Luminiferous Aether Exists!

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by Mazulu, Jun 19, 2012.

  1. gravitational_aether Banned Banned

    Messages:
    356
    The Michelson-Morley experiment looked for an absolutely stationary space which the Earth moved through. The aether is not an absolutely stationary space. Aether is displaced by matter.

    The Milky Way's halo is assumed to be non-baryonic dark matter anchored to the Milky Way. The Milky Way's halo is not non-baryonic dark matter anchored to the Milky Way. The Milky Way is moving through and displacing the aether. The aether is not anchored to the Milky Way.

    The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether.

    The Milky Way's halo is what Einstein referred to as curved spacetime.

    Curved spacetime is the state of displacement of the aether.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    There is no aether dummy. So any explanation you conjure up is bs. There's an explanation based on real natural phenomena. I don't know the answer but I'm sure your nonsense bs isn't it. You just make assertions that you claim are facts. Over and over people tell you to stuff it. If it wasn't for the internet you'd have to stand on a street corner soapbox while folks throw spoiled veggies at you.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Prof.Layman totally internally reflected Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    982
    If aether is displaced by matter, then wouldn't this displacement then be anchored to it? In other words, where matter is curving space towards a gravitational body, then wouldn't that curvature follow along with that gravitational body? I think that it could be possible for galaxies to experience less curvature if there was a change in their rotation, or a different amount of frame dragging. I heard they have found proof for frame dragging and this has been measured to happen even on the Earth, and it is caused by the Earths rotation.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. gravitational_aether Banned Banned

    Messages:
    356
    So, you still can't explain why the 'dark matter' is being left behind when galaxy clusters collide.

    'Dark Matter Core Defies Explanation in NASA Hubble Image'
    http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2012/mar/HQ_12-068_Hubble_Dark_Core.html

    "This technique revealed the dark matter in Abell 520 had collected into a "dark core," containing far fewer galaxies than would be expected if the dark matter and galaxies were anchored together. Most of the galaxies apparently have sailed far away from the collision. "This result is a puzzle," said astronomer James Jee of the University of California in Davis, lead author of paper about the results available online in The Astrophysical Journal. "Dark matter is not behaving as predicted, and it's not obviously clear what is going on. It is difficult to explain this Hubble observation with the current theories of galaxy formation and dark matter.""

    The dark matter core does not defy explanation. The dark matter core is not a puzzle. The dark matter core is not difficult to explain. It is obviously clear what is going on.

    There is nothing to 'leave behind'. Non-baryonic dark matter was never anchored to the matter in the first place. There is no such thing as non-baryonic dark matter. Matter moves through and displaces the aether.
     
  8. gravitational_aether Banned Banned

    Messages:
    356
    The 'curvature' would follow along with the body. However, it is not the 'same' aether moving along with the matter.

    You are in a bowling alley filled with a supersolid. As you roll the ball toward the pins the supersolid is displaced by the bowling ball. It is not the 'same' supersolid which is continually displaced by the bowling ball. The bowling ball moves through and displaces the supersolid. The bowling ball continually displaces the supersolid which had existed where the bowling ball now does. The supersolid continually fills-in where the bowling ball had been.

    The analogy of a bowling ball displacing a supersolid as it moves through the supersolid is completely different than the notion of non-baryonic dark matter being anchored to matter. Non-baryonic dark matter anchored to matter means it is the same non-baryonic dark matter traveling with the matter.

    Objects move through and displace the aether.

    Watch the following video starting at 0:45 to see a visual representation of the state of the aether. What is referred to as a twist in spacetime is the state of displacement of the aether. What is referred to as frame-dragging is the state of displacement of the aether.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9ITt44-EHE

    The analogy is putting a mesh bag full of marbles into a supersolid and spinning the bag of marbles. If you were unable to determine if the superfluid consists of particles or not you would still be able to detect the state of displacement of the supersolid.

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

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

    The state of which as determined by its connections with the Earth and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the state of displacement of the aether.
     
