mpc755 Posted April 9, 2011 Posted April 9, 2011 The aether is, or behaves similar to, a frictionless superfluid with properties of a solid. 'Superfluid Is Shown To Have Property Of A Solid' http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/07/990730072958.htm "Northwestern University physicists have for the first time shown that superfluid helium-3 -- the lighter isotope of helium, which is a liquid that has lost all internal friction, allowing it to flow without resistance and ooze through tiny spaces that normal liquids cannot penetrate -- actually behaves like a solid in its ability to conduct sound waves." '"Faraday's finding was the first indication that light and magnetism were related," says William Halperin, professor of physics and astronomy at Northwestern. "I wouldn't say that our discovery is of that magnitude, but it is significant as the first observation of a previously unknown mode of wave propagation in a liquid -- one that is of the type you would expect to see in a solid."' The galaxy clusters in the following article are not traveling with dark matter. The galaxy clusters are moving through the aether. The galaxy clusters displace aether. 'Hubble Finds Ghostly Ring of Dark Matter 'http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/news/dark_matter_ring_feature.html "Astronomers using NASA's Hubble Space Telescope got a first-hand view of how dark matter behaves during a titanic collision between two galaxy clusters. The wreck created a ripple of dark mater, which is somewhat similar to a ripple formed in a pond when a rock hits the water." The 'pond' consists of aether. The moving 'particles' are the galaxy clusters. The 'ripple' is a gravitational wave. The 'ripple' is an aether displacement wave. The above is physical evidence of a moving 'particle' having an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment, the particle travels a single path and enters and exits a single slit. It is the associated aether displacement wave which enters and exits both slits. The aether displacement wave creates wave interference upon exiting the slits. As the particle exits a singel slit, it is this interference which alters the direction the particle travels. Detecting the particle causes a loss of coherence of the associated aether displacement wave, there is no wave interference, and the direction the particle travels is not altered. The aether is detected every time a double slit experiment is performed. Aether has mass. Aether physically occupies three dimensional space. Aether is physically displaced by matter. Aether is not at rest when displaced. Displaced aether exerts force towards matter. Force exerted towards matter by aether displaced by matter is gravity. Aether Displacement explains why the shape of the Milky Way's 'dark matter' is in the shape of a squished beach ball. 'Dark Halo Around Our Galaxy Looks Like Squished Beach Ball' http://www.space.com/7746-dark-halo-galaxy-squished-beach-ball.html "Dark matter seems to shroud the remaining visible matter in giant spheres called haloes." The Milky Way's halo is displaced aether. "But the new study found that the Milky Way's halo isn't exactly spherical, but squished. In fact, its beach-ball form is flattened in a surprising direction perpendicular to the galaxy's visible, pancake-shaped spiral disk." All of the aether displaced by the Milky Way matter exerts force towards the matter. The force exerted towards the matter by the aether displaced perpendicular to the plane of the galaxy's spiral disk offset. It is the aether which is displaced outward relative to the plane of the spiral disk which exerts force towards the center of the galaxy. This forces the matter closer together which results in the displaced aether looking like a squished beach ball. Matter does not move with dark matter. Matter moves through the aether. 'Offset between dark matter and ordinary matter: evidence from a sample of 38 lensing clusters of galaxies' http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16739.x/abstract "We compile a sample of 38 galaxy clusters which have both X-ray and strong lensing observations, and study for each cluster the projected offset between the dominant component of baryonic matter centre (measured by X-rays) and the gravitational centre (measured by strong lensing). Among the total sample, 45 per cent clusters have offsets >10 arcsec. The >10 arcsec separations are significant, considering the arcsecond precision in the measurement of the lensing/X-ray centres. This suggests that it might be a common phenomenon in unrelaxed galaxy clusters that gravitational field is separated spatially from the dominant component of baryonic matter. It also has consequences for lensing models of unrelaxed clusters since the gas mass distribution may differ from the dark matter distribution and give perturbations to the modelling. Such offsets can be used as a statistical tool for comparison with the results of Lambda cold dark matter ( CDM) simulations and to test the modified dynamics." The offset is due to the galaxy clusters moving through the aether. 'Ether and the Theory of Relativity - Albert Einstein' http://www.tu-harburg.de/rzt/rzt/it/Ether.html "Since according to our present conceptions the elementary particles of matter are also, in their essence, nothing else than condensations of the electromagnetic field" The electromagnetic field is a state of aether. Matter is condensations of aether. DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT?' A. EINSTEIN http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf "If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass diminishes by L/c2." The mass of the body does diminish; however, the matter which no longer exists as part of the body has not vanished. It still exists, as aether. Matter evaporates into aether. As matter converts to aether it expands in three dimensional space. The physical effects this transition has on the neighboring aether and matter is energy. Mass is conserved. Energy is conserved. A change in state of that which has mass is energy. All 'delayed choice quantum eraser' experiments are explained by understanding conservation of momentum and a moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In the image on the right here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#The_experiment When the downgraded photon pair are created, in order for there to be conservation of momentum, the original photons momentum is conserved. This means the downgraded photon pair have opposite polarizations. We will describe one of the photons as being the 'up' photon and the other photon as being the 'down' photon. One of the downgraded photons travels either the red or blue path towards D0 and the other photon travels either the red or blue path towards the prism. There are physical waves in the aether propagating both the red and blue paths. The aether waves propagating towards D0 interact with the lens and create interference prior to reaching D0. The aether waves create interference which alters the direction the photon travels prior to reaching D0. There are actually two interference patterns being created at D0. One associated with the 'up' photons when they arrive at D0 and the other interference pattern associated with the 'down' photons when they arrive at D0. Both 'up' and 'down' photons are reflected by BSa and arrive at D3. Since there is a single path towards D3 there is nothing for the wave in the aether to interfere with and there is no interference pattern and since it is not determined if it is an 'up' or 'down' photon being detected at D3 there is no way to distinguish between the photons arriving at D0 which interference pattern each photon belongs to. The same for photons reflected by BSb and arrive at D4. Photons which pass through BSa and are reflected by BSc and arrive at D1 are either 'up' or 'down' photons but not both. If 'up' photons arrive at D1 then 'down' photons arrive at D2. The opposite occurs for photons which pass through BSb. Photons which pass through BSa and pass through BSb and arrive at D1 are all either 'up' or 'down' photons. If all 'up' photons arrive at D1 then all 'down' photons arrive at D2. Since the physical waves in the aether traveling both the red and blue paths are combined prior to D1 and D2 the aether waves create interference which alters the direction the photon travels. Since all 'up' photons arrive at one of the detectors and all 'down' photons arrive at the other an interference pattern is created which reflects back to the interference both sets of photons are creating at D0. The following experiment will provide evidence of Aether Displacement: Instead of having a single beam splitter BSc have two beam splitters BSca and BScb. Have the photons reflected by mirror Ma interact with BSca and have the photons reflected by mirror Mb interact with BScb. Do not combine the red and blue paths. Have additional detectors D1a, D2a, D1b, and D2b. Have the photons reflected by and propagate through BSca be detected at D1a and D2a. Have the photons reflected by and propagate through BScb be detected at D1b and D2b. If you compare the photons detected at D1a and D1b with the photons detected at D0, the corresponding photons detected at D0 will form an interference pattern. If you compare the photons detected at D2a and D2b with the photons detected at D0, the corresponding photons detected at D0 will form an interference pattern. What is occurring is all 'up' photons are being detected at one pair of detectors, for example D1a and D1b, and all 'down' photons are being detected at the other pair of detectors, for example D2a and D2b. Interference patterns do not even need to be created in order to determine the interference patterns created at D0.
