#1111
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
On Dec 29, 6:43*pm, mpc755 wrote:
On Dec 29, 9:26*pm, Brad Guth wrote: In other words, you still got nothing other than aether parrot speak. Aether has mass. Aether physically occupies three dimensional space. Aether is displaced by matter. Displaced aether pushes back and exerts inward pressure toward matter. Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward matter is gravity. A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle travels a well defined trajectory which takes it through one slit while the associated wave in the aether passes through both. 'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein' http://www-groups..dcs.st-and.ac.uk/...ein_ether.html "According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable" "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places, ... disregarding the causes which condition its state." The state of the aether at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the state of displacement of the aether. 'The Third Book of Opticks (1718) by Isaac Newton' http://www.newtonproject.sussex.ac.u...ized/NATP00051 "Qu. 21. Is not this Medium much rarer within the dense Bodies of the Sun, Stars, Planets and Comets, than in the empty celestial Spaces between them? And in passing from them to great distances, doth it not grow denser and denser perpetually, and thereby cause the gravity of those great Bodies towards one another, and of their parts towards the Bodies; every Body endeavouring to go from the denser parts of the Medium towards the rarer? ..." Newton is referring to the state of displacement of the aether. The aether does not have a variable density. However, Newton was correct; displaced aether is the cause of gravity. 'NASA's Voyager Hits New Region at Solar System Edge' http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2011...U_Voyager.html "Voyager is showing that what is outside is pushing back. ... Like cars piling up at a clogged freeway off-ramp, the increased intensity of the magnetic field shows that inward pressure from interstellar space is compacting it." It is not the particles of matter which exist in quantities less than in any vacuum artifically created on Earth which are pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward the solar system. It is the aether, which the particles of matter exist in, which is the interstellar medium. It is the aether which is displaced by the matter the solar system consists of which is pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward the solar system. 'Interpretation of quantum mechanics by the double solution theory - Louis de BROGLIE'http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-classiques/aflb124p001.pdf “When in 1923-1924 I had my first ideas about Wave Mechanics I was looking for a truly concrete physical image, valid for all particles, of the wave and particle coexistence discovered by Albert Einstein in his "Theory of light quanta". I had no doubt whatsoever about the physical reality of waves and particles.” “any particle, even isolated, has to be imagined as in continuous “energetic contact” with a hidden medium” The hidden medium of de Broglie wave mechanics is the aether. The “energetic contact” is the state of displacement of the aether. "For me, the particle, precisely located in space at every instant, forms on the v wave a small region of high energy concentration, which may be likened in a first approximation, to a moving singularity." A particle is a moving singularity which has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle travels a well defined path which takes it through one slit. The associated wave in the aether passes through both. As the aether wave exits the slits it creates wave interference. As the particle exits a single slit the direction it travels is altered by the wave interference. This is the wave piloting the particle of pilot-wave theory. Detecting the particle strongly exiting a single slit turns the associated aether wave into chop. The aether waves exiting the slits interact with the detectors and become many short waves with irregular motion. The waves are disorganized. There is no wave interference. The particle pitches and rolls through the chop. The particle gets knocked around by the chop and it no longer creates an interference pattern. 'Surprise! IBEX Finds No Bow ‘Shock’ Outside our Solar System' http://www.universetoday.com/95094/s...no-bow-shock-o... '“While bow shocks certainly exist ahead of many other stars, we’re finding that our Sun’s interaction doesn’t reach the critical threshold to form a shock,” said Dr. David McComas, principal investigator of the IBEX mission, “so a wave is a more accurate depiction of what’s happening ahead of our heliosphere — much like the wave made by the bow of a boat as it glides through the water.”' The wave ahead of our heliosphere is an aether displacement wave. This is evidence of a moving 'particle', the solar system, having an associated aether wave. 'Hubble Finds Ghostly Ring of Dark Matter'http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/news/dark_matter_ring_featur... "Astronomers using NASA's Hubble Space Telescope got a first-hand view of how dark matter behaves during a titanic collision between two galaxy clusters. The wreck created a ripple of dark mater, which is somewhat similar to a ripple formed in a pond when a rock hits the water." The 'pond' consists of aether. The moving 'particles' are the galaxy clusters. The ripple is an aether displacement wave. The ripple is a gravitational wave. This is also evidence of a moving 'particle', the galaxy clusters, having an associated aether wave. 'Giant black hole kicked out of home galaxy' http://www.astronomy.com/en/News-Obs.../Giant%20black... "But these new data support the idea that gravitational waves — ripples in the fabric of space first predicted by Albert Einstein but never detected directly — can exert an extremely powerful force." The fabric of space is the aether. Gravitational waves are ripples in the aether. What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment; the aether. Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's pilot-wave. They are both aether displacement waves. 