Results form another neutrino experiment at CERN & Gran Sasso contradictFTL neutrinos

On Nov 23, 12:26Â*pm, mpc755 wrote:
On Nov 23, 12:19Â*pm, 7









email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_...@enemygadgets .com wrote:
mpc755 wrote:
On Nov 23, 7:44 am, 7
email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_...@enemygadgets .com wrote:

What these ICARUS people are saying is that if particles
are speeding faster than light, then they should emit some kind of light.
Reasonable enough.

However, these guys have forgotten old rules about measuring speeds in
pressurized media. Speed of sound is faster for example in pressurized
media because but that is the correct speed for that media.

If space is pressurized media, then the speed of light is correct
for the increased pressurized media and thus it would travel
faster relative to us in the pressurized media and nothing abnormal
would happen. It is more evidence that light travels in a media
which could best be modeled as a frictionless super solid:

In the following recent articles the aether is described as a
frictionless super solid and a replacement for dark matter, dark
energy and quintessence. The last article describes gravity as a
pressure associated with the aether exerted toward matter.

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"

'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."

'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"

'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"

'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."

'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."

'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. ... We argue that deviations from General Relativity (GR) in
this theory are sourced by pressure or vorticity."

Pressure exerted by displaced aether toward matter is gravity.

A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave.

Curved spacetime is displaced aether.

Which article specifically describe space as a frictionless supersolid?

The last one I linked to refers to the aether as an incompressible
fluid. That is the definition of a supersolid.

I should explain this more clearly. I agree with Einstein where
Einstein defines the aether as not consisting of individual particles
which can be separately tracked through time. I interpret this to mean
it can not be known if aether consists of particles or not.

Aether exists where particles of matter do not.

In terms of the state of the aether connected to and neighboring
matter there is no difference between it being described as an
incompressible fluid or as a supersolid.

The state of which is the state of displacement of the aether.

Watch the following video starting at 0:45 to see a visual
representation of of the state of the aether. What is referred
to as a twist in spacetime is the state of displacement of the aether.
What is referred to as frame-dragging is the state of displacement of
the aether.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9ITt44-EHE

The above video visually represents the state of displacement of the
aether of relativity.

On Nov 22, 10:12*pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
'Faster-than-light' observations reined in - Technology & Science - CBC Newshttp://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2011/11/21/science-neutrinos-...

"The same subatomic particles clocked going faster than light speed by
European scientists show signs indicating they are moving at only the
speed of light, says a group of Italian physicists.

The ICARUS collaboration based their conclusion on an independent
analysis of particles known as neutrinos generated at CERN, the European
Organization for Nuclear Research, and travelling to Gran Sasso, Italy.

The same particles from the same source were timed over the same path in
two separate experiments by the OPERA collaboration, and found to be
going faster than light. That appears to contradict Albert Einstein's
1905 special theory of relativity, which provides the basis for most of
modern physics."

* * * * Yousuf Khan

Neutrinos are fastest matter moving under and infinitely close to the
speed of light with a Gamma of infinity.

Mitch Raemsch

mpc755 wrote:

On Nov 23, 12:19 pm, 7
email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_...@enemygadgets .com wrote:
mpc755 wrote:
On Nov 23, 7:44 am, 7
email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_...@enemygadgets .com wrote:

What these ICARUS people are saying is that if particles
are speeding faster than light, then they should emit some kind of
light. Reasonable enough.

However, these guys have forgotten old rules about measuring speeds in
pressurized media. Speed of sound is faster for example in pressurized
media because but that is the correct speed for that media.

If space is pressurized media, then the speed of light is correct
for the increased pressurized media and thus it would travel
faster relative to us in the pressurized media and nothing abnormal
would happen. It is more evidence that light travels in a media
which could best be modeled as a frictionless super solid:

In the following recent articles the aether is described as a
frictionless super solid and a replacement for dark matter, dark
energy and quintessence. The last article describes gravity as a
pressure associated with the aether exerted toward matter.

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"

'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."

'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"

'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"

'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."

'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."

'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. ... We argue that deviations from General Relativity (GR) in
this theory are sourced by pressure or vorticity."

Pressure exerted by displaced aether toward matter is gravity.

A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave.

Curved spacetime is displaced aether.

Which article specifically describe space as a frictionless supersolid?

The last one I linked to refers to the aether as an incompressible
fluid. That is the definition of a supersolid.

Thats not the definition of a supersolid.

