#1
|
|||
|
|||
Aether or whatever
Lots of off-topic groups removed
harry wrote: "George Dishman" wrote in message ... "Researcher" wrote in message .. . Ether or whatever it is fine if it stands for an absolute Reference frame. Ether: http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/motm/n2o/n2oc.htm On the other hand, the "luminiferous aether" was a material substance which fills the universe through which light was supposed to propagate as a transverse wave. It has nothing to do with reference frames of any kind. In fact, usually mediums have everything to do with reference frames for those entities that it is a medium for - everyone(?) knows that the atmosphere is a reference frame for sound. No, the atmosphere is the medium through which the sound propagates but if you are standing on the ground on a windy day and measure the speed, you will find it is anisotropic. The reference frame is that of your instrument which is measuring the speed, not the moving air. George |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Aether or whatever
George Dishman wrote: harry wrote: .... No, the atmosphere is the medium through which the sound propagates but if you are standing on the ground on a windy day and measure the speed, Correcting a typo: that should have read "measure the speed of sound," it did not mean the speed of the air. you will find it is anisotropic. The reference frame is that of your instrument which is measuring the speed, not the moving air. George |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Aether or whatever
"George Dishman" wrote in message ups.com... George Dishman wrote: harry wrote: ... No, the atmosphere is the medium through which the sound propagates but if you are standing on the ground on a windy day and measure the speed, Correcting a typo: that should have read "measure the speed of sound," it did not mean the speed of the air. you will find it is anisotropic. The reference frame is that of your instrument which is measuring the speed, not the moving air. George George, it is generally believed that the speed of sound in air is isotropic, even if the speed of sound in air is anisotropic when measured relative to the ground on a windy day. That is because the implicit ("standard") reference frame for waves is that in which the medium is in rest. It's the same with the max. speed specification of an airoplane. Harald |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Aether or whatever
harry wrote: "George Dishman" wrote in message ups.com... George Dishman wrote: harry wrote: ... No, the atmosphere is the medium through which the sound propagates but if you are standing on the ground on a windy day and measure the speed, Correcting a typo: that should have read "measure the speed of sound," it did not mean the speed of the air. you will find it is anisotropic. The reference frame is that of your instrument which is measuring the speed, not the moving air. George, it is generally believed that the speed of sound in air is isotropic, even if the speed of sound in air is anisotropic when measured relative to the ground on a windy day. That is because the implicit ("standard") reference frame ... The phrase "frame of reference" means a mathematical coordinate system and has nothing to do with the medium carrying the waves. Your words "implicit" and "standard" mean nothing in this context, the frame of reference is that of the measuring instrument. George |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Aether or whatever
George Dishman wrote: harry wrote: "George Dishman" wrote in message ups.com... .......... The phrase "frame of reference" means a mathematical coordinate system and has nothing to do with the medium carrying the waves. Your words "implicit" and "standard" mean nothing in this context, the frame of reference is that of the measuring instrument. George If we specify a "frame of reference" in which the *medium* is at rest then this frame of reference could "mean" an absolute reference frame with respect to that medium. In this regard let me express my viewpoint concerning the subject issue " Aether or whatever" and the associated absolute reference frame. Empty Space, Aether or Vacuum ----------------------------- There are two notions of space in vogue. The first notion is of a coordinate space and the second is that of physical space. Whereas the metric scaling property is only associated with coordinate space, the physical properties of permittivity, permeability and intrinsic impedance are only associated with physical space. The notions of physical space, empty space, vacuum, aether and their modern reincarnation the quantum vacuum, all mean the