Aether has mass

On Nov 11, 5:33*am, mpc755 wrote:
On Nov 11, 8:23*am, Brad Guth wrote:









On Nov 11, 4:58*am, mpc755 wrote:

On Nov 11, 7:53*am, mpc755 wrote:

On Nov 11, 12:30*am, Brad Guth wrote:

On Nov 10, 9:02*pm, mpc755 wrote:

On Nov 10, 11:49*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

On Nov 10, 8:45*pm, mpc755 wrote:

On Nov 10, 11:31*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

On Nov 10, 8:04*pm, mpc755 wrote:

On Nov 10, 10:48*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

Yes, those are each good guys, though not entirely without flaws.

Once the Nobels are awarded to a dozen or more of these wise guys,
then others may follow suit. *Meanwhile, the interpretation as to what
aether is or is not is sort of up for grabs.

"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?" - Newton

Newton is referring to the state of displacement of the aether.

The aether does not grow denser and denser. The aether is, or behaves
similar to, a supersolid. However, Newton is correct, displaced aether
pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward matter is gravity.

""In several parts of this treatise an attempt has been made to
explain electromagnetic phenomena by means of mechanical action
transmitted from one body to another by means of a medium occupying
the space between them. The undulatory theory of light also assumes
the existence of a medium. We have now to shew that the properties of
the electromagnetic medium are identical with those of the
luminiferous medium." - Maxwell

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

'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html

"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"

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.

'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 through a single slit and
the associated aether wave through both.

"It is ironic that Einstein's most creative work, the general theory
of relativity, should boil down to conceptualizing space as a medium
when his original premise [in special relativity] was that no such
medium existed [..] The word 'ether' has extremely negative
connotations in theoretical physics because of its past association
with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because, stripped
of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most
physicists actually think about the vacuum. . . . Relativity actually
says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading
the universe, only that any such matter must have relativistic
symmetry. [..] It turns out that such matter exists. About the time
relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began
showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure
similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids. Subsequent
studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand
that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian
emptiness. It is filled with 'stuff' that is normally transparent but
can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a
part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day
by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this
because it is taboo." - Robert B. Laughlin, Nobel Laureate in Physics,
endowed chair in physics, Stanford University

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

Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward
matter is gravity.

Perhaps aether and molecular gravity are 50/50 equals.

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

Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward
matter IS gravity.

Molecular mass is also worthy of creating gravity, so why not 50/50 ?

Molecular mass displaces the aether.

Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward
matter IS gravity.

Then why does a solid of molecular mass simulate gravity?

Is aether inside of atoms?

I don't understand the question. What do you mean by a solid of
molecular mass simulates gravity?

You are not comparing molecular bonds to gravity, are you?

If I interpreted it correctly, de Broglie thinks it is possible
molecular bonds are the same phenomenon as gravity. Which means
molecular bonds are also caused by aether displacement. I have no idea
if this is correct.

Neither do most of us, and that's why having this topic is a good
method of others collectively scratching their heads in trying to
figure out if aether is in fact the same as dark matter, and at the
same time represents or even influences what we call gravity. *You
wouldn't have offered this topic if you already knew all there was to
know about aether and gravity.

I do know what is postulated as non-baryonic dark matter is aether. I
do know aether has mass. I do know particles of matter move through
and displace the aether.

I do know displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure
toward matter is gravity.

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

Yet for all of that knowing, it does you no good.

What is the supersolid density of aether?

Is its density or given mass/cm3 always exactly the same, regardless
of the molecular stuff it surrounds?

What application of aether is going to alter or change physics for the
better or worse?

On Nov 11, 8:45*am, Brad Guth wrote:
On Nov 11, 5:33*am, mpc755 wrote:









On Nov 11, 8:23*am, Brad Guth wrote:

On Nov 11, 4:58*am, mpc755 wrote:

On Nov 11, 7:53*am, mpc755 wrote:

On Nov 11, 12:30*am, Brad Guth wrote:

On Nov 10, 9:02*pm, mpc755 wrote:

On Nov 10, 11:49*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

On Nov 10, 8:45*pm, mpc755 wrote:

On Nov 10, 11:31*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

On Nov 10, 8:04*pm, mpc755 wrote:

On Nov 10, 10:48*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

Yes, those are each good guys, though not entirely without flaws.

