What is the Aether?
in [Relativity]
|
From: GSS on 31 May 2007 03:32 On May 30, 8:10 pm, Bilge <dubi...(a)radioactivex.sz> wrote: > On 2007-05-29, GSS <gurcharn_san...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On May 29, 5:15 am, Bilge <dubi...(a)radioactivex.sz> wrote: >>> On 2007-05-28, GSS <gurcharn_san...(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? > >> Are you familiar with the system of dimensions and units in Physics? >> Can you distinguish between 'physical dimensions' and the 'unit >> systems'? > > Yeah - my point is that you can't make that distinction and you Isn't it too vague? You may not be convinced with my arguments, but the question was "Can you distinguish between 'physical dimensions' and the 'unit systems'?" Please be specific, either say that such a distinction doesn't exist or say that you are not clear about it. > prove me right with your silly, superficial argument below. > .... OK I delete my arguments and let us consider yours instead. To help you express your point of view clearly, let me frame a few relevant questions which you may answer as briefly as you please. Further, let me assure you that I do not regard you as an idiot or crackpot unless you prove otherwise by your *conduct* (and not by differences in viewpoints). 1. Dimensions & Units ------------------ (a) Do you think the dimensions and units of *speed* are both arbitrary and you can change them as you please? Or do you think that only units of speed are arbitrary but its dimensions are linked with those of a large number of physical parameters (like force, momentum, energy, distance, time etc.) and hence cannot be tampered with arbitrarily. (b) The intrinsic *impedance* Z_0 of space continuum is measured to be 377 ohms. Do you consider that either the magnitude or units or dimensions of Z_0 are arbitrary and can be changed as you please? (c) If by any chance you agree that the dimensions of speed 'c' and impedance 'Z_0' cannot be changed arbitrarily, then do you agree that the dimensions of eps_0 and mu_0 can also not be changed arbitrarily? 2. Spacetime continuum ------------------- (a) Do you consider *spacetime* continuum to be a physical entity or just a mathematical notion? Does it possess any physical properties? If so, kindly name the *physical properties* of the spacetime continuum and indicate their measured values (in a so called 'flat' region). (b) Do you understand that a non-zero value of the *Riemann tensor* composed from the metric coefficients of 'spacetime' continuum actually represents the deformations in the continuum (which is generally regarded as the 'curvature' of the continuum)? (c) Do you understand that the deformations in 'space' continuum can be associated with the strained state of the continuum? 3. Material Media approximated as a Continuum ------------------------------------------ (a) When a material media is approximated to a continuum of points with bulk properties of density, elasticity etc., it is found to support the propagation of transverse as well as longitudinal strain waves. If you can figure out, kindly let us know the necessary conditions under which the speed of propagation of transverse strain waves will be the same as that of longitudinal strain waves? (b) When we study the propagation characteristics of strain waves in a material media, approximated as a continuum, is it necessary to account for the particulate nature of the media (in addition to its bulk properties) to obtain correct results? (c) Consider a short strain wave pulse propagating in a continuum at constant speed c1. Do you regard the speed c1 to be a characteristic of the strain pulse or a characteristic of the continuum? GSS
From: Rudolf Drabek on 31 May 2007 03:33 On 30 Mai, 19:03, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote: > Rudolf Drabek wrote: > > On 30 Mai, 18:40, Rudolf Drabek <newsr...(a)aon.at> wrote: > >> On 30 Mai, 16:13, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote:> Rudolf Drabek wrote: > > >>>> EM waves are propagating thru this nondetectable and acc. to SR not > >>>> necc. medium. > >>>> But it has 377 Ohm's. > >>> "The characteristic impedance of free space, also called the Zo of > >>> free space, is an expression of the relationship between the > >>> electric-field and magnetic-field intensities in an electromagnetic > >>> field (EM field) propagating through a vacuum. The Zo of free space, > >>> like characteristic impedance in general, is expressed in ohms, and > >>> is theoretically independent of wavelength. It is considered a physical > >>> constant". > >> Yes, the surface of the unity sphere multiplied with sqrt(c). > >> So what? > > >> A moving charge generates a magnetic field. Do you agree on that? > >> Usually the charges are electrons. > > >> EM waves in empty space can only propagate if there is something that > >> can be exited to behave as electrons. > >> What I want to say also is, that this medium, totally elastic , the > >> aether is irrelevat for SR. It has not the properties like an absolute > >> coordination system, also not for the transportation of EM energy. > >> More I don't know at the moment. But it is surprisingly strange and > >> new -may be for me only-. > >> I came to that, because I investigated the h_w of antennaes, current > >> distribution E and H field. > > > Oh, I forgot, dark matter behaves in the same way. Not detectable to > > date. > > Oh dark matter is detectable all right... by its gravitational effects! Yes, correct, by it's effects
