Administrator
The previous AWT thread was terminated by the forum software. It wasn't our intent to terminate it, but we merged an old thread with the newer one (something we often do outside of ATM and CT). The result was a closed thread.
Please pick up the discussion following adsar's post (#39) from the linked thread above.
Forming opinions as we speak
Banned
OK, thank you. I'd like to start with widespread opinion between many positivists. Some others aren't so categorical, but the relevant ubnderstanding of Aether concept importance for physics is still missing here. The purpose of AWT concept is to fill this conceptual gap.
By my opinion, the Aether concept is quite fundamental and it cannot be omitted. It serves as a conceptual glue between relativity theory and quantum mechanics both on cosmic energy/distance scale, both on Planck scale. But the Aether multi-particle concept goes even deeper - it can help us to redefine the whole observable reality on the background of probability calculus. It's not still the ultimate approach, as it cannot explain, why reality exists. But if we consider, the reality exists and its formed from many pieces, it enables us to predict the appearance of this reality on the background of scale invariant fluctuations. The Aether Wave Theory is closely related to Constructal theory, Process Physics, Unparticle Physics and Emergence Theory - it can serve as the conceptual base of all these theories. The concept of Aether foam covers the quantum foam or spin network of LQG theory, the protosimplex lattice of Heim theory or the recent string net liquid concept. And the non-linear properties of Aether foam can reconcile the dual aspects of general relativity and quantum mechanics.
If all these theories are relevant each other, as the correspondence principle requires, here must exist some common connecting point/concept and we are forced to find it, because it's unacceptable to have many theories, which are incompatible each other. I'd recommend you to became familiar with each concept listed above, so we can discuss the relation of AWT to all these particular theories/concepts later in more details.
Banned
By general definition, the Aether is hypothetical inhomogeneous environment, forming the space for energy spreading, the light energy spreading in particular. This later version of Aether is called the luminiferous Aether, but the Aether concept isn't limited just to light energy spreading.Originally Posted by Tensor
The main difference of AWT from older version of Aether is, it doesn't consider only the particle Aether environment. The Aether of AWT is based on concept of scale invariant fluctuations, so called unparticles. This concept was introduced into physics somewhat miraculously by Howard Georgi, a physicist at Harvard University. Maybe the Unparticle Physics was inspired by AWT on background - nevertheless prof. Georgi never mentioned its connection to Aether concept or physical mechanism of unparticle formation.
The Aether foam is the concept, resulting from extrapolation of scale invariant fluctuations to large density of Aether. In sparse gas the fluctuations of density are of blobby character, but in dense gas (like the supercritical fluid) it can obtain a character of multidimensional foam or sponge. It behavior is strongly nonlinear, as such foam gets more dense after introduction of energy (during shaking or passing of energy wave) - from this behavior the another nonlinear phenomena can be derived.
Banned
The Aether is the only postulate of AWT. This basically says, the reality must be composed of many mutually colliding entities to become observable. But such entities must be real as well, so that such definition of reality is recursive and from this perspective the AWT uses no abstract concepts - it just depends on our definition of reality.The Aether itself is incompressible, but the different phases of Aether are. How is it possible? Well, the fluids are nearly incompressible too, but they can exhibit a well pronounced wave motion. This is because the AWT doesn't relies just on longitudinal model of wave spreading, but to the transversal wave spreading model as well. While the former one is typical for sparse gas, the later one is relevant for foam and liquid phases, the supercritical foam in particular.
But the Aether isn't restricted just to foam phase. This foam is just most apparent Aether phase for us, as it enables to propagate the energy/information at the distance without distortion. The space around us is full of longitudinal waves, but we cannot see them, as these waves cannot transfer the energy by causal way. Instead of this, they're manifest itself as a tachyons spreading through space-time with many time dimensions, i.e. they're source of so called quantum uncertainty (compare the Huygens/Fermat/Feynman principles).
