Main Page | Report this Page
 
   
Science Forum Index  »  Physics Forum  »  Aether is the empty space on which the Universe sits
Page 2 of 9    Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Author Message
N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)
Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 8:03 am
Guest
Dear Benj:

"Benj" <bjacoby@iwaynet.net> wrote in message
news:7d3390f0-d210-4c7b-88e0-57594e76e5b3@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
....
Quote:
Hey Bob, Once again, Saying that Aether has
never been observed is a lie.

Any aether that can be observed has been experimentally
disproven.

Quote:
Empty space has PROPERTIES therefore,
aether has been observed!

There is no empty space. Look at any diffraction experiment...
any finite slit geometry derives non-zero diffraction. Any
"empty space" is filled with the barest hint matter surrounding
it, and the light being passed through it. The properties you
bark about derive from the Universe et al.

Quote:
How about you keep your religion in church?

Lorentz aether cannot be observed. So you have to accept aether
on faith.

Quote:
The failure was not to observe Aether but
rather a failure to observe Aether Drift!
Quite a different matter.

Aether drift, and dragged aether have both been disproven.

David A. Smith
FrediFizzx
Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 1:53 am
Guest
"Robert J. Kolker" <bobkolker@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:M8WdnRWCUISJW2_anZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@comcast.com...
Quote:
Laurent wrote:


Right, it does not exist as matter but it is, like God.

So you believe. But you don't know. In addition the Aether of Maxwell
(a super stiff space filling goo that was rarer than virtue) was
falsified by the MMX.

Aether makes no sense. Light is particles. It does not need a medium.

For sure, the old-time aether didn't work out as planned. Wink Light
also has wave properties though. Photons only have spin and momentum as
intrinsic properties. Where does the electromagnetic properties of
light come from?

Best,

Fred Diether
Co-moderator sci.physics.foundations
N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)
Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 8:01 am
Guest
Dear FrediFizzx:

"FrediFizzx" <fredifizzx@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:65jdcpF2fgp6gU1@mid.individual.net...
....
Quote:
For sure, the old-time aether didn't work out
as planned. Wink Light also has wave properties
though.

No, the system of light + Universe has wave properties.

Quote:
Photons only have spin and momentum as intrinsic properties.
Where does the
electromagnetic properties of light come from?

Assigned in relation to the Universe. Are wew measuring the
meat, the butcher's thumb, or both?

Quote:
Fred Diether
Co-moderator sci.physics.foundations

You say that like it meant something more than you were willing
to set yourself up for unending hours of unpaid tedium. ;>)

David A. Smith
Laurent
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 12:53 am
Guest
On Apr 1, 7:31 pm, "Robert J. Kolker" <bobkol...@comcast.net> wrote:
Quote:
Laurent wrote:

Right, it does not exist as matter but it is, like God.

So you believe. But you don't know. In addition the Aether of Maxwell (a
super stiff space filling goo that was rarer than virtue) was falsified
by the MMX.

Aether makes no sense. Light is particles. It does not need a medium.

Bob Kolker


You are living in the 19th century.

--
Laurent
Laurent
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 1:15 am
Guest
On Apr 1, 10:23 pm, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <dl...@cox.net>
wrote:
Quote:
Dear leonmaure:

leonma...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:793d3e50-a2fd-49f1-9a59-2e99a72b4758@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
...

Where did the light particles come from?

They are quantum exchange particles between two charged
particles.


Explain particle pair creation without aether or any energy sources.
Isn't there a law against that in your text book? :)


Quote:

What are they composed of?

They are modelled by Maxwell as "EM fields".  They are a series
of (non-propagating) virtual photons in QM.

When they move. What do they move through?

The Universe in Maxwell, and they don't move through anything in
QM.

Right, space is an extension of matter.

Quote:

Einstein said,

He died in 1955.  There is no religion with His name on it.


Right, but he was a Pantheist.

Quote:

"Light is pure energy" and "Energy is space in
motion."  Therefore, a light particle has be
composed of energy waves.

No.

Light is wave and particle, it's called photons or quanta.


Quote:

Waves of what, if not aether?

Ripples in the Universe, in one model.

Relativity theory says they have to be
something substantial. Q.E.D.

No.  In fact, it says they cannot have any substance at all.


That depends on what your definition of a substance is.

Quote:

No matter what you call it,
it's still aether, or empty (of form) space.

There is no empty space.


Right, just like there are no point particles.


Quote:

So, the MMX proved nothing.

It disproved an aether that was unique to light alone.

It proved they didn't understand the nature of the aether.

Quote:

Since the aether is the root of all earthly
matter

Impossible to prove.

The proof is that we are here. There can be aether without fields but
there can be no fields without aether. Aether is empty space and
fields are shapes drawn by matter as process (spacetime) takes place.
Matter and space are one and the same autopoietic process.

--
Laurent

Quote:

and had to be traveling through space along
with the Earth, how could the MMX prove it
wasn't really the medium of light originating
from the Earth?

