Aether

On May 30, 8:22 pm, Tom Roberts wrote:
Rod Ryker wrote:

The Aether is supported by many examples where things cannot be
without it.

Not really. At present there is no aether theory that explains the breadth of
phenomena explained by modern physics (which includes GR and the standard model
as fundamental theories).

(The standard model includes both SR and QED, which I mention
below. GR also includes SR, as a local approximation.)

Putting away your zealous faith on GR, you will find GR does not deny
the Aether. Of course, that does not mean GR is a valid or an
“improved” theory of the Newtonian law of gravity. shrug

Now examine EM Waves. There is a source that emits a wave which is NOT
OF THE MEDIUM!

Right. There is no "medium" for light or other EM waves. At least not in any
mainstream theory of modern physics, which as I pointed out above explains a
considerably wider breadth of phenomena than any other theory, aether or not.

Under Maxwell’s equations, EM waves fare better with the medium called
the Aether. However, the null results of the MMX steered the shallow
minds (which include almost all physicists) away through gross
misinterpretations to the consequences of these null results. Whether
Maxwell’s equations are valid or not, that is another chapter of
discussions. However, all observed phenomena of EM waves are best
interpreted with the Aether in mind. shrug

The physicists did not understand where to look for the Aether. The
null results of the MMX actually have hinted at the existence of the
Aether, but through ignorance and stupidities, mysticism has ruled.
Finally, the physicists actually understood where to look for the
Aether through the Doppler shift in CMBR, but they have discarded the
results. What a bunch of high priests zealously and faithfully stand
by their fouled religion, eh? shrug

In physics we call something a "wave" when it obeys laws that constitute a wave
equation. THAT is the defining characteristic, not the presence of "something
that waves" (i.e. a medium).

Well, He (Yours Truly) supposes you can bring up an example of an
observed wave that does not require a medium to propagate, then.
Please do so, and please don’t bring up any variety of abstract waves
describing probabilities. shrug

If one is willing to speak rather loosely, one could say that in QED what is
"waving" is probability. This is a sound bite that does not really capture the
essence of the theory, and is naive in several aspects, but it does satisfy some
peoples' need for there to be "something that is waving". Note that probability
does make sense here, and is not in any way a medium. For instance, "probability
waving" explains in general both the geometrical optics and the wave
approximations for EM waves, the double-slit experiment, etc.

Wow! You are a step ahead of Him to justify to continue to believe in
your bull****. The bottom line is that probability waves are
spiritual in nature. EM waves are tangible and observable. shrug

(Yes, it is really the "complex square root" of probability,
and there are MANY other complexities.)

In actuality, SR and GR have nothing to do with probabilities. So,
stop creating more mysticism to justify your zealous belief in this
religion of SR and GR. shrug

On Jun 2, 10:30 pm, "Androcles" wrote:
"Koobee Wublee" wrote:

Putting away your zealous faith on GR, you will find GR does not deny
the Aether. Of course, that does not mean GR is a valid or an
improved theory of the Newtonian law of gravity. shrug

Putting away your zealous faith on Aether,

You are grossly mistaken. True scholars of science have no faith but
logical and reasonable deductions to support the conclusions as
claims. You need to go back to your 7th grade science class and
understand what science is. shrug

you will find Aether does not deny the GR.

GR is mathematically inconsistent. On top of that, the mathematical
constructs that created GR were man-made mathematical artifacts.
Thus, your statement is stupid above and ignorant. shrug

Of course, that does not mean Aether is
a valid or an improved theory of the Galilean law of relativity. shrug

Androcles the ignorant has to study electromagnetism. Classical
electromagnetism if applied with Galilean relativity cannot explain
the null results of the MMX. Thus, Galilean transform is not valid
for the general case. Of course, that does not mean the Lorentz
transform is valid. shrug

It is more scientifically logical to modify the Galilean transform
instead of going back to the stone age of accepting Newtonian concept
on the corpuscle in light and keeping the Galilean transfrom. shrug

You need to get over with Wendy. shrug

"Koobee Wublee" wrote in message
...
| On Jun 2, 10:30 pm, "Androcles" wrote:
| "Koobee Wublee" wrote:
|
| Putting away your zealous faith on GR, you will find GR does not deny
| the Aether. Of course, that does not mean GR is a valid or an
| improved theory of the Newtonian law of gravity. shrug
|
| Putting away your zealous faith on Aether,
|
| You are grossly mistaken.

