Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 37 of 37

Thread: The Reinterpretation

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    4,434
    Quote Originally Posted by Deansh View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Reality Check; 2020-Sep-02 at 08:42 AM.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    37,983
    Quote Originally Posted by Deansh View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Noclevername; 2020-Sep-02 at 03:35 PM. Reason: clarified
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,873

    Ethereal Stories And Cartoons Are Neither Observations Nor Evidence

    Quote Originally Posted by Shaula View Post
    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 View Post
    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 View Post
    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 View Post
    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.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    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.

    I guess the main thing about this model is that it does not use any
    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.

    Link to ether interactions:
    https://imgur.com/xQVsBUN

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    4,434
    Quote Originally Posted by Deansh View Post
    I guess the main thing about this model is that it does not use any
    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.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Deansh; 2020-Sep-04 at 09:21 AM. Reason: request to close thread and do math

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Peters Creek, Alaska
    Posts
    13,466
    Thread closed per OP request.

    Deansh,

    The clock is still ticking on the 30-day time limit for this thread. After September 11th, we won't reopen it unless you can provide justification to do so per our rules.
    In the future, it would be best that you use the report button when you want a moderator to close your thread.
    Forum Rules►  ◄FAQ►  ◄ATM Forum Advice►  ◄Conspiracy Advice
    Click http://cosmoquest.org/forum/images/buttons/report-40b.png to report a post (even this one) to the moderation team.


    Man is a tool-using animal. Nowhere do you find him without tools; without tools he is nothing, with tools he is all. Thomas Carlyle (1795-1881)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •