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 23 Feb 2010 15:24 On Feb 23, 11:27 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Feb 23, 2:10 pm, dlzc <dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > > > > > > Dear mpc755: > > > On Feb 23, 9:39 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Feb 23, 11:34 am,dlzc<dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > > > On Feb 23, 1:59 am, GogoJF <jfgog...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 22, 4:15 pm,dlzc<dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > > > > > On Feb 22, 2:12 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. > > > > > > > > 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? > > > > > > > Might as well call it "The Matrix" for all the > > > > > > sense it makes. It does not allow us to > > > > > > discern "absolute motion", the "physics of the > > > > > > vacuum" is the same now as it was billions of > > > > > > years ago, so it behaves *exactly* like > > > > > > spacetime. > > > > > > > Why not accept then that it arises from the > > > > > > source of these properties, namely the matter > > > > > > and energy in this Universe? Wasting > > > > > > breath / thought on an 18th century crutch is > > > > > > just that, a waste. > > > > > > > If you want to know what *I* think. > > > > > > I think of the aether as a pressure- like the > > > > > pressure that fish feel when they are in a 45 > > > > > gallon tank. We are all fish living in a > > > > > certain medium. That's why its' difficult to > > > > > measure- if not impossible. > > > > > Then it has no discernable properties. And > > > > unlike the tank analogy, reveals no "drag" > > > > as we move through it. So clearly this model > > > > provides you nothing good, except "feelings" > > > > like you understand things that *no Man* > > > > understands. > > > > There is no 'drag' in a frictionless superfluid. > > > And such fails to describe the motion / "wave nature" of light. > > Waves are able to propagate through a frictionless superfluid. > > A particle moving through a frictionless superfluid is able to created > a displacement wave in the superfluid. > > > > If you remove the matter from the superfluid > > > then there is no 'drag' in a frictionless > > > aether. > > > So you'd have the light move through a completely empty Universe, > > parallel to our own, entirely unaffected by matter. You don't get to > > describe gravitational lensing, diffraction, or "index of refraction". > > "the state of the former 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 determined by its connections with the matter > and the state of the aether occurs for the connections between matter > and a frictionless aether. > > You are confusing pressure with friction. > > Matter applies pressure towards the aether when matter displaces the > aether. The aether applies pressure towards the matter as it > 'displaces back'. > > > > > > > > > > > > There is a well established principle that > > > > > says that nothing can travel faster than c, > > > > > like a fish that can only travel so fast in > > > > > water. > > > > > Except that we can send objects faster than > > > > the speed of sound in water, and we can alter > > > > water to make its speed of sound anything we > > > > like. And quantum effects occur without > > > > respecting either space or time, so clearly > > > > defining yet another moderator to achieve c > > > > merely compounds the problem. > > > > 'Quantum effects' like a C-60 molecule being > > > able to create an interference pattern in and > > > of itself? > > > But you have said that matter does not propagate. You are now putting > > the lie to your own words again. > > Matter travels through the aether. I was just trying to help you clean > up your misuse of words. Matter travels through the aether. Waves > propagate through the aether. Light waves propagate at 'c' with > respect to the aether. > > > > It is easy to dismiss aether when you choose > > > to believe in absurd nonsense. > > > You've worded that wrong. It is easy to dismiss aether *unless* you > > choose to believe in absurd nonsense. > > > > A moving C-60 molecule, a particle of > > > matter, has an associated aether displacement > > > wave. > > > You are on record as saying matter does not propagate. So again you > > lie. > > Matter travels through the aether. Waves propagate through the aether. > > > > > > This well defined limit c, must also define > > > > > the meaning of the aether- at least locally. > > > > > No, "aether" clearly only defines limits you > > > > place on your imagination. Yoda was a > > > > smarter character than I ever imagined... > > > > Aether allows our minds to understand the > > > physics of nature. > > > It hasn't helped you *at all*. > > > David A. Smith > > I understand the observed behaviors in any double slit, delayed > choice, or quantum eraser experiment are due to the C-60 molecule > having an associated aether displacement wave. > > Since you understand how a C-60 molecule is able to create an > interference pattern in and of itself in a double slit experiment, you > should have no problem answering the following: > > A moving C-60 molecule is in the slit(s) in a double slit experiment. > Detectors are placed at the exits to the slits the instant prior to > the C-60 molecule exiting the slit(s). The C-60 molecule is detected > exiting a single slit. Detectors are placed and removed form the exits > to the slits the instant prior to the C-60 molecule exiting the > slit(s). Repeat and the C-60 molecule creates an interference > pattern. > > In AD, the moving C-60 molecule has an associated aether displacement > wave. The aether displacement wave enters and exits the available > slits while the C-60 molecule enters and exits a single slit. Placing > detectors at the exits to the slits causes decoherence of the > associated aether displacement wave and there is no interference. > Removing the detectors prior to the C-60 molecule exits the slits > allows the aether displacement wave to exit the available slits and > create interference which alters the direction the C-60 molecule > travels.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Matter flows. Mitch Raemsch
From: mpc755 on 23 Feb 2010 15:27 On Feb 23, 3:24 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Feb 23, 11:27 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 23, 2:10 pm, dlzc <dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > > > Dear mpc755: > > > > On Feb 23, 9:39 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 23, 11:34 am,dlzc<dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 23, 1:59 am, GogoJF <jfgog...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Feb 22, 4:15 pm,dlzc<dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 22, 2:12 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. > > > > > > > > > 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? > > > > > > > > Might as well call it "The Matrix" for all the > > > > > > > sense it makes. It does not allow us to > > > > > > > discern "absolute motion", the "physics of the > > > > > > > vacuum" is the same now as it was billions of > > > > > > > years ago, so it behaves *exactly* like > > > > > > > spacetime. > > > > > > > > Why not accept then that it arises from the > > > > > > > source of these properties, namely the matter > > > > > > > and energy in this Universe? Wasting > > > > > > > breath / thought on an 18th century crutch is > > > > > > > just that, a waste. > > > > > > > > If you want to know what *I* think. > > > > > > > I think of the aether as a pressure- like the > > > > > > pressure that fish feel when they are in a 45 > > > > > > gallon tank. We are all fish living in a > > > > > > certain medium. That's why its' difficult to > > > > > > measure- if not impossible. > > > > > > Then it has no discernable properties. And > > > > > unlike the tank analogy, reveals no "drag" > > > > > as we move through it. So clearly this model > > > > > provides you nothing good, except "feelings" > > > > > like you understand things that *no Man* > > > > > understands. > > > > > There is no 'drag' in a frictionless superfluid. > > > > And such fails to describe the motion / "wave nature" of light. > > > Waves are able to propagate through a frictionless superfluid. > > > A particle moving through a frictionless superfluid is able to created > > a displacement wave in the superfluid. > > > > > If you remove the matter from the superfluid > > > > then there is no 'drag' in a frictionless > > > > aether. > > > > So you'd have the light move through a completely empty Universe, > > > parallel to our own, entirely unaffected by matter. You don't get to > > > describe gravitational lensing, diffraction, or "index of refraction".. > > > "the state of the former 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 determined by its connections with the matter > > and the state of the aether occurs for the connections between matter > > and a frictionless aether. > > > You are confusing pressure with friction. > > > Matter applies pressure towards the aether when matter displaces the > > aether. The aether applies pressure towards the matter as it > > 'displaces back'. > > > > > > > There is a well established principle that > > > > > > says that nothing can travel faster than c, > > > > > > like a fish that can only travel so fast in > > > > > > water. > > > > > > Except that we can send objects faster than > > > > > the speed of sound in water, and we can alter > > > > > water to make its speed of sound anything we > > > > > like. And quantum effects occur without > > > > > respecting either space or time, so clearly > > > > > defining yet another moderator to achieve c > > > > > merely compounds the problem. > > > > > 'Quantum effects' like a C-60 molecule being > > > > able to create an interference pattern in and > > > > of itself? > > > > But you have said that matter does not propagate. You are now putting > > > the lie to your own words again. > > > Matter travels through the aether. I was just trying to help you clean > > up your misuse of words. Matter travels through the aether. Waves > > propagate through the aether. Light waves propagate at 'c' with > > respect to the aether. > > > > > It is easy to dismiss aether when you choose > > > > to believe in absurd nonsense. > > > > You've worded that wrong. It is easy to dismiss aether *unless* you > > > choose to believe in absurd nonsense. > > > > > A moving C-60 molecule, a particle of > > > > matter, has an associated aether displacement > > > > wave. > > > > You are on record as saying matter does not propagate. So again you > > > lie. > > > Matter travels through the aether. Waves propagate through the aether. > > > > > > > This well defined limit c, must also define > > > > > > the meaning of the aether- at least locally. > > > > > > No, "aether" clearly only defines limits you > > > > > place on your imagination. Yoda was a > > > > > smarter character than I ever imagined... > > > > > Aether allows our minds to understand the > > > > physics of nature. > > > > It hasn't helped you *at all*. > > > > David A. Smith > > > I understand the observed behaviors in any double slit, delayed > > choice, or quantum eraser experiment are due to the C-60 molecule > > having an associated aether displacement wave. > > > Since you understand how a C-60 molecule is able to create an > > interference pattern in and of itself in a double slit experiment, you > > should have no problem answering the following: > > > A moving C-60 molecule is in the slit(s) in a double slit experiment. > > Detectors are placed at the exits to the slits the instant prior to > > the C-60 molecule exiting the slit(s). The C-60 molecule is detected > > exiting a single slit. Detectors are placed and removed form the exits > > to the slits the instant prior to the C-60 molecule exiting the > > slit(s). Repeat and the C-60 molecule creates an interference > > pattern. > > > In AD, the moving C-60 molecule has an associated aether displacement > > wave. The aether displacement wave enters and exits the available > > slits while the C-60 molecule enters and exits a single slit. Placing > > detectors at the exits to the slits causes decoherence of the > > associated aether displacement wave and there is no interference. > > Removing the detectors prior to the C-60 molecule exits the slits > > allows the aether displacement wave to exit the available slits and > > create interference which alters the direction the C-60 molecule > > travels.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Matter flows. > > Mitch Raemsch Matter flows through the aether. Waves propagate through the aether. Matter flows with respect to the aether pressure. Waves propagate at 'c' with respect to the aether.
From: BURT on 23 Feb 2010 16:28 On Feb 23, 12:27 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Feb 23, 3:24 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 23, 11:27 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Feb 23, 2:10 pm, dlzc <dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > > > > Dear mpc755: > > > > > On Feb 23, 9:39 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Feb 23, 11:34 am,dlzc<dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > > > > > On Feb 23, 1:59 am, GogoJF <jfgog...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 22, 4:15 pm,dlzc<dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Feb 22, 2:12 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. > > > > > > > > > > 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? > > > > > > > > > Might as well call it "The Matrix" for all the > > > > > > > > sense it makes. It does not allow us to > > > > > > > > discern "absolute motion", the "physics of the > > > > > > > > vacuum" is the same now as it was billions of > > > > > > > > years ago, so it behaves *exactly* like > > > > > > > > spacetime. > > > > > > > > > Why not accept then that it arises from the > > > > > > > > source of these properties, namely the matter > > > > > > > > and energy in this Universe? Wasting > > > > > > > > breath / thought on an 18th century crutch is > > > > > > > > just that, a waste. > > > > > > > > > If you want to know what *I* think. > > > > > > > > I think of the aether as a pressure- like the > > > > > > > pressure that fish feel when they are in a 45 > > > > > > > gallon tank. We are all fish living in a > > > > > > > certain medium. That's why its' difficult to > > > > > > > measure- if not impossible. > > > > > > > Then it has no discernable properties. And > > > > > > unlike the tank analogy, reveals no "drag" > > > > > > as we move through it. So clearly this model > > > > > > provides you nothing good, except "feelings" > > > > > > like you understand things that *no Man* > > > > > > understands. > > > > > > There is no 'drag' in a frictionless superfluid. > > > > > And such fails to describe the motion / "wave nature" of light. > > > > Waves are able to propagate through a frictionless superfluid. > > > > A particle moving through a frictionless superfluid is able to created > > > a displacement wave in the superfluid. > > > > > > If you remove the matter from the superfluid > > > > > then there is no 'drag' in a frictionless > > > > > aether. > > > > > So you'd have the light move through a completely empty Universe, > > > > parallel to our own, entirely unaffected by matter. You don't get to > > > > describe gravitational lensing, diffraction, or "index of refraction". > > > > "the state of the former 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 determined by its connections with the matter > > > and the state of the aether occurs for the connections between matter > > > and a frictionless aether. > > > > You are confusing pressure with friction. > > > > Matter applies pressure towards the aether when matter displaces the > > > aether. The aether applies pressure towards the matter as it > > > 'displaces back'. > > > > > > > > There is a well established principle that > > > > > > > says that nothing can travel faster than c, > > > > > > > like a fish that can only travel so fast in > > > > > > > water. > > > > > > > Except that we can send objects faster than > > > > > > the speed of sound in water, and we can alter > > > > > > water to make its speed of sound anything we > > > > > > like. And quantum effects occur without > > > > > > respecting either space or time, so clearly > > > > > > defining yet another moderator to achieve c > > > > > > merely compounds the problem. > > > > > > 'Quantum effects' like a C-60 molecule being > > > > > able to create an interference pattern in and > > > > > of itself? > > > > > But you have said that matter does not propagate. You are now putting > > > > the lie to your own words again. > > > > Matter travels through the aether. I was just trying to help you clean > > > up your misuse of words. Matter travels through the aether. Waves > > > propagate through the aether. Light waves propagate at 'c' with > > > respect to the aether. > > > > > > It is easy to dismiss aether when you choose > > > > > to believe in absurd nonsense. > > > > > You've worded that wrong. It is easy to dismiss aether *unless* you > > > > choose to believe in absurd nonsense. > > > > > > A moving C-60 molecule, a particle of > > > > > matter, has an associated aether displacement > > > > > wave. > > > > > You are on record as saying matter does not propagate. So again you > > > > lie. > > > > Matter travels through the aether. Waves propagate through the aether.. > > > > > > > > This well defined limit c, must also define > > > > > > > the meaning of the aether- at least locally. > > > > > > > No, "aether" clearly only defines limits you > > > > > > place on your imagination. Yoda was a > > > > > > smarter character than I ever imagined... > > > > > > Aether allows our minds to understand the > > > > > physics of nature. > > > > > It hasn't helped you *at all*. > > > > > David A. Smith > > > > I understand the observed behaviors in any double slit, delayed > > > choice, or quantum eraser experiment are due to the C-60 molecule > > > having an associated aether displacement wave. > > > > Since you understand how a C-60 molecule is able to create an > > > interference pattern in and of itself in a double slit experiment, you > > > should have no problem answering the following: > > > > A moving C-60 molecule is in the slit(s) in a double slit experiment. > > > Detectors are placed at the exits to the slits the instant prior to > > > the C-60 molecule exiting the slit(s). The C-60 molecule is detected > > > exiting a single slit. Detectors are placed and removed form the exits > > > to the slits the instant prior to the C-60 molecule exiting the > > > slit(s). Repeat and the C-60 molecule creates an interference > > > pattern. > > > > In AD, the moving C-60 molecule has an associated aether displacement > > > wave. The aether displacement wave enters and exits the available > > > slits while the C-60 molecule enters and exits a single slit. Placing > > > detectors at the exits to the slits causes decoherence of the > > > associated aether displacement wave and there is no interference. > > > Removing the detectors prior to the C-60 molecule exits the slits > > > allows the aether displacement wave to exit the available slits and > > > create interference which alters the direction the C-60 molecule > > > travels.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Matter flows. > > > Mitch Raemsch > > Matter flows through the aether. Waves propagate through the aether. > Matter flows with respect to the aether pressure. Waves propagate at > 'c' with respect to the aether.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Space and time unified field flows over flowing energy. Mitch Raemsch