A frictionless supersolid behaves like a superfluid but unlike
a fluid which only transmits p waves, a frictionless supersolid,
transmits p and s waves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seismic_wave

mpc755 wrote:

On Nov 23, 12:26 pm, mpc755 wrote:
On Nov 23, 12:19 pm, 7









email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_...@enemygadgets .com wrote:
mpc755 wrote:
On Nov 23, 7:44 am, 7
email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_...@enemygadgets .com wrote:

What these ICARUS people are saying is that if particles
are speeding faster than light, then they should emit some kind of
light. Reasonable enough.

However, these guys have forgotten old rules about measuring speeds
in pressurized media. Speed of sound is faster for example in
pressurized media because but that is the correct speed for that
media.

If space is pressurized media, then the speed of light is correct
for the increased pressurized media and thus it would travel
faster relative to us in the pressurized media and nothing abnormal
would happen. It is more evidence that light travels in a media
which could best be modeled as a frictionless super solid:

In the following recent articles the aether is described as a
frictionless super solid and a replacement for dark matter, dark
energy and quintessence. The last article describes gravity as a
pressure associated with the aether exerted toward matter.

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"

'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."

'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"

'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"

'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."

'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."

'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. ... We argue that deviations from General
Relativity (GR) in this theory are sourced by pressure or vorticity."

Pressure exerted by displaced aether toward matter is gravity.

A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave.

Curved spacetime is displaced aether.

Which article specifically describe space as a frictionless supersolid?

The last one I linked to refers to the aether as an incompressible
fluid. That is the definition of a supersolid.

I should explain this more clearly. I agree with Einstein where
Einstein defines the aether as not consisting of individual particles
which can be separately tracked through time. I interpret this to mean
it can not be known if aether consists of particles or not.

Aether exists where particles of matter do not.

In terms of the state of the aether connected to and neighboring
matter there is no difference between it being described as an
incompressible fluid or as a supersolid.

The state of which is the state of displacement of the aether.

Watch the following video starting at 0:45 to see a visual
representation of of the state of the aether. What is referred
to as a twist in spacetime is the state of displacement of the aether.
What is referred to as frame-dragging is the state of displacement of
the aether.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9ITt44-EHE

The above video visually represents the state of displacement of the
aether of relativity.


I had trouble believing in Einstein from day 1 I heard about it.
Most discussions are dead ends unless the material for light to travel
in is so fine grained that it percolates through atoms. Adding the idea
of frictionless supersolid on top of that makes it far easier to take
another leap from there to solve a bigger range of issues, and importantly
make predictions. Since frictionless supersolids were not available as
discussion material, to be thrown into the melting pot of ideas and
discussions, Einstein had all but dominated discussions on this subject
up till now.

On 11/23/11 3:52 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
That is a dangerous position to take. Nature is the final arbiter.

Such as the SN 1987A essentially contradicts the OPERA results.

o total anti-neutrino energy 3 x 10^52 erg
o total neutrino energy 2.5 x 10^53 erg
o total neutrino luminosity 10^55 erg/s
o average neutrino temperature 4 MeV or 10^10 K
o number of neutrinos produced 10^58 neutrinos
o neutrino flux density at the earth 5 x 10^10 /cm^2

11 Anti-Neutrinos detected in the Kamiokande II Detector,
Feb 23, 1987 7h 35m 35s UTC (± 1 min) (Start)

8 Anti-Neutrinos detected in the Irvine-Michigan-Brookhaven (IMB)
Detector, Feb 23, 1987 7h 35m 41.37s UT (± 10 ms) (Start)

5 Anti-Neutrinos detected at Baksan, Feb 23, 1987 7h 35m

Optical Discovery: V = 5.0 mag 0n 24.122 Feb 1987... that does not
mean that the Anti-Neutrinos got to the Earth first, only that the
optical detection had no precise beginning and was via photographic
plate.

On 11/23/2011 4:29 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 11/23/11 3:52 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
That is a dangerous position to take. Nature is the final arbiter.

Such as the SN 1987A essentially contradicts the OPERA results.

o total anti-neutrino energy 3 x 10^52 erg
o total neutrino energy 2.5 x 10^53 erg
o total neutrino luminosity 10^55 erg/s
o average neutrino temperature 4 MeV or 10^10 K
o number of neutrinos produced 10^58 neutrinos
o neutrino flux density at the earth 5 x 10^10 /cm^2

11 Anti-Neutrinos detected in the Kamiokande II Detector,
Feb 23, 1987 7h 35m 35s UTC (± 1 min) (Start)

8 Anti-Neutrinos detected in the Irvine-Michigan-Brookhaven (IMB)
Detector, Feb 23, 1987 7h 35m 41.37s UT (± 10 ms) (Start)

5 Anti-Neutrinos detected at Baksan, Feb 23, 1987 7h 35m

Optical Discovery: V = 5.0 mag 0n 24.122 Feb 1987... that does not
mean that the Anti-Neutrinos got to the Earth first, only that the
optical detection had no precise beginning and was via photographic
plate.


