From: BURT on
On Feb 21, 8:20 pm, artful <artful...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 17, 3:42 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Should not time flow?. Should not there be order to energy phenomenon?
>
> That has absoltuely nothing to do with aether
>
> > Einstein brought the concept back.
>
> He got rid of it .. what came back was spacetime, which he said you
> could (if you wanted) put hte label of 'aether' on, but it was unlike
> the old pre-relativistic aether.

NO. He brought it back later. Aether is fllowing time over energy.

> > Mitch Raemsch - There is a two time aether
>
> Nope

From: funkenstein on
On Feb 17, 3:20 pm, dlzc <dl...(a)cox.net> wrote:
> On Feb 16, 9:42 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Aether (the only one that survives experiment) has no observables, no
> way to disprove it.
>
> David A. Smith

I saw a Frank Wilcek lecture recently which was quite good.

He talked at length about the physics going on in vacuum.

He proposes that we don't talk about "the aether" but instead use "the
grid".

What do you think?
From: mpc755 on
On Feb 22, 4:12 am, funkenstein <luke.s...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 17, 3:20 pm, dlzc <dl...(a)cox.net> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 16, 9:42 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Aether (the only one that survives experiment) has no observables, no
> > way to disprove it.
>
> > David A. Smith
>
> I saw a Frank Wilcek lecture recently which was quite good.
>
> He talked at length about the physics going on in vacuum.
>
> He proposes that we don't talk about "the aether" but instead use "the
> grid".
>
> What do you think?

Grid doesn't cut it. The aether is physical and it is a matter of the
properties we choose to apply to it.

In AD, the aether is a physical material with mass. Aether is
displaced by matter. Matter and aether are different states of the
same material. Aether is matter in its uncompressed state.
From: kenseto on
On Feb 22, 4:12 am, funkenstein <luke.s...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 17, 3:20 pm, dlzc <dl...(a)cox.net> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 16, 9:42 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Aether (the only one that survives experiment) has no observables, no
> > way to disprove it.
>
> > David A. Smith
>
> I saw a Frank Wilcek lecture recently which was quite good.
>
> He talked at length about the physics going on in vacuum.
>
> He proposes that we don't talk about "the aether" but instead use "the
> grid".
>
> What do you think?

The grid is good....the E-Matrix in my theory is a 3D grid occupying
all of space. A detail description of the E-Matrix is available in the
following link:
http://www.modelmechanics.org/2008irt.dtg.pdf

Ken Seto
From: kenseto on
On Feb 22, 4:56 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 22, 4:12 am, funkenstein <luke.s...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 17, 3:20 pm, dlzc <dl...(a)cox.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 16, 9:42 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Aether (the only one that survives experiment) has no observables, no
> > > way to disprove it.
>
> > > David A. Smith
>
> > I saw a Frank Wilcek lecture recently which was quite good.
>
> > He talked at length about the physics going on in vacuum.
>
> > He proposes that we don't talk about "the aether" but instead use "the
> > grid".
>
> > What do you think?
>
> Grid doesn't cut it.

Hey the grid is material of sort. In my theory it is called the E-
Matrix. It is a perfect description of the modern aether. It gives
rise to a new theory of relativity called IRT and a new theory of
gravity called DTG.
http://www.modelmechanics.org/2008irt.dtg.pdf

Ken Seto

> The aether is physical and it is a matter of the
> properties we choose to apply to it.
>
> In AD, the aether is a physical material with mass. Aether is
> displaced by matter. Matter and aether are different states of the
> same material. Aether is matter in its uncompressed state.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -