pgtruspace's blog

about things that interest me.

More Aether

More Aether

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

I was asked for a better explanation of the characteristics of aether. H/T to Pascvaks “why would one think that aether has charge” so I will attempt to expand on that point.

During the early days of research on electrical phenomena, over distance, aether (ether) was the accepted explanation. Various experimenters attempted to discern the characteristics of this medium by many means, some successfully, others failure. One of the earliest demonstrated that every electron in the universe felt the actions of every other electron. The charge or force field of every  electron repels every other one over any distance. This causes a powerful overall field.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Tesla said the following;

Nikola Tesla:

The technical editor of the New York Herald Tribune’s radio section responded thus to an article by Laurence M. Cockaday:

“I have read the article, and I quite agree with the opinion expressed – that wireless power transmission is impractical with present apparatus. This conclusion will be naturally reached by any one who recognizes the nature of the agent by which the impulses are transmitted in present wireless practice.

“When Dr. Heinrich Hertz undertook his experiments from 1887 to 1889 his object was to demonstrate a theory postulating a medium filling all space, called the ether which was structureless, of inconceivable tenuity and yet solid and possessed of rigidity incomparably greater than that of the hardest steel.  He obtained certain results and the whole world acclaimed them as an experimental verification of that cherished theory.  But in reality what he observed tended to prove just its fallacy.

“I had maintained for many years before that such a medium as supposed could not exist, and that we must rather accept the view that all space is filled with a gaseous substance.  On repeating the Hertz experiments, with much improved and very powerful apparatus, I satisfied myself that what he had observed was nothing else but effects of longitudinal waves in a gaseous medium, that is to say, waves, propagated by alternate compression and expansion.  He had observed waves in the ether much of the nature of sound waves in the air.

“Up to 1896, however, I did not succeed in obtaining a positive experimental proof of the existence of such a medium.  But in that year I brought out a new form of vacuum tube capable of being charged to any desired potential, and operated it with effective pressures of about 4,000,000 volts.  I produced cathodic and other rays of transcending intensity.  The effects, according to my view, were due to minute particles of matter carrying enormous electrical charges, which, for want of a better name, I designated as matter not further decomposable.  Subsequently those particles were called electrons.

“One of the first striking observations made with my tubes was that a purplish glow for several feet around the end of the tube was formed, and I readily ascertained that it was due to the escape of the charges of the particles as soon as they passed out into the air; for it was only in a nearly perfect vacuum that these charges could be confined to them.  The coronal discharge proved that there must be a medium besides air in the space, composed of particles immeasurably smaller than those of air, as otherwise such a discharge would not be possible.  On further investigation I found that this gas was so light that a volume equal to that of the earth would weigh only about one-twentieth of a pound.

“The velocity of any sound wave depends on a certain ratio between elasticity and density, and for this ether or universal gas the ratio is 800,000,000,000 times greater than for air.  This means that the velocity of the sound waves propagated through the ether is about 300,000 times greater than that of the sound waves in air, which travel at approximately 1,085 feet a second.  Consequently the speed in ether is 900,000 × 1,085 feet, or 186,000 miles, and that is the speed of light.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

from Wikipedia;

In 1918 Einstein publicly alluded to that new definition for the first time. Then, in the early 1920s, in a lecture which he was invited to give at Lorentz’s university in Leiden, Einstein sought to reconcile the theory of relativity with his mentor’s cherished concept of the aether. In this lecture Einstein stressed that special relativity took away the last mechanical property of Lorentz’s aether: immobility. However, he continued that special relativity does not necessarily rule out the aether, because the latter can be used to give physical reality to acceleration and rotation. This concept was fully elaborated within general relativity, in which physical properties (which are partially determined by matter) are attributed to space, but no substance or state of motion can be attributed to that “aether” (aether = curved space-time).

In another paper of 1924, named “Concerning the Aether”, Einstein argued that Newton’s absolute space, in which acceleration is absolute, is the “Aether of Mechanics”. And within the electromagnetic theory of Maxwell and Lorentz one can speak of the “Aether of Electrodynamics”, in which the aether possesses an absolute state of motion. As regards special relativity, also in this theory acceleration is absolute as in Newton’s mechanics. However, the difference from the electromagnetic aether of Maxwell and Lorentz lies in the fact, that “because it was no longer possible to speak, in any absolute sense, of simultaneous states at different locations in the aether, the aether became, as it were, four dimensional, since there was no objective way of ordering its states by time alone.“. Now the “aether of special relativity” is still “absolute”, because matter is affected by the properties of the aether, but the aether is not affected by the presence of matter. This asymmetry was solved within general relativity. Einstein explained that the “aether of general relativity” is not absolute, because matter is influenced by the aether, just as matter influences the structure of the aether.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Albert Einstein was working on causes of mass/inertia and gravity when he got sidetracked  into studies of actions of light and then relativity. To understand gravity, you must understand mass/inertia and for that the study of the behavior of light is necessary and due to it’s strange behavior you get relativity.

