Mordred Posted July 29, 2016 Posted July 29, 2016 (edited) .. and the model of reflected waves in the swimming poor giving a very close fit to the actual layout of the universe as recentely gained by observation of the cosmos . Including the clear picture of 'flow ' usually associated with a fluid medium as illustrated with the super cluster Mike If your referring to flow as in gravity waves. None of your pictures match.... Gravity waves don't ressemble neither electromagnetic waves nor water waves. Gravity waves is a tranverse quadrupole wave form. (visualize squeezing a ball). Where water waves and electromagnetic sine waves are dipole tranverse waves. In all honesty Mike you cannot rely on images and intuition to understand science..... (switch your visual reliance to mathematical graphs) forget photography. The first three of your last images have different mathematical relations... Edited July 29, 2016 by Mordred
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted July 29, 2016 Posted July 29, 2016 (edited) If your referring to flow as in gravity waves. None of your pictures match.... Gravity waves don't ressemble neither electromagnetic waves nor water waves. Gravity waves is a tranverse quadrupole wave form. (visualize squeezing a ball). Where water waves and electromagnetic sine waves are dipole tranverse waves. In all honesty Mike you cannot rely on images and intuition to understand science..... . Yes , I sort of appreciate that , although I am not really an expert on ' quadrupole waves' ( but appreciate the model of squeezing rubber ball) . The flow I speak about with both the super cluster ' Laniakia ' and the rest of the illustrated images produced of the Universe as a whole produced in recent years, definitely gives one the image of ' Flow '. ( what with the dark attractor etc ) . As an ( sort of ) Artist , attaining this flow is one of the ' secrets of success' , that one tries to attain. The delicate feeling of flow. Which as previously explained is often achieved by the use of a ' medium ' . So I would Posit that in some respects ' MEDIUM and FLOW ' is/are the great architecture of the COSMOS . Mike Edited July 29, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos
Mordred Posted July 29, 2016 Posted July 29, 2016 (edited) The problem is relying on images. Even good images on relativity only portray specific relations. You need the math to truly understand those images. Image 2 for example took several supercomputers several months to generate. Yet you are comparing this to image one which can be generated on any smartphone. Image three can also be readily programmed on a home PC. You can't replace images without the math. All three images can be mathematically generated but they all require different sets of formulas The dark attractor is a local (compared to size of universe influence) Edited July 29, 2016 by Mordred
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted July 29, 2016 Posted July 29, 2016 (edited) The problem is relying on images. Even good images on relativity only portray specific relations. You need the math to truly understand those images. Image 2 for example took several supercomputers several months to generate. Yet you are comparing this to image one which can be generated on any smartphone. Image three can also be readily programmed on a home PC. You can't replace images without the math. All three images can be mathematically generated but they all require different sets of formulas The dark attractor is a local (compared to size of universe influence) The dark attractor is a local (compared to size of universe influence) . Yes. I do appreciate what you are saying . Unfortunately for me. As in the past I have indicated about my school and University life . I can actually do the maths, but it really , really , really HURTS my brain. Yet , I LOVE , pictures, images, things I can see , and gaze at and think about.. .. Think very deeply about . My head is full of images, I can't help it . ( maths hurts , pictures delight and help me think . ) I have this sneaking feeling , that's why sight is our primary input . ( however that is another , different subject ) by the way my father was an architect , might have something to do with it . He probably got the quantity surveyors to do all the math ! ( and yes if they did not do the maths correctly the houses would fall down ) Mike . ----------- MEDIUMS IN THE COSMOS ----------- . Having now thought this through with the information available to me . And the development of ideas , at this stage it would appear to me that :- Whoever or whatever created this Universe, set out using TWO ENABLING MEDIUMS MEDIUM 1 One ENABLING MEDIUM lay a structure for where matter , mass , would be concentrated . This consisted of , what we currently call 'Dark Matter' . This medium spread throughout , what is now the whole universe . It's constituents was such as to provide for , and direct the growth of the mass part of the universe we see today . The particles of all sorts gathered and were attracted by the gravitational pull felt during various stages of development . So we see the galaxies ending up as they are today seen in channels , and voids , making up the image we have seen . THIS MEDIUM Is where all galaxies are , and as such gravity , with its gravity waves will work along these channels. MEDIUM 2 The Other ENABLING MEDIUM , Was and is composed of the Dark Energy , which spread very quickly across the whole universe as it expanded . Throughout the universe ( not as channels ,as the other medium ) This was in the form of a complete 3 dimensional lattice , making up the Electro Magnetic fields , suitable for all the photons and other lightweight particles , to traverse the universe , usually in some form of wave nature . ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ . MEDIUM 1 .. MEDIUM 2 If this is not how it is , I have given it my best shot to date . Mike Ps. I need to think of some way I can ' tease out ' the validity of these two ideas . Seeing as they are half way across the universe , that is not going to be too.easy? Edited July 29, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted July 29, 2016 Posted July 29, 2016 (edited) .TESTING I suppose the mediums ( if they exist , as I think and propose they exist ) will also be right here , Under my nose ) . So a test right here on the bench would be sufficient ? Even if the measurement is made on the ENABLED rather than the ENABLER . So if we're testing for DARK ENERGY the test would need to be on the enabled. Eg the photon or electro magnetic wave And if we were testing for DARK MATTER the test would need to be on the enabled . Eg mass or whole atoms or molecules . I Think ? Mike Edited July 29, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos
imatfaal Posted July 29, 2016 Posted July 29, 2016 ! Moderator Note Last Chance. Gravitational Waves and the Aether.
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted July 29, 2016 Posted July 29, 2016 (edited) Gravitational waves and the Aether . Well as discussed through much of this thread, I have substituted the word 'Aether' with the word 'Medium ' , because of the poor press , and bias, since the Michael Morley experiment , supposedly debunked the idea of an Aether , and it has made it very difficult to discuss , because many scientists have become quite dogmatic on the subject. ( B) So , I am suggesting there is the necessity for a medium ( previously called aether ) for both the electro magnetic waves , namely light and radio waves . And also ; (A) Further I am suggesting there is a need for a different medium ( previously called aether ) for gravitational waves . So in covering (B) first , as this is the origination of the word AETHER , I have followed the argument proposed by many on this forum , for the origin of the electro-magnetic field . We appeared to find its source back in the time before the recombination ( 300,000 years after Big Bang ) at a time of separation of the electro-week force from the four main symmetrical forces. We then suggested that this could become the electro-magnetic field that permeated all of free space . What I am suggesting , is that that amount of electrical field, to be set up across ALL of space would require an immense amount of ENERGY . So I am suggesting that the MEDIUM or AETHER supplying that amount of energy , is in fact the DARK ENERGY currently being discussed but set up in this Electro Magnetic field , which acts as an AETHER or MEDIUM for photons and other Electro Magnetic radiation . So in covering (A) second , as I believe this could follow in a similar style , with an Aether or Medium. This time for GRAVITATIONAL WAVES. Gravity was one of the first forces to separate from the original Super symmetry. In so doing I am suggesting this was the origin of mass, by way of DARK MATTER , which constituted the other AETHER OR MEDIUM , containing much of the main mass of the universe , going out in strands and waves , like waves in water , as previously discussed . So that the structure of the universe was laid down by this combination of Gravity and Medium , or rather GRAVITATIONAL WAVES and the AETHER . The Gravity, Aether of Mass and Waves , keeping up the strands and void-like appearance, of the whole Universe . . Mike Edited July 29, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted July 30, 2016 Posted July 30, 2016 (edited) Gravitational waves and the Aether . Well as discussed through much of this thread, I have substituted the word 'Aether' with the word 'Medium ' , because of the poor press , and bias, since the Michael Morley experiment , supposedly debunked the idea of an Aether , and it has made it very difficult to discuss , because many scientists have become quite dogmatic on the subject. ( B) So , I am suggesting there is the necessity for a medium ( previously called aether ) for both the electro magnetic waves , namely light and radio waves . And also ; (A) Further I am suggesting there is a need for a different medium ( previously called aether ) for gravitational waves . So in covering (B) first , as this is the origination of the word AETHER , I have followed the argument proposed by many on this forum , for the origin of the electro-magnetic field . We appeared to find its source back in the time before the recombination ( 300,000 years after Big Bang ) at a time of separation of the electro-week force from the four main symmetrical forces. We then suggested that this could become the electro-magnetic field that permeated all of free space . What I am suggesting , is that that amount of electrical field, to be set up across ALL of space