"A Basic Look at the Aether"
Xedni
(See also our sister website reticsessays.com)
Until the start of the 20th century, the fundamental structure of the
Universe was considered to be based upon the claasical Aether. This
viewpoint ran into trouble when the Michealson-Morley Experiment failed to
detect the velocity of the Earth through the Aether, an apparent logical
impossibility. The difficulty was resolved when Fitzgerald and Larmor showed
that the units of measurement for time and parallel length changed inveresly
as a result velocity through the alleged Aether. The concept was derived
mathematically two years later by Dr. Einstein as the Special Theory of
Relativity. This theory did not disprove the existence of the Aether but, in
Dr. Einstein's words, "remember gentlemen, we have not disproven the Aether,
we have merely shown that we do not need it for calculations".
It is constructive therefore apply tests which are simple enough to be
understood, and perhaps applied by high school students of physics. Consider
a volume of space, perhaps a meter on a side which contained no matter at
all. Does that volume of space have observeable properties? If it does, then
there is "something" in that volume, IT IS NOT MERELY EMPTY SPACE! If it is
not empty, then it must contain a medium which we may dub the Aether. Let us
the examine the possible observeable properties of that allegidely "empty"
volume.
The simplest measurements which can be made is the observation of its
dielectric constant, permeability, and charachteristic impedance (300 ohms).
Observation reveal these properties and permit their measurement.
Furthermore, the observations are simple enough to be made with the
equipment in a good high school physics lab.
With a little more sophistication, one recognizes that an electric
field will produce a stress in the space as a result of its dielectric
constant. Similarly, a magnetic field produces a stress in the space as a
result of its permeability. Late in the 19th century, it was shown that a
rate of change in the electric field produces a transverse magnetic field
and a rate change of the magnetic field produces a transverse electric
field. This observstion was codified in Maxwell's Equtions and predicted the
propagation of electromagnetic (e.g.- radio) waves. The velocity of
propagation of those waves was shown to be determined as the square root of
the product of the dielectric constant and permeability of that space.
There is an additional property of space which we can infer from
Newton's Third Law of Motion (for every action there is an equal and
opposite reaction). When a material object is on the surface of the Earth,
it experiences a force. If it us accelerated it also experiences a force.
Consider what happpens when you sit in the driver's seat of a car. You
experience a force which presses your derriere into the seat, the seat
pushes upwards on you and you press downwards on the seat! Then, when the
car accelerates, a second force is experienced which presses you body
against the back of the seat. In order for these forces to occur, Newton's
Third Law requires that a force exist which pushes you downward and/or
backward. NEITHER THESE FORCES ARE OBSERVEABLE! Since both of these forces
are unobserveable, mainstream physics declares them to be FICTITIOUS!. So
much for Newton's Third Law, or could it be that the thinking of mainstream
physics is defective?
It was recognized early that the "hypothetical" Aether had to be a
solid since it propagated transverse electromagnetic waves, which pass
freely though it, and which cannot propagate through a fluid. This raised
the problem as to how solid matter can move freely though the solid Aether.
The problem vanishes if one accepts the idea, (frequently proposed by
mainstream physics) that material particles consist of standing waves
(presumedly electromagnetic). (See Posting #44.)
If we observe our cosmology in view of the preceeding, the surety of
inertial motion both near and far and the lack of any any observeable
chromatic dispersion of the light from distant sources tells us that, not
only must the Aether be a solid, it must be n0n-granular.
Without accepting the Aether, modern physics had to do a fast shuffle
to prevent its intellectual failings from being obvious. If one accepts the
Aether, however, the conceptual difficulties disappear. The concept of the
Aether allows for a medium which has the required properties and which can
exert the necessary forces to satisfy the requirements of Newton's Third Law
and of gravity. And in view of Special Relativity, the concept of the Aether
is is entirely consistent with the results of observation (assuming that
their implications are properly thought through).
"Is String Theory Justified?"
The holy grail of theoretical physics seems to be the generation of a
"theory of everything". It is the goal to generate a single set of equations
which deals with all physical processes. Mathematical theoreticians have
apparently been successful in generating five theories which meet the
requirements. Some of those theories require 11 dimensions while the others
require 26 dimensions, as compared to the four dimensions (3 length and 1
time), of common experience.
The fact that those higher number of dimensions are required shows that
some of the included processes are completely independent of each other. If
this were not true, the extra dimensions would not be required. To the
writer, the search for a single theory is about as sensible as an effort to
create a single master drawing which would show an automobile engine in its
entirety rather than as an assembly of individually defined parts. It could
be done, but it would be so unwieldy as to be useless. Treating the parts as
individual and independent entities and then showing how thy fit together
has been found to be a much more useful practice.
When we look at the processes which are described in superstring theory
we find that we are describing independent process which operate in the same
region of space. The resultant can be obtained by treating them as
independent processes and obtaining the results by combining them using the
principle of superposition. (This is what us simple folks do instintively.)
The extra dimensions added by string theorists has the effect of
compartmentalized the processes since each of the dimensions they employ
must be mathematically orthoganal to all the others It would seem that
string theory is a sophisticated way of achieving the same result as the
simpler process of superposition.
It is unfortunate that Dr. Einstein had to resort to the fakery of
"curved space" in order to overcome the defect caused by the sophomoric
error he made in the generation of General Relativity. Instead of doing his
mathematics correctly, he made the equations solve by adding an extra degree
of freedom. string theorists hav not added one extra dimension, as did Dr.
Einstein, they added as many as 22! It would appear that the most useful
result of string theory is to provide employment for theoretical physicists.
ANY JACKASS, OR GROUP THEREOF, CAN MAKE A FAULTY THEORY WORK BE ADDING
ONE OR MORE SUPERLOUS DEGREES OF FREEDOM. THE THING THAT SEPARATES THE MEN
FROM THE BOYS IS THE ABILITY TO DEFINE NATURE IN TERMS OF THE THREE SPATIAL
AND ONE TEMPORAL DIMENSION WHICH WE CAN OBSERVE.
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:- einste...@verizon.net. 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.
KONCHOK.PENDAY
Xedni [xn...@verizon.net] wrote:
> "A Basic Look at the Aether"
>
> (See also our sister website reticsessays.com)
>
> Until the start of the 20th century, the fundamental structure of the
> Universe was considered to be based upon the claasical Aether.
But "classical aether"
was considered to be:
1] A SOLID
2] MOTIONLESS
THESE WERE HUGE ERRORS!
> This viewpoint ran into trouble when the Michealson-Morley Experiment
> failed to detect the velocity of the Earth through the Aether, an
> apparent logical impossibility.
SO THEY NEEDED TO UPGRADE
THEIR EITHER THEORY!
NOT FORGET ABOUT IT!
> The difficulty was resolved when Fitzgerald and Larmor
> showed that the units of measurement for time and parallel length
> changed inveresly as a result velocity through the alleged Aether.
The difficulty is resolved when you realize that
AETHER IS A GAS, IN MOTION LIKE ALL OTHER GASSES!
THAT'S ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW!
> The concept was derived mathematically two years later
> by Dr. Einstein as the Special Theory of Relativity.
Which was just J.J. Thompson's 1888 *AETHER EQUATION*
of E=MC^2, plagarized, with an insane theory added!
> This theory did not disprove the existence of the
> Aether but, in Dr. Einstein's words, "remember gentlemen, we have not
> disproven the Aether, we have merely shown that we do not need it for
> calculations".
Yes.
YOU DON'T NEED ANY UNDERSTANDING AT ALL,
if you just want to make calculations!
> It is constructive therefore apply tests which are simple
> enough to be understood, and perhaps applied by high school
> students of physics.
YES!
Start ANY electric motor.
Measure the current required
to bring it up to speed.
Turn it off. Let it stop.
Start it right back up again.
Measure the current it draws.
It's much less this time!
Turn it off. Wait a minute.
Start it up again!
Now it draws full power again!
When the motor is running,
the motor creates an aether vortex.
After a minute, the vortex dissipates!
A six year old can do that!
> Consider a volume of space, perhaps a meter on a side which
> contained no matter at all. Does that volume of space have
> observeable properties?
YES!
> If it does, then there is "something" in that volume,
> IT IS NOT MERELY EMPTY SPACE!
YES!
> If it is not empty, then it must contain a medium which we may dub
> the Aether. Let us the examine the possible observeable properties
> of that allegidely "empty" volume.
Good idea!
> The simplest measurements which can be made is the observation of its
> dielectric constant, permeability, and charachteristic impedance (300
> ohms). Observation reveal these properties and permit their
> measurement. Furthermore, the observations are simple enough
> to be made with the equipment in a good high school physics lab.
YES!
> With a little more sophistication, one recognizes that an electric
> field will produce a stress in the space as a result of its dielectric
> constant. Similarly, a magnetic field produces a stress in the space
> as a result of its permeability. Late in the 19th century, it was
> shown that a rate of change in the electric field produces a
> transverse magnetic field and a rate change of the magnetic field
> produces a transverse electric field. This observstion was codified
> in Maxwell's Equtions and predicted the propagation of
> electromagnetic (e.g.- radio) waves. The velocity of propagation
> of those waves was shown to be determined as the square root
> of the product of the dielectric constant and permeability of
> that space.
