“In several parts of this treatise an attempt has been made to explain electromagnetic phenomena by means of mechanical action transmitted from one body to another by means of a medium occupying the space between them. The undulatory theory of light also assumes the existence of a medium. We have now to shew that the properties of the electromagnetic medium are identical with those of the luminiferous medium.” - Maxwell
Maxwell’s displacement current is a physical displacement of the aether.
The following article discusses the mass of the virtual particles which fill ‘empty’ space
I disagree with the notion of virtual particles. However, the article describes the mass and refers to it as the aether and describes it as being what waves in a double slit experiment.
What is the mass of aether?
It should be noted that what you mean by the word “mass” and what mpc755 means are very different things.
What you mean is probably something like, “the property of a physical body which determines the body’s resistance to being accelerated by a force and the strength of its mutual gravitational attraction with other bodies.”
Whereas mpc755’s definition is
mpc755’s definition appears to be synonymous with volume, and in fact he’s explicitly stated that the only reason materials appear to have differing density is because the space between the fundamental particles varies.
Mass is defined as that which physically occupies three dimensional space.
‘Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein’
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html
“Think of waves on the surface of water. Here we can describe two entirely different things. Either we may observe how the undulatory surface forming the boundary between water and air alters in the course of time; or else-with the help of small floats, for instance - we can observe how the position of the separate particles of water alters in the course of time. If the existence of such floats for tracking the motion of the particles of a fluid were a fundamental impossibility in physics - if, in fact nothing else whatever were observable than the shape of the space occupied by the water as it varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that water consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise it as a medium.”
if, in fact nothing else whatever were observable than the shape of the space occupied by the aether as it varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that aether consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise it as a medium having mass which is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.
Is that an accurate description of the interstellar medium or solar wind?
So you’re saying the statistical behaviours of matter (in particular, gas laws) have a nonzero lower limit? Where did you get that idea from?
Also, why do you keep responding as though you’re really pissed off that people are asking you to explain yoursel?
You came here of your own accord and it can’t be a matter of great surprise to you that your topic is one that would generate questions, especially in places where your idea seeks to overturn established science.
We didn’t drag you out of bed on a Sunday morning and bring you here to question you, so what’s going on?
Let’s just concentrate on this one statement of yours for the moment. As it is, it’s meaningless: your terms are ill-defined, and you nowhere elaborate on what it means that both are the same.
But you can make it meaningful easily. All you have to do is to show (mathematically) how a solution of the Schrödinger equation (i.e. a de Broglie wave) can also be a gravitational wave solution of Einstein’s field equations. This is a minimum requirement; without this, all you have provided is just a string of words, without establishing that it actually makes sense to string them along in this way. It’s like Star Trek technobabble, or like Chomsky’s ‘colourless green ideas sleep furiously’. You could just as well say ‘Einstein’s gravitational wave is the reversal of the polarity of the neutron flow’.
Certainly, de Broglie waves and gravitational waves have some similar characteristics, at least in both being wave phenomena. But tomatoes and apples have similar characteristics in being edible; this doesn’t mean they’re the same thing. If you want to claim they are, you have to establish more than that; say, that tomatos grow on apple trees, or that they are genetically the same as apples, etc. Otherwise, whenever you use ‘tomato’ in place of ‘apple’, you’re not uttering a meaningful sentence.
In principle, however, substantiating your claim is straightforward, as I outlined above. So before you continue making your claims, you should provide that substantiation; otherwise, again, what you’re saying will not have meaning to anybody reading along.
Of course, as anybody who’s spent a little time studying either theory can tell you, it’s completely impossible that solutions of the Schrödinger equation are simultaneously solutions of Einstein’s equation: they’re just very different mathematically. De Broglie wave are defined on 3n-dimensional configuration space for n particles, while gravitational waves are four dimensional spacetimes regardless of the number of particles. Even if both were of equal dimension, solutions to Einstein’s equation are 2-tensorial objects, while ordinary matter de Broglie waves are typically spinorial (or even scalar in the simplest approximate case, which is really the only one for which this picture has been well discussed). Furthermore, the Schrödinger equation is linear, while the Einstein equations aren’t; this means that for two solutions of the Schrödinger equation, their sum is again a solution, while the sum of two gravitational waves is not a solution of Einstein’s equations (this is the root of the defining quantum property of superposition). And this barely scratches the surface; gravitational and de Broglie waves are much more different from one another than tomatoes and apples.
