What is the disagreement to aether?
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: 4-vector dot A = invariant => A is a 4-vector?
Next: Capacitance theory of gravity - interesting theory
From: BURT on 27 Feb 2010 20:19 On Feb 27, 5:10 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Feb 26, 2:28 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 26, 1:25 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Feb 26, 2:23 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 26, 1:11 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Feb 26, 1:34 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 26, 9:34 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > The total contents is the total > > > > > > > > system energy that gravity acts upon, and in many ways the total contents > > > > > > > > acts just like matter. > > > > > > > > Because the total amount of mass in existence does not change.. > > > > > > > And where did this statement become obviously correct? How do you > > > > > > KNOW? > > > > > > If mass 'converts' to energy then you need to account for the lack of > > > > > there being less mass in existence, not the other way around. > > > > > Why? You don't have to account for there being fewer dinosaurs in > > > > existence. You don't have to account for there being less neutrons in > > > > beta decay. Why do you think the amount of mass in the universe does > > > > not change? Other than the fact that you think it SHOULD be, I mean.. > > > > If mass converted to energy then there would be no mass. > > > Why would you say that? Energy also converts back into mass. > > Mass-less energy does not convert back to mass. > > The universe consists of mather. Mather has mass. The two basic forms > of mather we are familiar with are as matter and aether. Matter is > compressed mather and aether is uncompressed mather. > > When mather converts from matter to aether the physical effect the > increase in volume of the mather has as it transitions from matter to > aether on the neighboring mather is energy. > > > Neither > > one of them is expected to remain the same. They fluctuate back and > > forth into each other all the time, but not always at equal rates. > > Mass does not fluctuate back to mass-less energy and mass-less energy > does not fluctuate back to mass. This is just more of the absurd > nonsense you choose to believe in. Mass does become finite energy density which does not weigh. Light spreads out from a single point and goes back to it inbetwen waves. Mass is defined as pointlike and infinitely dense energy. Spread out energy is for light and bond for matter. Mitch Raemsch > > You really have to get out of the habit of just making statements you > > THINK are true and demanding that they MUST be true. First you should > > ask yourself WHY you think those statements are true. > > The physical effect mather has on the neighboring mather as it > transitions from matter to aether is more correct than mass 'converts > to' energy and energy 'converts to' aether. > > A moving C-60 molecule having an associated aether displacement wave > and the C-60 molecule entering and exiting a single slit while the > aether displacement wave enters and exits the available slits is more > correct than the future determines the past. > > > > > > > > > > The fact that AD accounts for the mass and energy means it is more > > > > > correct. > > > > > No, it is only more correct if mass is expected to stay the same. But > > > > you haven't said why you expect that.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: Sam Wormley on 27 Feb 2010 20:23 On 2/27/10 7:10 PM, mpc755 wrote: > Mass-less energy does not convert back to mass. Photon momentum p = hν/c = h/λ Photon Energy E = hν http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pair_production "Pair production refers to the creation of an elementary particle and its antiparticle, usually from a photon (or another neutral boson). This is allowed, provided there is enough energy available to create the pair – at least the total rest mass energy of the two particles – and that the situation allows both energy and momentum to be conserved (though not necessarily on shell). All other conserved quantum numbers (angular momentum, electric charge) of the produced particles must sum to zero — thus the created particles shall have opposite values of each (for instance, if one particle has strangeness +1 then another one must have strangeness −1)".
From: Sam Wormley on 27 Feb 2010 20:26 On 2/27/10 7:13 PM, mpc755 wrote: > How does mass-less energy 'convert to' mass? Photon momentum p = hν/c = h/λ Photon Energy E = hν One way is Pair Production http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pair_production "Pair production refers to the creation of an elementary particle and its antiparticle, usually from a photon (or another neutral boson). This is allowed, provided there is enough energy available to create the pair – at least the total rest mass energy of the two particles – and that the situation allows both energy and momentum to be conserved (though not necessarily on shell). All other conserved quantum numbers (angular momentum, electric charge) of the produced particles must sum to zero — thus the created particles shall have opposite values of each (for instance, if one particle has strangeness +1 then another one must have strangeness −1)".