would require an immense amount of ENERGY . So I am suggesting that the MEDIUM or AETHER supplying that amount of energy , is in fact the DARK ENERGY currently being discussed but set up in this Electro Magnetic field , which acts as an AETHER or MEDIUM for photons and other Electro Magnetic radiation . So in covering (A) second , as I believe this could follow in a similar style , with an Aether or Medium. This time for GRAVITATIONAL WAVES. Gravity was one of the first forces to separate from the original Super symmetry. In so doing I am suggesting this was the origin of mass, by way of DARK MATTER , which constituted the other AETHER OR MEDIUM , containing much of the main mass of the universe , going out in strands and waves , like waves in water , as previously discussed . So that the structure of the universe was laid down by this combination of Gravity and Medium , or rather GRAVITATIONAL WAVES and the AETHER . The Gravity, Aether of Mass and Waves , keeping up the strands and void-like appearance, of the whole Universe . . Mike . Some really supportive research , being accomplished , with regards to " Dark Matter " and the way it is structuring the universe as possibly ' WHIMPS' , 'AXIONS' etc this could support my idea as a " MEDIUM OR AETHER to support GRAVITATIONAL WAVES A really useful link and discussion about dark matter , and how it gives structure to the universe, enabling GRAVITATIONAL forces to have an effect and act within and between Galaxies, giving them their shape :- http://www.kavlifoundation.org/science-spotlights/spotlight-live-dark-matter-long-last-three-new-experiments-ramp#.V5xMJZB4WK1 . Mike Edited July 30, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted July 30, 2016 Posted July 30, 2016 (edited) The next step, as you (should) know, is amassing evidence from experiment, and the experiment would be shaped by the questions we need answered. Such as: are we moving with respect to this medium, or are we stationary with respect to it? What effects does this medium have on things passing through it? What does that tell us about the medium's properties? Some fluid, as a medium for waves, has a density and a viscosity and other properties. Waves in water will not move quite the same as waves in some other fluid. So we need to know the properties of this medium you insist exists. .As per my previous post , I am suggesting the medium/ AETHER for GRAVITATIONAL WAVES ''' could ''' be ' DARK MATTER ' . This would seem reasonable as it was first descovered by its galactic requirement for approximately 25 % more mass required in rotating galaxies to balance the forces ( my old favourite I think , centripetal- centrifugal force in rotating galaxies ) . Experiments are currently underway to identify and capture interaction with this matter. Many interaction experiments are carried out underground , in mines etc. This reference discusses ( dark matter 'particles' ) many of these ' on earth' or ' under earth ' experiments and potential particles. Which If I am right could make up , or be part of , the AETHER for GRAVITATIONAL WAVES . WIMP's appear to be a hot favourite ( WIMP weakly interacting massive particles) . Their size could be several times the size of a proton down to just less than the size of a proton . Sounds like good MEDIUM / AETHER for GRAVITATIONAL WAVES to me ? Ref : - :- http://www.kavlifoundation.org/science-spotlights/spotlight-live-dark-matter-long-last-three-new-experiments-ramp#.V5xMJZB4WK1 Mike. Ps . I did a simple compression experiment , while in Italy , in my swimming pool. It was found to be quite in order to make waves travel UNDERWATER by shock or sudden compression . I felt the waves arrive a moment or two later on my legs , as well as seeing the sun light distortion , that passed through the water . Not quite two black holes collapsing into one another , but the principle was there ! Edited July 30, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos
swansont Posted July 30, 2016 Posted July 30, 2016 . As per my previous post , I am suggesting the medium/ AETHER for GRAVITATIONAL WAVES ''' could ''' be ' DARK MATTER ' . This would seem reasonable as it was first descovered by its galactic requirement for approximately 25 % more mass required in rotating galaxies to balance the forces ( my old favourite I think , centripetal- centrifugal force in rotating galaxies ) . Experiments are currently underway to identify and capture interaction with this matter. Many interaction experiments are carried out underground , in mines etc. This reference discusses ( dark matter 'particles' ) many of these ' on earth' or ' under earth ' experiments and potential particles. Which If I am right could make up , or be part of , the AETHER for GRAVITATIONAL WAVES . WIMP's appear to be a hot favourite ( WIMP weakly interacting massive particles) . Their size could be several times the size of a proton down to just less than the size of a proton . Sounds like good MEDIUM / AETHER for GRAVITATIONAL WAVES to me ? Ref : - :- http://www.kavlifoundation.org/science-spotlights/spotlight-live-dark-matter-long-last-three-new-experiments-ramp#.V5xMJZB4WK1 Mike That doesn't address any of my questions. Are we moving with respect to the dark matter, or stationary with respect to it? How do we discern the properties of it if it is this medium?
