Aether Wave Theory - a new approach to the contemporary physics understanding

Reiku

12-01-07, 02:34 PM

As you might know, Einstein’s theory of Brownian movement became empirical evidence that atoms existed. Before this discovery, particles and forces where assumed not to exist - but this revolution showed us that we could observe atoms through microscopic-lensed telescopes.

Einstein was heavily influenced by his mathematical insights, and this gave him great understanding into the world of particle behaviour - this too must bring with it the forces that 'carry' these specific particles… This included a particular medium for all matter called the Aether.

What is 'Aether Theory' all about?
Einstein wrote a paper on what was called, 'The Investigation of the State of Aether in Magnetic Fields'. I find it a most interesting paper. I believe it was originally devised contemporaneously for [one] of his uncles.

Also known as 'Ether' from the Greek Word (aio'np), which basically means 'upper' or a.k.a. 'pure fresh air,' - it was believed to be an all-spacetime filling field. They refer its effects as a 'transmissional medium'. The Aether hypothesis has come in numerous forms, through the multiple interpretations throughout history.

The orthodox Aether Interpretation is that it is a physical force/medium that permeates every corner of spacetime thus indicating an influence on all materialistic bodies contained within all spacetime. Another result of Aether presents properties that give rise to the electric, magnetic and gravitational potentials, and also determines the propagating velocity of their effects.

It get's even more complex: it states that the propagating effects throughout all of the universe, are determined by the physical field of the Aether - which acts in a manor analogous to sound waves, such as the wave properties of a photon. Any developing propagation and potential effects within spacetime due to their velocities are viewed as having real effects. Thus, fundamental interactions depend on this Aether Force, in intrical ways.

The rippling or ''propagation'' of the Force of Aether also presents time directionality, reflected in the 'Radiative Arrow’ - found in quantum evolution. Though, the effect in velocities predicted by Aether indicates the possibility in the answering of matter formations, and the age discrepancies that haunt our observations of galactic formations.

This is as elementary as i can express it: Aether is a physically-interactive force field which acts as a mediator throughout all universal bodies - even between them in the vast Intergalactic Cosmological Medium - and like all 'mediums', if it exists, as i believe it does, must have fundamental attributes consisting of a pressure, a tension, a mass density and temperature.

Aether, as controversial as it has become to be known in the academic world, has played, as i believe, one of the biggest roles in the developing theories of the equally controversial quantum mechanics. And this is why: During the 19th century, the most elementary fundamental forces where known as electrical, magnetical and 'luminous' phenomena. By unifying these fundamental characteristics, brought with it new modes of theories... integrating the fields of force into a single network.

The Preferred Model of Aether Theory

Thus, the attention during the 19th century was focused on the fundamental interaction of electromagnetic phenomena.
It was in fact assumed for a while by the majority of the physicists of that era that 'ponderable' matter, consistent of having what is called 'rest value,' and 'inertia', was inexorably differential, that was 'somehow' meshed, or, enveloped through the permeating, all-space and all-time Aether.

Now, some strange conclusions can be made here. If the above is correct, this interpretation states that an object must literally 'plow' through the Aether. If it 'plows' through the Aether, it then must also drag the ''fabric'' of Aether along its trajectory.

If the hypothetical object does not move the distribution of pressure exerted by the strange Aether, means that it is equally proportional in all directions! A function coined by scientists as (isotropic). It has also come to be more widely known as the 'Rest Frame of The Aether.'

Thought indicated that the measure of matter in motion through this Aether Field was highly important. One way to measure such an effect would be found in the momentum of the Earth, which was considered to be suffice in magnitude, that its speed was determinable.

Thus a physicist called Albert Michelson in 1881 set out to find the tail whip of the Aether wind as earth ploughed through it.

The Test of Matter in Motion Through The Aether

Michelson solved the question to this, through experimental tests, that, unfortunately resulted in 'the Big Goose Egg,' - 'absolute nada'. Again, it was repeated in 1887, this time counterparted with physicist Edward Morley, and their experiment became to be known as the 'Michelson-Morley Experiment.' However, even this revived experiment proved fruitless!

It basically meant at the time, that the positive results predicted by the ‘Preferred Model,’ were not conclusive with the predicted results.

So How Should Matter in Aether Be Viewed?

Well, science informs us that any medium would itself react to any movement of a physical ''meshed'' object, the postulate of a static Aether is also assumed to be flawed. However, ways around this can be evaluated. The 'classic way' to describe the following, is that, whenever you swirl your hand in water, and if the medium has any viscosity, it will experience a 'dragging effect', thus can be now imagined to cause a circular motion - a bit like the way a Black Hole itself drags space and time with it... However, as the time variables increase, so does the relative speed and drag between the body and the medium.

This results the overall magnitude to be equally dependant on the 'value of viscosity', which relentlessly leads to many variants of the Aether theory and the momentum of matter through it. These lead to 'Coefficient Theories,' and principles for how all Bradyonic matter should interact with the Luxen particle of light.

The progressive evolution in Aether theories has paradoxically made our search rather difficult, as they open 'too many doors', making any initial theory almost invalid to make any self-assured predictions.

Quantum Mechanics and Aether Theory

Quantum Mechanics, as you will undoubtedly know, is used to interpret the function of matter at the fundamental level. We see this as all arising from the vacuum, like the spontaneous bubbling of electrons and antielectrons out of the Dirac Sea whenever there is enough energy present. Remember, the Dirac Sea is packed full with negative particles.

Matter must come out of the vacuum, and create two distinct forms of longer-lived spacetime distortional fluctuations; a particle and its antipartner. This was called by physicist J. A Wheeler as ''quantum foam.''

These fluctuations arise out of a spatial coordinate - this size is 1.616 x 30^-33, which is the smallest known 'box' of space. The fluctuations also arise out of the smallest time possible, called the ‘Planck Time,' which is 5.391 x 10^-44 seconds. It is here, in this infinitesimal unit of space that releases an enormous amount of virtual energy in the quickest time possible!

On this small level, space and time literally forces these spontaneous rapid releases of quantum bubbles of energy/gas that breaks into a particle and its antiparticle. Thus, Quantum Theory might itself be indicating an equivalence with 'zero-point energy field,' that may be the shadow of a ''particulate Aether''.

There are simply some aspects about the Aether field that we simply ‘just need’. There are many more theories about the Aether though which are very controversial such as The Einstein-Aether Theories… And all this originally stemmed from physicist Thomas Young’s experiment of a photons quantum wave. I don't think the Aether field will be solved any time soon – however, the Aether field is now gaining more and more interest, as I have been informed by Dr. Fred Alan Wolf… The reason why is because some scientists believe that dark energy might be linked to the Aether… And because we know so very little about dark energy, this has got the scientists very excited.

zephir

12-01-07, 02:44 PM

what is 'Aether Theory' all about?

This is just a repost from another forum, so you can read all my answers there (they weren't responded, till now).

sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=73869

This forum is supposed to be just the AWT topic dedicated to the testable and reliable connection of the ancient Aether hypothesis to the modern physics. Thank you all for keeping this thread consistent and synoptical.

Reiku

12-01-07, 02:50 PM

I know Zeph. I am NeoNo.1... You know me.

Anyhow, I'm trying to keep this as scientific as possible. Nothing more. Nothing less. :)

zephir

12-01-07, 02:58 PM

I'm trying to keep this as scientific as possible.

The "Aether" word has a strong antiscientific connotations, I know that. But these connotations aren't the result of science, but politics of the very beginning of the 20th century. Now we are one hundred years older, supposedly wiser (.. just kidding) - so we should reconsider these concepts without historical prejudice.

If the modern theories are saying, the Universe is formed by dark brane (string theory) or even by black hole interior (LQG), we simply should stop here and put the question:

How these findings are related to the luminiferous Aether concept?
If these insights are considered relevant with respect of modern physics by now, what's wrong on the Aether concept, after then?
And the most important one:

If the Aether concept is substantiated even with respect of modern theories, which new insights it can bring into contemporary science?

Reiku

12-01-07, 03:09 PM

String Theory is certainly not my forte, but i do know that if string theory is correct, then the Kaluza-Klein Theory Predicts that the fifth dimension is literally connected to electromagnetic waves... thus causing the wave-like nature of light as moves across the vacuum... I'm not moved by the notion though. The prediction of the fifth dimension is just as dubious as inviting more dimensions into the mix... and therego, it complicates matters even more.

If we are talking about interiors of black holes, then we need to answer this question first:

''If this universe is the interior of a black hole, what are the background temperatures if the are not the product of a big bang, and what is universal acceleration?''

Please keep me updated if i am missing something... I am getting slightly tired... :) I'm assuming this is what you meant from the link... ''black-holes-may-harbour-their-own-universes.html,'' which i am still to look at.

zephir

12-01-07, 03:18 PM

''If this universe is the interior of a black hole, what are the background temperatures if the are not the product of a big bang, and what is universal acceleration?''
If the Universe is formed by interior of black hole, the first legitimate question is: how the hell such interior should appear?

Well, like the hell - from the outer perspective. You can think, the black hole is the most dense and hot stage of the matter collapse, which we can even imagine. But the interior of neutron stars or even white dwarfs can serve as a viable alternative for our conceptual extrapolations.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/astronomy/blackhole.gif

From the inner perspective we can see suddenly, the interior of such hot and dense star isn't supposed to be a very stormy environment. In fact it can behave as a quite calm and quite environement, mostly because of slow overall speed of energy spreading. For example. inside of neutron star the speed of light spreading should be slow down up to same few meters per year, so such system should appear as a quite large from internal observer perspective.

Read-Only

12-01-07, 03:19 PM

The "Aether" word has a strong antiscientific connotations, I know that. But these connotations aren't the result of science, but politics of the very beginning of the 20th century. Now we are one hundred years older, supposedly wiser (.. just kidding) - so we should reconsider these concepts without historical prejudice.

