A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Amateur Astronomy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Empty Space is NOT Empty



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 6th 17, 03:14 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
StarDust
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 732
Default Empty Space is NOT Empty

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3xL...g3ty bvv1x2gw

So, is it empty or not empty?
That is the question!
Ads
  #2  
Old January 6th 17, 05:22 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Martin Brown
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,707
Default Empty Space is NOT Empty

On 06/01/2017 14:14, StarDust wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3xL...g3ty bvv1x2gw

So, is it empty or not empty?
That is the question!


Not empty. Casimir effect was first predicted in 1948 (pre QCD).
Demonstrated experimentally in 1996 by Lamoureaux.

See:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...casimir-effec/

There are always vacuum fluctuations borrowing energy for extremely
short periods of time in accordance with Heisenbergs uncertainty
principle. These quantum fluctuations allow Hawking radiation to escape
from the proximity of a black hole causing it to lose mass.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown
  #3  
Old January 6th 17, 08:47 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Gerald Kelleher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,551
Default Empty Space is NOT Empty

It now seems somewhat quaint to see the empiricists speak about the qualities of space while being unable to make sense of Newton's attempt to mimic the perspective changes accomplished by the original heliocentric astronomers but then again they seem entirely happy with the story they conjured up in the early 20th century.

"It is indeed a matter of great difficulty to discover, and effectually to distinguish, the true motion of particular bodies from the apparent; because the parts of that absolute space, in which those motions are performed, do by no means come under the observation of our senses. Yet the thing is not altogether desperate; for we have some arguments to guide us, partly from the apparent motions which are the differences of the true motions " Newton

The whole ideology of apparent/true is skewed even if it is framed as absolute/relative space and motion for the shift to heliocentricity and a moving Earth accounting for observations didn't segregate by apparent motions and true motions but simply assigned relevance to the motions of the planets seen from a moving Earth based on relative speeds between a faster moving Earth and the slower moving outer planets.

Mathematicians are unlikely to appreciate the perspective changes Newton tried to introduce by double modelling the same observation where he would assign significance to retrogrades as geocentric and motions seen from the Sun as heliocentric -

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...retrograde.jpg

"For to the earth planetary motions appear sometimes direct, sometimes
stationary, nay, and sometimes retrograde. But from the sun they are
always seen direct,..." Newton

The followers of Newton have been barking up the wrong tree for centuries in assuming Newton was describing 'space' what all he was doing was chopping up the antecedent astronomical insights to suit himself and his agenda by waving loosely at the predictive nature of astronomy.

Like a pyramid built on its apex the whole empirical narrative was going to collapse or descend into a look of meaningless voodoo even when electromagnetic influences were begging for attention in respect to rotation and especially orbital motion of the planets around the Sun and the solar system turning through the galaxy along with all the other solar systems.

This is genuine history and not manufactured history to serve the current batch of academics.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is Space Really Empty David Spain Science 18 February 27th 13 04:20 AM
Is Space Really Empty h v mohanlal Space Station 1 November 16th 12 11:58 PM
Empty Space ????? Again More Thinking On G=EMC^2[_2_] Misc 4 October 20th 11 05:58 PM
No Empty Space =Universes G=EMC^2 Glazier[_1_] Misc 3 April 18th 09 04:16 PM
Space and Why it Seems Empty ??? G=EMC^2 Glazier Misc 3 January 28th 07 03:46 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.