| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Kow" |
| Date: |
21 Sep 2006 06:32:58 AM |
| Object: |
"The Properties of the Aether" |
"The Properties of the Aether"
Of course there is no such thing as the Aether, it says so right here
in the book that the Aether has been proven not to exist. Unfortunately for
the academic elite, such a proof does not exist. As Dr. Einstein said,
"remember gentlemen, we have not proven that the Aether does not exist, we
have merely proven that we do not need it (for computations)"! Actually, by
combining the Lorentz Transformations provided by Special Relativity to
obtain the Lorentz Transformation for velocity and adding a simple and
physically realizable thought experiment, the existence of an absolute rigid
velocity reference frame is readily proven. See
http://winsteinhoax.com/posting36.htm.
The classical Aether was postulated as a medium which allowed the
transmission of light, which was known to be a wave, through space. When
attempts were made to measure our velocity though the alleged medium the
result was failure. In 1903, Fitzgerald and Larmor provided the Lorentz
Transformations for Length and Time which were later mathematically derived
by Dr. Einstein in the Special Theory of Relativity. Both of these
approaches (which are actually identical) answered the dilemma posed by the
failure of the Michelson-Morely experiment to measure our absolute velocity.
Accepting the Aether as the basic component of space answers many, if
not all, of the problems associated with modern physics. The Aether was
postulated to explain how light, which was known to be a wave, could
propagate through empty space. As shown by Maxwell's Equations, a light wave
consisted of a cyclical interchange of energy between orthogonal
electromagnetic fields in a plane perpendicular to the direction of
propagation and was therefore a shear wave. Since all known waves require a
medium for propagation and shear waves cannot propagate through a fluid, it
was accepted that the medium (the Aether) must be a solid.
Later work suggested that light was composed of particles, which could
travel without a medium, rather than as a wave. It is easy to show, however,
that electromagnetic waves are composed of one cycle "pings" of an
electromagnetic energy traveling in synchronism. <A
href="posting19.htm">Posting 19</A><font size=+1> The velocity of such a
wave and of photons is determined by the permeability and dielectric
constant of space and, if space has such properties, it cannot be merely a
geometric construct as modern physics would have one believe. Attempting to
retain space as a geometric concept devoid of an Aether forced Dirac to a
invent a space filled with negative energy in order to make his mathematical
explanation of the creation of electron-positron pairs from the energy of a
high energy photon. One might wonder haw that space filled with "negative
energy" is any different from a space filled with the classical Aether.
If the Aether is a solid, then two questions must be answered. What is
the Nature of that solid and how do "solid" particles (e.g.- matter) travel
through it. The first question is easily answered by looking at the results
of cosmological observations. If the "solid" Aether is composed of minute
granules, akin to rice pudding, then there should be evidence of chromatic
dispersion of the light from distant objects analogous to the reddening of
Sunlight as it passes through the air molecules of our atmosphere. If the
"solid" Aether discontinuous, akin to jello, then no such dispersion would
occur. To date no chromatic dispersion or light from distant objects seems
to have been reported and it seems safe to assert that the Aether is a
continuous solid.
One is then left with the question of how solid matter can pass through
a solid Aether. The answer which follows is that material particles are not
solid but are actually standing waves (probably electromagnetic). It should
be noted that the work of de Broglie and the theoretical and physical
experiments which followed established the wavelike properties of material
particles early in the 20th century. Such waves would have no more trouble
passing through the Aether than does light. (The nature of particles
including the quarks which compose protons and neutrons etc. is discussed in
http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm and in a posting to follow.
The Aether must be composed of two materials in proximity, a positive
electric field and a negative electric field. (The use of the word field
rather than charge is deliberate since it is quite possible that the
materials are continuous rather than discrete as is the charge of
electrons.) The application of a sufficiently strong electromagnetic field
might then be expected to separate those materials to form an
electron-positron pair.
One more property that the Aether must have if one is to account for
gravity is that the proximity of energy causes a reduction in the ABSOLUTE
velocity of light. (The Lorentz Transformation for Velocity shows that since
the velocity of light is constant when measured locally, it cannot be
constant in ABSOLUTE terms.)
