Gravity waves and the aether

[Strange]

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

 

There is no reason to think that dark matter is the medium for gravitational waves.

 

The theory of gravitational waves was developed before we knew anything about dark matter. Therefore:

• It does not require dark matter.
• It is not changed by our knowledge of dark matter.
• Dark matter is totally irrelevant to the propagation of gravitational waves

You have just randomly picked on dark matter as a medium. You could have chosen hydrogen. Or neutrinos. Or unicorns. They are present throughout space (OK, not the unicorns) and also have nothing to do with the propagation of gravitational waves.

 

You are going around this completely backwards. You have decided on a conclusion and are now randomly choosing things that could be evidence.

 

It is like a police officer saying, "Jack 'Chalky' White committed the crime!"

"How do you know that, Guv?"

"Because it is Tuesday and Justin Bieber's favourite colour is orange"

"But that isn't evidence for the crime!"

"OK. Well, then it's because of dark matter. See, it's obvious: dark matter - Chalky White. Guilty as heck."

"But, Guv ..."

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, ) ?

 

Because there is no evidence for such a thing and no theory requires it.

 

Why is there such a strong desire for people not to believe in Father Christmas?

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

There is no reason to think that dark matter is the medium for gravitational waves.

 

The theory of gravitational waves was developed before we knew anything about dark matter. Therefore:

• [*]It does not require dark matter.

.

I have added a few more examples of waves in matter. Different matter , different waves . And as the ringing electric bell in a Bell jar , experiment . ( empty the bell jar of air , and the ringing Stops . ) no medium no sound . .

 

I think it is the Kings suit of clothes , syndrome . Everybody is saying " there is no aether , no need for an aether "

 

This is ' craziness ' . There has to be a vehicle for waves , no vehicle , no transportation of waves . It's counter to most of nature . If there is no medium " I will eat my hat "

 

The reason I have picked Dark Matter as the medium is because ( whatever dark matter is ) , it is a MAJOR player in the gravitational balance within Galaxies . If you hit a gong , brass with silver plating , then you could say that the silver plating was part of the medium for the gonging sound , in reality , most was due to the brass as the medium . So with matter and dark matter . Gravity is a central feature of normal matter , but in a galaxy the majority of influence is due to dark matter . I believe . If I have understood what I have read about dark matter and its influence in galaxies and the universe .

 

Mike

Edited August 1, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Strange]

I think it is the Kings suit of clothes , syndrome . Everybody is saying " there is no aether , no need for an aether "

 

Remember the point of the fable? People said there were clothes when there weren't any. So it looks like science is playing the role of the child and pointing out that there are no clothes. And you are playing the part of the deluded courtiers, insisting there must be. (Because the King wouldn't go out naked. That would be 'craziness'.)

 

 

The reason I have picked Dark Matter as the medium is because ( whatever dark matter is ) , it is a MAJOR player in the gravitational balance within Galaxies .

 

Outside of galaxies, there is relatively little dark matter. And yet gravity, and gravitational waves, behave exactly the same there as in galaxies.

[ajb]

Mike, the problem is that we already have a notion of a gravitational wave and how to describe these as ripples in the local geometry of space-time. Mechanical waves in some medium, and in this case dark matter, seem to be very different things. You need to show that phenomenologically these mechanical waves are indistinguishable from gravitational waves - which I don't think is possible.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Remember the point of the fable? People said there were clothes when there weren't any. So it looks like science is playing the role of the child and pointing out that there are no clothes. And you are playing the part of the deluded courtiers, insisting there must be. (Because the King wouldn't go out naked. That would be 'craziness'.)

 

 

 

Outside of galaxies, there is relatively little dark matter. And yet gravity, and gravitational waves, behave exactly the same there as in galaxies.

.

Hey ! Wait a minute , you just Hi jacked my illustrative tale ! That's not fair ! Joke .