YES!
> There is an additional property of space which we can infer from
> Newton's Third Law of Motion (for every action there is an equal
> and opposite reaction). When a material object is on the surface
> of the Earth, it experiences a force. If it us accelerated it
> also experiences a force. Consider what happpens when you sit
> in the driver's seat of a car. You experience a force which
> presses your derriere into the seat, the seat pushes upwards
> on you and you press downwards on the seat! Then, when the
> car accelerates, a second force is experienced which presses you body
> against the back of the seat. In order for these forces to occur,
> Newton's Third Law requires that a force exist which pushes you
> downward and/or backward. NEITHER THESE FORCES ARE OBSERVEABLE!
What are you talking about?
A two year old can observe those forces!
> Since both of these forces are unobserveable,
> mainstream physics declares them to be FICTITIOUS!.
ANY YET *ANYBODY* CAN *EASILY* OBSERVE THEM!
> So much for Newton's Third Law,
YES! AND NEWTON TOO! AND ALL HIS WANKERS!
> or could it be that the thinking of
> mainstream physics is defective?
YES!
> It was recognized early that the "hypothetical" Aether had to be a
> solid since it propagated transverse electromagnetic waves, which pass
> freely though it, and which cannot propagate through a fluid.
BUT THAT IS A *HUGE* CATASTROPIC ERROR!
As Steven Rado carefully proves,
there is no such thing as a
purely transverse wave!
ALL WAVES HAVE A LONGITUDINAL COMPONENT!
> This raised the problem as to how solid matter
> can move freely though the solid Aether.
IT CANNOT! THE AETHER IS A GAS!
> The problem vanishes if one accepts the idea, (frequently proposed
> by mainstream physics) that material particles consist of standing
> waves (presumedly electromagnetic). (See Posting #44.)
BUT THAT'S AN INSANE HALLUCINATION!
IT'S AS STUPID AS NEWTON'S FOOLISH
"MATTER ATTRACTS MATTER" IDEA OF GRAVITY!
GET OVER IT!
> If we observe our cosmology in view of the preceeding, the surety of
> inertial motion both near and far and the lack of any any observeable
> chromatic dispersion of the light from distant sources tells us that,
> not only must the Aether be a solid, it must be n0n-granular.
WHICH IS WHY YOU
CAN'T DO PHYSICS!
THE AETHER IS A GAS!
> Without accepting the Aether, modern physics had to do a fast
> shuffle to prevent its intellectual failings from being obvious.
Unfortunately, the fast shuffle just
spilled all the cards on the floor.
To keep the intellectual failings
of obvious wank from being visible,
YOU HAVE TO BLIND YOURSELF
WITH EVEN MORE ODIOUS WANK!
> If one accepts the Aether, however, the
> conceptual difficulties disappear.
AND WHEN YOU READ RADO,
YOU WILL FINALLY UNDERSTAND!
> The concept of the Aether allows for a medium which
> has the required properties and which can exert the
> necessary forces to satisfy the requirements of Newton's
> Third Law and of gravity. And in view of Special Relativity,
> the concept of the Aether is is entirely consistent with the
> results of observation (assuming that their implications are
> properly thought through).
If you would *STOP* citing those insane morons,
Newton and Einstein, you would appear much smarter!
> "Is String Theory Justified?"
NO!
The universe is not constructed
out of theoretical yarn!
Though that IS quite a yarn!
But it's fiction, not fact!
ACTUAL aethrons do all the work!
> The holy grail of theoretical physics seems to be the generation
> of a "theory of everything". It is the goal to generate a single
> set of equations which deals with all physical processes.
FALSE!
It is the goal of MATHEMATICIANS to generate EQUATIONS!
PHYSICISTS SEEK A WORKABLE MODEL!
EQUATIONS COME EASILY FROM THAT!
> Mathematical theoreticians have apparently been successful
> in generating five theories which meet the requirements.
BUT ABSOLUTELY NO PHYSICAL MODEL AT ALL!
UNFORTUNATELY, THE SUN IS
*NOT* MADE UP OF EQUATIONS!
GET USED TO IT!
> Some of those theories require 11 dimensions while the
> others require 26 dimensions, as compared to the four
> dimensions (3 length and 1 time), of common experience.
Some theories require many angels to dance on the head of a pin!
Epicycles require the planets to change direction and go backwards!
TAKE YOUR PICK!
> The fact that those higher number of dimensions are required
> shows that some of the included processes are completely
> independent of each other. If this were not true, the extra
> dimensions would not be required. To the writer, the search
> for a single theory is about as sensible as an effort
> to create a single master drawing which would show an
> automobile engine in its entirety rather than as an
> assembly of individually defined parts. It could be
> done, but it would be so unwieldy as to be useless. Treating
> the parts as individual and independent entities and then
> showing how thy fit together has been found to be a much
> more useful practice.
Therefore you will be OVERJOYED
when you finally READ RADO!
THE WHOLE UNIVERSE IS MADE UP OF
*ONLY ONE PART*, ENDLESSLY REPEATED!
> When we look at the processes which are described in superstring
> theory we find that we are describing independent process which
> operate in the same region of space. The resultant can be obtained
> by treating them as independent processes and obtaining the results
> by combining them using the principle of superposition. (This is
> what us simple folks do instintively.) The extra dimensions added
> by string theorists has the effect of compartmentalized the
> processes since each of the dimensions they employ must be
> mathematically orthoganal to all the others It would
> seem that string theory is a sophisticated way of achieving
> the same result as the simpler process of superposition.
SO STOP WANKING
ABOUT STRING THEORY!
> It is unfortunate that Dr. Einstein had to resort to the
> fakery of "curved space" in order to overcome the defect
> caused by the sophomoric error he made in the generation
> of General Relativity. Instead of doing his mathematics
> correctly, he made the equations solve by adding an extra
> degree of freedom. string theorists hav not added one extra
> dimension, as did Dr. Einstein, they added as many as 22!
SO STOP WANKING ABOUT
INSANE WANKERS AND PLAGARISTS!
It's hard to tell you apart!
> It would appear that the most useful result of string
> theory is to provide employment for theoretical physicists.
NO!
It provides infinitely rich
material for commedians!
> ANY JACKASS, OR GROUP THEREOF, CAN MAKE A FAULTY THEORY
> WORK BE ADDING ONE OR MORE SUPERLOUS DEGREES OF FREEDOM.
> THE THING THAT SEPARATES THE MEN FROM THE BOYS IS THE
> ABILITY TO DEFINE NATURE IN TERMS OF THE THREE
> SPATIAL AND ONE TEMPORAL DIMENSION WHICH WE CAN OBSERVE.
SO READ RADO, AND JOIN THE MEN'S GROUP!
> 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).
[ ,,, SNIP ...]
KP2009DEC22+ AETHRO-DYNAMICS RELEASED!
AFTER TOO MANY MONTHS
OF SAYING �ANY DAY NOW�
IT�S FINALLY OUT!
SANTA BROUGHT IT
JUST FOR YOU!
GET IT QUICK!
YOU CAN BUY IT IN PAPER FOR $29.50
PLUS SHIPPING ON AMAZON.COM at:
http://www.amazon.com/Aethro-dynamics-Steven-Rado/dp/0966757181
AETHRO-KINEMATICS [A-K] IN 1994 FIRMLY
ESTABLISHED STEVEN RADO AS BY FAR THE
GREATEST PHYSICIST IN HUMAN HISTORY.
*NOBODY* ELSE EVEN COMES CLOSE!
ONLY A FEW LIKE KEPLER, DESCARTES
GALLILEO, FARADAY, MAXWELL, ETC.
WERE EVEN ON THE RIGHT TRACK!
FOR THE LAST HUNDRED YEARS PHYSICS
HAS GONE *BACKWARDS* INTO IRRELEVANT,
UNINTELLIGIBLE MATHEMATICAL *WANK*!
[I WAS A PHYSICS MAJOR AT THE UNIVERSITY
OF CHICAGO IN THE 1960'S, UNTIL I REALIZED
THAT "PHYSICISTS" WERE JUST MATHEMATICIANS
PRETENDING* TO KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT
PHYSICS, BUT HAD *NO* UNDERSTANDING!
I FLED FROM PHYSICS IN TERROR AND
DISGUST UNTIL STEVE BROUGHT ME BACK
WITH SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY MADE SENSE!]
UNTIL AETHRO-KINEMATICS,
THE 20TH CENTURY WAS A
COMPLETE AND UNMITIGATED
*CATASTROPHE* FOR PHYSICS!
BUT THAT�S ALL OVER NOW!
AETHRO-DYNAMICS [A-D] IN 2009
FAR SURPASSES EVEN A-K!
IF A-K IS THE BOOSTER
THAT PUT PHYSICS IN ORBIT,
A-D LAUNCHED IT ON IT�S
INTERSTELLAR JOURNEY!
I PRAYED FOR 15 YEARS THAT
STEVE WOULD WRITE MORE!
NOW IT�S HERE!
GET *YOUR* TICKET-TO-RIDE!
===========================
THESE TWO EPOCHAL BOOKS ARE
*THE* SUPREME INTELLECTUAL
TRIUMPH OF THE HUMAN RACE!