Banned
If we're living in the casual portion of Aether foam, it's natural to expect, the causality will be violated both toward the Planck scale (the future), both toward the cosmological scale (the past) by symmetric way. From this point of view we should live exactly at the center of causal portion of the observable Universe from time/scale perspective. Nevertheless, such symmetry is violated toward the future due the universe expansion, which is the reason, we can observe it at all. The violation of causality manifests by many plural way, by the violation of Lorentz symmetry in particular. As the Lorentz symmetry becomes violated, the number of time arrow increases and the space becomes polarized and inhomogeneous, so we are perceive objects through it like through undulating water surface or bumpy glass.
The inhomogeneity of space is the reason of the quantum uncertainty, which can be perceived even by naked eye as a Brownian motion. On the cosmological scale the inhomogeneity of space manifests by gravitational lensing, which is theoretically possible to observe by naked eye too (though its probability is way way lower). It's symptomatic for mainstream science, it believe in relativity so much, it refutes to consider the quantum uncertainty as a manifestation of Lorentz symmetry violation.
The Lorentz symmetry breaking is the direct consequence of branching of time arrows inside of Aether foam. With increased foam density the bubbles of foam are becoming spherical and their surface gradients are mutually separating each other. As the result, every space-time events propagates through foam along multiple paths and the vacuum becomes birefringent. The birefringence results into formation of multiple event horizons inside of black holes, where it can be considered as a new generation of Aether foam, forming the vacuum inside of black hole..
Last edited by Zephir; 2008-Jul-14 at 10:50 PM.
Order of Kilopi
Here are a number of questions I asked about AWT*, as presented by Zephir in the now closed thread, that have not yet been answered. I would like them answered (ask if the context of any is unclear, and I'll happily provide the necessary links); the numbering below is new.
1) What mathematical tools could be employed - in principle - to investigate attributes (epiphenomena?) that take "infinite" values? [Recall that, in AWT, the universe is infinitely dense (as in 'mass per unit volume') and has an infinite temperature (this has not yet been explored, AFAIK)]
2) How - even in principle - could "infinities" be related to phenomenology (that which is, or could be, observable)? Specifically, techniques to estimate mass, density, and temperature (or any combination of them).
3) What is the diagram in post #11? What does it intend to represent?
4) All the simulations (or whatever they are intended to be) in post #31, involve finite entities (or, more precisely, entities which take only finite values). Yet, if I have understood AWT correctly, what is being simulated is entities which have infinite values (whatever that means). Can you clarify please? Specifically, how can you represent something (density, temperature, mass, ...) which is "infinite" in these simulations?
5) re this statement by Z: "This behavior can be understood easily, if we realize, everything what can be observed from random field of fluctuation are the fluctuations, where the randomness is less or more violated by ordered, collective motion." Are you claiming that "what can be observed" (presumably with extensions of one or more of the human senses) is something that is "infinite"? Or fluctuations (random or otherwise) of something that is "infinite"?
I have many more questions about AWT, as presented by Z to date, but I want to get these earlier questions answered first.
* there are also a number of questions asked by others that also have not yet been answered. If those other BAUT members do not repeat them here, in the next 24 hours or so, I will attempt to.
Banned
By recent observations, the more distant cefeids exhibits the higher red shift, which leads to the assumption, the expansion of Universe increases due the mysterious dark energy. By Aether Wave Theory the brightening of distant supernovae follows simply from Universe omni-directional expansion. By AWT the Universe expands due its collapse, which increases the mass/energy density of vacuum by the same way, like at the case of common collapsars. It means, the Universe density increases with time so that the more distant parts of universe are less dense, then the near ones. The trick is, the matter is precollapsed already, so it collapses more slowly, then the vacuum. Such effect has even its measurable consequences, like the dilatation of meter prototype and disappearing of kilogram prototype.
The brightness of supernovae explosions depends on the density of matter with compare to vacuum. As the density of vacuum increases, the cepheid explosions are becoming more frequent, but weaker. This results into illusion of Universe expansion, when these supernovae are used as a standard candles, because more distant supernovae are brighter. The same effect affects the spectrum of the CMB too.