It disproved one of three classes of aether.

David A. Smith
Laurent
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 1:19 am
Guest
On Apr 2, 4:26 am, "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics> wrote:
Quote:
"Robert J. Kolker" <bobkol...@comcast.net> wrote in messagenews:mqWdnaOtT4xS3W7anZ2dnUVZ_vbinZ2d@comcast.com...| Benj wrote:

|
|
| > Oh great. Two kooks arguing "religion"!
|
| > Hey Bob, Once again, Saying that Aether has never been observed is a
| > lie. Empty space has PROPERTIES therefore, aether has been observed!
| > How about you keep your religion in church?  The failure was not to
| > observe Aether but rather a failure to observe  Aether Drift! Quite a
| > different matter.
|
| Aether, according to Maxwell is super stiff space filling goo that is so
| rare it does not slow planets down in their orbits. Maxwell did not
| believe space was aether.  Neither did Michelson nor Morley.

Don't bring Morley into it, he was a chemist who assisted his friend
Albert Michelson.
Michelson DID believe aether was space but changed his mind from
certain to uncertain.

|
| Aether is an unnecessary and useless concept.

Correct, and out go its properties as well.

| Which is why it has been
| largely dropped from physics.

The crank properties haven't been dropped though. Permittivity
and permeability  of "free space" (aether) is still around, screwing
everything up.

| It has suffered the same fate as
| phlogiston, caloric, electric fluid and vital essence.
|
| Bob Kolker
|

heheh Androcles making sense at last.
Laurent
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 1:27 am
Guest
On Apr 2, 9:03 am, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <dl...@cox.net>
wrote:
Quote:
Dear Benj:

"Benj" <bjac...@iwaynet.net> wrote in message

news:7d3390f0-d210-4c7b-88e0-57594e76e5b3@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
...

Hey Bob, Once again, Saying that Aether has
never been observed is a lie.

Any aether that can be observed has been experimentally
disproven.


Right.

Quote:

Empty space has PROPERTIES therefore,
aether has been observed!

There is no empty space.  

There IS space, it just does not exist as matter.


Look at any diffraction experiment...
Quote:
any finite slit geometry derives non-zero diffraction.  Any
"empty space" is filled with the barest hint matter surrounding
it, and the light being passed through it.  The properties you
bark about derive from the Universe et al.

??? If it isn't real how can it be filled?

Quote:

How about you keep your religion in church?

Lorentz aether cannot be observed.  So you have to accept aether
on faith.

But the gravitational aether can be felt.


Quote:

The failure was not to observe Aether but
rather a failure to observe  Aether Drift!
Quite a different matter.

Aether drift, and dragged aether have both been disproven.


Want to measure aether drag? Just measure the momentum in a moving
object. That force pushing against you when you hit the brakes on your
car. Clear enough?

--
Laurent

Quote:

David A. Smith
Laurent
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 1:28 am
Guest
On Apr 3, 9:01 am, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <dl...@cox.net>
wrote:
Quote:
Dear FrediFizzx:

"FrediFizzx" <fredifi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:65jdcpF2fgp6gU1@mid.individual.net...
...

For sure, the old-time aether didn't work out
as planned.  Wink  Light also has wave properties
though.

No, the system of light + Universe has wave properties.

Photons only have spin and momentum as intrinsic properties.
Where does the
electromagnetic properties of  light come from?

Assigned in relation to the Universe.  Are wew measuring the
meat, the butcher's thumb, or both?

Fred Diether
Co-moderator  sci.physics.foundations

You say that like it meant something more than you were willing
to set yourself up for unending hours of unpaid tedium.  ;>)

David A. Smith

Aether is the empty space on which the Universe sits.

--
Laurent
Robert J. Kolker
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 7:00 am
Guest
Laurent wrote:
Quote:

You are living in the 19th century.

No. You are. Have you ever heard of a photon? A 20-th century invention.

Light is particles with zero rest mass.

There is no aether.

Bob Kolker
Robert J. Kolker
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 7:01 am
Guest
Laurent wrote:

Quote:

Explain particle pair creation without aether or any energy sources.
Isn't there a law against that in your text book? Smile

Read any book on the Standard Model for that.

There is no aether.

Bob Kolker
Robert J. Kolker
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 7:03 am
Guest
Laurent wrote:


Quote:
But the gravitational aether can be felt.

Gravity is curvature of the spacetime manifold. It is not a substance.

Bob Kolker
Robert J. Kolker
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 7:03 am
Guest
Laurent wrote:>
Quote:

Aether is the empty space on which the Universe sits.

Empty space is not a substance.

Bob Kolker
N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 10:28 am
Guest
Dear Laurent:

"Laurent" <cyberdyno@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4835b7bd-89d0-4643-ae29-f0b67348fc02@b5g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 1, 10:23 pm, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <dl...@cox.net>
wrote:
Quote:
Dear leonmaure:

leonma...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:793d3e50-a2fd-49f1-9a59-2e99a72b4758@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
...