swansont Posted April 9, 2011 Posted April 9, 2011 You're getting ahead of yourself. Explain the result of the michelson-morley experiment and existence of stellar aberration with an ether. 1
ydoaPs Posted April 9, 2011 Posted April 9, 2011 I'd much rather discuss the biological effects of caffeine on hobbits.
mpc755 Posted April 9, 2011 Author Posted April 9, 2011 You're getting ahead of yourself. Explain the result of the michelson-morley experiment and existence of stellar aberration with an ether. The analogy is a tank full of superfluid helium-3. In the tank you place a bowling ball sized mesh container full of small marbles. You rotate the mesh bag. As you rotate the mesh container you move the bag through the frictionless superfluid. The state of the frictionless superfluid at the surface of the mesh bag is mostly determined by the rotation of the bag. The state of the frictionless superfluid is mostly determined by its connections with the matter and the state of of the frictionless superfluid in neighboring places. The Earth displaces the aether far beyond the moon. To fill a telescope with water to provide evidence the aether is not entrained by the Earth is scientifically weak. The aether is, or behaves similar to, a frictionless superfluid with properties of a solid. The aether is not entrained by the Earth, the aether is displaced by the Earth. Ether and the Theory of Relativity - Albert Einstein' http://www.tu-harburg.de/rzt/rzt/it/Ether.html "if, in fact nothing else whatever were observable than the shape of the space occupied by the water as it varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that water consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise it as a medium." If you replace water with ether you will understand Einstein's concept of ether: if, in fact nothing else whatever were observable than the shape of the space occupied by the [ether] as it varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that [ether] consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise it as a medium. What Einstein is referring to throughout the article is the aether's state of displacement. "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places, ... disregarding the causes which condition its state." The state of the aether as determined by its connections with the matter and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the aether's state of displacement. The cause which conditions its state is its displacement by matter. -1
swansont Posted April 9, 2011 Posted April 9, 2011 This is science, though. Analogies are simplified explanations of theories, not the theories themselves. Your proposal, your burden of proof. Until you can show that your theory fits with observation, any hand-wavy dismissal of an experiment as "scientifically weak" is scientifically pathetic. 3
mpc755 Posted April 9, 2011 Author Posted April 9, 2011 (edited) Matter does not move with dark matter. Matter moves through the aether. 'Offset between dark matter and ordinary matter: evidence from a sample of 38 lensing clusters of galaxies' http://onlinelibrary...6739.x/abstract "We compile a sample of 38 galaxy clusters which have both X-ray andstrong lensing observations, and study for each cluster the projectedoffset between the dominant component of baryonic matter centre(measured by X-rays) and the gravitational centre (measured by stronglensing). Among the total sample, 45 per cent clusters have offsets>10 arcsec. The >10 arcsec separations are significant,considering the arcsecond precision in the measurement of thelensing/X-ray centres. This suggests that it might be a commonphenomenon in unrelaxed galaxy clusters that gravitational field isseparated spatially from the dominant component of baryonic matter. Italso has consequences for lensing models of unrelaxed clusters sincethe gas mass distribution may differ from the dark matter distributionand give perturbations to the modelling. Such offsets can be used as astatistical tool for comparison with the results of Lambda cold darkmatter ( CDM) simulations and to test the modified dynamics." The above fits with matter moving through the 'dark matter'; which is evidence what is postulated as 'dark matter' is aether. The offset is due to the galaxy clusters moving with respect to the state of the aether. The analogy is a submarine moving through the water. Far off in the distance are lights. The submarine moves between you and the lights destorting the light waves. The submarine displaces the water. The galaxy clusters displace the aether. Edited April 9, 2011 by mpc755 -1
lemur Posted April 10, 2011 Posted April 10, 2011 (edited) The aether is, or behaves similar to, a frictionless superfluid with properties of a solid. The aether is not entrained by the Earth, the aether is displaced by the Earth. If the either was displaced by Earth (which would make sense if it was lighter than helium because I assume it would be shot way out of orbit with its low mass), then how would it function as a medium for light? Wouldn't light only be present where the aether is? Second, how can anything with inertia be completely frictionless? It takes energy to accelerate matter with mass from rest to motion or a faster speed, no? In that case, there has to be a time-lag between the addition of energy and the full dissipation of that energy through all subsequent collisions, right? So how can that not result in some degree of friction? In fact, how could it be the cause of gravity if it didn't exert friction against matter? Also, I read in one of Hawking's books (I think it was Hawking anyway) that gravity can't be attributed to particles reaching bodies from the outside because that would mean that there would be 'gravity shadows' caused by moons and gazebos and such. Edited April 10, 2011 by lemur
swansont Posted April 10, 2011 Posted April 10, 2011 Still waiting for your analysis of the expected results of the M-M experiment and stellar aberration from your model… 1
mpc755 Posted April 10, 2011 Author Posted April 10, 2011 (edited) If the either was displaced by Earth (which would make sense if it was lighter than helium because I assume it would be shot way out of orbit with its low mass), then how would it function as a medium for light? Wouldn't light only be present where the aether is? As far as we know, there is no space, nor any part of three dimensional space, devoid of mass. Second, how can anything with inertia be completely frictionless? It takes energy to accelerate matter with mass from rest to motion or a faster speed, no? In that case, there has to be a time-lag between the addition of energy and the full dissipation of that energy through all subsequent collisions, right? So how can that not result in some degree of friction? In fact, how could it be the cause of gravity if it didn't exert friction against matter? Also, I read in one of Hawking's books (I think it was Hawking anyway) that gravity can't be attributed to particles reaching bodies from the outside because that would mean that there would be 'gravity shadows' caused by moons and gazebos and such. If you were in zero gravity and pushed a bowling ball through a tank filled with frictionless superfluid the bowling ball would move forever through the frictionless superfluid. The bowling ball would displace the frictionless superfluid. The frictionless superfluid would 'displace back'. There would be no loss of energy in the interaction of the bowling ball and the frictionless superfluid. 'Frictionless supersolid a step closer' http://www.physorg.c...s185201084.html "Superfluidity and superconductivity cause particles to move without friction. Koos Gubbels investigated under what conditions such particles keep moving endlessly without losing energy, like a swimmer who takes one mighty stroke and then keeps gliding forever along the swimming pool." Is the swimmer displacing the 'water' or is the 'water' displacing the swimmer? Both must be occurring if the swimmer is able to take one mighty stroke and keep gliding forever. If the energy associated with the swimmer's one mighty stroke was not returned to the swimmer the swimmer would be unable to maintain momentum. 'On the super-fluid property of the relativistic physical vacuum medium and the inertial motion of particles' http://arxiv.org/ftp...701/0701155.pdf "Abstract: The similarity between the energy spectra of relativistic particles and that of quasi-particles in super-conductivity BCS theory makes us conjecture that the relativistic physical vacuum medium as the ground state of the background field is a super fluid medium, and the rest mass of a relativistic particle is like the energy gap of a quasi-particle. This conjecture is strongly supported by the results of our following investigation: a particle moving through the vacuum medium at a speed less than the speed of light in vacuum, though interacting with the vacuum medium, never feels friction force and thus undergoes a frictionless and inertial motion." Is the particle displacing the 'super fluid medium' or is the 'super fluid medium' displacing the particle? Both must occur if the particle "never feels friction force and thus undergoes a frictionless and inertial motion." Whatever energy is used to move the particle through the 'super fluid medium' must be continuously returned to the particle or the particle would not be able to maintain momentum. That does not mean there is no interaction between the particle and the frictionless superfluid. That does not mean the particle does not require energy to displace the frictionless superfluid. What it means is whatever energy the particle requires to displace the frictionless superfluid the frictionless superfluid medium applies the same amount of energy to the particle as it 'displaces back'. The interaction of the particle and the frictionless superfluid medium allows the particle to move forever through the frictionless superfluid medium. Not that there is no interaction between the particle and the frictionless superfluid medium. Just that there is no loss of energy in the interaction. That's what frictionless means when discussing a frictionless superfluid medium. No loss of energy in its interaction with matter. You are mistaking friction with force. Aether has mass. Aether physically occupies three dimensional space. Aether is physically displaced by matter. Aether displaced by matter physically exerts force towards the matter. Force exerted towards matter by aether displaced by matter is gravity. The force exerted towards matter by aether displaced by matter is frictionless. That doesn't mean there is no force exerted by the displaced aether towards the matter. Just that the interaction of matter and aether is frictionless; not force-less. Edited April 10, 2011 by mpc755
lemur Posted April 10, 2011 Posted April 10, 2011 Frictionless superfluid sounds like a perpetual motion machine to me. It's one thing for objects in motion to remain in motion under momentum of their own inertia. But for an object to interact with a fluid in a way that changes the trajectory(ies) of any number of particles with inertia, work has to be done. Work is/involves friction, no?