===========================
NOBODY ELSE EVEN COMES CLOSE!
EVEN �GODEL, ESCHER, BACH� FADES
INTO INTELLECTUAL INSIGNIFICANCE
NEXT TO STEVE�S *UNRIVALED* WORK!
STEVE PUTS IT *ALL* TOGETHER!
THERE IS *NO* SUBSTITUTE!
IF YOU HAVE NOT READ RADO,
YOU ARE JUST PLAIN *IGNORANT*
ABOUT PHYSICS, *ESPECIALLY* IF
YOU HAVE A PHD. IN PHYSICS!
PHYSICS PHD�S KNOW
THE LEAST OF ALL!
THEY DON�T EVEN KNOW,
THAT THEY DON�T KNOW!
WHAT WANKERS!
IT�S A WHOLE *NEW* GAME NOW!
YOU HAVE GOT TO *UNLEARN*
NEWTON, COULOMB, EINSTEIN,
QUANTUM MECHANICS, DIMENSIONS
4 THROUGH N, AND EVEN
TANGLED STRING THEORY!
*THEN* YOU CAN *UNDERSTAND*!
A-K IS A HUGE [527 PAGES]
ANALYSIS OF THE HISTORY
OF PHYSICS, EXHAUSTIVELY
DOCUMENTING MOSTLY GRAVITY.
A-D IS A SMALLER [153 PAGES] WORK
WHICH WHICH EXTENDS AETHER ANALYSIS
INTO THE OTHER AREAS OF PHYSICS.
IT HAS FOUR MAJOR CHAPTERS:
[1] FERRO-MAGNETISM
[2] ELECTRO-MAGNETISM
[3] ELECTRO-STATICS
[4] GRAVITY REVISITED
ELECTRO-STATICS BREAKS
SHOCKING NEW GROUND,
THAT WILL LEAVE YOUR
HAIR STANDING ON END
AND YOUR JAW IN YOUR LAP!
A-D IS THE ABSOLUTELY THE
BEST INTRODUCTION TO PHYSICS,
AND ALSO THE MOST ADVANCED TEXT!
[NOT BAD FOR A GUY WHO
NEVER WENT TO COLLEGE,
BUT TRAINED DILIGENTYLY AS
A MYSTERY-NOVEL DETECTIVE,
WITH HIS BROTHER LAZLO,
WHO GOT SENT TO THE RUSSIAN
FRONT, AND NEVER CAME BACK!]
A-K AND A-D ARE ALSO THE
FINEST MYSTERY STORIES
EVER WRITTEN! BUT THEY
ARE TRUTH, NOT FICTION!
AFTER YOU READ A-D YOU
CAN WORK THROUGH A-K
TO GET THE FULL STORY.
===================
A-D ALSO COMES WITH
A *FREE* CD OF A-K!
===================
EVERYTHING IMPORTANT KNOWN ABOUT
PHYSICS IN ONE LITTLE PACKAGE!
FROM THE *ONE* GUY WHO
FIGURED IT *ALL* OUT!
THIS IS THE BEST DEAL
IN PHYSICS EDUCATION
THAT HAS EVER EXISTED!
DON�T WAIT TO
GET YOUR CLUES!
O
� )
\
KONCHOK PENDAY
EDITOR, A-D
NEWSGROUPS:
alt.ucp,alt.conspiracy,alt.sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories
PERMALINK: http://net-prophet.net/?p=1859
Benj
> The difficulty is resolved when you realize that
>
> AETHER IS A GAS, IN MOTION LIKE ALL OTHER GASSES!
>
> THAT'S ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW!
No it's not. Gasses do not transmit transverse waves. Hence aether is
NOT a true gas. And obviously it's not a solid either for a number of
reasons lack of aether-drift among them. The ONLY theory that can make
sense is that aether is BOTH a solid and a gas at the same time! In
other words it's some kind of super-fluidic material fine and tenuous
as a gas yet still able to transmit shear.
> Start ANY electric motor.
> Measure the current required
> to bring it up to speed.
> Turn it off. Let it stop.
> Start it right back up again.
> Measure the current it draws.
> It's much less this time!
> Turn it off. Wait a minute.
> Start it up again!
> Now it draws full power again!
> When the motor is running,
> the motor creates an aether vortex.
> After a minute, the vortex dissipates!
>
> A six year old can do that!
Perhaps. But if this is so obvious then why have I never observed it
nor seen any references to it in the CONSIDERABLE electric motor
literature? Hmmm?
> > It was recognized early that the "hypothetical" Aether had to be a
> > solid since it propagated transverse electromagnetic waves, which pass
> > freely though it, and which cannot propagate through a fluid.
>
> BUT THAT IS A *HUGE* CATASTROPIC ERROR!
>
> As Steven Rado carefully proves,
> there is no such thing as a
> purely transverse wave!
>
> ALL WAVES HAVE A LONGITUDINAL COMPONENT!
Yes this is true and has been demonstrated for a long time. The
evidence is that low frequency EM waves are largely longitudinal while
microwave and above are largely transverse. Evidence is that they can
be polarized.
> > This raised the problem as to how solid matter
> > can move freely though the solid Aether.
>
> IT CANNOT! THE AETHER IS A GAS!
THIS IS A HUGE CATASTROPHIC ERROR! (to coin a phrase!)
Gasses DO NOT transmit shear forces. Hence aether must be some kind of
super-fluid capable of gas-like flow and at the same time capable of
shear forces. Stored magnetic energy requires this.
And not that "solid matter" despite appearances is not "solid"!
> THE AETHER IS A GAS!
<snort> YOU ARE A GAS!
> AND WHEN YOU READ RADO,
> YOU WILL FINALLY UNDERSTAND!
> Therefore you will be OVERJOYED
> when you finally READ RADO!
>
> THE WHOLE UNIVERSE IS MADE UP OF
> *ONLY ONE PART*, ENDLESSLY REPEATED!
SO YOU SAY!
Only one choice now. And that is to "read Rado". OF course if he were
REALLY interested in promoting discussion of his theories he's supply
the book on .pdf for inspection rather than selling them sight unseen.
But hey, I can afford to wank with Rado. Once I see what he actually
has to say, I'll be back! And then we will determine if Stephen Rado
being the genius of the universe and the assertion that he is even
smarter than "the smartest man on the planet" [Bill Gates] is Truth,
Hype, or Hypocrisy. I'll be happy to give my opinion. Stay tuned.
Szczepan Bialek
"Benj" <bja...@iwaynet.net> wrote
news:0165ed79-20a7-423d...@n33g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 6, 10:56 am, "KONCHOK.PENDAY" <K...@net-prophet.net> wrote:
>> The difficulty is resolved when you realize that
>
>> AETHER IS A GAS, IN MOTION LIKE ALL OTHER GASSES!
>
>> THAT'S ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW!
>No it's not. Gasses do not transmit transverse waves. Hence aether is
NOT a true gas.
Transverse components are in all medium.
> And obviously it's not a solid either for a number of
reasons lack of aether-drift among them. The ONLY theory that can make
sense is that aether is BOTH a solid and a gas at the same time! In
other words it's some kind of super-fluidic material fine and tenuous
as a gas yet still able to transmit shear.
But it is like the Stokes jelly:
"The object of the present communication is to attempt an
explanation of the cause of aberration which shall be in accordance
with the theory of undulations. I shall suppose that the earth
and the planets carry a portion of the ether along with them so
that the ether close to their surfaces is at rest relatively to those
surfaces, while, its velocity alters as we recede from the surface,
till, at no great distance, it is at rest in space. According to the
undulatory theory, the direction in which a heavenly body is seen
is normal to the fronts of the waves which have emanated from
it, and have reached the neighbourhood of the observer, the ether
near him being supposed to be at rest relatively to him. If
the ether in space were at rest, the front of a wave of light at any
instant being given, its front at any future time could be found
by the method explained in Airy s tracts. If the ether were in
motion, and the velocity of propagation of light were infinitely
small, the wave s front would be displaced as a surface of parti
cles of the ether. Neither of these suppositions is however true,
for the ether moves while light is propagated through it. In the
following investigation I suppose that the displacements of a
wave s front in an elementary portion of time due to the two
causes just considered take place independently." From:
http://www.archive.org/stream/mathphyspapers01stokrich#page/n151/mode/2up
Why the Stokes aether is abandond?
>>
>> > It was recognized early that the "hypothetical" Aether had to be a
> > solid since it propagated transverse electromagnetic waves, which pass
> > freely though it, and which cannot propagate through a fluid.
>
>> BUT THAT IS A *HUGE* CATASTROPIC ERROR!
>
>> As Steven Rado carefully proves,
> there is no such thing as a
> purely transverse wave!
>
>> ALL WAVES HAVE A LONGITUDINAL COMPONENT!
>Yes this is true and has been demonstrated for a long time. The
evidence is that low frequency EM waves are largely longitudinal while
microwave and above are largely transverse. Evidence is that they can
be polarized.
The real pressure wave can be "polarized" also. Each real wave which have
the transverse component is "polarized".
Waves from monopole is "unpolarized", wave from dipole is polarized.