From: BURT on 23 Feb 2010 16:32 On Feb 23, 12:27 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Feb 23, 3:24 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 23, 11:27 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Feb 23, 2:10 pm, dlzc <dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > > > > Dear mpc755: > > > > > On Feb 23, 9:39 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Feb 23, 11:34 am,dlzc<dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > > > > > On Feb 23, 1:59 am, GogoJF <jfgog...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 22, 4:15 pm,dlzc<dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Feb 22, 2:12 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. > > > > > > > > > > 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? > > > > > > > > > Might as well call it "The Matrix" for all the > > > > > > > > sense it makes. It does not allow us to > > > > > > > > discern "absolute motion", the "physics of the > > > > > > > > vacuum" is the same now as it was billions of > > > > > > > > years ago, so it behaves *exactly* like > > > > > > > > spacetime. > > > > > > > > > Why not accept then that it arises from the > > > > > > > > source of these properties, namely the matter > > > > > > > > and energy in this Universe? Wasting > > > > > > > > breath / thought on an 18th century crutch is > > > > > > > > just that, a waste. > > > > > > > > > If you want to know what *I* think. > > > > > > > > I think of the aether as a pressure- like the > > > > > > > pressure that fish feel when they are in a 45 > > > > > > > gallon tank. We are all fish living in a > > > > > > > certain medium. That's why its' difficult to > > > > > > > measure- if not impossible. > > > > > > > Then it has no discernable properties. And > > > > > > unlike the tank analogy, reveals no "drag" > > > > > > as we move through it. So clearly this model > > > > > > provides you nothing good, except "feelings" > > > > > > like you understand things that *no Man* > > > > > > understands. > > > > > > There is no 'drag' in a frictionless superfluid. > > > > > And such fails to describe the motion / "wave nature" of light. > > > > Waves are able to propagate through a frictionless superfluid. > > > > A particle moving through a frictionless superfluid is able to created > > > a displacement wave in the superfluid. > > > > > > If you remove the matter from the superfluid > > > > > then there is no 'drag' in a frictionless > > > > > aether. > > > > > So you'd have the light move through a completely empty Universe, > > > > parallel to our own, entirely unaffected by matter. You don't get to > > > > describe gravitational lensing, diffraction, or "index of refraction". > > > > "the state of the former 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 determined by its connections with the matter > > > and the state of the aether occurs for the connections between matter > > > and a frictionless aether. > > > > You are confusing pressure with friction. > > > > Matter applies pressure towards the aether when matter displaces the > > > aether. The aether applies pressure towards the matter as it > > > 'displaces back'. > > > > > > > > There is a well established principle that > > > > > > > says that nothing can travel faster than c, > > > > > > > like a fish that can only travel so fast in > > > > > > > water. > > > > > > > Except that we can send objects faster than > > > > > > the speed of sound in water, and we can alter > > > > > > water to make its speed of sound anything we > > > > > > like. And quantum effects occur without > > > > > > respecting either space or time, so clearly > > > > > > defining yet another moderator to achieve c > > > > > > merely compounds the problem. > > > > > > 'Quantum effects' like a C-60 molecule being > > > > > able to create an interference pattern in and > > > > > of itself? > > > > > But you have said that matter does not propagate. You are now putting > > > > the lie to your own words again. > > > > Matter travels through the aether. I was just trying to help you clean > > > up your misuse of words. Matter travels through the aether. Waves > > > propagate through the aether. Light waves propagate at 'c' with > > > respect to the aether. > > > > > > It is easy to dismiss aether when you choose > > > > > to believe in absurd nonsense. > > > > > You've worded that wrong. It is easy to dismiss aether *unless* you > > > > choose to believe in absurd nonsense. > > > > > > A moving C-60 molecule, a particle of > > > > > matter, has an associated aether displacement > > > > > wave. > > > > > You are