From: glird on
On Dec 20, 1:13 pm, mpc755 wrote:
>
> Gravity is aether pressure.

What is the mechanism? Please explain how it works.

glird

From: Michael Moroney on
mpc755 <mpc755(a)gmail.com> writes:

>> OK. I put you down under "totally clueless".

>Another poster afraid to answer the modified Einstein Train gedanken.
>This is a pattern.

The pattern is your cluelessness.

>The water[slap!]

Get rid of the stupid water! Since the experiment you refer to is based
on the fact that light through water doesn't travel at c, but at 0.75 c.
It is no longer related to Einstein's thought experiment, which depends on
light moving at c. Now, your scenario is equivalent to: A train moves
at 0.25 c. A passnger on board fires a bullet at speed w, which is 0.75 c.
What do people on the embankment see? (and vice versa, what does someone
on the train see if someone on the embankment fires a bullet at speed w?
From: mpc755 on
On Dec 20, 2:21 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote:
> On Dec 19, 11:39 pm, mpc755 wrote:>< Do not consider the aether to be entrained by the Earth. The aether is
>
> entrained by the Earth. The aether moves with respect to the Earth's
> rotation. >
>
> >> MPC! LET THE AETHER BE COMPRESSIBLE.
>
> > I think what you want is the
> > property of 'density' to be applied
> > to the aether.
>
>  No, mpc.
>   Actually, for several decades ending around 2008, I used the word
> "dinsity" to denote a quantity of ether per cc. Why? Because "density"
> means "mass/cc" and in my oldish terms, "raw undifferentiated non-
> particulate etheric matter has no mass".
>  Why did I change from "dinsity" to "density" wrt etheric matter? For
> the reason I'd hoped to provide after you answered my "(misleadingly)
> 'simple'" question, How do you measure a quantity of matter?
>   (I expected you or someone else to answer, "You weigh it."  Instead,
> you said, "The quantity of matter is determined by the amount of
> displaced
> aether. I know this is not what you are looking for but the amount of
> aether matter displaces is mass.")
>   If, as you said, mass is the amount of {incompressible?} aether that
> matter displaces, then "mass" would be restricted to aether.

Incorrect. The mass relates to the amount of matter required to
displace the aether.

>   Given your reply to my question "How do you measure a quantity of
> aether?"
> I will ask it another way:
>   If A=Mc^2 denotes a quantity of aether, how would you MEASURE it in
> order to find the value of A in a given case?
>

How do you measure it?

> glird
>
> > What does aether 'density' get you
> > that aether 'pressure' does not?
>
>

From: mpc755 on
On Dec 20, 2:27 pm, glird <gl...(a)aol.com> wrote:
> On Dec 20, 1:13 pm, mpc755 wrote:
>
>
>
> > Gravity is aether pressure.
>
>   What is the mechanism?  Please explain how it works.
>
> glird

Matter displaces aether and the aether pushes back. The pushing back
is the pressure the aether exerts towards the matter. The aether
pressure is gravity.
From: mpc755 on
On Dec 20, 3:11 pm, moro...(a)world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
wrote:
> mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> writes:
> >> OK. I put you down under "totally clueless".
> >Another poster afraid to answer the modified Einstein Train gedanken.
> >This is a pattern.
>
> The pattern is your cluelessness.
>
> >The water[slap!]
>
> Get rid of the stupid water!  Since the experiment you refer to is based
> on the fact that light through water doesn't travel at c, but at 0.75 c.
> It is no longer related to Einstein's thought experiment, which depends on
> light moving at c.  Now, your scenario is equivalent to: A train moves
> at 0.25 c.  A passnger on board fires a bullet at speed w, which is 0.75 c.
> What do people on the embankment see? (and vice versa, what does someone
> on the train see if someone on the embankment fires a bullet at speed w?

What are you afraid of with the modified Einstein train gedanken?

Einstein's train gedanken is modified to consist of water at rest with
respect to the embankment.

Lightning strikes occur in the water at A/A' and B/B'. Does the light
travel from A' and B' to M' or from A and B to M'?