If the modern theories are saying, the Universe is formed by dark brane (string theory) or even by black hole interior (LQG), we simply should stop here and put the question:

How these findings are related to the luminiferous Aether concept?
If these insights are considered relevant with respect of modern physics by now, what's wrong on the Aether concept, after then?
And the most important one:

If the Aether concept is substantiated even with respect of modern theories, which new insights it can bring into contemporary science?

I think you are simply whistling in the dark and trying to revive long-dead ghosts. Can you show us ANY evidence whatsoever that supports your idea? (I'd be ashamed to call it a "theory.")

zephir

12-01-07, 03:27 PM

Can you show us ANY evidence whatsoever that supports your idea?

Bellow is the animation of real supercritical vapor condensation and the computer simulation of tiny "black hole" by Newtonian particle dynamics.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/supercrit.gif http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/space_topology.gif

Now, this is an end of TV demo. Try to answer my question, how these two articles are related each other by your opinion?

The universe is a string-net liquid (http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19325954.200.html), Black holes may harbour their own universes (http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn12853-black-holes-may-harbour-their-own-universes.html)

Reiku

12-01-07, 03:29 PM

I've been able to read over this paper link with better detail now...

''When matter gets swallowed by a black hole, it could fall into another universe contained inside the black hole, or get trapped inside a wormhole-like connection to a second black hole, a new study suggests.
What's inside a black hole is one of the biggest mysteries in physics. The theory that predicted black holes in the first place – general relativity – says that all the matter inside them gets squashed into a central point of infinite density called a singularity. But then, "things break down mathematically", says Christian Böhmer of University College London, in the UK. "We would like to see the singularity removed."
Many researchers believe that some kind of new, overarching theory that unites gravity and quantum effects will resolve the problem. String theory is the most popular of these alternatives.
But Böhmer and colleague Kevin Vandersloot of the University of Portsmouth in the UK use a rival approach called loop quantum gravity, which defines space-time as a network of abstract links that connect tiny chunks of space.
Loop quantum gravity has been used before to tackle the singularity that would seem to have occurred at the origin of our universe. It suggests that instead of a big bang, an earlier universe could have collapsed and then exploded outward again in a "big bounce".''

This is talking first about an outdated theory, suggesting matter can move into black holes and into other universes... But this is overthrown now, as Dr Hawking has shown that nothing can move through a black hole and into another universe because it would suggest that information is lost.
I would agree that the concept of a universe inside a black hole is still possible, if it existed in the inner horizon, but we still need to ask what the accelerated expansion is, and what are background temperatures.

Due to the new advances in understanding how to treat black holes, i cannot say the link provides a good understanding into how we would ever know what is going on inside a black hole, unless we said we already existed in one.

Read-Only

12-01-07, 03:32 PM

Bellow is the animation of real supercritical vapor condensation and the computer simulation of tiny "black hole" by Newtonian particle dynamics.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/supercrit.gif http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/space_topology.gif

Now, this is an end of TV demo. Try to answer my question, how these two articles are related each other by your opinion?

The universe is a string-net liquid (http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19325954.200.html), Black holes may harbour their own universes (http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn12853-black-holes-may-harbour-their-own-universes.html)

You submit THAT as evidence?!? Egad!

zephir

12-01-07, 03:35 PM

i cannot say the link provides a good understanding into how we would ever know what is going on inside a black hole...
This is what the AWT is good for. You can think, the black hole is dense plasma fuzzball (http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/fuzzball.htm). You can think, it's a dense star formed by hot plasma. You can think, the plasma is behaving like dense particle stuff, for example like hot condensing vapor.

Inside of such vapor the spongy density fluctuations occurs before condensation. But these fluctuations are so dense, so they're creating another density fluctuations, recursivelly. The most giant aggregates corresponds the stars and planets.

As an evidence can serve the striking similarity between the vacuum behavior and the dense star behavior. Both they're considered as a boson condensates with the structure of quantum foam. Or do we have a better explanation for this similarity?

You submit THAT as evidence?!? Egad!...
Do you have a better and more straightforwarding explanation of the relation between two articles (based on different theories), then the supercritical vapor condensation?

If yes, go ahead - try to explain it for us by your own words.

Reiku

12-01-07, 03:41 PM

But what i am saying is, is that there is no way, even with an Aether concept can we measure what is going on inside a black hole. We can only speculate. But suppose it is true:We would expect the same laws in this universe we exist in right now, for this universe itself wold have to be the interior of a black hole... But things just aren't dense enough from an observer inside a black hole.

zephir

12-01-07, 03:48 PM

...But things just aren't dense enough from an observer inside a black hole...
Of course, because what you can see is just a tiny, subtle density fluctuations of environment, which is even much more dense. But the density of matter/energy inside of elementary particles isn't so distant from the conditions, predicted by different theories for it. By Wheeler's calcullation the energy density of vacuum foam corresponds well the energy density inside of black hole (some 10E+90 J/m3, as it can be estimated from third power of Planck constant easily). You can consider it as another evidence of this model (which was proposed a long time before the AWT was postulated, after all).

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/spacetime/Newscientist.jpg

The black hole universe model is not idea of mine. The quantum foam model of black hole interior was proposed by Kip Thorne (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kip_Thorne), which was the student of J.A.Wheeler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Archibald_Wheeler), who was the father of the quantum foam concept for vacuum.

Reiku

12-01-07, 03:53 PM

Zeph

I'll continue to talk about this... but can you please edit your last response of page 1... you've qouted something read-only said to you, and said it was me saying this...:)

zephir

12-01-07, 04:01 PM

and said it was me saying this.
Corrected.
there is no way, even with an Aether concept can we measure what is going on inside a black hole.
That's true - but who cares? We cannot even measure, what's one hundred metters bellow the Earth mantle.

On the contrary, just from these reasons, we should use as simple and straightforward logic as possible during development of physical theories. For example, if we don't know, why the black hole shouldn't behave as a dense stars, we shouldn't consider the opposite. If we don't know, how the interior of black hole is behaving, we should consider the dense particle stuff as a starting hypothesis. If we don't know, how such dense particle system is behaving, we should use the behavior of dense vapor as a first shot. And so on.

Only after these trivial models will be refuted reliably, you should consider the more abstract and complicated one - but not before. But as I can see, you're not big friend of Occam's razor criterion, aren't ya? Why?

The Occam's razor is the only relevant clue, which we have when considering the relevance of theories: if two or more ideas are of different complexity, the most probable is the simplest one. Just because of principle of least action by AWT. The information tends to spread along as short and straight path, as possible, because it's being driven by innertial diffusion, i.e. by the same way, like the energy.

Reiku

12-01-07, 04:13 PM

Black holes are very dense from the outside, but the equations describing their interiors are not... I just don't see how any Aether Concept today would help us understand, even the nature of this universe we live in.

What excperimental evidence do you suggest? I cannot think of any, without resorting to the old theories, which are now overthrown.

zephir

12-01-07, 04:26 PM

..I just don't see how any Aether Concept today would help us understand, even the nature of this universe we live in..

The AWT says, the Universe is basically of chaotic nature of many quantities, the pair of them (inertial energy and mass density) is relevant for us due the anthropic principle. You can think about it as about solution of question: how the ideal shape and density of inertial gradients should appear to see as most from our Universe, as possible. This question is quite relevant in dense fog of inertial particles. If such fog will be too dense, you will not see many particles because of dispersion. If the fog will be too sparse, you'll see at the distance, but you'll see a too few particles anyway. So here's some optimum density of fog, which will enable you to see as much, as possible.

..What experimental evidence do you suggest?..
For example, this is the scheme of MAGIC experiment (http://arxiv.org/abs/0708.2889) (dispersion of gamma light), which is relying to the spin foam structure of vacuum. In fact, the same reasoning is working even for inertial foam, too. But the AWT is predicting the same result even for the case of microwaves, which are expected to be dispersed by the vacuum foam as well.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/lqg/lqgtest.gif

The another question is the intepretation of well known reality. Can you explain, why the light is spreading in transversal waves at the distance? If the vacuum would be of zero density, then the frequency of energy waves would be infinite. Why just the transversal waves? We know, in sparse particle encironment the energy spreads along longitudinal waves. But as the environment density increases, the character of energy waves will change to the transversal one.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/aether_density.gif http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/foamgradient2.jpg

When the density of vacuum foam increases (for example near magnetars and black holes), we can observe the gradual switching to the transversal model of energy spreading again, followed by the birefringence of vacuum, multiplication of event horizons and many other related phenomena. The system of testable predictions of AWT are quite broad and complex.

Reiku

12-01-07, 04:46 PM

This so-called gamma-dispersion, sounds very similar to the failed aether-wind predicted from Michelson-Morley experiment... or perhaps it is I who is not understanding?

Reiku

12-01-07, 04:47 PM

My computer is very slow at the mom.

Reiku

12-01-07, 04:48 PM

''you're not big friend of Occam's razor criterion, aren't ya? Why? ''

Because not everyting in this universe can be summed up so easily. In other words, a universe as complex as this one, will not allow us to reduce its complexity so readily.

zephir

12-01-07, 04:49 PM

This so-called gamma-dispersion, sounds very similar to the failed aether-wind predicted from Michelson-Morley experiment...
Even the Maxwell has predicted the Aether drag and the light invariance violation correctly - he just didn't realized, the Aether is so dense, so that these phenomena would occur ouside the visible light spectrum region.

..Because not everyting in this universe can be summed up so easily...
This is just a conjecture. Here are many who are believing, the final theory of Universe should be very simple, at least conceptually. The Nature is full of examples, where the simple mechanism leads to the very complex results. The ontogenesis of human brain, for example: everything about it is hardcoded in the linear sequence of genes. Isn't it amazing?

With respect of this the AWT isn't far so special, it just extrapolates the same concept for inertial matter evolution.

zephir

12-01-07, 05:01 PM

My computer is very slow at the mom.
Note for Read-only and others:

Don't incorporate my images into your quotes. Some browsers are handling the larger number of animated GIF badly.

