Aether has mass

Forward's device was no-doubt devised
with ordinary electromagnetic principles.

what folks don't "get" about the QM formality, is that
one can use either wave or particle model, but
not both at the same time. anyway, long before,
Young showed that there is no need, at all
for a particular model of "light rays;"
that is just geometrical optics.

A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a
double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and
the associated wave in the aether through both.

thus:
The N2 molecule has a uniform distribution of charge and its only
vibrational mode is the symmetric stretch. Transitions within this
mode are forbidden, and as a result the N2 molecule does not absorb in
the near-IR.

On Dec 12, 10:07*pm, 1treePetrifiedForestLane
wrote:
Forward's device was no-doubt devised
with ordinary electromagnetic principles.

what folks don't "get" about the QM formality, is that
one can use either wave or particle model, but
not both at the same time. *anyway, long before,
Young showed that there is no need, at all
for a particular model of "light rays;"
that is just geometrical optics.

A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a
double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and
the associated wave in the aether through both.

thus:
The N2 molecule has a uniform distribution of charge and its only
vibrational mode is the symmetric stretch. Transitions within this
mode are forbidden, and as a result the N2 molecule does not absorb in
the near-IR.

My photon is always paired,and two slits proves it. Get the picture
TReBert

Le 2012-12-12 08:52, HVAC a écrit :
On 12/11/2012 10:02 PM, benj wrote:

As HVAC would say: DO you BELIEVE in "action at a distance?"
Well, do ya? (I'll bet HVAC does! He even believes in Cosmology!)


I would never ask such a retarded question.
Anyone that has ever thrown a rock has witnessed action at a distance.

;-)

fsdfsdf

Young's experiment was two pinholes;
more pinholes gives a more-complicated Moire' pattern,
of constructive & destructive "interference of waves -- not
of massless, 0d rocks of light in Newton's untheory!"

it is true, that one can try to model the waves with lots & lots
of little "point-particle quanta," but I doubt that this is ever done
in practice. teh waves work quite well with "atoms."

neither little rocks nor aether is required.

My photon is always paired,and two slits proves it

On Wed, 12 Dec 2012 19:24:08 -0800, G=EMC^2 wrote:

My photon is always paired,and two slits proves it. Get the picture
TReBert

And three slits proves your theory wrong. Get the picture?

On Dec 13, 2:27*am, 1treePetrifiedForestLane
wrote:
Young's experiment was two pinholes;
more pinholes gives a more-complicated Moire' *pattern,
of constructive & destructive "interference of waves -- not
of massless, 0d rocks of light in Newton's untheory!"

it is true, that one can try to model the waves with lots & lots
of little "point-particle quanta," but I doubt that this is ever done
in practice. *teh waves work quite well with "atoms."

neither little rocks nor aether is required.


What waves in a double slit experiment is the aether.

On Dec 13, 5:45*am, mpc755 wrote:
On Dec 13, 2:27*am, 1treePetrifiedForestLane
wrote:

Young's experiment was two pinholes;
more pinholes gives a more-complicated Moire' *pattern,
of constructive & destructive "interference of waves -- not
of massless, 0d rocks of light in Newton's untheory!"

it is true, that one can try to model the waves with lots & lots
of little "point-particle quanta," but I doubt that this is ever done
in practice. *teh waves work quite well with "atoms."

neither little rocks nor aether is required.

What waves in a double slit experiment is the aether.

But it's still not the aether displacement form of gravity unless it's
the imperceptible photon mass itself that represents gravity.

On Dec 13, 10:18Â*am, Brad Guth wrote:
On Dec 13, 5:45Â*am, mpc755 wrote:

On Dec 13, 2:27Â*am, 1treePetrifiedForestLane
wrote:

Young's experiment was two pinholes;
more pinholes gives a more-complicated Moire' Â*pattern,
of constructive & destructive "interference of waves -- not
of massless, 0d rocks of light in Newton's untheory!"

it is true, that one can try to model the waves with lots & lots
of little "point-particle quanta," but I doubt that this is ever done
in practice. Â*teh waves work quite well with "atoms."

neither little rocks nor aether is required.

What waves in a double slit experiment is the aether.

But it's still not the aether displacement form of gravity unless it's
the imperceptible photon mass itself that represents gravity.

The following article describes a 'back reaction' associated with the
"fluidic" nature of space itself. This is the displaced aether
'displacing back'.

'An Extended Dynamical Equation of Motion, Phase Dependency and
Inertial Backreaction'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1208.3458

"We hypothesize that space itself resists such surges according to a
kind of induction law (related to inertia); additionally, we provide
further evidence of the “fluidic� nature of space itself."