mpc755 Posted April 10, 2011 Author Posted April 10, 2011 (edited) Still waiting for your analysis of the expected results of the M-M experiment and stellar aberration from your model… The aether is, or behaves similar to, a frictionless superfluid with properties of a solid. http://en.wikipedia....rley_experiment "Since the Earth is in motion, it was expected that the flow of aetheracross the Earth should produce a detectable "aether wind"." The MMX experiment was looking for an ether similar to the ether of Lorentz. An 'at rest' aether which the Earth moves through. The aether is not at rest. The aether is displaced by matter. The reason for the near null result of the MMX experiment is due to the state of the aether and the state of the aether in neighboring places being determined by its connections with the matter which is the Earth; which is the aether's state of displacement. The Earth displaces the aether far beyond the moon. Pouring water into a telescope does not change the state of the aether Edited April 10, 2011 by mpc755
swansont Posted April 10, 2011 Posted April 10, 2011 The aether is, or behaves similar to, a frictionless superfluid with properties of a solid. http://en.wikipedia....rley_experiment "Since the Earth is in motion, it was expected that the flow of aetheracross the Earth should produce a detectable "aether wind"." The MMX experiment was looking for an ether similar to the ether of Lorentz. An 'at rest' aether which the Earth moves through. The aether is not at rest. The aether is displaced by matter. The reason for the near null result of the MMX experiment is due to the state of the aether and the state of the aether in neighboring places being determined by its connections with the matter which is the Earth; which is the aether's state of displacement. The Earth displaces the aether far beyond the moon. Pouring water into a telescope does not change the state of the aether. Stop tap-dancing. This doesn't answer the question. 1
mpc755 Posted April 11, 2011 Author Posted April 11, 2011 (edited) Frictionless superfluid sounds like a perpetual motion machine to me. It's one thing for objects in motion to remain in motion under momentum of their own inertia. But for an object to interact with a fluid in a way that changes the trajectory(ies) of any number of particles with inertia, work has to be done. Work is/involves friction, no? Work involves force. Not necessarily friction. If you had a particle sitting in an empty chamber and behind a gate you contained a large amount of a frictionless superfluid then when you lifted the gate and the frictionless superfluid flowed and interacted with the particle then the particle would move, correct? The interaction of the particle and the frictionless superfluid would still be frictionless. However, the frictionless superfluid would alter the state of the particle. How do I keep my responses from winding up in a single reply??? Stop tap-dancing. This doesn't answer the question. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_drag_hypothesis "For George Stokes (1845) the model of an aether which is only partially dragged by matter was unnatural. So Stokes assumed that the aether is completely dragged by and in the vicinity of matter.[9] Heinrich Rudolf Hertz (1890) incorporated Stoke's aether dragging model within his elaboration of Maxwell's theory of electromagnetism, to bring it into accord with the Galilean principle of relativity. That is, if it is assumed that the aether is at rest within matter in one reference frame, the Galilean transformation gives the result that matter and (entrained) aether travel with the same speed in another frame of reference.[1] Another version of that model was proposed by Theodor des Coudres and Wilhelm Wien (1900). They assumed that aether dragging is proportional to the gravitational mass. That is, the aether is completely dragged by the earth, and only partially dragged by smaller objects on earth.[10] [edit] Problems of complete aether dragging Complete aether dragging can explain the negative outcome of all aether drift experiments (like the Michelson-Morley experiment). However, this theory is considered to be wrong for the following reasons:[1][11] * The Fizeau experiment (1851) indicated only a partial entrainment of light. * The Sagnac effect shows that two rays of light, emanated from the same light source in different directions on a rotating platform, require different times to come back to the light source. However, if the aether is completely dragged by the platform this effect should not occur at all. * Oliver Lodge conducted experiments in the 1890s, seeking evidence that the propagation of light is influenced by being in the proximity of large rotating masses, and found no such influence. * In the Hammar experiment (1935) a Michelson-Morley type interferometer was used, and massive lead blocks were installed on both sides of only one leg of the interferometer. This arrangement should cause different amounts of aether drag and therefore produce a positive result. However, the result was again negative. * It is inconsistent with the phenomenon of stellar aberration. In stellar aberration the position of a star when viewed with a telescope swings each side of a central position by about 20.5 seconds of arc every six months. This amount of swing is the amount expected when considering the speed of earth's travel in its orbit. In 1871 Airy demonstrated that stellar aberration occurs even when a telescope is filled with water. It seems that if the aether drag hypothesis were true then stellar aberration would not occur because the light would be travelling in the aether which would be moving along with the telescope. Consider a bucket on a train about to enter a tunnel, and a drop of water drips from the tunnel entrance into the bucket at the very center. The drop will not hit the center at the bottom of the bucket. The bucket is analogous to the tube of a telescope, the drop is a photon and the train is the earth. If aether is dragged then the droplet would be traveling with the train when it is dropped and would hit the center of bucket at the bottom." All of the above 'problems' with a completely dragged aether are explained by understanding aether is not dragged by matter; aether is displaced by matter. The aether is not at rest within matter. The aether is displaced within matter. The state of the aether is determined by its connections with the matter. This means the state of the aether is determined mostly by is connections with the Earth. The state of the aether is also determined by its connections with the Sun. The state of the aether is also determined by its connections with all of the matter in the Milky Way. This is why experiments do not find the aether to be completely entrained by the Earth. Because it isn't. The aether is displaced by the Earth. The aether is also displaced by the Sun. However, the state of the aether is mostly determined by its connections with the matter which is the Earth'; which is the aether's state of displacement. The rate at which an atomic clock ticks is determined by the force of the aether in which it exists. The greater the force of the aether exerted towards and throughout an atomic clock the slower the clock ticks. The aether is, or behaves similar to, a frictionless superfluid. This causes the aether, where the airplane flies in the 'Hafele and Keating Experiment', to have the affect of 'flowing' east to west with respect to the surface of the Earth. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/Relativ/airtim.html "Relative to the atomic time scale of the U.S. Naval Observatory, the flying clocks lost 59+/-10 nanoseconds during the eastward trip and gained 273+/-7 nanosecond during the westward trip, where the errors are the corresponding standard deviations." Flying with the Earth's rotation, eastward, is flying against the 'flow' of aether, relative to the surface of the Earth, causing a greater aether force on the atomic clock causing the atomic clock to tick slower. Flying against the Earth's rotation, westward, is flying with the 'flow' of aether, relative to the surface of the Earth, causing a lower aether force on the atomic clock causing the atomic clock to tick faster. Everything is with respect to the state of the aether, including the rate at which atomic clocks tick. The state of the aether as determined by its connections with the matter which is the Earth is not an entrained aether; it is a displaced aether. Edited April 11, 2011 by mpc755
ydoaPs Posted April 11, 2011 Posted April 11, 2011 If the aether was displaced by matter, it would create a high pressure area in front and a low pressure in back. This would cause a flow of aether which should be observable. And since matter displaces the aether, the aether should slow down the matter which should also be observable. Are either of these effects actually observed?