'Offset between dark matter and ordinary matter: evidence from a sample of 38 lensing clusters of galaxies' http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/...004.1475v1.pdf "Our data strongly support the idea that the gravitational potential in clusters is mainly due to a non-baryonic fluid, and any exotic field in gravitational theory must resemble that of CDM fields very closely." The offset is due to the galaxy clusters moving through the aether. The analogy is a submarine moving through the water. You are under water. Two miles away from you are many lights. Moving between you and the lights one mile away is a submarine. The submarine displaces the water. The state of displacement of the water causes the center of the lensing of the light propagating through the water to be offset from the center of the submarine itself. The offset between the center of the lensing of the light propagating through the water displaced by the submarine and the center of the submarine itself is going to remain the same as the submarine moves through the water. The submarine continually displaces different regions of the water. The state of the water connected to and neighboring the submarine remains the same as the submarine moves through the water even though it is not the same water the submarine continually displaces. This is what is occurring physically in nature as the galaxy clusters move through and displace the aether. 'Milky Way's halo more squished than spherical' http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34735679...science-space/... The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether. The matter which would form the Milky Way was moving as it displaced the aether. The aether displaced perpendicular to the major direction of motion became the majority force of the displaced aether and forced the matter into the disk. This resulted in the angular momentum of the matter. It is the aether which is displaced outward relative to the plane of the angular momentum which exerts force toward the center of the Milky Way. This force, along with the state of displacement of the aether as determined by the angular momentum of the Milky Way, forced the matter closer together which resulted in the displaced aether looking like a squished beach ball. Aether displacement explains how the Milky Way was created, how the disk and halo formed and why the rotational speed can not be accounted for by the mass of the matter of the Milky Way itself. 'Ether and the Theory of Relativity - Albert Einstein' http://www.tu-harburg.de/rzt/rzt/it/Ether.html "Since according to our present conceptions the elementary particles of matter are also, in their essence, nothing else than condensations of the electromagnetic field" The electromagnetic field is a state of the aether. Particles of matter are condensations of aether. 'DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT?' A. EINSTEINhttp://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf "If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass diminishes by L/c2." The mass of the body does diminish. However, the matter which no longer exists as part of the body has not vanished; it still exists, as aether. Matter evaporates into aether. As matter evaporates into aether it expands into neighboring places; which is energy. Mass is conserved. When a nuclear bomb explodes matter evaporates into aether. The evaporation is energy. Mass is conserved. The rate at which an atomic clock ticks is determined by the state of the aether in which it exists. In terms of general relativity, the greater the mass per volume of the matter the greater the displacement of the aether, the greater the force exerted toward and throughout the atomic clock by the displaced aether the slower the atomic clock ticks. In terms of special relativity, the faster a clock moves through the aether the more aether the clock displaces the more force the displaced aether exerts toward and throughout the atomic clock the slower the clock ticks. Curved spacetime is the state of displacement of the aether. 'Was the universe born spinning?' http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/46688 "The universe was born spinning and continues to do so around a preferred axis" The Universe spins around a preferred axis because the Universe is, or the local Universe we exist in is in, a jet; a larger version of a black hole polar jet. 'Mysterious Cosmic 'Dark Flow' Tracked Deeper into Universe' http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/...10/10-023.html "The clusters appear to be moving along a line extending from our solar system toward Centaurus/Hydra, but the direction of this motion is less certain. Evidence indicates that the clusters are headed outward along this path, away from Earth, but the team cannot yet rule out the opposite flow. "We detect motion along this axis, but right now our data cannot state as strongly as we'd like whether the clusters are coming or going," Kashlinsky said." The clusters are headed along this path because the Universe is, or the local Universe we exist in is in, a jet. The following is an image analogous of the Universal jet. http://aether.lbl.gov/image_all.html The reason for the 'expansion' of the universe is the continual emission of aether into the Universal jet. Three dimensional space associated with the Universe itself is not expanding. What we see in our telescopes is the matter associated with the Universe moving outward and away from the Universal jet emission point. In the image above, '1st Stars' is where aether condenses into matter. Dark energy is aether emitted into the Universal jet. It's not the Big Bang; it's the Big Ongoing. In other words, you still got nothing other than aether parrot speak of whatever others think is out there. The Aether Lens: http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap111221.html The foreground galaxy (LRG-3-757) is either a truly massive composition of an extremely super-large and massive galaxy, or that of representing a galactic cluster of at least ten to a hundred or more fairly massive galaxies, that which their tightly combined mass distorts our extremely distant perspective as having morphed their surrounding aether, as reformulated into an enormous lens of something more than a couple million ly diameter, as well as offering an illumination boost of at least 10:1 of the background galaxy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lensshoe_hubble.jpg http://www.spacetelescope.org/static.../potw1151a.jpg The required galactic mass for accomplishing such a terrific IGM or aether lens might have to be at least a hundred times that of either our Milky Way or Andromeda. So, is it the cosmic distortion of the IGM that offers less than 1 particle/m3, or is it a quantum distortion of time, or is this the morphed aether as having been displaced by the enormous galactic cluster that’s blocking our view of the other bluish background galaxy? How much does our galaxy lens compared to LRG-3-757? 10% 1% .1% BTW; has anyone PhotoShop reverse engineered what that background galaxy might look like? |
#1112
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
"Olrik" wrote in message ...