>> > This raised the problem as to how solid matter
> > can move freely though the solid Aether.
>
>> IT CANNOT! THE AETHER IS A GAS!
>THIS IS A HUGE CATASTROPHIC ERROR! (to coin a phrase!)
Gasses DO NOT transmit shear forces. Hence aether must be some kind of
super-fluid capable of gas-like flow and at the same time capable of
shear forces. Stored magnetic energy requires this.
Yes. Stokes known that and his aether is like jelly.
S*
KONCHOK.PENDAY
Benj [bja...@iwaynet.net] wrote:
> On Feb 6, 10:56 am, "KONCHOK.PENDAY" <KP at net-prophet.net> wrote:
>
>> The difficulty is resolved when you realize that
>>
>> AETHER IS A GAS, IN MOTION LIKE ALL OTHER GASSES!
>>
>> THAT'S ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW!
>
> No it's not. Gasses do not transmit transverse waves.
> Hence aether is NOT a true gas.
Steve thinks it IS.
His meticulous analysis of waves
destroys the artificial distinction
between transverse and longitudinal.
His arguments are convincing to me,
but I'm not an expert on this:
please review his arguments and
give me your take on his theory!
> And obviously it's not a solid either for a
> number of reasons lack of aether-drift among them.
And solid objects moving freely through it!
> The ONLY theory that can make sense is
> that aether is BOTH a solid and a gas at the same time!
> In other words it's some kind of super-fluidic material
> fine and tenuous as a gas yet still able to transmit shear.
????
>> Start ANY electric motor.
>> Measure the current required
>> to bring it up to speed.
>> Turn it off. Let it stop.
>> Start it right back up again.
>> Measure the current it draws.
>> It's much less this time!
>> Turn it off. Wait a minute.
>> Start it up again!
>> Now it draws full power again!
>
>> When the motor is running,
>> the motor creates an aether vortex.
>> After a minute, the vortex dissipates!
>>
>> A six year old can do that!
>
> Perhaps. But if this is so obvious
> then why have I never observed it
Maybe you just didn't bother
to actually DO the testing?
> nor seen any references to it in the CONSIDERABLE
> electric motor literature?
> Hmmm?
Why would they be interested?
Einstein told them not to bother!
I haven't tested it either!
I don't even have the simple
and cheap test equipment!
I JUST READ IT IN THE INTERNET!
Sorry I don't have the citation!
If I find it again, I'll copy it!
Maybe it was einstein-hoax.com?
It didn't cite any literature,
so you may discount it as rumor,
but it did give the actual watts
used, which I omitted, so it
sounded real to me. Only an
extremely stupid idiot would
cite fake results which can
be easily and cheaply tested.
Are they extremely stupid idiots?
Am I, for citing their unverified claim?
===========================
PLEASE DO THE EXPERIMENT!
REPORT YOUR RESULTS HERE!
===========================
Then we'll have a documented public record!
A motor and a sensitive watts-used
electric meter are all you need!
Just like that thing on your
house, but much more sensitive!
It measure KILO-watts, but
you probably just need watts.
If your results are negative,
I'll either stop making that
claim ... or test it myself!
If your results are positive,
YOU WILL BE THE WORLD'S FOREMOST HEXPERT
AND CAN WRITE THE LITERATURE YOURSELF!
Which I will happily cite!
THEN EVERYBODY WILL
KNOW THE TRUTH!
>> > It was recognized early that the "hypothetical" Aether had to be a
>> > solid since it propagated transverse electromagnetic waves, which
>> > pass freely though it, and which cannot propagate through a fluid.
>> BUT THAT IS A *HUGE* CATASTROPIC ERROR!
>>
>> As Steven Rado carefully proves,
>> there is no such thing as a
>> purely transverse wave!
>>
>> ALL WAVES HAVE A LONGITUDINAL COMPONENT!
>
> Yes this is true and has been demonstrated for a long time.
> The evidence is that low frequency EM waves are largely
> longitudinal while microwave and above are largely transverse.
> Evidence is that they can be polarized.
OK! I'm just going on
what I read in Rado.
I'm not an expert on this,
but you certainly seem to be.
Please review his arguments
and report back to us all!
>> > This raised the problem as to how solid matter
>> > can move freely though the solid Aether.
>>
>> IT CANNOT! THE AETHER IS A GAS!
>
> THIS IS A HUGE CATASTROPHIC ERROR! (to coin a phrase!) Gasses DO NOT
> transmit shear forces. Hence aether must be some kind of super-fluid
> capable of gas-like flow and at the same time capable of shear forces.
> Stored magnetic energy requires this.
???? I never heard of
STORED magnetic energy.
On the other hand, my
magnets never ran out
of magnetism, so maybe
all magnetism is stored?
> And not that "solid matter"
> despite appearances is not "solid"!
OK!
>> THE AETHER IS A GAS!
>
> <snort> YOU ARE A GAS!
You say the nicest things!
>> AND WHEN YOU READ RADO,
>> YOU WILL FINALLY UNDERSTAND!
>
>> Therefore you will be OVERJOYED
>> when you finally READ RADO!
>>
>> THE WHOLE UNIVERSE IS MADE UP OF
>> *ONLY ONE PART*, ENDLESSLY REPEATED!
>
> SO YOU SAY!
From reading Rado,
it seems pretty clear.
I've been asking myself
for about 15 years now:
WHAT ELSE COULD IT BE?
I don't have ANY answer!
BUT STEVE'S!
> Only one choice now. And that is to "read Rado".
WAY COOL!
THE RIGHT CHOICE!
[Even if he's wrong!]
I'D LOVE TO SEE
YOUR EVALUATION!
> OF course if he were REALLY interested in promoting
> discussion of his theories he's supply the book on .pdf
> for inspection rather than selling them sight unseen.
He's 90 years old, and he's been working
full time on this book for years. We finally
got it published for you to read! BE HAPPY!
HE DIDN'T DIE YET!
He's in good health now,
but at 90, breathing is
full proof of good health!
HE WANTS to do a PDF, but there are HUGE
technical problems. He has a pre-1994
Mac with Quark Express 3.3.5. The book
is set in BOOKMAN, which is no longer
supported by Quark Express, so he CAN'T
make a PDF [like he did many years ago
for Aethro-Kinematics!]. He has a new
computer too, but he can't transfer
the book to it for a PDF, because it's
in a dead font! He needs a font
which has exactly the same spacing as
BOOKMAN, and is available in QE 3.3.5
AND the current 8.8. Then he could
just switch fonts, and transfer it to
his new computer with the current QE.
OTHERWISE, HE HAS TO
RESET THE WHOLE BOOK!
What a bummer!
IS THERE SUCH A FONT?
WHICH ONE IS IT?
BUT THE BOOK IS DONE!
YOU CAN READ IT NOW!
AT LEAST WE DIDN'T
LOSE THE DATA!
[I lived in TERROR
for more than a year
while there was
absolutely *NO* data
backup, whatsoever!]
NOW AT LEAST IT
CAN'T BE LOST!
THAT'S A
GREAT BIG
STEP UP!
and a BIG
relief to me!
If you give him a few
more good years to live,
He'll give you a PDF, and
maybe a third volume too!
> But hey, I can afford to wank with Rado.
FANTASTIC!
Welcome to the
World-Wide-Wank!
> Once I see what he actually
> has to say, I'll be back!
FANTASTIC!
I appreciate your interest,
and your courtesy too!
I was a skeptic too,
until I read A-K!
Now nobody else
makes ANY sense!
> And then we will determine if Stephen Rado
> being the genius of the universe
That's MY evaluation, but I am
very interested in yours as well!
You seem like quite a bright guy!
If he's wrong, let's find out now!
Don't withhold any of your
DEVASTATING CRITICISM!
Steve is open to being wrong!
That's why he is publishing!
Give YOUR eval of his theory!
If he's right ... you tell us!
Good or bad,
BRING IT ON!
LET HIM FIND OUT
BEFORE HE DIES!
That's the least
you can do for him!
He's tough.
He can take it
either way, but
he does have
a preference.
> and the assertion that he is even smarter than "the
> smartest man on the planet" [Bill Gates]
???? I have nothing but contempt for Bill Gates!
He made tons of money!
So did the Rothchilds!
Both are just rapacious looters,
with no beneficial product at all!
He set computing back 20 or 30 years!
> is Truth, Hype, or Hypocrisy.
> I'll be happy to give my opinion. Stay tuned.
FANTASTIC!
I look forward to
your excited response!
THANKS FOR WRITING!
O
--- )
\
KP2009DEC22+ AETHRO-DYNAMICS RELEASED!
NOW IT�S HERE!
GET *YOUR* TICKET-TO-RIDE!
WHAT WANKERS!
*THEN* YOU CAN *UNDERSTAND*!
O
--- )
\
KONCHOK PENDAY
EDITOR, A-D
NEWSGROUPS:
alt.ucp,alt.conspiracy,alt.sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories
PERMALINK: http://net-prophet.net/?p=1867
KONCHOK.PENDAY
Szczepan Bialek [sz.b...@wp.pl] wrote:
> "Benj" <bja...@iwaynet.net> wrote
> news:0165ed79-20a7-423d...@n33g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 6, 10:56 am, "KONCHOK.PENDAY" <K...@net-prophet.net> wrote:
>
>>> The difficulty is resolved when you realize that
>>
>>> AETHER IS A GAS, IN MOTION LIKE ALL OTHER GASSES!
