Re: Aether has mass

[mpc755]

On Nov 30, 9:38 am, linuxgal <linux...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> mpc755 wrote:
> > How about understanding displaced aether pushing back and exerting
> > inward pressure toward matter is gravity?
>
> I like the idea that gravity is when an object follows a geodesic in
> space-time.  It's much simpler, and has nearly a century of
> observational evidence to support it.
>
> --
> Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0

An object following a geodesic in space-time is a pseudoforce. It
doesn't physically exist. It is a mathematical representation of
gravity.

Now, all you have to do is associated the physical force of the
displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward the
matter and you understand what is actually occurring physically in
nature to cause gravity.

If it helps you to conceptually visualize gravity as an object
following a geodesic in space-time that is fine.

All you have to do to that in order to understand what is occurring
physically in nature which causes the object to follow the geodesic is
to understand aether displaced by matter pushing back toward matter is
gravity and that is what causes the object to follow the geodesic.

The geometrical representation of gravity as curved spacetime
physically exists in nature as the state of displacement of the
aether.

Curved spacetime is displaced aether.

[mpc755]

On Nov 30, 9:51 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 29, 5:42 pm, GogoJF <jfgog...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 29, 7:31 pm, GogoJF <jfgog...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 29, 7:18 pm, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Nov 29, 8:14 pm, John Gogo <jfgog...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Nov 29, 7:04 pm, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Nov 29, 7:18 pm, GogoJF <jfgog...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > The two slits and their separation acts like some primitive filter- a
> > > > > > > primitive filter with a design.
>
> > > > > > A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a
> > > > > > double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and
> > > > > > the associated wave in the aether passes through both.
>
> > > > > Again, the double-slit model is macroscopic- the effects are
> > > > > macroscopic.  When you talk of particles- these particles are not
> > > > > observable.  Your idea is just a theory.  The aether is unobservable.
> > > > > The idea that there would contain so much energy called the aether-
> > > > > yet to be so transparent and capable of supporting observations with
> > > > > our most powerful telescopes of objects which are billions of light
> > > > > years away seems unimaginable.
>
> > > > Again, a moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave.
> > > > In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit
> > > > and the associated wave in the aether passes through both.
>
> > > It is a miracle that all of the observed planets revolve around the
> > > Sun.  The Sun has made this all possible.  When we realize how "calm"
> > > the Earth has made it for us humans- we are even more amazed.  The
> > > double-slit experiment is one done in "calm" circumstances.  In fact,
> > > all human measures follow this "calm" philosophy.  To compare aether
> > > with the double-slit experiment does not even make sense to me.
>
> > What I am trying to say is- sure it is alright to try to make sense of
> > the two-slit model on a local level- that one particle (if we may call
> > it that) has an associated aether wave- that affects both slits.  But
> > this all small scale- we have no right to assume that the results of
> > the two slit model will give any sort of truism when dealing with
> > astronomical scales- or atomic scales for that matter.
>
> Is there any objective method of proving that a singular photon wave
> (all by itself) actually travels, and is not otherwise simply getting
> replicated along any given path?
>
> It seems logical that aether of whatever's dark/clear matter that gets
> displaced by everything, could also provide photon conductance.
>
> Could dark energy be positrons?

A light wave is an aether displacement wave.

[HVAC]

On 11/30/2012 9:40 AM, linuxgal wrote:
> mpc755 wrote:
>> On Nov 29, 9:20 pm, Brad Guth<bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>>> > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_theories#Pilot_waves
>>> >
>>> >Was any of that contributed by yourself?
>>> >
>> I contributed pilot waves.
>>
>
> Always with the negative pilot waves, Moriarty!
>

I wonder how many people will get that reference?











--
"OK you cunts, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo .. 变亮
http://www.richardgingras.com/tia/images/tia_logo_large.jpg

[Brad Guth]

You could be right about that, in which case the photon wave and its
2D quantum entangled particle has actual volume and mass. Can you and
your aether theory of everything help to establish the particle mass
and volume of a photon?

On average, how many all-inclusive (0 Hz to 1e24 Hz) photons exist per
cm3/sec or per nano second if you like?

[linuxgal]

mpc755 wrote:
> The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether.

No wonder you're a theist, you think the galaxy is an angel.

[mpc755]

I do not think it can be known if a photon is a particle which has an
associated external aether displacement wave or if the photon
'particle' consists of a very small region of the wave itself.

[mpc755]

'Milky Way's halo more squished than spherical'
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34735679/ns/technology_and_science-space/t/milky-ways-halo-more-squished-spherical/#.TjkpbmDmE2c

[Brad Guth]

I'd have to agree with that.

