Aether Displacement and Entrainment
mpc755
aether it displaces. Matter displaces the aether which would otherwise
exist where the matter is.
A moving particle or object has an associated aether wave.
'entrain'
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/entrainment
"to draw along with or after oneself"
'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html
"What is fundamentally new in the ether of the general theory of
relativity as opposed to the ether of Lorentz consists in this, that
the state of the former is at every place determined by connections
with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places"
"We know that [ether] determines the metrical relations in the space-
time continuum, e.g. the configurative possibilities of solid bodies
as well as the gravitational fields"
dlzc
On Oct 16, 6:46 am, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Aether is displaced by matter.
Such an aether is obviated by observation. Rest of post dead on
arrival.
David A. Smith
mpc755
What observation?
glird
> Aether is displaced by matter.
"Aether" is the material filling a given volume of space.
> The more massive an object is, the more
> aether it displaces.
Not so. The LARGER an object is the more aether it will displace,
regardless of its mass, in grams.
>Matter displaces the aether which would >otherwise exist where the matter is.
Paraphrased, that says, Matter displaces the matter which would
otherwise exist where the matter is.
Though true, it is a bit amgiguous.
> A moving particle or object has an >associated aether wave.
Yes.
> 'entrain'http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/entrainment
> "to draw along with or after oneself"
> < 'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html
"What is fundamentally new in the ether of the general theory of
relativity as opposed to the ether of Lorentz consists in this, that
the state of the former is at every place determined by connections
with the matter and the state of the ether in neighboring places"
Einstein was right about that! Lorentz's ether was a universally
stationary continuous material; wherefore he assumed that ponderable
matter is a sensory illusion consisting of wave systems moving at c
wrt that relatively incompressible ether.
Maxwell's ether consisted of tiny incompressible particles suspended
from each other by tiny springs.
Einstein's ether was actually the non-particulate form of the same
matter of which particles are made. Although he didn't know that, he
did realize that "the state of the former is at every place determined
by [its] connections with the [partculate] matter and the state of the
ether in neighboring places"
<"We know that [ether] determines the metrical relations in the space-
time continuum, e.g. the configurative possibilities of solid bodies
as well as the gravitational fields" >
Translation: The tempero-spatial relations between the density
gradients of the ether surrounding an object and any particulate
matter embedded therein control the actions that will follow in both.
glird
mpc755
> On Oct 16, 9:46 am, mpc755 wrote:
>
> > Aether is displaced by matter.
>
> "Aether" is the material filling a given volume of space.
>
> > The more massive an object is, the more
> > aether it displaces.
>
> Not so. The LARGER an object is the more aether it will displace,
> regardless of its mass, in grams.
>
Aether is displaced by mass, not volume. We have the existing Jupiter
and we have a Jupiter which consists entirely of lead. The lead
Jupiter is denser, therefore it contains less aether, therefore it
displaces more aether.
Note: 'Aether' is the lowest common denominator of matter. Since lead
is simply compressed aether, we could say the lead Jupiter actually
consists of more aether, but that is just confusing. For now on, when
I mention 'aether' I am referring to matter in its most basic form and
when I refer to 'matter' I am referring to compressed aether. And when
discussing 'matter' I am referring to the stuff that is not in a black
hole (and possibly not in a neutron star). 'Matter' refers to the
stuff made up of atoms that contains 'aether' between the nuclei of
the atoms. So there is 'aether' in the lead Jupiter, but there is less
of it than in the real Jupiter. More aether is displaced by the lead
Jupiter. And 'dark matter' exists between aether and matter. It is pre-
atomic aether, or pre-atomic matter. The definitions can be refined,
but I think this gives us a level playing field in which to
communicate.
dlzc
On Oct 16, 7:28 am, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 10:13 am, dlzc <dl...@cox.net> wrote:
> > On Oct 16, 6:46 am, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Aether is displaced by matter.
>
> > Such an aether is obviated by
> > observation. Rest of post dead on
> > arrival.
>
> What observation?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_drag_hypothesis
... and Kopeikin's "speed of gravity" experiment where he used Jupiter
as a shutter to block a light signal from a distant pulsar... and got
"c" (+/-) for the lihgt speed measurment he ended up making.
There either is no aether, or it propagates matter in much the same
way it propagates light. *No* displacement, no drag.
David A. Smith
mpc755
I think you cut-and-past the wrong URL for your quote. But speed of
gravity is the same thing as speed of light. As Jupiter moves through
its orbit it is displacing the aether which transfers the displacement
through the aether at 'c'. The displaced aether behind Jupiter's orbit
transfers the 'back fill' at 'c' through the aether.
'Aether drag hypothesis'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_drag_hypothesis
"In 1871 Airy demonstrated that stellar aberration occurs even when a
telescope is filled with water. It seems that if the aether drag
hypothesis were true then stellar aberration would not occur because
the light would be travelling in the aether which would be moving
along with the telescope."