In any case, you’ve got two options: either substantiate your claim by showing how solutions to the Schrödinger equation are solutions to Einstein’s equation, or retract it. Once you’ve done either, we can have a look at your other claims.
Out of curiousity, google the OP’s mantra:
“There is no such thing as non-baryonic dark matter anchored to matter.”
Seems he and his pet theories have been making the rounds on a great variety of science based forums to be met with pretty much the same skepticism and request to show his work. All to no avail.
I’m willing to entertain the possibility that we are in the presence of genius and are simply too dull witted to recognize it as such. If so, I would like to ask mpc755, have you ever submitted your hypothesis for peer review? Has it ever been published in a recognized scientific publication? If not, why not?
If you have two particles of matter which exist light years apart, you really believe they are able to wave?
‘NASA’s Voyager Hits New Region at Solar System Edge’
“Voyager is showing that what is outside is pushing back. … Like cars piling up at a clogged freeway off-ramp, the increased intensity of the magnetic field shows that inward pressure from interstellar space is compacting it.”
It is not the particles of matter which exist in quantities less than in any vacuum artifically created on Earth which are pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward the solar system.
It is the aether, which the particles of matter exist in, which is the interstellar medium. It is the aether which is displaced by the matter the solar system consists of which is pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward the solar system.
I get pissed off when people post about people high on ether or when others just say, “no, you’re wrong”. The posts are a waste of energy.
I’m not pissed off by your posts. However, I can tell from them that attempting to have a ‘conversation’ with you is a waste of time. Not that we aren’t conversing. I can tell by your posts that you believe in the conventional wisdom and nothing that occurs in our communication is going to change that. That’s fine. There’s nothing wrong with that. However, it is a waste of time.
For example, you believe particles of matter light years apart can wave. I think that is complete nonsense.
I understand in a double slit experiment it is the aether which waves. I don’t know what you think occurs in a double slit experiment, however, if you believe particles of matter light years apart can wave it seems pretty obvious to me you are never going to understand it is the hidden medium of de Broglei’s wave mechanics which waves and that hidden medium is the aether.
Just because you can’t figure out the math doesn’t mean it’s not what occurs physically in nature.
You do understand mathematics is used to help describe what occurs physically in nature, correct? You do understand mathematics itself does not physically exist, correct?
The following is the best article I have found which describes it as the aether which waves in a double slit experiment.
‘From the Newton’s laws to motions of the fluid and superfluid vacuum: vortex tubes, rings, and others’
The particles of matter can be as large as a galaxy cluster. They are still moving through and displacing the aether.
If you choose to remain ignorant of understand the following physical phenomenon due to you limited mathematical skills then that is your choice.
‘Offset between dark matter and ordinary matter: evidence from a sample of 38 lensing clusters of galaxies’
“Our data strongly support the idea that the gravitational potential in clusters is mainly due to a non-baryonic fluid, and any exotic field in gravitational theory must resemble that of CDM fields very closely.”
The offset is due to the galaxy clusters moving through the aether. The analogy is a submarine moving through the water. You are under water. Two miles away from you are many lights. Moving between you and the lights one mile away is a submarine. The submarine displaces the water. The state of displacement of the water causes the center of the lensing of the light propagating through the water to be offset from the center of the submarine itself. The offset between the center of the lensing of the light propagating through the water displaced by the submarine and the center of the submarine itself is going to remain the same as the submarine moves through the water. The submarine continually displaces different regions of the water. The state of the water connected to and neighboring the submarine remains the same as the submarine moves through the water even though it is not the same water the submarine continually displaces. This is what is occurring as the galaxy clusters move through and displace the aether.
‘The Milky Way’s dark matter halo appears to be lopsided’
“The emerging picture of the asymmetric dark matter halo is supported by the \Lambda CDM halos formed in the cosmological N-body simulation.”
The Milky Way’s ‘dark matter halo’ is lopsided due to the matter in the Milky Way moving through and displacing the aether.