The energy of neutrinos from SN1987A are several orders of magnitude
lower than the neutrinos observed at OPERA. An energy dependence would
accommodate this without conflict. However, the Cohen and Glashow paper
pointed out that higher energy neutrinos would also correspond to a
higher rate of energy loss due to a Cerenkov-like effect, and so a
faster-than-light neutrino should *also* be correlated with evidence of
energy degradation in the neutrinos, which was not seen either by ICARUS
or OPERA.

On Nov 23, 10:00Â*am, mpc755 wrote:
On Nov 23, 12:26Â*pm, mpc755 wrote:





On Nov 23, 12:19Â*pm, 7

email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_...@enemygadgets .com wrote:
mpc755 wrote:
On Nov 23, 7:44 am, 7
email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_...@enemygadgets .com wrote:

What these ICARUS people are saying is that if particles
are speeding faster than light, then they should emit some kind of light.
Reasonable enough.

However, these guys have forgotten old rules about measuring speeds in
pressurized media. Speed of sound is faster for example in pressurized
media because but that is the correct speed for that media.

If space is pressurized media, then the speed of light is correct
for the increased pressurized media and thus it would travel
faster relative to us in the pressurized media and nothing abnormal
would happen. It is more evidence that light travels in a media
which could best be modeled as a frictionless super solid:

In the following recent articles the aether is described as a
frictionless super solid and a replacement for dark matter, dark
energy and quintessence. The last article describes gravity as a
pressure associated with the aether exerted toward matter.

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"

'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."

'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"

'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"

'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."

'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."

'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. ... We argue that deviations from General Relativity (GR) in
this theory are sourced by pressure or vorticity."

Pressure exerted by displaced aether toward matter is gravity.

A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave.

Curved spacetime is displaced aether.

Which article specifically describe space as a frictionless supersolid?

The last one I linked to refers to the aether as an incompressible
fluid. That is the definition of a supersolid.

I should explain this more clearly. I agree with Einstein where
Einstein defines the aether as not consisting of individual particles
which can be separately tracked through time. I interpret this to mean
it can not be known if aether consists of particles or not.

Aether exists where particles of matter do not.

In terms of the state of the aether connected to and neighboring
matter there is no difference between it being described as an
incompressible fluid or as a supersolid.

The state of which is the state of displacement of the aether.

Watch the following video starting at 0:45 to see a visual
representation of of the state of the aether. What is referred
to as a twist in spacetime is the state of displacement of the aether.
What is referred to as frame-dragging is the state of displacement of
the aether.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9ITt44-EHE

The above video visually represents the state of displacement of the
aether of relativity.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Only the stupid are shooting for the breaking of Einstein's law.
This is a fad.

James

On 23/11/2011 22:29, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 11/23/11 3:52 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
That is a dangerous position to take. Nature is the final arbiter.

Such as the SN 1987A essentially contradicts the OPERA results.

o total anti-neutrino energy 3 x 10^52 erg
o total neutrino energy 2.5 x 10^53 erg
o total neutrino luminosity 10^55 erg/s
o average neutrino temperature 4 MeV or 10^10 K
o number of neutrinos produced 10^58 neutrinos
o neutrino flux density at the earth 5 x 10^10 /cm^2

11 Anti-Neutrinos detected in the Kamiokande II Detector,
Feb 23, 1987 7h 35m 35s UTC (± 1 min) (Start)

8 Anti-Neutrinos detected in the Irvine-Michigan-Brookhaven (IMB)
Detector, Feb 23, 1987 7h 35m 41.37s UT (± 10 ms) (Start)

5 Anti-Neutrinos detected at Baksan, Feb 23, 1987 7h 35m

Optical Discovery: V = 5.0 mag 0n 24.122 Feb 1987... that does not
mean that the Anti-Neutrinos got to the Earth first, only that the
optical detection had no precise beginning and was via photographic
plate.


It is quite likely that the neutrinos did reach the Earth before the
visible light as the bulk of the exploding supernova would have been
almost totally transparent to the neutrinos whilst being opaque to the
optical radiation until some time after the initial core collapse.