same entity - call it by any name. It is said that a rose by any other name will smell as sweet. For detailed discussion of this issue kindly refer to, http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sa...her_vacuum.pdf Notion of Universal Reference Frame ----------------------------------- The Universal or an Absolute reference frame may be defined as a non-rotating inertial reference frame with its origin fixed with respect to the 'Center of Mass' of the Universe. We know that the origin of International Celestial Reference Frame (ICRF or BCRF) is fixed at the barycenter or the center of mass of the solar system. If we could locate a point O in ICRF such that O is fixed with respect to the center of mass of our Universe, then a celestial reference frame with its origin at O could be referred as the Universal Reference Frame. For this we need to determine the velocity of O in ICRF which will lead us to determine the velocity of ICRF in the Universal Reference Frame. For establishing the Universal Reference Frame with reference to ICRF, we don't need to establish the location of the center of mass of the Universe. *The speed of light is an isotropic constant c and the measures of distance and time are absolute in this frame.* This Universal or Absolute reference frame can be experimentally established with the use of available technology. For details kindly refer to, http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sa...rsal_frame.pdf Let me give you a brief description of the basic idea behind the article "Experimental detection of Universal Reference Frame" referred above. Just for illustration, consider a ground station (A) in signal communication with a Pioneer type spacecraft (B) at an approximate distance D of 40 AU (40 * 1.5 * 10^11 m) from the station. Assume that identical precision atomic clocks (synchronized in advance) along with data processors are used at both ends (A and B) for signal communication. Further assume that at an instant of time Ta_t a coded signal pulse is transmitted from station A towards B (uplink signal) containing the coded data of time Ta_t. Let this signal pulse reach the spacecraft B at an instant of time Tb_r (as measured by the atomic clock of B). Assume that at a subsequent instant of time Tb_t another coded signal pulse is transmitted from spacecraft B towards station A (downlink signal) containing the coded data of time Ta_t, Tb_r and Tb_t. Let this downlink signal pulse reach ground station A at an instant of time Ta_r. From this data, the data processor at A will compute two intervals of time, first the uplink signal propagation time Tu = Tb_r - Ta_t and second the downlink signal propagation time Td = Ta_r - Tb_t. Let us further assume that all measurements of distances and velocities are done in the International Celestial Reference Frame (ICRF). CASE I (ICRF) In ICRF, speed of light (or signal propagation) is constant c and both A and B are moving at uniform speed V1 (known) along the direction AB as shown. D A.........................B -----V1 -----V1 Therefore, c*Tu = D + V1*Tu ...(1) and c*Td = D - V1*Td ...(2) That is, Tu = D/(c-V1) ...(3) and Td = D/(c+V1) ...(4) Hence, V1 = c*(Tu-Td)/(Tu+Td) ...(5) CASE II (GCRF) Assume that our solar system and hence ICRF is in motion in the Galactic Celestial Reference Frame (GCRF) at a speed of U1 (~ 220 km/s) along the direction AB. Assuming the speed of light c to be constant in the GCRF and both A and B moving at uniform speed V1 (known) in ICRF along the direction AB. Therefore, in GCRF both A and B will be seen to be moving at uniform speed of U1+V1 along the direction AB as shown. D A.........................B --------U1+V1 --------U1+V1 Therefore, c*Tu = D + (U1+V1)*Tu ...(6) and c*Td = D - (U1+V1)*Td ...(7) That is, Tu = D/(c-(U1+V1)) ...(8) and Td = D/(c+(U1+V1)) ...(9) Hence, (U1+V1) = c*(Tu-Td)/(Tu+Td) ...(10) CASE III (UCRF) Assume that our solar system and hence ICRF is in motion in the Universal Celestial Reference Frame (UCRF) at a speed of U1 (~ 500 km/s) along the direction AB. Assuming the speed of light c to be constant in the UCRF and both A and B moving at uniform speed V1 (known) in ICRF along the direction AB as shown. Therefore, in UCRF both A and B will be seen to be moving at uniform speed of U1+V1 along the direction AB. D A.........................B ------------U1+V1 ------------U1+V1 Therefore, c*Tu = D + (U1+V1)*Tu ...(11) and c*Td = D - (U1+V1)*Td ...(12) That is, Tu = D/(c-(U1+V1)) ...(13) and Td = D/(c+(U1+V1)) ...(14) Hence, (U1+V1) = c*(Tu-Td)/(Tu+Td) ...(15) Or U1 = c*(Tu-Td)/(Tu+Td) - V1 ...