Order of Kilopi
It doesn't depend on anything, you claimed it's an abstract concept. Yet, you claimed there are no abstract concepts in AWT. A contradiction.
Doesn't matter. If it's incompressible, there is no wave motion. Since you claim it's incopressible, and you claim there is wave motion, there is a contradiction.
Banned
We are formed by infinitely tiny fluctuations interacting with infinitely dense Aether, but the speed of energy spreading is always limited, so we can see only limited volume area of noise, which contains the limited number of states.
The limited number of states leads to the multinomial distribution of states probability, similar to the patterns existing in the series of random numbers chosen from limited interval. By another words, our ability to see something is the consequence of the impossibility to see everything at the same time.Compare the answer above. We are always sampling an infinitely small portion of infinitely large Universe, so that the result of sampling is always limited.
Why not? Even the Navier-Stokes solution of incompressible fluid can lead to the wave motion. This is given by the finite speed of energy propagation. Inside the infinitely cnaotic Aether the energy would propagate by the infinite speed. But the energy cannot spread by the infinitely chaotic system at the infinite distance. Instead of this, just the infinitely tiny fraction of Aether fluctuations can serve for energy spreading at the limited distance. But such infinitely small fraction would propagate by the infinitely small speed with respect to the infinite space-time, so we can detect the finite speed of energy spreading inside of this finite fraction of Universe.
Last edited by Zephir; 2008-Jul-15 at 12:53 AM.
Order of Kilopi
Exactly by how much does AWT say the violation in Lorentz symemetry is?
How much does the inhomogeneity of space predict should starlight bend near the rim of the sun? Please provide the calculations of this.
And the amount of Lorentz symmetry breaking inside the aether foam is? Let's say, for a photon coming in from a galaxy a billion LY distance.
An event horizon is nothing more then a sphere in space where the escape velocity is equal to c. Are you claiming that there are more than one sphere where this happens for a black hole? If so, please provide your proof for this.
Order of Kilopi
That was my comment, not Nereid's. You are using two different meanings of the term incompressible. Your claim is that aether is of zero compressibility. The meaning of incompressible in the Navier-Stokes equations simply means that density of the fluid under consideration doesn't change during the evaluation.
Banned
This diagram illustrates the space-time duality of AWT.
In AWT every Aether foam bubble is filled by another smaller bubbles. But the size of bubbles can seamlessly switch from one size into another like undulation fluctuation (nonabelian perturbation), which appear on every distance scale. Try to imagine, you'll mix two samples of colored foam: the green foam with small bubbles and the red one with large bubbles. Now you can imagine the size of small bubbles will increase while the size of large bubbles will decrease, until they'll switch their position. From internal observer perspective such process will correspond the topological inversion of surfaces, but basically it's the sequence of two congruent phase transforms, which occurs frequently in the nature as a consequence of pair reciprocal time arrows.
For example rain droplets will condense during contact, but they'll evaporate at the same time. By analogous way, every matter is condensing inside of our Universe into larger object, but such process will increase its evaporation into radiation. The extrapolation of this concept to the infinity leads to the Uroboros model of the Universe, where it's interior is formed by its exterior (Klein bottle manifold). Note that the antimatter exist in reciprocal time arrow inside of our Universe - it evaporates when the normal matter condenses, this is the reason, why the antimatter is so finely dispersed inside of our Universe generation.
Last edited by Zephir; 2008-Jul-15 at 01:33 AM.
Banned
By AWT the event horizon is result of total reflection phenomena, which occurs at the place, when the gradient of Aether density becomes sufficiently large. It means, the black hole appears as a bluish mirror-like sphere from inside ("heavens"), while it appears as dark reddish glowing hole from outside ("the hell"). This model can be verified by observation, because the light of the oldest objects can reflect from inner walls of our Universe generation (the strong red shift and dispersion will distort the reflected image, though).