My thought is this; By now there's at least 1e100 photons/atom as
coexisting within our universe, and since there could easily be 1e83
atoms and 1e100 photons/atom = 1e183 photons (as always increasing by
at least 1e74/sec regardless of all the trillions upon trillions upon
trillion per second getting terminated by their being trapped inside
of matter, hitting those photon absorbing targets or passing through
slits)

[mpc755]

When photons are detected they are no longer 'photons'. They evaporate
into aether.

[1treePetrifiedForestLane]

the real problem is a)
Minowski's silly slogans about mere "4d phase-space,
easily supplanted by quaternions (or "vector mechanics,
the original"), and b)
Newton's crap "theory of light,
as masslees rocks." I mean,
get over it.

> Curved spacetime is displaced aether.

thus:
not even Hubble actually believed in this tripe;
light must needs propogate through the electrons & positrons
around nucleii & antinucleii of "free space,"
whose permeability & permitivity are similar to air's (but,
even closer to "one, or Pascal's plenum,
which he thought to be in his experimental apparatus").

Einstein's terminology of "photons" has always
been needlessly shot through the lens of "massless rocks
o'light" -- phooey -- starting with the big E., hisself,
not to mention Newton's soi-dissant "theory of light."

> Start with Hubbles Law.

thus:
why is Trickier Dick Cheney from the Nixon Administration,
not questioned on his role in averting USA jetfighters
from that pentagonal thingie in DC?

why do "truthers" not see the rather large difference
in the type of construction of that,
compared with "the world's tallest pair of buidlings?"

thus:
I thought that you promoted the ideal,
that the Arctic was "warming because of dereased albedo,
due to less floating ice" -- even though this is terribly wrongsville.
(there is no where, thereat;
there is no why, thereby.)

just say,
"the angle of total reflection of sunlight at the interface
of air & water, viz Snell's law, thank you!..." I mean,
that is two indices of refraction related trigonometrically
-- just do it!

> The long term trend from albedo is that of cooling. In recent years,
> satellite measurements of albedo show little to no trend.
> http://www.skepticalscience.com/earth-albedo-effect.htm

thus:
there is no essential difference between the M-strip and
the K-bottle, and the essential character is that
they both self-intersect in some sort of "singularity" --
it's Grea-a-a-t!

> this (standard) representation of a Klein bottle is totally erroneous.

thus:
completely alleviated (or "obviated") by heh Alfven cosmology,
conforming to the Dirac proviso of equal amounts of antimatter;
you cannot see them!

> a galaxy is a massive, gravitationally bound system consisting of

thus:
the vast majority of mutagens, teratogens etc. is found
in the naturally occuring compounds in plants,
such as shown by the Ames assay,
which uses a standardized salmonella specie.

that is what Bruce said in a talk at UCSantaCruz,
that I stumbled upon, years after he wrote a rather apocalyptic
article
for *Whole Earth Review*.

thus:
as for "Arctic albedo," the whole debate is wrongfully premised,
as I have stated over & over, again,
with "these-here clowns, to utterly no commentarium."

[mpc755]

On Nov 30, 5:28 pm, 1treePetrifiedForestLane <Space...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>
> > Curved spacetime is displaced aether.
>
> thus:
> not even Hubble actually believed in this tripe;
> light must needs propogate through the electrons & positrons
> around nucleii & antinucleii of "free space,"
> whose permeability & permitivity are similar to air's (but,
> even closer to "one, or Pascal's plenum,
> which he thought to be in his experimental apparatus").
>

Light is not propagating through the particles of matter which exist
in the interstellar medium in quantities less than in any vacuum
artificially created on Earth.

Light waves propagate through the aether which the particles of matter
exist in.

[Brad Guth]

That's certainly a perfectly good guess or swag, but not of sufficient
proof if it's going to hold up in the kangaroo court of mainstream
physics w/benefits.

Aether as transporting, conducting or entanglement teleporting photons
and then photons converting themselves back into aether is certainly
providing a circular kind of ideal resolve.

[linuxgal]

mpc755 wrote:
> A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a
> double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and
> the associated wave in the aether passes through both.

Captain, the Zorgon fleet's vertron ray bombardament has reduced the
ship's fictionite deflector effectiveness to 36.8 percent.

