Mordred Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 (edited) One of the problems I've always had on eather supporters is they tend to think science stopped at the M and M test. Quite frankly that test never had a high degree of accuracy. Thankfully science didn't stop there. The modern tests have a far far higher degree of accuracy. One of the more modern tests being Robertson-Mansouri-Sexl tests. Which if I recall is roughly 2000 times more accurate. However other more modern tests have further refined any aberation error bars to less than 10^-15. That says a lot for the constancy of c. Some tests have even showed a higher degree of accuracy for constancy of c. Coleman and Glashow, Cosmic ray and Neutrino Tests of Special Relativity, For example gave results of 5*10^-23. Edited June 17, 2016 by Mordred
Strange Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 And that's exactly what I've said all along, Strange. It may be just semantics, but... Those 'physically implausible properties' would make it extremely hard ( if not impossible ) to detect, The whole point was that it acted like a medium for the transmission of light, and therefore it should have been easily detected by experiments like Michelson-Morley (if it were stationary, and others if it were not).
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 (edited) The whole point was that it acted like a medium for the transmission of light, and therefore it should have been easily detected by experiments like Michelson-Morley (if it were stationary, and others if it were not). . . -- So after all this: - IS. there a medium ? , called the Aether ( Ether ) which can support Electro-Magnetic waves, Gravity waves , or any other Space waves . Even if it is not the preferred model . Put on the shelf to gather dust . Is there a possible medium ? Is there , none the less , a possible * medium of space , for want of a better word ' Aether ' (Ether ) ?? Mike * Possible allows for it not being like other mediums , but something medium like , but something ? Not nothing, not total emptiness ? Edited June 17, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos
Strange Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 So after all this: Is there a medium , called the Aether ( Ether ) which can support Electro-Magnetic waves, Gravity waves , or any other Space waves . No.
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 No. That's a bit sweeping . Are you prepared to go down in history , known for saying : . 'NO ' " Space does not consist of some form of ' Medium ' , Catagorically NO? Mike
ajb Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 'NO ' " Space does not consist of some form of ' Medium ' , Catagorically NO? It seems to be a concept that is not needed mathematically and is unobservable. The notion of 'medium' does not sit at all well with Einsteinian relativity, which has been tested to some huge degree of accuracy. So, the aether is thought not to exist.
Strange Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 (edited) That's a bit sweeping . Are you prepared to go down in history , known for saying : . 'NO ' " Space does not consist of some form of ' Medium ' , Catagorically NO? Mike Do you think that there are invisible pink unicorns that that have no detectable effect on the universe? If that is a possibility, then I suppose the aether is too. And Father Christmas. Of course, if there were any evidence of an aether or invisible pink unicorns, then I would change my answer. Edited June 17, 2016 by Strange
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 (edited) Do you think that there are invisible pink unicorns that that have no detectable effect on the universe? If that is a possibility, then I suppose the aether is too. And Father Christmas. Of course, if there were any evidence of an aether or invisible pink unicorns, then I would change my answer. . It does not need to be called Aether, invisible pink unicorns, or Father Christmas . But I would Catagorically put my bet on :- Space is itself a Medium , ( which can curve and allow waves to move through it ) Within which all the Stars, Galxies, Black Holes and other things we see and detect out there, exist. Mike Edited June 17, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos
swansont Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 Congratulations Velocity_Boy. You posted evidence that the aether is not STATIONARY. How exactly does that 'de-bunk' the aether model ? ( sorry Moontanman, none of this answers your question, does it ? ) As I posted earlier, stellar aberration shows that we must be moving WRT the aether. That was known since ~1725 (Bradley). So if we must be moving, and it's shown we aren't, that debunks the aether. . It does not need to be called Aether, invisible pink unicorns, or Father Christmas . But I would Catagorically put my bet on :- Space is itself a Medium , ( which can curve and allow waves to move through it ) Within which all the Stars, Galxies, Black Holes and other things we see and detect out there, exist. Mike If you want to do some science, then you can tell us the properties the medium of space must have.
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 (edited) As I posted earlier, stellar aberration shows that we must be moving WRT the aether. That was known since ~1725 (Bradley). So if we must be moving, and it's shown we aren't, that debunks the aether. If you want to do some science, then you can tell us the properties the medium of space must have. I thought that is what Einstein physics and Rienmann maths , did . Einstein .. Link :- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein general relativity and waves Rienmann .. Link :- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernhard_Riemann. Maths for general relativity and waves . As regards this " movement against aether" your comments above and ' debunking ' ' I think this is where ' a wrong turn was taken, not by you but , ' some time ago . Because of this we are in a ' kings new suit of clothes' syndrome , people all wanted to say ohh yes , what a lovely suit of clothes , when really he had no clothes on . Mike Edited June 17, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos
Strange Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 I thought that is what Einstein physics and Rienmann maths , did . That shows that we do NOT need a medium. It does not need to be called Aether, invisible pink unicorns, or Father Christmas . But it does need to be detectable, to be considered to have any existence.