(16) That is the speed of the solar system (or ICRF) through the Universal Reference Frame can thus be determined. This leads to the detection of the Universal Reference Frame of absolute motion in which the speed of light is a universal constant. For illustration, if U1+V1= 300 km/s and D= 6*10^12 m then, Tu = 6e+12/(3e+8-3e+5)= 20020.02 sec = 5 hr, 33 mts, 40.02 sec Td = 6e+12/(3e+8+3e+5)= 19980.02 sec = 5 hr, 33 mts, 0.02 sec Therefore, Tu-Td = 40 seconds. and Tu+Td = 11 hr, 6 mts, 40.04 sec But if we calculate the Tu+Td by the usual relation, Tu+Td = 2D/c = 1.2e+13/3e+8 = 40000 sec = 11 hr, 6 mts, 40.00 sec Thus at a spacecraft distance of 40 AU, the anomaly in total up and down signal propagation time could be as large as 40 milli seconds. [It appears that in actual Pioneer 10 and 11 space missions the ranging data could not be used possibly due to such abnormal differences between uplink and downlink signal propagation times] However if U1+V1= 300 km/s and D= 6*10^6 m then, Tu-Td = 40 micro seconds The accuracy of modern atomic clocks is of the order of a few nano seconds and the synchronization accuracy between two atomic clocks can be expected to be well within a microsecond range. Therefore, to experimentally establish an Absolute or Universal reference frame all that is required is to measure the uplink (Tu) and downlink (Td) signal propagation times separately to compute the velocity (U1) of the ICRF in the Absolute reference frame (equation (16)). This of course is a simplified description. The procedure described in the above referred article is more detailed. The actual experiment can be conducted from the International Space Station (ISS) by using the GPS satellites as responders. GSS |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Aether or whatever
"George Dishman" wrote in message ups.com... harry wrote: "George Dishman" wrote in message ups.com... George Dishman wrote: harry wrote: ... No, the atmosphere is the medium through which the sound propagates but if you are standing on the ground on a windy day and measure the speed, Correcting a typo: that should have read "measure the speed of sound," it did not mean the speed of the air. you will find it is anisotropic. The reference frame is that of your instrument which is measuring the speed, not the moving air. George, it is generally believed that the speed of sound in air is isotropic, even if the speed of sound in air is anisotropic when measured relative to the ground on a windy day. That is because the implicit ("standard") reference frame ... The phrase "frame of reference" means a mathematical coordinate system and has nothing to do with the medium carrying the waves. Your words "implicit" and "standard" mean nothing in this context, the frame of reference is that of the measuring instrument. George Sure - the standard frame of measurement for specifying sound waves as well as airoplanes is that in which the medium is in rest - I don't know how to say that more clearly, sorry. Harald |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Aether or whatever
GSS wrote: George Dishman wrote: harry wrote: "George Dishman" wrote in message ups.com... ......... The phrase "frame of reference" means a mathematical coordinate system and has nothing to do with the medium carrying the waves. Your words "implicit" and "standard" mean nothing in this context, the frame of reference is that of the measuring instrument. If we specify a "frame of reference" in which the *medium* is at rest ... How do you know that is even possible? To explain gravitational effects like the bending of sunlight, one approach is to treat the aether as flowing into the Sun (and the same for other masses of course). The flow is in different directions and at different speeds at different locations on the surface, always towards the centre. It isn't even possible to define a frame of reference in which "the medium is at rest" under those conditions. then this frame of reference could "mean" an absolute reference frame with respect to that medium. That depends on what you mean by absolute. If I go back to what I think is the defining source, Newton's Principia, in his concepts of absolute time and space the aether as a medium would have motion. The two are quite different ideas. I have to quit at that, I'm out of time. George |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Aether or whatever