After all, the repeating of images in posts is thoughtless and useless.
I'll keep the number of images on the single page low for the future.

Reiku

12-01-07, 05:06 PM

Even the Maxwell has predicted the Aether drag and the light invariance violation correctly - he just didn't realized, the Aether is so dense, so that these phenomena would occur ouside the visible light spectrum region.

This is just a conjecture. Here are many who are believing, the final theory of Universe should be very simple, at least conceptually. The Nature is full of examples, where the simple mechanism leads to the very complex results. The ontogenesis of human brain, for example: everything about it is hardcoded in the linear sequence of genes. Isn't it amazing?

With respect of this the AWT isn't far so special, it just extrapolates the same concept for inertial matter evolution.

I have a problem with the superdensity you are referring to...

The Lumineferous Ether, would need to exist in your theory, and it is considered to be the medium through which light propagates... Light is very very very light... almost weightless in comparrison to your dense theory... If this is so, then no wind could even be produced as a photon moved through it... no?

''Isn't it amazing?''

Yes, the universe is amazing, and what is even more amazing, is our lack of understanding of it...

Reiku

12-01-07, 05:08 PM

In other words, something as light as a photon, wouldn't be dragging the aether, but the aether would become a resistence on the photon.

zephir

12-01-07, 05:17 PM

.....Light is very very very light.........
The mass of photons plays no role in considering of Aether density, but the energy density. And the energy of gamma radiation is able to break the atoms into particles - which is something, which cannot be done by the heaviest hammer available. Such energy density must be mediated and transfered by the environement, which is even much more dense: from this the idea of dense Aether of AWT follows. It's trivial causality requirement, no less, no more.

IYes, the universe is amazing, and what is even more amazing, is our lack of understanding of it...
The more it's surprising the apparent unwillingness of many people to consider the most simple explanations first and foremost. But the people tends to the mysticism, the complexness of contemporary theories is just replacing the religion for many people.

..something as light as a photon, wouldn't be dragging the aether...
The water is rather dense, but the tiny surface waves aren't dragged by the underwater: just because they're so tiny, so they don't penetrate the underwater. By AWT the Lorentz invariance of light spreading to the Aethe reference frame has the very same origin: the light waves aren't penetrating the interior of Aether foam, so that they're using just the surface membranes. By such way the absolute motion of Aether is undistinguishable for us by the same way, like the tiny surface waves (so called the capillary waves (http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9020144/capillary-wave)) are ingoring the underwater motion. With respect of these waves the water is behaving like thing elastic (mem)brane, so that the motion of underwater doesn't influent the surface wave spreading, despite of its energy density. Again, just a Victorian physics is required to understand that.

Reiku

12-01-07, 05:24 PM

I know the energy of the photons (for they do not have a mass), do not determine the density of the Aether, but rather a coupling effect is determined by the theory as it propogates through it... It is a medium after all. If what you where saying where indeed true, then the Aether would result to act against the photon.

Reiku

12-01-07, 05:28 PM

I am right in believing that the classical Aether is supposed to be a very ligh medium, as in, not very dense at all? - I'm a bit tired... I could be getting this wrong... but isn;t this heavy density something you have created yourself?

zephir

12-01-07, 05:30 PM

...the Aether would result to act against the photon...
The Aether is dispersing the light photons at the case, when the wavelength of light becomes too high or too dense. From microwave perspective we can observe the foam structure of nested vacuum foam at the cosmological scale by the same way, like the short gamma ray is dispersed in the MAGIC experiment.

The observation of polarization of microwave bacground differs from the gamma dispersion just by distance scale. The vorticity of Aether environment is the main reason of so called materialization of light. During this the virtual pairs of particle-antiparticles appears by the same way, like at the case of vortices at the water surface. The light is making the Aether turbulent easily, but the resuting vortices are recombining much more easily, then at the case of fluid environment. This is because the Aether is behaving like elastic foam rather then fluid, where the particles are moving freely.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/vortex/virtual_parts.jpg
...isn;t this heavy density something you have created yourself..
Of course, the heavily dense Aether is the concept of AWT, but conceptually this idea was hidden in the Maxwell's assumption of transversal spreading already. Because just the very dense inertial environment can spread the energy in transversal waves preferably. By such way, Maxwell was rather close to the ultimate Aether understanding in whole its depth.

Reiku

12-01-07, 05:41 PM

But... this doesn;t really answer my questions.

zephir

12-01-07, 05:45 PM

... this doesn;t really answer my questions.
Which questions do you mean, exactly? The more specific question you'll put, the more specific answer you CAN get.

Reiku

12-01-07, 05:47 PM

These in specific:

''I know the energy of the photons (for they do not have a mass), do not determine the density of the Aether, but rather a coupling effect is determined by the theory as it propogates through it... It is a medium after all. If what you where saying where indeed true, then the Aether would result to act against the photon.''

and

''I am right in believing that the classical Aether is supposed to be a very ligh medium, as in, not very dense at all? - I'm a bit tired... I could be getting this wrong... but isn;t this heavy density something you have created yourself?''

zephir

12-01-07, 05:56 PM

then the Aether would result to act against the photon.
I agree and I've given you a few examples of such action: the polarization of microwave light by vacuum, the dispersion of gamma rays and the materialization of light into particles as an ultimate example of the Aether vorticity. During this the photons are breaked by Aether completelly under formation of particle standing wave, i.e. vortex rotating at place.

Concerning the heavy dense Aether concept, you can found my answer at 01:45 AM. If you're tired, then have good night - the AWT will wait 4you:bugeye:.

Reiku

12-01-07, 06:06 PM

draqon

12-01-07, 06:07 PM

But here is the snag mate.

If the photon experiences a resistence through spacetime then it is next to suggesting it experiences inertia... but since it has no mass, there cannot be any inertial effects.

photon does have a momentum thou...you cant just say it doesnt have mass because it moves all the time as it exists

BenTheMan

12-01-07, 06:12 PM

Aether's have been disproven long ago.

Reiku

12-01-07, 06:16 PM

Draq - you cannot justify it using that arguement.

Some people like to say that the photon has mass because the photon has energy E=hf, where (h) is 'Planck’s constant' and (f) is the frequency of the photon. Thus, they tend to assume that because it has energy (E) it must have mass (M) because of Einstien’s mass-energy equivalence equation E=Mc^2...

They also say that the photon has momentum, and momentum is related to mass p = Mv where (v) is velocity and (p) is for momentum. Yet, you cannot justify it having mass using this argument. This is actually 'relativistic mass' - which is nothing but the measure of energy which will change with velocity. It isn't actually mass, even though mass and energy are related. In physics jargon, the mass of an object is called its 'invariant mass,' and the photon has no invariant mass. Now, a massless particle can have energy and it can have momentum, simply because mass is related to these through the equation

E^2 = M^2c^4 + p^2c^2

, which is subsequently zero-mass for a photon because

E = pc

for massless radiation (remember, c means the speed of light). So yes, the photon has momenta and energy, and can deliver a punch out of it when it hits a surface, but it doesn't have mass.

zephir

12-01-07, 06:27 PM

...if the photon experiences a resistence through spacetime then it is next to suggesting it experiences inertia...

By AWT every limited object with positive curvature should have nonzero rest mass, simply because it's behaving like dense blob of Aether foam. The rest mass of photon corresponds the energy of photon, whose wavelength is comparable with the observable Universe diameter (some 10E-66 kg), i.e. the graviton mass. The mainstream science doesn't care about forum trolls and it doesn't say, the photon is massless. It just puts the upper limit for the photon's rest mass and such limit can be therefore subject of experimental testing. Recently the clever experiment was proposed (http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/PhysicsWorldNews/~3/192467250/31999), how to detect / measure the photon rest mass by violating of Coulomb law. If such experiment will succede, you can consider it as another evidence of Aether concept as well.

http://images.iop.org/objects/physicsweb/news/11/11/29/law.jpg

Reiku

12-01-07, 06:47 PM

Well, i'll need to depart, unfortunately from this discussion... It's very... Counterintuitive.

All the best though. :)

zephir

12-01-07, 07:03 PM

..It's very... Counterintuitive.
If the AWT concept would be intuitive, it would be proposed a many years before. The true is, the sparse Aether concept is not working, wo we should try to consider the dense one. The AWT is as intuitive, as easy you can imagine the behavior of very dense matter.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/supercritical2.gif

The above animation is the record of the condensation (http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/supercritical1.avi) of supercritical SF6 vapor inside of sealed glass capillary. We can see on this video, how the density fluctuations primarilly formed are creating a sort of meta-fluid temporarily, i.e. the liquid formed by density fluctuations of another liquid. This is a rudimentary model of vacuum and its hidden dimensions by AWT. Of course, while at the common conditions these unparticle systems (http://www.physorg.com/news100753984.html) are quite brittle, shortliving and stable in narow range of conditions, inside of dense stars they can form the prevailing form of observable matter. Why?

Because they're enabling the most effective energy transfer at the distance. We can say, the vacuum is as huge, as we can see it just because inside of dense chaotic system exactly this phase is best suited for inertial energy transfer at the distance. I'll explain this insight in more details later.

zephir

12-08-07, 09:35 AM

Everett's "many worlds (http://www.hedweb.com/everett/everett.htm)" hypothesis is the one of the viable intepretations of quantum foam behavior at the Planck scale, while the Multiverse hyptohesis is the interpretation of (mem)brane worlds at the cosmological scale. The quantum foam is quite real foam and it doesn't differ conceptually by anything from normal foam, with the exception, it's infinitelly nested. The Multiverses are just bubbles of quantum foam of false vacuum, expanded enormously during inflation. This foam manifest itself by polarization of microwave background of Universe, so it has ebservational evidence, because the bubble branes are birefrigent for microwave radiation, as the AWT predicts (for very short and long wavelengths the Lorentz symmetry is violated).

