20090211

Dynamic Ether



Dr. Borchardt:

In the book, The Future of Atheism, Robert B. Stewart made the following statement in the book's introduction:

"...the idea of ether actually held back scientific progress."

He then wrote: "Fortunately, Albert Einstein built upon the work of Albert Michelson and Edward Morley and disproved it in his special theory of relativity."

Stewart described the ether as a substance that was "rigid in relationship to electromagnetic waves but completely permeable to matter."

Obviously, we are seeing indeterminism hard at work here. But, I am wondering about the physical description of the ether as it relates to the Infinite Universe Theory.
Would the actual ether ever be considered "rigid" in any sense? Or are we today describing something different from the 19th century ether counterpart?

Frederic Frees


Frederic:

Thanks so much for the question.

I would rephrase Stewart’s statement a bit:

“…the idea of ether actually held back scientific regress,” which is what Einstein was all about. The regression in science was centered on the subconscious indeterministic opposition to the 4th Assumption of Science, INSEPARABILITY (Just as there is no motion without matter, so there is no matter without motion). And, as I have pointed out many times, the Michelsen-Moreley experiment was performed many times with positive results at higher elevations by Miller (1933). With better equipment, similar experiments by Galaev (2001, 2002) also showed positive results at low elevation.

Stewart’s description of the ether as being completely rigid was a common error among indeterminists, particularly when the concept of motionless matter was still popular. Remember that up to 1966 even the continents were considered to be motionless. We now know (actually, “assume”) that everything is in motion with respect to everything else. The ether is no different, and many of the ether theories assumed as much before the 20th century.

Waves were considered a collective phenomenon. A wave was not produced by a single particle, but by many particles, just as it is in water and air. The idea that light is both matter and the motion of matter at the same time is what really is holding back scientific progress. Regressive science will dominate until we return to the ether theory. The empty space that Einstein tried to substitute for ether has never been found. That’s why cosmic background radiation has a temperature of 2.7K instead of 0.0K. Infinite Universe Theory assumes infinite subdividability of matter—including the ether. There is no “empty space,” even between the particles of ether, whatever they may turn out to be. There is no “empty space” between you and I; the air between us is simply less resistant to our motions. And so it is with all things. We find the concepts of empty space and solid matter to be useful in thinking about the world, but those are only ideas; they don’t exist and could not exist. The upshot is that nonexistence, like perfectly empty space is impossible. This is why the universe is infinite in all directions. It is impossible for it not to exist. Each portion of the universe has a beginning and an end, but the universe itself does not.

References:

Galaev, Y.M., 2001, Etheral wind in experience of millimetric radiowaves propagation (English translation): Spacetime & Substance, v. 2, no. 5, p. 211-225.

Galaev, Y.M., 2002, The measuring of ether-drift velocity and kinematic ether viscosity within optical waves band (English translation): Spacetime & Substance, v. 3, no. 5, p. 207-224.

Michelson, A.A., and Morley, E.W., 1887, On the relative motion of the earth and the luminiferous ether: American Journal of Science, v. 39, p. 333-345.

Miller, D., 1933, The Ether-Drift Experiment and the Determination of the Absolute Motion of the Earth: Reviews of Modern Physics, v. 5, no. 2, p. 203-242.

Stewart, R.B., ed., 2008, The Future of Atheism: Alister McGrath and Daniel Dennett in Dialogue: Minneapolis, MN, Fortress Press, 192 p.

2 comments:

Дима said...

Hello! I shall tell shortly.
So has received that my hypothesis about a world(global) Ether has the same title. Under the content she(it) is similar to yours. I do not want that you thought that I have copied you, I have come to these ideas self-maintainedly, and did not know about existence of similar hypotheses, theories.
I ask you to look this reference:
http://blogs.mail.ru/mail/battalin/7BECE6AAB892447D.html

I ask to forgive for my English.
Yours faithfully, Dmitry.

Glenn Borchardt said...

Dimitry:

It is always nice to hear from folks in other countries. Glad to hear that you are working on the ether. You might want to go to the Natural Philosophy Alliance website, where you can check out various ether theories. My own reference database has 26 entries with "ether" in the title:

Achuthan, P., T.S., S., and Venkatesan, K., 1979, Ether--As advocated by Einstein and others: Speculations in Science and Technology, v. 2, p. 277-284.

Atsukovsky, V.A., 1993, Ethereal wind: Moscow, 289 p.

Basmaison, P., 1939, The evolution of ether into matter: The ancestral root of life and sciences: San Francisco, Chase and Ray, 400 p.