[Brad Guth]

On Nov 28, 12:28 pm, Casimiro <fa.mo...@yahoo.it> wrote:
> On 28 Nov, 21:09, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 28, 12:06, doppio-A <doppio...@ hush.com> ha scritto:
>
> > > On Nov 27, 5:46, Painius <starswir...@ aol.com> ha scritto:> On Tue, 6 novembre 2012 13:18:09 -0500, HVAC <h...@ physisist.net> ha scritto :
> > >>> On 2012/11/06 12:55, Mike Cavedon ha scritto:
>
> > >> Questo è veramente * un filo *, eh? Secondo il conteggio da parte mia
> > >> Newsreader, questo post per me anche il 1000 - 1000 ° - dopo
> > >> In questo thread.
>
> > >> Ricevo qualcosa per questo? lol!
>
> > >.
>
> > > Per questo motivo Google ha rotto la parte vecchia del filo, e il
> > Parte> nuovo per postare 73.
>
> > > Doppia-A
>
> > e ci sono 926 più per andare prima che il successivo ripristino.
>
> Excuse my intromission. But I don't know were evidentiate my discovery
> of ether's drift.http://youtu.be/otedHor5THM
>  You are sure of the existence of ether, but up to now not any
> experiment demonstrated it.

mpc755 will keep telling us that everything about the existence and
function of aether has been proven multiple ways and multiple times,
even though you and I can't necessarily agree with that.

[mpc755]

What waves in a double slit experiment is the aether.

[Brad Guth]

That's your subjective interpretation, and at best it sure as hell
isn't providing the force of gravity via aether displacement that you
keep insisting upon.

Perhaps giving aether the 50/50 of gravity might be worth considering.

[mpc755]

Displaced aether pushing back toward matter IS gravity.

[linuxgal]

Double-A wrote:
> If the universe is spinning, then a coriolis effect should result in
> galaxies having a preferred direction of spin. Seems this Dr. Longo
> has discovered this to be true.

Spinning relative to what?

[Double-A]

On Dec 1, 12:58 pm, linuxgal <linux...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> Double-A wrote:
> > If the universe is spinning, then a coriolis effect should result in
> > galaxies having a preferred direction of spin.  Seems this Dr. Longo
> > has discovered this to be true.
>
> Spinning relative to what?

The discovery that the universe has angular momentum implies an
outside frame of reference. So spinning relative to whatever's ou
there.

Double-A

[Father Haskell]

On Dec 1, 2:03 pm, linuxgal <linux...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> mpc755 wrote:
> > A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a
> > double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and
> > the associated wave in the aether passes through both.
>
> Captain, the Zorgon fleet's vertron ray bombardament has reduced the
> ship's fictionite deflector effectiveness to 36.8 percent.

Try again. That makes too much sense.

[mpc755]

Relative to the Universal jet emission point.

[mpc755]

Spinning relative to the Universal jet emission point.

[linuxgal]

If you haven't seen what's out there, then maybe it's spinning at the
same rate we're spinning, for a net relative spin of zero. Who knows?

[mpc755]

'Was the universe born spinning?'
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/46688

"The universe was born spinning and continues to do so around a
preferred axis"

The Universe spins around a preferred axis because the Universe is, or
the local Universe we exist in is in, a jet; a larger version of a
black hole polar jet.

The Universe spins about the axis associated with the Universal jet
emission point.

[Brad Guth]

If you say so. How about getting one other physics authority to agree
with that?

[mpc755]

'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−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."

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"

[1treePetrifiedForestLane]

of course, the atoms in "free space" are fluidic;
that is the first part of magnetohydrodynamics.

there are not little rocks o'light,
as shown by Young, a hundred years after Newton's alleged theory.

[linuxgal]

Brad Guth wrote:
> At the Earth-moon L1 is a gravity null, and nearly IGM density of a
> hard vacuum that should have only aether to contend with.

Correction, the L1 point is the balance between the Earth's gravity, the
Moon's gravity, AND the centrifugal force caused by L1's own motion
around the Earth-Moon barycenter. There is another point, closer to
the Earth, where Earth's gravity and the Moon's gravity cancel out. But
gravitational flux there is still not zero, because there is still the
tug from the sun, Jupiter, the galactic center, etc. etc. You flubbed
your homework. So try again.

[Brad Guth]

Sounds great, and even a little fantastic, but why do you need my
approval?

Imagine what a real mainstream astrophysicist is going to say about
your aether. Convincing little old me isn't going to get your "aether
theory of everything" all that far, unless my GuthVenus or the LSE-CM/
ISS pays off.

Any chance that aether can be utilized to relocate the orbit of our
moon, pushed or pulled out to Earth L1?

Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus
“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

[mpc755]

On Dec 1, 10:35 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Sounds great, and even a little fantastic, but why do you need my
> approval?
>
> Imagine what a real mainstream astrophysicist is going to say about
> your aether.  Convincing little old me isn't going to get your "aether
> theory of everything" all that far, unless my GuthVenus or the LSE-CM/
> ISS pays off.
>
> Any chance that aether can be utilized to relocate the orbit of our
> moon, pushed or pulled out to Earth L1?
>
>  Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>  “GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> question:

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

Correctly understanding the physics of nature has to start somewhere.

[Brad Guth]

I most certainly can't argue against that logic.

How can a better understanding of aether assist in the relocation of
our moon?

Can artificially created singularities be used to artificially
displace aether?

What does a focused radar beam of very long-wave photons do to aether?

[mpc755]

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.

A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a
double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and
the associated wave in the aether passes through both.

What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double
slit experiment; the aether.

Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's pilot-wave.

Both are waves in the aether.

Aether displaced by matter relates quantum mechanics and general
relativity.

This allows for a common language which correctly describes the
physics of nature.

[Brad Guth]

In other words, accomplishing anything positive or constructive for
the greater good is not what aether is all about.

If aether is the holy grail of physics grand unification, then why
can't you and others of your kind put that to work for us, such as by
relocating our moon to Earth L1 and interactively keeping it there.

What does it take to modify or otherwise utilize aether to our
advantage?

[mpc755]

On Dec 2, 8:49 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
> > A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a
> > double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and
> > the associated wave in the aether passes through both.
>
> > What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double
> > slit experiment; the aether.
>
> > Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's pilot-wave.
>
> > Both are waves in the aether.
>
> > Aether displaced by matter relates quantum mechanics and general
> > relativity.
>
> > This allows for a common language which correctly describes the
> > physics of nature.
>
> In other words, accomplishing anything positive or constructive for
> the greater good is not what aether is all about.
>
> If aether is the holy grail of physics grand unification, then why
> can't you and others of your kind put that to work for us, such as by
> relocating our moon to Earth L1 and interactively keeping it there.
>
> What does it take to modify or otherwise utilize aether to our
> advantage?

If physics actually understood the physics of nature there is no
telling what might be accomplished.

Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's pilot-wave.

Both are aether displacement waves.

Aether displaced by matter relates general relativity and quantum
mechanics.

Aether displaced by matter is the physics of nature.

[Linuxgal]

What is the Right Ascension and Declination to this Universal jet
emission point of which you speak. I'll look for it on Kstars.

[mpc755]

[Brad Guth]

And your expertise besides aether parrot is what?

[Brad Guth]

Black holes (especially those going quasar) always have two polar jets.

[mpc755]

On Dec 2, 11:32 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> And your expertise besides aether parrot is what?

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

A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a
double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and
the associated wave in the aether passes through both.

Non-baryonic dark matter was never anchored to the matter in the first
place. There is no such thing as non-baryonic dark matter. Matter
moves through and displaces the aether.

Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's pilot-wave.

[mpc755]

There is zero evidence of another Universal jet. That doesn't mean
there is, or isn't, another Universal jet, just that there is no
evidence of one.

[Brad Guth]

But we have to assume there is at least one other, or else even your
aether flow and everything of our universe via the polar jet has to
fall apart.

So, specifically what is your personal expertise in science or physics
besides parrot-101?

[mpc755]

On Dec 2, 1:30 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> But we have to assume there is at least one other, or else even your
> aether flow and everything of our universe via the polar jet has to
> fall apart.
>
> So, specifically what is your personal expertise in science or physics
> besides parrot-101?

Assuming is why we have the absurd nonsense of the Big Bang.

The Universe is, or the local Universe we exist in is in, a larger

[Brad Guth]

In other words you've never worked for anyone, nor have you ever hired
anyone to work for yourself, and thereby you have no actual first hand
expertise, products, services or any spare resources for others to
develop anything from.

[mpc755]

[Fred^44]

linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:

>mpc755 wrote:
>> A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a
>> double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and
>> the associated wave in the aether passes through both.

>Captain, the Zorgon fleet's vertron ray bombardament has reduced the
>ship's fictionite deflector effectiveness to 36.8 percent.

ROFL! Fortunately shield #4 on this idiot's spaceship appears to be
on the verge of folding entirely. One more photon torp should do it.

[Fred^44]

Father Haskell <father...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Dec 1, 2:03=A0pm, linuxgal <linux...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>> mpc755 wrote:
>>> A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a
>>> double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and
>>> the associated wave in the aether passes through both.
>> Captain, the Zorgon fleet's vertron ray bombardament has reduced the
>> ship's fictionite deflector effectiveness to 36.8 percent.