>>
>>> THAT'S ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW!
> No it's not. Gasses do not transmit transverse waves.
> Hence aether is NOT a true gas.
>
> Transverse components are in all medium.
That's very interesting.
How does
"Gasses do not transmit transverse waves."
comport with
"Transverse components are in all medium."?
As I understand it, Steve
shows there are no exclusively
tranverse waves either, and
all waves have some
longitudial component.
Maybe the distinction is false?
I have enormous respect
for your aether expertise.
Have you read A-D?
I love to read
your review of it!
> And obviously it's not a solid either for a number of
> reasons lack of aether-drift among them. The ONLY theory that can make
> sense is that aether is BOTH a solid and a gas at the same time! In
> other words it's some kind of super-fluidic material fine and tenuous
> as a gas yet still able to transmit shear.
>
> But it is like the Stokes jelly:
>
> "The object of the present communication is to attempt an explanation
> of the cause of aberration which shall be in accordance with the
> theory of undulations. I shall suppose that the earth and the planets
> carry a portion of the ether along with them so that the ether close
> to their surfaces is at rest relatively to those surfaces, while, its
> velocity alters as we recede from the surface, till, at no great
> distance, it is at rest in space. According to the undulatory theory,
> the direction in which a heavenly body is seen is normal to the fronts
> of the waves which have emanated from it, and have reached the
> neighbourhood of the observer, the ether near him being supposed
> to be at rest relatively to him. If the ether in space were at rest,
> the front of a wave of light at any instant being given, its front at
> any future time could be found by the method explained in Airy s
> tracts. If the ether were in motion, and the velocity of propagation
> of light were infinitely small, the wave s front would be
> displaced as a surface of parti cles of the ether. Neither of these
> suppositions is however true, for the ether moves while light is
> propagated through it. In the following investigation I suppose that
> the displacements of a wave s front in an elementary portion of time
> due to the two causes just considered take place independently." From:
> http://www.archive.org/stream/mathphyspapers01stokrich#page/n151/mode/2up
For some reason, I can't
get this big enough to read.
> Why the Stokes aether is abandond?
>
>> > It was recognized early that the "hypothetical" Aether had to be a
>> > solid since it propagated transverse electromagnetic waves, which
>> > pass freely though it, and which cannot propagate through a fluid.
???? "Transverse components are in all medium."?
>>> BUT THAT IS A *HUGE* CATASTROPIC ERROR!
>> As Steven Rado carefully proves,
>> there is no such thing as a
>> purely transverse wave!
>>
>>> ALL WAVES HAVE A LONGITUDINAL COMPONENT!
>Yes this is true and has been demonstrated for a long time.
OK!
It's new to me.
This is not my field.
I'm just trying
to follow along.
> The evidence is that low frequency EM waves are
> largely longitudinal while microwave and above are
> largely transverse. Evidence is that they can be polarized.
You know far more
about it than me!
Steve has a section
on polarization that
made sense to me.
Maybe you would
not be impressed?
> The real pressure wave can be "polarized" also. Each real wave which
> have the transverse component is "polarized".
???? So since: "Transverse components are in all medium."
all waves are therefore polarized? ????
> Waves from monopole is
> "unpolarized", wave from dipole is polarized.
???? What monopole?
???? What dipole?
>> > This raised the problem as to how solid matter
>> > can move freely though the solid Aether.
>>
>>> IT CANNOT! THE AETHER IS A GAS!
>
>
>>THIS IS A HUGE CATASTROPHIC ERROR! (to coin a phrase!)
> Gasses DO NOT transmit shear forces.
???? "Transverse components are in all medium."
> Hence aether must be some kind of
> super-fluid capable of gas-like flow and at the same time capable of
> shear forces. Stored magnetic energy requires this.
What magnetic energy is not stored?
I'm not understanding this.
> Yes. Stokes known that and his aether is like jelly. S*
Thanks for writing!
I'd love to see
your review of A-D!
O
--- )
\
NEWSGROUPS:
alt.ucp,alt.conspiracy,alt.sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories
PERMALINK: http://net-prophet.net/?p=1878
Szczepan Bialek
Uzytkownik "KONCHOK.PENDAY" <K...@net-prophet.net> napisal w wiadomosci
news:hknsgj$9i$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> On Sun, 07 Feb 2010 11:18:16 +0100,
> Szczepan Bialek [sz.b...@wp.pl] wrote:
>
> > "Benj" <bja...@iwaynet.net> wrote
> > news:0165ed79-20a7-423d...@n33g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> > On Feb 6, 10:56 am, "KONCHOK.PENDAY" <K...@net-prophet.net> wrote:
> >
> >>> The difficulty is resolved when you realize that
> >>
> >>> AETHER IS A GAS, IN MOTION LIKE ALL OTHER GASSES!
> >>
> >>> THAT'S ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW!
>
>> > No it's not. Gasses do not transmit transverse waves.
>
>> > Hence aether is NOT a true gas.
> >
> > Transverse components are in all medium.
>
> That's very interesting.
>
> How does
> "Gasses do not transmit transverse waves."
> comport with
> "Transverse components are in all medium."?
The monopole (pulsator) generate only the longitudinal waves.
If the source is like the dipole then the transversal components appears.
>
> As I understand it, Steve
> shows there are no exclusively
> tranverse waves either, and
> all waves have some
> longitudial component.
Steve is right here.
>
> Maybe the distinction is false?
>
> I have enormous respect
> for your aether expertise.
>
> Have you read A-D?
Is the abstract available?
If the source is the dipole like.
>
> > Waves from monopole is
> > "unpolarized", wave from dipole is polarized.
>
> ???? What monopole?
> ???? What dipole?
The radio waves are produced by the dipole. If the transmitting antenna has
the both ands in the air we call it dipole and the waves are polarized.
If the one end is shielded (under ground) we have the monopole antenna and
unpolarized waves.
>
> >> > This raised the problem as to how solid matter
> >> > can move freely though the solid Aether.
> >>
> >>> IT CANNOT! THE AETHER IS A GAS!
> >
> >
> >>THIS IS A HUGE CATASTROPHIC ERROR! (to coin a phrase!)
>
> > Gasses DO NOT transmit shear forces.
>
> ???? "Transverse components are in all medium."
>
> > Hence aether must be some kind of
> > super-fluid capable of gas-like flow and at the same time capable of
> > shear forces. Stored magnetic energy requires this.
>
> What magnetic energy is not stored?
> I'm not understanding this.
Magnetism is an illusion. The aether must store the electric energy
(electrostatics) in form of stresses and at the same time be capable to
creep with the planets. It must be like Stokes jelly.
>
> > Yes. Stokes known that and his aether is like jelly. S*
>
> Thanks for writing!
>
> I'd love to see
> your review of A-D!
S*
KONCHOK.PENDAY
Szczepan Bialek [sz.b...@wp.pl] wrote:
> Uzytkownik "KONCHOK.PENDAY" <K...@net-prophet.net> napisal w wiadomosci
> news:hknsgj$9i$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> On Sun, 07 Feb 2010 11:18:16 +0100,
>> Szczepan Bialek [sz.b...@wp.pl] wrote:
>>
>> > "Benj" <bja...@iwaynet.net> wrote
>> >
news:0165ed79-20a7-423d...@n33g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
>> > On Feb 6, 10:56 am, "KONCHOK.PENDAY" <K...@net-prophet.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >>> The difficulty is resolved when you realize that
>> >>
>> >>> AETHER IS A GAS, IN MOTION LIKE ALL OTHER GASSES!
>> >>
>> >>> THAT'S ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW!
>>
>>> > No it's not. Gasses do not transmit transverse waves.
>>
>>> > Hence aether is NOT a true gas.
>> >
>> > Transverse components are in all medium.
>>
>> That's very interesting.
>>
>> How does
>> "Gasses do not transmit transverse waves." comport with
>> "Transverse components are in all medium."?
>
> The monopole (pulsator) generate only the longitudinal waves. If the
> source is like the dipole then the transversal components appears.
Thanks!
>> As I understand it, Steve
>> shows there are no exclusively
>> tranverse waves either, and
>> all waves have some
>> longitudial component.
>
> Steve is right here.
WAY COOL!
I had never heard that before,
but his argument was convincing
to me. I'm glad you agree!
>> Maybe the distinction is false?
>>
>> I have enormous respect
>> for your aether expertise.
>>
>> Have you read A-D?
>
> Is the abstract available?
No. The only way to get it
now is to BUY it in paper!
It's $29.50 plus shipping,
and has a CD of A-K too!
http://www.amazon.com/Aethro-dynamics-Steven-Rado/dp/0966757181
I know you are familiar with A-K!
A-D goes WAY BEYOND IT!
DON'T MISS OUT!
>> I love to read
>> your review of it!
[... snip ... ]
OK!
>> >> > This raised the problem as to how solid matter can move freely
>> >> > though the solid Aether.