mpc755 Posted April 11, 2011 Author Posted April 11, 2011 (edited) If the aether was displaced by matter, it would create a high pressure area in front and a low pressure in back. This would cause a flow of aether which should be observable. What you are describing is the reason for the offset described in the following: 'Offset between dark matter and ordinary matter: evidence from a sample of 38 lensing clusters of galaxies' http://onlinelibrary...6739.x/abstract "We compile a sample of 38 galaxy clusters which have both X-ray and strong lensing observations, and study for each cluster the projected offset between the dominant component of baryonic matter centre (measured by X-rays) and the gravitational centre (measured by strong lensing). Among the total sample, 45 per cent clusters have offsets >10 arcsec. The >10 arcsec separations are significant, considering the arcsecond precision in the measurement of the lensing/X-ray centres. This suggests that it might be a common phenomenon in unrelaxed galaxy clusters that gravitational field is separated spatially from the dominant component of baryonic matter. It also has consequences for lensing models of unrelaxed clusters since the gas mass distribution may differ from the dark matter distribution and give perturbations to the modelling. Such offsets can be used as a statistical tool for comparison with the results of Lambda cold dark matter ( CDM) simulations and to test the modified dynamics." The offset is due to the galaxy clusters moving with respect to the state of the aether. The analogy is a submarine moving through the ocean. You are a mile from the submarine. A mile on the other side of the submarine are many lights. As the submarine moves between you and the lights the light waves from the distant light sources changes as it interacts with the water displaced by the submarine. There will be an offset between the submarine itself and its 'gravitational center' as determined by measuring the light which propagates through the water displaced by the moving submarine. And since matter displaces the aether, the aether should slow down the matter which should also be observable. The aether is, or behaves similar to, a frictionless superfluid. There is no loss of energy in the interaction of matter and the aether. The aether does not slow down matter. The aether interacts with matter. Do not mistake force for friction. 'Frictionless supersolid a step closer' http://www.physorg.com/news185201084.html "Superfluidity and superconductivity cause particles to move without friction. Koos Gubbels investigated under what conditions such particles keep moving endlessly without losing energy, like a swimmer who takes one mighty stroke and then keeps gliding forever along the swimming pool." Is the swimmer displacing the 'water' or is the 'water' displacing the swimmer? Both must be occurring if the swimmer is able to take one mighty stroke and keep gliding forever. If the energy associated with the swimmer's one mighty stroke was not returned to the swimmer the swimmer would be unable to maintain momentum. 'On the super-fluid property of the relativistic physical vacuum medium and the inertial motion of particles' http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0701/0701155.pdf "Abstract: The similarity between the energy spectra of relativistic particles and that of quasi-particles in super-conductivity BCS theory makes us conjecture that the relativistic physical vacuum medium as the ground state of the background field is a super fluid medium, and the rest mass of a relativistic particle is like the energy gap of a quasi-particle. This conjecture is strongly supported by the results of our following investigation: a particle moving through the vacuum medium at a speed less than the speed of light in vacuum, though interacting with the vacuum medium, never feels friction force and thus undergoes a frictionless and inertial motion." Is the particle displacing the 'super fluid medium' or is the 'super fluid medium' displacing the particle? Both must occur if the particle "never feels friction force and thus undergoes a frictionless and inertial motion." Whatever energy is used to move the particle through the 'super fluid medium' must be continuously returned to the particle or the particle would not be able to maintain momentum. That does not mean there is no interaction between the particle and the frictionless superfluid. That does not mean the particle does not require energy to displace the frictionless superfluid. What it means is whatever energy the particle requires to displace the frictionless superfluid the frictionless superfluid medium applies the same amount of energy to the particle as it 'displaces back'. The interaction of the particle and the frictionless superfluid medium allows the particle to move forever through the frictionless superfluid medium. Not that there is no interaction between the particle and the frictionless superfluid medium. Just that there is no loss of energy in the interaction. That's what frictionless means when discussing a frictionless superfluid medium. No loss of energy in its interaction with matter. You are bowling. The bowling alley you are in is filled with a frictionless superfluid. As you release the bowling ball it heads towards the pins. The bowling ball displaces the frictionless superfluid. The bowling ball does not leave an empty void in its wake. The frictionless superfluid fills-in where the bowling ball had been. The frictionless superfluid exerts force towards the bowling ball. There is no loss of energy between the interaction of the bowling ball and the frictionless superfluid. The bowling ball is not slowed down by its interaction with the frictionless superfluid as it heads towards the pins because the interaction between the frictionless superfluid and the bowling ball is frictionless. Edited April 11, 2011 by mpc755
mpc755 Posted April 13, 2011 Author Posted April 13, 2011 (edited) If the aether was displaced by matter, it would create a high pressure area in front and a low pressure in back. This would cause a flow of aether which should be observable. The density of the aether likely does not change significantly due to its interaction with matter. So to describe the interaction of matter moving through the aether as having a high pressure area in front and a low pressure in back is not entirely accurate unless the matter is traveling near 'c' with respect to the state of the aether. The aether changes state at 'c'. Another example of what you describe above in terms of observable phenomenon having to do with the aether is the results from the Hafele and Keating Experiment. The rate at which an atomic clock ticks is determined by the force of the aether in which it exists. The greater the force of the aether exerted towards and throughout an atomic clock the slower the clock ticks. The aether is, or behaves similar to, a frictionless superfluid. This causes the aether, where the airplane flies in the 'Hafele and Keating Experiment', to have the affect of 'flowing' east to west with respect to the surface of the Earth. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/Relativ/airtim.html "Relative to the atomic time scale of the U.S. Naval Observatory, the flying clocks lost 59+/-10 nanoseconds during the eastward trip and gained 273+/-7 nanosecond during the westward trip, where the errors are the corresponding standard deviations." Flying with the Earth's rotation, eastward, is flying against the 'flow' of aether, relative to the surface of the Earth, causing a greater aether force on the atomic clock causing the atomic clock to tick slower. Flying against the Earth's rotation, westward, is flying with the 'flow' of aether, relative to the surface of the Earth, causing a lower aether force on the atomic clock causing the atomic clock to tick faster. Everything is with respect to the state of the aether, including the rate at which atomic clocks tick. Edited April 13, 2011 by mpc755