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted July 30, 2016 Posted July 30, 2016 (edited) That doesn't address any of my questions. Are we moving with respect to the dark matter, or stationary with respect to it? How do we discern the properties of it if it is this medium?.I am not quite sure what you mean by ' we '? As far as I can understand at the moment , with a limited knowledge we have of dark matter . Depending on the current research and which particles come to be fully identified as entertaining interaction . Some of the candidate particles , are like ' Neutrinos ' and several million are going straight through your hand per second as you type on your I pad . Other candidates have other properties. My choice of Dark Matter for the medium is not arbitory . Dark matter seems to work in conjunction with Gravity , as both Gravity and Dark Matter shape a Galaxy , and indeed the Universe , so we are in the right area of influence . At the moment I can not answer your question on the fluid , and viscous characteristics . Also I do not feel at this stage going through the Michaelson Morley experiment has too much relevance. As that has been discussed at depth , and argued about by greater men than I . I think though it may get rekindled , if Dark matter is better identified . Then perhaps we can visit , Michaelson -Morley afresh as it applies to 'dark matter ' . If it is like neutrinos and it's pouring through Everthing without batting an eye . Well we might just as well throw a cabbage in the air . But dark matter does Interact , BUT with what , and what actually IS IT? May be we will have to observe what happens when a comet or asteroid goes through Dark Matter ? Michaelson -Morley with a difference ? Mike Ps I will do some more research on These particles of Dark matter . Clearly they do interact, as they appear to be shaping Galaxies and in fact the Universe at large . ! Edited July 30, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos
swansont Posted July 30, 2016 Posted July 30, 2016 . I am not quite sure what you mean by ' we '? We. pronoun. First person plural. You and I. The people on earth. Any group of terrestrial observers. My choice of Dark Matter for the medium is not arbitory . I think it is. I think you came to a conclusion based on nothing and are now grasping at anything to be possible evidence. The exact opposite of science. Dark matter seems to work in conjunction with Gravity , as both Gravity and Dark Matter shape a Galaxy , and indeed the Universe , so we are in the right area of influence . Does light speed depend on the strength of gravity? At the moment I can not answer your question on the fluid , and viscous characteristics . Also I do not feel at this stage going through the Michaelson Morley experiment has too much relevance. Why not? How do you explain the stellar aberration of light without a medium, rather than relativity? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aberration_of_light As that has been discussed at depth , and argued about by greater men than I . I think though it may get rekindled , if Dark matter is better identified . Then perhaps we can visit , Michaelson -Morley afresh as it applies to 'dark matter ' . If it is like neutrinos and it's pouring through Everthing without batting an eye . Well we might just as well throw a cabbage in the air . But dark matter does Interact , BUT with what , and what actually IS IT? May be we will have to observe what happens when a comet or asteroid goes through Dark Matter ? Michaelson -Morley with a difference ? Mike Ps I will do some more research on These particles of Dark matter . Clearly they do interact, as they appear to be shaping Galaxies and in fact the Universe at large . ! If it's neutrinos, wouldn't the speed of light be affected near a source of them, like a nuclear reactor?