 

Well , if I am wrong about dark matter , ( I may be ) . I just went for the biggest , gravity sensitive commodity around . As you would expect sea water to be the main medium of waves in the sea . No doubt sea weed plays an infinitesimal part . But sea water is one of the main ingredients.

 

Mike

Mike, the problem is that we already have a notion of a gravitational wave and how to describe these as ripples in the local geometry of space-time. Mechanical waves in some medium, and in this case dark matter, seem to be very different things. You need to show that phenomenologically these mechanical waves are indistinguishable from gravitational waves - which I don't think is possible.

Yes well that would be fine , if what you call SPACE - TIME , was something , something of some form of substance , or containing something of substance , like mass particles , or even go through-your hand 10,000,000 zippy particles ever second particles dark matter particles , but I fear and tremble that you are going to say that there is nothing there but geometry ?

 

Mike

Edited August 1, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Strange]

Yes well that would be fine , if what you call SPACE - TIME , was something , something of some form of substance , or containing something of substance , like mass particles , or even go through-your hand 10,000,000 zippy particles ever second particles dark matter particles ,

 

Billions of dark matter particles (and neutrinos) fly through and past you without having any noticeable effect.

 

The curvature of space-time holds you in your chair, keeps the moon in orbit, and creates the structure of galaxies.

 

I know which one I consider more substantial.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Billions of dark matter particles (and neutrinos) fly through and past you without having any noticeable effect.

 

The curvature of space-time holds you in your chair, keeps the moon in orbit, and creates the structure of galaxies.

 

I know which one I consider more substantial.

Yes , and I agree with you , IF , IF ,IF " SPACE -TIME was something ( THING ) . but Unless I am going completely round the bend . You guys keep telling me that space -time is curved , BUT , Space - Time is Only geometry. If space time was actually ' something ' . I really do not mind if it is goo y soft spongy rubber sheet style invisible , matrix shaped , ' ( gunge) . Then you can curve it , shape it into a chair , Great , I am your man ! I will sit in the chair too. Because then we can all send a wave , in it, and the ( gunge) is my medium , and we can all go home .

 

Please tell me what it is , as long as it's not " nothing "

 

Mike

Edited August 1, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[swansont]

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

 

 

Desire doesn't enter into it. The issue is what the evidence supports, and evidence does not support there being a medium.

Because there is no evidence for such a thing and no theory requires it.

 

 

And to go a step further, if a theory required it it would (potentially) point us to a test for it.

[Strange]

Please tell me what it is , as long as it's not " nothing "

 

It depends on your definition of "nothing".

 

Is the distance between New York and Rome "nothing:?

Is the time taken to make that journey "nothing"?

Are lines of latitude and longitude "nothing"?

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Desire doesn't enter into it. The issue is what the evidence supports, and evidence does not support there being a medium.

Are you sure we have looked hard enough . After all there are all sorts of scientific looking people , down mine shafts, looking for particles that sound important , but only interact occasionally ? Yet some of these particles are very important in the standard model , and other models for " how the universe works "

 

Mike

[ajb]

but I fear and tremble that you are going to say that there is nothing there but geometry ?

That is what our best model tells us ... the problem is you are hinting at some kind of aether models of gravity without having a model at hand.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

It depends on your definition of "nothing".

 

A) Is the distance between New York and Rome "nothing:?

B) Is the time taken to make that journey "nothing"?

C) Are lines of latitude and longitude "nothing"?

Humm ! ?

That is what our best model tells us ... the problem is you are hinting at some kind of aether models of gravity without having a model at hand.

Hmm !

[swansont]

Are you sure we have looked hard enough . After all there are all sorts of scientific looking people , down mine shafts, looking for particles that sound important , but only interact occasionally ? Yet some of these particles are very important in the standard model , and other models for " how the universe works "

 

Mike

 

 

There would be evidence even if we didn't know what it was, much like gravitational lensing and galactic rotation rates tell us there is dark matter, even though we don't yet know what it is.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

There would be evidence even if we didn't know what it was, much like gravitational lensing and galactic rotation rates tell us there is dark matter, even though we don't yet know what it is.