Modern astrophysics has deduced that a “Dark Energy” must exist as well as “Dark Matter”, because the known mass and energy effecting, visible matter, could only account for about 3% of the needed force and matter and the other 97% must be “dark” something. So we must return to the definition of Aether.

Aether must be the cause of mass/inertia effects to be invisible and act with mass.  Aether must have charge to act with force against it’s self to appear to be solid to EMF energies. To have mass/inertia effects there must be something external to cause a resistance to changes in relative motion. The need to have a quanta that appears to be both a wave and a partial and exhibit an energy transfer event when detected. The need for it to be able travel over time and distance beyond knowing with no real mass. This requires something that can deliver a unit of energy and then not appear to be there. So we have this problem, describe a thing that we need to describe effects but we can’t detect directly. We know that charge in motion causes EMF effects and we have EMF effects. We have units , quanta, of EMF effects and therefor units or quanta of something that carries the charge.

Neutrons and Protons have by far, the greater mass/inertia because at their heart they have a deep lack of charge and have a large pull on the charge aether.  Electrons, Photons have charge and push on aether and therefor act as in a super conductor as the aether moves around them as they travel, almost no mass/inertia.   pg

Advertisements

33 responses to “More Aether

  1. Pascvaks January 1, 2012 at 7:42 am

    Please be kind to a simple mind –

    I read every word twice, no doubt I’ll need to read it over a few more times and ponder the comments others make as well for a while too. I’ve probably missed a lot and am now far out in left field, here goes –

    Since the Big Bang popped, an awful lot of the energy –and I presume the ‘matter’ too that ‘formed’
    as the ‘energy’ cooled– was projected outward in the shock wall. Wouldn’t most of the ‘energy’ and ‘matter’ be out in the vicinity of the shock wall, edge, boundry of the universe? Say about 97%? The little problem that we can only account for 3% seems reasonable if it really was a Big Bang. Maybe i’m limited in my experience to explosions in truly empty space (or whatever it was where the BB went off) in this level of space-time and the 4 dimensions I take for granted and maybe things can be different in other levels above and below this one. If it was a really Big Bang and it’s had just a little more time to expand than we can detect/measure wouldn’t all that dark energy and dark matter be a little to far to detect?

    Reference Aether per se : (Remember you’re dealing with an Old PoliSci guy;-)
    Everything I’m told is made of smaller things, and while Strings are the latest smallest thing, I can’t imagine they will be the last. Might strings explain the Aether? If not, let me ramble a little more. How about photons? Can we bend light? I heard we could. If light can be bent (and stopped?), might Aether be old slow, or stopped, photons?

    (PG, I’m not fooling with you, I really am kind’a stupid about all this;-)

  2. p.g.sharrow January 2, 2012 at 10:27 pm

    @ Pascvaks Studies of the behavior our own and nearby galaxies is what has lead to the observation that most of the mass of those galaxies can not be seen. The galaxies spin or move as a mass and not as individual stars, so the stars are imbedded in something that holds them much stronger then would be expected from the known mass gravitation effects. The total mass of the universe was not examined for this observation.
    At present I have a hard time buying the “Big Bang” theory, I prefer a steady state universe. At present “we” can see 13.5 billion light years in all directions, and the universe is 12 to 15 billion years old. Does that mean “we” are in the center of the universe? Hard to believe! More likely we are inside an EMF “fun house” mirror and can “see” our own backsides in all directions. 😎
    Can we bend light? Well very strong EMF(electro motive force) seems to bend light trajectory, and gravity might. EMF fields such as the surface of an electron shell reflects, mirrors, light as in fiber optics or a mirrors surface. The idea that aether is”tired” or slow photons is as old as the science of aether(ether) and it appears to me and others that electrons, photons, neutrinos and other subatomic particles are just bits of aether with different spin or EMF signatures.
    I have been studying this stuff for nearly 60 years and know more then most, and I know very little.

    On the other hand I have no Idea why a large bunch of people act so stupidly. Seems as the larger the number the dumber they get. The IQ of a committee is lower then the lowest person in the group. Maybe you can explain it to me as I don’t understand. pg

  3. Pascvaks January 3, 2012 at 4:08 am

    Thank you PG. I personally always liked the Big Bang and have a feeling I’ll never be smart enough to give it up. The Steady State just never seemed to offer any hope of answering “why?”. 😉

    Over the years, with more and better pics of the Milky Way and the other ‘spinning wheels’ of matter out there, I’ve come to the conclusion that it and they are more like gyroscopes and not wheels and that they represent the visible center slices of spherical gobs of galactic matter/force. Kind’a like peas in the soup of the universe. Kind’a thought there was something strange about all those spinning gobs. That the matter we could see was being precipitated out of the gob on a rather flat plane.