But the situation isn't so trivial at the case of rotating black holes, where the location of event horizon depends on the mutual motion direction. And the real black hole is considered to be a giant large drop of boiling vacuum, so here's a complex system of event horizons with dodecahedral symmetry, whose density increases to wards the center of black hole. We can see some of them as a dark matter streaks inside of our Universe generation. Compare the Kerr solution of rotating black holes and Kipp Thorne model of black hole interior.
We'll continue tomorrow with further discussion.
Order of Kilopi
How do you determine the place of total reflection? Please provide the equations to show a gradient on a infinite density.
What are the requirements for a black hole in AWT?
You mean we can only see reflection from one direction? Why can't we get multiple reflections? How much of a red shift and how much dispersion? How much distortion?
I am well aware of both the Kerr solution and Thorne's model. They match up pretty well. On the other hand, you seem to pull random images off the web trying to illustrate your points. But, you don't seem to be able to actually tie the images directly to your points, except by infering that it is similar to the way AWT works. Infering that it works that way is a far cry from showing it actually works that way.
For instance, how do you exactly prove that a black hole in AWT has complex system of event horizons with dodecahedral symmetry. You claim it, but you haven't provided any kind of proof for it.
Banned
You can read about this formalism here. For me is more important some direct observation of this phenomena. The ability of theory to compute some phenomena isn't so important, until no confirmation exists.
It works on the logical, conceptual level. For example, the order of Venus phases or stellar parallax aren't direct evidences of heliocentric model, but they can confirm it easier, then the poorly conditioned math model (which supplies the similar data, like the geocentric model).I'm not sure, I can understand your question completely. By AWT the black holes can exist without problem, because the density of Aether fluctuation isn't limited by any way. My understanding is, as the size of black hole increases, the density gradient at the black hole surface becomes weaker, because the surface of sphere increases slower, then its volume. When the black hole size exceeds certain threshold (some 4 millions of solar mass units or so), the surface gradient of black hole isn't sufficient for formation of total reflection phenomena anymore and the black hole will change into "naked singularity", i.e. white hole, so called the quasar. This thing is quite radiative and it emanates the mass in the form of gamma ray photons through whole its surface, via polar jets later - until the black hole limit isn't reached. This model explains flat shape of gallaxies.
Last edited by Zephir; 2008-Jul-15 at 08:21 AM.
Banned
Actually the aether theory was mainstream until the 1900s. It was the mainstream that went against the aether, not the other way around. In fact most of the famous scientists that caused this change never themselves abandoned the aether - Michelson, Morley, Planck, Einstein, Dirac etc all believed in the aether. Einstein who did most to cause people to disbelieve in an aether said that although SR made an aether not needed, GR made it essential.
Why was it that people abandoned the aether? It was purely due to an accident of history and people are still confused about it today. The accident was that the Michelson-Morley results came before Schroedinger and de Broglie.
The Michelson-Morley result showed that we could not detect a motion relative to the aether. However if Schroedinger and de Broglie had made their discoveries before M-M then it would have been understood that matter was also made of the same stuff as light, but standing waves rather than traveling ones. When that is understood, then the expected M-M result is a null one. There is then no reason to abandon the aether concept.
It is needed to change your way of looking at things so as to see that this question misses the point.
The aether is not made of matter so we cannot measure its density. Likewise, matter is not made of aether and so the properties of the aether do not transfer directly to matter. Matter is waves in the aether and its properties derive from the wave equations of the aether.
Aether does not need a density and a tension, but only a ratio between these. There is only one constant needed to describe the aether properties and that is the speed of light. For matter we use to properties as you mentioned, density and tension. You cannot solve two unknowns with one measurement, and it does not matter at all.
IMO the mass of matter is purely and simply one thing. The amount of extra tension locally in the aether due to latitudinal spherical standing waves of matter that displaces the aether outwards from centrifugal forces. That tension also causes outward expansion locally compared to aether with no matter present. That expansion of the aether locally is the essence of what mass is. It results in the tension and density of aether elsewhere being reduced. This is exactly what is found in GR, that locally there is attraction and at greater distances repulsion.