The assumption being aether 'sticks' to water and not to air. Complete
nonsense.
Curved space-time is displaced aether.
mpc755
The Pioneer Anomaly (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_anomaly) is
due to the Pioneer satellites 'falling out of' the Sun's entrained
aether.
dlzc
On Oct 16, 10:58 am, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
...
> > ... and Kopeikin's "speed of gravity"
> > experiment where he used Jupiter
> > as a shutter to block a light signal
>> from a distant pulsar... and got "c"
> > (+/-) for the lihgt speed measurment
> he ended up making.
>
> > There either is no aether, or it
> > propagates matter in much the same
> > way it propagates light. *No*
> > displacement, no drag.
>
> I think you cut-and-past the wrong URL
> for your quote.
No, the Kopeikin reference was in addition to the aether drag
experiment.
> But speed of gravity is the same thing
> as speed of light.
Really? Most aetherists have it as infinity, since the aether is so
rigid.
> As Jupiter moves through its orbit it
> is displacing the aether
Yet it does not displace light behind it, through this "moving"
aether.
> which transfers the displacement through
> the aether at 'c'. The displaced aether
> behind Jupiter's orbit transfers the
> 'back fill' at 'c' through the aether.
Which requires that light move through that space either slower or
faster, which it did not do.
So you are stuck with either no aether, or an aether that is rigid and
propagates matter in much the same way as it propagates light.
Your ponderable aether is dead and dead. To 1 part in 10^9.
David A. Smith
dlzc
On Oct 16, 9:06 pm, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
...
> The Pioneer Anomaly (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_anomaly) is
> due to the Pioneer satellites 'falling out
> of' the Sun's entrained aether.
Which fails to explain why the Pioneer was accelerated Sunward, and
was accelerated Sunward even before Saturn, but Saturn and the outer
planets are unaffected.
You should pray daily to Saint Jude, the Patron Saint of Lost Causes.
Because you surely have not thought about this religion you are
wasting your breath in obeisance to... mindlessly finding vague
appearances of correlation, and not looking at the details.
David A. Smith
mpc755
> Dear mpc755:
>
> On Oct 16, 10:58 am, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...
>
> > > ... and Kopeikin's "speed of gravity"
> > > experiment where he used Jupiter
> > > as a shutter to block a light signal
> >> from a distant pulsar... and got "c"
> > > (+/-) for the lihgt speed measurment
> > he ended up making.
>
> > > There either is no aether, or it
> > > propagates matter in much the same
> > > way it propagates light. *No*
> > > displacement, no drag.
>
> > I think you cut-and-past the wrong URL
> > for your quote.
>
> No, the Kopeikin reference was in addition to the aether drag
> experiment.
>
> > But speed of gravity is the same thing
> > as speed of light.
>
> Really? Most aetherists have it as infinity, since the aether is so
> rigid.
>
The aether is not rigid. It is the medium.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fizeau_experiment
"It was shown by Hendrik Lorentz (1892, 1895) that the experiment can
be explained by the reaction of the moving water upon the interfering
waves without the need of any aether entrainment."
But it should not be because the aether is entrained.
> > As Jupiter moves through its orbit it
> > is displacing the aether
> Yet it does not displace light behind it, through this "moving"
> aether.
The aether is simply 'back-filling' at 'c'. If you pull a bowling ball
extremely slowly through a tank of water what happens to light waves
that travel through the water right behind the bowling ball?
You have to pull the bowling ball slowly because the aether is back-
filling at 'c'.
> > which transfers the displacement through
> > the aether at 'c'. The displaced aether
> > behind Jupiter's orbit transfers the
> > 'back fill' at 'c' through the aether.
> Which requires that light move through that space either slower or
> faster, which it did not do.
No. The light travels at 'c' relative to the aether.
> So you are stuck with either no aether, or an aether that is rigid and
> propagates matter in much the same way as it propagates light.
> Your ponderable aether is dead and dead. To 1 part in 10^9.
> David A. Smith
'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html
"What is fundamentally new in the ether of the general theory of
relativity as opposed to the ether of Lorentz consists in this, that
the state of the former is at every place determined by connections
with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places"
The displaced aether pushing back is the 'connection with matter'.
A moving particle or object having an associated aether wave is the
'connection with the matter and the state of the ether in neighboring
places'.
mpc755
The entrained aether is not the cause of gravity. The displaced aether
pushing back is the cause of gravity. The displaced aether of the Sun
is displaced beyond Pluto.
If you look at the moons of Jupiter only the inner moons are contained
within Jupiter's entrained aether.
'Can Minor Planets be Used to Assess Gravity in the Outer Solar
System?'
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0504/0504367v3.pdf
"After passing 20 AU from the Sun, both exhibited a systematic error
in their trajectories that can be interpreted as a constant
acceleration towards the Sun."