The aether is, or behaves similar to, a superfluid with properties of
a solid, a supersolid, which is described in the article as the
'fluidic' nature of space itself. The 'back-reaction' described in the
article is the displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward
pressure toward the matter.

The following article describes the aether as an incompressible fluid
resulting in what the article refers to as gravitational aether caused
by pressure (or vorticity).

'Phenomenology of Gravitational Aether as a solution to the Old
Cosmological Constant Problem'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1106.3955

"One proposal to address this puzzle at the semi-classical level is to
decouple quantum vacuum from space-time geometry via a modification of
gravity that includes an incompressible fluid, known as Gravitational
Aether. In this paper, we discuss classical predictions of this theory
along with its compatibility with cosmological and experimental tests
of gravity. We argue that deviations from General Relativity (GR) in
this theory are sourced by pressure or vorticity."

The following article describes gravity as a pressure exerted by
aether toward matter.

'The aether-modified gravity and the G ̈del metric'
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1109.5654v2

"As for the pressure, it is equal to p = 53−αg,6a2 so, it is positive
if αg 3 which is the weaker condition than the previous one. One
notes that the results corresponding to the usual gravity are easily
recovered. Also, it is easy to see that the interval αg 15
corresponds to the usual matter."

The following article describes a gravitating vacuum where aether is
the quantum vacuum of the 21-st century.

'From Analogue Models to Gravitating Vacuum'
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1111.1155

"The aether of the 21-st century is the quantum vacuum, which is a new
form of matter. This is the real substance"

On Dec 13, 7:36Â*am, mpc755 wrote:
On Dec 13, 10:18Â*am, Brad Guth wrote:









On Dec 13, 5:45Â*am, mpc755 wrote:

On Dec 13, 2:27Â*am, 1treePetrifiedForestLane
wrote:

Young's experiment was two pinholes;
more pinholes gives a more-complicated Moire' Â*pattern,
of constructive & destructive "interference of waves -- not
of massless, 0d rocks of light in Newton's untheory!"

it is true, that one can try to model the waves with lots & lots
of little "point-particle quanta," but I doubt that this is ever done
in practice. Â*teh waves work quite well with "atoms."

neither little rocks nor aether is required.

What waves in a double slit experiment is the aether.

But it's still not the aether displacement form of gravity unless it's
the imperceptible photon mass itself that represents gravity.

The following article describes a 'back reaction' associated with the
"fluidic" nature of space itself. This is the displaced aether
'displacing back'.

'An Extended Dynamical Equation of Motion, Phase Dependency and
Inertial Backreaction'http://arxiv.org/abs/1208.3458

"We hypothesize that space itself resists such surges according to a
kind of induction law (related to inertia); additionally, we provide
further evidence of the “fluidic� nature of space itself."

The aether is, or behaves similar to, a superfluid with properties of
a solid, a supersolid, which is described in the article as the
'fluidic' nature of space itself. The 'back-reaction' described in the
article is the displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward
pressure toward the matter.

The following article describes the aether as an incompressible fluid
resulting in what the article refers to as gravitational aether caused
by pressure (or vorticity).

'Phenomenology of Gravitational Aether as a solution to the Old
Cosmological Constant Problem'http://arxiv.org/abs/1106.3955

"One proposal to address this puzzle at the semi-classical level is to
decouple quantum vacuum from space-time geometry via a modification of
gravity that includes an incompressible fluid, known as Gravitational
Aether. In this paper, we discuss classical predictions of this theory
along with its compatibility with cosmological and experimental tests
of gravity. We argue that deviations from General Relativity (GR) in
this theory are sourced by pressure or vorticity."

The following article describes gravity as a pressure exerted by
aether toward matter.

'The aether-modified gravity and the G ̈del metric'http://arxiv.org/pdf/1109.5654v2

"As for the pressure, it is equal to p = 53−αg,6a2 so, it is positive
if αg 3 which is the weaker condition than the previous one. One
notes that the results corresponding to the usual gravity are easily
recovered. Also, it is easy to see that the interval αg 15
corresponds to the usual matter."

The following article describes a gravitating vacuum where aether is
the quantum vacuum of the 21-st century.

'From Analogue Models to Gravitating Vacuum'http://arxiv.org/pdf/1111.1155

"The aether of the 21-st century is the quantum vacuum, which is a new
form of matter. This is the real substance"

This is all good stuff to know about, except it needs some mainstream
support that you can’t seem to attract without the gauntlet of
considerable naysayism that most here in Usenet/newsgroups are good at
delivering.

Personally I can not connect the dots of how aether displacement is
gravity, so there has to be something more to help us understand how
this all-inclusive form of gravity works, especially in the subatomic
realm of atoms that are mostly empty.