Once the Nobels are awarded to a dozen or more of these wise guys,
then others may follow suit. *Meanwhile, the interpretation as to what
aether is or is not is sort of up for grabs.

"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?" - Newton

Newton is referring to the state of displacement of the aether.

The aether does not grow denser and denser. The aether is, or behaves
similar to, a supersolid. However, Newton is correct, displaced aether
pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward matter is gravity.

""In several parts of this treatise an attempt has been made to
explain electromagnetic phenomena by means of mechanical action
transmitted from one body to another by means of a medium occupying
the space between them. The undulatory theory of light also assumes
the existence of a medium. We have now to shew that the properties of
the electromagnetic medium are identical with those of the
luminiferous medium." - Maxwell

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

'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html

"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"

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.

'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 through a single slit and
the associated aether wave through both.

"It is ironic that Einstein's most creative work, the general theory
of relativity, should boil down to conceptualizing space as a medium
when his original premise [in special relativity] was that no such
medium existed [..] The word 'ether' has extremely negative
connotations in theoretical physics because of its past association
with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because, stripped
of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most
physicists actually think about the vacuum. . . . Relativity actually
says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading
the universe, only that any such matter must have relativistic
symmetry. [..] It turns out that such matter exists. About the time
relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began
showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure
similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids.. Subsequent
studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand
that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian
emptiness. It is filled with 'stuff' that is normally transparent but
can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a
part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day
by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this
because it is taboo." - Robert B. Laughlin, Nobel Laureate in Physics,
endowed chair in physics, Stanford University

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

Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward
matter is gravity.

Perhaps aether and molecular gravity are 50/50 equals.

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

Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward
matter IS gravity.

Molecular mass is also worthy of creating gravity, so why not 50/50 ?

Molecular mass displaces the aether.

Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward
matter IS gravity.

Then why does a solid of molecular mass simulate gravity?

Is aether inside of atoms?

I don't understand the question. What do you mean by a solid of
molecular mass simulates gravity?

You are not comparing molecular bonds to gravity, are you?

If I interpreted it correctly, de Broglie thinks it is possible
molecular bonds are the same phenomenon as gravity. Which means
molecular bonds are also caused by aether displacement. I have no idea
if this is correct.

Neither do most of us, and that's why having this topic is a good
method of others collectively scratching their heads in trying to
figure out if aether is in fact the same as dark matter, and at the
same time represents or even influences what we call gravity. *You
wouldn't have offered this topic if you already knew all there was to
know about aether and gravity.

I do know what is postulated as non-baryonic dark matter is aether. I
do know aether has mass. I do know particles of matter move through
and displace the aether.

I do know displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure
toward matter is gravity.

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

Yet for all of that knowing, it does you no good.

What is the supersolid density of aether?

Is its density or given mass/cm3 always exactly the same, regardless
of the molecular stuff it surrounds?

What application of aether is going to alter or change physics for the
better or worse?

Understanding what occurs physically in nature to cause gravity is
doing no good? Understanding what occurs physically in nature in a
double slit experiment is doing no good? Understanding Einstein's
gravitational wave is de Broglie's pilot wave is doing no good?
Understanding what relates general relativity and quantum mechanics is
doing not good? Understanding the relationship between mass and energy
is doing no good?

On Nov 11, 5:56*am, mpc755 wrote:
On Nov 11, 8:45*am, Brad Guth wrote:

Yet for all of that knowing, it does you no good.

What is the supersolid density of aether?

Is its density or given mass/cm3 always exactly the same, regardless
of the molecular stuff it surrounds?

What application of aether is going to alter or change physics for the
better or worse?