  9. Prof.Layman totally internally reflected Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    982
    But say, you took a trip to the North Pole. You take a plane there to find out if Santa Claus is for real. Then you tell the pilot to travel at a constant speed the whole trip. He does a fantastic job at this and you didn't feel any bumps in the ride at all or any real forces of acceleration. You get lost on the North Pole and then you try to determine your position by the amount of acceleration you felt during the flight. You factor in your velocity with the Earths rotation, and then you realize you must have change in velocity by thousands of miles per hour. But, you didn't feel any of the forces of acceleration getting to the North Pole. So then where are ya? I think the notion that you could even travel at a constant velocity to the North Pole, means that non-baryonic dark matter would have to be anchored to matter. You would have disobayed one of the primary premis of relativity. You would have made a drastic acceleration and would not have felt it. You would have accelerated and not been able to distinguish it from constant motion. Simply by traveling at a constant speed to the pole of a sphere. It will act as though it was truely constant regardless of the motions of the Earth.
     
  10. gravitational_aether Banned Banned

    Messages:
    356
    Watch the following video starting at 0:45 to see a visual representation of the state of the aether. What is referred to as a twist in spacetime is the state of displacement of the aether. What is referred to as frame-dragging is the state of displacement of the aether.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9ITt44-EHE

    The analogy is putting a mesh bag full of marbles into a supersolid and spinning the bag of marbles. If you were unable to determine if the superfluid consists of particles or not you would still be able to detect the state of displacement of the supersolid.

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

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

    The state of which as determined by its connections with the Earth and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the state of displacement of the aether.
     
  11. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    You see, you don't get any kind of answer, just a repost of a repost.
     
  12. gravitational_aether Banned Banned

    Messages:
    356
    If you were making any effort at all to actually participate in the discussion you would have noticed Prof.Layman responded to my post prior to me adding the part about the video.

    However, for some reason you and a bunch of others who keep jumping into this thread think you have some type of knowledge at the same time you can't explain something as simple as why the 'dark matter' is being left behind when galaxy clusters collide. Physics today is like the book 1984 where ignorance is knowledge. You, and a bunch of others, can't explain what occurs physically in nature for such simple physical phenomenon as gravity and the observed behaviors in a double slit experiment yet you insist your ignorance in understanding such simple physical phenomenon is knowledge.

    Aether has mass. Aether physically occupies three dimensional space. Aether is physically displaced by matter. Displaced aether pushes back and exerts inward pressure toward matter.

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

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

    The notion 'dark matter' is anchored to matter has been refuted. What causes your inability to understand this?

    You can't explain why the 'dark matter' is being left behind when galaxy clusters collide. From some reason you believe this ignorance of yours makes you knowledgable.

    'Dark Matter Core Defies Explanation in NASA Hubble Image'
    http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2012/mar/HQ_12-068_Hubble_Dark_Core.html

    "This technique revealed the dark matter in Abell 520 had collected into a "dark core," containing far fewer galaxies than would be expected if the dark matter and galaxies were anchored together. Most of the galaxies apparently have sailed far away from the collision. "This result is a puzzle," said astronomer James Jee of the University of California in Davis, lead author of paper about the results available online in The Astrophysical Journal. "Dark matter is not behaving as predicted, and it's not obviously clear what is going on. It is difficult to explain this Hubble observation with the current theories of galaxy formation and dark matter.""

    The dark matter core does not defy explanation. The dark matter core is not a puzzle. The dark matter core is not difficult to explain. It is obviously clear what is going on.

    There is nothing to 'leave behind'. Non-baryonic dark matter was never anchored to the matter in the first place. There is no such thing as non-baryonic dark matter. Matter moves through and displaces the aether.
     