>> >>
>> >>> IT CANNOT! THE AETHER IS A GAS!
>> >
>> >
>> >>THIS IS A HUGE CATASTROPHIC ERROR! (to coin a phrase!)
>>
>> > Gasses DO NOT transmit shear forces.
>>
>> ???? "Transverse components are in all medium."
>>
>> > Hence aether must be some kind of
>> > super-fluid capable of gas-like flow and at the same time capable
>> > of shear forces. Stored magnetic energy requires this.
>>
>> What magnetic energy is not stored?
>> I'm not understanding this.
>
> Magnetism is an illusion. The aether must store the electric energy
> (electrostatics) in form of stresses and at the same time be capable
> to creep with the planets. It must be like Stokes jelly.
As far as I can see,
Aethro-Dynamics fully
explains all magnetic
phenomena! Check it out!
>> > Yes. Stokes known that and his aether is like jelly. S*
>>
>> Thanks for writing!
>>
>> I'd love to see
>> your review of A-D!
Thanks for writing!
O
--- )
\
KONCHOK PENDAY
EDITOR, A-D
NEWSGROUPS:
alt.ucp,alt.conspiracy,alt.sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories
PERMALINK: http://net-prophet.net/?p=1881
Szczepan Bialek
"KONCHOK.PENDAY" <K...@net-prophet.net> wrote
news:hkpk0q$g7$1...@news.eternal-september.org...>>> > "Benj" <bja...@iwaynet.net> wrote
>>>
>>> > Hence aether must be some kind of
>>> > super-fluid capable of gas-like flow and at the same time capable
>>> > of shear forces. Stored magnetic energy requires this.
>>>
>>> What magnetic energy is not stored?
>>> I'm not understanding this.
>>
>> Magnetism is an illusion. The aether must store the electric energy
>> (electrostatics) in form of stresses and at the same time be capable
>> to creep with the planets. It must be like Stokes jelly.
>
> As far as I can see,
> Aethro-Dynamics fully
> explains all magnetic
> phenomena! Check it out!
In Nature is many things difficult to describe. For this reason in teaching
program must be many simplifications. The most important is the seperate
description of gravity, elecricity and magnetism. But in the space is the
place for only one mechanism. So for teaching purposes somebody must "fully
explains all magnetic phenomena" and after teaching hours thinks on
"Unification of gravity, electricity and magnetism". When it will be ready
the teaching program adopt it.
>
>>> > Yes. Stokes known that and his aether is like jelly. S*
The minor simplification is "no aether" in place of Stokes aether. The
motionless aether is simple to describe and students can fascinate SR.
S*
KONCHOK.PENDAY
Szczepan Bialek [sz.b...@wp.pl] wrote:
> "KONCHOK.PENDAY" <K...@net-prophet.net> wrote
> news:hkpk0q$g7$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> On Mon, 08 Feb 2010 10:53:12 +0100,
>> Szczepan Bialek [sz.b...@wp.pl] wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > "Benj" <bja...@iwaynet.net> wrote
>>>>
>>>> > Hence aether must be some kind of
>>>> > of super-fluid capable of gas-like flow and at the
>>>> > same time capable shear forces. Stored magnetic
>>>> > energy requires this.
>>>> What magnetic energy is not stored?
>>>> I'm not understanding this.
>>>
>>> Magnetism is an illusion. The aether must store the electric energy
>>> (electrostatics) in form of stresses and at the same time be capable
>>> to creep with the planets. It must be like Stokes jelly.
Steve's electrostatics model
left me in dumbfounded AWE!
His SUPER-SIMPLE model makes
STUNNING predictions which are
CONFIRMED by the latest research
on scotch-tape vacuum X-rays!
WOW! Reading IS believing!
>> As far as I can see,
>> Aethro-Dynamics fully
>> explains all magnetic
>> phenomena! Check it out!
>
> In Nature is many things difficult to describe. For this
> reason in teaching program must be many simplifications.
YES!
I agree!
Steve has introduced MANY SIMPLIFICATIONS!
HE ACTUALLY EXPLAINS EXACTLY HOW IT WORKS!
Not knowing is VERY complex!
> The most important is the
> seperate description of gravity, elecricity and magnetism.
YES!
Steve carefully sorts them out!
> But in the space is the place for only one mechanism.
So do we want gravity, OR
electricity, OR magnetism?
WHY CAN'T WE
HAVE ALL THREE?
> So for teaching purposes somebody must "fully explains
> all magnetic phenomena" and after teaching hours thinks
> on "Unification of gravity, electricity and magnetism".
> When it will be ready the teaching program adopt it.
As far as I can tell,
Steve has delivered it!
I can't see any flaws!
I'd be VERY interested
in your evaluation!
Maybe I am missing something?
>>>> > Yes. Stokes known that and his aether is like jelly. S*
>
> The minor simplification is "no aether" in place of Stokes aether. The
> motionless aether is simple to describe and students can fascinate SR.
WHO CARES ABOUT "SPECIAL RELATIVITY"?
Flushing twice takes care
of everything but the odor!
S*
Motionless solid aether may be simple to describe,
but it didn't work at all for Michaelson-Morely!
Or anybody else either!
Maybe Steve's moving gas is the answer?
I'd LOVE to see your evaluation!
I THINK YOU MIGHT LIKE IT A LOT!
You certainly have ALL the
intellectual tools to test it!
Briefly set aside your certainty
that T. Stokes 1848 jelly-aether
is the only possible solution!
You can always reassert
it after you read Steve!
http://www.amazon.com/Aethro-dynamics-Steven-Rado/dp/0966757181
I have a lot of faith in you,
that you can't be fooled by crap!
GIVE US YOUR JUDGMENT!
O
--- )
\
KONCHOK PENDAY
EDITOR, A-D
NEWSGROUPS:
alt.ucp,alt.conspiracy,alt.sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories
PERMALINK: http://net-prophet.net/?p=1887
Szczepan Bialek
"KONCHOK.PENDAY" <K...@net-prophet.net> wrote
news:hksad0$gao$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
The three were, are and will be for the kids (for teaching).
If we understand the Nature we can build the artifical model.
Aepinus proved that gravity and electrostatics are the same.
Ampere built the artifical magnet (solenoid) and proved that the magnetism
is the electric field of the moving electric charges.
So, electricity is a winner.
>
> > So for teaching purposes somebody must "fully explains
> > all magnetic phenomena" and after teaching hours thinks
> > on "Unification of gravity, electricity and magnetism".
> > When it will be ready the teaching program adopt it.
>
> As far as I can tell,
> Steve has delivered it!
>
> I can't see any flaws!
Teachers will decide, not we.
>
> I'd be VERY interested
> in your evaluation!
>
> Maybe I am missing something?
>
> >>>> > Yes. Stokes known that and his aether is like jelly. S*
> >
> > The minor simplification is "no aether" in place of Stokes aether. The
> > motionless aether is simple to describe and students can fascinate SR.
>
> WHO CARES ABOUT "SPECIAL RELATIVITY"?
>
> Flushing twice takes care
> of everything but the odor!
>
> S*
>
> Motionless solid aether may be simple to describe,
> but it didn't work at all for Michaelson-Morely!
>
> Or anybody else either!
>
> Maybe Steve's moving gas is the answer?
>
> I'd LOVE to see your evaluation!
Everything must be confirmed by experiments. Up to now Michelson confirmed
in 1887 that the giant whirl around the Sun exists and in 1925 that no whirl
around the Earth.
In gas should be many small whirls. Somebody must made the artifical one and
measure the speed of light in the aether flow.
>
> I THINK YOU MIGHT LIKE IT A LOT!
>
> You certainly have ALL the
> intellectual tools to test it!
It must be done in a laboratory.
>
> Briefly set aside your certainty
> that T. Stokes 1848 jelly-aether
> is the only possible solution!
Copernicus solution is older and is the only solution. Stokes in 1848 had
the all necessary data to find the only solution.
>
> You can always reassert
> it after you read Steve!
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Aethro-dynamics-Steven-Rado/dp/0966757181
>
> I have a lot of faith in you,
> that you can't be fooled by crap!
>
> GIVE US YOUR JUDGMENT!
From "About the Author":
Steven " became convinced that the intellectual liberation of humanity is a
direct function of the evolution of science and technology and thus depends
on the level of understanding physics."
Physics for kids and for NASA must be different.
" Hence, he spent most of the free moments of his adult life by researching
and trying to understand the occult theories of physics, particularly the
the general acceptance of Newton's 'action at a distance' and the modern
perplexities, postulated by Relativity and Quantum mechanics. The result of
the decades of research and thinking is, the book and CD-ROM published in
1995: An alternate solution to the problems of modern physics,
'Aethro-kinematics'."
May be that teachers adopt some from Steve.
"But Steven Rado realized that the book and the CD was only the first
volume of a more complete and simpler conceptional comprehension of Nature.
Thus, he never quit researching and pondering on a second volume;
'Aethro-dynamics'. This treatise claims to be the final reinstatement of
commonsense in physics with the firm conviction that it was able to solve
all obscure mysteries of the past centuries. In this respect, Steven Rado's
life maybe completed with a revolutionary victory.... "
Maxwell is famous because did something different (perfect solid aether)
than Stokes. Steve did something different than Maxwell (gaseous aether).