>Try again. That makes too much sense.

ROFL! It's ironic that an idiot would think that proposed dark matter
is some how the mythological "aether." :) Good grief.

[1treePetrifiedForestLane]

allow me to repeat it,

there are not little rocks o'light,
as shown by Young, a hundred years after Newton's alleged theory.

Newton's "theory" parroted Descartes bizarre "proof,"
showing that the speed of light is faster
in a denser medium.

if you didn't worship the secular church of England,
Isaac Christ, you wouldn't need any aether.

anyway, why would anyone want to push Moon
to the L1 point between Earth and Sun --
wouldn't the grunion bitch about taht?

[Brad Guth]

On Dec 2, 1:09 pm, 1treePetrifiedForestLane <Space...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

3+% spot of shade, 50% ocean tidal cycles, 25% or less seismic issues
and 1/15th or less of its gamma radiation.

[1treePetrifiedForestLane]

um, well, howsoever those are desirable,
aren't the Lagrange points unstable?

[HVAC]

On 12/2/2012 1:33 PM, mpc755 wrote:
>
> Assuming is why we have the absurd nonsense of the Big Bang.
>
> The Universe is, or the local Universe we exist in is in, a larger
> version of a black hole polar jet.

And it's turtles all the way down....









--
"OK you cunts, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo .. 变亮
http://www.richardgingras.com/tia/images/tia_logo_large.jpg

[1treePetrifiedForestLane]

well, I guess that the ones fore & aft by 60 degrees
are somewhat stable, given the Trojan asteroids;
is there anything fore & aft of Eaaarth?

[Brad Guth]

In other words, you've never worked for anyone, nor have you ever

hired anyone to work for yourself, and thereby you have no actual
first hand expertise, products, services or any spare resources for

others to research and develop anything from.

[Brad Guth]

On Dec 2, 4:44 pm, 1treePetrifiedForestLane <Space...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> well, I guess that the ones fore & aft by 60 degrees
> are somewhat stable, given the Trojan asteroids;
> is there anything fore & aft of Eaaarth?

Orbital stability isn't all that necessary if we park it at Earth L1
and interactively keep it there.

[mpc755]

On Dec 2, 7:31 pm, HVAC <h...@physisist.net> wrote:
> On 12/2/2012 1:33 PM, mpc755 wrote:
>
>
>
> > Assuming is why we have the absurd nonsense of the Big Bang.
>
> > The Universe is, or the local Universe we exist in is in, a larger
> > version of a black hole polar jet.
>
> And it's turtles all the way down....
>

'Was the universe born spinning?'
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/46688

"The universe was born spinning and continues to do so around a
preferred axis"

The Universe spins around a preferred axis because the Universe is, or
the local Universe we exist in is in, a jet; a larger version of a
black hole polar jet.

'Mysterious Cosmic 'Dark Flow' Tracked Deeper into Universe'
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/releases/2010/10-023.html

"The clusters appear to be moving along a line extending from our
solar system toward Centaurus/Hydra, but the direction of this motion
is less certain. Evidence indicates that the clusters are headed
outward along this path, away from Earth, but the team cannot yet rule
out the opposite flow. "We detect motion along this axis, but right
now our data cannot state as strongly as we'd like whether the
clusters are coming or going," Kashlinsky said."

The clusters are headed along this path because the Universe is, or
the local Universe we exist in is in, a jet.

The following is an image analogous of the Universal jet.

http://aether.lbl.gov/image_all.html

The reason for the 'expansion' of the universe is the continual
emission of aether into the Universal jet. Three dimensional space
associated with the Universe itself is not expanding. What we see in
our telescopes is the matter associated with the Universe moving
outward and away from the Universal jet emission point. In the image
above, '1st Stars' is where aether condenses into matter.

Dark energy is aether emitted into the Universal jet.

It's not the Big Bang; it's the Big Ongoing.

[mpc755]

[Brad Guth]

And?

[mpc755]

On Dec 2, 8:38 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> And?

[BroilJAB]

Ferverently do we pray that Heavenly
annihilation overtake Obama Fraud.

[GogoJF]

On Dec 2, 10:43 am, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:

mpc 755 says: Aether displaced by matter relates general relativity
and quantum
mechanics.
gogo says: Where is the critique to this?

[Brad Guth]

mpc755 is pretty much everything rolled up in one aether package deal.

[Hasan Farooqi4]

test

[mpc755]

[Brad Guth]

Yes it probably does. So, what are you going to do about that?

Is any of this aether theory going into the next round of K-12
textbooks?