on record as saying matter does not propagate. So again you > > > > lie. > > > > Matter travels through the aether. Waves propagate through the aether.. > > > > > > > > This well defined limit c, must also define > > > > > > > the meaning of the aether- at least locally. > > > > > > > No, "aether" clearly only defines limits you > > > > > > place on your imagination. Yoda was a > > > > > > smarter character than I ever imagined... > > > > > > Aether allows our minds to understand the > > > > > physics of nature. > > > > > It hasn't helped you *at all*. > > > > > David A. Smith > > > > I understand the observed behaviors in any double slit, delayed > > > choice, or quantum eraser experiment are due to the C-60 molecule > > > having an associated aether displacement wave. > > > > Since you understand how a C-60 molecule is able to create an > > > interference pattern in and of itself in a double slit experiment, you > > > should have no problem answering the following: > > > > A moving C-60 molecule is in the slit(s) in a double slit experiment. > > > Detectors are placed at the exits to the slits the instant prior to > > > the C-60 molecule exiting the slit(s). The C-60 molecule is detected > > > exiting a single slit. Detectors are placed and removed form the exits > > > to the slits the instant prior to the C-60 molecule exiting the > > > slit(s). Repeat and the C-60 molecule creates an interference > > > pattern. > > > > In AD, the moving C-60 molecule has an associated aether displacement > > > wave. The aether displacement wave enters and exits the available > > > slits while the C-60 molecule enters and exits a single slit. Placing > > > detectors at the exits to the slits causes decoherence of the > > > associated aether displacement wave and there is no interference. > > > Removing the detectors prior to the C-60 molecule exits the slits > > > allows the aether displacement wave to exit the available slits and > > > create interference which alters the direction the C-60 molecule > > > travels.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Matter flows. > > > Mitch Raemsch > > Matter flows through the aether. Waves propagate through the aether. > Matter flows with respect to the aether pressure. Waves propagate at > 'c' with respect to the aether.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Matter waves of the particle moves from their center. Mitch Raemsch
From: mpc755 on 23 Feb 2010 16:38
On Feb 23, 4:32 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Feb 23, 12:27 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 23, 3:24 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Feb 23, 11:27 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 23, 2:10 pm, dlzc <dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > > > > > Dear mpc755: > > > > > > On Feb 23, 9:39 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 23, 11:34 am,dlzc<dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 23, 1:59 am, GogoJF <jfgog...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Feb 22, 4:15 pm,dlzc<dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Feb 22, 2:12 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. > > > > > > > > > > > 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? > > > > > > > > > > Might as well call it "The Matrix" for all the > > > > > > > > > sense it makes. It does not allow us to > > > > > > > > > discern "absolute motion", the "physics of the > > > > > > > > > vacuum" is the same now as it was billions of > > > > > > > > > years ago, so it behaves *exactly* like > > > > > > > > > spacetime. > > > > > > > > > > Why not accept then that it arises from the > > > > > > > > > source of these properties, namely the matter > > > > > > > > > and energy in this Universe? Wasting > > > > > > > > > breath / thought on an 18th century crutch is > > > > > > > > > just that, a waste. > > > > > > > > > > If you want to know what *I* think. > > > > > > > > > I think of the aether as a pressure- like the > > > > > > > > pressure that fish feel when they are in a 45 > > > > > > > > gallon tank. We are all fish living in a > > > > > > > > certain medium. That's why its' difficult to > > > > > > > > measure- if not impossible. > > > > > > > > Then it has no discernable properties. And > > > > > > > unlike the tank analogy, reveals no "drag" > > > > > > > as we move through it. So clearly this model > > > > > > > provides you nothing good, except "feelings" > > > > > > > like you understand things that *no Man* > > > > > > > understands. > > > > > > > There is no 'drag' in a frictionless superfluid. > > > > > > And such fails to describe the motion / "wave nature" of light. > > > > > Waves are able to propagate through a frictionless superfluid. > > > > > A particle moving through a frictionless superfluid is able to created > > > > a displacement wave in the superfluid. > > > > > > > If