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/00/Multiverse_-_level_II.GIF/180px-Multiverse_-_level_II.GIF http://focus.aps.org/files/focus/v17/st21/pic-v17-st21-1.jpg http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/spacetime/collapse.gif

On the left is the model of "Bubble universes", every disk is a bubble universe (Universe 1 to Universe 6 are different bubbles, they have physical constants that are different from our universe), our universe is just one of the bubbles. In M-theory our universe and others are created by collisions between membranes in an 11-dimensional space. By AWT the bubbles are result of interactions between particles from another layer of space-time at the distance. The Universes are formed inside of quasars, which are formed at the places, where the bubble membranes met together during inflation, thus fitting the brane model. Note that the dodecahedron distribution of gallaxies and dark matter fluctuations corresponds the E8 root system, so it can serve as another observational evidence of the multiverse concept. If the string theorists would really understand the physical implications of their theory, they would propose such model already before time, instead of piling the equations blindly.

zephir

12-08-07, 09:38 AM

From the black hole model of Universe another consequences of Multiverse concept can be deduced. Near magnetars the vacuum foam becomes more dense and birefrigent, thus leading to the multiversum during energy spreading. This X-ray polarization is dual to the microwave polarization of CMB, being observed from outside perspective. The energy will scatter through vacuum into many directions like the light travelling inside of foam. It means, the single space-time event (for example the flash of gamma radiation) can influent two or more distant places of Universe differently in different directions at the same time!

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/foamgradient2.jpg http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/astronomy/blackhole_double.gif http://space.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn8255/dn8255-1_250.jpg

At the case of rotating charged black holes such behavior can even lead to the formation of dual event horizons, whose radii will depend to the light polarization: a first generation of Universe branes inside of black hole. This is the result of Kerr's black holee solution of general relativity. Inside of black hole the density of event horizons/branes/quantum foam bubbles will increase gradully, until seamlessly converts into the quantum foam interior (http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg19325954.200) of another Universe generation. Recently Laura Mersini-Houghton (http://arxiv.org/find/gr-qc/1/au:+Mersini_Houghton_L/0/1/0/all/0/1) proposed the hypothesis, the gap in the CMB can be considered as the observation evidence (http://space.newscientist.com/channel/astronomy/cosmology/mg19626311.400-the-void-imprint-of-another-universe.html) of multiverse concept. By AWT the Universe brane should refract or even reflect the infrared and microwave radiation, so even the observation of infrared stars from first generation (http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap070102.html) can be interpreted as an observational evidence of multiverse and brane Universe model. Because the light is dispersed the more, the lower/higher wavelength it has, the gamma ray and microwave imaging (http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/~huchra/2mass/images/jarrett_Fig1.jpg) of the Universe forms an effective way of testing of multiverse concepts.

zephir

12-08-07, 09:49 AM

By AWT the gravity is related to Universe expansion and the inertia is result of space-time R-1/R ("Klein bottle") transform, which manifests itself as an acceleration of the expansion, i.e. the so-called "dark energy". Both general relativity (GR), both quantum mechanics (QM) are approximate theories by dual way: while the quantum mechanics predicts the gradual dissolving of particle wave packets into vacuum, the GR predicts, all particles should collapse into singularities.

The AWT is based on the concept of hypothetical inertial environment of infinite mass/energy density (i.e. the Aether) and it's facing these conceptual problems by the assumption, the current Universe generation is formed by interior of giant collapsar, similar to black hole, which is collapsing with the increasing speed by the same way, like common stars. This collapse is perceived as an Universe expansion from internal perspective of observer, formed by standing wave packets (i.e. the particles) of nested E8 foam, forming the interior of Universe.

zephir

12-08-07, 09:57 AM

The LQG is dual to string theory by the same way, like the relativity is dual to quantum mechanics, just in more advanced level. I'll try explain you, why both these theories are supersymmetric by the most easy and transparent way possible.

The main problem of quantum mechanics (which was surprisingly ignored by most of theorists) is, the fundamental Schrodinger equation of quantum mechanics is physically non-realistic. It predicts, the quantum wave of completelly free particle will dissolve in vacuum gradually. Which doesn't occcurs at the common distance scale (at the cosmological scales we can observe radiative dissolving of matter, though). This apparent paradox can be solved by introducing of potential box of gravitational field, the problem is, here's no way, how to derive the gravity just by using of quantum mechanics without using of infinite recursion. Briefly speaking, the gravity is relativity concept, not this one of quantum mechanics.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/relativity/grqm1.png

While the (general) relativity is facing exactly the opposite problem. It can consider the particles as a gravitational wave packets (the geometrodynamic theory of J.A.Wheeler takes account into it and it calls them geons). But the geon model has no mechanism, how to prohibit the gravitational collapse into singularity. By such way, nether relativity theory, nor quantum mechanics theory in their current state of development can be considered as an exact models of reality. The AWT explains, every particular theory can serve as a TOE theory at the moment, it will be made implicit by infinitely nested recursion. Unfortunatelly, the formalism of these theories is quite complex with compare to Newtonian mechanics, so that only the first hesitant attemps, how to make these theories implicit has appeared (the double relativity as an example).

The AWT solves the problem of both theories by elegant and simple way. It considers the universe as a dense collapsing blob of Aether nested foam, which is expanding from internal observer perspective. By AWT way, the Universe expands by the (nearly) the same speed, as the particle wave packets inside it, and it collapses by the (nearly) same speed, like the particle geons inside it. By such way, the particles of matter inside of particular Universe generation remains (approximatelly) of the same relative size during whole Universe life-time. Note that by such model, both the gravitational field of particles, both the surface energy of gravity field (which follows from mass-energy equivalence) is the direct consequence of the Universe collapse/expansion.

The AWT explains furthermore, the Universe expansion/collapse cannot be ethernal and it's alternated by phase transforms, which effectivelly switch their signs in the process of mutual exchange of space and time dimensions. This metarotation is aupposed to be the source of of the last missing point, the source of Universe inertia. Such insight makes the (nearly) whole the Universe existence virtual, but the complete understanding of Universe inertia appears as a quite deep problem.

We are facing the semantical causality problems here: if we'll insist on strictly logical explanation of the Universe nature, we should consider, only inertial, i.e. nonpenetrating fermion particles can fulfill the Boolean logic operators. Therefore the requirement of logic introduces an inertial bias into our thinking, the Universe can never be understood in terms of causual predicate logic completelly, the formal math the less. Because the Universe has no rules, in fact - if we can see some rules in it, we are just sampling the causual gradients from quantum chaos.

darksidZz

12-08-07, 10:24 AM

Huh? You can understand new theories conceptually without math, AND without looking at ridiculous 19th century theories... (Because before Planck, ovens contained infinite energy, and before Einstein time was the same everywhere...)

lmao roflmao

zephir

12-08-07, 12:22 PM

lmao roflmao
The spin network of LQG is dual view to the string and branes of string theories. Both they're can be considered as the system of dynamic fluctuations, which appears inside of condensing vapor or during mixing of fluids of different refraction index (dissolving of sugar solution in pure water).

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/dynafoam.gif http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/rotators.gif http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/waves/imgwav/circonwave.gif (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/waves/imgwav/circonwave.gif)

Every undulation is dual to rotation via Euler transform (http://wehner.org/euler/euler.gif), when every harmonic motion can be considered as a rotation in the complex plane (i.e. the complex conjugate of nested dimensions). For example, the undulations of water surface in hidden dimensions can be interpreted as a rotational motion of water particles from invariant reference frame perspective.

From this point of view, the undulations of nested strings and branes in string theory can be considered as an dual view of nested quantum loops of LQG theory. While the string theory is quantum wave based, it prefers the (quantum) wave formalism, while the LQG is GR based, so it preffers the torsion field formalism, based on (shear) torsions of Lorents transform. The mutuall battles of string a LQG theorists follows just from the fact, both groups of theorists cannot see the forrest of physics through the number of trees, i.e. the through the pile of equations, which are describing their theories - so they cannot understand the conceptual simmilarities and connection points of theirs models, although these models are conceptually quite simple, in fact. This is the logical consequence of the fact, the contemporary theories of physics are developed mostly by formal way, i.e. by logic rules of algebra, but without intuitive understanding of the subject. It's like the attempt to solve the physical homework just by random combinations of eqautions, rewritten from textbook, i.e. withou intuitive understanding of the assignation at first. While such formal approach is qualified as wrong by teachers, it's quite common in the contemporary physical theories development.

This approach is somewhat dual to the philosophy, which is based on the vague description of reality, so it cannot make any predictions, although the development of formal model can be quite simple. While the problems of modern theories with testable predictions is based on the exactly opposite problem: we have complex formal models, but because the reality is stochastic by its very nature, the strictly causual models are poorly conditioned, which leads to the huge landscapes of alternative theories, i.e. the vagueness by the same way, like the natural philosphy. We have a lotta formal models, but because we don't understand, which one can be correct, we are scrambled by the same way, like from vague tractates of philosophy.

It's evident, for achieving of best perfomance during development of reality models both the intuitive approach, both the formal approach must remain balanced in duality.

zephir

12-08-07, 12:48 PM

Because no other answer proposal were given so far, I'll try to explain the AWT's explanation of time arrow briefly. Like I've said previously, the radiative time arrow is tightly connected to the space-time concept, where the time dimension is just one of many dimensions of space-time metric. Neverthelles, the time dimension always differ from space dimensions by its orientation, i.e. the arrow. This is an important point, because it enables always to distinguish the time dimensions from another dimensions of space-time.