Putting away your zealous faith on ghostly ectoplasm, you will find
ghostly ectoplasm does not deny the GR. Of course, that does not
mean ghostly ectoplasm is a valid or an "improved" theory of the
Galilean law of relativity. shrug

On Jun 2, 10:21*pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
On May 30, 8:22 pm, Tom Roberts wrote:

Rod Ryker wrote:
The Aether is supported by many examples where things cannot be
without it.

Not really. At present there is no aether theory that explains the breadth of
phenomena explained by modern physics (which includes GR and the standard model
as fundamental theories).

* * * * (The standard model includes both SR and QED, which I mention
* * * * *below. GR also includes SR, as a local approximation..)

Putting away your zealous faith on GR, you will find GR does not deny
the Aether. *Of course, that does not mean GR is a valid or an
“improved” theory of the Newtonian law of gravity. *shrug

Now examine EM Waves. There is a source that emits a wave which is NOT
OF THE MEDIUM!

Right. There is no "medium" for light or other EM waves. At least not in any
mainstream theory of modern physics, which as I pointed out above explains a
considerably wider breadth of phenomena than any other theory, aether or not.

Under Maxwell’s equations, EM waves fare better with the medium called
the Aether. *However, the null results of the MMX steered the shallow
minds (which include almost all physicists) away through gross
misinterpretations to the consequences of these null results. *Whether
Maxwell’s equations are valid or not, that is another chapter of
discussions. *However, all observed phenomena of EM waves are best
interpreted with the Aether in mind. *shrug

The physicists did not understand where to look for the Aether. *The
null results of the MMX actually have hinted at the existence of the
Aether, but through ignorance and stupidities, mysticism has ruled.
Finally, the physicists actually understood where to look for the
Aether through the Doppler shift in CMBR, but they have discarded the
results. *What a bunch of high priests zealously and faithfully stand
by their fouled religion, eh? *shrug

In physics we call something a "wave" when it obeys laws that constitute a wave
equation. THAT is the defining characteristic, not the presence of "something
that waves" (i.e. a medium).

Well, He (Yours Truly) supposes you can bring up an example of an
observed wave that does not require a medium to propagate, then.
Please do so, and please don’t bring up any variety of abstract waves
describing probabilities. *shrug

If one is willing to speak rather loosely, one could say that in QED what is
"waving" is probability. This is a sound bite that does not really capture the
essence of the theory, and is naive in several aspects, but it does satisfy some
peoples' need for there to be "something that is waving". Note that probability
does make sense here, and is not in any way a medium. For instance, "probability
waving" explains in general both the geometrical optics and the wave
approximations for EM waves, the double-slit experiment, etc.

Wow! *You are a step ahead of Him to justify to continue to believe in
your bull****. *The bottom line is that probability waves are
spiritual in nature. *EM waves are tangible and observable. *shrug

* * * * (Yes, it is really the "complex square root" of probability,
* * * * *and there are MANY other complexities.)

In actuality, SR and GR have nothing to do with probabilities. *So,
stop creating more mysticism to justify your zealous belief in this
religion of SR and GR. *shrug

Isn't the gravity null of a cosmic lens kind of where the Aether is
getting pulled apart? (sort of getting thinned out to the point where
normal wave propagation simply can't pass directly through)

http://groups.google.com/group/googl...t/topics?hl=en
http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet/topics?hl=en
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

what is unnormal propogation of waves?... all vacuum is relative!

normal wave propagation simply can't pass directly through)