# The Reinterpretation

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 2 of 2 First 12
• 2020-Sep-02, 08:34 AM
Reality Check
Quote:

Originally Posted by Deansh
In post #1 ...

Nothing to do with IF06: Why is a aether with mass, charge and momentum undetectable in simple experiments or even ordinary life?
You think there are positive and negative, massive components with momentum that make up all particles. Even the election with no evidence of a substructure and no evidence of an electric dipole moment from separated charges. There is no reason to think that these components are not also floating around outside of particles - that is basically what an aether is! You even imply this in post #1. That is your "background ether". You make up denser spheres of aether made up of that background aether. You might wish this away, e.g. make up a story that your "components" only exist in particles. But that would be science fiction, not science.

You have an undetectable aether with mass. Mass creates gravity. Why can we not detect your "aether" by its gravitational effects?
You have an undetectable aether with actual charges. Why can we not detect your aether by the effects of the charges, e.g. on charged particles?
You have an undetectable aether with momentum (mass*velocity). All objects will interact with your aether and its momentum (think about a ball moving thru air). Why can we not detect your aether from it's drag on objects?
The Large Hadron Collider is a good example of something that should not work as designed according to your stories and cartoons. Massive, charged protons are accelerated to very close to the speed of light. Your aether has no effects.

This is the luminiferous aether in physics. It is what was supposed to allow light to propagate. It had specific properties which your aether does not have, e.g. no mass. It has been shown to have no measurable effects (MM and other experiments).

An interesting aside: Electron electric dipole moment. The Standard Model predicts a tiny moment of at most 10−38 e⋅cm. We have currently an experimental upper limit of 10−29 e⋅cm.
• 2020-Sep-02, 02:19 PM
Noclevername
Quote:

Originally Posted by Deansh
In post #1 I specify the pages that show how the oscillating spheres of ether produce the same effect as charged particles. There is no drag on the components in this model. The components only appear in a compressed state after they have expanded and contracted.

Added images below for how the components have charge and how they attract and repel each other.

Here is an image that has some more detail on the components and why they do not drag through the ether:
https://imgur.com/V7GTRgZ

Image for ether charges:
https://imgur.com/HnFBpYr

Image for ether components attracting and repelling each other:
https://imgur.com/TnHKDl2

Formal request: Please stop showing more unsupported images. Are there any any actual scientific data you can provide that supports your already-shown images? Observations, experimental results, even any physical predictions you can make under your hypothesis.
• 2020-Sep-02, 07:35 PM
John Mendenhall
Ethereal Stories And Cartoons Are Neither Observations Nor Evidence
Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaula
I take it from your responses that you are going to stick to the "telling stories that make me feel like I understand stuff" approach rather than actually doing any science?

If so I don't see anything else to discuss really. You have a narrative that you like and you alter on a whim to fit observations. You can't extract anything new from it and it doesn't deliver any scientific value. So to me and anyone who wants to have a model they can actually use it is worthless because you still need to use current models to make predictions (that you will then add another arbitrary rule and diagram to 'explain').

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Mendenhall
The quote above is the first sentence of your original post . You must show with observations and evidence that an ether exists or else all that you have written here and self-published elsewhere is so much speculation about something that does not exist.

Do you have such observations and evidence? If so, could you kindly present them here, pleae. Until you can demonstrate the basis of your theory, there is nothing else to discuss. When you have the data - real physical data, not stories - to show that there is any ether, please tell us. You will win a dozen Nobel prizes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reality Check
Nothing to do with IF06: Why is a aether with mass, charge and momentum undetectable in simple experiments or even ordinary life?
You think there are positive and negative, massive components with momentum that make up all particles. Even the election with no evidence of a substructure and no evidence of an electric dipole moment from separated charges. There is no reason to think that these components are not also floating around outside of particles - that is basically what an aether is! You even imply this in post #1. That is your "background ether". You make up denser spheres of aether made up of that background aether. You might wish this away, e.g. make up a story that your "components" only exist in particles. But that would be science fiction, not science.

You have an undetectable aether with mass. Mass creates gravity. Why can we not detect your "aether" by its gravitational effects?
You have an undetectable aether with actual charges. Why can we not detect your aether by the effects of the charges, e.g. on charged particles?
You have an undetectable aether with momentum (mass*velocity). All objects will interact with your aether and its momentum (think about a ball moving thru air). Why can we not detect your aether from it's drag on objects?
The Large Hadron Collider is a good example of something that should not work as designed according to your stories and cartoons. Massive, charged protons are accelerated to very close to the speed of light. Your aether has no effects.

This is the luminiferous aether in physics. It is what was supposed to allow light to propagate. It had specific properties which your aether does not have, e.g. no mass. It has been shown to have no measurable effects (MM and other experiments).

An interesting aside: Electron electric dipole moment. The Standard Model predicts a tiny moment of at most 10−38 e⋅cm. We have currently an experimental upper limit of 10−29 e⋅cm.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noclevername
Formal request: Please stop showing more unsupported images. Are there any any actual scientific data you can provide that supports your already-shown images? Observations, experimental results, even any physitions you can make under your hypothesis.

