wrote in message oups.com...
|
| Hexenmeister wrote:
| wrote in message oups.com...
| | Bill, you can do better than that!
| |
| | What about the rest of you, PD, Wormley, Eric, Timo and the rest --
| | it's no fun if you don't come out and play!
| |
| | Now I should have just loaded you guys up with all the ammo you need by
| | refuting several major scientific dogmas:
| |
| | The aether exists.
|
| Prove it, idiot.
|
| Maybe a better question for you is - prove that it doesn't exist!
I will if you can prove bright green flying elephants do not exist.
| The
| MMX experiment by itself didn't rule out the aether.
Yes it did.
http://tinyurl.com/h2g7z
| It only showed
| that it isn't moving at Earth's orbital speed. A great many things -
| like how EM travels, how atoms are arranged, magnetic force, atomic
| spectra, time dialation, inertia, what is dark matter and what causes
| dark energy can be simply explained in terms of an aether. See my TOE
| at:
|
|
http://www.geocities.com/franklinhu/theory.html
No. I'm not interested in your wild and crazy pet theories.
|
| Things usually cannot be absolutely proved, however, just the fact that
| many things can be explained in terms of an aether is evidence that it
| may be true.
| It would be best to experimentally prove the aether exists.
Do it then. shrug
| Since MMX
| type experiments are not convincing, I would suggest we try to find
| compression effects.
Do it then. Don't involve me, though.
Even if the aether flows through almost anything
| as if it wasn't there, I would imagine there should be some resistance.
| So if you take a closed evacuated cylinder and fire a projectile to the
| closed end, you might find it puts up more resistance than if the
| cylinder were open due to the compression of the aether in the closed
| cylinder.
|
| You could look for inertial effects as well.
No I can't. I'm not interested. You've gone for 'it could' to ' to
'we' to 'you'. Forget it, you claim it, you prove it. I'm innocent until
proven guilty.
|The aether is what
| propagates inertia, so if we could somehow create an aether wind
| (perhaps with some kind of magnetic arrangement), we may be able to
| show that it is easier or harder to push a mass depending on which
| direction you are pushing the mass. There have been some recent
| experiments showing that if you spin up a magnet and then stop it, the
| second time you spin it up, it takes less energy. Perhaps this shows
| that the aether can be made to spin using magnets and that it is easier
| to spin it up the second time because the aether is already in motion.
| There are also some very recent experiments using only gyroscopes that
| appear to show that space somehow has a memory of whether the gyro was
| recently spun. These types of experiments could definitely point to an
| aether.
Yada yada yada.
I said PROVE it exists.
|
| We could also look for it directly in particle accelerators.
No WE cannot. You prove it, leave me out of it.
If we
| frame collisions in the frame of reference where there is not only the
| colliding particles, but also an interaction of the aether, we would
| predict that some of the particles being emitted, come from the aether.
| Maybe this is the source of the random spray of hadrons we see in
| experiments. It would be a matter of re-examing the experiments for
| evidence.
Yada yada tada...
Produce the EVIDENCE, not your maybes.
|
| | Quarks do not exist.
|
| shrug, nothing to say
|
|
| | Dark matter and dark energy are gravitationally associated.
|
| Bright green flying elephants and black holes are emotionally associated.
| (What ****ing dark matter?)
|
| Probably the best evidence to date is a mapping of the dark matter
| using telescopes. Don't ask me how they did it,
Who the **** is "they"?
but they produced some
| kind of map showing it congregates around galaxies. The association
| that I placed between dark matter and dark energy are directly related
| unlike elephants and black holes. If you could draw an unbroken line
| between the elephant and black holes, that would be impressive - but
| that isn't what I did. Dark matter is gravitationally attracted aether
| and dark energy is not caused by universe expansion, but is caused by
| the aether clumping together which forces the lighter galaxies into the
| bubbles we see in the universe structure. Can't get much more direct
| and simple than that. The whole thing can be explained in a single
| sentence that an elementary student could understand.
|
|
|
| | The magnetic lines of force are defined in the wrong direction.
|
| Who gives a ****?
|
| Granted, it doens't make much of a difference which way to define it
| mathematically - it all produces the same results, but you could say
| the same thing about saying that the Earth is the center of the
| universe and calculating that everything moves around it. Sure it could
| work out mathematically, but in a real sense, it is totally wrong when
| compared to reality. So it is totally wrong to think the magnetic lines
| of force actually run from pole to pole. Based on how electron react to
| the field, they wrap around the axis of the poles instead and things
| are much easier to understand.
Who gives a ****?
|
|
| | Redshift is an effect caused by distance only.
|
| Correct.
|
| | The big bang didn't need to happen to explain the CMBR
|
| It didn't happen anyway.
|
|
| Yeah, the big bang and redshift is a crock!
I didn't say redshift was a crock.
I agreed that redshift is an effect caused by distance only.
|
|
|
| |
| | Now, I've noticed that the internet usenets exist on the principle -
| | 'If you can't say anything to refute, don't say anything at all". I
| | see very little in the way of collaboration on the sci.physics group. I
| | think it would be OK to encourage people every once in a while when
| | they're not totally crazy.
| |
| | All of the papers I have recently published on the sci.physics news
| | groups have opened to virtual silence - which could mean a couple of
| | things - either
| |
| | 1. You are in total agreement and have nothing to say against it and
| | are in stunned silence - which I find bloody unlikely
| | 2. You're not reading any of my posts
| | 3. Maybe you're just sick of me
| |
| | In any case, some comments please ....
|
| Put up your dukes, then. Let's see what you are capable of.
| Androcles.
|
| Whoo-hoo we're having fun now!
Ok, well, produce the evidence (you have until I get sick of you to try).
Androcles.