Steven is also famous.
S*
Benj
> >> Start ANY electric motor.
> >> Measure the current required
> >> to bring it up to speed.
> >> Turn it off. Let it stop.
> >> Start it right back up again.
> >> Measure the current it draws.
> >> It's much less this time!
> >> Turn it off. Wait a minute.
> >> Start it up again!
> >> Now it draws full power again!
> >> When the motor is running,
> >> the motor creates an aether vortex.
> >> After a minute, the vortex dissipates!
> >>
> >> A six year old can do that!
> >
> > Perhaps. But if this is so obvious
> > then why have I never observed it
>
> Maybe you just didn't bother
> to actually DO the testing?
Obviously I'd first have to be convinced that there were actual
theoretical reasons to DO the testing. I would point out the
disconnect above from your experiment and your explanation of it.
What we have evidence of is thermal effects in the motor such as a
change in wire resistance due to heating. So you start with the motor
cold and it draws a certain current. Next time it's warm from the
first start and resistance is higher and it draws less current. Allow
it to sit for a time and it cools down and bingo it draws more current
again. No aether "vortexes" in sight. A six year old can do the
experiment, but it takes a full adult to really misinterpret the data!
Maybe you just didn't bother to actually DO the thinking?
KONCHOK.PENDAY
Szczepan Bialek [sz.b...@wp.pl] wrote:
What about physicists and electrical engineers?
THEY NEED IT MUCH MORE!
They might be VERY interested!
> If we understand the Nature we can build the artifical model.
Why not the NATURAL model of nature?
> Aepinus proved that gravity and electrostatics are the same.
????
I don't know him, but
I think he's DEAD WRONG!
> Ampere built the artifical magnet (solenoid) and proved
> that the magnetism is the electric field of the moving
> electric charges. So, electricity is a winner.
Yes.
>> > So for teaching purposes somebody must "fully explains all magnetic
>> > phenomena" and after teaching hours thinks on "Unification of
>> > gravity, electricity and magnetism". When it will be ready the
>> > teaching program adopt it.
>>
>> As far as I can tell,
>> Steve has delivered it!
>>
>> I can't see any flaws!
> Teachers will decide, not we.
WHAT "teachers"?
Are you refusing to teach?
Few know more than you!
But you haven't read Rado's Aethro-dynamics either!
>> I'd be VERY interested
>> in your evaluation!
>>
>> Maybe I am missing something?
>> >>>> > Yes. Stokes known that and his aether is like jelly. S*
>> >
>> > The minor simplification is "no aether" in place of Stokes aether.
>> > The motionless aether is simple to describe and students
>> > can fascinate SR.
>>
>> WHO CARES ABOUT "SPECIAL RELATIVITY"?
>>
>> Flushing twice takes care
>> of everything but the odor!
>>
>> S*
>>
>> Motionless solid aether may be simple to describe,
>> but it didn't work at all for Michaelson-Morely!
>>
>> Or anybody else either!
>>
>> Maybe Steve's moving gas is the answer?
>>
>> I'd LOVE to see your evaluation!
>
> Everything must be confirmed by experiments.
Steve's electrostatics model and predictions are
EXACTLY confirmed by the latest scotch tape x-rays!
READ ALL ABOUT IT!
> Up to now Michelson confirmed in 1887 that the
> giant whirl around the Sun exists and in 1925
> that no whirl around the Earth.
???? What did he do in 1887?
I'm not familiar with that.
I don't think he proved ANYTHING about the earth-whirl!
His solid-motionless aether theory was bunk,
and his experiment was badly misdesigned!
> In gas should be many small whirls.
YES! There are!
EVERY particle is a whirl!
And there are BIG whirls too!
> Somebody must made the artifical one and
> measure the speed of light in the aether flow.
ALL light is "in the aether flow"!
>> I THINK YOU MIGHT LIKE IT A LOT!
>>
>> You certainly have ALL the
>> intellectual tools to test it!
> It must be done in a laboratory.
THEN READ IT IN A LABORATORY!
Laboratories are ALREADY confirming
Steve's amazing electrostatic model!
>> Briefly set aside your certainty
>> that T. Stokes 1848 jelly-aether
>> is the only possible solution!
> Copernicus solution is older and is the only solution.
???? I don't get that!
> Stokes in 1848 had the all necessary data to find the only solution.
But he didn't!
>> You can always reassert
>> it after you read Steve!
>> I have a lot of faith in you,
>> that you can't be fooled by crap!
>>
>> GIVE US YOUR JUDGMENT!
> From "About the Author":
> Steven " became convinced that the intellectual liberation
> of humanity is a direct function of the evolution of science
> and technology and thus depends on the level of understanding
> physics."
As far as I know,
he succeeded brilliantly
where everybody else failed!
> Physics for kids and for NASA must be different.
???? WHY? Do they live in different universes?
> "Hence, he spent most of the free moments of his adult life by
> researching and trying to understand the occult theories of physics,
> particularly the the general acceptance of Newton's 'action at a
> distance' and the modern perplexities, postulated by Relativity
> and Quantum mechanics. The result of the decades of research and
> thinking is, the book and CD-ROM published in 1995: An alternate
> solution to the problems of modern physics, 'Aethro-kinematics'."
>
> May be that teachers adopt some from Steve.
MAYBE!
BUT THEY HAVE TO
READ HIM FIRST!
> "But Steven Rado realized that the book and the CD was only the first
> volume of a more complete and simpler conceptional comprehension of
> Nature. Thus, he never quit researching and pondering on a second
> volume; 'Aethro-dynamics'. This treatise claims to be the final
> reinstatement of commonsense in physics with the firm conviction
> that it was able to solve all obscure mysteries of the past centuries.
> In this respect, Steven Rado's life maybe completed with a
> revolutionary victory.... "
I see him as the greatest
thinker man has produced yet.
So far, you seem to think
he's not worth reading!
I really wish you would reconsider!
> Maxwell is famous because did something different
> (perfect solid aether) than Stokes. Steve did something
> different than Maxwell (gaseous aether).
> Steven is also famous.
> S*
BUT YOU DO NOT KNOW HIS A-D THEORY!
Therefore you cannot teach it!
So far, only three people
have read his new book!
Two people think that it's a
groundbreaking MUST READ.
Another gave it a 1/5 rating,
and said A-K was much better,
which I do not understand at all.
It's a damn shame
you are missing out!
http://www.amazon.com/Aethro-dynamics-Steven-Rado/dp/0966757181
I had expected you to
be the first to rave:
you have the whole history!
O
--- )
\
KONCHOK PENDAY
EDITOR, A-D
NEWSGROUPS:
alt.ucp,alt.conspiracy,alt.sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories
PERMALINK: http://net-prophet.net/?p=1895
Szczepan Bialek
"KONCHOK.PENDAY" <K...@net-prophet.net> wrote
news:hkvlqn$3bl$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 20:32:47 +0100,
> Szczepan Bialek [sz.b...@wp.pl] wrote:
>
> >>
> >> > But in the space is the place for only one mechanism.
> >>
> >> So do we want gravity, OR
> >> electricity, OR magnetism?
> >>
> >> WHY CAN'T WE
> >> HAVE ALL THREE?
> >
> > The three were, are and will be for the kids (for teaching).
>
> What about physicists and electrical engineers?
>
> THEY NEED IT MUCH MORE!
Engineers have Handbooks.
>
> They might be VERY interested!
>
> > If we understand the Nature we can build the artifical model.
>
> Why not the NATURAL model of nature?
>
> > Aepinus proved that gravity and electrostatics are the same.
>
> ????
> I don't know him,
"In the 1937
Encyclopaedia Britannica article on electricity it says 'Aepinus
(1724-1802) also suggested that the attractive forces between two
uncharged bodies might be very slightly greater than the repulsive
forces and that this difference might be the cause of gravitation.'
>but I think he's DEAD WRONG!
>
> > Ampere built the artifical magnet (solenoid) and proved
> > that the magnetism is the electric field of the moving
> > electric charges. So, electricity is a winner.
>
> Yes.
>
> >> > So for teaching purposes somebody must "fully explains all magnetic
> >> > phenomena" and after teaching hours thinks on "Unification of
> >> > gravity, electricity and magnetism". When it will be ready the
> >> > teaching program adopt it.
> >>
> >> As far as I can tell,
> >> Steve has delivered it!
> >>
> >> I can't see any flaws!
>
> > Teachers will decide, not we.
>
> WHAT "teachers"?
They do not hurry. Copernicus solution they adopted after 250 years.
>
> Are you refusing to teach?
>
> Few know more than you!
NASA engineers.
>
> But you haven't read Rado's Aethro-dynamics either!
>
> >
> > Everything must be confirmed by experiments.
>
> Steve's electrostatics model and predictions are
> EXACTLY confirmed by the latest scotch tape x-rays!
>
> READ ALL ABOUT IT!
>
> > Up to now Michelson confirmed in 1887 that the
> > giant whirl around the Sun exists and in 1925
> > that no whirl around the Earth.
>
> ???? What did he do in 1887?