This is just past Uranus.
This might be why Uranus rotates on its side. It might not be caught
up enough in the Sun's entrained aether for the entrained aether to
cause Uranus to rotate more on a plain with the entrained aether.
PD
> On Oct 17, 2:25 am, dlzc <dl...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Dear mpc755:
>
> > On Oct 16, 10:58 am, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > ...
>
> > > > ... and Kopeikin's "speed of gravity"
> > > > experiment where he used Jupiter
> > > > as a shutter to block a light signal
> > >> from a distant pulsar... and got "c"
> > > > (+/-) for the lihgt speed measurment
> > > he ended up making.
>
> > > > There either is no aether, or it
> > > > propagates matter in much the same
> > > > way it propagates light. *No*
> > > > displacement, no drag.
>
> > > I think you cut-and-past the wrong URL
> > > for your quote.
>
> > No, the Kopeikin reference was in addition to the aether drag
> > experiment.
>
> > > But speed of gravity is the same thing
> > > as speed of light.
>
> > Really? Most aetherists have it as infinity, since the aether is so
> > rigid.
>
> The aether is not rigid. It is the medium.
Any medium has certain properties. How rigid it is (its rigidity) is a
crucial factor in how elastic it is, which you claim to be a feature
of the aether. Therefore if it is an elastic medium, then it is has
some rigidity. How rigid it is is partially determined by the speed of
transmission of a signal through it. It is completely determined once
you also know its inertia per unit volume, which can be determined by
other experimental means.
It is this calculated rigidity then that has other experimental
implications that can be tested, and it is precisely in these tests
that problems start to arise for aether models.
mpc755
But as usual, you do not cite any experiments.
PD
> Aether is displaced by matter. The more massive an object is, the more
> aether it displaces. Matter displaces the aether which would otherwise
> exist where the matter is.
Except, according to you, matter is also composed of aether.
So what you are saying is that aether displaces aether, and how
massive something is is determined by how much aether the aether
displaces, where the aether would otherwise be. Combine that with the
fact that the motion of aether entrains aether, and one starts to get
a little fuzzy about where the aether that displaces ends and where
the aether that gets displaced begins.
But of course, that is making a one-sentence explanation of the
universe too complicated....
mpc755
> On Oct 16, 8:46 am, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Aether is displaced by matter. The more massive an object is, the more
> > aether it displaces. Matter displaces the aether which would otherwise
> > exist where the matter is.
>
> Except, according to you, matter is also composed of aether.
> So what you are saying is that aether displaces aether, and how
> massive something is is determined by how much aether the aether
> displaces, where the aether would otherwise be. Combine that with the
> fact that the motion of aether entrains aether, and one starts to get
> a little fuzzy about where the aether that displaces ends and where
> the aether that gets displaced begins.
>
Yes.
> But of course, that is making a one-sentence explanation of the
> universe too complicated....
>
One sentence to explain the universe is too complicated and you want
me to read how many books to understand QM?
PD
> On Oct 16, 12:31 pm, glird <gl...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 16, 9:46 am, mpc755 wrote:
>
> > > Aether is displaced by matter.
>
> > "Aether" is the material filling a given volume of space.
>
> > > The more massive an object is, the more
> > > aether it displaces.
>
> > Not so. The LARGER an object is the more aether it will displace,
> > regardless of its mass, in grams.
>
> Aether is displaced by mass, not volume. We have the existing Jupiter
> and we have a Jupiter which consists entirely of lead. The lead
> Jupiter is denser, therefore it contains less aether, therefore it
> displaces more aether.
>
> Note: 'Aether' is the lowest common denominator of matter. Since lead
> is simply compressed aether, we could say the lead Jupiter actually
> consists of more aether, but that is just confusing.
Yes, indeed. It seems to confuse you as well, so you don't bother
dealing with it.
> For now on, when
> I mention 'aether' I am referring to matter in its most basic form and
> when I refer to 'matter' I am referring to compressed aether. And when
> discussing 'matter' I am referring to the stuff that is not in a black
> hole (and possibly not in a neutron star). 'Matter' refers to the
> stuff made up of atoms that contains 'aether' between the nuclei of
> the atoms. So there is 'aether' in the lead Jupiter, but there is less
> of it than in the real Jupiter.
Or more of it, since matter is compressed aether. So whether it
contains more of it or less of it depends on what part of the
confusing tale you want to ignore for now.
Now add to that fact that the more-or-less-aether Jupiter also
entrains aether, one has to ask whether the entrained aether counts as
part of the more-or-less-aether in Jupiter, making the more-aether
even more more-aether or the less-aether even less less-aether.
But that gets confusing too, so we'll not bother with that.
mpc755
A couple of us are bothering with that.