Understanding what occurs physically in nature to cause gravity is
doing no good? Understanding what occurs physically in nature in a
double slit experiment is doing no good? Understanding Einstein's
gravitational wave is de Broglie's pilot wave is doing no good?
Understanding what relates general relativity and quantum mechanics is
doing not good? Understanding the relationship between mass and energy
is doing no good?

What do you plan to offer humanity as a direct or indirect result of
all your aether knowledge?

Is there going to be an antigravity car or transporter named after
you?
Is this knowledge going to help us exploit Venus?

https://picasaweb.google.com/bradgut...18595926178146
https://picasaweb.google.com/bradgut...79402364691314
“Guth Venus”, at 1:1, then 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

On Nov 11, 9:20*am, Brad Guth wrote:
On Nov 11, 5:56*am, mpc755 wrote:









On Nov 11, 8:45*am, Brad Guth wrote:

Yet for all of that knowing, it does you no good.

What is the supersolid density of aether?

Is its density or given mass/cm3 always exactly the same, regardless
of the molecular stuff it surrounds?

What application of aether is going to alter or change physics for the
better or worse?

Understanding what occurs physically in nature to cause gravity is
doing no good? Understanding what occurs physically in nature in a
double slit experiment is doing no good? Understanding Einstein's
gravitational wave is de Broglie's pilot wave is doing no good?
Understanding what relates general relativity and quantum mechanics is
doing not good? Understanding the relationship between mass and energy
is doing no good?

What do you plan to offer humanity as a direct or indirect result of
all your aether knowledge?

Is there going to be an antigravity car or transporter named after
you?
Is this knowledge going to help us exploit Venus?

*https://picasaweb.google.com/bradgut...18595926178146
*https://picasaweb.google.com/bradgut...79402364691314
*“Guth Venus”, at 1:1, then 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

'Quantum mechanics rule 'bent' in classic experiment'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13626587

'For his part, Professor Steinberg believes that the result reduces a
limitation not on quantum physics but on physicists themselves. "I
feel like we're starting to pull back a veil on what nature really
is," he said. "The trouble with quantum mechanics is that while we've
learned to calculate the outcomes of all sorts of experiments, we've
lost much of our ability to describe what is really happening in any
natural language. I think that this has really hampered our ability to
make progress, to come up with new ideas and see intuitively how new
systems ought to behave."'

Understanding aether has mass, physically occupies three dimensional
space and is physically displaced by matter is going to allow physics
to discuss what occurs physically in nature in a common language. It
is going to correct the absolute nonsense which exists in physics
today. There is no telling what physics will be able to accomplish
when it understands what occurs physically in nature.

On 11/11/2012 9:20 AM, Brad Guth wrote:


What do you plan to offer humanity as a direct or indirect result of
all your aether knowledge?

Is there going to be an antigravity car or transporter named after
you?
Is this knowledge going to help us exploit Venus?


You are one funny cocksucker, Goth!












--
"OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo .. �亮
http://www.richardgingras.com/tia/im...logo_large.jpg

On Nov 11, 6:25*am, mpc755 wrote:
On Nov 11, 9:20*am, Brad Guth wrote:









On Nov 11, 5:56*am, mpc755 wrote:

On Nov 11, 8:45*am, Brad Guth wrote:

Yet for all of that knowing, it does you no good.

What is the supersolid density of aether?

Is its density or given mass/cm3 always exactly the same, regardless
of the molecular stuff it surrounds?

What application of aether is going to alter or change physics for the
better or worse?

Understanding what occurs physically in nature to cause gravity is
doing no good? Understanding what occurs physically in nature in a
double slit experiment is doing no good? Understanding Einstein's
gravitational wave is de Broglie's pilot wave is doing no good?
Understanding what relates general relativity and quantum mechanics is
doing not good? Understanding the relationship between mass and energy
is doing no good?

What do you plan to offer humanity as a direct or indirect result of
all your aether knowledge?

Is there going to be an antigravity car or transporter named after
you?
Is this knowledge going to help us exploit Venus?