Here is a little logic, which if studied and understood can explain all of this to a clear mind.
1. Maxwell's equations (and many other famous equations) are wave equations, second order equations where there is a force proportional to the second differential of a field.
2. Any such second order wave equation is equally valid under a Lorentz transformation.
3. It follows from the validity of Lorentz transforms that from within the environment of the system you cannot ever detect the rest frame of the aether.
4. It does not matter how dense or how tense the aether is. It looks and behaves identically as seen to any observer whether you are at rest or in motion through the aether.
Those simple facts (which are all well established facts) disprove all the nonsense about SR disproving the aether.
Banned
If I understand well, the problem of yours is, how the infinite system (aka Aether) can model the finite reality? A quite easily, because the speed of energy spreading inside of such system is limited, so it limits the influence of infinite mass/energy density. For example, you cannot expect, you'll reach the physical singularity, when collapsing a sufficient amount of matter. The energy propagates through dense system quite slowly, so that this system will undergo a phase transform, instead. From this perspective, the classical Schwarzchild solution of black hole is nonphysical, because it's steady-state solution, relevant for infinite time. But the real black hole can never contain a central singularity, because the formation of such singularity would require a more time, then the age of Universe. Instead of this a dense system of multiple "daughter black holes" with finite radius is formed inside of such black hole - which is exactly what we can observe inside of our Universe. This case illustrates clearly, how misleading the formal model can be, if you neglect some important constrains.
Moderator
rtomes, shouldn't you pu your ATM theory in a seperate thread?
Rules For Posting To This Board
All Moderation in Purple
Banned
Here's no conceptual difference between vacuum (quantum field) inside of atoms and the vacuum in free space. From this point the vacuum forming the matter cannot differ from the vacuum, which forms the "empty space". The claim "aether is not made of matter" is unsubstantial, because the energy spreads through vacuum in waves, i.e. by the same way, like it propagates through matter. A dual approach is possible, for example the geometrodynamical model considers, the matter is formed by space-time deformations, but I'm considering the material concept of vacuum more illustrative, because both time, both space are derived concepts - while the matter concept is familiar for people from ancient time. When you'll use an abstract concepts for description of Universe, you can never develop a TOE, until you'll understand these derived concepts completely. This is a problem of every theory, based on abstract poorly defined/understood concepts like the space/time/quantum waves/strings, etc.
Banned
Like I've said already here, you cannot detect the reference frame of environment by using of waves, which are spreading through such environment. This is even nonsense from semantic point of view. Try to imagine, you're trying to detect the (motion of) particles constituting the surface waves (i.e.. the water molecules) just by using of these waves. This is virtually impossible - at the moment, some particle of environment is forming some wave, it cannot be observed by the same wave anymore. You cannot form your own mean of observation. Therefore the reference frame of every wave environment remains always undetectable/hidden for these wawes by definition and everybody, who is trying to detect the environment by using of these waves is looking for illusion.
This trivial misunderstanding of environment concept arises from the fact, we are used to observe environment by another kind of waves, which differs from those, which are spreading in this environment. Therefore it's possible to detect the (reference frame of) environment for surface water waves by using of waves of light, for example - but it's virtually impossible to detect it just by using of surface waves. And this is exactly the case of observation of light wave spreading through vacuum where no reference wave exists for its observation "from outside". Just try to think about it - whole thousands of years the people have misunderstood this trivial concept!
Order of Kilopi
Thank you for your prompt answer.We are formed by infinitely tiny fluctuations interacting with infinitely dense Aether, but the speed of energy spreading is always limited, so we can see only limited volume area of noise, which contains the limited number of states.
The limited number of states leads to the multinomial distribution of states probability, similar to the patterns existing in the series of random numbers chosen from limited interval. By another words, our ability to see something is the consequence of the impossibility to see everything at the same time.
However, I cannot see that it answers the question I asked.