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 (edited) That shows that we do NOT need a medium. But it does need to be detectable, to be considered to have any existence. . These 2 things are where the " kings clothes ( lack of clothes, that nobody dare say " the King has no clothes on ! ") * I thought that was what all this Ligo experiment was all about " looking for the true nature of space , and the propagation of gravitational waves across this " stuff " called Space . ( the water in the fish bowl ) ? One pound bet on it . ( they find the medium , and they find out it is the medium transferring the gravity waves) . Mike * for those not familiar , this was a nursery rhyme about a king who went balmy and paraded himself with no clothes on . All his frightened subjects , cowardly said ' oh look at the beautiful clothes ! . I thought that was what all this Ligo experiment was all about " looking for the true nature of space , and the propagation of gravitational waves across this " stuff " ! . To make a scientific ' creative guess' at what the medium of space is . :- We already know that most of things require ' charge ' ( + and - ) and moving charge leads to magnetism , and electro magnetism is what light is , that travels across space at 'C' ( speed of light ) . So let's say that space is a medium composed of a 3 dimensional lattice of infinitesimally , infinitesimally ,small alternating positive and negative charges . + - + - + etc in three dimensions ? Very very very very very small. + and - charges. ..That is the MEDIUM of SPACE .... Mike Edited June 17, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos
Strange Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 (edited) I thought that was what all this Ligo experiment was all about " looking for the true nature of space , and the propagation of gravitational waves across this " stuff " called Space . ( the water in the fish bowl ) ? What GR describes, and LIGO measures, is the changes in distance and time caused the the presence of mass or energy (moving masses in this case). Do you consider the distance between London and New York to be made of "stuff"? Do you consider 5 seconds to be a medium? Edited June 17, 2016 by Strange
StringJunky Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 (edited) I keep hearing gravity waves described as ripples in space time. Does this suggest that space time is a substance like the discredited notion of the aether? It seems to me that if space time can be said to ripple then a preferred reference frame is suggested by this "ripple" I know I must be off base here but how am I mistaken? There's no preferred frame. The time/distance difference is relative between each of the two arms. I think, if I have it right. Because the wavelengths of the ripples involved are small compared to Ligo each arm goes minutely out of phase, in terms of what they measure, with the other at any given moment; this manifests graphically as a ripple. The ripple is a visual representation of the time/distance variation in spacetime. Edited June 17, 2016 by StringJunky
MigL Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 And, before anyone gets the idea that I'm an aether supporter, far from it. Relativity renders it un-needed. But, just to get something straight, relativity is a model which does not need it. Similarily the aether is a model. They describe reality, where applicable. The aether model has outlived its usefulness ( if it ever had any ). I don't think in modern physics any model can be dismissed or 'debunked' simply because it is implausible. If that were the case, a lot of QM would be similarly 'debunked'.
Strange Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 (edited) And, before anyone gets the idea that I'm an aether supporter, far from it. Relativity renders it un-needed. But, just to get something straight, relativity is a model which does not need it. Similarily the aether is a model. They describe reality, where applicable. The aether model has outlived its usefulness ( if it ever had any ). I don't think in modern physics any model can be dismissed or 'debunked' simply because it is implausible. If that were the case, a lot of QM would be similarly 'debunked'. There are, it is true, degrees of "wrong" (Asimov wrote a great essay about this). The aether has no supporting evidence and several lines of evidence against it. Like phlogistion it is an ex-theory. It is no more. It is pushing up hypothetical daisies. It has shuffled off this mortal coil. (If you see what I mean.) Actually, unlike phlogistion, which was a plausible theory for a while, the aether never had any evidence for it. (So it was barely a model, more an assumption.) See also, Occam's Razor. Edited June 17, 2016 by Strange
Mordred Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 (edited) And, before anyone gets the idea that I'm an aether supporter, far from it. Relativity renders it un-needed. But, just to get something straight, relativity is a model which does not need it. Similarily the aether is a model. They describe reality, where applicable. The aether model has outlived its usefulness ( if it ever had any ). I don't think in modern physics any model can be dismissed or 'debunked' simply because it is implausible. If that were the case, a lot of QM would be similarly 'debunked'. In this your correct. Thats why research is still actively hunting for eather. However there still isn't any findings even at extremely precise tests. Considering the number of different tests and that extreme accuracy. I would say its largely debunked. At least till evidence shows otherwise. Edited June 17, 2016 by Mordred
