The universe is a spin net liquid, that they have called the Higgs field.
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 9:39 PM, John Berry <[email protected]> wrote: > Not that it matters, but I gave the speed of light in km a second and then > said meters a second... > > Also, I would genuinely like to know if anyone disagrees with my > arguments, or fails to understand them. > > > And if you do agree, would you conclude that an aether of some type is > logically required? > > John > > > On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 3:21 PM, John Berry <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Originally the aether was thought to exist, but it was hoped the earth >> would move though it rather than entrain it, maybe as a continued departure >> from earth centric thinking, or more likely because a static aether was far >> more simple than trying to understand an aether that was entrained to some >> degree by Earth. >> >> First Michelson and Morley performed an experiment which if not flawed >> (some say it is) would show if the earth moved though an aether, however >> such was not detected. >> However this did not disprove an entrained aether, Michelson and or >> Morley still believed in an aether. >> Indeed drifts with the M-M experiment were detected, just really tiny >> ones consistent with with a mostly entrained aether, but larger drifts have >> been detected up mountains in glass houses than in brick basements where >> aether might be more poorly entrained. >> >> Next came Einstein with SR, he showed how an aether wasn't required if >> space and time distorted in the right ways. >> Actually he still believed in an aether, although a very different one. >> >> Let's look at Time dilation. >> >> First off I must say that SR arguments works and look alright until you >> change your view slightly. >> Let's take a pulse of light, some observers on the ground measuring the >> time this pulse takes to traverse 2 detectors 1 meter apart, they get a >> speed of 299,292.458 meters a second. >> >> Then we have have this pulse run along train tracks past a train, they >> detect this light pulse which they are moving with, and they are meant to >> detect the same speed. >> This is an impossibility, except for length contraction and time >> dilation, only it is still impossible! >> >> The first thing to appreciate is that there is an illusion that will >> appear to create length contraction and time dilation, but this illusion is >> not real at all. >> It is the Doppler effect, consider that if I was shooting at you and >> moving towards you, each bullet would have less travel time causing an >> increase in the rate at which I seem to be firing bullets, this is the same >> effect as pitch changes in horns as cars go by. If I was moving away from >> you it would appear the rate of fire decreased. But of course the rate of >> fire is unchanged >> >> This will create an illusion of the rate of time, but this illusion can >> be removed through calculation, or by communication of time rate >> orthogonally to direction of travel. >> a b-> >> >> >> c >> >> b is moving away from a, but both a and b can sync clocks with c. since b >> and c have a period where they are not moving away or toward each other >> they can keep track of each others progress through time without and >> Doppler effects in the way. >> >> Secondly the Doppler effect causes a length contraction (and expansion) >> illusion, this is where at any moment a sees b, it sees light from >> different points in time and hence different positions for the closer and >> furthest part of b. >> Because the light from the furthest part of b takes longer to get to a, >> by the time it has got to a the image a has of the closer portion of the >> ship is slightly newer and based on a position further away. >> >> This causes an illusion of length contraction, but for c this length >> contraction also has not occurred. >> And if we add 'stationary' point d that b is moving towards it would see >> a length expansion which SR ignores completely. >> >> So if there is real time and length contraction it is important to >> separate that from this bogus, illusive form of these effects. >> And it is important to realise that observer c collapses any possibility >> of time dilation occurring without a preferred reference frame, if a time >> rate difference exists between b and c it can be agreed upon between both b >> and c, they can't see the other as experiencing time slower than they are >> because they can observe each other without the Doppler distortion, if they >> both saw the other as frozen in time what happens if they both reach a >> common reference frame, and meet, would they have to see the time rate on >> the other suddenly make up for all that time they saw the other being >> frozen? >> >> It just doesn't work. >> >> Next let's go back to our train and light pulses, if the train is seen to >> shrink from the earth frame, then the distance of the meter shrinks so even >> though they are moving with the light pulse the stationary observer could >> expect their speed of light measure to agree. >> But now what if we send another pulse in the other direction??? >> >> Now the earth measures the expected rate, sure. >> But the train is travelling against the direction, this would cause them >> to expect to find the light to be, ahem, superluminal. >> So again we hop off the train and see the length of the train has >> contracted, this helped light travelling with the train attain it's >> expected speed, but now it is working against us! >> >> Clearly length contraction might be effective at fixing the speed of >> light in one direction, but it heaps up the problem on the other side. >> >> How can light speed possibly be corrected by something that only works >> with one half of the problem and makes the other side worse? >> You can't just turn length contraction off and on when and where it >> suits, if it exists it exists for both problems. >> >> Ok, so how about time dilation? >> >> Well I have already argued that time dilation without a discoverable >> preferred reference frame simply isn't possible, and time dilation >> with a discoverable preferred reference frame isn't SR, it is an >> aethericmodel. >> >> But let's just argue it anyway? >> So to the outside observer according to SR the time on the train should >> slow down, does this fix our measured light speed problem? >> Well if the train is moving with the light pulse direction, from the >> earth view the passage of time on the train has slowed, this means that >> their clock is moving slowly and so even though they are moving with the >> light which should make the light seem slow, the light might be measured to >> be the same speed since their clock are slow, and the length contraction on >> top of that. >> >> But if the light pulse is opposite the trains motion, they might expect >> to measure the light to be faster than C. >> So time dilation slows their clock down, so even less train clock time >> passes before light moves across the length contracted meter that separates >> the 2 light sensors. >> >> Seriously, how has this illusion lasted for so long when it only helps >> light travelling with the train/spaceship but compounds the problem for >> light moving the other direction? >> >> I can accept that these arguments will not persuade an intellectually >> dishonest establishment science. >> >> But can we agree that this is not a realistic model of the universe? >> And if it is not, what model could exist that agrees with all physical >> evidence besides an entrained aether? >> >> And if the aether is entrained, then can an electrodynamic experiment to >> prove or disprove this not be found? >> >> John >> > >