The source material for this posting may be found in
http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm (1997); http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm
(1987); and http://einsteinhoax.com/relcor.htm (1997). EVERYTHING WHICH WE
ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING ELSE WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS
TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS, AND IT MUST BE
MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET THIS
REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP FROM
THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.
All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at the
http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm.
Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on
a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy
as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts,
please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you
have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.
E-mail:- einsteinhoax@isp.com. If you wish a reply, be sure that your
mail reception is not blocked.
The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 8
years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE
MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without
questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be
objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn.
Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one
exception for which a correction was provided.
.
|
|
| User: "T Wake" |
|
| Title: Re: "The Properties of the Aether" |
21 Sep 2006 11:36:14 AM |
|
|
"Kow" <kow@isp.com> wrote in message
news:8df95$4512770c$d8080e95$2484@DIALUPUSA.NET...
E-mail:- einsteinhoax@isp.com. If you wish a reply, be sure that your
mail reception is not blocked.
Strangely you never replied to my email....
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "rds" |
|
| Title: Re: "The Properties of the Aether" |
21 Sep 2006 09:24:58 AM |
|
|
Kow wrote:
Accepting the Aether as the basic component of space answers many, if
not all, of the problems associated with modern physics. The Aether was
postulated to explain how light, which was known to be a wave, could
propagate through empty space. As shown by Maxwell's Equations, a light wave
consisted of a cyclical interchange of energy between orthogonal
electromagnetic fields in a plane perpendicular to the direction of
propagation and was therefore a shear wave. Since all known waves require a
medium for propagation and shear waves cannot propagate through a fluid, it
was accepted that the medium (the Aether) must be a solid.
The EM wave is called a transverse or shear wave and yet is it really?
As far asits influence in space it really isn't a transverse wave in
the physical direction. The peaks on the sine waves actiually represent
accelerations of charges.
A transverse wave is a wave that causes a disturbance in the medium
perpendicular to the direction it advances. For example: if a wave
moves along the x-axis, its disturbances are in the yz-plane.
In other words, it causes medium disturbances across the
two-dimensional plane that it is travelling in, like a string being
pulled up and down.
But in relality what is really happening on the vector representing a
EM Wave is that charges are being accelerated and decelerated on the
ray. The peaks really represent the max speed the charges traveled at
in the conductor they radiated from. The zeros are when the charges
were still. The picture of a sine wave rising above and below the
pointing vector is kind of misleading. All of the medium changes for
that ray occur on that ray, not above or below that ray. Isn't this
true?
Also it is clear that the radiation is moving trough something with a
particluar property. For eample the impedance of 377 ohms means that
free space has a resistance to current flow. Well what is causing that
resistance. Something is there. With a medium with some length for the
magnetic lines to flow through and develop polarity in there would be
no Electric field. It is the very AETHER or Space Fabric or whatever
you wish to call it that allows polarity to develop. I perfer the term
Polarity Fabric. This is the best description for Aether that exists.
Its a medium that can be polarized. Without it we could develop no
frequencies, wave lengths, electric charge, spin etc.
Also my strong feeling is that every force is realted to and stems from
magetic fields which placed in a Polarity Fabric form electric charge
and form forces on one another.
In general, the concept of energy refers to "the potential for causing
changes". In physics these potentials are realized by polarity changes.
The change in position or movement of an object which is brought about
through the action of a force. A force is what exists between different
polarity points.
Gravity for example is the combined charge (randomly distributed) of
one mass over another. The more mass the more randomly distributed
charge is realized. Also I think that these invisible particles like
electrons are simply rotating (spining) Polarity Fabric, like magnetic
waves traveling so fast that the EM radiation wave length approaches
zero and the frequency approaches infinity. I also believe that rapid
spinning and magnetic flux is what constitues mass as we know it.
Gravity is called a force which acts toward the center of the earth and
is shown as an acceleration on the Earth at 9.8 m*s*s. The vector is
always shown as moving down toward the earth. However I believe the
pull is actually a push from polarity fields lines which run in
circular rings around the earth formed in this PolFabric.