With respect of radiative time arrow, the time is always defined by the direction of radiative energy spreading. The direction of the readiative time arrow is related to the thermodynamic time arrow, which explains the energy spreading by the diffusive matter spreading along the density gradient of inertia. By another words, the energy is always spreading to level the density gradients of Aether. As the density gradients are related to time density, the energy spreading can be expressed as a time density leveling inside of gradually collapsing Universe. Bellow is, how the gravitational waves and the motion of particle can be intepreted as an inertial diffusion of Aether. In real cases the density gradients are much more sharper and mutually nested, indeed.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/spacetime/difussion.gif http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/spacetime/gravityspread.gif

Inside of Universe observable by inertial creatures, every reality is formed by inertial gradients, i.e. the density gradients of inertial (causual) Aether fluctuations. Therefore the space-time is formed just by inertial gradient as well. You can think, the space-time is formed by the density gradient, like the water surface. The apparent inertial energy spreading at the water surface is caused by the increased density of inertial gradients here due the interference of inertial waves.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/gradient.jpg

Because the density of energy spreading is proportional the density of inertial gradients, the energy density is enhanced along the surface of density gradient. We can say, every sufficiently sharp density gradient of Aether fluctuations is behaving like less or more dense sheet, serving for inertial matter spreading, like the massive N-dimmensional plate or string. This sheet is called the space-time.

For example, the water surface gradient is behaving like thin, but dense elastic membrane. Above the water surface the environment is of low inertial density, so it cannot transfer energy well. Bellow the surface is underwater. Underwater is of relativelly high density, but its compressibility is low as well. Therefore the maximal density of energy spreading is exactly at the place of highest mass density gradient by dE/V = dm/Vc^2 equation. We know, during the shallow underwater explosions most of energy is radiated just via water surface, the amount of energy spreaded through underwater of by air can be neglected. Therefore, with respect of energy spreading the water surface is behaving like quite common space-time brane of string theory.

zephir

12-08-07, 12:50 PM

If the space-time is formed by less or more flat mass/energy density gradient of inertial density fluctuation of Aether, what the heck the time dimension is? And how it differs from space-dimensions?

The inertial energy can spread across the water surface gradient by many ways. But just a few directions are mutually independent: these directions are defining the degrees of freedom for inertial energy spreading, i.e. the symmetry degree of underlying space-time metric and they're can be called the dimensions of space-time. At the case of space-time brane at the water surface the number of spatial dimensions is just two, becase every wave of inertial energy can spread along the water surface just in two mutually independent directions, in which the water surface wave doesn't affect/interfere the another surface waves. This is because the interference will result into another space-time generation formation.

The remaining direction, which is normal to the space dimensions is the direction, normal to the water surface direction. And this is exactly, what the time dimension means in the AWT. The time dimension of space-time are the normal direction, paralel with the direction of inertial gradient, forming the space-time metric. We can see, the time dimensions is just one of many directions of space-time, by the same way, like the space dimension, but because this direction is oriented to space-time gradient, it has always an arrow. The space dimensions, which are planparalel with the space-time gradinent have no such orientation, in fact they're defined just by the directions, which exhibits the lowest anisotropy, i.e. nonequllibrial character of energy spreading.

As we know, the energy spreads along the water surface freely, while the passing of mass/energy through water surface is much more difficult and it's followed by reflection and refraction phenomena. This is the reason, why the travelling in time is so difficult with compare to travelling through space and it's always followed by the substantial loss of energy and mass. The spreading of matter along water surface (the flowing) is more easy, then accross of water surface, but its followed by less or more pronounced formation of standing wave (the deBroglie wave), which results into accumulation of motion energy. This energy is released back during matter breaking, so it's the source of matter inertia.

Surprisingly enough, all the complex phenomena following the matter/energy spreading in the vacuum can be explained by inertial diffusion of matter particles at the water surface, i.e. the artifacts following the diffusion of Aether fluctuations accross the sufficiently pronounced gradients of inertia.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/simulace/fluid1.gif

The simulation above models most of complex turbulence and wave phenomena at the liquid surface just by particle simulation of gas. At the moment, this gas will condense by sufficiently high speed, the diffusive dissolution of surface gradient can be neglected and then the inertial waves, spreading along density gradients can remain the conditionally stable. It means, the observable Universe is temporal phenomena, the gradual collapse/expansion of which enables the radiative energy spreading at the distance. So we can explain most of Universe properties just by sufficient accumulation of matter/energy of Aether at the place, i.e. as an effect following the sufficiently large mass/energy fluctuations of Aether.

If the space-time is formed by inertial gradients of Aether and the time dimension is formed by normal direction of this gradient, which testable predictions/explanations can be derived from this simple model? Without such predictions no model of reality can have a deeper sense, as it remains useless with respect of the human's understanding of reality.

Try to propose some! You can still use the water surface analogy. For example, what will happen, if we increase the energy density at the water surface?

zephir

12-08-07, 01:12 PM

Subject exhausted.
(the AWT explanation of the question "Is the Universe / an electron a Black Hole?" - a reply to the post (http://sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1664097&postcount=297), closing the subject)

In fact, the subject wasn't even started. In general, the black hole is general relativity concept. The quantum mechanics doesn't recognize the singularity or event horizon concept, being based on wave solution. Therefore the comparison of electron and black hole is not realm of general relativity, but quantum gravity. Such theory isn't working yet, unfortunatelly.

More advanced theories, like the string theory or AWT can see the common points between electron and black hole behavior, the AWT can demonstrate them (http://sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1658895&postcount=11) even without math. The only problem is, the AWT model of black holes isn't accepted yet and the string theory description is complex and completelly formal. So that the only accepted common property of electron and black hole is the assumption, both they're pin-point objects. Which cannot be true in both cases.

By AWT the electron is considered as a dense clound of Aether fluctuations (so called the virtual quarks), which are simmilar to the fluctuations of condensing supercritical vapor, confined their own gravity. The similarity with the black hole model of AWT is quite apparent here. Whole the electron is behaving like undulating density fluctuations of Aether, i.e. by the same way, like the black hole, which is undulating and swirling beneath the event horizon as a single quantum wave (http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/waveequation/quantum_wave.gif) by AWT. This swirling is the source of electron electromagnetic and leptonic charges.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/astronomy/blackhole.gif http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/so31.gif http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/experiments/speckle_movie.gif

By such way, here's as many conceptual similarities between black hole and the electron, as many differences.

zephir

12-08-07, 03:29 PM

How differs the object in motion from the objects at rest? By relativity the position is relative, so here's no way, how to distingush such objects.

http://www.disabledartistsnetwork.net/Swimming%20Duck%20by%20Artist%20Tim%20Morris.jpg http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/splash-ripples.jpg

By Aether theory every object in motion is making so called de Broglie wave of vacuum around itself, by the same way, like the duck, swimming at the water surface. But such wave cannot be seen by using of light, because the waves are penetrating mutually like ghosts. So what we can see it's just the duck, not the wave of vacuum, generated by its motion.

sly1

12-10-07, 04:53 PM

zephir

12-10-07, 06:33 PM

Einstein was horrible at math
He wasn't definitelly excellent, but he was quite good in everything, which is the reason of relativelly high degree of synergy between different forms of intelligence. Many quite brilliant mathematicians are suffering by quite poor sense of physics and nonformal intuition, which is the reason of what I'm calling "supersymmetric philosophy". The classical philosophers equipped by nonformal intuition often cannot express their's ideas by formal, exact models even at the case, such formal derivation can be quite trivial task. The superphilosphers, i.e. formal mathematicians cannot explain his formal results by understandable way, even at the case, such explanation can be quite simple. Briefly speaking, both groups of people cannot understand their subject completelly.

We can see, both group of theorists are facing the reproducibility problem: they cannot spread their ideas well through the population at the distance due their limitations. We can compare such situation to the case of inertial energy spreading at the water surface: The air is highly compressible, "vague" stuff, but it has low density, high volatility of ideas - so it transfers low energy density. While the water is pretty dense, but incompressible stuff, it's conceptual rigidity leads to the same result: the energy density transferred in mechanical waves is rather low here as well.

As the result, during underwater explosion (http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/abomb/underwater.avi), most of energy spreads via surface wave, not through air or underwater. Just the water interface, or the foam, where both compressible, both heavy phases are mixed in proper ratio exhibits the highest density of energy and information spreading and evolution speed. This is why we are composed of cells foam, why our neural network is foam and why the vacuum is supposedly foam too. All these phases are optimized with respect of inertial energy spreading at the distance.

zephir

12-10-07, 06:47 PM

The Aether foam forming the vacuum is interesting by another point: it's not optimized to just the dispersive energy spreading, but even to inertial, i.e. highly causual energy flux, spreading in waves (the wave is the most atemporal, inertial and deterministic sort of energy). We can consider the vacuum as a sort of ideal metamaterial or boson condensate.

Many metamaterials are formed by spongy or foamy materials, the size of its cavities is tuned well for wavelength of microwaves and observable light. This results into negative refraction index, unfortunately in quite narrow range of wavelength in most cases. Simply because the cavities of such material are fixed, so they remain tuned to quite narow range of energy wave frequencies.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/light/metamaterial.gif http://www.nanotechnology.bilkent.edu.tr/research areas/metamaterials_files/image002.jpg

By AWT the vacuum is formed by dense particle system, filled/formed by foamy density fluctuations like condensing supercritical foam. From this point of view isn't very surprising, the vacuum is behaving like metamaterial too, focusing the energy waves into particles, so called the bosons. Because the foam gets dense during shaking by decreasing its bubbles, the vacuum is behaving as a "tunable" autoadaptive metamaterial, well optimized to the non-dissipative energy spreading at the distance in surprisingly wide range of wavelengths. Only the microwave (< 10E-6 eV) and TeV (>10E+12 eV) gamma radiation is undergoing the dispersion followed by Lorentz invariance violation. This enables us to observe the most distant light sources without dispersiona and/or dissipative attenuation.

While the AWT is inertia concept based, this insight gives us clue about probabilistic nature of Universe, whose geometry follows from trivial optimization task: under which density and geometry of density gradients we will be able to see as most (of these causal gradients) from the Universe, as possible?

