ether

[dreece]

thanks for the advce. that explains why its so hard to get written info on this stuff. it actually seems easier to get info for ether, than against it. the particles appearind and vanishing in space seems to me a logical argument for ether, and i havrn't heard any alternative explanation so far. i think i will try forming my own theory.

 

[dreece]

how do you respond to the claim of some physicist qouted in my original post that particles appear and vanish into the so-called void? do you have a better explanation than ether, or do youreject the spontaneously vanish/appearing particles altogether?

 

[trumptor]

"I didn't know I come over so strongly, I guess I couldn't be a teacher as kids would run back to their homes crying after every lecture and probably wouldn't come back "<br /><br />Hey, well I probably read your post a little more seriously than you intended it to be. I just noticed something innocently enough and wanted to point out my thought and was surprised by your strong response<img src="/images/icons/shocked.gif" /><br /><br />I've read many of your posts in various forums and will admit that I have learned a thing or two from some of your posts so don't give up on the teaching thing (this will look funny to you if you're actually a professor having some fun with your statement).<br /><br />I won't even pretend to be on the same level as you when it comes to my knowledge on the subject considering you've worked out a "mechanism" for gravitation while I don't know if I can still work out previously simple problems from my calc or differential eqns books<img src="/images/icons/frown.gif" /><br /><br />So, keep preaching and teaching <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> I do enjoy your posts regardless of what you may think I think of you now. I am generally a very laid back person that gets along with everyone and generally like everyone, so sorry for the overreaction.<br /><br />With my overreaction out of the way, lol, I do have a real question to ask. How would you explain a photon travelling from the sun to the earth? Does the aether absorb any of the radiation travelling through it? How come it doesn't slow down the speed of light proportionally with the distance the light is travelling?(eg. If the light travels 10m through aether is it travelling at the same speed at the end of its journey as a photon travelling through 10 light yrs of aether?) How can there be a constant speed? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em><font color="#0000ff">______________</font></em></p><p><em><font color="#0000ff">Caution, I may not know what I'm talking about.</font></em></p> </div>

 

[siarad]

The speed of a wave, electromagnetic or sound, is determined by the medium.<br />Have look at the great <b>James Clerk Maxwell's</b> determination of C.<br />Interestingly if space is expanding, do the values of Permittivity & Permeability weaken causing C to rise over time or is space not expanding but being created.

 

[nexium]

Back to the original post. "seething ferment", "throbbing energy and vitality" is likely an exageration.<br />The theory of ether was mainstream a century ago, but the theory failed to make some important predictions. A new theory something like the old ether is gaining followers in quantum physics, but my guess is lack of details, and testable predictions is preventing this becoming mainstream. Next year, maybe. Neil

 

[vandivx]

no I don't teach, thing is it was inevitable with me because making it up in in ranks in academia (so one could teach or do whatever else) is in these modern times a pretty reliable mark that one lacks genius necessary for the really big discoveries, I really don't believe that todays physicists that are part of academia could make them, most they can do is partial discoveries within the bounds of the bigger picture but they won't be able to alter that picture fundamentally, point is if they were fit at all for that they wouldn't almost by definition make career in academia in the first place<br /><br /><font color="yellow">How can there be a constant speed?</font><br /><br />here you have put your finger on the major stumbling block of ether acceptance because it (the existence of ether) would imply some sort of absolute framework and that is incompatible with relativity, that is with the constancy of the speed of light in all reference frames (which is the sacred cow that Einstein gave birth to )<br /><br />I can only tell you that you can just forget the ether if you can't solve this problem, I believe this is what killed the old ether in nineteenth century although some didn't realize it and carried on with it and today many play with the ether idea still or again and don't realize that if this issue isn't solved the idea of ether can't stand<br /><br />of course if photons were slowed by the passage through ether then they would be in the same position as fish moving through water and such 'classic picture' of ether is not tennable ever since Michelson and Morley did their famous experiment and how the photons do it is that proverbial $ 64k question <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><br /><br />anyway glad you asked, I need all the prodding to write down on paper what's in my head so far<br /><br />vanDivX <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[vandivx]

<font color="yellow">it actually seems easier to get info for ether, than against it</font><br /><br />I'd say that's because today the mainstream physics community is smug in their certainty that the ether is safely dead and they trully believe that and so they see it as not even worth to be fought (argued) against (God will be mercifull with them anyway I think <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> )<br /><br /><font color="yellow">how do you respond to the claim of some physicist qouted in my original post that particles appear and vanish into the so-called void? do you have a better explanation than ether, or do youreject the spontaneously vanish/appearing particles altogether?</font><br /><br />not aimed at me but I answer anyway<br /><br />physicists are carefull to claim that this phenomenon implies the existence of ether because very likely they have already bought into the idea that ether is discredited forever or they don't want to embroil themselves in having to defend ether on (many) other fronts which they don't have to if they just talk about vacuum boiling with particles <br /><br />it is known for ages now that normal enduring particles can pop up from nowhere in space and vanish into space later on and the vacuum seething with virtual particles is just extension of that effect really except here the talk is about very shortlived particles, one can think of them as being still born particles as opposed to those that get really born and exist for some time and even become part of atoms for example and last indefinitely<br /><br />vanDivX <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>