The philosophy and Attributes of ETHER

[PoPpAScience]

NO!


Allen;
In my concept the “Aether” is just an extreme motion state of the fundamental entity of the universe that is in a state of chaotic vibrations such that it does not condense to its solid form; it actually causes expansion. The opposite of this state is the total uniform motion in the form of linear velocity that allows the bonding property of the fundamental substance to achieve its maximum and thus forming a perfect solid unit of the fundamental; no need to invent a singularity.

Your vortex concept can only apply to the process of converting the chaotic motion of the substance to the uniform motion of angular momentum. A vortex is not a fundamental state of motion nor substance; it requires several degrees of freedom to exist; along with wave mechanics however, it can be aplied to subatomic particle concepts.

Attempting to give the word “aware” a different meaning only causes confusion; you should attempt to use existing terminology until you actually need to invent a new word or meaning.

Hi David.

Just happen to come across your thread again. And once again find it exiting to read your posts. I like your theory very much, and feel it should be at the centre of conversation in this forum.

But, I still question the make up of your Aether. When I think about your theory, or Jimbo's theory, I still have to ask myself: What is the shape of the fundamental substance? What is the medium that the FS is whizzing around in? What would the boundary of FS look like? If FS is round in nature, and at one time at rest, what fills the void where the sphere's do not touch? Etc...

I have been able to eliminate these problems in my thinking, by having an Aether that is infinite in nature with out boundary. It can be compressed and attenuated, but not separated. All that would be needed is a disturbance by Motion, which would lead to linear velocity, then angular momentum. When you have only, ever, one thing that is infinite in nature, then you do not need a medium, or boundaries.

FS of infinite nature without boundary, would sure have "Self Affinity". Hmmm, Af(in)finity.

It has taken me a half a year of contemplating, to envision a boundless FS that can be effected by Motion, without being separated. I was wondering if you have contemplated this in the past, and if not, would you be interested in doing so for the interest of it? I know this goes against what you think, but would like to hear what you think.

I promise to not mention "Aware" in your thread. LOL

[dipayankar]

We all speak of Aether... very confidently. I still dont know whether it exists. If it does, does it differ from space time? If so how?

[dleviwing]

Hi David.
But, I still question the make up of your Aether. When I think about your theory, or Jimbo's theory, I still have to ask myself:
What is the shape of the fundamental substance?
What is the medium that the FS is whizzing around in? What would the boundary of FS look like?
If FS is round in nature, and at one time at rest, what fills the void where the sphere's do not touch?

And you say you read my theory?

[Lloyd Gillespie]

One of your best threads ever, David...

[JAK]

And you say you read my theory?

David, I have a question which I do not recall you covering in your theory. You noted earlier that it might be possible for the ether to be absent in some part(s) of our universe.

But what about the known laws? Would they still be in effect in the postulated/possible "voids"?

If not, then it would seem to pose difficulties regarding the threshold where the ether and our known laws start. It would seem that the background vibrations which create the ether could not carry the laws of physics with them but, rather, be subject to them while passing through space/time. In other words, space/time would essentially be a field with our known laws uniformly acting throughout - virtually omnipresent and omnipotent.

Thoughts?

[PoPpAScience]

And you say you read my theory?

Oh well, at least I like to read it.

[JAK]

...
But what about the known laws? Would they still be in effect in the postulated/possible "voids"?
...
Thoughts?

Hey, David, RU still thinking over my question?

[dleviwing]

David, I have a question which I do not recall you covering in your theory. You noted earlier that it might be possible for the ether to be absent in some part(s) of our universe.

But what about the known laws? Would they still be in effect in the postulated/possible "voids"?

Our physical laws, provided they are true laws of nature, will continue to be true where ever the physical substance of the universe is; a true void does not have physical substance within it yet time is still valid for a void; it's just that it would have no meaningful motion reference to measure it there.

[dleviwing]

Oh well, at least I like to read it.

Hi PoPpAScience;
Sorry I was so frank but your questions show no purpose to me or should be easily determined by your own thinking.
Let me try to explain my view of an Aether in a bit more detailed maner:

To me space is a void filled with random electromagnetic waves of the FS; it does not make sense to call it by other names due to the enigma science has invoked on the terms "Aether or Ether". This state of the FS forms the lowest spatial densities of this substance without forming actual particle domains. Waves produce interference domains of high spatial density for which there is always a domain of lower spatial density often discussed as intrinsically coupled photon pairs or also called entangled pairs for those interested in the entanglement concepts. These are equivalent volumes of space but are not equivalent quantities of substance per volume yet both will impart an energy or motion change equal to Planck’s constant as in E=hf or the energy imparted on a unit circular area represented by the wavelength as the diameter. This equation represents both entangled photonic volumes so the actual motion change pure unit volume would be ½ h*w (w=wavelength). Now if you study wave mechanics you realize that magnetic phenomena (magnetic moments) are due to a rotational motion whereas electrical phenomena is due to spatial density variance between the high spatial density and the low spatial density domains. The magnetic angular motion of a wave will always attempt to align perpendicular to the linear velocity of the wave and thus the magnetic properties and the electrical properties are also perpendicular. You need to remember that we are talking about highly randomizations of the wave motions of FS and not particle wave functions of spherical domains. If you use this visualization you should be able to develop a better comprehension of what is meant by virtual particles and quantum entanglements.

There are other aether theories that express this same concept but in different terms. My concept however is the only one that views that the motions of FS systems are absolute. It prevents the need to invent other spatial dimension to account for observation anomalies.

[JAK]

Our physical laws, provided they are true laws of nature, will continue to be true where ever the physical substance of the universe is; a true void does not have physical substance within it yet time is still valid for a void; it's just that it would have no meaningful motion reference to measure it there.

Let me try to explain my view of an Aether in a bit more detailed maner:

To me space is a void filled with random electromagnetic waves of the FS;
...

David, you're confusing me: "a true void does not have physical substance" versus "a void is filled with random electromagnetic waves".

This discussion has important ramifications for the Big Bang - did time exist in a void prior to the Big Bang? Or did electromagnetic waves exist in a void prior to the Big Bang? Or something else?