> I'm not familiar with that.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_the_Relative_Motion_of_the_Earth_and_the_Luminiferous_Ether
>
> I don't think he proved ANYTHING about the earth-whirl!
> His solid-motionless aether theory was bunk,
> and his experiment was badly misdesigned!
You should read the original paper.
>
> > In gas should be many small whirls.
>
> YES! There are!
> EVERY particle is a whirl!
> And there are BIG whirls too!
>
> > Somebody must made the artifical one and
> > measure the speed of light in the aether flow.
>
> ALL light is "in the aether flow"!
>
> >> I THINK YOU MIGHT LIKE IT A LOT!
> >>
> >> You certainly have ALL the
> >> intellectual tools to test it!
>
> > It must be done in a laboratory.
>
> THEN READ IT IN A LABORATORY!
>
> Laboratories are ALREADY confirming
> Steve's amazing electrostatic model!
>
> >> Briefly set aside your certainty
> >> that T. Stokes 1848 jelly-aether
> >> is the only possible solution!
>
> > Copernicus solution is older and is the only solution.
>
> ???? I don't get that!
The only possible solution may be found many years ago.
They do not hurry. Copernicus solution they adopted after 250 years.
>
> > "But Steven Rado realized that the book and the CD was only the first
> > volume of a more complete and simpler conceptional comprehension of
> > Nature. Thus, he never quit researching and pondering on a second
> > volume; 'Aethro-dynamics'. This treatise claims to be the final
> > reinstatement of commonsense in physics with the firm conviction
> > that it was able to solve all obscure mysteries of the past centuries.
> > In this respect, Steven Rado's life maybe completed with a
> > revolutionary victory.... "
>
> I see him as the greatest
> thinker man has produced yet.
>
> So far, you seem to think
> he's not worth reading!
Quite opposite. In such Treatise are description of phenomenon and
explanations of them. Everybody who wants to know the all phenomena shoud
read the Maxwell, Tombe, Rado and the rest.
Authors miss this phenomena which do not fit to their explanations.
>
> I really wish you would reconsider!
>
> > Maxwell is famous because did something different
> > (perfect solid aether) than Stokes. Steve did something
> > different than Maxwell (gaseous aether).
> > Steven is also famous.
> > S*
>
> BUT YOU DO NOT KNOW HIS A-D THEORY!
>
> Therefore you cannot teach it!
>
> So far, only three people
> have read his new book!
>
> Two people think that it's a
> groundbreaking MUST READ.
> Another gave it a 1/5 rating,
> and said A-K was much better,
> which I do not understand at all.
>
> It's a damn shame
> you are missing out!
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Aethro-dynamics-Steven-Rado/dp/0966757181
>
> I had expected you to
> be the first to rave:
> you have the whole history!
I do. Rado is the only who write nowadays that the aether rotate together
with the planets around the Sun. The rest are details.
The waves are the important details. The physical waves - not the harmonic.
Take glance at Stokes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stokes_drift
S*
KONCHOK.PENDAY
Szczepan Bialek [sz.b...@wp.pl] wrote:
How can you suggest that after reading A-K?
>>but I think he's DEAD WRONG!
>>
>> > Ampere built the artifical magnet (solenoid) and proved that the
>> > magnetism is the electric field of the moving electric charges. So,
>> > electricity is a winner.
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>> >> > So for teaching purposes somebody must "fully explains all magnetic
>> >> > phenomena" and after teaching hours thinks on "Unification of
>> >> > gravity, electricity and magnetism". When it will be ready the
>> >> > teaching program adopt it.
>> >>
>> >> As far as I can tell,
>> >> Steve has delivered it!
>> >>
>> >> I can't see any flaws!
>>
>> > Teachers will decide, not we.
>>
>> WHAT "teachers"?
>
> They do not hurry. Copernicus solution they adopted after 250 years.
>>
>> Are you refusing to teach?
>>
>> Few know more than you!
>
> NASA engineers.
We're not talking about
rockets and orbits here:
just physics and gravity.
>> But you haven't read Rado's Aethro-dynamics either!
>>
>>
>> > Everything must be confirmed by experiments.
>>
>> Steve's electrostatics model and predictions are EXACTLY confirmed by
>> the latest scotch tape x-rays!
>>
>> READ ALL ABOUT IT!
>>
>> > Up to now Michelson confirmed in 1887 that the giant whirl around the
>> > Sun exists and in 1925 that no whirl around the Earth.
>>
>> ???? What did he do in 1887?
>> I'm not familiar with that.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_the_Relative_Motion_of_the_Earth_and_the_Luminiferous_Ether
Thanks for this cite!
A fascinating historical document!
But he thinks the earth is IMPERMEABLE
to the aether! His aether model is
very primitive and full of errors!
I admire the glacial equanimity
of of your view of history.
Steve thinks it might take a
thousand years to catch on.
I WANT HIM TO GET
THE NOBEL PRIZE
WHILE HE IS ALIVE!
IT'S THE VERY LEAST WE OWE HIM!
Why not discover him
WHILE YOU ARE ALIVE?
>> > "But Steven Rado realized that the book and the CD was only the first
>> > volume of a more complete and simpler conceptional comprehension of
>> > Nature. Thus, he never quit researching and pondering on a second
>> > volume; 'Aethro-dynamics'. This treatise claims to be the final
>> > reinstatement of commonsense in physics with the firm conviction that
>> > it was able to solve all obscure mysteries of the past centuries. In
>> > this respect, Steven Rado's life maybe completed with a revolutionary
>> > victory.... "
>>
>> I see him as the greatest
>> thinker man has produced yet.
>>
>> So far, you seem to think
>> he's not worth reading!
>
> Quite opposite. In such Treatise are description of phenomenon and
> explanations of them. Everybody who wants to know the all phenomena
> shoud read the Maxwell, Tombe, Rado and the rest. Authors miss this
> phenomena which do not fit to their explanations.
FANTASTIC!
I'll shut up until you
render your verdict :-)
>> I really wish you would reconsider!
THANKS!
>> > Maxwell is famous because did something different (perfect solid
>> > aether) than Stokes. Steve did something different than Maxwell
>> > (gaseous aether). Steven is also famous.
>> > S*
>>
>> BUT YOU DO NOT KNOW HIS A-D THEORY!
>>
>> Therefore you cannot teach it!
>>
>> So far, only three people
>> have read his new book!
>>
>> Two people think that it's a
>> groundbreaking MUST READ.
>> Another gave it a 1/5 rating,
>> and said A-K was much better,
>> which I do not understand at all.
>>
>> It's a damn shame
>> you are missing out!
>>
>> http://www.amazon.com/Aethro-dynamics-Steven-Rado/dp/0966757181
>>
>> I had expected you to
>> be the first to rave:
>> you have the whole history!
>
> I do. Rado is the only who write nowadays that the
> aether rotate together with the planets around the Sun.
> The rest are details. The waves are the
> important details. The physical waves - not the harmonic.
FANTASTIC!
> Take glance at Stokes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stokes_drift S*
WHOA!
That's a lot to take in!
Thanks for the reference.
Thanks for replying!
I'll be sure to
look for your
Rado Review, in
about 250 years!
O
--- )
\
KONCHOK PENDAY
EDITOR, A-D
NEWSGROUPS:
alt.ucp,alt.conspiracy,alt.sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.new-theories
PERMALINK: http://net-prophet.net/?p=1907
Szczepan Bialek
"KONCHOK.PENDAY" <K...@net-prophet.net> wrote
news:hl284o$ht9$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:05:40 +0100,
> Szczepan Bialek [sz.b...@wp.pl] wrote:
>
> > "In the 1937
> > Encyclopaedia Britannica article on electricity it says 'Aepinus
> > (1724-1802) also suggested that the attractive forces between two
> > uncharged bodies might be very slightly greater than the repulsive
> > forces and that this difference might be the cause of gravitation.'
>
> How can you suggest that after reading A-K?
I have read Maxwell, F.D. Tombe and Rado. Their aether is full of
picowhirls. It is very interesting.
Everybody should read.
But in Kelvin aether are only stresess. It is the simplest aether.
>
> >>
> >> Few know more than you!
> >
> > NASA engineers.
>
> We're not talking about
> rockets and orbits here:
> just physics and gravity.
They know what aether is like. Physicists no.
>
> >> ???? What did he do in 1887?
> >> I'm not familiar with that.
>
> http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_the_Relative_Motion_of_the_Earth_and_the_Luminiferous_Ether
>
> Thanks for this cite!
> A fascinating historical document!
> But he thinks the earth is IMPERMEABLE
> to the aether! His aether model is
> very primitive and full of errors!
It will be obvious after 250 years.
>
> >>
> >> BUT THEY HAVE TO
> >> READ HIM FIRST!
> >
> > They do not hurry. Copernicus solution they adopted after 250 years.
>
> I admire the glacial equanimity
> of of your view of history.
> Steve thinks it might take a
> thousand years to catch on.
>
> I WANT HIM TO GET
> THE NOBEL PRIZE
> WHILE HE IS ALIVE!
>
> IT'S THE VERY LEAST WE OWE HIM!
Teachers decide.
>
> Why not discover him
> WHILE YOU ARE ALIVE?
He is known. In Internet time no unknown.
S*