Have you edited any of the Wikipedia context to suit?

[mpc755]

Aether displaced by matter relating relativity and quantum mechanics
is a new correct understanding of the physics of nature. Wikipedia
does not do new theories.

[Brad Guth]

Wikipedia allows as much as you can offer, although making it stick as
a front page theory or new interpretation rather than as a cranky rant
sort of back page notation or link to an external page, is what takes
persistence and a little help from your friends. Do you have any
friends?

[mpc755]

On Dec 3, 2:16 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Wikipedia allows as much as you can offer, although making it stick as
> a front page theory or new interpretation rather than as a cranky rant
> sort of back page notation or link to an external page, is what takes
> persistence and a little help from your friends.  Do you have any
> friends?

You should read the Wikipedia rules. They don't post new theories.

[Brad Guth]

You can create your very own Wikipedia page on this aether topic.

Then eventually you can go back into other existing pages and edit a
few of those to include a link to your personal Wikipedia page devoted
to aether the way you interpret it.

Once you have been proven as a reasonably good guy (usually this
process takes a few weeks of yourself being positive and constructive
to others), Wikipedia rules should allow you to directly edit other
preexisting pages or topics. Of course having an insider friend would
make everything go much smoother.

Do you have any such friends?

[mpc755]

If I create my own Wikipedia page having to do with aether
displacement the page will be removed because aether displacement is a
new theory and Wikipedia does not allow new theories to be posted on
Wikipedia.

[Brad Guth]

Then place it as a novel idea or alternative notion that is supported
by the research of all those other guys you keep harping about. In
other words, don't even bother to call it a new theory or even an
improved one, but simply imply that it's an ongoing scientific
interpretation of whatever's out there and that it could be
responsible for gravity via its displacement. You seem to have
sufficient collaborating research that isn't entirely bogus to start
with, so that alone makes your version of aether into a valid
Wikipedia page, or at least worthy of becoming a footnote as an
alternative to the existing theories.

Of course aether could be simply loads of positrons, helium and those
pesky photons with no place special to go. But that's just my swag at
it.

[mpc755]

Wikipedia does not allow new theories to be posted. Aether
displacement is a new theory. Therefore, it will not be allowed to be
posted on Wikipedia.

[HVAC]

On 12/3/2012 3:15 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
>
>> Aether displaced by matter relating relativity and quantum mechanics
>> is a new correct understanding of the physics of nature.
>
> You can create your very own Wikipedia page on this aether topic.
>
> Then eventually you can go back into other existing pages and edit a
> few of those to include a link to your personal Wikipedia page devoted
> to aether the way you interpret it.

This is Goth's way of telling you to go the fuck away.


Just an FYI

[mpc755]

On Dec 3, 4:43 pm, HVAC <h...@physisist.net> wrote:
> On 12/3/2012 3:15 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
>
>
>
> >> Aether displaced by matter relating relativity and quantum mechanics
> >> is a new correct understanding of the physics of nature.
>
> > You can create your very own Wikipedia page on this aether topic.
>
> > Then eventually you can go back into other existing pages and edit a
> > few of those to include a link to your personal Wikipedia page devoted
> > to aether the way you interpret it.
>
> This is Goth's way of telling you to go the fuck away.
>
> Just an FYI
>

[Brad Guth]

Actually it's a very old theory, and what little there is of it does
exist in Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_theories
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_%28classical_element%29

Just add your new and improved version to the pile, and be happy.

Create a Wikipedia account, log in and edit or contribute whatever
without intentionally pissing everyone off. You seem to be a nice
enough person, so they shouldn't automatically reject nor otherwise
banish whatever you have to share.

[Brad Guth]

FYI; Harlow is paid to do the Usenet/newsgroup FUD-master thing, of
topic/author stalking and bashing to whatever extent that he and
others of his oligarch redneck kind can muster.

[mpc755]

[Bill Snyder]

FYI: The Guthtard is not paid to be a foul-mouthed, stupid,
batshit insane polluter of newsgroups. It's just his hobby.


--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank]

[Brad Guth]

But in order to get that message across, you'll have to step on a few
thousand toes.

Can't you even manage to create your own webpage or private Google
Group that only you get to manage?

[Brad Guth]

Your mainstream status-quo butt-cheeks are flapping again, are they
not?

[mpc755]

Physics will eventually decide correctly understanding what occurs
physically in nature is important in physics.

[Brad Guth]

"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents
and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents
eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with
it." / Max Planck

[mpc755]

There is evidence non-baryonic dark matter is not anchored to matter.
This means mater moves through and displaces the aether.