  13. Aqueous Id flat Earth skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,152
    In science, you don't get to force a conclusion into a question. Dark matter is the explanation, get it? Dark matter is the conjecture that has been around since just a few decades after Michelson-Morley, to explain phenomena that do not yet have a better explanation. Aether is not, and never was, in any way ever related to dark matter, and nothing about this cite supports your absurd beliefs. Therefore, to try to assert -- that some of the pending mystery about the phenomena that gave rise to the dark matter conjecture -- is problematic to the existence of dark matter, is ludicrous. Aether, no matter how many ways you cook it, can never apply to explaining phenomena that dark matter explains. To suggest this simply means you have no idea what those phenomena are. This parallels your ignorance that electromagnetics explains the bending of the magnetic field we call the heliosphere, by the impingement of the interstellar medium (which means particles, not aether). Most people wouldn't be expected to know this kind of esoterica. But you're calling scientists ignorant. And yet you aren't even aware of freshman concepts, such as F=qVxB -- facts essential to making an informed statement of opinion on a subject you are pretending to master.

    Until you can frame the question objectively, and in the context of the phenomenon that was actually reported in the cite you mangled, it remains a bogus question. First you need to ask yourself what led to the conclusion; what was the actual data that brought scientists to raise the question in this cite? That's your downfall. You seem to have no foundation in science at all.

    Only for a Bonaparte of the Heliosphere. Real science sticks with real observations, and sends narcissism to the shrink.

    I'm quite certain you have no idea what you just said.

    You might want to start with demonstrating a working knowledge of non-baryonic matter, and the reason it's a candidate for dark matter, and why dark matter ever came up in the first place. Minus that, this is all merely (to quote AlexG) "word salad".

    If that were true, you could specify the displacement in meters. You can't because it doesn't.

    "Displacement" is meaningless. The operative word you are avoiding is "collision". Collisions would cause friction, and we would measure it as a deceleration due to friction of spacecraft. We would know the mass in kg, the density of aether and we would speak of its coefficient of friction, none of which appear anywhere in the scientific literature because it's spurious, unsupported by fact, and controverted by direct evidence.

    This is all just dreaming. When you wake up, you will be in the real world, with a science text in your hand.
     
  14. gravitational_aether Banned Banned

    Messages:
    356
    So, you still can't understand superfluid and supersolid mean a frictionless interaction with objects which exist in it. Not no interaction. A frictionless interaction. You are still unable to understand an object moving through a superfluid or a supersolid displaces it.

    So, you still can't explain why the 'dark matter' is being left behind when galaxy clusters collide.

    'Dark Matter Core Defies Explanation in NASA Hubble Image'
    http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2012/mar/HQ_12-068_Hubble_Dark_Core.html

    "This technique revealed the dark matter in Abell 520 had collected into a "dark core," containing far fewer galaxies than would be expected if the dark matter and galaxies were anchored together. Most of the galaxies apparently have sailed far away from the collision. "This result is a puzzle," said astronomer James Jee of the University of California in Davis, lead author of paper about the results available online in The Astrophysical Journal. "Dark matter is not behaving as predicted, and it's not obviously clear what is going on. It is difficult to explain this Hubble observation with the current theories of galaxy formation and dark matter.""

    The dark matter core does not defy explanation. The dark matter core is not a puzzle. The dark matter core is not difficult to explain. It is obviously clear what is going on.

    There is nothing to 'leave behind'. Non-baryonic dark matter was never anchored to the matter in the first place. There is no such thing as non-baryonic dark matter. Matter moves through and displaces the aether.
     
  15. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,804
    And yet a particle moving through it still can create a wave. Pretty remarkble stuff, this aether of yours, or as science would refer to it "complete bull shit".

    Nor can you (your arm waving inconsistent illogical gibberish is not an explanation).

    I would recommend ignoring all responses and simply reposting the same thing again - this has worked well for you up to this point!
    :crazy:
     
  16. gravitational_aether Banned Banned

    Messages:
    356
    If you roll a bowling ball through a tank filled with a superfluid, as the bowling ball passes by objects in the superfluid the superfluid is going to affect the objects. Stand up a bunch of feathers along the path the bowling ball travels similar to trees which align both sides of a street. The feathers are going to wave as the bowling ball passes by. This is evidence the state of the superfluid connected to and neighboring the feathers changes as the bowling ball rolls by. This is evidence of the associated superfluid displacement wave.