    Not sure how many dimensions there are now but it sure seems to make a lot of sense that there’s more than the four I see and feel. I fully expect that the search for the God-Particle at CERN will find something, but not the final answer of “small” and that the Universe as we know it is going to get bigger and bigger (to us) as we are able to see more and more of it. I don’t think we’ll find the end (or beginning) of it, because I doubt that its size (or time span) has an end (or beginning) the way we calculate such things. Don’t like the Multi-verse terminology, or the comments these days that we’re one of many universes. I think it’s like the cave, the lake, the valley, the country, the nation, the continent(s), the world, the solar system, the milky way, the local group, etc., etc,; for all the growth we’ve gone through in the past, only we have gotten bigger, we can see further, yes, but the one and only Universe hasn’t changed a bit.

  4. Tenuc January 3, 2012 at 11:36 am

    Difficult to know where to start, Pascvaks, the universe is such a big question… 🙂

    Perhaps ‘why’ is not a useful question regarding the universe and we just have to accept it IS. Like PG, I too don’t think the Big Bang (or rapid inflation) conjecture fits what we observe. Too much order and self similarity at all scales here, while I’ve seen the results of big bangs which tend to produce randomness and disorder. An ever growing, structured universe is what I observe and I think it has always been here since time began (at the speed of light time is a property of length and motion, therefore before things started moving time did not exist).

    I think matter is just a form of organised concentrated energy, and that the basic component of everything we see is the ubiquitous photon, which is the basic energy packet from which all other forms are constructed via different spin states. What we define as matter is simply conglomerates of these simpler building blocks. I don’t thing the Higgs boson is the ‘cod’ particle, rather it is the humble photon, which has real but tiny mass and size, from which all we see is created. I don’t think the scientist at the LHC will find the required super-heavy particle, although it looks like they will pretend they’ve found it’s ghost, but will need several £b more to definitely confirm it’s existence… 😦

    I also believe, contrary to the Copenhagen agreement back in the 1920’s, that all we observe happens in 3 dimensions (time and distance being interchangeable at the speed of light). The driving force for all we see is the kinetic energy of collision, and the apparent attraction of gravity. The Yin and Yang – but then again, perhaps I’m just a simpleton.

  5. p.g.sharrow January 3, 2012 at 4:15 pm

    In the beginning there was the word and it was “Let there be Light” and there was light,
    Photonic energy.
    “The light” was then divided into light and dark, matter and not matter.

    Seems to be about right to me. But then I tend towards simple. God works in 3 dimensions plus time. Time keeps everything from happening at once. Mathematicians need 128 dimensions, God and I only need 3, too lazy for more. 😎

    OH! yes “the Light” is GOD. physics/psychics has the same source point. pg

  6. adolfogiurfa January 3, 2012 at 5:38 pm

    @P.G.: Look at this:
    http://www.giurfa.com/fragmentsof.pdf
    Like Einstein said, there is no obligation to read it from the start to the end, it will be better if we read it beginning where we find something interesting for us.

  7. p.g.sharrow January 3, 2012 at 5:56 pm

    adolfogiurfa January 3, 2012 at 5:38 pm: adolfo your link only loads a blank page pg

  8. adolfogiurfa January 4, 2012 at 6:13 am

    @P.G.Sharrow: No my dear P.G., it´s a book in PDF file. I have just checked it, you must download:
    http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/product.jsp?platform=windows&product=10

  9. p.g.sharrow January 5, 2012 at 8:53 am

    @ Adolfo; after 2 hours I finally got all the Adobe upgrades up and working and that book downloaded. TOO damn late for me to read it, but I did save it for later this evening. Hope it is worth the effort. 🙂 Adobe multi-language X plus 10.1 upgrade, about 150 meg. 48 minuets on my connection & computer 😦 pg

  10. P.G. Sharrow January 10, 2012 at 11:48 pm

    @Adolfo; read the book of fragments. The “G” character was on some kind of mission, teaching or manipulation. He had some kind of Indian education in mind and body control. I know of Fakir’s and Yogi’s as I had a friend that was a Yogi and taught Yoga at my house many years ago. He found it interesting that I was familiar with his knowledge and practices without instruction. Just seemed natural to me. The book it’s self was a slow read for me. I can see where you get some of your “quotes” The “G” character has a good 19th century education and the writer does give a good account of his impressions and feelings in eastern Europe WW1 and the Bolshevik take over.
    Immanuel Velikovsky is also a good read on this period. He also gives many writings of his life as well as conversations with Albert Einstein. A very good read about how things evolved in the first half of the 20th century, both in politics and science.