"GSS" wrote in message ups.com... George Dishman wrote: harry wrote: "George Dishman" wrote in message ups.com... ......... The phrase "frame of reference" means a mathematical coordinate system and has nothing to do with the medium carrying the waves. Your words "implicit" and "standard" mean nothing in this context, the frame of reference is that of the measuring instrument. George If we specify a "frame of reference" in which the *medium* is at rest then this frame of reference could "mean" an absolute reference frame with respect to that medium. In this regard let me express my viewpoint concerning the subject issue " Aether or whatever" and the associated absolute reference frame. Empty Space, Aether or Vacuum ----------------------------- There are two notions of space in vogue. The first notion is of a coordinate space and the second is that of physical space. Whereas the metric scaling property is only associated with coordinate space, the physical properties of permittivity, permeability and intrinsic impedance are only associated with physical space. The notions of physical space, empty space, vacuum, aether and their modern reincarnation the quantum vacuum, all mean the same entity - call it by any name. It is said that a rose by any other name will smell as sweet. For detailed discussion of this issue kindly refer to, http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sa...her_vacuum.pdf Notion of Universal Reference Frame ----------------------------------- The Universal or an Absolute reference frame may be defined as a non-rotating inertial reference frame with its origin fixed with respect to the 'Center of Mass' of the Universe. We know that the origin of International Celestial Reference Frame (ICRF or BCRF) is fixed at the barycenter or the center of mass of the solar system. If we could locate a point O in ICRF such that O is fixed with respect to the center of mass of our Universe, then a celestial reference frame with its origin at O could be referred as the Universal Reference Frame. For this we need to determine the velocity of O in ICRF which will lead us to determine the velocity of ICRF in the Universal Reference Frame. For establishing the Universal Reference Frame with reference to ICRF, we don't need to establish the location of the center of mass of the Universe. *The speed of light is an isotropic constant c and the measures of distance and time are absolute in this frame.* This Universal or Absolute reference frame can be experimentally established with the use of available technology. For details kindly refer to, http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sa...rsal_frame.pdf Let me give you a brief description of the basic idea behind the article "Experimental detection of Universal Reference Frame" referred above. Just for illustration, consider a ground station (A) in signal communication with a Pioneer type spacecraft (B) at an approximate distance D of 40 AU (40 * 1.5 * 10^11 m) from the station. Assume that identical precision atomic clocks (synchronized in advance) along with data processors are used at both ends (A and B) for signal communication. Further assume that at an instant of time Ta_t a coded signal pulse is transmitted from station A towards B (uplink signal) containing the coded data of time Ta_t. Let this signal pulse reach the spacecraft B at an instant of time Tb_r (as measured by the atomic clock of B). Assume that at a subsequent instant of time Tb_t another coded signal pulse is transmitted from spacecraft B towards station A (downlink signal) containing the coded data of time Ta_t, Tb_r and Tb_t. Let this downlink signal pulse reach ground station A at an instant of time Ta_r. From this data, the data processor at A will compute two intervals of time, first the uplink signal propagation time Tu = Tb_r - Ta_t and second the downlink signal propagation time Td = Ta_r - Tb_t. Let us further assume that all measurements of distances and velocities are done in the International Celestial Reference Frame (ICRF). CASE I (ICRF) In ICRF, speed of light (or signal propagation) is constant c and both A and B are moving at uniform speed V1 (known) along the direction AB as shown. D A.........................B -----V1 -----V1 Therefore, c*Tu = D + V1*Tu ...(1) and c*Td = D - V1*Td ...(2) That is, Tu = D/(c-V1) ...(3) and Td = D/(c+V1) ...(4) Hence, V1 = c*(Tu-Td)/(Tu+Td) ...(5) CASE II (GCRF) Assume that our solar system and hence ICRF is in motion in the Galactic Celestial Reference Frame (GCRF) at a speed of U1 (~ 220 km/s) along the direction AB. Assuming the speed of light c to be constant in the GCRF and both A and B moving at uniform speed V1 (known) in ICRF along the direction AB. Therefore, in GCRF both A and B will be seen to be moving at uniform speed of U1+V1 along the direction AB as shown. D A.........................B --------U1+V1 --------U1+V1 Therefore, c*Tu = D + (U1+V1)*Tu ...(6) and c*Td = D - (U1+V1)*Td ...(7) That is, Tu = D/(c-(U1+V1)) ...(8) and Td = D/(c+(U1+V1)) ...(9) Hence, (U1+V1) = c*(Tu-Td)/(Tu+Td) ...