There is no “pull” of gravity, only the PUSH of flowing ether!
in [Physics]
|
From: spudnik on 27 Mar 2010 18:47 what need of mather? what need of relying on old Albert's meager comprehemdion? some one, supply a precis! --Light: A History! http://wlym.com
From: Paul Stowe on 27 Mar 2010 18:54 On Mar 27, 1:25 pm, spudnik <Space...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > don't top-post! > > well-said -- i think. I was flirting with aether, for a while, but > i came to realize that the "claassical" aether was missing > a lot of what we have come to know. Not really... What do you think it is missing? > unfortunately, the whole "field" is a flood with crappy time-space > sillygisms, Absolutely, one asks what does the 'fields' consist of? And calling it space-time is silly > and the overweaning abuse of Schroedinger's joke-cat > by the Copenhagenskoolers myticism. When dealing with large populations (as with an aether medium), using statistics and probabilities make sense AS LONG AS! you know what you're dealing with :) Schroedinger's cat is either alive or dead and it makes no difference whether you looked or not. It is only your knowledge of the cat's fate that is uncertain until you look. The whole exercise was to show the silliness of taking such things too literally. > there are no rocks o'light, and there is no vacuum. You're right there. As Einstein once wrote, "there exists no such thing as empty space" and "space without ether is unthinkable" > you have got to start from somw where, > where there is not no where! Which points to the absurdity of modern conceptual foundations... > > > The pressure exerted by aether displaced by matter is gravity. > > > Look, I usually don't respond to your posts since you are as closed > > minded as most. You're trying to 'preach' your version of scientific > > religion and ignore all else. I am an aetherist (modern type) but ask > > yourself a question, in all known cases, how does pressure come > > about? Further, you keep saying matter displaces aether, thus, by > > that logic this would seem to indicate that you think matter is > > something else. I disagree, matter is just standing patterns of the > > very same thing, thus it cannot displace aether. But, on the other > > hand, those patterns can, and do, affect the properties of the medium > > due to their presence... > > --Light: A History!http://wlym.com Paul Stowe
From: Paul Stowe on 27 Mar 2010 19:26 On Mar 27, 1:59 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 27, 3:34 pm, Paul Stowe <theaether...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mar 27, 11:37 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > A particle is not responsible for gravity. The aether as a one > > > something is responsible for gravity. > > > > The pressure exerted by aether displaced by matter is gravity. > > > Look, I usually don't respond to your posts since you are as closed > > minded as most. You're trying to 'preach' your version of scientific > > religion and ignore all else. I am an aetherist (modern type) but ask > > yourself a question, in all known cases, how does pressure come > > about? Further, you keep saying matter displaces aether, thus, by > > that logic this would seem to indicate that you think matter is > > something else. I disagree, matter is just standing patterns of the > > very same thing, thus it cannot displace aether. But, on the other > > hand, those patterns can, and do, affect the properties of the medium > > due to their presence... > > Aether and matter are different states of the same material. I have > named this material mather. Matter is compressed mather and aether is > uncompressed mather. Why invent new names needlessly? Further, I think that it will be realized that, in fact, matter is less dense than 'free space' and that inertia is an EM response to changes in velocity. Such changes equires that the fields change and, in turn, this produces a counter EMF which we perceive as inertia. Then, if the strong equivilence is true, gravity is related to a second order EM process (v^2). > "Think of waves on the surface of water. Here we can describe two > entirely different things. Either we may observe how the undulatory > surface forming the boundary between water and air alters in the > course of time; or else-with the help of small floats, for instance - > we can observe how the position of the separate particles of water > alters in the course of time. If the existence of such floats for > tracking the motion of the particles of a fluid were a fundamental > impossibility in physics - if, in fact nothing else whatever were > observable than the shape of the space occupied by the water as it > varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that water > consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise > it as a medium." - Albert Einstein > > If there was no way to know if water consists of particles, or not, > placing a bowling ball into the water still displaces the water. Yes, it does... But a Feynman just loved to point out, the reason isn't as straight forward a one likes to think. On the sub-atomic level... > Water is not at rest when displaced. When you take the bowling ball > out of the water is there a void in the water where the bowling was? > No, of course not. The displaced water exerts pressure towards the > bowling ball. If the bowling ball consisted of tiny particles > separated by springs the water would exert pressure on and throughout > the bowling ball. Again yes it does, but it is because the so-called atoms of the bowling ball form an electrostatic barrier that the atoms of water cannot penetrate. Quantum mechanically the wave formss have phase interferences. > If tracking the motion of the particles of aether is a fundamental > impossibility in physics - if, in fact nothing else whatever were > observable than the shape of the space occupied by the aether as it > varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that > aether consists of movable particles. We have solid grounds for that assumption. In fact, provide one other known system that can result in fluidic behavior. > "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. Reverse the concept, think of matter AS displaced aether... > Displacement creates pressure. I think you really mean differential pressures... > Gravity is pressure exerted by aether displaced by matter. Yes, the gravitational 'field' is pressure gradients in the aether... The real issue is, how do these come about. Paul Stowe