We can compare this task to the observation inside of dense foam. If the foam will be too dense, we will not see many of foam fluctuations because of dispersion at the distance. If the foam will be too sparse, the visibility would be good, but we will not see many particles anyway. So here's some optimal concentration (and supposedly the shape) of foam gradients, which enables us to see as huge Universe, as possible. The compexity of solution of such simple task is increased by the fact, these density gradients are serving as an environment for information/energy spreading, i.e. both like the subject, both like mean of observation.

Currently it's not quite clear, whether the apparent optimization of the observable reality with respect to the causual energy and information spreading at the distance has some deeper reason, or whether it's just a trivial consequence of the anthropocentric principle: the Universe appears so, or it wouldn't be so huge and transparent for us. For example, the dumb animals doesn't care about vacuum and distant objects very much, so from perspective of such creatures the Universe appears a substantially poorer conductor of information, then for us - their Universes are quite limited. They simply doesn't care, most of Universe is formed by highly transparent vacuum with specific properties, what they can realize is just a highly dispersive Aether forming the particles of matter, not the vacuum or black holes.

As usually, we can expect, both these assumptions are dual in certain sense and therefore true at the same moment, depending on the observational perspective. But some deeper & more thorough analysis is definitelly necessary here.

Squeak22

12-12-07, 03:20 PM

With lengthy posts less than a minute apart Zephir and Reiku are most likely the same person. I smell sock puppet.

zephir

12-13-07, 03:53 AM

I smell sock puppet.

U got it! Yes, both we are a single person...:D

zephir

12-24-07, 05:39 AM

One of most significant results of relativity is, the objects are moving in spacetime along fastest path available, so called the geodesics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geodesics). Doesn't such theorem sounds familiar for us? Of course, it's well known Fermat theorem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermat%27s_principle), which basically says, the light is spreading in optical inhomogeneous material along the fastest way available. Note that the Fermat theorem is special case of Huyghens principle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huygens%27_principle), which is furthermore the special case of principle of least action (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least_action).

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/light/fermat.gif http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/light_gravity.gif

This effectively renders the inertial motion in the gravitational field as a Hamiltonian flow (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geodesics_as_Hamiltonian_flows) without presence of external forces, i.e. in the realm of Newtonian mechanics, which is most apparent at the case of so-called the gravitational lensing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_lensing). We can say, the Earth is moving in the gravitational field like huge overgrown photon droplet through optically inhomogeneous matter. And this is exactly, what the gravitational field is: it's a density gradient of Aether, i.e. the gradient of mass/energy concentration of the material stuff, forming the vacuum and the matter is a dense cluster of standing waves of it.

Note that this concept can be generalized recursively, so we can consider the generalized version of Fermat principle: both energy, both matter is spreading along extremal path of curve integral through space-time, whose curvature at the long scale is caused by nested deformations at the Planck scale. From this model the Feynman's concept of path integrals follows, which connect the quantum mechanics with general relativity: the quantum phenomena can be considered as a results of super-gravitational lensing at the Planck scale. The AWT explains this behavior by probabilistic character of Aether fluctuations spreading in the chaotic field of Aether.

Furthermore, the analogy of Fermat principle at the water surface and the geodesics concept of 4D space-time leads to the general definition of space-time and time dimensions. By AWT the space-time is formed by Aether mass/energy density gradient to be able to serve for the energy wave spreading by the same way, like the density gradient at the water surface. And the time dimension is the direction normal to this gradient. After then the geodesics concept follows exactly the Fermat principle concept of inertial environment.

zephir

12-31-07, 02:27 PM

Because the expansion of Universe is equivalent to time dilatation (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/12/18/scitime118.xml), all distances inside of our universe expands, so every energy spreading slows down gradually. By Aether Wave Theory the same effect can be interpreted by the model of gradually collapsing star, forming the vacuum environment. If the Universe gets more dense, the energy is moving more slowly gradually and all distances inside of such Universe will expand. I suppose, such explanation is much more easier to realize from physical perspective, then model of dots on the expanding balloon (albeit such model has a relevancy from even deeper perspective of brane cosmology, as we can explain later)

It means, if Universe expands, then every energy spreading slows down, then the speed of light and gravity slows down too. If we compare the speed of Universe expansion with respect of the contemporary speed of light, we will see, the Universe expansion accelerates.

But this is not all. If the vacuum gets dense, we can expect, it collapses by different speed, then the more dense matter inside it. The density of matter and vacuum will level mutually. It means, the matter is surrounded by larger concentration gradient, the gravitation force radius increases. The gravity gets stronger, which effectively means, the gravitational constant in history was substantially weaker in history, then by now.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/astronomy/rotation_galx.gif http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b9/GalacticRotation2.svg/300px-GalacticRotation2.svg.png http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/astronomy/galrotation.gif

Can such extrapolations have some observational consequences? Of course they can, because both light, both gravity is spreading inside of our Universe by limited speed. Therefore we can compare the gravitational force of very distant objects. which were separated by Universe expansions. This results into violation of gravitation force at large distances with respect of Newton law. Such violation is the subject of Modified Newtonian dynamics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modified_Newtonian_dynamics), so called the MOND theory, which is trying to explain the shape and rotational curves of stars inside galaxies and some other dark matter effects by nonlinear gravitational force, which gets weaker with the age/distance.

Of course, here are many other consequences of the time varying gravitational constants, which affects the other fundamental physical constants (http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7285) too. Another consequence is the Expanding Earth theory ( I still don't really buy it..) or the latest observation of dilatation (http://www.physorg.com/news64.html) of losing mass (http://www.vetscite.org/publish/items/003986/index.html) iridium prototype. Another consequence is the gradual decreasing of the supernovae brightening magnitude (http://www.redorbit.com/news/space/16781/the_mystery_of_standard_candles/), when compared with the CMB observations. This is because inside of more dense vacuum the properties of matter and vacuum are much more close each other, so that the effect of supernovae explosions is less pronounced. These supernovae are used as so called "standard candles" for estimations of distances and age of our Universe. The correction would lead to the considerable increasing of the age and size of our Universe.

zephir

01-01-08, 02:04 AM

By AWT the time is real dimension, I mean real at least by the same way, like the space dimensions. For example, the fact the matter is moving through spacetime along geodesics (fastest path in relativity) is the exact analogy of photon motion along fastest path in optics, because the particle of matter is just an energy wave of spacetime and the time is just another compacted space dimension.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/refraction1.gif http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/refraction_trans.gif

For example, for 2D model of space-time formed by water surface the time dimension is the spatial coordinate perpendicular to the water surface. Therefore the water surface can serve as an physically relevant model of 3D spacetime. Note that this space-time R-1/R transform can be interpreted as a Lisi Garett's rotation (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=-xHw9zcCvRQ). I'd recommend you to become familiar with such perspective, or you wouldn't be able to imagine any phenomena in higher dimensions as well.

zephir

01-26-08, 12:57 PM

Time is one of space-time dimensions, i.e. the directions, by which are gradients of mass/energy density of environment are defined.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/time_dimension.gif http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/time_dimension_foam1.gif

Note that the life on particularly stable spacetime brane implies the existence of pair conjugated time dimensions (1 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-theory), 2 (http://science.propeller.com/story/2007/05/15/does-time-have-2-dimensions/), 3 (http://www.physorg.com/news96027669.html), 4 (http://www.physorg.com/news98468776.html)).

BenTheMan

01-26-08, 04:00 PM

With lengthy posts less than a minute apart Zephir and Reiku are most likely the same person. I smell sock puppet.

Nahh... It's clear that English isn't zephir's first language---he makes typical non-native enlish speaking mistakes. And the IP addresses are different.

zephir

01-30-08, 11:35 PM

The animation bellow is illustrating, how the holographic concept arises in the realm of Aether Wave Theory. By this theory the reality is formed by density fluctuations of Aether (i.e. by the "quantum strings", if such concept sounds more familiar for you - which I'm in doubt about). And these fluctuations can be interpreted as the result of projection of another waves by space-time manifolds (Aether density gradients) existing in higher dimensions.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/foam_part.gif http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/heim/dynafoam2.gif http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/Caustics1.gif

This is because all the density fluctuations of Aether are nested mutually and the undulating surface of fluctuation at certain hierarchy level can serve as a projection plane for energy waves formed at the another hierarchy levels, mutually. You can imagine, every density fluctuation inside of dense liquid sphere (black hole, for example) appears as a result of surface waves projection from outside of such sphere. By more formal words, every conformal field perturbation can be intepreted as a result of R-1/R projection of AdS wave on the space-time boundary (the result of quantum tunelling of Universe of Planck size through 2D surface), and vice-versa. Such approach can explain, why the maximal entropy of every finite space volume is related (http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/space_dim2.gif) to it's surface area, not the volume itself (compare the famous Hawking formula for black-hole entropy - from which the relation m=c^3.t/G follows).

Despite of this, I can found the holographic principle as a somewhat artistic concept, just because every hologram is material thing and as such rather unnecessary level of Aether abstraction. Most of people are unable to realize even the function of simple hologram in 3D, not to say in higher dimensions. BTW You can met with nice practical application of the above priciple here (http://www.physorg.com/news120837734.html).

Jozen-Bo

01-30-08, 11:46 PM

Awesome...I will have to follow up on this thread when there is more time!!!

Reiku

01-31-08, 04:52 AM

There is an aether... a quantum aether.

I can tell you more about its history if you want... or just look it up in the encylcopedia in which i imprinted work on this.

zephir

01-31-08, 08:25 AM

There is an aether... a quantum aether..
A large number of Aether models was postulated already (the "quantum aether", "Maxwell's Aether", "Einsteinian Aether" and some others).

We should define some smallest common denominator of Aether concept at first to decide, what the Aether is and what cannot be. For example, I've no problem with Aether concept, which is dependent on quantum mechanics - but how we can be perfecty sure, none of quantum mechanics postulates violates the concept of inertial environement?