[Bill Snyder]

You really can't get shit off your mind, can you? Why don't you
go ahead and eat some?

[HVAC]

Goth does indeed have a bizarre and disturbing anal/fecal fetish.

Most distasteful. Especially for someone of my sensibilities.

[Brad Guth]

So, when is that interpretation getting into any of our K-12
textbooks?

You are aware that not 0.1% of educated Americans even know about
these public Usenet/newsgroups, and perhaps only 0.1% of those that
know of these public newsgroups ever bother to contribute or interact
by way of reading our stuff and offering feedback. That gets these
Usenet/newsgroups down to an active audience or classroom of 300 out
of 300 million, and the rest of the world is at least ten fold worse
off.

Don't you think we should at least try to fix that problem first?

The Google Groups+ version of accessing Usenet/newsgroups and for
creating personal newsgroups to suit, offers a number of interactive
communications and publication solutions at little or no cost to those
of us smart enough to tie their own shoelaces.

[Brad Guth]

On Dec 2, 6:07 pm, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 2, 8:38 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > And?

>
> Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward
> matter is gravity.
>
> A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a
> double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and
> the associated wave in the aether passes through both.
>
> Non-baryonic dark matter was never anchored to the matter in the first
> place. There is no such thing as non-baryonic dark matter. Matter

> moves through and displaces the aether.
>

> Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's pilot-wave.
>
> Both are aether displacement waves.
>
> Aether displaced by matter relates general relativity and quantum
> mechanics.

So, where's your personal Google Group?

Where's your Nobel?

Where's anything that uses aether for the greater good?

[mpc755]

[Brad Guth]

Are you and your aether about stuck at this point?

[mpc755]

On Dec 6, 11:46 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Are you and your aether about stuck at this point?

"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

"According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is
unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation
of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space
and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time
intervals in the physical sense." - Albert Einstein

The relativistic ether referred to by Laughlin is the ether which
propagates light referred to by Einstein

[Brad Guth]

And yet here you are, not smart enough to create a personal Google
Group page or even a few aether web pages that modern physics can deal
with.

I happen to agree that either/aether propagates light, and perhaps
understanding that quantum entangled photons can only exist because of
aether.

[mpc755]

On Dec 7, 11:58 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> And yet here you are, not smart enough to create a personal Google
> Group page or even a few aether web pages that modern physics can deal
> with.
>
> I happen to agree that either/aether propagates light, and perhaps
> understanding that quantum entangled photons can only exist because of
> aether.

ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_effect#Vacuum_energy

"a "field" in physics may be envisioned as if space were filled with
interconnected vibrating balls and springs, and the strength of the
field can be visualized as the displacement of a ball from its rest
position"

A 'field' in physics is space filled with aether and the strength of
the field is the displacement of the aether from its rest position.

Each of the plates in the Casimir effect displace the aether. The
displaced aether which exists between the plates is pushing back
toward each of the plates which causes the aether displaced by each of
the plates which exists between the plates to offset. This aether is
more at rest than the aether which is displaced by the plates which
encompasses the plates. The reduced force associated with the aether
which exists between the plates along with the displaced aether which
encompasses the plates which is pushing back and exerting inward
pressure toward the plates causes the plates to be forced together.

What occurs physically in nature in the Casimir effect is the same
phenomenon as gravity.

There is no such thing as non-baryonic dark matter. Aether has mass
and physically occupies three dimensional space. Aether is physically
displaced by matter.

[Brad Guth]

And your nomination for that Nobel is on hold because???????

[mpc755]

On Dec 7, 12:16 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> And your nomination for that Nobel is on hold because???????

'Milky Way's halo more squished than spherical'
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34735679/ns/technology_and_science-space/t/milky-ways-halo-more-squished-spherical/#.TjkpbmDmE2c

The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether. The
matter which would form the Milky Way was moving as it displaced the
aether. The aether displaced perpendicular to the major direction of
motion became the majority force of the displaced aether and forced
the matter into the disk. This resulted in the angular momentum of the
matter. It is the aether which is displaced outward relative to the
plane of the angular momentum which exerts force toward the center of
the Milky Way. This force, along with the state of displacement of the
aether as determined by the angular momentum of the Milky Way, forced
the matter closer together which resulted in the displaced aether
looking like a squished beach ball. Aether displacement explains how
the Milky Way was created, how the disk and halo formed and why the
rotational speed can not be accounted for by the mass of the matter of
the Milky Way itself.