(10) CASE III (UCRF) Assume that our solar system and hence ICRF is in motion in the Universal Celestial Reference Frame (UCRF) at a speed of U1 (~ 500 km/s) along the direction AB. Assuming the speed of light c to be constant in the UCRF and both A and B moving at uniform speed V1 (known) in ICRF along the direction AB as shown. Therefore, in UCRF both A and B will be seen to be moving at uniform speed of U1+V1 along the direction AB. D A.........................B ------------U1+V1 ------------U1+V1 Therefore, c*Tu = D + (U1+V1)*Tu ...(11) and c*Td = D - (U1+V1)*Td ...(12) That is, Tu = D/(c-(U1+V1)) ...(13) and Td = D/(c+(U1+V1)) ...(14) Hence, (U1+V1) = c*(Tu-Td)/(Tu+Td) ...(15) Or U1 = c*(Tu-Td)/(Tu+Td) - V1 ...(16) That is the speed of the solar system (or ICRF) through the Universal Reference Frame can thus be determined. This leads to the detection of the Universal Reference Frame of absolute motion in which the speed of light is a universal constant. For illustration, if U1+V1= 300 km/s and D= 6*10^12 m then, Tu = 6e+12/(3e+8-3e+5)= 20020.02 sec = 5 hr, 33 mts, 40.02 sec Td = 6e+12/(3e+8+3e+5)= 19980.02 sec = 5 hr, 33 mts, 0.02 sec Therefore, Tu-Td = 40 seconds. and Tu+Td = 11 hr, 6 mts, 40.04 sec But if we calculate the Tu+Td by the usual relation, Tu+Td = 2D/c = 1.2e+13/3e+8 = 40000 sec = 11 hr, 6 mts, 40.00 sec Thus at a spacecraft distance of 40 AU, the anomaly in total up and down signal propagation time could be as large as 40 milli seconds. [It appears that in actual Pioneer 10 and 11 space missions the ranging data could not be used possibly due to such abnormal differences between uplink and downlink signal propagation times] However if U1+V1= 300 km/s and D= 6*10^6 m then, Tu-Td = 40 micro seconds The accuracy of modern atomic clocks is of the order of a few nano seconds and the synchronization accuracy between two atomic clocks can be expected to be well within a microsecond range. Therefore, to experimentally establish an Absolute or Universal reference frame all that is required is to measure the uplink (Tu) and downlink (Td) signal propagation times separately to compute the velocity (U1) of the ICRF in the Absolute reference frame (equation (16)). I lost track of what you were doing but here it's clear: from signal propagation times it's *impossible* - at least in theory - to determine an Absolute Reference frame. That's the ABC (in fact the first postulate) of SRT. Thus, without having had a close look at it, I can safely assume that you didn't correctly apply the Lorentz transformations or its alternative of {relativity of simultaneity + time dilation + length contraction}. The locally determined speed of light in vacuum is always isotropically c. Harald This of course is a simplified description. The procedure described in the above referred article is more detailed. The actual experiment can be conducted from the International Space Station (ISS) by using the GPS satellites as responders. GSS |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Aether or whatever
George Dishman wrote: GSS wrote: George Dishman wrote: harry wrote: "George Dishman" wrote in message ups.com... ......... The phrase "frame of reference" means a mathematical coordinate system and has nothing to do with the medium carrying the waves. Your words "implicit" and "standard" mean nothing in this context, the frame of reference is that of the measuring instrument. If we specify a "frame of reference" in which the *medium* is at rest ... How do you know that is even possible? That is quite elementary. In a "frame of reference" in which the *isotropic medium* is at rest, the characteristic speed of propagation of a *disturbance wave* (eg. pressure wave, stress/strain wave or electromagnetic wave) will be an *isotropic* constant. In all other reference frames in which the medium is in motion, such a characteristic speed of propagation will be anisotropic. To explain gravitational effects like the bending of sunlight, How are you so sure that the bending of light *is due to* gravitational effects and *not due to* the refraction effects? one approach is to treat the aether as flowing into the Sun (and the same for other masses of course). The flow is in different directions and at different speeds at different locations on the surface, always towards the centre. It isn't even possible to define a frame of reference in which "the medium is at rest" under those conditions. Kindly let me know from where did you learn all such rubbish as "the aether flowing into the Sun..." ? Especially when you run out of time for reading something sensible!! then this frame of reference could "mean" an absolute reference