Re: relativity of simultaneity - real or perceived?


"Curious" <anthonyroseuk-curious@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1117042537.246458.305960@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
> > "Curious" <anthonyroseuk-curious@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1116970756.386491.238140@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > > Paul Stowe wrote:
> > >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > > > http://www.tu-harburg.de/rzt/rzt/it/Ether.html
> > > >
> > >
> > > Einstein, 1920: "According to the general theory of relativity space
> > > without ether is unthinkable"
> > >
> > > So what powers the drive to oppose it?
> >
> > http://groups-beta.google.com/group/humanities.philosophy.objectivism/msg/84ecd60f73437954
> >
> > Dirk Vdm
>
> On thinking on what I popularly heard long ago I've wondered if space
> did not consist of ... hmmm, how to describe it without it sliding off
> into some pre-conceieved idea... a lattice (or sea) of particles (or
> waves or something) which cancel each other out most of the time, but
> can be rippled through by ordinary matter or light, which are actually
> nothing more than a manifestation of behaviour of these ... um...
> whatever-they-ares... when their naturally balanced opposition to each
> other is affected.
> But in this hypothesis, we do not move PASSING through the aether, we
> ARE the aether. Every time I move my hand, it translates from one pair
> of whatever-it-is to another. The state of one of my electrons being
> moved is such that it exists *here* in this imbalanced pair of
> whatever-it-is's, then it jumps from here to the *next* pair.
> Do you see what I mean?

Actually, no.
In the context of this newsgroup it is gibberish.

> Now I'm excited because it looks like Einstein was saying something
> compatible with that: the aether of space-time is not something which
> moves, or we can move through, like a sea, but is the property of
> space-time - is the property of us, as I see it.

If you can get excited over something like that, that's
good for you. I get excited over other matters.

> But to my point: nobody, at this stage, has ever dictated what the
> qualities of the aether are. The essence of the word in relativity I
> would think embodies the concept that light travels through a medium.
> But not *necessarily* that it fills space with something separate to
> space.
> In opposition is the view that light travels all by itself. That there
> is absolutely nothing in space. Admittedly, the "space EQUALS the
> aether" concept is inbetween the two.
> So can we not call off the dogs and say both sides could be right?

Ether and gods do not show up in physics.
Those who claim otherwise confuse physics with philosophy
or religion and are therefore wrong - by definition of 'physics',
'philosophy' and 'religion'.

Dirk Vdm


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Is physics a science?
    ... science and technology. ... It is whatever physics wants it to be. ... >>>aether would do, as long as it has certain basic properties, and test ... >> physicists to explain it to them. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: SR theory is simplistic
    ... Unfortunately Ritz died at an early age in 1909. ... Physics today would be different. ... My problem is that with hindsight everything points to the fact that if you accept "no aether" the decision to go with Einstein makes absolutely no logical sense although an enormous amount of rhetoric has been expended trying to present it in a way which makes it seem sensible. ... Einsteins idea that photons travel at c wrt source and observer. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: THE GENESES OF THE FALSE THEORIES IN PHYSICS
    ... Even before physics turned into metaphysics no theory was rejected - ... was rejected and the wave in aether theory accepted. ... All the evidence pointed to the fact that light is primarily ... Every attempt to demonstrate the existence of an aether has failed. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Is physics a science?
    ... deemed to need an explanation and the existence of an electric aether ... a wave does NOT need a medium to propagate. ... which are still the holy grail of this branch of physics. ... What you are presenting is pure propaganda. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: "The Einstein Hoax"
    ... The Einstein Hoax was written to counter an intellectual "fast shuffle" which used Dr. Einstein's Special Relativity (which is easily seen to be a mathematical copy of the earlier Lorentz Transformations Aether Theory) ... No because it is a mathematical model which as such does not need to explain how nature works. ... Modern physics owes its existence to belief in the aether. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Quantcast