#811
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
On Dec 9, 6:04*pm, mpc755 wrote:
On Dec 9, 8:50*pm, Brad Guth wrote: On Dec 9, 5:40*pm, mpc755 wrote: On Dec 9, 3:05*pm, Brad Guth wrote: On Dec 9, 11:54*am, mpc755 wrote: On Dec 9, 2:28*pm, Brad Guth wrote: On Dec 9, 10:30*am, mpc755 wrote: On Dec 9, 12:40*pm, Brad Guth wrote: On Dec 9, 8:09*am, mpc755 wrote: On Dec 9, 10:38*am, Brad Guth wrote: On Dec 9, 7:26*am, mpc755 wrote: On Dec 9, 10:21*am, Brad Guth wrote: On Dec 9, 7:12*am, mpc755 wrote: On Dec 9, 9:59*am, Brad Guth wrote: On Dec 8, 10:17*pm, mpc755 wrote: On Dec 9, 1:11*am, Brad Guth wrote: You have two dice. They are exact opposites. If you roll one and it is a 6 the other is going to be a 1. One is a 5 the other a 2. One is a 4 the other a 3. So, when you roll the dice and one shows up as a 5 you know the other one is going to be a 2. The dice are not entangled. There is no tunnel or wormhole between them. They are created as exact opposites and will be detected with 'opposite' numbers. That's a silly analogy that doesn't make any sense as to the science accomplishments of photon entanglement. That's because you are unable to understand there is no such thing as photon entanglement. That's only because you and others can't seem to objectively prove that individual photons actually travel. That's only because you are incapable of understanding photons move. Then show us the objective proof that an individual photon and its phantom particle moves through aether from its source to whatever target. *If nothing else, you'll be the first. Something moves from the Sun to your eye. That something travels through a single slit in a double slit experiment. This means the something which moves has properties of a singularity. And yet you and all others can't objectively prove that any original singular photon and its phantom particle actually travels anywhere, as in all by itself. *Why is that? The solar wind that can exceed 1000 km/sec moves physical 3D stuff away from our sun. *The phantom particle of your displaced aether conducted photon has no 3D volume and thus represents no particle mass. *Can you give us a 2D photon mass? The moving singularity which passes through a single slit in a double slit experiment is the photon particle. The associated wave is a wave in the aether. So, how much does this phantom singularity particle of zero volume weigh? Who said it has zero volume? I did, though I've previously stipulated a swag on behalf of a photon having mass (though damn little) long before you ever came along. If it has mass then it has volume. If it has volume then it has mass. Except as far as anyone knows, photons represent zero volume, as though they are only 2D. When are you going to provide objective proof-positive about your aether stuff? In the optical ring cavity, each reflected photon is a secondary/ recoil to the one before. |
#812
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
On Dec 9, 9:11*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
On Dec 9, 6:04*pm, mpc755 wrote: On Dec 9, 8:50*pm, Brad Guth wrote: On Dec 9, 5:40*pm, mpc755 wrote: On Dec 9, 3:05*pm, Brad Guth wrote: On Dec 9, 11:54*am, mpc755 wrote: On Dec 9, 2:28*pm, Brad Guth wrote: On Dec 9, 10:30*am, mpc755 wrote: On Dec 9, 12:40*pm, Brad Guth wrote: On Dec 9, 8:09*am, mpc755 wrote: On Dec 9, 10:38*am, Brad Guth wrote: On Dec 9, 7:26*am, mpc755 wrote: On Dec 9, 10:21*am, Brad Guth wrote: On Dec 9, 7:12*am, mpc755 wrote: On Dec 9, 9:59*am, Brad Guth wrote: On Dec 8, 10:17*pm, mpc755 wrote: On Dec 9, 1:11*am, Brad Guth wrote: You have two dice. They are exact opposites. If you roll one and it is a 6 the other is going to be a 1. One is a 5 the other a 2. One is a 4 the other a 3. So, when you roll the dice and one shows up as a 5 you know the other one is going to be a 2. The dice are not entangled. There is no tunnel or wormhole between them. They are created as exact opposites and will be detected with 'opposite' numbers. That's a silly analogy that doesn't make any sense as to the science accomplishments of photon entanglement. That's because you are unable to understand there is no such thing as photon entanglement. That's only because you and others can't seem to objectively prove that individual photons actually travel. That's only because you are incapable of understanding photons move. Then show us the objective proof that an individual photon and its phantom particle moves through aether from its source to whatever target. *If nothing else, you'll be the first. Something moves from the Sun to your eye. That something travels through a single slit in a double slit experiment. This means the something which moves has properties of a singularity. And yet you and all others can't objectively prove that any original singular photon and its phantom particle actually travels anywhere, as in all by itself. *Why is that? The solar wind that can exceed 1000 km/sec moves physical 3D stuff away from our sun. *The phantom particle of your displaced aether conducted photon has no 3D volume and thus represents no particle mass. *Can you give us a 2D photon mass? The moving singularity which passes through a single slit in a double slit experiment is the photon particle. The associated wave is a wave in the aether. So, how much does this phantom singularity particle of zero volume weigh? Who said it has zero volume? I did, though I've previously stipulated a swag on behalf of a photon having mass (though damn little) long before you ever came along. If it has mass then it has volume. If it has volume then it has mass. Except as far as anyone knows, photons represent zero volume, as though they are only 2D. When are you going to provide objective proof-positive about your aether stuff? In the optical ring cavity, each reflected photon is a secondary/ recoil to the one before. 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. A moving particle 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...-solar-system/ '“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/hu...g_feature.html "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...0 galaxy.aspx "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.../#.TjkpbmDmE2c 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. EINSTEIN http://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. |
#813
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
On Sun, 9 Dec 2012 17:33:23 -0800 (PST), Brad Guth