Let me try again.
Can you please cite a standard mathematics textbook, or textbooks, or sections of any, which describe and develop the mathematical tools contained in, or implied by, your answer.
Specifically, what techniques did you use to create the images in your post? In your answer, please show explicitly how you derived the finite values therein from "infinities".
Which of these four are you claiming produce estimates of mass? Which density? Which temperature?Compare the answer above. We are always sampling an infinitely small portion of infinitely large Universe, so that the result of sampling is always limited... How ... could "infinities" be related to phenomenology ..? Specifically, techniques to estimate mass, density, and temperature ......
[...]
Order of Kilopi
I think I recall that you defined* "inertia", "mass", and "density" in the classical physics way, and in particular that "density" is "mass" per unit (space) volume.This diagram illustrates the space-time duality of AWT.
In AWT every Aether foam bubble is filled by another smaller bubbles. But the size of bubbles can seamlessly switch from one size into another like undulation fluctuation (nonabelian perturbation), which appear on every distance scale. Try to imagine, you'll mix two samples of colored foam: the green foam with small bubbles and the red one with large bubbles. Now you can imagine the size of small bubbles will increase while the size of large bubbles will decrease, until they'll switch their position. From internal observer perspective such process will correspond the topological inversion of surfaces, but basically it's the sequence of two congruent phase transforms, which occurs frequently in the nature as a consequence of pair reciprocal time arrows.
For example rain droplets will condense during contact, but they'll evaporate at the same time. By analogous way, every matter is condensing inside of our Universe into larger object, but such process will increase its evaporation into radiation. The extrapolation of this concept to the infinity leads to the Uroboros model of the Universe, where it's interior is formed by its exterior (Klein bottle manifold). Note that the antimatter exist in reciprocal time arrow inside of our Universe - it evaporates when the normal matter condenses, this is the reason, why the antimatter is so finely dispersed inside of our Universe generation.
In this post of yours I'm quoting you seem to introduce a completely new, and different, definition (or at least usage) of volume.
So, in AWT, how is "density" defined?
While I'm at it, how is "temperature" defined?
For avoidance of doubt, I am not asking for an illustration.
Finally, for now, you say that you have merely "illustrated" what seems to me to be a core AWT concept. To what extent have you developed this "space-time duality of AWT" into a mathematically tractable, quantitative form?
* in the now closed thread.
Order of Kilopi
Here, in full, is the actual question I asked:If I understand well, the problem of yours is, how the infinite system (aka Aether) can model the finite reality? A quite easily, because the speed of energy spreading inside of such system is limited, so it limits the influence of infinite mass/energy density. For example, you cannot expect, you'll reach the physical singularity, when collapsing a sufficient amount of matter. The energy propagates through dense system quite slowly, so that this system will undergo a phase transform, instead. From this perspective, the classical Schwarzchild solution of black hole is nonphysical, because it's steady-state solution, relevant for infinite time. But the real black hole can never contain a central singularity, because the formation of such singularity would require a more time, then the age of Universe. Instead of this a dense system of multiple "daughter black holes" with finite radius is formed inside of such black hole - which is exactly what we can observe inside of our Universe. This case illustrates clearly, how misleading the formal model can be, if you neglect some important constrains.
"4) All the simulations (or whatever they are intended to be) in post #31, involve finite entities (or, more precisely, entities which take only finite values). Yet, if I have understood AWT correctly, what is being simulated is entities which have infinite values (whatever that means). Can you clarify please? Specifically, how can you represent something (density, temperature, mass, ...) which is "infinite" in these simulations?"
Your answer does not address my question at all (though it certainly is interesting).
Let me try again.
As I understand it, the first two diagrams in post #31 (or whatever they are supposed to be) are representations of "the Aether foam". Earlier in that (now closed) thread you stated that this foam is infinitely dense and infinitely hot. However, there do not seem to be any infinities in either diagram!
Similarly, wrt the third diagram you refer to a "less-or more dense blob", presumably of something that is already infinitely dense.
