Quote:
Originally Posted by Felix Schrodinger  Hi Fredrick
I am convinced that the aether is part of the underlying explanation of our very real world and that it's rejection is the reason why 'physics' currently finds itself in such a hole. Whilst my particular model may not be correct, you must admit that it can be used to link and explain more facets of reality than most paradigms.
regards
Felix |
The whole point, Felix, revolves around the question whether there is bathwater with the baby or if it is just the baby. My take: we must focus on the baby to get the whole for our toe, questioning the bathwater is a side-issue, itself not that important. I have no beef with ether, but rejecting one of the two views will leave you one-eye blind.
The fundamental concept that must be valid for a toe to be valid addresses the dimensional aspects of our universe head-on. If it doesn't then it is not a correct delivery we can use for our toe. 3D does not deliver, and therefore we are looking for the ether, to explain what 3D does not capture.
My 2D+ concept contains all spatial aspects, QM, and explains why ether is the bathwater.
3D is left-right, up-down, front-back. Static, incomplete.
There is no beef with ether or non-ether, because that's not where the toe finds its clarification. It is with in and out where our universe finds its most fundamental spatial aspect. Our entire universe is moving outwardly, the single most important spatial aspect imaginable, and it is not addressed by 3D.
The dance is part of our universe and the dimensional concept that helps explain the toe will therefore contain the dance. 3D is static and has no dance inside.