Edtharan Posted April 13, 2011 Posted April 13, 2011 The density of the aether likely does not change significantly due to its interaction with matter. So to describe the interaction of matter moving through the aether as having a high pressure area in front and a low pressure in back is not entirely accurate unless the matter is traveling near 'c' with respect to the state of the aether. The aether changes state at 'c'. If the Aether has a finite movement rate, then you will inevitably get a high pressure zone in front of it as something moves through it. This is not due to the interaction of matter with it, but of the interaction of the Aether with itself and the fact that it does not move at an infinite speed. If the Aether was to move at an infinite speed, then it would have an effective stiffness of infinite too (not to mention this would prevent any object from moving in it either). This would cause any vibration in it to move at an infinite speed as well, which would mean that light would move at an infinite speed. As light does not mover at an infinite speed, we can conclude that the Aether has a finite stiffness and a finite rate of movement, thus a region of high pressure and low pressure due to any object moving within it will exist. So, if you are willing to accept a finite speed of light in your Aether, then you must also accept that there should be regions of high and low pressure in front and behind moving objects and all the other effects that go with these. The problem with these high and low pressure areas is that they will cause an object to slow down, despite the fluid having 0 friction (as it is not a friction effect but a pressure effect). The fact that to move would require the object to push the Aether out of the way means that the object has to do work. This work reduces the energy of the object slowing it down. The loss of energy of the Earth moving through the Aether would mean that it would slow down and spiral into the sun in a fairly short amount of time (much less than what it has been around for). Thus, as the Earth has not spiralled into the sun and we have not seen any evidence of the Earth slowing down at all, we can conclude that either the Aether has an infinite stiffness or that it doesn't exist. As an infinitely stiff Aether would cause light to have an infinite speed as well, and that we don't measure an infinite speed of light, we can conclude that the Aether can not be infinitely stiff. This leaves us with only 1 option: That the Aether does not exist. Another example of what you describe above in terms of observable phenomenon having to do with the aether is the results from the Hafele and Keating Experiment. The rate at which an atomic clock ticks is determined by the force of the aether in which it exists. The greater the force of the aether exerted towards and throughout an atomic clock the slower the clock ticks. The aether is, or behaves similar to, a frictionless superfluid. This causes the aether, where the airplane flies in the 'Hafele and Keating Experiment', to have the affect of 'flowing' east to west with respect to the surface of the Earth. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/Relativ/airtim.html "Relative to the atomic time scale of the U.S. Naval Observatory, the flying clocks lost 59+/-10 nanoseconds during the eastward trip and gained 273+/-7 nanosecond during the westward trip, where the errors are the corresponding standard deviations." Flying with the Earth's rotation, eastward, is flying against the 'flow' of aether, relative to the surface of the Earth, causing a greater aether force on the atomic clock causing the atomic clock to tick slower. Flying against the Earth's rotation, westward, is flying with the 'flow' of aether, relative to the surface of the Earth, causing a lower aether force on the atomic clock causing the atomic clock to tick faster. Everything is with respect to the state of the aether, including the rate at which atomic clocks tick. This would mean that the rate of clock ticking would vary from the side of the Earth that lies in the direction of travel as compared to the trailing edge of the Earth. This has not been measured despite hundreds of thousands of devices that rely on accurate measurements from atomic clocks (GPS). As the evidence that exists disproves your claims that this is how the Aether works, then either the Aether doesn't work as you claim (leaving the initial problem with your hypothesis un-addressed) or it doesn't exist. 1
mpc755 Posted April 13, 2011 Author Posted April 13, 2011 (edited) If the Aether has a finite movement rate, then you will inevitably get a high pressure zone in front of it as something moves through it. This is not due to the interaction of matter with it, but of the interaction of the Aether with itself and the fact that it does not move at an infinite speed. If the Aether was to move at an infinite speed, then it would have an effective stiffness of infinite too (not to mention this would prevent any object from moving in it either). This would cause any vibration in it to move at an infinite speed as well, which would mean that light would move at an infinite speed. As light does not mover at an infinite speed, we can conclude that the Aether has a finite stiffness and a finite rate of movement, thus a region of high pressure and low pressure due to any object moving within it will exist. So, if you are willing to accept a finite speed of light in your Aether, then you must also accept that there should be regions of high and low pressure in front and behind moving objects and all the other effects that go with these. The problem with these high and low pressure areas is that they will cause an object to slow down, despite the fluid having 0 friction (as it is not a friction effect but a pressure effect). The fact that to move would require the object to push the Aether out of the way means that the object has to do work. This work reduces the energy of the object slowing it down. The loss of energy of the Earth moving through the Aether would mean that it would slow down and spiral into the sun in a fairly short amount of time (much less than what it has been around for). Thus, as the Earth has not spiralled into the sun and we have not seen any evidence of the Earth slowing down at all, we can conclude that either the Aether has an infinite stiffness or that it doesn't exist. As an infinitely stiff Aether would cause light to have an infinite speed as well, and that we don't measure an infinite speed of light, we can conclude that the Aether can not be infinitely stiff. This leaves us with only 1 option: That the Aether does not exist. The aether is, or behaves similar to, a frictionless superfluid with properties of a solid. 'Superfluid Is Shown To Have Property Of A Solid' http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/07/990730072958.htm "Northwestern University physicists have for the first time shown that superfluid helium-3 -- the lighter isotope of helium, which is a liquid that has lost all internal friction, allowing it to flow without resistance and ooze through tiny spaces that normal liquids cannot penetrate -- actually behaves like a solid in its ability to conduct sound waves." '"Faraday's finding was the first indication that light and magnetism were related," says William Halperin, professor of physics and astronomy at Northwestern. "I wouldn't say that our discovery is of that magnitude, but it is significant as the first observation of a previously unknown mode of wave propagation in a liquid -- one that is of the type you would expect to see in a solid."' Whatever energy the galaxy clusters require to displace the aether the aether returns to the galaxy clusters as the aether 'displaces back'. The object does require energy to displace the aether. The aether requires the same amount of energy to displace the object. There is no loss of energy between the interaction of matter and aether. That is the 'has properties of a solid' part. The aether does not change state at an infinite rate. The aether changes state at 'c'. For any object moving with respect to the aether, does the object displace the aether or does the aether displace the object? Both are occurring simultaneously with equal force. Objects do not slow down when interacting with the aether. This would mean that the rate of clock ticking would vary from the side of the Earth that lies in the direction of travel as compared to the trailing edge of the Earth. This has not been measured despite hundreds of thousands of devices that rely on accurate measurements from atomic clocks (GPS). As the evidence that exists disproves your claims that this is how the Aether works, then either the Aether doesn't work as you claim (leaving the initial problem with your hypothesis un-addressed) or it doesn't exist. It has been measured. The Michelson-Morley experimental results were not null. The Michelson-Morley experiment was designed to detect an at rest aether which the Earth moves through. The Michelson-Morley not null results detected a displaced aether. Edited April 13, 2011 by mpc755
