What is the Aether?
in [Relativity]
|
From: Bilge on 28 May 2007 19:56 On 2007-05-27, GSS <gurcharn_sandhu(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On May 26, 3:46 pm, Bilge <dubi...(a)radioactivex.sz> wrote: >> On 2007-05-26, GSS <gurcharn_san...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>..... >>>>> The notions of aether, physical space, empty space, vacuum and their >>>>> modern reincarnation the quantum vacuum, all mean the same entity - >>>>> call it by any name. >> >>>> Obviously, you have never studied physics, otherwise you would >>>> recognize the differences. > . >>> Kindly let us know the differences that *you recognize* if any. >> >> The aether is a hypothetical physical medium which occupies space. > > Here you are implying the *physical medium* to mean *material medium* > which is composed of material particles. I did not imply anything. I stated it directly. >You are mistaken. No, you just happen to prefer being vague, as below: > Aether is a *continuum* A ``continum'' of what? > just as physical space is considered to be a continuum of points. You are confused. > Aether does not consist of material particles but > material particles are embedded in or exist in the aether continuum as > standing strain wave oscillations or strain bubbles. Please derive a result which explicitly demonstrates what that means and how that results in any physics. > > The aether continuum can be regarded as a physical entity precisely > because of its physical properties like Z_0 as discussed in my > original post. If you are going to discuss the Z_0, you had better do a great deal more research. I more than a passing aqcuaintance with weak interactions and the experimental data associated with it. >Starting with the measured physical properties and > using the existing body of knowledge known as 'continuum mechanics', > the aether continuum can be studied in great detail. In fact I find it > to be an extremely challenging study. Well, when you get around to studying enough continuum mechanics to understand it, you'll realize why it won't work. > >> The vacuum is the ray in hilbert space which contains no particles. > > The Hilbert space and a ray in Hilbert space are purely mathematical > notions. Any time someone drags out that tired cliche, I know that person is an idiot. If you cannot connect physics to mathematics, that is your problem. In this case, you are also a complete hypocrite, since your definition of a ``continuum'' is a philosophical abstraction with no physical or mathematical content and your appeal to continuum mechanics as justification only indicates your ignorance of continuum mechanics. Go buy a copy of goldstein or fetter and walecka.
From: Sue... on 28 May 2007 20:09 On May 28, 8:56 pm, Bilge <dubi...(a)radioactivex.sz> wrote: > > > The aether continuum can be regarded as a physical entity precisely > > because of its physical properties like Z_0 as discussed in my > > original post. > > If you are going to discuss the Z_0, you had better do a great deal > more research. I more than a passing aqcuaintance with weak interactions > and the experimental data associated with it. Did your research with weak interactions show a significant variation from 377 ohms for the Z_0 ? ;-) Sue...
From: Bilge on 28 May 2007 20:11 On 2007-05-27, FrediFizzx <fredifizzx(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > "GSS" <gurcharn_sandhu(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:1180248463.245420.241120(a)z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com... >> On May 26, 3:46 pm, Bilge <dubi...(a)radioactivex.sz> wrote: >>> On 2007-05-26, GSS <gurcharn_san...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>..... >>>>>> The notions of aether, physical space, empty space, vacuum and >>>>>> their >>>>>> modern reincarnation the quantum vacuum, all mean the same >>>>>> entity - >>>>>> call it by any name. >>> >>>>> Obviously, you have never studied physics, otherwise you would >>>>> recognize the differences. >> . >>>> Kindly let us know the differences that *you recognize* if any. >>> >>> The aether is a hypothetical physical medium which occupies space. >> >> Here you are implying the *physical medium* to mean *material medium* >> which is composed of material particles. You are mistaken. > > Yeah, Bilge wants to hold to the 19th Century notion of what the aether > should or could be. No, I hold to the idea that physical theories ought to have a basis in physical phenomena. That idea has spanned centuries. I also subscribe to the notion that anyone who deliberately obscures terminolgy which is well known and well defined, does so because he has a philosophical agenda which he/she lacks knowledge of any physics and lacks the imagination, competence and self-confidence in his/her own bullshit to invest the effort needed to follow through on it. [...] > A bigger question would be; can hbar be a property of a Higgs-like field > that fills space near mass-energy? Obviously not. hbar is a unit of angular momentum. The higgs is a scalar. [...] >>> The vacuum is the ray in hilbert space which contains no particles. > > Fortunately, I don't think that decribes the "quantum vacuum". The true It doesn't matter what you think. The quantum vacuum is defied by quantum field theory, so it is not open for personal interpretation. If you want to invent something else, give it a different name and develop the mathematical formalism to go with it. All you and the other idiot are doing is attempting to inject philospohical bullshit onto ideas which have rigorous mathematical definitions that correspond to specific physics.
From: Bilge on 28 May 2007 20:15 On 2007-05-28, GSS <gurcharn_sandhu(a)yahoo.com> wrote: [...] > Here it appears that you are trying to find the fundamental basis > for the existence of the physical properties (eps_0, mu_0, Z_0 and c) Do you really think that the ratios of human defined SI constants (not to mention redundant ratios of those constants) has any basis in physics? [...] > In my opinion, the study on these lines can explain most of the The difference between having an opinion and supporting an argument with calculations and experimental data is the difference between crackpots and physicists.
From: Y on 28 May 2007 20:47
Do a search for Borg's Laws in this forum. It reads. Space is the most to matter as matter is the host to space. -y |