This Is where I need to be very careful.

To me the very presence recently of the remnants of a gravitational wave , that passed by as it hit the LIGO DETECTORS, is itself evidence of a medium / Aether.

 

Because , if you believe as I do that mediums are NOT optional . In other words , I would say , NO waves whatsoever could cross a void without a (boat ) or MEDIUM/AETHER . Then the arrival of a wave , to me , was evidence that there IS an Aether / medium. As I explained in previous posts , I think of medium/aether as a facilitator ENABLER as sure as " anyone flapping a paddle about in the air near the ground , at the edge of a dried up lake , would never produce a movement on the far side of the lake . Whereas a refilled lake , receiving the flapping paddle on one side of the lake , WOULD receive a wave , ripple on the far side of the lake . Thus the lake of water acted as a facilitator, ENABLER , for energy , a wave to pass from one side of the lake to the other. As I previously explained , the evidence would be provided from the RECIPIENT of the ENABLEMENT .

 

QED

 

MIKE

[Strange]

This Is where I need to be very careful.

To me the very presence recently of the remnants of a gravitational wave , that passed by as it hit the LIGO DETECTORS, is itself evidence of a medium / Aether.

 

 

How can it be when it is really good evidence for a scientific theory that doesn't require a medium.

 

 

 

Because , if you believe as I do that mediums are NOT optional .

 

Your quasi-religious belief is irrelevant to science.

 

 

 

In other words , I would say , NO waves whatsoever could cross a void without a (boat ) or MEDIUM/AETHER .

 

So you are wrong. <shrug>

 

 

 

Then the arrival of a wave , to me , was evidence that there IS an Aether / medium.

 

In which case you need to provide an accurate (mathematical) mode that includes this medium and produces all the same results as GR.

[swansont]

This Is where I need to be very careful.

To me the very presence recently of the remnants of a gravitational wave , that passed by as it hit the LIGO DETECTORS, is itself evidence of a medium / Aether.

 

 

Evidence has to be interpreted in the context of a model. You haven't presented one.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Evidence has to be interpreted in the context of a model. You haven't presented one.

Sure . To follow ! Promise .

 

In the mean time I need to adjunct the related AETHER/MEDIUM . Which provides the Electro-Magnetic ENABLER for the whole of space time ELECTRO-MAGNETISM .

 

I would SUGGEST that with all the voids which pepper the universe from the centre of atoms to the expanse of deep space , can only be communicated across by a medium /aether . In this second case we are talking about ELECTRO-MAGNETISM .

SO the enabling MEDIUM / AETHER In this case is the ELECTRO-MAGNETIC FIELD set up by an energy source so great that it permeate everything ,everywhere .

 

In looking for an energy source that contained this amount of energy , which with the assistance, and working in conjunction with ELECTRO -MAGNETISM . In order to be such an all pervasive MEDIUM./AETHER source could only be DARK ENERGY .

 

Again , with the flapping at the edge of an empty pond would enable nothing , but with an AETHER/MEDIUM could pervade and ENABLE all of space time . So the fact that an Electro-Magnetic field permeates all of space time is Evidence of the ENABLING AETHER.

 

MIKE

[ajb]

Dark energy is now the aether?

[Strange]

In looking for an energy source that contained this amount of energy , which with the assistance, and working in conjunction with ELECTRO -MAGNETISM . In order to be such an all pervasive MEDIUM./AETHER source could only be DARK ENERGY .

 

 

You have replaced one insubstantial thing which pervades all of space (the electromagnetic field) with another insubstantial and hypothetical thing that might pervade all of space (dark energy).

 

The problem is we know a LOT about the electromagnetic field. We can describe it precisely. We can measure it. We have technology that uses it.

