It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Bedlam
There is no "aether". No one's had any use for it since the early 1900's. No one's ever found any. It's an idea whose time has gone, quite some time back.
Quantum field theory, and in particular the theory of quantum optics, makes claims about the physics of electromagnetic fields. These claims have been validated by extraordinary experiments.
Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by buddhasystem
Did you know that Newton was heavily into reading everything he could on alchemy, mysticism, and magic. Which means, if Newton was posting on the thread, you would be calling him a simpleton as well.
Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by DenyObfuscation
No, I'm not going to click on your link because my experience has taught me what it is likely to be
Originally posted by buddhasystem
I was amused when I discovered that Flanagan has obtained his "PhD" from the same Sri Lankan diploma mill as other charlatans have used.
Originally posted by Mary Rose
Originally posted by buddhasystem
I was amused when I discovered that Flanagan has obtained his "PhD" from the same Sri Lankan diploma mill as other charlatans have used.
I, on the other hand, am quite amused at how little you know from your education.
It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false, it is "generally accepted" (or vice versa).This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is that there is insufficient investigation and therefore insufficient information to prove the proposition satisfactorily to be either true or false. [...] In debates, appeals to ignorance are sometimes used to shift the burden of proof.
Everything is causal and fine at a macro level (galaxies, stars, planets and us) at a micro level (bacteries microbes...) and even at a nano level (molecules), but it ALL goes down the rabbit's hole at the quantum level!
Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by 1Agnostic1
Everything is causal and fine at a macro level (galaxies, stars, planets and us) at a micro level (bacteries microbes...) and even at a nano level (molecules), but it ALL goes down the rabbit's hole at the quantum level!
1. Can you predict whether a batter will hit a ball or not? And if he does, precisely what the path will be?
That the universe is a clockwork mechanism that can be described and understood fully is an 18th Century conceit.
2. In fact, there is a great deal that cannot be predicted with a great deal of certainty, but race horse touts, stock market traders and marketing consultants continue to ply their trades with uniformly disappointing results.
3. It can be argued that, at the macroscopic level, the interwoven, vastly complicated fields of probability create the illusion of causality, and it's related concept of locality. Technically, this is metaphysics, but it is a logical conclusion.
Originally posted by 1Agnostic1
So, a void can be defined as a space empty of matter whereas WE KNOW there are at least neutrinos in it
(even photons in the "buzzer in the jar" experiment.
So, you would think that, at the very least, the existence of waves should be proof enough that there is an Aether, a medium for them to travel through.
But, no, the existence of an Aether is so taboo, that they have to immediately say: "But, you know, waves don't exist either, they are simply abstract mathematical concepts. In fact, they are a representation of fields'interactions (and existence)."
Ok, but even so, fields do require an Ether to, well, be fields (to exist).
Originally posted by buddhasystem
Originally posted by 1Agnostic1
You are mixing a concept of void with a sample you are likely to obtain if you delineate a volume in the world around you. Sure, you'll get a few neutrinos in that 4-gallon canister even if you pump out all the air. Doesn't change anything.
What photons in the "buzzer in the jar"? If you mean the experiment where the sound vanished when the volume was evacuated, it had nothing to do with photons. Try to think straight next time, do you mind?
ME: So, you would think that, at the very least, the existence of waves should be proof enough that there is an Aether, a medium for them to travel through.
1. Why should it be a proof?
2. It's not.
Patently false. There is no "aether" term in Maxwell equations, and they describe static, variable and propagating fields. Period. "Aether" is not a part of this theory.
Originally posted by 1Agnostic1
1. Because waves need a medium to travel through maybe? Just saying.
Patently false. There is no "aether" term in Maxwell equations, and they describe static, variable and propagating fields. Period. "Aether" is not a part of this theory.
Yeah, if it's not part of the theory (Maxwell's equation), then it surely doesn't exist. Why didn't I think of that before?
Originally posted by Mary Rose
Originally posted by primalfractal
Modern mainstream science says that the wave portion of a photon wave packet duality is purely a mathematical abstraction with no real physical existence.
Aether theories, including my own, say the wave portion of the wave packet polar duality is real and exists in another dimension physically underlying our own, the same place where the electrons disappear to.
With my theory there is no reason for a "mathematical" wave to move sideways or radially through space or respond to the movement of the device, only a wave that existed physically would exhibit such qualities and show such effects.
So, if I can do the experiment and prove the theory I can show the Aether is real.
The experiment I have designed to show it involves spinning a fluorescent molecule with lasers at over 6 billion revolutions per second.
I would like to return to my question, which no one has addressed. What would it take to do this experiment?