From: Rudolf Drabek on 31 May 2007 03:38 On 30 Mai, 19:02, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote: > Rudolf Drabek wrote: > > On 30 Mai, 16:13, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote: > >> Rudolf Drabek wrote: > > >>> EM waves are propagating thru this nondetectable and acc. to SR not > >>> necc. medium. > >>> But it has 377 Ohm's. > >> "The characteristic impedance of free space, also called the Zo of > >> free space, is an expression of the relationship between the > >> electric-field and magnetic-field intensities in an electromagnetic > >> field (EM field) propagating through a vacuum. The Zo of free space, > >> like characteristic impedance in general, is expressed in ohms, and > >> is theoretically independent of wavelength. It is considered a physical > >> constant". > > Yes, the surface of the unity sphere multiplied with sqrt(c). > > So what? > > > A moving charge generates a magnetic field. Do you agree on that? > > Usually the charges are electrons. > > > EM waves in empty space can only propagate if there is something that > > can be exited to behave as electrons. > > Says you--I'm saying that photons *do* propagate through empty space > without anything getting excited. Let's do an experiment or make an > observation to decide which idea is supported. > > > What I want to say also is, that this medium, totally elastic , the > > aether is irrelevat for SR. It has not the properties like an absolute > > coordination system, also not for the transportation of EM energy. > > More I don't know at the moment. But it is surprisingly strange and > > new -may be for me only-. > > I came to that, because I investigated the h_w of antennaes, current > > distribution E and H field. Before an experiment pls agree/not on magnetic field around moving charges.
From: FrediFizzx on 31 May 2007 04:00 "GSS" <gurcharn_sandhu(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1180596752.519177.244050(a)o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com... > On May 30, 8:10 pm, Bilge <dubi...(a)radioactivex.sz> wrote: >> On 2007-05-29, GSS <gurcharn_san...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>> On May 29, 5:15 am, Bilge <dubi...(a)radioactivex.sz> wrote: >>>> On 2007-05-28, GSS <gurcharn_san...(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? >> >>> Are you familiar with the system of dimensions and units in Physics? >>> Can you distinguish between 'physical dimensions' and the 'unit >>> systems'? >> >> Yeah - my point is that you can't make that distinction and you > > Isn't it too vague? You may not be convinced with my arguments, but > the question was "Can you distinguish between 'physical dimensions' > and the 'unit systems'?" Please be specific, either say that such a > distinction doesn't exist or say that you are not clear about it. > >> prove me right with your silly, superficial argument below. >> > ... > OK I delete my arguments and let us consider yours instead. > > To help you express your point of view clearly, let me frame a few > relevant questions which you may answer as briefly as you please. > Further, let me assure you that I do not regard you as an idiot or > crackpot unless you prove otherwise by your *conduct* (and not by > differences in viewpoints). > > 1. Dimensions & Units > ------------------ > (a) Do you think the dimensions and units of *speed* are both > arbitrary and you can change them as you please? Or do you think that > only units of speed are arbitrary but its dimensions are linked with > those of a large number of physical parameters (like force, momentum, > energy, distance, time etc.) and hence cannot be tampered with > arbitrarily. > > (b) The intrinsic *impedance* Z_0 of space continuum is measured to > be 377 ohms. Do you consider that either the magnitude or units or > dimensions of Z_0 are arbitrary and can be changed as you please? > > (c) If by any chance you agree that the dimensions of speed 'c' and > impedance 'Z_0' cannot be changed arbitrarily, then do you agree that > the dimensions of eps_0 and mu_0 can also not be changed arbitrarily? Sure, they all can be changed arbitrarily. Why not? In CGS units, the impedance of space is 4pi/c. Which is length divided by time. In natural units, the impedance of space is 4pi. Eps0 becomes 1/4pi. All magnitudes of velocities become equal to or less than 1 and dimensionless. Best, Fred Diether Moderator sci.physics.foundations
From: Rudolf Drabek on 31 May 2007 04:35
