Re: Reflections on Aether
From: Paul Stowe (ps_at_acompletelyjunkaddress.net)
Date: 08/27/04
- Next message: Paul Stowe: "Re: Reflections on Aether"
- Previous message: Jim Greenfield: "Re: What's up with gravity wave detection?"
- In reply to: Harry: "Re: Reflections on Aether"
- Next in thread: Paul Stowe: "Re: Reflections on Aether"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 00:03:10 GMT
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 11:43:19 +0200, "Harry" <harald.vanlintel@epfl.ch> wrote:
>
>"Paul Stowe" <ps@acompletelyjunkaddress.net> wrote in message
>news:tbpqi0tj64vl94o6ql1a02uvk0q5vajmlg@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 03:47:43 GMT, Sam Wormley <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Albert Einstein, in his essay On the Aether (1924), made some
>> > injudicious comments to the effect that relativity theory could be said
>> > to ascribe physical properties to spacetime itself, and in that sense,
>> > to involve a kind of "aether". He clearly did not mean the kind of
>> > "aether" which had been envisioned by Maxwell and others in the
>> > nineteenth century, but his remarks have been seized upon ever since,
>> > by various cranks and other ill-informed persons, as evidence that
>> > "gtr is an aether theory".
>> >
>> > Luminiferous Ether
>> > http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Ether.html
>> > http://www.google.com/search?q=aether+site%3Awww.aip.org+update
>>
>> Hmmm, given the insistence to repost this I researched further. I get
>> to eat Crow (Feathers & all, pituey :( ) I WAS WRONG in this regard.
>> There is indeed an article in 1924 "On the Ether". It cannot be found
>> on line (at least I couldn't find it) but references to it can.
>>
>> http://itis.volta.alessandria.it/episteme/ep3-24.htm
>> http://www.cox-internet.com/hermital/book/holoprt2-4.htm
>>
>> Now perhaps Mr. Wormley could point to this article? However, it seem to
>> be a simply revision of his 1920 Leyden paper most often referenced.
>>
>> In fact, Einstein never seemed to abandon the idea of a relativistic
>> medium. In 1934 he writes,
>>
>> "The mechanical properties of the ether were at first a
>> mystery. Then came H. A. Lorentzs great discovery. All
>> the phenomena of electromagnetism then known could be
>> explained on the basis of two assumptions: that the
>> ether is firmly fixed in space that is to say, unable
>> to move at all, and that electricity is firmly lodged
>> in the mobile elementary particles. Today his discovery
>> may be expressed as follows: physical space and the
>> ether are only different terms for the same thing;
>> fields are physical states of space. For if no
>> particular state of motion can be ascribed to the
>> ether, there does not seem to be any ground for
>> introducing it as an entity of a SPECIAL SORT alongside
>> of space."
>>
>> Translation, there exist not space devoid of field a.k.a ether
>> medium, the ether IS everywhere & everything. (See Page 281 of
>> "Ideas & Opinions", Article starting on Page 276 "The problem of
>> Space, Ether and the Field in Physics"
>>
>> Paul Stowe
>
> Interesting! It turns out that I have less and less disagreement with
> Einstein's idea's while he got older.
As one matures and gets 'wisdom' reason sometimes prevails :)
The funny thing is, the aether medium IS consistent with all
observations and none would exist without it. Thus is is
ludicrous to claim that there are non aether theories. To
have such it would have to be without the ability to conduct
non-contact force, momentum, and energy.
Paul Stowe
- Next message: Paul Stowe: "Re: Reflections on Aether"
- Previous message: Jim Greenfield: "Re: What's up with gravity wave detection?"
- In reply to: Harry: "Re: Reflections on Aether"
- Next in thread: Paul Stowe: "Re: Reflections on Aether"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
