Zephir

Briefly the postulates. What the AWT basically says, is, the Universe is random inertial stuff.

The information cannot be transported without matter, until you prove the opposite (by some example). The information in boson condensate is transferred by number of atoms.

And how you can derive this math without using of existing theories, if you don't understand the subject? By such approach you're required to develop the physics only by combination of existing equations (like the string theorists are doing), are you? Furthermore, you're not required to understand model completely, you're just required to derive some testable predictions of it. And such derivation doesn't required to be formal, just unambiguous.

The computer simulation isn't required to solve any formal model. You can use the particle simulation of fluid (for example the Lattice Boltzmann simulation), without writing any differential equation. This is how the simulation bellow was computed. If I should derive the formal model of it at first, I would spend the whole rest of my life by this task. Because the string theorists don't know, what they're computing, theyre required to combine the formal model from scratch by blind combinations of equations from existing theories, which are believed to be working with infinite precision. No wonder, the understanding of the physical model proceeds so slowly. They're simply cannot see the forest for woods. The result is growing landscape of mutually incompatible theories. I don't know, what the "modern science" means for you. For me it's completelly undefined concept. What I can just see, even the simplest concepts weren't considered, tested the lessl, just because they cannot be formalized so easily. Therefore I don't want to understand the "modern science", I want to understand the Universe and to collect some testable predictions about it. I'd reccomend you to do the same. After all, if you want to compute somethings, you're on wrong place here. This is not computational forum. Albert Einstein: "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not even sure about the former." If the above is true, why to start the understanding of the reality by its apparently more difficult part? I'm just following the principle of least action, as usually.

This is just an conjecture of yours. For example, as a Galileo I'm able to predict Venus phases from heliocentric model and verify such prediction by observation without single row of math. And my theory will remain verified by such way by much more reliable way, then any numerical prediction of string theory. Simply because my prediction is working on robust logical level, not the formal math level, which can be poorly conditioned. What I mean with this? If the Galileo would wait for numerical confirmation of heliocentric model, we would use the Ptolemy theory even this very day. Because the Ptolemy theory was heavily fitted to the observational data, so that every prediction of heliocentric model, derived from Kepler's law cannot compete with it. Briefly speaking, because both Ptolemy both heliocentric model are supplying the same numerical results, the formal math cannot be used for distinguishing them. After all, the fact, the ancient astronomers were able to compute the astronomical events with high reliability doesn't mean at all, they understood the subject. Therefore your argumentation is just a conceptual return to the times of opponents of Galileo, who didn't understood, why to replace the epicycles model, if it's working so well for astronomers.

You shouldn't calculate your homework, until you'll get (understand) the assignation completelly. Or you'll start to blindly combine the formulas without understanding. And how can you derive these formula without understanding of subject at first? No way... Briefly speaking, you should always understand the physics at first on logical, illustrative level. Or you'll develop the string theory for forty years without single testable prediction, because you've ignored the facts, the testable predictions are coming from logical conjectures, not from equations only. The equations can give you just the result, which was putted into them during derivation of physical model. And without physical model you will not get the physical results, end of story. Furthermore, the calculations isn't so great problem in AWT. Can you model the dynamic fluctuations of supercritical vapor? It's quite easy by using of computer. But it's not so easy to derive some working math model of that stuff, due the highly chaotic nature of these fluctuations. This is why, we have a many theories of black holes, but we haven't the (explicit) theory of common vapor condensation or turbulence.

This is just an illusion of yours. The waves can travel on water only by the speed of surface waves, when observed by using of surface water waves. By the same way, like when observing the light spreading speed by light waves in vacuum. What you probably mean, is the case of observation of surface water wave spreading by using of sound or light waves. But this IS NOT equivalent situation. Whenever you'll use a two kinds of waves, instead of single one in experiment, you'll get a different result. It's logical, isn't it?

I'm discussing the AWT only. This isn't supposed to be a replacement of any theory, it's a metatheory. After all, why it should be replacement just the maxwell theory of light? There is huge number of other theories. I don't understand the sentence of yours fully. Sorry, English isn't my native language, as You probably realize... The violation Lorentz invariance for short wavelength gamma radiation was confirmed by MAGIC observation. Guys, you're all very nervous. Try to explain, why the particles should consist of strings for me, for example. After you'll find some reasonable explanation, you can call it "theory of strings", or whatever else. I choosed the AWT, because of scientific priority of this concept, that's all.

Betwixt and between, if you try to think about Aether concept, youl'll find, it has no reference frame at all. Or at least its reference frame is undefined.

From where the Darwins theory have become a real scientific theory, after then? Try to supply some date.

Then the Darwin's theory is not scientific theory as well. The light is spreading through Aether via thin density fluctuations in transversal waves by the same way, like the waves at water surface. The propagation of tiny surface waves (so called the capillary waves) doesn't depend on the underwater motion, so that such motion cannot be detected easily by using of these waves, therefore the negative result of MM experiment is in agreement with Aether theory in fact. But the AWT predicts, for light of much shorter of longer wavelength then the visible light the Lorentz invariance should be violated by the same way, like for waves at the water surface due the dispersion.