frame with respect to that medium. That depends on what you mean by absolute. By absolute we mean what is not relative. I am fully convinced that both relativity theories (SR and GR) are fundamentally wrong. SR is primarily a study of * moving inertial* reference frames. All inertial reference frames are *defined* to be in relative uniform motion and hence can not be under *any accelerated motion*. Nor by definition can the inertial reference frames be seen to be moving on curved paths or trajectories. Now, other than hypothetical frames mentioned in relativity text books, can you mention even a single practical reference frame within our galaxy, which you consider as truly *inertial*, that is not moving on a curved path in the galaxy? GR model on the other hand, is a study of deformations of space and time introduced by the Riemannian metric induced by the gravitational field. Do you understand that under the influence of static gravitational field, only radial dimension of space gets *deformed* without affecting the tangential dimensions. Now can you mentally visualize that such anisotropic deformation of space continuum will lead to a state of discontinuum?? That is why GR model is physically invalid. http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sa...uum_strain.htm http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sa...alidity_gr.pdf If I go back to what I think is the defining source, Newton's Principia, in his concepts of absolute time and space the aether as a medium would have motion. The two are quite different ideas. You have got it quite wrong. The fundamental notion of time is absolute but our measure of time is a relative measure of change. http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sa...me_measure.htm As I explained in the last post, the empty space, aether or vacuum refer to the one and the same entity, call it by any name. http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sa...her_vacuum.pdf I have to quit at that, I'm out of time. George Kindly do spare a little of your valuable time and study the proposal for experimental detection of the Universal or absolute reference frame referred in my last post. I do need your comments and opinion on the same. GSS |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Aether or whatever
"GSS" wrote in message ups.com... George Dishman wrote: GSS wrote: George Dishman wrote: harry wrote: "George Dishman" wrote in message ups.com... ......... The phrase "frame of reference" means a mathematical coordinate system and has nothing to do with the medium carrying the waves. Your words "implicit" and "standard" mean nothing in this context, the frame of reference is that of the measuring instrument. If we specify a "frame of reference" in which the *medium* is at rest ... How do you know that is even possible? That is quite elementary. In a "frame of reference" in which the *isotropic medium* is at rest, ... The point is that in general the medium may *not* be isotropic. If some parts of the medium are moving relative to others then it is impossible to define a single frame in which all parts are at rest. ... the characteristic speed of propagation of a *disturbance wave* (eg. pressure wave, stress/strain wave or electromagnetic wave) will be an *isotropic* constant. In all other reference frames in which the medium is in motion, such a characteristic speed of propagation will be anisotropic. To explain gravitational effects like the bending of sunlight, How are you so sure that the bending of light *is due to* gravitational effects and *not due to* the refraction effects? Two reasons, first because the plasma density is known with reasonable accuracy and is many orders of magnitude too small to explain the amount of bending observed and second the bending is independent of wavelength which is not true for the plasma. one approach is to treat the aether as flowing into the Sun (and the same for other masses of course). The flow is in different directions and at different speeds at different locations on the surface, always towards the centre. It isn't even possible to define a frame of reference in which "the medium is at rest" under those conditions. Kindly let me know from where did you learn all such rubbish as "the aether flowing into the Sun..." ? It's what so aether supporters have told me is their approach to extending LET to cope with gravitational effects like Pound Rebka. Especially when you run out of time for reading something sensible!! I car-share. I either had to go then or walk the 25 miles home :-( I'll try to reply to the rest shortly. then this frame of reference could "mean" an absolute reference frame with respect