PD
> On Oct 17, 12:17 pm, PD <thedraperfam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 16, 8:46 am, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Aether is displaced by matter. The more massive an object is, the more
> > > aether it displaces. Matter displaces the aether which would otherwise
> > > exist where the matter is.
>
> > Except, according to you, matter is also composed of aether.
> > So what you are saying is that aether displaces aether, and how
> > massive something is is determined by how much aether the aether
> > displaces, where the aether would otherwise be. Combine that with the
> > fact that the motion of aether entrains aether, and one starts to get
> > a little fuzzy about where the aether that displaces ends and where
> > the aether that gets displaced begins.
>
> Yes.
Yes, I agree that your notion is a little fuzzy.
>
> > But of course, that is making a one-sentence explanation of the
> > universe too complicated....
>
> One sentence to explain the universe is too complicated and you want
> me to read how many books to understand QM?
Nah, the extra sentences that show that it's a little fuzzy is what's
complicated, so it's best not to bother thinking about the fuzzy-
making sentences and just stick to the one sentence that ignores all
the fuzziness.
Now, if you really want to understand how something works, and not be
ignoring all those details, then yes, reading is probably required.
Unless, of course, you have some deep-seated problems with reading and
some miserable memories of failure associated with that. Then reading
is a Bad Thing and should be considered unnecessary.
PD
Are both of your personalities taking medication?
Who are the "couple"?
mpc755
Add value or fuck off.
PD
I've certainly pointed you to lists of experimental papers, and you've
dismissed reading them.
I don't know why you'd ask for something you don't want, just for the
sake of asking for it.
PD
I think I did, in the form of lifting up the corner of the sheet that
you've draped over AD in the hopes that no one can see it for what it
is.
It's a flim-flam man that puts a sheet over an empty apple basket and
claims that what lies under the sheet is the answer to humanity's
problems. It's added value when someone lifts up the sheet and reveals
the empty apple basket. It's added value when the flim-flam man gets
run out of town, or if he decides to stick around in town, at least he
becomes a harmless laughing stock.
If you want control of your audience, take your postings to your own
blog. This is a public space and you control none of it.
PD
mpc755
Take care.
PD
Yes, indeed, that is what I am doing. I'm sure you've noticed.
mpc755
What if the aether wave associated with a body knocked Uranus' matter
over and its interaction with the Sun's entrained aether transitioned
it to its present state?
mpc755
The pull of aether through matter is acceleration.
mpc755
In the Casimir effect, the force of the displaced aether outside the
plates pushing the plates together is greater than the force of the
displaced aether between the plates keeping the plates apart.
mpc755
Momentum is entrained aether.
When you are driving down the highway at a constant speed, the aether
in the matter which is you and the vehicle is moving with you and the
vehicle.
When you accelerate, the matter which is you and the vehicle is
pulling away from the aether. When you decelerate, the aether's
momentum continues while the matter slows down.
mpc755
The double slit experiment is evidence of Aether Displacement.
YBM
> On Oct 18, 1:25 pm, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Oct 17, 8:52 pm, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Oct 17, 4:03 pm, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Oct 17, 12:06 am, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Oct 16, 9:46 am, mpc755 <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
Going mad again, mpc ?
mpc755
I am talking to myself on this thread. Take care.
mpc755
The particle creates a displacement wave in the aether. That is the
reason for the interference pattern created by the particle in the
double slit experiment.
PD
Yes, you certainly are! Take care!
mpc755
The reason why the force of the displaced aether outside the plates
pushing the plates together is greater than the force of the displaced
aether between the plates is because the displaced aether of one plate
extends beyond the other plate.
YBM
At least you realize that you are. Next step in your evolution
will be that you won't. This is sad.
mpc755
This 'cumulative' displaced aether pushes the plates together.
PD
> mpc755 a écrit :
Really the question is, WHY would one want to talk with oneself on a
public discussion group?
mpc755
The double slit experiment is evidence of aether.
A moving particle or object has an associated aether wave.
Placing detectors at the exits to the slits causes the aether wave to
be turned into chop (decoherence). No detectors and the aether wave
exits ahead of the particle and creates interference which alters the
direction the particle travels.
mpc755
Annus Mirabilis papers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annus_Mirabilis_papers
'The introduction of a "luminiferous ether" will prove to be
superfluous in as much as the view here to be developed will not
require an "absolutely stationary space" provided with special
properties'
Einstein is not saying there is not an aether or that the aether is
superfluous as he is saying the aether is not absolutely stationary
space.
mpc755
>
> 'The introduction of a "luminiferous ether" will prove to be
> superfluous in as much as the view here to be developed will not
> require an "absolutely stationary space" provided with special
> properties'
>
> Einstein is not saying there is not an aether or that the aether is
> superfluous as he is saying the aether is not absolutely stationary
> space.
Displaced and entrained aether is not absolutely stationary space.