you remove the matter from the superfluid > > > > > > then there is no 'drag' in a frictionless > > > > > > aether. > > > > > > So you'd have the light move through a completely empty Universe, > > > > > parallel to our own, entirely unaffected by matter. You don't get to > > > > > describe gravitational lensing, diffraction, or "index of refraction". > > > > > "the state of the former 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 determined by its connections with the matter > > > > and the state of the aether occurs for the connections between matter > > > > and a frictionless aether. > > > > > You are confusing pressure with friction. > > > > > Matter applies pressure towards the aether when matter displaces the > > > > aether. The aether applies pressure towards the matter as it > > > > 'displaces back'. > > > > > > > > > There is a well established principle that > > > > > > > > says that nothing can travel faster than c, > > > > > > > > like a fish that can only travel so fast in > > > > > > > > water. > > > > > > > > Except that we can send objects faster than > > > > > > > the speed of sound in water, and we can alter > > > > > > > water to make its speed of sound anything we > > > > > > > like. And quantum effects occur without > > > > > > > respecting either space or time, so clearly > > > > > > > defining yet another moderator to achieve c > > > > > > > merely compounds the problem. > > > > > > > 'Quantum effects' like a C-60 molecule being > > > > > > able to create an interference pattern in and > > > > > > of itself? > > > > > > But you have said that matter does not propagate. You are now putting > > > > > the lie to your own words again. > > > > > Matter travels through the aether. I was just trying to help you clean > > > > up your misuse of words. Matter travels through the aether. Waves > > > > propagate through the aether. Light waves propagate at 'c' with > > > > respect to the aether. > > > > > > > It is easy to dismiss aether when you choose > > > > > > to believe in absurd nonsense. > > > > > > You've worded that wrong. It is easy to dismiss aether *unless* you > > > > > choose to believe in absurd nonsense. > > > > > > > A moving C-60 molecule, a particle of > > > > > > matter, has an associated aether displacement > > > > > > wave. > > > > > > You are on record as saying matter does not propagate. So again you > > > > > lie. > > > > > Matter travels through the aether. Waves propagate through the aether. > > > > > > > > > This well defined limit c, must also define > > > > > > > > the meaning of the aether- at least locally. > > > > > > > > No, "aether" clearly only defines limits you > > > > > > > place on your imagination. Yoda was a > > > > > > > smarter character than I ever imagined... > > > > > > > Aether allows our minds to understand the > > > > > > physics of nature. > > > > > > It hasn't helped you *at all*. > > > > > > David A. Smith > > > > > I understand the observed behaviors in any double slit, delayed > > > > choice, or quantum eraser experiment are due to the C-60 molecule > > > > having an associated aether displacement wave. > > > > > Since you understand how a C-60 molecule is able to create an > > > > interference pattern in and of itself in a double slit experiment, you > > > > should have no problem answering the following: > > > > > A moving C-60 molecule is in the slit(s) in a double slit experiment. > > > > Detectors are placed at the exits to the slits the instant prior to > > > > the C-60 molecule exiting the slit(s). The C-60 molecule is detected > > > > exiting a single slit. Detectors are placed and removed form the exits > > > > to the slits the instant prior to the C-60 molecule exiting the > > > > slit(s). Repeat and the C-60 molecule creates an interference > > > > pattern. > > > > > In AD, the moving C-60 molecule has an associated aether displacement > > > > wave. The aether displacement wave enters and exits the available > > > > slits while the C-60 molecule enters and exits a single slit. Placing > > > > detectors at the exits to the slits causes decoherence of the > > > > associated aether displacement wave and there is no interference. > > > > Removing the detectors prior to the C-60 molecule exits the slits > > > > allows the aether displacement wave to exit the available slits and > > > > create interference which alters the direction the C-60 molecule > > > > travels.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > Matter flows. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > Matter flows through the aether. Waves propagate through the aether. > > Matter flows with respect to the aether pressure. Waves propagate at > > 'c' with respect to the aether.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Matter waves of the particle moves from their center. > > Mitch Raemsch Moving particles have associated aether displacement waves. |