From: mpc755 on 27 Mar 2010 19:47 On Mar 27, 7:26 pm, Paul Stowe <theaether...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 27, 1:59 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 27, 3:34 pm, Paul Stowe <theaether...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mar 27, 11:37 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > A particle is not responsible for gravity. The aether as a one > > > > something is responsible for gravity. > > > > > The pressure exerted by aether displaced by matter is gravity. > > > > Look, I usually don't respond to your posts since you are as closed > > > minded as most. You're trying to 'preach' your version of scientific > > > religion and ignore all else. I am an aetherist (modern type) but ask > > > yourself a question, in all known cases, how does pressure come > > > about? Further, you keep saying matter displaces aether, thus, by > > > that logic this would seem to indicate that you think matter is > > > something else. I disagree, matter is just standing patterns of the > > > very same thing, thus it cannot displace aether. But, on the other > > > hand, those patterns can, and do, affect the properties of the medium > > > due to their presence... > > > Aether and matter are different states of the same material. I have > > named this material mather. Matter is compressed mather and aether is > > uncompressed mather. > > Why invent new names needlessly? Because there are those on this forum who insist aether is a state of matter and there are others who insist matter is a state of aether. To try and avoid this pointless discussion I decided to say matter and aether are different states of the same material and gave this material the name aether. It also helps because aether is a one something. So describing a 'quantum of mather' distinguishes a photon directed/pointed wave from matter when the photon is detected and collapses and is detected as a quantum of mather. > Further, I think that it will be > realized that, in fact, matter is less dense than 'free space' and > that inertia is an EM response to changes in velocity. Such changes > equires that the fields change and, in turn, this produces a counter > EMF which we perceive as inertia. Then, if the strong equivilence is > true, gravity is related to a second order EM process (v^2). > Either that or aether is displaced by matter and the aether is not at rest when displaced and displaces back and the displacing back is the pressure the aether exerts towards the matter which is gravity. > > "Think of waves on the surface of water. Here we can describe two > > entirely different things. Either we may observe how the undulatory > > surface forming the boundary between water and air alters in the > > course of time; or else-with the help of small floats, for instance - > > we can observe how the position of the separate particles of water > > alters in the course of time. If the existence of such floats for > > tracking the motion of the particles of a fluid were a fundamental > > impossibility in physics - if, in fact nothing else whatever were > > observable than the shape of the space occupied by the water as it > > varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that water > > consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise > > it as a medium." - Albert Einstein > > > If there was no way to know if water consists of particles, or not, > > placing a bowling ball into the water still displaces the water. > > Yes, it does... But a Feynman just loved to point out, the reason > isn't as straight forward a one likes to think. On the sub-atomic > level... > A nucleus displaces aether. The aether is not at rest when displaced and applies pressure towards the nucleus doing the displacing. > > Water is not at rest when displaced. When you take the bowling ball > > out of the water is there a void in the water where the bowling was? > > No, of course not. The displaced water exerts pressure towards the > > bowling ball. If the bowling ball consisted of tiny particles > > separated by springs the water would exert pressure on and throughout > > the bowling ball. > > Again yes it does, but it is because the so-called atoms of the > bowling ball form an electrostatic barrier that the atoms of water > cannot penetrate. Quantum mechanically the wave formss have phase > interferences. > > > If tracking the motion of the particles of aether is a fundamental > > impossibility in physics - if, in fact nothing else whatever were > > observable than the shape of the space occupied by the aether as it > > varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that > > aether consists of movable particles. > > We have solid grounds for that assumption. In fact, provide one other > known system that can result in fluidic behavior. > > > "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. > > Reverse the concept, think of matter AS displaced aether... > Exactly. The aether displaces back. > > Displacement creates pressure. > > I think you really mean differential pressures... > > > Gravity is pressure exerted by aether displaced by matter. > > Yes, the gravitational 'field' is pressure gradients in the aether... > The real issue is, how do these come about. > Because the aether is displaced. The aether is not at rest when displaced. If the aether were at rest when displaced there would be no aether. If the aether were at rest when displaced, and there were an aether, there would not be conservation of energy. If the aether exists then it is displaced by matter. If the aether is displaced by matter it is not at rest when displaced and 'displaces back'. The 'displacing back' is the pressure the aether exerts towards the matter doing the displacing. The pressure exerted by aether displaced by matter is gravity. Gravity is the reason for the observed behaviors in the Casimir Effect.