Le 2012-12-27 18:48, benj a écrit : On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 05:37:41 -0800, Linuxgal wrote: benj wrote: Sorry Linuxgal, but Faraday's law (or Maxwell's equation in usual form) are not causal. EMFs are NOT caused by a changing magnetic field. They are caused by changing currents as are the accompanying magnetic fields. Gosh, then I suppose we get our electric power by pure ****ing magic rather than coils of wire rotating in a magnetic field. Excellent insight, Linuxgal, but you'll notice above I was not talking about Lorentz motional E fields. I was talking about "electrokinetic" E fields. Note there are three types of E fields with totally different properties: Electrostatic, Electrokinetic, and Lorentz. Obviously our electric power comes from the last one. However, it's distributed by transformers which utilize Electrokinetic fields. I'm confident you haven't a clue what the **** I'm talking about, right? What you're talking about is not important unless you can improve on current things. Can you do that? Could you produce more electricity than is available now? ================================================== ====== What the moron is saying is the transformer has no moving parts, whereas the generator does. To him the iron core of the transformer and its magnetic field plays no part in the process. To him there is a huge difference between a moving magnetic field and a growing or shrinking one, so it is his precious aether that drives the voltage in the secondary winding. The best thing to do is killfile the cretin, he'll never learn. -- This message is brought to you from the keyboard of Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway. When I get my O.B.E. I'll be an earlobe. |
#1113
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 03:01:17 -0000, "Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of
Medway" wrote: "Olrik" wrote in message ... Le 2012-12-27 18:48, benj a écrit : On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 05:37:41 -0800, Linuxgal wrote: benj wrote: Sorry Linuxgal, but Faraday's law (or Maxwell's equation in usual form) are not causal. EMFs are NOT caused by a changing magnetic field. They are caused by changing currents as are the accompanying magnetic fields. Gosh, then I suppose we get our electric power by pure ****ing magic rather than coils of wire rotating in a magnetic field. Excellent insight, Linuxgal, but you'll notice above I was not talking about Lorentz motional E fields. I was talking about "electrokinetic" E fields. Note there are three types of E fields with totally different properties: Electrostatic, Electrokinetic, and Lorentz. Obviously our electric power comes from the last one. However, it's distributed by transformers which utilize Electrokinetic fields. I'm confident you haven't a clue what the **** I'm talking about, right? What you're talking about is not important unless you can improve on current things. Can you do that? Could you produce more electricity than is available now? ================================================= ======= What the moron is saying is the transformer has no moving parts, whereas the generator does. To him the iron core of the transformer and its magnetic field plays no part in the process. To him there is a huge difference between a moving magnetic field and a growing or shrinking one, so it is his precious aether that drives the voltage in the secondary winding. The best thing to do is killfile the cretin, he'll never learn. Even "cretins" are allowed their opinions, however misled or misleading they may be. It is you who is suspect, since you obviously advocate killfiling, which is not only cowardly but also a hideous and rather sickly form of censorious censorship. Other than that, you're probably a very nice wussie. Have a very nice day! -- Happy Holidays! and Warm Wishes for the New Year! Indelibly yours, Paine @ http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/ "When most people run the other way, courage runs toward danger." |
#1114
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
On Dec 30, 1:30*pm, Painius wrote:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 03:01:17 -0000, "Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway" wrote: "Olrik" *wrote in ... Le 2012-12-27 18:48, benj a écrit : On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 05:37:41 -0800, Linuxgal wrote: benj wrote: Sorry Linuxgal, but Faraday's law (or Maxwell's equation in usual form) are not causal. EMFs are NOT caused by a changing magnetic field. They are caused by changing currents as are the accompanying magnetic fields. Gosh, then I suppose we get our electric power by pure ****ing magic rather than coils of wire rotating in a magnetic field. Excellent insight, Linuxgal, but you'll notice above I was not talking about Lorentz motional E fields. I was talking about "electrokinetic" E fields. Note there are three types of E fields with totally different properties: Electrostatic, Electrokinetic, and Lorentz. Obviously our electric power comes from the last one. However, it's distributed by transformers which utilize Electrokinetic fields. I'm confident you haven't a clue what the **** I'm talking about, right? What you're talking about is not important unless you can improve on current things. Can you do that? Could you produce more electricity than is available