For example if we could only see in 2D, and we examined from an
airplane the progress of a boy on his bike fraveling from left to right
and exerting a known amount of work peddling the bike. The progress of
the right moving vector suddenly slows as the boy incounters a large
hill. It appears from our point that a force operating in the oposite
direction of the vector (right to left) is operating on the boy, yet in
reality it is that he is passing through a polarity line (in this case
formed by real gravity) but the real pull is actually (from our current
view of gravity) down into the earth our frame of reference. In the
same way I believe that masses leaving the earth are actually passing
through circular polarity fields formed around the earth based on its
randomly distributed charges. Portions of the earth are polarized and
form the earths magnetic field, but that magnetic field is effected by
randomly distributed charge (gravity) of the earth. In fact gravity
should be found to be effected by the magnetic field if it is charge
related. However the random distribution of charge is gravity should
limit the amount. Researchers are beginning to see some effect see:
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2814
Any thoughts?
.
|
|
|
| User: "mountain man" |
|
| Title: Re: "The Properties of the Aether" |
21 Sep 2006 07:03:47 PM |
|
|
"rds" <rdschwarz61@yahoo.com> wrote in message
....[trimmed]...
Researchers are beginning to see some effect see:
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2814
Any thoughts?
http://www.mountainman.com.au/process%5Fphysics/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sue..." |
|
| Title: Re: "The Properties of the Aether" |
21 Sep 2006 07:32:57 PM |
|
|
rds wrote:
[...]
Any thoughts?
I like the EM.
Try this for the gravity.
http://www.chem.purdue.edu/gchelp/liquids/inddip.html
Nature is lazy and never makes
a new mechanism when an existing mechanism will work.
http://www.citebase.org/cgi-bin/citations?id=oai:arXiv.org:physics/0107015
http://www.mypage.bluewin.ch/Bizarre/GRAV.htm
http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/GSP/SEM0L6OVGJE_0.html
Sue...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ross A. Finlayson" |
|
| Title: Re: "The Properties of the Aether" |
21 Sep 2006 07:49:40 PM |
|
|
Sue... wrote:
rds wrote:
[...]
Any thoughts?
I like the EM.
Try this for the gravity.
http://www.chem.purdue.edu/gchelp/liquids/inddip.html
Nature is lazy and never makes
a new mechanism when an existing mechanism will work.
http://www.citebase.org/cgi-bin/citations?id=oai:arXiv.org:physics/0107015
http://www.mypage.bluewin.ch/Bizarre/GRAV.htm
http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/GSP/SEM0L6OVGJE_0.html
Sue...
75 points for saying Baez plagiarized you.
Androcles, since you changed your pseudonym, then I would want to
filter you.
Ehrenfest is the binding energy paradox. It's the laser pulsed around
the ring.
Hi Sue, thank you so much for posting.
Please search my posts on sci.physics.
Hey is Uncle Al here? Hey, Al, how's it going.
Ross
.
|
|
|
| User: "mountain man" |
|
| Title: Re: "The Properties of the Aether" |
21 Sep 2006 08:22:11 PM |
|
|
"Ross A. Finlayson" <raf@tiki-lounge.com> wrote in message
news:1158886180.086427.194420@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Hey is Uncle Al here? Hey, Al, how's it going.
Good question.
Pete Brown
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ross A. Finlayson" |
|
| Title: Re: "The Properties of the Aether" |
22 Sep 2006 02:00:29 PM |
|
|
mountain man wrote:
"Ross A. Finlayson" <raf@tiki-lounge.com> wrote in message
news:1158886180.086427.194420@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Hey is Uncle Al here? Hey, Al, how's it going.
Good question.
Pete Brown
Hi Pete, hey what's up buddy,
Spam!
I'm glad some people agree that the notion of infinitesimal probability
is rigorous.
Apparently so, Al is with us.
Al, Frere Al, Uncle Al, hey Null or non-Null?
Ha ha, people will be able to jab Al about Eoetvoes for years. That's
OK, he jabbed everybody about it for years. Uncle Al's, Al Schwartz',
Eotvos Parity Experiment, Al, you got an experimental error. To
actually notice that it's null and non-null just has to do with the
geometry, of the experiment.
Al doesn't care if there's ether. Don't get me wrong, he probably has
an opinion about it.
Ross
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