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted July 30, 2016 Posted July 30, 2016 (edited) Questions by Swansont . Q We. pronoun. First person plural. You and I. The people on earth. Any group of terrestrial observers." Answers by Mike A. I am not sure we need to consider an earthbound observer . So we as observers I would say are irrelevant to this level of discussion . True if we were trying to make some form of measurement of us standing still , or passing or not passing by some medium. Then I would say it matters about us as ' we' . But in this discussion I ' think' it is not immediately, relevant . Q I think it is. I think you came to a conclusion based on nothing and are now grasping at anything to be possible evidence. The exact opposite of science. A. As an individual , grown up with , on ,in science and engineering . Since Birth , I looked out on the world , wanted to understand how everything works . As a 3/4/5 year old boy I would peer, think , ask " how does that do that. All the way through school , I would ask, Fellow humans , engineers friends teachers answered me up through my life. I was not content , to move on until I knew how things worked. This went on through school , university , employment , hobby. I would , and still am not content , until I know how something works. Nowerdays it is the Universe, How does it work ? That's what I call a life of science . I do science . I observe , I see things work , if I do not know how they work , I will ultimately search , until I find out . So now I don't know how the universe came to be the way it is , or seems . I am trying to find out and will not rest until I find out . .... This is Science as far as I am concerned. Q . Does light speed depend on the strength of gravity? A. I have been told light has a constant speed . I am aware it travels slightly lower in glass and water , that is why the light front gets refracted at an air water , or air glass interface. I have been taught and relayed this teaching . I was unaware it was it was particularly changed in speed by gravity. I am aware of gravitational lensing in deep space . Can not say I know much more than that . Q. Why not? How do you explain the stellar aberration of light without a medium, rather than relativity?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aberration_of_light A . Not certain I understand what you are asking me here? Q If it's neutrinos, wouldn't the speed of light be affected near a source of them, like a nuclear reactor ? A. I think I understand what you are saying , but I am not totally sure of the situation , so I cannot give a sensible answer at this time ! Mike Edited July 30, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos
swansont Posted July 30, 2016 Posted July 30, 2016 That you are unaware of these issues says you aren't very familiar with this part of physics. You posit dark matter as a medium and note its connection to gravity, but haven't made any connection to the speed of light, which would be affected by the medium. Why bring up gravity in the conversation if it's unconnected? I'm trying to assess the implications of your conjecture. Something you should be doing.
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted July 30, 2016 Posted July 30, 2016 (edited) That you are unaware of these issues says you aren't very familiar with this part of physics. You posit dark matter as a medium and note its connection to gravity, but haven't made any connection to the speed of light, which would be affected by the medium. Why bring up gravity in the conversation if it's unconnected? I'm trying to assess the implications of your conjecture. Something you should be doing. . I hope you are on the same ' wavelength ' as me . ( pardon the pun ) . As previously described , I have learned my science , in and out of , childhood, school, University , Industry, and Teaching . And now pondering . This evolving way of learning, understanding , of the world and universe , is the similar progression made by scientists as a whole , have learned , over the last 1000 to 2000 years . Pardon my apparent arrogance , it is not meant that way , but sometimes , only sometimes , a little overview type of understanding , over a multiplicity of disciplines , can sometimes , only sometimes , give one a view, a glimps , a peek , that specialists fail to see , because of being TOO CLOSE , to the subject . I know this will make you ' bristle ' , but I have even had one of my daughters, or wife , say , something so ' naive ' that it makes one wince . But occasionally they can be ' right on the nail ' What does this have to do with all this ? I am not involved with doing the maths of the standard model , or super strings, or relativistic analysis, or quantum mechanics directly . However , I do understand in vague principle , mostly ALL of it . This is like squinting your eyes , in a room of various sources of light . Once 