From: BURT on 27 Feb 2010 20:40 On Feb 27, 5:13 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Feb 26, 9:51 pm, moro...(a)world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) > wrote: > > > > > > > mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> writes: > > >On Feb 26, 1:34 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >> On Feb 26, 9:34 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> > > The total contents is the total > > >> > > system energy that gravity acts upon, and in many ways the total contents > > >> > > acts just like matter. > > > >> > Because the total amount of mass in existence does not change. > > > >> And where did this statement become obviously correct? How do you > > >> KNOW? > > >If mass 'converts' to energy then you need to account for the lack of > > >there being less mass in existence, not the other way around. > > > Already accounted for. Mass is simply a form of energy. > > How does mass 'convert to' mass-less energy? > How does mass-less energy 'convert to' mass? > > Matter and aether are different forms of mather. Matter is compressed > mather and aether is uncompressed mather. When mather transitions from > matter to aether the mather increases in volume. The physical effect > this increase in volume has on the neighboring mather is energy. > > > > > E=mc^2. > > If chemical energy becomes electromagnetic energy, nobody asks why > > chemical energy wasn't conserved. Same with rest mass as a form of > > energy. > > > We already know rest mass isn't a constant. Measure the mass of an > > electron Measure the mass of a positron. Combine them. Measure the mass > > of the resulting photons. Notice the "before" and "after" masses are not > > the same. But notice that the "before" and "after" energy (using E=mc^2) > > *are* the same. > > > >The fact that AD accounts for the mass and energy means it is more > > >correct. > > > How can it possibly be more correct than explaining why the "before" > > and "after" energies are the same, thus overall energy is conserved? > > > >The H20 analogy is accurate. > > > Well, it would be if you didn't keep twisting and abusing it in ways > > that simply don't apply.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - There is a point of light. Mitch Raemsch
From: mpc755 on 27 Feb 2010 20:45
On Feb 27, 8:23 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 2/27/10 7:10 PM, mpc755 wrote: > > > Mass-less energy does not convert back to mass. > >   Photon momentum >    p = hν/c = h/λ > >   Photon Energy >    E = hν > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pair_production > > "Pair production refers to the creation of an elementary particle and > its antiparticle, usually from a photon (or another neutral boson). This > is allowed, provided there is enough energy available to create the pair > â at least the total rest mass energy of the two particles â and that > the situation allows both energy and momentum to be conserved (though > not necessarily on shell). All other conserved quantum numbers (angular > momentum, electric charge) of the produced particles must sum to zero â > thus the created particles shall have opposite values of each (for > instance, if one particle has strangeness +1 then another one must have > strangeness â1)". Did you notice there is a photon being fired at a nucleus? The nucleus has mass. Show me where mass-less energy and only mass-less energy 'converts to' mass. Post the link where mass-less energy and only mass-less energy creates the nucleus. What your link represents is the mather associated with the photon is physically absorbed by the nucleus causing the electron/positron pair to be emitted. "Since the momentum of the initial photon must be absorbed by something, pair production cannot occur in empty space out of a single photon; the nucleus (or another photon) is needed to conserve both momentum and energy (consider the time reversal of Electron-positron annihilation)." When the initial photon is absorbed it is the addition of the quantum of mather to the nucleus which causes pair production. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_creation "Because of momentum conservation laws, the creation of a pair of fermions (matter particles) out of a single photon cannot occur. However, matter creation is allowed by these laws when in the presence of another particle (another photon or other boson, or even a fermion) which can share the primary photon's momentum. Thus, matter can be created out of two photons." When a photon is detected it collapses and is detected as a quantum of mather. This is the compression of pointed/directed photon wave in the aether and is the conversion of mather from aether to matter. That is why two photons are required. Two photons are required in order for the photon to collapse (i.e. compress) and transition from a wave in the aether to matter. |