    So, you still can't understand superfluid and supersolid mean a frictionless interaction with objects which exist in it. Not no interaction. A frictionless interaction. You are still unable to understand an object moving through a superfluid or a supersolid displaces it.

    So, you still can't explain why the 'dark matter' is being left behind when galaxy clusters collide.

    'Dark Matter Core Defies Explanation in NASA Hubble Image'
    http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2012/mar/HQ_12-068_Hubble_Dark_Core.html

    "This technique revealed the dark matter in Abell 520 had collected into a "dark core," containing far fewer galaxies than would be expected if the dark matter and galaxies were anchored together. Most of the galaxies apparently have sailed far away from the collision. "This result is a puzzle," said astronomer James Jee of the University of California in Davis, lead author of paper about the results available online in The Astrophysical Journal. "Dark matter is not behaving as predicted, and it's not obviously clear what is going on. It is difficult to explain this Hubble observation with the current theories of galaxy formation and dark matter.""

    The dark matter core does not defy explanation. The dark matter core is not a puzzle. The dark matter core is not difficult to explain. It is obviously clear what is going on.

    There is nothing to 'leave behind'. Non-baryonic dark matter was never anchored to the matter in the first place. There is no such thing as non-baryonic dark matter. Matter moves through and displaces the aether.
     
  17. OnlyMe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,914
    You keep making this assertion. Perhaps you could explain exactly what "mass" is!
     
  18. gravitational_aether Banned Banned

    Messages:
    356
    Mass is that which physically occupies three dimensional space.
     
  19. OnlyMe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,914
    That explanation is itself pretty thin. It seems almost circular, in that one can only define 3D space by observations of the relative locations of objects having "mass".

    IE Mass is that which occupies space and space is that which lies between objects having mass. There are no great insights or answers to be had here.

    Could you be a bit more specific? Without space, what is mass?
     
  20. gravitational_aether Banned Banned

    Messages:
    356
    'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'
    http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html

    "Think of waves on the surface of water. Here we can describe two entirely different things. Either we may observe how the undulatory surface forming the boundary between water and air alters in the course of time; or else-with the help of small floats, for instance - we can observe how the position of the separate particles of water alters in the course of time. If the existence of such floats for tracking the motion of the particles of a fluid were a fundamental impossibility in physics - if, in fact nothing else whatever were observable than the shape of the space occupied by the water as it varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that water consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise it as a medium."

    if, in fact nothing else whatever were observable than the shape of the space occupied by the aether as it varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that aether consists of movable particles. But all the same we could charaterise it as a medium having mass.

    "Without space, what is mass" is a nonsensical question, especially when the definition of mass is that which physically occupies three dimensional space.

    Aether and matter have mass. As far as we know there is no space, nor any part of three dimensional space, devoid of mass.

    Mass is that which physically occupies three dimensional space. Aether has mass. Aether physically occupies three dimensional space. Which means aether is physically displaced by the objects which exist in it.

    Displaced aether is not at rest. Displaced aether pushes back and exerts inward pressure toward matter.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and the associated wave in the aether passes through both.
     
  21. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,804
    Really? You said there is no friction, where is the force that makes the feathers move?
     
  22. gravitational_aether Banned Banned

    Messages:
    356
    So, you still can't understand superfluid and supersolid mean a frictionless interaction with objects which exist in it. Not no interaction. A frictionless interaction. You are still unable to understand an object moving through a superfluid or a supersolid displaces it. You are still unable to understand a change in state of the superfluid changes the state of the object which exists in the superfluid, such as the feather next to the bowling ball.

    You are still unable to understand the definition of superfluid and supersolid. The definition is frictionless interaction. Frictionless interaction means no loss of energy in the interaction. Not no interaction.

    Are you able to understand a bowling ball rolling through a superfluid displaces the superfluid?
     
  23. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,804
    That is correct. Please give me a brief description of how a fluid that has zero viscosity and no friction can cause the feathers to 'wave' as you call it in your bowling ball example.
     

Share This Page