How did you transform something (or some things) which you claim are "infinite" into something (or some things) which take finite values?
If you have the specifics of the transformations (i.e. the equations etc), please present them.
If, on the other hand, you are merely painting a word picture using analogies, please say so explicitly.
Finally, this post of yours that I am quoting contains several new key terms: "speed", "energy", and "spreading". In light of my confusion over your apparently inconsistent use of "volume", would you please define each of these key terms clearly. Specifically, please state explicitly how they differ from terms with the same names in standard physics textbooks (for "spreading" I assume you mean "propagating"; of course, I may be wrong).
Order of Kilopi
Bumping this post as question 5) does not seem to have been answered yet.When do you expect to answer this question, Zephir?
Banned
The SR cannot disprove the Aether simply because the SR is Aether based theory: the Aether theory is the only theory, which can derive the c=const postulate instead. The Lorentz transforms were derived a well before the Einstein did - and the special relativity is completely based on this transform - it doesn't contain any new insight in fact, if we adhere on the fact, the theory is defined by its formal model.
H. Lorentz: "Einstein simply postulates what we have deduced." The Theory of Electrons, 1916.
If so, how the Lorentz transform is related to Aether concept? The tiny waves at the water surface are spreading like waves on elastic foam, being driven by surface tension of water. With respect of these waves the water is behaving like thin elastic membrane and the underwater motion doesn't influence the wave spreading at all. The tiny surface waves (so called the capillary waves) can therefore serve as a mechanical demonstration of Lorentz invariance and the absence of reference frame.
The concept of transversal wave spreading was introduced into Maxwell's Aether theory of light empirically. The light waves are polarizable, as it was proven by Hertz experiments in 1862 already. Therefore the Maxwell concluded correctly, the light waves are transversal waves and incorporated this behavior into his model of Aether. Therefore it's nothing strange, the Lorentz invariance and Lorentz transforms can be derived from Maxwell's equations easily.
If so, why the heck Michelson-Morley experiment was considered as a refusal of Aether concept instead of confirmation it? Simply because of lack of logical thinking: the Aether was considered as a thin gas, where energy is spreading by longitudinal waves. Why the scientists have considered the longitudinal waves model, albeit they knew already, the light is spreading in transversal waves is fragrant example of deep misunderstanding of both Aether concept: both classical mechanics, both formal model of Maxwell. This mistake could be recognized by many ways even at the Michelson & Morley times - it means, it was mistake of Aether proponents, in fact.
Even Einstein didn't understood it by explicit way, although he later expressed rather vaguely his intuitive belief in Aether concept - but he never explained, why Aether concept is necessary for physics. The people have to wait another one hundred years for final explanation and for correction of this deepest mistake in the history of modern physics.
Banned
The Aether is infinitely dense by AWT definition - not the Aether foam. The foam is just a special phase of Aether.
This is the picture of the condensing supercritical fluid of carbon dioxide. The density fluctuations of gas are here compacted heavily into form of sparse foam of sponge. It's evident, the density of that foam is way way lower, then the physical density of carbon dioxide itself (the pressure inside of chamber is 80 atm or so). Nevertheless, the surprising fact is, most of energy inside of such dense environment is spread along surfaces of this sparse foam, not through bulk phase, which is behaving like emptiness with respect of the rest of liquid.
The model of condensing supercritical foam explains the concept of reality, i.e. the concept of "what can be observed". The supercritical foam is transparent and clear under normal circumstances. The only visible part is the foamy density fluctuations, which are formed by gradients of foam density. From microscopic point of view such gradient is the place, where the randomness of chaotically motion of molecules is violated. Briefly speaking, by AWT the observable reality is manifestation of regularity of Aether chaotic motion. The wave motion is the most arranged and temporal form of Aether motion, therefore every wave motion increases mass/energy density of Aether as so called "probability wave". From this concept the name Aether Wave Theory is derived - it's the theory of the observable portion of Aether.