‘Hubble Finds Ghostly Ring of Dark Matter’
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/news/dark_matter_ring_feature.html
“Astronomers using NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope got a first-hand view of how dark matter behaves during a titanic collision between two galaxy clusters. The wreck created a ripple of dark matter, which is somewhat similar to a ripple formed in a pond when a rock hits the water.”
The ‘pond’ consists of aether. The moving ‘particles’ are the galaxy clusters. The ripple is an aether displacement wave. The ripple is a gravitational wave. This is also evidence of a moving ‘particle’, the galaxy clusters, having an associated aether wave.
‘Galactic Pile-Up May Point to Mysterious New Dark Force in the Universe’
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/01/musket-ball-dark-force/
“The reason this is strange is that dark matter is thought to barely interact with itself. The dark matter should just coast through itself and move at the same speed as the hardly interacting galaxies. Instead, it looks like the dark matter is crashing into something — perhaps itself – and slowing down faster than the galaxies are. But this would require the dark matter to be able to interact with itself in a completely new an unexpected way, a “dark force” that affects only dark matter.”
It’s not a new force. It’s the aether displaced by each of the galaxy clusters interacting analogous to the bow waves of two boats which pass by each other.
Mainstream physics is in denial of understanding aether has mass and is what waves in a double slit experiment.
The following article describes such physical phenomenon and has been submitted for review at the Journal of Fluid Mechanics. It is the first such article I have found.
‘From the Newton’s laws to motions of the fluid and superfluid vacuum: vortex tubes, rings, and others’
A direct quote from the above link provides this:
Now, I’m just an ol’ country boy with a smidgen of edjumacation, so could someone please tell me what the hell this guy means by the “Schr"{o}dinger equation”?
It’s because it’s been copied and pasted straight from the LaTeX.
Ironic, I seem to remember you not being able to understand simple equations relating variables with nothing more complicated than a square root
I also seem to remember pointing out very similar problems with your line of reasoning, i.e. wavefunctions and gravitational waves have rather different mathematical settings and the former are linear and the latter non-linear. Both are artifacts of different mathematical descriptions of physics, so you can’t ignore their mathematical properties.
And this is your big problem, you can’t even answer straightforward and obvious objections to what you say in a way that shows you even comprehend them.
Math is the language in which difficult scientific concepts can be effectively communicated; hence my asking that you supply your math—which should not be a problem, seeing how you see fit to taunt me for my lacking abilities—is nothing but a request for actual communication. Otherwise, again, all you’re saying is ‘gravity is the reversal of the polarity of the neutron flow’—strings of words with nothing behind.
And even if I’m not mathematically sophisticated enough to find the proof myself, I’m reasonably confident I would be capable of grasping it; and since it’s probably a trivial effort for you to provide it, you could just do so and test me. Or are the margins in this forum too small to contain it? Do you not wish to throw your pearls of wisdom before the swine of this forum? Or what other excuse will you come up with for your next reply to me not to contain any math at all?
And you are unable to understand aether has mass which is physically displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.
And this is your big problem, you are unable to understand the ‘particle’ can be a photon, electron, neutron, proton, atom, molecule or galaxy cluster.
You insist on hiding behind your inability to mathematically relate de Broglie’s wave of wave-particle duality with Einstein’s gravitational wave in order to not understand what ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment; the aether.
As was written in the original post, it is now understood ‘empty’ space has mass. If you choose not to understand what that means in terms of what occurs physically in nature then that is your choice.
‘Cosmologists at Penn Weigh Cosmic Filaments and Voids’
http://www.upenn.edu/pennnews/news/cosmologists-penn-weigh-cosmic-filaments-and-voids
“Dark matter … permeate[s] all the way to the center of the voids.”
Title says it all in the following.
‘“No Empty Space in the Universe” --Dark Matter Discovered to Fill Intergalactic Space’
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2012/02/no-empty-space-in-the-universe-dark-matter-discovered-to-fill-intergalactic-space-.html
The nice thing about being a conceptually deficient mathematician is you can make up all sorts of nonsense like ‘many worlds’ all in order to not understand it is the mass which fills ‘empty’ space which waves in a double slit experiment.