Edtharan Posted April 14, 2011 Posted April 14, 2011 The aether is, or behaves similar to, a frictionless superfluid with properties of a solid. 'Superfluid Is Shown To Have Property Of A Solid' http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/07/990730072958.htm Hmm, so you point to an article that disproves the Aether. If you read the article it makes a point to show the difference between waves in a medium and in the electromagnetic field. One part of the article in particular talks about how light is a transverse wave, but a wave in a medium can act as a compression wave. If light was carried by an Aether, then it would be able to act as both transverse waves and as compression waves. So, the fact that light does not come in compression type waves proves that an Aether can not exist. The article actually disproves your hypothesis. It might be a good idea to make sure that what you reference supports your claims rather than disproves them Whatever energy the galaxy clusters require to displace the aether the aether returns to the galaxy clusters as the aether 'displaces back'. The object does require energy to displace the aether. The aether requires the same amount of energy to displace the object. There is no loss of energy between the interaction of matter and aether. That is the 'has properties of a solid' part. But to do this would require the Aether to be moved in the opposite direction to the motion of the body. As the Aether has been moved, it takes energy to do this (you can't get anything for free, if you could then you could use the Aether to get energy for nothing and violate the laws of conservation) it has to get it form some where and it would come from the motion of the objects,thus slowing it down. It doesn't matter if it is a frictionless super-fluid or not. As I said: This has nothing to do with friction. It has, instead to do with inertia. The aether does not change state at an infinite rate. The aether changes state at 'c'. State changes are not the same as motion. For example, electricity only travels slowly along a wire, but the effect of that electricity travels close to the speed of light (a bit slower, but close). Now, this means that the motion of the electrons is slow, but the state change is fast. Now, if you has an object trying to move through that sea of electrons in the wire, then it would not be able to move fast as the motion of the electrons is so slow. However, you could "push" on some of the electrons and the force of that push could be felt at a distance almost immediately. However, even with this, it will still take energy to push an object through that sea of electrons because the electrons have to move. This occurs even in a super conductor. As I keep trying to say: Regardless of it being a superfulid, superconductor or just a normal fluid, the fact that you have to mvoe the substance out of the way to move the object will cause the energy of the object to be dispersed into the medium slowing the object down. Friction has not part in what I am saying. For any object moving with respect to the aether, does the object displace the aether or does the aether displace the object? Both are occurring simultaneously with equal force. This would not occur like this. To start with, you have to push the Aether backwards with respect to the object. This takes energy, and where does this energy come from? The inertia of the object moving through it. You claim that the Aether acts as a super-fluid/solid, however, with super-fluids and solids (or medium actually) the laws of thermodynamics come into play and state that you can't get back 100% of the effort you put in. In the case of your frictionless super-fluid Aether, it force of the object moving through it would disperse throughout the Aether and less than 100% of the energy would go back to the object, thus slowing the object down. Objects do not slow down when interacting with the aether. Again, you seem to think that super-fluids are some kind of magical substance that can just do what you want it to. Unfortunately the physics of fluids (super of mundane) still apply and these physical laws state that the object will slow down. It has been measured. The Michelson-Morley experimental results were not null. The Michelson-Morley experiment was designed to detect an at rest aether which the Earth moves through. The Michelson-Morley not null results detected a displaced aether. By what do you mean "not null". From what I have read and seen of their experiments, the result was negative for an Aether (that is no evidence of the effects it should have on light were found in the experimental results). If you have the evidence I would like to see it, so post it up here and also clarify what you mean by "not null" (to me that means that the experiment did find evidence of the Aether, but if it did, what then does the evidence not show evidence of the effects of an Aether?). 1
mpc755 Posted April 14, 2011 Author Posted April 14, 2011 (edited) Hmm, so you point to an article that disproves the Aether. If you read the article it makes a point to show the difference between waves in a medium and in the electromagnetic field. One part of the article in particular talks about how light is a transverse wave, but a wave in a medium can act as a compression wave. If light was carried by an Aether, then it would be able to act as both transverse waves and as compression waves. So, the fact that light does not come in compression type waves proves that an Aether can not exist. The article actually disproves your hypothesis. It might be a good idea to make sure that what you reference supports your claims rather than disproves them The article states superfluid helium-3 supports both transverse waves AND compression waves. Not that waves traveling through it have to act as both. "Showing a Faraday effect -- a rotation of the wave by a magnet -- means that this acoustic wave is transverse" But to do this would require the Aether to be moved in the opposite direction to the motion of the body. As the Aether has been moved, it takes energy to do this (you can't get anything for free, if you could then you could use the Aether to get energy for nothing and violate the laws of conservation) it has to get it form some where and it would come from the motion of the objects,thus slowing it down. It doesn't matter if it is a frictionless super-fluid or not. As I said: This has nothing to do with friction. It has, instead to do with inertia. 'Frictionless supersolid a step closer' http://www.physorg.com/news185201084.html "Superfluidity and superconductivity cause particles to move without friction. Koos Gubbels investigated under what conditions such particles keep moving endlessly without losing energy, like a swimmer who takes one mighty stroke and then keeps gliding forever along the swimming pool." 'On the super-fluid property of the relativistic physical vacuum medium and the inertial motion of particles' http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0701/0701155.pdf "Abstract: The similarity between the energy spectra of relativistic particles and that of quasi-particles in super-conductivity BCS theory makes us conjecture that the relativistic physical vacuum medium as the ground state of the background field is a super fluid medium, and the rest mass of a relativistic particle is like the energy gap of a quasi-particle. This conjecture is strongly supported by the results of our following investigation: a particle moving through the vacuum medium at a speed less than the speed of light in vacuum, though interacting with the vacuum medium, never feels friction force and thus undergoes a frictionless and inertial motion." There is no loss of energy in the interaction of matter and aether. Whatever energy is required to displace the aether the aether returns to the object as the aether 'displaces back'. Whatever force is required by the object to displace the aether the aether exerts the same amount of force towards the object. State changes are not the same as motion. For example, electricity only travels slowly along a wire, but the effect of that electricity travels close to the speed of light (a bit slower, but close). Now, this means that the motion of the electrons is slow, but the state change is fast. Now, if you has an object trying to move through that sea of electrons in the wire, then it would not be able to move fast as the motion of the electrons is so slow. However, you could "push" on some of the electrons and the force of that push could be felt at a distance almost immediately. However, even with this, it will still take energy to push an object through that sea of electrons because the electrons have to move. This occurs even in a super conductor. As I keep trying to say: Regardless of it being a superfulid, superconductor or just a normal fluid, the fact that you have to mvoe the substance out of the way to move the object will cause the energy of the object to be dispersed into the medium slowing the object down. Friction has not part in what I am saying. The energy associated with an object interacting with the aether is not dispersed into the aether. The aether has properties of a solid. This causes the energy, all of it, to be returned to the object moving through the aether as the aether 'displaces back'. Aether has properties of a solid. Which means there is no dispersion of the energy associated with its interaction with matter moving with respect to it. This would not occur like this. To start with, you have to push the Aether backwards with respect to the object. This takes energy, and where does this energy come from? The inertia of the object moving through it. You claim that the Aether acts as a super-fluid/solid, however, with super-fluids and solids (or medium actually) the laws of thermodynamics come into play and state that you can't get back 100% of the effort you put in. In the case of your frictionless super-fluid Aether, it force of the object moving through it would disperse throughout the Aether and less than 100% of the energy would go back to the object, thus slowing the object down. 