[Brad Guth]

On Dec 7, 9:22 am, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 7, 12:16 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > And your nomination for that Nobel is on hold because???????
>

> 'Milky Way's halo more squished than spherical'http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34735679/ns/technology_and_science-space/...

>
> The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether. The
> matter which would form the Milky Way was moving as it displaced the
> aether. The aether displaced perpendicular to the major direction of
> motion became the majority force of the displaced aether and forced
> the matter into the disk. This resulted in the angular momentum of the
> matter. It is the aether which is displaced outward relative to the
> plane of the angular momentum which exerts force toward the center of
> the Milky Way. This force, along with the state of displacement of the
> aether as determined by the angular momentum of the Milky Way, forced
> the matter closer together which resulted in the displaced aether
> looking like a squished beach ball. Aether displacement explains how
> the Milky Way was created, how the disk and halo formed and why the
> rotational speed can not be accounted for by the mass of the matter of
> the Milky Way itself.

[HVAC]

On 12/7/2012 11:58 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
>
>> The relativistic ether referred to by Laughlin is the ether which
>> propagates light referred to by Einstein
>
> And yet here you are, not smart enough to create a personal Google
> Group page or even a few aether web pages that modern physics can deal
> with.
>
> I happen to agree that either/aether propagates light, and perhaps
> understanding that quantum entangled photons can only exist because of
> aether.

Dear MP3-
I have good news and I have bad news.

The good news is that you have made a convert to ether.

The bad news is that it's Brad Goth.

[HVAC]

On 11/27/2012 1:21 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
>
> Otherwise, your topic was hijacked and systematically ripped to shreds
> by and official mainstream FUD-master known as Harlow(aka H V A C).


Wow. Paranoid much?

Hint: When I want to 'systematically rip you to shreds', rest assured
you won't be posting ANYTHING for quite some time.


> Are you computer retarded and/or browser dysfunctional, or were you
> simply born extra stupid and dysfunctional?


It's an honest question, MP3. What's the answer?


> Your parrot-speak is only further proving how dysfunctional and
> pathetic you really are. Obviously you don't give a tinkers damn what
> others do by way of hijacking and trashing your topics.
>
> You obviously have not a clue as to what you and others are up
> against.


LOL Goth claims to have a clue!

[1treePetrifiedForestLane]

your "balls" are just the atoms of "free space,"
index of refraction closer to one than air; I mean,
how else do you even bother to explain "electromagnetism?"

[Brad Guth]

On Dec 7, 9:22 am, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Dec 7, 12:16 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > And your nomination for that Nobel is on hold because???????
>

> 'Milky Way's halo more squished than spherical'http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34735679/ns/technology_and_science-space/...

>
> The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether. The
> matter which would form the Milky Way was moving as it displaced the
> aether. The aether displaced perpendicular to the major direction of
> motion became the majority force of the displaced aether and forced
> the matter into the disk. This resulted in the angular momentum of the
> matter. It is the aether which is displaced outward relative to the
> plane of the angular momentum which exerts force toward the center of
> the Milky Way. This force, along with the state of displacement of the
> aether as determined by the angular momentum of the Milky Way, forced
> the matter closer together which resulted in the displaced aether
> looking like a squished beach ball. Aether displacement explains how
> the Milky Way was created, how the disk and halo formed and why the
> rotational speed can not be accounted for by the mass of the matter of
> the Milky Way itself.

Does any of this help:
http://www.orgonelab.org/energyinspace.htm

Can you add anything to the above link, such as where they are asking
for more feedback?

[mpc755]

That link refers to ether drift. Just as I'm not sure we can know if
aether consists of particles or not, I'm not sure we can know if the
ether drifts.

Watch the following video starting at 0:45 to see a visual
representation 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 analogy is putting a mesh bag full of marbles into a supersolid
and spinning the bag of marbles. If you were unable to determine if
the superfluid consists of particles or not you would still be able to
detect the state of displacement of the supersolid.

The supersolid connected to and neighboring the mesh bag of marbles is
in the same state throughout the rotation of the bag in the
supersolid.

The aether connected to and neighboring the Earth is in the same
state, or almost the same state, throughout the Earth's rotation about
its axis and orbit of the Sun.

The state of which as determined by its connections with the Earth and
the state of the aether in neighboring places is the state of
displacement of the aether.

[Brad Guth]

Meanwhile, you can't manage to contribute any better context to this
link?
http://www.orgonelab.org/energyinspace.htm

Why not focus your interpretations of aether with those actually
looking at ether/aether considerations?

Can you get others on your side to come here, into alt.astronomy or
any other unmoderated public newsgroup?

[mpc755]