now? ================================================= ======= What the moron is saying is the transformer has no moving parts, whereas the generator does. To him the iron core of the transformer and its magnetic field plays no part in the process. To him there is a huge difference between a moving magnetic field and a growing or shrinking one, so it is his precious aether that drives the voltage in the secondary winding. The best thing to do is killfile the cretin, he'll never learn. Even "cretins" are allowed their opinions, however misled or misleading they may be. *It is you who is suspect, since you obviously advocate killfiling, which is not only cowardly but also a hideous and rather sickly form of censorious censorship. Other than that, you're probably a very nice wussie. *Have a very nice day! -- Happy Holidays! * and Warm Wishes for the New Year! Indelibly yours, Paine @http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/ "When most people run the other way, courage runs toward danger." If Lord Androcles has run out of sand to stick his head into, then perhaps all that's left is the method of killfiling anyone that has an honest opinion that's any different than Lord Androcles. Obviously some of our resident FUD-masters that topic/author stalk for sport, as such require a great deal more sand than others. |
#1115
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 17:26:54 -0800 (PST), mpc755
wrote: On Dec 28, 8:14*pm, Brad Guth wrote: You can't possibly specify aether has mass, because there's still no replicated science in support of such aether mass. The following articles describe what is presently postulated as dark matter is aether. Meaning, aether has mass. 'Quantum aether and an invariant Planck scale' http://arxiv.org/abs/1110.3753 "this version of aether may have some bearing on the abundance of Dark Matter and Dark Energy in our universe." "mass of the aether" 'Scalars, Vectors and Tensors from Metric-Affine Gravity' http://arxiv.org/pdf/1110.5168 "the model obtained here gets closer to the aether theory of , which is shown therein to be an alternative to the cold dark matter." 'Unified model for dark matter and quintessence' http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0610135 "Superfluid dark matter is reminiscent of the aether and modeling the universe using superfluid aether is compatible." 'Vainshtein mechanism in Gauss-Bonnet gravity and Galileon aether' http://arxiv.org/pdf/1107.1892 "the perturbations of the scalar field do not propagate in the Minkowski space-time but rather in some form of ”aether” because of the presence of the background field" 'On the super-fluid property of the relativistic physical vacuum medium and the inertial motion of particles' http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0701155 "In this paper we shall show that the relativistic physical vacuum medium as a ubiquitous back ground field is a super fluid medium." In the following article the faster the object moves through the super- fluid ideal relativistic ether from general relativity the greater the relativistic mass of the object. Good, Mike, you came out and said that the scientifically found yet still mysterious "dark matter" is the spatial medium itself. I agree with you, for what it's worth, and have been saying it for years. The reason, well two reasons, that dark matter cannot be sensed "up close" is that 1) scientists are still very hung up and extremely hypersensitized by the idea of "officially" admitting any substance at all to the medium of spacetime, and 2) even if scientists would "come around", we still don't possess the technology required to sense or measure the "mass" of space. Since dark matter is indeed spacetime, and since there is no need for, and no such thing as, "dark energy", then it is safe to say that dark matter composes nearly all of the mass and energy in the Universe. The approximate distribution would be as follows... 0.4% = stars, etc. 3.6% = intergalactic gas 96% = space/dark matter -- Happy Holidays! and Warm Wishes for the New Year! Indelibly yours, Paine @ http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/ "When most people run the other way, courage runs toward danger." |
#1116
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
On Dec 30, 1:47*pm, Painius wrote:
On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 17:26:54 -0800 (PST), mpc755 wrote: On Dec 28, 8:14*pm, Brad Guth wrote: You can't possibly specify aether has mass, because there's still no replicated science in support of such aether mass. The following articles describe what is presently postulated as dark matter is aether. Meaning, aether has mass. 'Quantum aether and an invariant Planck scale' http://arxiv.org/abs/1110.3753 "this version of aether may have some bearing on the abundance of Dark Matter and Dark Energy in our universe." "mass of the aether" 'Scalars, Vectors and Tensors from Metric-Affine Gravity' http://arxiv.org/pdf/1110.5168 "the model obtained here gets closer to the aether theory of , which is shown therein to be an alternative to the cold dark matter." 'Unified model for dark matter and quintessence' http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0610135 "Superfluid dark matter is reminiscent of the aether and modeling the universe using superfluid aether is compatible." 