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

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by zephir, Dec 1, 2007.

?

What do you think about AWT?

Poll closed Nov 30, 2008.

3 vote(s)
17.6%

0 vote(s)
0.0%

0 vote(s)
0.0%

0 vote(s)
0.0%

3 vote(s)
17.6%

11 vote(s)
64.7%
1. zephirBannedBanned

Messages:
390
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.

Last edited: Feb 4, 2008

3. zephirBannedBanned

Messages:
390
My reply to the Physics and psychokinesis forum, which was deleted inbetween from unknown reason.
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.

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.

5. ReikuBannedBanned

Messages:
11,238
... Have you yet considered that ZPF Zeph mate?

7. ReikuBannedBanned

Messages:
11,238
(I really liked that last read).

Messages:
390
WTF?

9. ReikuBannedBanned

Messages:
11,238
The Zero-Point Energy Field, which has close relations to the Dirac Sea? - In fact, they are the same thing...

10. zephirBannedBanned

Messages:
390
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.

Last edited: Feb 8, 2008
11. zephirBannedBanned

Messages:
390
Conceptual father of Aether Wave Theory

As a conceptual father of Aether Wave Theory (beside the J.C. Maxwell) can be considered an an American astronomer T. J. J. See (1866 - 1962), who wrote a series of articles about the Aether (nearly 300 pages), which served as his framework for his theory of everything.

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 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.

Last edited: Feb 16, 2008
12. zephirBannedBanned

Messages:
390
Conceptual origins of Aether Wave Theory

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, who published in Haper's Magazine in 1904 his "Electric Theory of Matter", which is basically the electromagnetic theory of Aether. The fundamental mistake of T.J.J.See was, he didn't understood the dense Aether concept, like others, albeit Lodge has explained it to him explicitly. From this discussion it's evident, the conceptual father of AWT was rather Oliver Lodge, not T.J.J. See, albeit the later had published a lotta articles about Aether (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7) later.

Last edited: Mar 16, 2008
13. ReikuBannedBanned

Messages:
11,238
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.

14. zephirBannedBanned

Messages:
390
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.

15. AlphaNumericFully ionizedModerator

Messages:
6,697
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.

16. zephirBannedBanned

Messages:
390
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?

17. ReikuBannedBanned

Messages:
11,238
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.

18. zephirBannedBanned

Messages:
390
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 are deleted from here? Because they don't talk science?

19. ReikuBannedBanned

Messages:
11,238
Zeph...

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

20. ReikuBannedBanned

Messages:
11,238
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.

21. zephirBannedBanned

Messages:
390
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..

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.

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.

Last edited: Mar 17, 2008
22. AlphaNumericFully ionizedModerator

Messages:
6,697
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.
That's precisely what AWT and your BS is.
No, it isn't. It's not strong competition at all.

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.
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 $E=mc^{2}[/tec]") which can be testable in an accurate experiment.$

23. zephirBannedBanned

Messages:
390
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.

Last edited: Mar 18, 2008