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 (edited) ..........The aether has no supporting evidence .......That's not strictly true. Firstly I would rather refer to it as the MEDIUM of space. Unfortunately ' Aether' has had such bad press, it has been bandied around with scorn , that nobody dare have a sensible discussion about the issue of the requirement for a medium. We have sought a need for a medium for sound ( namely air ) . We shout warning words ( get out the way ! ) by pushing energy up through our vocal cords to produce waves of energy in the air. We have sailed the high seas for centuries using the transmitted energy of wind into the medium both air and of water . Also the waves have moved by vibrations of the medium of water to produce energy flow from one side of an ocean to the other. One day we might use this to power generators. We have detected the waves or vibrations of earthquakes, this time as the recipient of energy. As P waves and S waves , the energy of earthquakes has produced waves that practically travel round the world .Here the medium has been Rocks and soil . We have used the medium of space to send radio waves and light waves across space . The whole thing is a logical of energy seeking out a medium in which to operate in wave form . In this case with space as the medium it is electric and magnetic fields . If you go small enough just miniscule electric charges trillions upon trillions in a grid . When they are vibrated they induce magnetic fields and vibrations ( together E-M waves ) So it seems quite natural and logical that Electro .Magnetic waves would seek out a medium through which to travel . And there it is the medium of Space . Ram jam packed with miniscule point charges of electricity ready to be vibrated into electro magnetic oscillation and thus waves travelling through the medium at the speed of light . These vibrating fields ( magnetic and electrical ) take energy to start the waves in the medium . Just like all the previously quoted mediums for sound in air , waves in water , P and S waves in Rock . What is the problem , it seems , naturally obvious , As plain as day . Mike Edited June 17, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos
Strange Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 So it seems quite natural and logical that Electro .Magnetic waves would seek out a medium through which to travel . That is not evidence. And there it is the medium of Space . Ram jam packed with miniscule point charges of electricity ready to be vibrated into electro magnetic oscillation and thus waves travelling through the medium at the speed of light . These vibrating fields ( magnetic and electrical ) take energy to start the waves in the medium . That is not how electromagnetic radiation propagates.
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 (edited) That is not evidence. That is not how electromagnetic radiation propagates. . Yes they do , they propagate by electro - magnetic waves , as many would have it ( in nothing , Kings suit of clothes ' nothing on ) . As I would have it , ( in the medium of space , namely , miniscule electric charge fields ) . Vibrating electric fields induce vibrating magnetic fields . Together that is an Electro- Magnetic field . The evidence is that they do this ! Mike Edited June 17, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos
Strange Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 (edited) . Yes they do , they propagate by electro - magnetic waves , as many would have it ( in nothing , Kings suit of clothes ' nothing on ) . As I would have it , ( in the medium of space , namely , miniscule electric charge fields ) . Vibrating electric fields induce vibrating magnetic fields . Together that is an Electro- Magnetic field . The evidence is that they do this ! Mike It does NOT involve "minuscule [sic] point charges of electricity". Edited June 17, 2016 by Strange
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 (edited) It does NOT involve "minuscule [sic] point charges of electricity".Why not ? It's got to ' sling shot ' itself across this big ' supposedly empty void of space '. All I am saying is that like a monkey crossing a forest , swinging from one branch to the next . The electro magnetic wave , sling shots itself across the grid of point charges which exist everywhere across space as a medium ( grid ). Inducing small magnetic waves, as part of the sling shot process. As far as I understand it , space is brimming with ' stuff' like this . Mike Edited June 17, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos -1
Mordred Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 (edited) No Mike electromagnetic radiation does not require a medium to propogate. An electromagnetic field changes strength as the field propogates from a to b. I think the problem is you keep thinking of particles as little bullets. A particle is an excitation. Lets look at it this way assign a virtual photon at every point in space. Now if the value is zero you have no virtual photon present at that coordinate. The field itself is attached to the spacetime coordinates. So the field itself isn't moving. (Keep in mind this is a mathematical analogy). The wave itself progogates through that zero value field. This causes excitations at the coordinates being measured. Those excitations take on particle characteristics in particular virtual photons. However you can't think of photons as being little bullets its an excitation. If you have a zero value field you have zero particles at any coordinate. This is completely different than whats describes as a medium or Ether. Those two terms require a non zero value. Which a field can be of zero value. Edited June 17, 2016 by Mordred
swansont Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 I thought that is what Einstein physics and Rienmann maths , did . Einstein .. Link :- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein general relativity and waves Rienmann .. Link :- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernhard_Riemann. Maths for general relativity and waves . As regards this " movement against aether" your comments above and ' debunking ' ' I think this is where ' a wrong turn was taken, not by you but , ' some time ago . Because of this we are in a ' kings new suit of clothes' syndrome , people all wanted to say ohh yes , what a lovely suit of clothes , when really he had no clothes on . image.jpeg Mike GR gives a geometry. We need more science, and fewer pictures and 'sayings in quotes'
Mordred Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 If you want a good example think of the rate a charge moves through a copper wire. Yet the flow of electrons is limitted by the medium.
Recommended Posts