The Aether was considered as a gas, which is surrounding the massive objects. It was never considered as a material of such objects. Don't ask me, why. No contemporary theory can derive the light speed from scratch. The science is using many qualitative concepts (the evolutionary theory, the heliocentric theory) without formal models. For example, just from assumption, the Earth is moving around Sun and not vice verse is possible to deduce many testable predictions, like the : existence of parallax shape of Lunar crater shadows phases of Jupiter moons Venus phases Does it mean, the heliocentric model has no testable predictions without math or even it shouldn't be considered seriously? I don't think so. If the Darwin's theory has no math model, it doesn't mean, it's wrong, or such model cannot be developed later, after confirmation of such theory by testable predictions, based on boolean logic. If nothing else, you can use the AWT for explanation of concepts, which are having no explanation (the constant speed of light as an example). By AWT the speed of every wave is constant, when measured by the same wave by definition of speed.

Some trivial simulation of such situation (developed & tested just for MSIE 6.0 browser only, sorry).

Because the watter as exotermic coumpound is more close to decomposition when heated. This results in lower voltage required. Of course, the higher conductivity and lower viscosity should be considered too, but the true reason is thermodynamical one.

We do, but the total mass transferable is quite low just due the E=mc^2, so such teleportation is feasible just for very thin clouds of matter, so called boson condensates.

By AWT the observation of chaos inhomogeneities through another chaos inhomogeneities will lead into illusion of increasing number of inhomogeneities like the observation of object through bumpy glass. The higher density of chaos inhomogeneities leads to the illusion of Universe expansion with distance (and the acceleration of this expansion, and so on...)

Yes, the universe can be considered as a single quantum wave, just in infinite number of dimensions, therefore we can see it as a random chaos. If you project the harmonic motion in many dimensions into 2D plane, it will appear chaotic, therefore the projection of harmonic motion in infinite number of dimensions into 3D space-time would appear like quantum chaos as well. The quantum wave isn't completely harmonic wave, though, by AWT it's the wave of foam, i.e. the string, whose mass density is proportional the energy density in each time and space interval, because what we can see from Universe is just random foam of chaos and the foam gets more dense under shaking temporarily. Therefore the observable Universe can considered to be a dense blob simmilar to black hole, which is undulating like single quantum wave, so it has an character of both wave, both particle at the same time like every piece of it.

Currently the AWT is the only theory, which explains the character of light, which is spreading through vacuum in transversal waves without Maxwell's theory, which is based on experiments with these waves and/or quantum field theories, which are based on unexplained yet postulates of quantum mechanics and relativity theory. The AWT is basically the inertial chaos theory, it doesn't use any experimentally determined postulates for description of Universe, therefore every description of Aether can be considered as a theorem of AWT, i.e. the prediction. The most important prediction of AWT at the first sight is the string concept and string structure of vacuum, because inside of every dense particle system the fluctuations are having the foamy structure, which can be revealed both by direct observation of supercritical fluid, both by computer simulations. The foam concept is much more common in contemporary physics, then just in string theory, though. Even the LQG and/or Heim theories are based on foam lattice/network concepts, for example. So if you don't know, from where such concept has come into physics, then the AWT is here for you. The first attempt to describe the black hole interior was done by Kip Thorne, who conjectured before twenty years, the black hole interior has a foamy structure. It's quite easy to derive such conclusion, if we assume, the interior of BH is behaving like dense Boltzmann gas composed of mutually colliding particles. We can compare it with foamy structure of dark matter streaks, which can be detected by CMB and gravitational lensing. Even some string theorists have their own model of the black hole interior. They're calling it fuzzball and describing it as a ball full of strings, similar to golf ball. Such hypothesis is consistent with J.A.Wheeler's concept of quantum foam and Process physics, Unparticle physics and others.

The main idea of Aether Wave Theory (AWT) is, the whole Universe is composed of continuous inertial environment with infinite mass and energy density, i.e. the Aether. No other assumptions are given, therefore all consequences should follow from this introductory postulate. This corresponds the idea, the whole observable Universe is formed by dense interior of giant collapsed star, which is similar to black hole. Such environment is so dense, so that even the smallest density fluctuation here is behaving like independent particle with gravitating effects. We can imagine such matter as a condensing hot and dense particle system, similar to supercritical fluid, where all observable artifacts are formed by density fluctuations of another particles, recursively. Currently the main asset of AWT is, it simplifies the qualitative understanding of most of formal aspects of contemporary physics, i.e. the relativity, quantum mechanics and cosmology and related phenomena. It brings a many new insights into them, while reconciling the modern physics with classical Newtonian mechanics, well - at least conceptually. The realm of AWT is not limited just to the area of physics. It's in fact the comprehensive theory of both matter, both biological and social evolution, as we can demonstrate later. The AWT was disputed on physorg forum extensively. You can found backup of all posts here. The AWT is based on luminiferous aether concept, which was studied extensively at the end of 19th century. While the Aether is considered a inertial, i.e. massive environment composed from particles, which is serving for spreading of light, it considers the Aether as being postulated by Rene Descartes (1647) and Christian Huygens (1678). It just modifies the Aether hypothesis by assumption, the Aether is of infinite mass and energy density. The idea of dense Aether is close to "Electric Theory of Matter" of Sir Oliver Joseph Lodge, which was published in Harper's Magazine in 1904 as a electromagnetic theory of Aether. He was first, who stated correctly, the Aether must be very dense environment, to be able to mediate the most energetic light (like the X-ray and gamma radiation) and to mediate the forces in atom nuclei. Unfortunately, this idea was misunderstood by other aetherists, ignored by relativitists and as such it was forgotten completely.