Re: Reflections on Aether

From: Bilge (dubious_at_radioactivex.lebesque-al.net)
Date: 08/30/04 

Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:15:18 -0000

Paul Stowe:

> Maxwell's aether IS what brought about the realization that locally,
> the aether is Lorentz Covariant.

  No it isn't and despite my repeated requests for you to prove that
statement, you have refused to do so. Let's see a derivation. You've also
stated that the aharanov-bohm effect can be understood in terms in
maxwell's ether. Let's see you demonstrate that, too. Since the
aharanov-bohm effect cannot be derived from maxwell's equations _at_
_all_, regardless of what you do, I'd realy like to see you try deriving
it. I predict that you'll do none of the above.

> Both Lorentz in 1904 AND Einstein in 1905 placed this fact above all
> others as the necessity FOR their works.

  That isn't so. Einstein's first postulate does not favor any particular
equations for any phenomena. It makes no difference whether maxwell's
equations hold or not. The second postulate was chosen specifically to
provide a _geometrical basis for maxwell's equations as a natural
consequence of spacetime.

   Furthermore, the second postulate is basically irrelevant to the theory
of relativity. It's relevant to a theory of electromagnetism. Finally, I
can _derive_ maxwell's equations from the first postulate and the quantum
mechanical replacements for the momentum and energy using nothing but
the requirement of _invariance_.

> If's that NOT Maxwell's aether, what is???
 
  So, does that mean you finally accept the modern point of view in
terms of fields and have reconciled your personal issues as being
due to strange semantics on your part? If so, then it's nice to see
that you've finally joined the modern world. If not, then what,
precisely, is your argument? I mean, if you don't accept the modern
view of fields, why are you trying to argue that field theories
have some resemblence to your idea of an ether?

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Reflections on Aether
    ... maxwell's ether. ... Einstein's first postulate does not favor any particular ... the second postulate is basically irrelevant to the theory ... that you've finally joined the modern world. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Why LET Is Superior to SR!
    ... What about the part of the electron mass that isn't electromagnetic? ... >> not constrained by the ether medium. ... those steps only involves asserting the first postulate as I go. ... who can explain how the ether can support a transverse oscillation, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Science and dishonesty
    ... Yes, the second postulate was a shameful glitch, which you evidently ... The first Postulate however, is that of Galileo too and Mother Teresa. ... relative to the state of the observer with respect to source. ... The first postulate is Galilean and I have nothing against it, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Science and dishonesty
    ... >>>Yes, the second postulate was a shameful glitch, which you evidently ... >>>The first Postulate however, is that of Galileo too and Mother Teresa. ... >>>If I challenged you to produce Lorentz transformations without assuming ... >>>being philosophers. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Science and dishonesty
    ... >>>Yes, the second postulate was a shameful glitch, which you evidently ... >>>The first Postulate however, is that of Galileo too and Mother Teresa. ... >>>If I challenged you to produce Lorentz transformations without assuming ... >>>being philosophers. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)