Einstein accepted Ether (at least around the time upon his GR)

[bottomlander]

I always feel that "absolute vacuum" is a disaster to theory developers.

However, mainstream followers just bootstrap equations of mainstream theoretical physics. They simply take spacetime as in-between the entities of matter-energy. They follow physics textbooks to say that spacetime continuum and quantum fluctuations in space as the phenomena of vacuum rather than of ether. They forget that vacuum should means emptiness (empty of any physical continuum [including spacetime continuum] and fluctuations) while ether is a physical continuum [though non-material].
(Is spacetime a physical continuum or not physical?)

Actually, those physics terms like: field, quantum fluctuation, loop quantum, spacetime continuum, wrapped spacetime, dark matter are more ether-like rather than vacuum-like.

People say that Einstein's Special Relativity overthrew ether. However, it is in Black and White with a book written by Einstein
(with pictures http://www.helical-structures.org/Ei...relativity.pdf )
mentioned in a web page Einstein conclusion about the existence of Ether after he developed the General relativity - a fact missing in the scholar Physics textbooks http://www.helical-structures.org/ei...bout_ether.htm

Please have a look.

Best Regards. Bottomlander

[RascalPuff]

Dear Bottomlander:

Thank you for this iimportant thread and its links.

"There is no space empty of field". - Einstein

The electromagnetic field itself seems a likely candidate as the 'ether' medium of space, whatever else may be shaking, in that consideration.

Best regards,
- RP

[Lloyd Gillespie]

"There is no space empty of field". - Einstein

[MJA]

In the 1905 Einstein paper "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" he wrote: "The introduction of a 'light ether' will prove to be superfluous, inasmuch as the view to be developed here will not require "a space at absolute rest.' "

Newtonian mechanics was the belief in the absolute measure of nature. The ether prior to 1905 was considered a state of absolute rest. Einstein rewrote the Newtonian physics of absolute measure, absolute time, and absolute ether and found measure to be only relative to the observer. Quantum mechanics was born. I don't believe he discarded the ether, only the absolute measure of it.

Space is the unity of both fields and particles, or everything, don't you think?
E=M

=
MJA

[Lloyd Gillespie]

MJA, your post should be edited to "observer position", not observer...

In the 1905 Einstein paper "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" he wrote: "The introduction of a 'light ether' will prove to be superfluous, inasmuch as the view to be developed here will not require "a space at absolute rest.' "

Newtonian mechanics was the belief in the absolute measure of nature. The ether prior to 1905 was considered a state of absolute rest. Einstein rewrote the Newtonian physics of absolute measure, absolute time, and absolute ether and found measure to be only relative to the observer[Position]. Quantum mechanics was born. I don't believe he discarded the ether, only the absolute measure of it.

Space is the unity of both fields and particles, or everything, don't you think?
E=M

=
MJA

Lloyd

[bottomlander]

In the 1905 Einstein paper "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" he wrote: "The introduction of a 'light ether' will prove to be superfluous, inasmuch as the view to be developed here will not require "a space at absolute rest.' "

I don't believe he discarded the ether, only the absolute measure of it.

MJA

Ether conception has a very long history, since ancient Greeks. Different ether models had been accepted during the progress of natural philosophy and physics. Many old ether models had been overthrown, just like what happened after the dominance of special relativity. However, once a new theory requires a field/continuum, ether-like conception can be updated. That is what happened to Einstein, over 10 years after SR, he accepted ether for GR. Really many theories, like the GR, need a field/continuum and thus ether-like rather than vacuum-like.

Dear MJA, I cannot catchup your implication to mention Einstein had wrote "The introduction of a 'light ether' will prove to be superfluous, inasmuch as the view to be developed here will not require 'a space at absolute rest.'
Anyhow, same as the common practises of any thinkers, you should know that a human can change his/her viewpoint after re-think. Despite your quote in 1905, Einstein can update his viewpoint to accept ether in 1920. (And I read a 7th preface to a book Relativity wrote by Einstein himself just a few years before his death that seemingly he still concludes entities of matter-energy extended [as ether-like].) So I agree with what MJA wrote "I don't believe he discarded the ether, only the absolute measure of it."

Best Regards. Bottomlander

ps. most people can improve their theories except those already finalized by oversimplified assertions like "everything equals". It is too hard to modify into "everything equals except .....in some hierarchies, in some conditions, .....".

[MJA]

ps. most people can improve their theories except those already finalized by oversimplified assertions like "everything equals". It is too hard to modify into "everything equals except .....in some hierarchies, in some conditions, .....".

It is impossible to simplify the simplest truth.

=
MJA

[mkirkpatrick]

Albert accepted the ether because in his gut and in his head he knew that it was so!



regards michael.

[Profpat]

Hi everyone;

My question is what is the "ether"?

Is it Dirac's negative space?
Is it spacetime ( quantum ) foam?
Is it gravitional waves that bind all matter?
Is it the background radiation? ( photons )
Is it electro/magnetic fields?

Your thoughts please.

Best to all,

Pat

[bottomlander]

Hi everyone;

My question is what is the "ether"?

Is it Dirac's negative space?
Is it spacetime ( quantum ) foam?
Is it gravitional waves that bind all matter?
Is it the background radiation? ( photons )
Is it electro/magnetic fields?

Your thoughts please.

Best to all,

Pat

I have my own model of ether. Anyhow, I am satisfied with Ether as an umbrella model as long as any continua in-between matter-energy contribute to the inclusion of physical reality in a theory.

Vacuum concept is oversimplified. In contrast, any non-vacuum are ether-like.
And all ATM (Against The Mainstream) concepts are helpful to explore the physical reality of the universe rather than just mathematical simplification.

Best Regards. Bottomlander