 

On the other hand, we know almost nothing about dark energy. We don't even know for sure if it exists. We can't measure it. (It is also, I think, very tiny. Like 1 nanojoule per cubic metre.)

 

I'm not sure that counts as progress.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

.

Dark energy is now the aether?

.

 

Not THE AETHER , In my model there are two distinct MEDIUMS ( that's why I do not like using the title AETHER )

 

one .................( for mass and gravity waves ) .......................the heavy content .............Dark Matter

and another.... ( for light and electro-magnetic waves ) . ......the lightweight content ........Dark Energy .

 

 

 

 

Link :- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_modelling

 

An example of scientific modelling .

 

Mike

 

So the model for

 

GRAVITY WAVES AND THE AETHER

 

Needs to be arranged in this format . ( to follow )

Edited August 1, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Strange]

An example of scientific modelling .

 

 

That is NOT an example of scientific modelling. It is a dumbed down, visual representation of a high-level and highly inaccurate summary of a model. At best.

 

The model will consist of a large number of complex equations describing, among other things:

• the concentrations of the various gases
• the sources of energy
• the rate at which the components move (dependent on concentration, temperature, density, wind speeds, moisture levels, etc)
• how long they are stable for
• what happens to them over time
• what they react with
• what effect they have on the absorption and reflection of sunlight over time
• what effect ultraviolet radiation has on them
• how they affect cloud formation
• how they are absorbed in water
• how that depends on temperature and salinity
• the effects of ocean current
• the effects of trees, phytoplankton and other plant life
• the amount that different industries, including farming, contribute
• and on
• and on
• and on

Getting results from a model like this takes hours of supercomputer time.

 

By comparison, your wild guesses are worthless.

Edited August 1, 2016 by Strange

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Quote Strange"

...... By comparison, your wild guesses are worthless. .."

 

What happens if they are Right ? I am going to supply a model , which should contain why and how

 

...... -------- GRAVITY WAVES and the AETHER ---------- .........Are what they are !

 

 

Mike

Edited August 1, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[disarray]

If a layman such as myself is allowed to throw in 2 cents, it seems to me that, if one had to make a choice, it would be more likely that gravitational waves would be qualitatively more like electromagnetic waves than the ‘mechanical’ waves found, for example in water, so that it is more logical in the first place that gravitational waves would not need a medium in order to propagate.

 

Furthermore, I see no reason to assume that there are more examples of waves in nature that require a medium than those that don’t, e.g., Maxwell's equations predicted an infinite number of frequencies of electromagnetic waves, all traveling at the speed of light (though apparently we have narrowed down the number from his rather overboard estimate).

 

Also, I am guessing that theories about the early inflation of the universe suggest that electromagnetic waves do not provide any alleged medium through which electromagnetic and/or gravity waves might supposedly travel, since they only travel at the speed of light, whereas the rate of expansion owing to early inflation is postulated to be many times greater than the speed of light, suggesting that electromagnetic/gravitational waves neither rely on nor are coextensive with the alleged medium of space.

 

Finally, whether electromagnetic waves, for example, are so cosmically diffuse as to provide their own medium is, I gather, something which there is no known means of testing, and is meaningless speculation because such a theory lacks any substantiating or suggestive evidence, and at present seems to be neither verifiable or falsifiable.

Edited August 1, 2016 by disarray

[swansont]

With every example you've given of a medium for waves, there are independent ways of detecting and interacting with the medium, other than a wave in them.

 

Why can't we do that for EM and gravity?

[MigL]

Mike, the very theory which predicts and forms the basis for gravitational waves has not needed an aether or medium for the past century.

I find it rich that you can now claim that the gravitational waves are proof of an aether or medium.

If it wasn't for mediumless relativity, no-one would have even been looking for gravitational waves.

 

Its been 30 pages now and I bet Moontanman regrets the OP.

Its getting tiresome, especially since you're not presenting supporting facts or mechanisms.

Wishing and hoping don't count for much