'squinting ' it soon becomes apparent where is the ' Main source of light ' . Yes you need to recognise light , but the squinting , makes it obvious where the main ' source or sources'. Are. To me, having an overall ' squint ' at everything , roughly , from beginning to end , from top to bottom , it seems painfully obvious ' what is going on , in principle . True I do not have anywhere near the detail , but I believe I have a good idea of what is going on . The words may not all be correct, the detailed operations are probably not correct . BUT this is one world, one universe , one system across the whole thing . All the animals are different , but they all have something in common .. Life . And similarly you can trace much commonality across the universe , even though there are mind blowing extremes. I think we have a brain that can handle those extremes. It's no wonder the Galaxy is seen and called the ' Milky Way ' , and so scientists through the last 1000 to 2000 years have self taught their way through all the twists , turns , attraction , repulsion , flow, waves , seas, streams, wind , clouds, and now they see the heavens as never before , we are amazed at it , and we are understanding it ! So to me it is obvious what is going on , with the two systems of mediums ( aethers ) , one for light , one for matter . Thus one with mainly energy ( dark energy ) mediating the electro magnetism , light , etc . And another one with mainly mass orientated ( dark matter ) mediating ( aether ) mass and gravity . All the rest working around these two distinctly different channels . The human body is a good example of this type of dual mediums . The digestive tract ( handling food ) , and the nerve tract . ( handling nerve, electricity ) . O.k there are other systems working in the universe and in the human body , but the principle is there as clear as day ! Yes I probably have some aspects horribly wrong , but in principle I feel quite comfortable , I am on the right track . Mike Edited July 30, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos
Professional Strawman Posted July 31, 2016 Posted July 31, 2016 I am on the right track . Mike You're in the wrong forum, though. This forum is slow. Probably explains why it's also fake. You won't learn anything here. My two cents. -2
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted July 31, 2016 Posted July 31, 2016 (edited) .. Thinking about the origination of the Medium / AETHER for GRAVITY WAVES . If I am right , then the origin will have occurred shortly after the break in the original Super Symmetry. At the first break which I assume occurred right at the beginning of the ....... Breaking Symmetry ... The size at the start , has purported to be the size of an ATOM . ( a Singularity of singularities. ) DARK MATTER must surely have been part of that first ' break ' . This must have thus been the start of MASS, GRAVITY , Constituting AETHER/MEDIUM plus any other necessary early ingredients all in one package . No doubt the seeds of GRAVITATIONAL WAVES , Mass, and Medium/ Aether were possibly causing standing waves to develope , that set the basis for the universes structure that we now see , but in a much smaller package . As the later symmetry breaking brought about the start of DARK ENERGY , which would have occupied all of the then existing SPACE . In so doing , the second AETHER/MEDIUM set up as an ELECTRO-MAGNETIC FIELD , evenly distributed across all existing space . This then acting as the medium for LIGHT and other ELECTRO-MAGNETIC WAVES . OR at least that is how I imagine it happening . As a Conjecture ? I do not see a conflict , other than like the inside of the sun , the whole thing is a seathing sea of all sorts . Until it expands . But on a much , much , much ,much vaster scale . I would think the two mediums/ aethers and their respective contents would start to sort themselves out , by the recombination event , 300,000 years out ? At this time , I would have thought the AETHER /MEDIUM and MATTER and GRAVITATIONAL WAVES would be well on the way to setting up the future structure of the Universe. Also , at this time , I would have thought the other AETHER/MEDIUM and ENERGY and LIGHT WAVES would be well on the way to spreading out across all of space to become the MICROWAVE BACKGROUND RADIATION we see today ? Possibly one in advance of the other . Light and Energy first , then. Gravity and Matter , following on? Thus LIGHT WAVES and GRAVITY WAVES being in their respective AETHER's / MEDIUM's Illustration of light crossing from early universe to earth today . In this case incorporating gravitational lensing . Mike Edited July 31, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos
Strange Posted July 31, 2016 Posted July 31, 2016 .. Thinking about the origination of the Medium / AETHER for GRAVITY WAVES . As there is no evidence for such a medium, it is premature to be thinking about its origin.