to that medium. That depends on what you mean by absolute. By absolute we mean what is not relative. There are two interpreatations I have seen, one being that a single isolated body has some well-defined "absolute velocity" relative to Newtonian space, the other being more limited to saying that simultaneity is frame independent but that Galilean relativity means that it is not possible even _in_principle_ to define an absolute velocity. I am fully convinced that both relativity theories (SR and GR) are fundamentally wrong. SR is primarily a study of * moving inertial* reference frames. All inertial reference frames are *defined* to be in relative uniform motion and hence can not be under *any accelerated motion*. That is not actually true, SR can handle accelerated frames with some effort but you get some pseudo-forces appearing. What it cannot handle is gravitational tidal forces. However, that is aside from your main point. Nor by definition can the inertial reference frames be seen to be moving on curved paths or trajectories. Now, other than hypothetical frames mentioned in relativity text books, can you mention even a single practical reference frame within our galaxy, which you consider as truly *inertial*, that is not moving on a curved path in the galaxy? The reference frame in which, at exactly noon today local time, the tip of my nose was at rest at the origin. It is of course inertial by definition. GR model on the other hand, is a study of deformations of space and time introduced by the Riemannian metric induced by the gravitational field. Do you understand that under the influence of static gravitational field, only radial dimension of space gets *deformed* without affecting the tangential dimensions. That is not true in general but I think you are referring specifically to the Schwarzschild solution. Now can you mentally visualize that such anisotropic deformation of space continuum will lead to a state of discontinuum?? The metric of the Schwarzschild solution is the result of a stress-energy distribution which is spherically symmetric hence of course the metric is also spherically symmetric. That is why GR model is physically invalid. You'll have to come up with something better than that, the fact that a spherically symmetric cause produces a spherically symmetric effect is hardly surprising! http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sa...uum_strain.htm http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sa...alidity_gr.pdf If I go back to what I think is the defining source, Newton's Principia, in his concepts of absolute time and space the aether as a medium would have motion. The two are quite different ideas. You have got it quite wrong. Can I ask you to read parts I, II and IV of the Scholium: http://members.tripod.com/~gravitee/...ions.htm#Schol and explain why you think I am wrong. The fundamental notion of time is absolute but our measure of time is a relative measure of change. Certainly, but that is not what I was discussing. http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sa...me_measure.htm As I explained in the last post, the empty space, aether or vacuum refer to the one and the same entity, call it by any name. http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sa...her_vacuum.pdf I have to quit at that, I'm out of time. George Kindly do spare a little of your valuable time and study the proposal for experimental detection of the Universal or absolute reference frame referred in my last post. I do need your comments and opinion on the same. Will do, but having had a quick glance, I can tell you the method won't work if you are contemplating a Lorentz invariant aether since that precludes determination of speed by any means. If you are thinking of a Galilean universe then it would work but you need to reconcile that with what are considered to be contrary observations, such as the Michelson-Morely experiment. Perhaps it would be best if you clarified that small point before I go into any detail. George |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Confirmation of Aether drift direction from COBE CMBR data/Dayton Miller experiments | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 36 | August 29th 06 10:44 AM |
Dark matter and dark energy are caused by only gravity and the boyancy effect | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 1 | April 12th 06 08:03 PM |
Nature of dark matter and dark energy | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 24 | January 9th 06 03:54 PM |
Physics Challenged | Bill Sheppard | Misc | 176 | July 5th 05 04:08 AM |
The Aether and the Trolls | nightbat | Misc | 4 | June 6th 05 03:13 PM |