wrote: On Dec 9, 4:36*pm, Painius wrote: On Sun, 9 Dec 2012 11:28:57 -0800 (PST), Brad Guth wrote: . . . And yet you and all others can't objectively prove that any original singular photon and its phantom particle actually travels anywhere, as in all by itself. *Why is that? . . . It took me awhile, Brad, because I was rather intrigued by your idea that there was no objective evidence of photon motion, and I finally found that evidence in the following article... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compton_scattering As you already know, Albert Einstein proposed in 1905 that light *moved* in discreet packets of energy that were called "quanta" (singular "quantum"). *His idea solved a good deal of anomalies in physics, and for that he received the Nobel prize in physics in 1921. During that sixteen-year period, there was a lot of resistance from physicists who still greatly favored the wave makeup of light. Einstein had proved mathematically that photons moved as individual particles and had the property of *momentum". *But the math proof was not enough. Arthur Compton performed an experiment in 1923 that's described in the article linked to above, and he received the Nobel for it in 1927. Compton's experiment supported Einstein's math and was performed by others to confirm the result. *Following that experimental proof, physicists were convinced of the particle nature of light, and that light quanta (photons) possessed the property of momentum. As you should agree, anything that has "momentum" moves. *Without momentum there can be no movement. *When anything moves, it then must possess the property of momentum. * And any kind of object that has momentum must be in motion. Einstein proposed that light particles had momentum, and Compton proved Einstein correct with experimental evidence. Phantom singularity particle momentum within their individual wavelength is well enough understood. Now all we need is to follow one singular originating photon in order to make darn certain that it's only the original photon and not of any replicated copies arriving at or reflecting off point B. The trillion frame per second camera still can't mange to do this, but perhaps a better observation method will soon materialize, that will give us the objective proof. Brad, if a truck were moving straight toward you, would you get out of its way? or would you wait for a better observation method? Einstein proved mathematically, and Compton proved empirically that photons have momentum, which means that they must be in motion, they must move. If that's not objective proof enough for you, consider yourself a majority of one. -- Happy Holidays! and Warm Wishes for the New Year! Indelibly yours, Paine @ http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/ "DISCOVERY: An accident meeting a prepared mind." |
#814
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
Newton had no theory, he just said that light was corpuscles;
100 years later, Young buried this ideal, showing that all characters of light are wavey. yes, waves of light do impart momentum, and how that can occur is a matter of interest. Einstein proved mathematically, and Compton proved empirically that photons have momentum, which means that they must be in motion, |
#815
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 18:49:30 -0800 (PST), 1treePetrifiedForestLane
wrote: Newton had no theory, he just said that light was corpuscles; 100 years later, Young buried this ideal, showing that all characters of light are wavey. yes, waves of light do impart momentum, and how that can occur is a matter of interest. Einstein proved mathematically, and Compton proved empirically that photons have momentum, which means that they must be in motion, Light waves are transverse waves like ocean waves. Bobbers on the ocean move up and down, perpendicular to the motion of transverse ocean waves. Ocean waves "wave" water and air. So how do you think that waves of light impart momentum? And what do you think they "wave"? -- Happy Holidays! and Warm Wishes for the New Year! Indelibly yours, Paine @ http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/ "Imagination is more important than knowledge . . ." A.E. |
#816
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
the atoms in the medium of "free space,"
index of refraction, "closer to one than air, but not that much;" essentially the same permitivity & permeability. this problem was solved classically by Liebniz et al, the problem of the brachistorchrone (tautochrone). Pascal discoverd the vacuum, experimentally, but he thought that it was perfect (i.e. the limit of a stage of a vacuum pump is about 32 feet .-) So how do you think that waves of light impart momentum? *And what do you think they "wave"? thus: the absoprtive spectrum of water is much larger than that of carbon dioxide; so? thus: Ahrrenius' metaphor has ne'er actually been applied, either a) to a globe with a glass house around it, or b) to a glass house at a particular lattitude ... as a "control for the God-am metaphor." that is the 100-year-old nonsequiter of "global" warming! thus quoth: - In Section 2 the warming effect in real greenhouses, which has to be distinguished strictly from the (in-) famous conjecture of Arrhenius, is discusseed. |
#817
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
Painius wrote:
So how do you think that waves of light impart momentum? And what do you think they "wave"? E=MC^2, right? It's like getting smacked by a teensy BB. The electric fields wave the magnetic fields, and verse vice-a. -- Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0 |
#818
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
|
#819
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 20:16:47 -0800, Linuxgal wrote:
Painius wrote: So how do you think that waves of light impart momentum? And what do you think they "wave"? E=MC^2, right? It's like getting smacked by a teensy BB. The electric fields wave the magnetic fields, and verse vice-a. The amount of ignorance in this thread absolutely defies conceptions. Not E=MC^2 but G=EMC^2. Treebert is VERY clever! Light is not one particle (Treeb is smarter than Newton AND Einstein!) Light particles come in pairs with a wiggly-wave hooked between them! Treeb claims this idea as his own but he stole it from my "Wood is Good" theory. And while we are pointing out gross errors, allow me to note that electric and magnetic fields DO NOT "create each other" no matter what you've read in Wikipedia. |
#820
|
|||
|
|||
Aether has mass
benj wrote:
And while we are pointing out gross errors, allow me to note that electric and magnetic fields DO NOT "create each other" no matter what you've read in Wikipedia. They do too. That's why there's a reverse-biased diode across the coil of relays in the better-designed circuits. When the magnetic field of the relay collapses it creates a backwards transient electrical surge and the diode neutralizes it before the juice goes out and ****s up the switching logic. -- Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0 |
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 |