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 Michelson-Morley 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.