Reiku

01-31-08, 08:46 AM

The quantum however, is needed. THESE are words from a physicist.

zephir

01-31-08, 09:29 AM

...The quantum however, is needed...
If it's possible to observe the quantum wave phenomena (http://www.physorg.com/news78650511.html) in mechanical systems, then it should be possible to generalize such phenomena for every mechanical system of the same geometry. It's the geometry, what makes the mechanical system the quantum one, not the postulates. The Aether Wave Theory explains the quantum wave behavior by foamy structure of Aether.

http://www.physorg.com/newman/gfx/news/2006/Walkerphoto(1).jpg

zephir

02-01-08, 03:37 AM

By AWT the universe is formed by random field of Aether density fluctuations, the geometry which appears somewhat transformed for us, though. Because the space-time is perceived via energy spreading and the energy spread via gradients preferably, the volume of transition areas (density gradients) appears greatly enhanced from human perspective and they're forming large volumes of vacuum. Whereas the volume or density fluctuations appears heavily shrinked into massive bodies and rounded into approximately spherical shapes of black holes, stars and planets and their random character manifest itself in their mass only.

The 3D space appears greatly enhanced in such model because of geometry rules for energy spreading. At the case of multidimensional spheres just the 3D hyperspheres can form the most compact arrangement, i.e. the arrangement with highest surface/volume ratio. This leads to the highest complexity of just 3D space-time and richness of Platonic solids.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/perlin1.jpg http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/aether_density.gif

Together with Aether density the complexity of density perturbation is fluctuating and it can reach the levels, at which the intelligent creatures are occasionally formed, this idea is usually called the Boltzmann brain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boltzman_brain), although it was addressed by his assistant by Boltzmann himself. Note, that the concept of human brain and universe as a thermal fluctuation relies on the concept of inertial environment again - so it cannot serve for replacement of Aether theory, being rather direct consequence of it.

We should remember, the randomness of Universe is the dual side of the complexity of its arrangement - i.e. the Universe will appear always as complex and intelligently constructed for us, as random, huge and chaotic it really is.

Reiku

02-01-08, 07:46 AM

I do have a problem with the Boltzmann model of the brain however. Even though it seems like an exotic idea to say that ''things are the way they are, simply because,'' is just an easy way to say that nothing has any providence. When i look at the reflection of consciousness, i don't see chance.

zephir

02-01-08, 05:50 PM

...When i look at the reflection of consciousness, i don't see chance.
When the particle is moving through Aether by AWT, it sniffs for the density gradients like bacteria for food while avoiding obstacles, it makes a number of quantum mechanics "attempts" and it's behaving like tiny primitive organism. The random character of such behavior follows from influence of many surrounding particles and multilateral interactions in many hidden dimensions.

The human behavior is exactly the same from the perspective of our animal pets. When we are moving across city, our motion appears random and unpredictable, being influenced by many congruent motivations at the same moment.

The human consciousness is only illusion of human consciousness.

Trippy

02-03-08, 12:30 PM

You know...

He once posted the exact same survey on another forum, and got much the same result. (not to mention made much the same spelling errors).

And yes, English is nor Zephirs first language.

zephir

02-04-08, 05:07 AM

You know....
Try to write down some new theory in Czech language - we'll see and we can compare the results...;) The problem of many opponents is, they've never considered super-symmetric situation/solution.
For example, many people have thought the Aether as a thin, sparse gas - but who considered the Aether as some heavy dense matter? Is that a reason not to consider such model just because the mainstream science has omitted it?

Trippy

02-04-08, 11:57 AM

For example, many people have thought the Aether as a thin, sparse gas - but who considered the Aether as some heavy dense matter? Is that a reason not to consider such model just because the mainstream science has omitted it?

Well, for starters, the idea makes little or no sense, especially when you consider ideas like the transfer of energy from the aether to objects within the aether.

zephir

02-04-08, 02:17 PM

..when you consider ideas like the transfer of energy from the aether to objects within the aether...

Well, it just means, such idea is nonsense and the idea, both matter, both energy are formed by Aether by the same way appears more relevant. You can consider the vacuum as some special form of matter, or you can consider the matter as some special form of field. The most relevant will be the assumption, both they're special forms of Aether.

The material model of Aether just appears more familiar for most people, because they know about matter from its outside perspective well, so they can find a highest number of analogies here. The field and space/time concepts were recognized a much more later. But in fact, just a proclaimed refusal of Aether concept prohibits the science to consider the material concept of field as freely, as the field concept of matter. It's a matter of politics, because the science is supposed "not to make mistakes".

Another problem is, the science substitutes a role of religion (or the natural oponent of religion) for many people. Every correction in such fundamental point can impeach the credibility of mainstream science and to strengthen the role of religion, indeed. Which is the reason, such correction cannot come from inside of science.

Despite of this, the Aether concept is the trivial and logical consequence of the duality between field and matter concepts and nothing strange is about it. I believe, we can develop the relevant model of Aether composed of matter and energy duality as easily, as the model of Aether composed of space and time (a sort of geometrodynamics theory, in fact). From formal point of view, the formal combination of more complex theories (relativity and quantum mechanics) can be effective as well - but not from intuitive understanding point of view.

From AWT follows, these models aren't completelly equivalent and they should be violated less or more latelly as well on background of some chaos based theory - but this is not really the task for single human, who is developing such theories as an outwork, like me. Frankly, I hope, such theory will be developed by more advanced creatures, who will play together better, then contemporary scientists do.

zephir

02-07-08, 10:49 AM

My reply to the Physics and psychokinesis forum (http://www.sciforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=1741368), which was deleted inbetween from unknown reason.
..Since we know its real, what are the implications and how can this powerful force be controlled?..
As we know, the human brain consumes large amount of energy - at the case of new-born childs nearly of the 60% percent of the total energy consumption! A substantial portion of such energy consist from less or more organized motion of ions in neural cells membranes. And the organized motion of charged particles can have an macroscopical effects to the distance, albeit they produce no macroscopic measurable field. Well known Bohm-Aharamov effect demonstrates, the solenoid can affect the motion of particles flying through double slit, even at the case, the particles doesn't pass it's magnetic field directly. The solenoid is making the vacuum slightly more dense around it, and the particle motion is affected by it indirectly - these effects are highly delocalized.

Everything up to this point are measurable phenomena, the rest are extrapolations of mine. Here are some implicitions for gravitodynamic theory, predicted by Heim's theory and verified by Taimar's experiments. This theory has no robust intepretation at this moment, but I can explain it by the mechanism of composite interactions (electromagnetic force and gravity in this case). It can be understood by inertial mechanics: the pair of weak interactions can result in composite force, which is stronger, then just a product of force constants of both introducing interactions.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/gradient.jpg

A typical case of composite force is the strong nuclear interaction, which is considered as a composite product of weak nuclear force and the electromagnetic interaction by so called electroweak force theory. The force constant of strong nuclear interaction is higher, then the force constants of both interactions together. We can met with the same mechanism at the case of water surface. The water waves can serve as a composite bosons of gravity and electromagnetic force and they can transfer a substantial amount of energy at the distance, much higher, then the gravity or electromagnetic force can by itself.

Therefore we can expect the gravitomagnetic interaction at the case of accelerated motion of charged particles in gravitational field, or during acceleration of inertial particles in geomagnetic field (pyramid effect), etc. The conduction of electric current at the distance in Earth's gravity field can resul into gravitomagnetic waves as well. Until now, the gravitomagnetic effects were observed in lab during fast acceleration (spinning) of boson condensate in superconductors in magnetic field. The so called "hot dark matter" phenomena and the cohesion of charge carriers inside of ball lighning can have the same effect. And the human brain can be considered as cold plasma, i.e. the dense cloud of solvated ions, whose motion is tighly confined by neural cell membranes. They're forced to undulate from one side to another by energy gradients of oscilating chemical reactions, so they form a substantial amount of charged matter, undulating at place by organized way.

Here's another interesting system of standing waves of charge carriers, which can model this behavior: a bifiliar twisted coil, which is believed to be the source of scalar field - i.e. the volume area of dense vacuum, which doesn't affect it's vicinity by electromagnetic field, just by vacuum density of such field. By another words, here's a whole large area of physics to explore.

Reiku

02-07-08, 11:40 AM

... Have you yet considered that ZPF Zeph mate?

Reiku

02-07-08, 11:41 AM

(I really liked that last read).

zephir

02-07-08, 05:08 PM

... Have you yet considered that ZPF..?
WTF?

Reiku

02-08-08, 04:16 AM

The Zero-Point Energy Field, which has close relations to the Dirac Sea? - In fact, they are the same thing...

zephir

02-08-08, 07:36 AM

I see, Aether particles - supposedly the density fluctuations in higher dimensions.
We should consider the model of infinitelly dimensional random scalar field - how such field is supposed to appear from low dimensional perspective? Such field cannot appear completelly random for us, because the more distant/derived dimensions will manifest itself by less pronounced way.

zephir

02-16-08, 06:32 AM

As a conceptual father of Aether Wave Theory (beside the J.C. Maxwell) can be considered an an American astronomer T. J. J. See (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson_Jackson_See) (1866 - 1962), who wrote a series of articles (http://www.rexresearch.com/see/see.htm) about the Aether (nearly 300 pages), which served as his framework for his theory of everything.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/TJJSee11.jpg http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/TJJSee21.jpg

All forces were carried as waves in his ether by his theory, which was calculated to be correct description of nature to higher then 10E+200. He also engaged in vitriolic attacks against Einstein and his theory of relativity, which Einstein essentially ignored. The serious scientific community also ignored See's books on relativity, other than to bandy them about for laughs.