From: mpc755 on 28 Mar 2010 00:03
On Mar 27, 7:26 pm, Paul Stowe <theaether...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 27, 1:59 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 27, 3:34 pm, Paul Stowe <theaether...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mar 27, 11:37 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > A particle is not responsible for gravity. The aether as a one > > > > something is responsible for gravity. > > > > > The pressure exerted by aether displaced by matter is gravity. > > > > Look, I usually don't respond to your posts since you are as closed > > > minded as most. You're trying to 'preach' your version of scientific > > > religion and ignore all else. I am an aetherist (modern type) but ask > > > yourself a question, in all known cases, how does pressure come > > > about? Further, you keep saying matter displaces aether, thus, by > > > that logic this would seem to indicate that you think matter is > > > something else. I disagree, matter is just standing patterns of the > > > very same thing, thus it cannot displace aether. But, on the other > > > hand, those patterns can, and do, affect the properties of the medium > > > due to their presence... > > > Aether and matter are different states of the same material. I have > > named this material mather. Matter is compressed mather and aether is > > uncompressed mather. > > Why invent new names needlessly? Because there are those on this forum who insist aether is a state of matter and there are others who insist matter is a state of aether. To try and avoid this pointless discussion I decided to say matter and aether are different states of the same material and gave this material the name mather. It also helps because aether acts as a one something. So describing a 'quantum of mather' distinguishes a photon directed/pointed wave from aether and matter when the photon is detected and collapses and is detected as a quantum of mather. > Further, I think that it will be > realized that, in fact, matter is less dense than 'free space' 'DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT? By A. EINSTEIN' http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf "If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass diminishes by L/c2." The mass of the body does diminish, but the matter which no longer exists as part of the body has not vanished. It still exists, as aether. As the matter transitions to aether it expands in three dimensions. The effect this transition has on the surrounding aether and matter is energy. Matter has more mass per volume than aether. > and > that inertia is an EM response to changes in velocity. Such changes > equires that the fields change and, in turn, this produces a counter > EMF which we perceive as inertia. Then, if the strong equivilence is > true, gravity is related to a second order EM process (v^2). > Either that or aether is displaced by matter and the aether is not at rest when displaced and displaces back and the displacing back is the pressure the aether exerts towards the matter which is gravity. > > "Think of waves on the surface of water. Here we can describe two > > entirely different things. Either we may observe how the undulatory > > surface forming the boundary between water and air alters in the > > course of time; or else-with the help of small floats, for instance - > > we can observe how the position of the separate particles of water > > alters in the course of time. If the existence of such floats for > > tracking the motion of the particles of a fluid were a fundamental > > impossibility in physics - if, in fact nothing else whatever were > > observable than the shape of the space occupied by the water as it > > varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that water > > consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise > > it as a medium." - Albert Einstein > > > If there was no way to know if water consists of particles, or not, > > placing a bowling ball into the water still displaces the water. > > Yes, it does... But a Feynman just loved to point out, the reason > isn't as straight forward a one likes to think. On the sub-atomic > level... > A nucleus displaces aether. The aether is not at rest when displaced and applies pressure towards the nucleus doing the displacing. > > Water is not at rest when displaced. When you take the bowling ball > > out of the water is there a void in the water where the bowling was? > > No, of course not. The displaced water exerts pressure towards the > > bowling ball. If the bowling ball consisted of tiny particles > > separated by springs the water would exert pressure on and throughout > > the bowling ball. > > Again yes it does, but it is because the so-called atoms of the > bowling ball form an electrostatic barrier that the atoms of water > cannot penetrate. Quantum mechanically the wave formss have phase > interferences. > > > If tracking the motion of the particles of aether is a fundamental > > impossibility in physics - if, in fact nothing else whatever were > > observable than the shape of the space occupied by the aether as it > > varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that > > aether consists of movable particles. > > We have solid grounds for that assumption. In fact, provide one other > known system that can result in fluidic behavior. > > > "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. > > Reverse the concept, think of matter AS displaced aether... > Exactly. I prefer the term compressed. The matter, which is compressed aether, exists in and displaces the aether. The aether displaces back. > > Displacement creates pressure. > > I think you really mean differential pressures... > > > Gravity is pressure exerted by aether displaced by matter. > > Yes, the gravitational 'field' is pressure gradients in the aether... > The real issue is, how do these come about. > Because the aether is displaced. The aether is not at rest when displaced. If the aether were at rest when displaced there would be no aether. If the aether were at rest when displaced, and there were an aether, there would not be conservation of momentum. There would be no momentum. How do we know the aether 'displaces back'? Because light from distant stars reaches us from where Jupiter was in its orbit (i.e. Jupiter does not leave a void in its wake). If the aether exists then it is displaced by matter. If the aether is displaced by matter it is not at rest when displaced and 'displaces back'. The 'displacing back' is the pressure the aether exerts towards the matter doing the displacing. The pressure exerted by aether displaced by matter is gravity. Gravity is the reason for the observed behaviors in the Casimir Effect. The aether displaced by each plate extends past the other plate. The pressure exerted by the aether displaced by the plates forces the plates together. |