On 30 Mai, 17:10, Bilge <dubi...(a)radioactivex.sz> wrote: > On 2007-05-29, GSS <gurcharn_san...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > On May 29, 5:15 am, Bilge <dubi...(a)radioactivex.sz> wrote: > >> On 2007-05-28, GSS <gurcharn_san...(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? > > > Are you familiar with the system of dimensions and units in Physics? > > Can you distinguish between 'physical dimensions' and the 'unit > > systems'? > > Yeah - my point is that you can't make that distinction and you > prove me right with your silly, superficial argument below. > > > For the 'quantification of observations' in Physics, we need systems > > of physical dimensions, systems of measurements and systems of > > reference coordinates. The fact that in mathematics we mainly deal > > with dimensionless numbers, distinguishes its domain from that of > > physics. Some scientists, who are deeply engrossed in mathematical > > aspect of Physics, tend to dismiss the dimensional aspect of physical > > quantities rather casually, as something quite arbitrary. Dimensions > > provide an extremely important linkage between mathematics and > > physical reality and hence constitute an essential part of physics > > which aims to study and grasp physical reality by making use of > > mathematical tools. A unit system is highly inter-related and > > dimensions of any one parameter can not be arbitrarily changed without > > affecting many other parameters. > > > Real physical entities or objects of nature are given a symbolic > > representation in Physics. There is direct one to one unique > > correspondence between these physical objects and their corresponding > > symbolic representation. The concept of dimensions is based on > > established physical laws (like Newton's laws of motion), and observed > > inter-relationship between various physical quantities. Just as the > > physical laws and observed inter-relationships are not arbitrary, the > > dimensions of corresponding physical quantities are also not > > arbitrary. Quoting Percy William Bridgman from an article in > > Encyclopedia Britannica : > > > "The view has been very common that a dimensional formula expresses > > the essential physical nature of a quantity. From this point of view > > the present indeterminateness in dimensional formulas is an expression > > of our present incomplete knowledge of the complete physical > > mechanism, and the time is anticipated when we shall be able to write > > the correct dimensional formula for the dielectric constant and the > > magnetic permeability of empty space." > > > For further elaboration of the linkages between eps0, mu0, z0 and c in > > free space or vacuum and clarification of their basis in Physics, > > kindly refer to, > >http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sandhu/pdf_art/space_aether_vacuum.pdf > > >> [...] > > >> > 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. > > > Kindly be assured that I usually make my comments on the basis of > > tremendous amount of intricate calculations which cannot be presented > > in these discussions. Just for illustration, let me reproduce my > > comments given on another thread titled "What is the shape of an > > electron?". If you are interested in the supporting calculations, I > > will be pleased to present the same!! > > > GSS > > > What is the shape of an electron? > > ------------------------------------------------ > > "We may imagine the electron structure as consisting of a central core > > of about 1.61 fm (10^-15 m) radius containing a standing wave > > 'electrostatic' field and surrounded by a radial phase wave field with > > decaying amplitude. The radial wave field for electron may be given by > > f(r).e^(iK(r+ct))and that for positron by f(r).e^(iK(r-ct)). Here K > > represents the wave number of the radial wave field and could be of > > the order of 10^15 m^-1. The amplitude factor f(r) is proportional to > > 1/r. The concept of charge is related to the direction of propagation, > > intensity and interaction characteristics of radial wave field. > > > As you can see this picture of the electron is drastically different > > from the conventional point mass and point charge notion generally > > taken for granted. In this *core-field picture of electron* (or > > positron), the mass energy is characteristically distributed in space > > and its charge property is represented by the interaction > > characteristic of its wave field. This wave field replaces the notion > > of virtual photons. About 65 percent of the total mass energy of the > > electron (positron) is contained in the central core region and the > > remaining 35 percent is distributed in its wave field. The > > characteristic frequency of oscillations of the standing wave field of > > the electron/positron core is of the order of 8X10^22 Hz. > > > When two opposite charges interact, their electrostatic wave fields > > get superposed thereby reducing the amplitude of the resultant wave > > field and reducing the combined field energy of the interacting > > charges. This reduction in the combined field energy amounts to a net > > release of a portion of