'Probable Discovery Of A New, Supersolid, Phase Of Matter' http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/09/040903085531.htm '"When we go to a low-enough temperature, thermal energy is no longer important and this quantum-mechanical effect becomes very apparent," Chan explains.' Again, you seem to think that super-fluids are some kind of magical substance that can just do what you want it to. Unfortunately the physics of fluids (super of mundane) still apply and these physical laws state that the object will slow down. Again, you seem to think you can ignore the 'with properties of a solid'. The aether, which is, or behaves similar to, a frictionless superfluid with properties of a solid means there is no dispersion. That is what the 'with properties of a solid' means. By what do you mean "not null". From what I have read and seen of their experiments, the result was negative for an Aether (that is no evidence of the effects it should have on light were found in the experimental results). If you have the evidence I would like to see it, so post it up here and also clarify what you mean by "not null" (to me that means that the experiment did find evidence of the Aether, but if it did, what then does the evidence not show evidence of the effects of an Aether?). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson–Morley_experiment#Experiments "If the aether were stationary relative to the sun, then the Earth's motion would produce a fringe shift 4% the size of a single fringe." "Instead of providing insight into the properties of the aether, Michelson and Morley's article in the American Journal of Science reported the measurement to be as small as one-fortieth of the expected displacement but "since the displacement is proportional to the square of the velocity" they concluded that the measured velocity was "probably less than one-sixth" of the expected velocity of the Earth's motion in orbit and "certainly less than one-fourth." Although this small "velocity" was measured, it was considered far too small to be used as evidence of speed relative to the aether, and it was later said to be within the range of an experimental error that would allow the speed to actually be zero." A small "velocity" was measured. This is the measurement associated with the aether whose state is determined by its 'connections' with matter. The aether is not stationary. Aether has mass. Aether physically occupies three dimensional space. Aether is physically displaced by matter. The state of the aether in the experiment is mostly determined by the Earth which is its state of displacement caused by its 'connections' with the Earth. Edited April 14, 2011 by mpc755
Edtharan Posted April 15, 2011 Posted April 15, 2011 "Superfluidity and superconductivity cause particles to move without friction. Koos Gubbels investigated under what conditions such particles keep moving endlessly without losing energy, like a swimmer who takes one mighty stroke and then keeps gliding forever along the swimming pool." (bold by me) And that's my point. The swimmer had to exert effort to do this.
mpc755 Posted April 15, 2011 Author Posted April 15, 2011 (edited) (bold by me) And that's my point. The swimmer had to exert effort to do this. The analogy is not quite correct because taking a stroke in a frictionless superfluid/solid will not cause the swimmer to glide at all. The more correct analogy is for the swimmer to push off the side of the pool. (bold by me) "Superfluidity and superconductivity cause particles to move without friction. Koos Gubbels investigated under what conditions such particles keep moving endlessly without losing energy, like a swimmer who takes one mighty stroke and then keeps gliding forever along the swimming pool." The swimmer displaces the frictionless superfluid/solid. The frictionless superfluid/solid displaces the swimmer. The state of the frictionless superfluid/solid is determined by its connections with the swimmer and the state of the frictionless superfluid/solid in neighboring places; which is the frictionless superfluid/solid's state of displacement. There is no dispersion of energy due to the swimmer's interaction with the frictionless superfluid/solid. There is no loss of energy in the interaction of the swimmer and the frictionless superfluid/solid. The swimmer never slows down. The swimmer moves through the frictionless superfluid/solid forever. Hence, inertia. Edited April 15, 2011 by mpc755
mpc755 Posted April 16, 2011 Author Posted April 16, 2011 (edited) A moving physical particle has an associated physical wave. An ether wave. Ether has mass. Ether physically occupies three dimensional space. Ether is displaced by matter. A moving particle has an associated ether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment, the physical particle travels a single path and enters and exits a single slit. It is the associated physical ether wave which enters and exits multiple slits. The ether wave creates interference upon exiting the slits and it is this wave interference which alters the direction the particle travels. Detecting the particle causes there to be a loss of coherence of the associated ether wave and there is no interference. Not quite ready to understand what is presently postulated as dark matter is ether? Then what occurs between a moving physical particle and the associated physical dark matter the moving particle interacts with? Dark matter has mass. This means dark matter physically occupies three dimensional space. Dark matter is physically displaced by a moving particle. The moving particle has an associated physical dark matter displacement wave. In a double slit experiment, the moving physical particle travels a single path and enters and exits a single slit. It is the associated dark matter displacement wave which enters and exits both slits. The dark matter displacement wave creates wave interference upon exiting the slits. It is this wave interference which alters the direction the particle travels. Detecting the particle causes there to be a loss of coherence between the particle and the associated dark matter displacement wave and there is no interference. 'Hubble Finds Ghostly Ring of Dark Matter' http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/news/dark_matter_ring_feature.html "Astronomers using NASA's Hubble Space Telescope got a first-hand view of how dark matter behaves during a titanic collision between two galaxy clusters. The wreck created a ripple of dark mater, which is somewhat similar to a ripple formed in a pond when a rock hits the water." How is it the moving galaxy clusters have associated dark matter displacement waves but a particle in a double slit experiment does not? The particle in a double slit experiment does have an associated dark matter displacement wave. Edited April 16, 2011 by mpc755
mpc755 Posted April 17, 2011 Author Posted April 17, 2011 (edited) OK, so what experiment would you do to validate or invalidate this idea? Your story tries to explain current experimental results -- so what experimental results would you need to validate or invalidate your story here? The following explains what occurs physically in nature in a 'delayed choice quantum eraser' experiment. Following the explanation is an experiment which will provide evidence of Aether Displacement. After the experiment which will provide evidence of aether displacement is an explanation of what occurs physically in nature for there to be an offset between galaxy clusters and the dark matter. There is also experimental evidence of directionality to the motion of galaxy clusters. Following these two summaries of the articles is a prediction of what direction the offset of the galaxy clusters moving directionally and the aether will be. This is more evidence of Aether Displacement. All 'delayed choice quantum eraser' experiments are explained by understanding conservation of momentum and a moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In the image on the right here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#The_experiment when the downgraded photon pair are created, in order for there to be conservation of momentum, the original photons momentum is conserved. This means the downgraded photon pair have opposite polarizations. We will describe one of the photons as being the 'up' photon and the other photon as being the 'down' photon. One of the downgraded photons travels either the red or blue