DeMeo, J., 2001, Dayton Miller's ether-drift experiments: A fresh look: Infinite Energy Magazine, no. 38, p. 72-82.

DeMeo, J., ed., 2002, Heretic's notebook: Emotions, protocells, ether-drift and cosmic life energy with new research supporting Wilhelm Reich, 272 p.

Dirac, P.A.M., 1951, Is there an ether?: Nature, v. 168, p. 906-907.

Dmitriyev, V.P., 2006, E=mc2 in the turbulent aether: Apieron, v. 13, no. 2, p. 297-300.

Dudley, H.C., 1974, Is there an ether?, Industrial Research, p. 41-46.

Einstein, A., 1920, Sidelights on relativity: 1. Ether and relativity. 2. Geometry and experience: London, Methuen, 56 p.

Galaev, Y.M., 2001, Etheral wind in experience of millimetric radiowaves propagation (English translation): Spacetime & Substance, v. 2, no. 5, p. 211-225.

Galaev, Y.M., 2002, The measuring of ether-drift velocity and kinematic ether viscosity within optical waves band (English translation): Spacetime & Substance, v. 3, no. 5, p. 207-224.

Gift, S.J.G., 2006, Experimental Detection of the Ether: Proceedings of the Natural Philosophy Alliance, v. 3, no. 1, p. 37-43.

Kehr, R.W., 2002, The Detection of Ether (1st ed.): Overland Park, Kansas.

Kolata, G.B., 1977, Protein degradation: Putting the research together: Science, v. 198, p. 596-598.

Kostro, L., 2000, Einstein and the ether, 242 p.

MacWood, G.E., and Verhoek, F.H., 1961, How can you tell whether a reaction will occur?: Journal of Chemical Education, v. 38, p. 334-337.

Michelson, A., 1881, The relative motion of the earth and the luminiferous ether: American Journal of Science, v. 22, p. 120-129.

Michelson, A.A., and Morley, E.W., 1887, On the relative motion of the earth and the luminiferous ether: American Journal of Science, v. 39, p. 333-345.

Miller, D., 1933, The Ether-Drift Experiment and the Determination of the Absolute Motion of the Earth: Reviews of Modern Physics, v. 5, no. 2, p. 203-242.

Miller, D.C., 1940, The Ether-Drift Experiment, Cleveland Plain Dealer: Cleveland, OH, p. 1 & 6 ("All Feature Section").

Preston, S.T., 1875, Physics of the Ether: London, E. & F. N. Spon, 136 p.

Ruderfer, M., 1975, Neutrino structure of the ether: Lettere Nuovo Cimento, v. 13, p. 9-13.

Tsau, J., 2005, Discovery of Aether And Its Science
Infinity Publishing, 129 p.

Whittaker, S.E., 1951, A history of the theories of aether and electricity: The classical theories: New York, Harper Torchbooks, v. 1, 434 p.

Whittaker, S.E., 1953, A history of the theories of aether and electricity: The modern theories, 1900-1926: New York, Harper and Brothers, v. 2, 319 p.

Zapffe, C.A., 1979, A magnetospheric ether-drag theory and the reference frames of relativistic physics: Speculations in Science and Technology, v. 2, p. 439-459.


Hope this helps with your studies. I will take a look at your website and get back to you in a week or two.

Glenn

Post a Comment

Thanks so much for your comment. Be sure to hit "Preview" to see if it will publish correctly. Then hit "Publish". Include your email address if you wish to receive copies of your comment as well as all other published comments to this Blog.

For those having trouble getting this comment section to work:

Nitecruzr writes:

[FAQ] Why can't people post comments on my blog?

The Blogger / Google login status, and the ability to post comments, is sensitive to both cookie and script filters. Your readers may need to enable (stop filtering) "third party cookies", in their browser and on their computer. The effects of the newly unavoidable CAPTCHA, and the Google "One account" login, requires third party cookies, even more than before.

http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/11/the-google-one-account-login-and-cookie.html

http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/10/comments-and-cookie-filters-october-2014.html

http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/10/the-new-commenting-captcha-is.html

Third party cookies filtering, in a browser setting, is the most common solution, overall - but your readers may have to search for other filter(s) that affect their use of Blogger / Google.

Any filters are subject to update, by the creator. If the problem started a few days ago, your readers may have to look on their computers, and find out what product or accessory was updated, a few days ago.

http://blogging.nitecruzr.net/2014/01/almost-nobody-controls-their-own.html