*https://picasaweb.google.com/bradgut...18595926178146
*https://picasaweb.google.com/bradgut...79402364691314
*“Guth Venus”, at 1:1, then 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

'Quantum mechanics rule 'bent' in classic experiment'http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13626587

'For his part, Professor Steinberg believes that the result reduces a
limitation not on quantum physics but on physicists themselves. "I
feel like we're starting to pull back a veil on what nature really
is," he said. "The trouble with quantum mechanics is that while we've
learned to calculate the outcomes of all sorts of experiments, we've
lost much of our ability to describe what is really happening in any
natural language. I think that this has really hampered our ability to
make progress, to come up with new ideas and see intuitively how new
systems ought to behave."'

Understanding aether has mass, physically occupies three dimensional
space and is physically displaced by matter is going to allow physics
to discuss what occurs physically in nature in a common language. It
is going to correct the absolute nonsense which exists in physics
today. There is no telling what physics will be able to accomplish
when it understands what occurs physically in nature.

I agree with that, but what have you accomplished or plan upon
accomplishing for us?

On Nov 11, 11:39*am, Brad Guth wrote:
On Nov 11, 6:25*am, mpc755 wrote:









On Nov 11, 9:20*am, Brad Guth wrote:

On Nov 11, 5:56*am, mpc755 wrote:

On Nov 11, 8:45*am, Brad Guth wrote:

Yet for all of that knowing, it does you no good.

What is the supersolid density of aether?

Is its density or given mass/cm3 always exactly the same, regardless
of the molecular stuff it surrounds?

What application of aether is going to alter or change physics for the
better or worse?

Understanding what occurs physically in nature to cause gravity is
doing no good? Understanding what occurs physically in nature in a
double slit experiment is doing no good? Understanding Einstein's
gravitational wave is de Broglie's pilot wave is doing no good?
Understanding what relates general relativity and quantum mechanics is
doing not good? Understanding the relationship between mass and energy
is doing no good?

What do you plan to offer humanity as a direct or indirect result of
all your aether knowledge?

Is there going to be an antigravity car or transporter named after
you?
Is this knowledge going to help us exploit Venus?

*https://picasaweb.google.com/bradgut...18595926178146
*https://picasaweb.google.com/bradgut...79402364691314
*“Guth Venus”, at 1:1, then 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

'Quantum mechanics rule 'bent' in classic experiment'http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13626587

'For his part, Professor Steinberg believes that the result reduces a
limitation not on quantum physics but on physicists themselves. "I
feel like we're starting to pull back a veil on what nature really
is," he said. "The trouble with quantum mechanics is that while we've
learned to calculate the outcomes of all sorts of experiments, we've
lost much of our ability to describe what is really happening in any
natural language. I think that this has really hampered our ability to
make progress, to come up with new ideas and see intuitively how new
systems ought to behave."'

Understanding aether has mass, physically occupies three dimensional
space and is physically displaced by matter is going to allow physics
to discuss what occurs physically in nature in a common language. It
is going to correct the absolute nonsense which exists in physics
today. There is no telling what physics will be able to accomplish
when it understands what occurs physically in nature.

I agree with that, but what have you accomplished or plan upon
accomplishing for us?

I figured out what occurs physically in nature to cause gravity. I
figured out what occurs physically in nature in a double slit
experiment. I figured out the relationship between mass and energy. I
figured out a more correct definition of time. I figured out there is
no such thing as entanglement. I figured out it's not the big bang
it's the big ongoing.

The question is, what are you going to do with this knowledge?

On 11/11/2012 11:50 AM, mpc755 wrote:


I figured out what occurs physically in nature to cause gravity.


No. You have some wild ass story about a ****ing bowling alley.

That's it.







--
"OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo .. �亮
http://www.richardgingras.com/tia/im...logo_large.jpg

On Nov 11, 12:22*pm, HVAC wrote:
On 11/11/2012 11:50 AM, mpc755 wrote:



I figured out what occurs physically in nature to cause gravity.

No. You have some wild ass story about a ****ing bowling alley.

That's it.


Are you able to understand objects interact with a supersolid?