Where did the light particles come from?

They are quantum exchange particles between
two charged particles.

Explain particle pair creation without aether or
any energy sources. Isn't there a law against
that in your text book? Smile

Without "energy sources"? Where did that idiocy come from?
Explanations without aether are simple a straightforward.

....
Quote:
When they move. What do they move through?

The Universe in Maxwell, and they don't move
through anything in QM.

Right, space is an extension of matter.

... and energy. But only in classical theories. In QM, space is
nonsequitur... so far.

Quote:
Einstein said,

He died in 1955. There is no religion with His
name on it.

Right, but he was a Pantheist.

Says nothing about where Science has gone since 1915 or so...

Quote:
"Light is pure energy" and "Energy is space in
motion." Therefore, a light particle has be
composed of energy waves.

No.

Light is wave and particle, it's called photons or
quanta.

These labels you attach to light are a function of the model used
to describe them in relation to the system you define. You say
something about the butcher's thumb, and not the meat on the
scale.

Quote:
Relativity theory says they have to be
something substantial. Q.E.D.

No. In fact, it says they cannot have any
substance at all.

That depends on what your definition of a
substance is.

In aether, light is "ripples in"... no substance inherent to
light there either.

Quote:
No matter what you call it,
it's still aether, or empty (of form) space.

There is no empty space.

Right, just like there are no point particles.

Who said that? Electrons and photons... there is no collision
where "bumpers" meet, where new unique particles resolve.

Quote:
So, the MMX proved nothing.

It disproved an aether that was unique to
light alone.

It proved they didn't understand the nature of
the aether.

You don't either. Will you be droll about your own
misconceptions too, as you are about people that died ~100 years
ago?

Quote:
Since the aether is the root of all earthly
matter

Impossible to prove.

The proof is that we are here.

Fails.

Quote:
There can be aether without fields but there
can be no fields without aether.

Yes, there can be. There is no empty space, and what "waves"
with the passage of light is *us*.

Quote:
Aether is empty space and fields are shapes
drawn by matter as process (spacetime) takes
place. Matter and space are one and the same
autopoietic process.

Word salad. And we again come full circle.

In a diffraction experiment, any finite geometry yields non-zero
diffraction. Both the diffracted particle and the slit
"material" are expressed across each bit of "empty" space.
Subtract that effect out, and the need for an aether ceases to
be.

David A. Smith
Benj
Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 10:48 pm
Guest
On Apr 6, 1:44 am, "FrediFizzx" <fredifi...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Quote:
"According to the modern view the elementary particles (electrons,
neutrinos, quarks, etc.) are excitations of some more fundamental medium
called the quantum vacuum. This is the new ether of the 21st century.
The electromagnetic and gravitational fields, as well as the fields
transferring the weak and the strong interactions, all represent
different types of collective motion of the quantum vacuum."

Actually this doesn't make much sense either! I don't mean the
existence of some medium which is the basis of the four basic
interactions, but rather the name "quantum vacuum". It is obvious
that since it represents properties of space, it cannot be a "void" or
a "vacuum". It should properly be called the "quantum aether" to
eliminate the misleading name. But establishment physics is SO set on
denying the existence of classical aether that they spew the "vacuum"
dogma even in the face of irrefutable evidence that space is filled
with some kind of interesting substance. Which raises and even MORE
interesting question: If space is filled with Quantum Aether, is it
somehow possible to create a "hole" in that aether which would
actually BE a "true" vacuum or void? In other words a space devoid of
all properties (including the four interactions).

Quote:
Most likely we just don't know what all the quantum objects are yet. Or
their possible interactional configurations. Hopefully we will get some
more clues after the LHC has been running for awhile.

Well, provided it doesn't open a black hole and the earth gets sucked
into it...
FrediFizzx
Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 12:44 am
Guest
"Laurent" <cyberdyno@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:854417cb-9999-4e71-ab7b-a7bc9026105a@n1g2000prb.googlegroups.com...

Quote:
Aether is the empty space on which the Universe sits.

Well, that doesn't make much sense. You don't help your case much with
a statement like that. Empty space (the void) is the stage that ether
and *other* quantum objects play on.

Volovik says it like it is very well in his book "The Universe in a
Helium Droplet" page 461 sect. 33 Conclusion;

"According to the modern view the elementary particles (electrons,
neutrinos, quarks, etc.) are excitations of some more fundamental medium
called the quantum vacuum. This is the new ether of the 21st century.
The electromagnetic and gravitational fields, as well as the fields
transferring the weak and the strong interactions, all represent
different types of collective motion of the quantum vacuum."

Most likely we just don't know what all the quantum objects are yet. Or
their possible interactional configurations. Hopefully we will get some
more clues after the LHC has been running for awhile.

Best,

Fred Diether
Co-moderator sci.physics.foundations
 
Page 2 of 9    Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next   All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Fri Sep 05, 2008 7:11 pm