The origins of Aether Wave Theory goes even deeper, though, As in the E.E. Brooks & A.W.Poyeser's Magnetism and electricity (http://www.archive.org/details/magnetismelectri00broorich) textbook (published in London, 1914) is explicitelly stated:

"We have implicitly assumed the existence of a medium, which is the seat of the phenomena denoted by the terms electric and magnetic lines of force. ... For instance, if the ether is incompressible, as it is usually assumed to be, we are driven, by one line of argument, to the conclusion that it is 2000 million times denser than lead and possesses enormous energy of internal motion. On the other hand, if it is compressible, it may be much rarer than the rarest gas. There is no intrinsic difficulty in either view, but at present no method is known by which we may hope to discriminate between them. The whole subject of the ether is in that state of uncertainty and apparent confusion, which in other branches of science has usually preceded some great advance in knowledge."

It means, even before one hundred years the people have understood the dual nature of Aether hypothesis. In his later papers, T.J.J. See has even supplied a conclusive criterions for rejecting this claim of a large density for the Aether.

zephir

03-16-08, 03:06 PM

When the idea of dense Aether has appeared first in physics? It seems, the original author of dense Aether concept was Sir Oliver Joseph Lodge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Lodge), who published in Haper's Magazine (http://www.harpers.org/archive/1904/08/0011272) in 1904 his "Electric Theory of Matter (http://www.oneillselectronicmuseum.com/page40.html)", which is basically the electromagnetic theory of Aether. The fundamental mistake of T.J.J.See (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=1999JHA....30...25S&db_key=AST&link_type=ARTICLE) was, he didn't understood (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=1920AN....211...49S&db_key=AST&link_type=ARTICLE) the dense Aether concept, like others, albeit Lodge has explained it (http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1918Obs....41..446L&data_type=PDF_HIGH&whole_paper=YES&type=PRINTER&filetype=.pdf) to him explicitly. From this discussion it's evident, the conceptual father of AWT was rather Oliver Lodge (http://chem.ch.huji.ac.il/history/lodge.html), not T.J.J. See, albeit the later had published a lotta articles (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-ref_query?bibcode=1920AN....211...49S&refs=AR&db_key=AST) about Aether (1 (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=1920AN....211..137S&db_key=AST&link_type=ARTICLE), 2 (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=1920AN....211...49S&db_key=AST&link_type=ARTICLE), 3 (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=1921AN....212..385S&db_key=AST&link_type=ARTICLE), 4 (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=1921AN....212..233S&db_key=AST&link_type=ARTICLE), 5 (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=1923AN....217..193S&db_key=AST&link_type=ARTICLE), 6 (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=1921AN....214..281S&db_key=AST&link_type=ARTICLE), 7 (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=1926AN....226..401S&db_key=AST&link_type=ARTICLE)) later.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/dense_aether01.gif http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/OliverLodge.jpg http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/dense_aether02.gif

Reiku

03-16-08, 09:06 PM

The Zero-Point Field Fluctuations would actually contribute to your discussions. It is found that this sea of negative energy (which is really neaded) is linked not only to the metaphysical aether, but also the quantum mechanical aether.

zephir

03-17-08, 12:50 PM

...this sea of negative energy...
The Aether Wave Theory considers the Aether as a dense inertial system defined by equilibrium of mass and energy density. If this equilibrium is broken, it manifest itself as a energy and/or mass field, depending the sign of perturbation.

It can be understood easily by condensing vapor model. If the mass density prevails in some place and moment, the formation of observable matter, i.e. the condensation of droplet will occur. On the other hand, the excess of energy density leads to the thermal dissolution of the droplets and the spreading of their matter in the form of the energy.

By such way, the Aether Wave Theory contains the concept of "Zero energy field" on the background naturally. For example the condensation of matter droplets can be understood in terms of separation of vacancy hole - charge carriers concept of Dirac's sea of ZPE. But here are other concepts, for which the ZPE field isn't so good in explanations, so that the AWT isn't based on this concept in its entirety. The AWT is supposed to be as general, as possible, so it contains every particular concept as a theorem, not the postulate.

AlphaNumeric

03-17-08, 01:24 PM

Still at it eh Zephir. Still got nothing to show for all your claims. Still got no way of modelling anything. Still got no understanding of actual physics. Still as delusional as ever.

Just like all the cranks, you're still peddling the same BS and you always will be. You're going nowhere.

zephir

03-17-08, 03:00 PM

..still got no understanding of actual physics..
This is result of optimized strategy. At first, the understanding of Universe is easier, then the understanding of the physics.

Albert Einstein: "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."

If it's true, why to waste the time by apparently more extensive and difficult tasks?

At second, if the "actual physics" cannot explain the reality in its deeper extent, why to waste the time by understanding of "actual physics"?

Thirdly, what's wrong on the Aether theory, in fact? If it's not apparently wrong, why not to check this apparently transparent way of Nature understanding?

Reiku

03-17-08, 05:05 PM

AN

As i have said before, your attitude stinks. You don't come here to talk science, but gather up on some way for you to try and get into a fight or bring someone else down so it makes you feel happier.

Well, i hope you do. I wouldn't want to see your invaluable efforts going to waste.

zephir

03-17-08, 05:46 PM

...You don't come here to talk science, but gather up on some way for you to try and get into a fight or bring someone else down so it makes you feel happier.....

Well, just try to answer the simple question: which relevant objection can you put against AWT? If any, why not to face the reality: I'm here just to reintroduce well abandoned view to contemporary physics for other people. Not for dummy discussions about someone's pet theories.

BTW Why do you mean, my explanations (http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/physorg/Interaction.htm) are deleted from here? Because they don't talk science?

Reiku

03-17-08, 05:55 PM

Zeph...

That was directed at Alphanumeric, hence ''AN'' first/

Reiku

03-17-08, 05:58 PM

But...

Your explanations are just as valid as mine, Tom, Dick or Harry... Only that there will always be other contending theories, and some which are highlighted to be more scientifically-accurate than others.

If it is any constallation, i like your idea's. They spark originality.

zephir

03-17-08, 06:04 PM

...that was directed at Alphanumeric, hence ''AN'' first...
Frankly, I missed the "AN" redirection in your post completely, sorry. Why not to use the standard QUOTE feature? You're risking, you'll be gunned down during foreign selfdefence occasionally..:cool:

Concerning the Alphanumeric, u should understand him. He's a string theory proponent and the AWT brings a strong competition to string theory, at least at the conceptual level in this moment. Believe it or not, he's is fighting for survival.

What's your criterion of relevance of physical theories? You should have some - or do you want to consider all these theories of Tom, Dick or Harry at the same level? Such approach will lead into flat landscape of some 6.7 E+9 theories undeniably. If nothing else, I can suppose, the theory, which covers the theories of both Tom, Dick and Harry altogether as a particular cases of itself should be more acceptable for you, then any other individual theory.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/dynafoam.gif

The AWT is very pluralistic by its very nature. It considers a scientific theories as a dynamic foam, the density fluctuations of which are connecting different places in casual space time.The physical theories are true physical artifacts by AWT, because their existence has a tangible effect to physical reality. From this follows, no single universal theory can ever exist for given purpose. What you can do is just to choose the best suited theory for given purpose in given moment.

Here are many analogies between information and energy spreading throughout civilization. For example, the system of dual theories (GR/QM, LQG/ST, ...) appears more temporal, by the same way, like the political system of two parties (democratic/conservative party in particular). The pluralistic systems tends to convert into dual ones by the same way, like the membranes in the foam, which consists mostly just from two surfaces, which are the result of balanced force equilibrium.

AlphaNumeric

03-18-08, 05:08 AM

As i have said before, your attitude stinks. You don't come here to talk scienceHypocrisy overload!
Well, just try to answer the simple question: which relevant objection can you put against AWT? What results can you derive from AWT? What are it's postulates? What precise predictions can it make? What physical system can it model with experimentally verifiable results?

All of those make AWT fall flat on it's face.
Not for dummy discussions about someone's pet theories.That's precisely what AWT and your BS is.
He's a string theory proponent and the AWT brings a strong competition to string theory,No, it isn't. It's not strong competition at all.

AWT cannot answer any of those questions I just asked you.
Believe it or not, he's is fighting for survival.You're just like Farsight. You think you've got all the answers but you're unable to publish your work because it's BS.

How many years you been peddling this crap now Zephir? 2? 4? 6? Why aren't you trying to publish it? If it's 'strong competition' why aren't I scared? Farsight thinks I'm scared but I challenged him to publish his work and he ran away. Just like StevenA did/does. Just like you will.

Come on. I bet £100 you cannot get your work published in JHEP. Up for that bet? If I'm scared, why do I put my money where my mouth is. If you think I'm scared, put your money where your mouth is.
What's your criterion of relevance of physical theories?It should be able to provide some accurate description of nature.

String theory can do that, for instance in the case of gravity. Can AWT? Provide a single equation which you can derive from the postulates of AWT (which isn't just "I claim [tex]E=mc^{2}[/tec]") which can be testable in an accurate experiment.

zephir

03-18-08, 05:49 AM

What results can you derive from AWT? What are it's postulates? What precise predictions can it make? What physical system can it model with experimentally verifiable results?...
At first, the very same objections can by elevated against string theories as well. The string theories are many, every with different postulate set, they're often mutually contradicting itself. For example, the dilaton version of string theory predicts the violation of ISL, some other not.

How is it possible to verify the string theory as a whole, after then? Concerning the precise predictions, the string theory is unable to compute anything testable at this moment as well. The prediction of cosmological constant differs by many orders of magnitude from reality. It means, the string theory does the very same in consequence like AWT, just in qualified way from the formal math perspective, while the AWT is trying to remain rigorous at the boolean logic level.

From causal perspective, the string theory isn't competition for AWT, because it's not even trying to explain the quantum mechanics and relativity postulates, being a highly derived theory in fact, built on top of relativity and quantum mechanics theories, which are left unexplained by string theory. While the explanation of quantum theory, relativity and string artifacts are all theorems for AWT, which should be indeed formalized later. The real competition of string theory is the LQG theory, for example, not the AWT.

At the moment, the string theorists have no explanation for the postulates of string theory, they're simply condemned to wait for some more general theory, which will try to explain them.