'Vainshtein mechanism in Gauss-Bonnet gravity and Galileon aether' http://arxiv.org/pdf/1107.1892 "the perturbations of the scalar field do not propagate in the Minkowski space-time but rather in some form of ”aether” because of the presence of the background field" 'On the super-fluid property of the relativistic physical vacuum medium and the inertial motion of particles' http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0701155 "In this paper we shall show that the relativistic physical vacuum medium as a ubiquitous back ground field is a super fluid medium." In the following article the faster the object moves through the super- fluid ideal relativistic ether from general relativity the greater the relativistic mass of the object. Good, Mike, you came out and said that the scientifically found yet still mysterious "dark matter" is the spatial medium itself. *I agree with you, for what it's worth, and have been saying it for years. The reason, well two reasons, that dark matter cannot be sensed "up close" is that 1) *scientists are still very hung up and extremely hypersensitized by the idea of "officially" admitting any substance at all to the medium of spacetime, and 2) *even if scientists would "come around", we still don't possess the technology required to sense or measure the "mass" of space. Since dark matter is indeed spacetime, and since there is no need for, and no such thing as, "dark energy", then it is safe to say that dark matter composes nearly all of the mass and energy in the Universe. The approximate distribution would be as follows... 0.4% = stars, etc. 3.6% = intergalactic gas 96% = space/dark matter -- Happy Holidays! * and Warm Wishes for the New Year! Indelibly yours, Paine @http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/ "When most people run the other way, courage runs toward danger." And there's nothing wrong in giving that 96% a proper name, like aether. BTW; I happen to think the IGM and ISM combined is measurably worth a lot more than 3.6%, and that perhaps aether is worth at most 50%. |
#1117
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 17:04:32 -0800 (PST), mpc755
wrote: On Dec 28, 7:50*pm, Painius wrote: On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 04:06:04 -0800 (PST), mpc755 wrote: On Dec 27, 11:49*pm, Brad Guth wrote: On Dec 27, 7:16*pm, mpc755 wrote: On Dec 27, 7:36*pm, Brad Guth wrote: The Aether Lens: *http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap111221.html *The foreground galaxy (LRG-3-757) is either a truly massive composition of an extremely super-large and massive galaxy, or that of representing a galactic cluster of at least ten to a hundred or more fairly massive galaxies, that which their tightly combined mass distorts our extremely distant perspective having morphed their surrounding aether, as reformulated into an enormous lens of something more than a couple million ly diameter, as well as offering an illumination boost of at least 10:1. *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lensshoe_hubble.jpg The required galactic mass for accomplishing such a terrific lens might have to be a hundred times that of either our Milky Way. *So, is it the cosmic distortion of time, or is it the morphed aether as having been displaced by the galactic cluster blocking our view? The light from the distant blue galaxy is propagating through the aether displaced by the foreground red galaxy.- Hide quoted text - Yes, it is propagated through something, and it might as well be aether, or helium. Particles of matter exist in the interstellar medium in quantities less than in any vacuum artificially created on Earth. Particles of matter are not what light propagates through. Light propagates through the aether. "According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense." - Albert Einstein When taken out of context this produces "almost" a contradiction. Einstein had shown that it was unnecessary to postulate an "aether" of the type that had filled the writings of scientists for 200 years. We'll call that the "classic aether". *It was static, unchanging and not in motion in any sense of the word. *On this issue, "the rest is history", as they say. *Other scientists picked up on what Einstein had found, and they completely tossed out the classic aether, only to settle for a spacetime that was made of "nothing" -- nothing at all. That was not at all what Einstein meant to happen. Then he continued his study of gravity and began the development of a "field theory" of gravitation. *Mike, your quotation above was all about that field theory. *When Einstein wrote about the "ether", he was not referring to the classic aether of old. *No. *Einstein's "ether" was what he called the "gravitational field" that he studied for the rest of his life. *He never developed more than a mathematical model of this gravitational ether. *He spent the rest of his life searching to build a body of physical evidence for the "ether". *In one of his final writings, his Appendix 5 of the 15th edition of his book _Relativity - The Special and the General Theory_, he urged us all to, ". . . not desist from pursuing to the end the path of the relativistic field theory." That was the "ether" to which Einstein alluded in your above quotation. Einstein as a teenager understood the aether has mass. Einstein's 'First Paper' http://www.efiko.org/material/Albert...n onymous.pdf "The velocity of a wave is proportional to the square root of the elastic forces which cause [its] propagation, and