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted July 31, 2016 Posted July 31, 2016 (edited) As there is no evidence for such a medium, it is premature to be thinking about its origin..I think the evidence is born in the fact that : The nature of producing a wave is :- that you have to produce a wave in something . You cannot produce a wave in nothing . This is the nub of this issue of Aether and Medium . The examples of waves in something are countless. The examples of waves in nothing are few , not at all , or dubious to say the least. I find it extraordinary that people , scientists , and the like , who will not normally believe in anything they can't see , can't prove , can't scape a sample off, can't get there hands on and test , :- that they believe waves are flapping about in absolutely " nothing " . If they are flapping about in something , then it's an aether or medium , even if that medium is an electro- magnetic field , it's a medium or aether . As with light or radiation . If it's Gravity , that's flapping about , it must be flapping about in something , not nothing , not a mathmatical formulae , that's nothing , unless it's describing something , even if that something is a field , it's something , an Aether/ medium , not nothing ? Space - is not nothing , it's heaving with " stuff " , so if that stuff is waving ,flapping about, it's an aether/ medium by my definition , as the wave is in the stuff. Either that , or I died , and am having some insane dream ! Now, I don't think I have died yet , so if GRAVITY needs a medium to wave about in , I am suggesting the medium / aether that its flapping around in is DARK MATTER. And there is evidence for DARK MATTER so there is evidence for this Aether/ medium ( true we need to prove the dark matter is flapping /waving. (Perhaps this will come out of the LIGO experiments ) And so if Light and ELECTRO MAGNETIC waves need a medium/aether to flap around in , I am suggesting the medium /aether that it's interacting with is the space wide electro-magnetic field set up And carried by DARK ENERGY. I am not too clear about evidence for the Electro Magnetic Field as tied in with DARK ENERGY ( I need to think about that one , but that is probably easier to detect , and find evidence for ) , I would think , that can nearly be a bench experiment , even if the bench needs to be down a mine ? Mike Edited July 31, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos
Strange Posted August 1, 2016 Posted August 1, 2016 . I think the evidence is born in the fact that : The nature of producing a wave is :- that you have to produce a wave in something . You cannot produce a wave in nothing . That is not evidence or even a fact. It is your (incorrect) assumption/guess. 1
swansont Posted August 1, 2016 Posted August 1, 2016 . I think the evidence is born in the fact that : The nature of producing a wave is :- that you have to produce a wave in something . You cannot produce a wave in nothing . This is the nub of this issue of Aether and Medium . The examples of waves in something are countless. The examples of waves in nothing are few , not at all , or dubious to say the least. Assumption, followed by circular logic. I find it extraordinary that people , scientists , and the like , who will not normally believe in anything they can't see , can't prove , can't scape a sample off, can't get there hands on and test , :- that they believe waves are flapping about in absolutely " nothing " . If they are flapping about in something , then it's an aether or medium , even if that medium is an electro- magnetic field , it's a medium or aether . As with light or radiation . You believe there's an aether, despite having nothing. No sample, nothing to test, can't see it. Why is concluding that's there's nothing the incredible result, rather than insisting that something is there being the unsupportable assertion?
Strange Posted August 1, 2016 Posted August 1, 2016 I find it extraordinary that people , scientists , and the like , who will not normally believe in anything they can't see , can't prove , can't scape a sample off, can't get there hands on and test , :- that they believe waves are flapping about in absolutely " nothing " . That is because the medium you insist on can't be seen, can't be proved, can't get a sample of, can't be tested etc. All attempts to detect any such medium have been negative. Also, our current best theory does not require any such medium.
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted August 1, 2016 Posted August 1, 2016 (edited) That is because the medium you insist on can't be seen, can't be proved, can't get a sample of, can't be tested etc. All attempts to detect any such medium have been negative. Also, our current best theory does not require any such medium. But that is not quite correct! Surely? I am saying Dark matter is the medium for Gravity waves. You can detect and gain evidence for the existence of Dark matter. By galaxy calculation , observation . , surely ? Mike Edited August 1, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos
swansont Posted August 1, 2016 Posted August 1, 2016 But that is not quite correct! Surely? I am saying Dark matter is the medium for Gravity waves. You can detect and gain evidence for the existence of Dark matter. By galaxy calculation , observation . , surely Dark matter as a medium suffers from all of the problems we had when it was unidentified but posited. Such as the stellar aberration vs Michelson-Morley interferometer measurements being in stark disagreement. (Surely you've read up on stellar aberration since I mentioned it previously as being an issue. I'd hate to think you aren't trying to educate yourself on the issue, and are rather just soapboxing)
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted August 1, 2016 Posted August 1, 2016 (edited) Dark matter as a medium suffers from all of the problems we had when it was unidentified but posited. Such as the stellar aberration vs Michelson-Morley interferometer measurements being in stark disagreement. (Surely you've read up on stellar aberration since I mentioned it previously as being an issue. I'd hate to think you aren't trying to educate yourself on the issue, and are rather just soapboxing)I do want to be educated . What I do not understand , is why there should be so much of a desire , for there not to have " mediums or Aethers ' for things that would normally seems such common sense . ( like sound in air , waves in water, undersea currents , gusts in air , earthquake P and S waves in rock and mantel etc , ) ? Mike Edited August 1, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos
Recommended Posts