On Nov 23, 4:54Â*pm, 7
email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_...@enemygadgets .com wrote:
mpc755 wrote:
On Nov 23, 12:26 pm, mpc755 wrote:
On Nov 23, 12:19 pm, 7

email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_...@enemygadgets .com wrote:
mpc755 wrote:
On Nov 23, 7:44 am, 7
email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_...@enemygadgets .com wrote:

What these ICARUS people are saying is that if particles
are speeding faster than light, then they should emit some kind of
light. Reasonable enough.

However, these guys have forgotten old rules about measuring speeds
in pressurized media. Speed of sound is faster for example in
pressurized media because but that is the correct speed for that
media.

If space is pressurized media, then the speed of light is correct
for the increased pressurized media and thus it would travel
faster relative to us in the pressurized media and nothing abnormal
would happen. It is more evidence that light travels in a media
which could best be modeled as a frictionless super solid:

In the following recent articles the aether is described as a
frictionless super solid and a replacement for dark matter, dark
energy and quintessence. The last article describes gravity as a
pressure associated with the aether exerted toward matter.

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"

'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."

'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"

'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"

'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."

'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."

'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. ... We argue that deviations from General
Relativity (GR) in this theory are sourced by pressure or vorticity."

Pressure exerted by displaced aether toward matter is gravity.

A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave.

Curved spacetime is displaced aether.

Which article specifically describe space as a frictionless supersolid?

The last one I linked to refers to the aether as an incompressible
fluid. That is the definition of a supersolid.

I should explain this more clearly. I agree with Einstein where
Einstein defines the aether as not consisting of individual particles
which can be separately tracked through time. I interpret this to mean
it can not be known if aether consists of particles or not.

Aether exists where particles of matter do not.

In terms of the state of the aether connected to and neighboring
matter there is no difference between it being described as an
incompressible fluid or as a supersolid.

The state of which is the state of displacement of the aether.

Watch the following video starting at 0:45 to see a visual
representation of of the state of the aether. What is referred
to as a twist in spacetime is the state of displacement of the aether.
What is referred to as frame-dragging is the state of displacement of
the aether.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9ITt44-EHE

The above video visually represents the state of displacement of the
aether of relativity.

I had trouble believing in Einstein from day 1 I heard about it.
Most discussions are dead ends unless the material for light to travel
in is so fine grained that it percolates through atoms. Adding the idea
of frictionless supersolid on top of that makes it far easier to take
another leap from there to solve a bigger range of issues, and importantly
make predictions. Since frictionless supersolids were not available as
discussion material, to be thrown into the melting pot of ideas and
discussions, Einstein had all but dominated discussions on this subject
up till now.

"Einstein's 'First Paper'"
http://www.worldscibooks.com/etextbo...4454_chap1.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."

The above more correctly stated as the following.

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, Newton, Maxwell and de Broglie all refer to the state of
displacement the aether.

Maxwell's displacement current is a physical displacement of the
aether.

de Broglie's statement, "any particle, even isolated, has to be
imagined as in continuous “energetic contact� with a hidden medium" is
referring to the state of displacement of the aether.

The following statement by Newton is referring to the state of
displacement of the aether.

"Doth not this aethereal medium in passing out of water, glass,
crystal, and other compact and dense bodies in empty spaces, grow
denser and denser by degrees, and by that means refract the rays of
light not in a point, but by bending them gradually in curve
lines? ...Is not this medium much rarer within the dense bodies of the
Sun, stars, planets and comets, than in the empty celestial space
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?"

'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 as determined by its connections with the
matter and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the
aether's state of displacement.

The aether has mass. The aether physically occupies three dimensional
space. The aether is physically displaced by matter.

Force exerted by displaced aether toward matter is gravity.

A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a
double slit experiment the particle enters and exits a single slit and
it is the associated aether displacement wave which enters and exits
both. As the 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. Placing detectors at the exits to the slits turns the
associated aether displacement wave into chop, there is no
interference, and the direction the particle travels is not altered.

Curved spacetime is displaced aether.

On 11/23/11 11/23/11 4:51 PM, OG wrote:
It is quite likely that the neutrinos did reach the Earth before the visible
light as the bulk of the exploding supernova would have been almost totally
transparent to the neutrinos whilst being opaque to the optical radiation until
some time after the initial core collapse.

Not only "quite likely", but it was OBSERVED that the neutrinos arrived before
the visible light. By about 4 hours, IIRC. But if the neutrinos had traveled at
the speed OPERA claims, 1.000025 c, the neutrinos would have arrived several
YEARS before the visible light.

The observation is consistent with models of supernova collapse, in
which the system is transparent to neutrinos, but visible light
scatters trillions of times before emerging, taking a few hours.


Tom Roberts