inversely proportional to the mass of the aether moved by these forces." What Einstein failed to realize is what he was describing was the state of displacement of the aether. The velocity of a wave is proportional to the square root of the elastic forces which cause its propagation, and inversely proportional to the mass of the aether displaced by these forces. Einstein said an absolutely stationary space is superfluous. An absolutely stationary space was the incorrect understanding of the aether of the time. 'ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES By A. Einstein June 30, 1905' http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/ "The introduction of a “luminiferous ether” will prove to be superfluous inasmuch as the view here to be developed will not require an “absolutely stationary space” provided with special properties, nor assign a velocity-vector to a point of the empty space in which electromagnetic processes take place." Einstein understood the state of the aether and the state of the aether in neighboring places is determined by its connections with matter. Einstein was unable to determined the cause of the condition of the state of the aether. 'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein' http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~...ein_ether.html "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places, ... disregarding the causes which condition its state." The state of the aether at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the state of displacement of the aether. That is true only if the aether/spatial medium of which you speak has actually been displaced by a physical object. Einstein was describing the state of his "spacetime" to be dependent upon it's state in neighboring places, which means that it was all connected together, and connected even to physical objects that it both surrounded and permeated... ". . . physical objects are not 'in space', instead they are 'spatially extended' . . ." The kind of matter that we know of, stars, planets, etc., is an "extension" of Einstein's spacetime, which is made of the same exact stuff, only it's so minute that it cannot yet be sensed by our instruments. -- Happy Holidays! and Warm Wishes for the New Year! Indelibly yours, Paine @ http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/ "When most people run the other way, courage runs toward danger." |
#1118
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
On Dec 30, 4:47*pm, Painius wrote:
On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 17:26:54 -0800 (PST), mpc755 wrote: On Dec 28, 8:14*pm, Brad Guth wrote: You can't possibly specify aether has mass, because there's still no replicated science in support of such aether mass. The following articles describe what is presently postulated as dark matter is aether. Meaning, aether has mass. 'Quantum aether and an invariant Planck scale' http://arxiv.org/abs/1110.3753 "this version of aether may have some bearing on the abundance of Dark Matter and Dark Energy in our universe." "mass of the aether" 'Scalars, Vectors and Tensors from Metric-Affine Gravity' http://arxiv.org/pdf/1110.5168 "the model obtained here gets closer to the aether theory of , which is shown therein to be an alternative to the cold dark matter." 'Unified model for dark matter and quintessence' http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0610135 "Superfluid dark matter is reminiscent of the aether and modeling the universe using superfluid aether is compatible." 'Vainshtein mechanism in Gauss-Bonnet gravity and Galileon aether' http://arxiv.org/pdf/1107.1892 "the perturbations of the scalar field do not propagate in the Minkowski space-time but rather in some form of ”aether” because of the presence of the background field" 'On the super-fluid property of the relativistic physical vacuum medium and the inertial motion of particles' http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0701155 "In this paper we shall show that the relativistic physical vacuum medium as a ubiquitous back ground field is a super fluid medium." In the following article the faster the object moves through the super- fluid ideal relativistic ether from general relativity the greater the relativistic mass of the object. Good, Mike, you came out and said that the scientifically found yet still mysterious "dark matter" is the spatial medium itself. *I agree with you, for what it's worth, and have been saying it for years. The reason, well two reasons, that dark matter cannot be sensed "up close" is that 1) *scientists are still very hung up and extremely hypersensitized by the idea of "officially" admitting any substance at all to the medium of spacetime, and 2) *even if scientists would "come around", we still don't possess the technology required to sense or measure the "mass" of space. Since dark matter is indeed spacetime, and since there is no need for, and no such thing as, "dark energy", then it is safe to say that dark matter composes nearly all of the mass and energy in the Universe. The approximate distribution would be as follows... 0.4% = stars, etc. 3.6% = intergalactic gas 96% = space/dark matter -- Happy Holidays! * and Warm Wishes for the New Year! Indelibly yours, Paine @http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/ "When most people run the other way, courage runs toward danger." I'm not sure what you mean by 'sensed "up close"'. Aether is sensed "up close" every time a double slit experiment is performed. It's what waves. There is no such thing as non-baryonic dark matter. Aether has mass. Matter moves through and displaces the aether. The Universe is, or the local Universe we exist in is in, a larger version of a black hole polar jet. Dark energy is aether emitted into the Universal jet. 96% = aether. |
