distance. That's why the "Lorentz transformation" works as a MATH > correction, but doesn't work as a law of science. There are no > velocity variant "rubber rulers" in Nature! NoEinstein > The pressure exerted by the aether in nearby regions towards the matter doing the displacing is described, weakly, as "space effectively flows towards matter". Aether and matter are different states of the same material. Aether is displaced by matter. Displacement creates pressure. Gravity is pressure exerted by aether displaced by matter. Gravitation, the 'Dark Matter' Effect and the Fine Structure Constant http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0401047 "There we see the first arguments that indicate the logical necessity for quantum behaviour, at both the spatial level and at the matter level. There space is, at one of the lowest levels, a quantumfoam system undergoing ongoing classicalisation. That model suggest that gravity is caused by matter changing the processing rate of the informational system that manifests as space, and as a consequence space effectively flows towards matter. However this is not a flow of some form of matter through space, as previously considered in the aether models or in the random particulate Le Sage kinetic theory of gravity, rather the flow is an ongoing rearrangement of the quantum-foam patterns that form space, and indeed only have a geometrical description at a coarse-grained level. Then the flow in one region is relative only to the patterns in nearby regions, and not relative to some a priori background geometrical space" What is described as "space effectively flows towards matter" is the pressure exerted by the aether towards the matter. "Then the flow in one region is relative only to the patterns in nearby regions" is the pressure exerted by the aether in nearby regions displaced by the matter.
From: mpc755 on 2 May 2010 21:19
On May 2, 4:19 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > On Apr 26, 1:48 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear mpc755: The velocity of the ether is pressure determined. The > ether density is greatest right next to massive objects, and less > further away. The "conveyor belt" of photon emission from massive > objects carries out the most ether in the early part of its travel. > That helps to maintain the ether density greatest closer to the mass. > Eventually, all light will loose its 'hitch-hiking' ether and keep > right on going. Photons can travel perfectly well through the ether- > less regions between galaxies. Much of my New Science has resulted > from my near total understanding of the mechanisms of both light and > gravity. NoEinstein > The faster an object moves with respect to the aether the greater the pressure exerted by the aether towards and throughout the object. The pressure exerted by the aether in nearby regions towards the matter doing the displacing is described, weakly, as "space effectively flows towards matter". Aether and matter are different states of the same material. Aether is displaced by matter. Displacement creates pressure. Gravity is pressure exerted by aether displaced by matter. Gravitation, the 'Dark Matter' Effect and the Fine Structure Constant http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0401047 "There we see the first arguments that indicate the logical necessity for quantum behaviour, at both the spatial level and at the matter level. There space is, at one of the lowest levels, a quantumfoam system undergoing ongoing classicalisation. That model suggest that gravity is caused by matter changing the processing rate of the informational system that manifests as space, and as a consequence space effectively flows towards matter. However this is not a flow of some form of matter through space, as previously considered in the aether models or in the random particulate Le Sage kinetic theory of gravity, rather the flow is an ongoing rearrangement of the quantum-foam patterns that form space, and indeed only have a geometrical description at a coarse-grained level. Then the flow in one region is relative only to the patterns in nearby regions, and not relative to some a priori background geometrical space" What is described as "space effectively flows towards matter" is the pressure exerted by the aether towards the matter. "Then the flow in one region is relative only to the patterns in nearby regions" is the pressure exerted by the aether in nearby regions displaced by the matter. |