path towards D0 and the other photon travels either the red or blue path towards the prism. There are physical waves in the aether propagating both the red and blue paths. The aether waves propagating towards D0 interact with the lens and create interference prior to reaching D0. The aether waves create interference which alters the direction the photon travels prior to reaching D0. There are actually two interference patterns being created at D0. One associated with the 'up' photons when they arrive at D0 and the other interference pattern associated with the 'down' photons when they arrive at D0. Both 'up' and 'down' photons are reflected by BSa and arrive at D3. Since there is a single path towards D3 there is nothing for the wave in the aether to interfere with and there is no interference pattern and since it is not determined if it is an 'up' or 'down' photon being detected at D3 there is no way to distinguish between the photons arriving at D0 which interference pattern each photon belongs to. The same for photons reflected by BSb and arrive at D4. Photons which pass through BSa and are reflected by BSc and arrive at D1 are either 'up' or 'down' photons but not both. If 'up' photons arrive at D1 then 'down' photons arrive at D2. The opposite occurs for photons which pass through BSb. Photons which pass through BSa and pass through BSb and arrive at D1 are all either 'up' or 'down' photons. If all 'up' photons arrive at D1 then all 'down' photons arrive at D2. Since the physical waves in the aether traveling both the red and blue paths are combined prior to D1 and D2 the aether waves create interference which alters the direction the photon travels. Since all 'up' photons arrive at one of the detectors and all 'down' photons arrive at the other an interference pattern is created which reflects back to the interference both sets of photons are creating at D0. The following experiment will provide evidence of Aether Displacement: Instead of having a single beam splitter BSc have two beam splitters BSca and BScb. Have the photons reflected by mirror Ma interact with BSca and have the photons reflected by mirror Mb interact with BScb. Do not combine the red and blue paths. Have additional detectors D1a, D2a, D1b, and D2b. Have the photons reflected by and propagate through BSca be detected at D1a and D2a. Have the photons reflected by and propagate through BScb be detected at D1b and D2b. If you compare the photons detected at D1a and D1b with the photons detected at D0, the corresponding photons detected at D0 will form an interference pattern. If you compare the photons detected at D2a and D2b with the photons detected at D0, the corresponding photons detected at D0 will form an interference pattern. What is occurring is all 'up' photons are being detected at one pair of detectors, for example D1a and D1b, and all 'down' photons are being detected at the other pair of detectors, for example D2a and D2b. Interference patterns do not even need to be created in order to determine the interference patterns created at D0. 'Offset between dark matter and ordinary matter: evidence from a sample of 38 lensing clusters of galaxies' http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.16739.x/abstract "We compile a sample of 38 galaxy clusters which have both X-ray and strong lensing observations, and study for each cluster the projected offset between the dominant component of baryonic matter centre (measured by X-rays) and the gravitational centre (measured by strong lensing). Among the total sample, 45 per cent clusters have offsets >10 arcsec. The >10 arcsec separations are significant, considering the arcsecond precision in the measurement of the lensing/X-ray centres. This suggests that it might be a common phenomenon in unrelaxed galaxy clusters that gravitational field is separated spatially from the dominant component of baryonic matter. It also has consequences for lensing models of unrelaxed clusters since the gas mass distribution may differ from the dark matter distribution and give perturbations to the modelling. Such offsets can be used as a statistical tool for comparison with the results of Lambda cold dark matter ( CDM) simulations and to test the modified dynamics." The offset is due to the galaxy clusters moving with respect to the state of the aether. 'Mysterious Cosmic 'Dark Flow' Tracked Deeper into Universe' http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/releases/2010/10-023.html 'The clusters appear to be moving along a line extending from our solar system toward Centaurus/Hydra, but the direction of this motion is less certain. Evidence indicates that the clusters are headed outward along this path, away from Earth, but the team cannot yet rule out the opposite flow. "We detect motion along this axis, but right now our data cannot state as strongly as we'd like whether the clusters are coming or going," Kashlinsky said.' The galaxy clusters are moving directionally because their motion is determined by the state of the aether in which they exist. When the offset for the clusters moving along a line extending from our solar system toward Centaurus/Hydra is detected it will be in the direction the clusters are traveling. The analogy is a comet moving away from the Sun. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet_tail "the ion tail, made of gases, always points directly away from the Sun, as this gas is more strongly affected by the solar wind than is dust, following magnetic field lines rather than an orbital trajectory" The offset between galaxy clusters and the aether is caused by the galaxy clusters interaction with the aether. The change in state of the aether is in the direction the galaxy clusters are traveling. The analogy is an object floating down stream. The object flows with the stream of water but moves down stream slower than the water itself. This will not be true of all galaxy clusters and their interaction with the aether. However, it will be so for the galaxy clusters which are moving directionally toward Centaurus/Hydra because their directionality is caused by their interaction with the state of the aether. Edited April 17, 2011 by mpc755
Edtharan Posted April 18, 2011 Posted April 18, 2011 A moving physical particle has an associated physical wave. An ether wave. Ether has mass. Ether physically occupies three dimensional space. Ether is displaced by matter. If your Ether has mass, and is displaced by matter, then I can created a device that would enable me to move without seeming to use any fuel. As matter displaces the Ether, then I would use a one way valve system on both ends of a chamber (to create a single direction that the Ether can flow through the chamber). This chamber can be expanded and contracted. I would open Valve A (on the forward side of the chamber) and then expand the chamber to its maximum size. Then I would close valve A and open Valve B (on the trailing side). Finally I would compress the chamber to its minimum size. As matter displaces your Ether, expanding the chamber would cause the Ether surrounding the chamber to be pushed out and the extra space in side the chamber would accommodate this displaced Ether with the Ether moving through valve A. Next, after closing valve A and opening valve B, compressing the chamber would expel the Ether inside the chamber and it would exist through valve B. Now, as you have stated that your Ether has mass, I would get a net movement of Ether in one direction (from valve A to valve B) pushing the device in the opposite direction. This device would of course need to work in a vacuum to avoid any effects of other non Ether fluids. This device does not work off of friction and a frictionless super-fluid would still provide movement. However, this does not happen in a vacuum. It has never been observed and there is no evidence for it at all. In other words, if your Ether really did exist, then we should see this effect as it uses inertia, but because there is no evidence of such an effect occurring in a vacuum, we can conclude that your Ether can not exist as the effects that it would cause do not exist. But this is similar to how a swimming stroke works. You don't use friction, you use the displacement of mass backwards (water) to propel you forwards (it is action reaction of mass). Because of the stiffness of water (that is the speed of motion of water is not infinite), this means that water can not always get out of the way fast enough and it is the push of water against water (because water can not take up 0 space it must push against itself - and because even frictionless super-fluids take up finite space they too must push against themselves), then you can use such a push to move through the water. So swimming is still possible in frictionless super-fluids. It also means my previous arguments stand against your Ether (along with the other arguments presented in this post too).
Recommended Posts