#1119
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
On Dec 30, 5:10*pm, Painius wrote:
On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 17:04:32 -0800 (PST), mpc755 wrote: On Dec 28, 7:50*pm, Painius wrote: On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 04:06:04 -0800 (PST), mpc755 wrote: On Dec 27, 11:49*pm, Brad Guth wrote: On Dec 27, 7:16*pm, mpc755 wrote: On Dec 27, 7:36*pm, Brad Guth wrote: The Aether Lens: *http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap111221.html *The foreground galaxy (LRG-3-757) is either a truly massive composition of an extremely super-large and massive galaxy, or that of representing a galactic cluster of at least ten to a hundred or more fairly massive galaxies, that which their tightly combined mass distorts our extremely distant perspective having morphed their surrounding aether, as reformulated into an enormous lens of something more than a couple million ly diameter, as well as offering an illumination boost of at least 10:1. *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lensshoe_hubble.jpg The required galactic mass for accomplishing such a terrific lens might have to be a hundred times that of either our Milky Way. *So, is it the cosmic distortion of time, or is it the morphed aether as having been displaced by the galactic cluster blocking our view? The light from the distant blue galaxy is propagating through the aether displaced by the foreground red galaxy.- Hide quoted text - Yes, it is propagated through something, and it might as well be aether, or helium. Particles of matter exist in the interstellar medium in quantities less than in any vacuum artificially created on Earth. Particles of matter are not what light propagates through. Light propagates through the aether. "According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense." - Albert Einstein When taken out of context this produces "almost" a contradiction. Einstein had shown that it was unnecessary to postulate an "aether" of the type that had filled the writings of scientists for 200 years. We'll call that the "classic aether". *It was static, unchanging and not in motion in any sense of the word. *On this issue, "the rest is history", as they say. *Other scientists picked up on what Einstein had found, and they completely tossed out the classic aether, only to settle for a spacetime that was made of "nothing" -- nothing at all. That was not at all what Einstein meant to happen. Then he continued his study of gravity and began the development of a "field theory" of gravitation. *Mike, your quotation above was all about that field theory. *When Einstein wrote about the "ether", he was not referring to the classic aether of old. *No. *Einstein's "ether" was what he called the "gravitational field" that he studied for the rest of his life. *He never developed more than a mathematical model of this gravitational ether. *He spent the rest of his life searching to build a body of physical evidence for the "ether". *In one of his final writings, his Appendix 5 of the 15th edition of his book _Relativity - The Special and the General Theory_, he urged us all to, ". . . not desist from pursuing to the end the path of the relativistic field theory." That was the "ether" to which Einstein alluded in your above quotation. Einstein as a teenager understood the aether has mass. Einstein's 'First Paper' http://www.efiko.org/material/Albert...20First%20Pape... "The velocity of a wave is proportional to the square root of the elastic forces which cause [its] propagation, and inversely proportional to the mass of the aether moved by these forces." What Einstein failed to realize is what he was describing was the state of displacement of the aether. The velocity of a wave is proportional to the square root of the elastic forces which cause its propagation, and inversely proportional to the mass of the aether displaced by these forces. Einstein said an absolutely stationary space is superfluous. An absolutely stationary space was the incorrect understanding of the aether of the time. 'ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES By A. Einstein June 30, 1905' http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/ "The introduction of a “luminiferous ether” will prove to be superfluous inasmuch as the view here to be developed will not require an “absolutely stationary space” provided with special properties, nor assign a velocity-vector to a point of the empty space in which electromagnetic processes take place." Einstein understood the state of the aether and the state of the aether in neighboring places is determined by its connections with matter. Einstein was unable to determined the cause of the condition of the state of the aether. 'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein' http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~...ein_ether.html "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places, ... disregarding the causes which condition its state." The state of