You are in a bowling alley filled with a supersolid. You roll the
bowling ball toward the pins.

You are able to understand the bowling ball displaces the supersolid,
correct?

You are able to understand there is no loss of energy between the
bowling ball and the supersolid because that's what supersolid means,
correct?

You are able to understand the bowling ball will roll forever through
the supersolid, correct?

The interaction of an object and a supersolid does not mean no
interaction. It means no loss of energy in the interaction. The
bowling ball requires energy to displace the supersolid. The
supersolid returns to the bowling ball the same amount of energy as
the supersolid 'displaces back'.

Q. Is the bowling ball displacing the supersolid or is the supersolid
displacing the bowling ball?
A. Both occur simultaneously with equal force.

On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 19:36:33 -0800 (PST), mpc755
wrote:

On Nov 10, 8:27*pm, Painius wrote:
On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 14:17:58 -0800 (PST), mpc755
wrote:

On Nov 10, 1:26 pm, Painius wrote:
On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 04:58:15 -0800 (PST), Brad Guth

wrote:
On Nov 9, 10:18 pm, Painius wrote:
On Fri, 9 Nov 2012 12:44:23 -0800 (PST), mpc755
wrote:

On Nov 9, 3:38 pm, Painius wrote:
On Fri, 9 Nov 2012 09:06:42 -0800 (PST), mpc755
wrote:

On Nov 9, 11:07 am, Painius wrote:

It seems very likely to me that space and dark matter are one and the
same.

Which means what is postulated as dark matter is aether. Which means
aether has mass. Which means aether physically occupies three
dimensional space. Which means aether is physically displaced by
matter. Which means displaced aether pushes back and exerts inward
pressure toward matter. Which means displaced aether pushing back and
exerting inward pressure toward matter is gravity.

That all sounds pretty true, if non-mainstream. My main question
would concern the *pressure* required behind what you call the
"aether". There would have to be some kind of power source that
pushes the aether into matter to cause gravitation.

Once more - you stated...

Which means displaced aether pushes back and exerts inward
pressure toward matter. Which means displaced aether pushing back and
exerting inward pressure toward matter is gravity.

What is the source of the pressure that is exerted on the displaced
aether that causes it to exert inward pressure toward matter?

Aether exists where particles of matter do not. Where particles of
matter exist the aether is displaced.

And again, just like the battery in a DC circuit exerts a pressure
that moves current through the circuit, there must be a source of the
pressure that is exerted by the displaced aether. In your opinion,
what is that source?

Perhaps aether is the last unknown element of what makes everything
tick, and otherwise responsible for what ties everything together, as
the grand unification of gravity that could represent the final nail
in the coffin of physics.

All that is correct, except that the science of physics would not die
and will be better off when your statement is confirmed.

And yet, oc and Wolter recognized the need for a very forceful power
source to push the spatial medium, which oc and I dubbed the
sub-Planckian energy domain (SPED), into matter to cause gravitation.
So I would like Mike to give his opinion and description of what he
thinks that source might be.

The aether is, or behaves similar to, a supersolid.

I believe aether exists everywhere particles of matter do not. This
means where particles of matter exist the aether is displaced. A
moving particle displaces the aether. The displaced aether fills-in
where the particle had been. Displaced aether pushes back and exerts
inward pressure toward the matter. Displaced aether pushing back and
exerting inward pressure toward matter is gravity.

That can only happen if there is a pressure exerted on the aether from
"outside", so to speak. *In your bowling alley analogy, the outside
pressure comes from the ceiling, walls and floor of the building. *In
an "open" Universe, where does this outside pressure originate?

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine @http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/
"Never to suffer would never to have been blessed."

'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??g,6a2 so, it is positive
if ?g 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 ?g 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"

The following articles describe what is presently postulated as dark
matter is aether.

'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"

'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."

'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."

'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"


Polly wanna cracker?

I don't want you to parrot what they thought, I want to know what
*you* think.


--
Indelibly yours,
Paine @ http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/
"Never to suffer would never to have been blessed."