Is it more clear for you by now? Personally I consider the AWT as a quite easy and straightforward theory, so for me is somewhat surprising, how difficult is the conceptual understanding of trivial physical system like the supercritical vapor for many people - including those, which are experienced in theoretical physics. This is why I'm spreading the pictures of the concepts, which I'm trying to explain here - because the AWT understanding is completely based on intuitive approach - here are no artificially introduced abstract concepts, every idea of AWT is derived for normal behavior of common matter. The AWT just makes the understanding of physics intuitive.
Banned
For example, the numerical axis is infinitely long, but it doesn't mean, we cannot separate it into finite intervals.
The assumption, the Aether is infinitely dense doesn't excludes the presence of density fluctuations. The fact, something is infinitely dense doesn't mean, it must be homogeneous. In this case, what we can observe and measure are just a infinitely small fluctuations of infinite value.What's new on these terms? Don't search the complexity, where no complexity exists. The "spreading" word indeed means a "propagation", at least I can see no significant semantical difference here.
Banned
I already did. See http://www.bautforum.com/against-mai...-universe.html
However here I am on topic to the discussion raised, and answering Zephir's questions.
Banned
Wonderful! I have been explaining this to people for years and most of them do not get it.
and later...
Agreed.
The answer to "why the heck?" is that they had a serious problem conceptualizing how the very high tension aether (or gas aether) required to make light go so fast could let planets pass through it without any measurable friction. That was because matter was seen as "a stuff" entirely different from the aether of light. Once Schroedinger and de Broglie had shown very clearly that matter is also made of waves and that they also have velocity of c, then it is very clear that matter is also waves in the aether. That is what I referred to as an accident of history....
If so, why the heck Michelson-Morley experiment was considered as a refusal of Aether concept instead of confirmation it? Simply because of lack of logical thinking: the Aether was considered as a thin gas, where energy is spreading by longitudinal waves.
...
Actually Lorentz and Fitzgerald were also beginning to catch on to this because they saw that atomic structure was dependent on electrons and electrons were interacting by charge at velocity c.
I still have difficulty working out why the majority of physicists still do not see this. I think it relates to an accident of teaching methods based on the accident of history. They still think that matter is a different stuff to light even though the clues are all provided and documented as to who dunnit.
Banned
Error no. 1 : SR is not an aether-based theory. Your continous repetition of this fallacy doesn't make it true.
Error no. 2 : postulates are not derived. Didn't you know that?the Aether theory is the only theory, which can derive the c=const postulate instead.
Errors no. 3&4 : SR is based on two postulates. Based on these postulates Einstein derived the transforms , not the other way around.The Lorentz transforms were derived a well before the Einstein did - and the special relativity is completely based on this transform
Error no 5 : total word salad, cannot be parsed.- it doesn't contain any new insight in fact, if we adhere on the fact, the theory is defined by its formal model.
Error no. 6 : the Lorentz transforms have nothing to do with any "tiny waves ...being driven by surface tension". If you think otherwise, please derive the Lorentz transforms in this thread. If you cannot, then say so. These are the BAUT rules: any ** you put up, you need to defend or you are out.If so, how the Lorentz transform is related to Aether concept? The tiny waves at the water surface are spreading like waves on elastic foam, being driven by surface tension of water.
Error no. 7: How can you have a functional theory in the "absence of reference frame". Please explain.
The tiny surface waves (so called the can therefore serve as a mechanical demonstration of Lorentz invariance and the absence of reference frame.
Error no 8 : Please show the "mechanical demonstration of Lorenz invariance" via your "tiny surface waves. Do not use pictures swiped of the web, use math.
Error no.9 : No it was not introduced into and it wasn't done empirically.The concept of transversal wave spreading was introduced into Maxwell's Aether theory of light empirically.
Enough for now, I am getting sick of all this stuff. Please answer these questions , I may have a second set regarding the stuff in the second half of your post. Please do not use your standard elusive techniques, you must answer the questions and defend your theory.
Posting Permissions