Above are the last four posts, in order, by the only four members that have been willing to respond to your ATM. Note that they all make the same point: that your speculations are meaningless because there is no ether. Your pages and pages of imaginary interadtions mean nothing since you have no physical evidence of an ether. It is simply a waste time to criticize a theory which has no rational basis.
• 2020-Sep-04, 01:47 AM
Deansh
Quote:

Originally Posted by Noclevername
Formal request: Please stop showing more unsupported images. Are there any any actual scientific data you can provide that supports your already-shown images? Observations, experimental results, even any physical predictions you can make under your hypothesis.

of the 4 forces in describing experimental results. I focused on
current observations and was able to come up with possible solutions
in this model. I don't know if this ether actually exists.

Prediction:
"Charged" components and/or particles expand and contract millions
of light years and produce the phenomenon that dark matter currently
explains.

This model predicts that same charge components repel each other
less at far distances whereas the opposite charge components still
attract each other with the expected strength at far distances.
This would cause net attractive force that would be seen at
distances like 50,000 light years for the stars at the edge of
the galaxy that are moving too fast.

Example:
If there is a star at the edge of the Milky Way galaxy, it has
approximately the same number of positive components as there
are negative components. The positive and negative components
in all the matter in the rest of the galaxy should interact
with the components in the star.

Interactions:
1: All the negative components in the galaxy repel all the
negative components in the star at the edge of the galaxy.
2: All the positive components in the galaxy repel all the
positive components in the star.
3: All the negative components in the galaxy attract all
the positive components in the star.
4: All the positive components in the galaxy attract all
the negative components in the star.

The number of interactions in each case should be close to equal
and the number of components repelling each other equals the
number of components attracting each other.

With expanding and contracting components there would be less of
the repulsion effect than there is with the attraction effect.
This would create a stronger pull on the star which is currently
seen as what dark matter does.

If there is a way to calculate the attraction versus the
repulsion effect based on this model it could show this
model to be definately false. (I don't know if it is true!)

If this is not a prediction then please close this thread for now.
If I find a good prediction then I will ask to have the thread
opened again.

https://imgur.com/xQVsBUN
• 2020-Sep-04, 06:00 AM
Reality Check
Quote:

Originally Posted by Deansh
of the 4 forces in describing experimental results. I focused on
current observations and was able to come up with possible solutions
in this model. ...

That is wrong in several ways, Deansh.
The four forces physically exist! You cannot describe experimental results without using them.
You have no solutions - stories and cartoons are not solutions in science.
You have no model. A scientific model uses math and physics. A scientific model makes testable, falsifiable predications. A good scientific model makes predictions that other models do not.

A "Prediction" that is a not a prediction! Imagining what imaginary components do is just a story.
Ignorance about the galaxy rotation curve evidence for dark matter. When we look at spiral galaxies we see that stars and gas do not obey Newtonian gravity. Stars and gas from just outside the central bulge to the edge of the galaxy are moving faster than predicted. That shows there is additional, dark matter distributed throughout the galaxy. Some ignorance about dark matter - the observational evidence for dark matter is many lines of evidence.
• 2020-Sep-04, 08:15 AM
Deansh
Quote:

Originally Posted by Reality Check
That is wrong in several ways, Deansh.
The four forces physically exist! You cannot describe experimental results without using them.
You have no solutions - stories and cartoons are not solutions in science.
You have no model. A scientific model uses math and physics. A scientific model makes testable, falsifiable predications. A good scientific model makes predictions that other models do not.

A "Prediction" that is a not a prediction! Imagining what imaginary components do is just a story.
Ignorance about the galaxy rotation curve evidence for dark matter. When we look at spiral galaxies we see that stars and gas do not obey Newtonian gravity. Stars and gas from just outside the central bulge to the edge of the galaxy are moving faster than predicted. That shows there is additional, dark matter distributed throughout the galaxy. Some ignorance about dark matter - the observational evidence for dark matter is many lines of evidence.

"Ignorance about the galaxy rotation curve evidence for dark matter."

I stated "distances like 50,000 light years" as a specific example,
not that it is at only that distance. It is all the positive and
negative charges in the galaxy which is stated in the "interactions":

"Interactions:
1: All the negative components in the galaxy repel all the
negative components in the star at the edge of the galaxy.
2: All the positive components in the galaxy repel all the
positive components in the star.
3: All the negative components in the galaxy attract all
the positive components in the star.
4: All the positive components in the galaxy attract all
the negative components in the star."

I would also not rule out that the 4 forces could be combined in some
"Theory of everything", which would still use all of the math and have
an adjustment for the dark matter and possibly dark energy. Similar
to the adjustment used to solve the orbit of mercury.

The "link to ether interactions" shows specifically the type of
interactions in this model that would be causing the extra gravitational
pull on the star. There should be a mathematical way to calculate the
effect of those interactions. If the repelling set of interactions act
a little different than the attracting set of interactions then that could
cause what we see with dark matter. If it takes all the positive and
negative particles in the galaxy to produce the effect we see on the star
then it is likely to small of an effect to measure in a lab. It's just
another possibility.

Can you close this thread? I am going to try and do the math
for the calculation mentioned above. It may take a bit of time. Thanks.
• 2020-Sep-04, 02:40 PM
PetersCreek