their field (mass) energy (called negative > > interaction energy) which could either get transferred to the kinetic > > energy of the interacting charges or gets used up in creation of a > > photon or some other transient elementary particle. If the released > > interaction energy is given out or gets extracted from the system then > > the interacting charge particles are said to get bound together and > > the amount of interaction energy extracted from the system is termed > > as their binding energy. > > > When two similar charges interact, their electrostatic wave fields get > > superposed thereby increasing the amplitude of the resultant wave > > field and increasing the combined field energy of the interacting > > charges leading to positive interaction energy. The Coulomb > > interaction between two charged particles is essentially the > > interaction between their radially decaying wave fields and is > > strictly valid for separation distances greater than 3.2 fm." > > > --------------- > > > " The approximate shape of the electron described in my previous post > > is based on a detailed mathematical model. Let me introduce some > > relevant background of that model. > > > Under the proposed viewpoint, the E&M fields as well as all elementary > > particles could be viewed as space-time 'distortions' or dynamic > > deformations in the space continuum. That is these 'deformations' will > > constitute a 'structure' of these particles and cover a finite region > > of space. Therefore we need to shed the current notion of elementary > > particles being 'point' or 'point-like' particles with characteristic > > properties. Instead, we need to derive the characteristic properties > > from the 'structure' and the 'interactions' of these particles. > > > There are two reasons why we need to move beyond the conventional view > > point even if it is more difficult and arduous task. Firstly we need > > to understand the fundamental nature of E&M fields as well as all > > elementary particles with such clarity that we should be able to > > mentally visualize the same just as we do most other physical > > entities. Secondly, at present the space-time curvature is considered > > a very respectable concept whereas the notion of space-time > > 'distortions' or deformations is generally considered something fuzzy. > > In reality however, space-time curvature is just a mathematical notion > > depicting an incompatible deformation of space and time. Detailed > > analysis of this incompatibility of space-time curvature induced > > deformations is available at, > > >http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sandhu/htm_art/continuum_strain.htm > >http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sandhu/pdf_art/invalidity_gr.pdf > > > The electric and magnetic fields could be viewed as dynamic > > deformations in the space continuum with physical properties of eps_0 > > and mu_0. Let U be a time dependent 'displacement' vector in the space > > continuum such that it satisfies the Maxwell's vector wave equation > > > Del^2(U) = (1/c^2) D^2(U)/Dt^2 ...... (1) > > where D represents the partial derivative symbol. > > > A solution of equation (1) for U that satisfies the essential boundary > > conditions, will represent a transverse wave field if Del.U = 0. > > Further, we may identify U with the conventional electric and > > magnetic fields E & B in 'free space' through the identities, E = - > > (1/eps_0).(1/c). DU/Dt and B = (1/c).(1/eps_0).(Del X U). The > > displacement vector field U will now satisfy all the electromagnetic > > field equations that are satisfied by E & B in 'free space'. > > > To develop some insight into this otherwise highly complex phenomenon > > of space-time 'distortions' or the dynamic deformations of the space > > continuum, equation (1) given above could be an excellent starting > > point. We may try to *solve* equation (1) in terms of components of > > displacement vector U in any convenient coordinate system subject to > > appropriate boundary and stability conditions. For example in > > Cartesian coordinates we have to solve (1) for displacement vector > > components u_x, u_y and u_z as functions of x, y, z and t. In > > spherical polar coordinates we have to solve for u_r, u_theta and > > u_phi as functions of r, theta, phi ant t. > > > Of course it is very important to clarify two points regarding space- > > time distortions in the very beginning. Firstly, all space-time > > distortions or dynamic deformations of the space continuum can be > > identified with or referred to as strained states of the continuum. > > Secondly all space-time distortions will be associated with > > corresponding energy density of the deformed or > > ... > > Erfahren Sie mehr ยป The propagation of EM waves, as the name says, need el. and magnetic fields. A moving charge produces a magnetic field an vice versa. As there are no electrons available in empty space/vacuum/or name what you like, another characteristic must take that role ---> say ether/or how you name it. |