the aether at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the state of displacement of the aether. That is true only if the aether/spatial medium of which you speak has actually been displaced by a physical object. *Einstein was describing the state of his "spacetime" to be dependent upon it's state in neighboring places, which means that it was all connected together, and connected even to physical objects that it both surrounded and permeated... ". . . physical objects are not 'in space', instead they are 'spatially extended' . . ." The kind of matter that we know of, stars, planets, etc., is an "extension" of Einstein's spacetime, which is made of the same exact stuff, only it's so minute that it cannot yet be sensed by our instruments. -- Happy Holidays! * and Warm Wishes for the New Year! Indelibly yours, Paine @http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/ "When most people run the other way, courage runs toward danger." The object 'spatially extended' is the object and the aether connected to and neighboring the object which is displaced by the object. |
#1120
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 14:06:27 -0800 (PST), Brad Guth
wrote: On Dec 30, 1:47*pm, Painius wrote: On Fri, 28 Dec 2012 17:26:54 -0800 (PST), mpc755 wrote: On Dec 28, 8:14*pm, Brad Guth wrote: You can't possibly specify aether has mass, because there's still no replicated science in support of such aether mass. The following articles describe what is presently postulated as dark matter is aether. Meaning, aether has mass. 'Quantum aether and an invariant Planck scale' http://arxiv.org/abs/1110.3753 "this version of aether may have some bearing on the abundance of Dark Matter and Dark Energy in our universe." "mass of the aether" 'Scalars, Vectors and Tensors from Metric-Affine Gravity' http://arxiv.org/pdf/1110.5168 "the model obtained here gets closer to the aether theory of , which is shown therein to be an alternative to the cold dark matter." 'Unified model for dark matter and quintessence' http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0610135 "Superfluid dark matter is reminiscent of the aether and modeling the universe using superfluid aether is compatible." 'Vainshtein mechanism in Gauss-Bonnet gravity and Galileon aether' http://arxiv.org/pdf/1107.1892 "the perturbations of the scalar field do not propagate in the Minkowski space-time but rather in some form of ”aether” because of the presence of the background field" 'On the super-fluid property of the relativistic physical vacuum medium and the inertial motion of particles' http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0701155 "In this paper we shall show that the relativistic physical vacuum medium as a ubiquitous back ground field is a super fluid medium." In the following article the faster the object moves through the super- fluid ideal relativistic ether from general relativity the greater the relativistic mass of the object. Good, Mike, you came out and said that the scientifically found yet still mysterious "dark matter" is the spatial medium itself. *I agree with you, for what it's worth, and have been saying it for years. The reason, well two reasons, that dark matter cannot be sensed "up close" is that 1) *scientists are still very hung up and extremely hypersensitized by the idea of "officially" admitting any substance at all to the medium of spacetime, and 2) *even if scientists would "come around", we still don't possess the technology required to sense or measure the "mass" of space. Since dark matter is indeed spacetime, and since there is no need for, and no such thing as, "dark energy", then it is safe to say that dark matter composes nearly all of the mass and energy in the Universe. The approximate distribution would be as follows... 0.4% = stars, etc. 3.6% = intergalactic gas 96% = space/dark matter And there's nothing wrong in giving that 96% a proper name, like aether. BTW; I happen to think the IGM and ISM combined is measurably worth a lot more than 3.6%, and that perhaps aether is worth at most 50%. Slight misunderstanding? That was the gas that is between all the galaxies (intergalactic) that makes up 3.6% of the entire Universe. That is not "IGM" nor "ISM". That is GAS that lies BETWEEN all the galaxies. HTH -- Happy Holidays! and Warm Wishes for the New Year! Indelibly yours, Paine @ http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/ "A society of sheep will beget a government of wolves." |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Experimental evidence aether has mass | mpc755 | Astronomy Misc | 4 | November 27th 10 01:50 PM |
Yes, REAL suspected Black Holes can RiP you APART.!! But NOT in GR gtr Tivity.!! Because in GR Tivity you would be a POiNT ..and if you COULD have a mass, in GR, you would be a POiNT-mass. POiNT-mass CANNOT *STRETCH* with TOP & BOTTOM ROCKETs att | brian a m stuckless | Astronomy Misc | 0 | October 16th 05 08:54 AM |
Yes, REAL suspected Black Holes can RiP you APART.!! But NOT in GR gtr Tivity.!! Because in GR Tivity you would be a POiNT ..and if you COULD have a mass, in GR, you would be a POiNT-mass. POiNT-mass CANNOT *STRETCH* with TOP & BOTTOM ROCKETs attache | brian a m stuckless | Astronomy Misc | 0 | October 15th 05 12:22 PM |
Causation - A problem with negative mass. Negastive mass implies imaginary mass | brian a m stuckless | Astronomy Misc | 0 | October 1st 05 08:36 PM |