    http://www.varchive.org/

    As to my vision of the nature of the soul of things, it is something I have been working on for many years.
    When you understand the nature of Aether and the creation of matter. You see the nature of souls of matter and of men as well as the face of GOD. “That which IS”. Old Hebrew description. Not the Greek view of some dude sitting in a cloud, but the soul of the universe.
    In the beginning there was chaos and then there was the word, and the word was, let there be light!
    “The word” and “the light” are also descriptions of the concept of GOD.
    I was once told by a Baptist preacher friend that he hated my belief in the existence of GOD as a fact, where he only had faith in the existence of GOD. There is a point where psychics and physics come together. pg

  11. adolfogiurfa January 15, 2012 at 6:13 pm

    @P.G.: “A little of knowledge drives you away from God, a lot of knowledge drives you nearer to Him”….a french scientist said, long time ago. You will read the following: “Our teaching it is more material than materialism”
    If you like to know more about the teacher called “G” : http://youtu.be/7mulbI7cts4 ( a movie made after his book: “Meetings with remarkable men”)

  12. P.G. Sharrow January 23, 2012 at 11:04 pm

    Everything has an EMF soul or signature. From the tiny singularity that is a proton to the Universe its self. When the chaos of charge, aether, organize to become a proton, an organized EMF picture or soul is also created. When a molecule is created a soul is also created. When those molecules organize to a crystal, the soul of that crystal is created. If a new, not before seen molecule is created it will be hard to crystallize for the first time, but later crystallizations will be easier as if the blueprint has been created. RNA and DNA are also complex molecules that create the picture or soul of the final creation, from a cell to a person. God is the soul of the universe. As you are the collective soul of all your atoms, molecules and cells, god is the collective soul of the universe. Physics and psychics have the same starting point, the organization of charge that is aether. pg

  13. Zeke February 5, 2012 at 9:12 pm

    ““One of the first striking observations made with my tubes was that a purplish glow for several feet around the end of the tube was formed, and I readily ascertained that it was due to the escape of the charges of the particles as soon as they passed out into the air; for it was only in a nearly perfect vacuum that these charges could be confined to them. The coronal discharge proved that there must be a medium besides air in the space, composed of particles immeasurably smaller than those of air, as otherwise such a discharge would not be possible.” ~Nikola Tesla

    It seems to me that Nikola Tesla has found physical evidence of aether here. Aether is made up of collapsed particles that accept energy.

    That is a wonderful quote PG. Thank you for providing it.

  14. P.G. Sharrow February 5, 2012 at 10:30 pm

    When I began my mental quest to get a grasp on the cause of mass, inertia, gravity and matter, I had no need of aether as the standard model theory did not have any use for it, in fact the mention of aether was disparaged as the thoughts of simple minded people. As I put together all of the facts known to me about the world of physics phenomena aether always seemed to be needed to tie all of the parts together. So a complete definition of the characteristics of aether had to be devised that explained all the known phenomena. When I finished I found that I had as well seen the face of god. It all just fit together. Physics and psychics originated from the same thing, Aether, the soul of the universe and the foundation of all of creation. Dark matter, dark energy, photons, electrons, gravity and hydrogen all originated from the same thing. Aether is charge in chaos or dark energy and causes the effects of inertia/mass of dark matter on known matter as well as provide the propagation medium for gravity and all electro motive force. Aether when it is “condensed” into an organized singularity is a proton or Hydrogen atom. Everything material has a soul of organized energy emf by definition of it’s existence. pg

  15. adolfogiurfa February 6, 2012 at 10:51 am

    P.G: Did you receive these links?
    An Electric Universe?

    PDF version:
    http://www.mediafire.com/?dt0gc4xbmxzc2bz

  16. P.G. Sharrow February 6, 2012 at 11:57 pm

    @Adolfo; got the links and spent some time reading the science to sage issue. That and keeping up on Chiefio, tallbloke, and WUWT wrecked half my day! I need to create a post on the cause of gravity in a better explanation, with pictures etc. IT is supposed to rain tomorrow so no gardening and pruning to waste my time on. 😆 pg

  17. adolfogiurfa February 7, 2012 at 4:40 am

    @P.G.: BTW: It´s raining where it was not used to: La Niña > 500 mb low temps> almost spotless sun.

  18. Zeke February 7, 2012 at 10:41 am

    PG says, “Aether when it is “condensed” into an organized singularity is a proton or Hydrogen atom.”

    & “and neutrinos(originally described to cover up a math error, same size as electron and photon with little or no mass, spin or charge).”

    Which of these describe your view of a neutrino better?

  19. adolfogiurfa February 7, 2012 at 11:31 am

    @Zeke: Let us forget all those words!, then let us forget the tower we built to reach heaven and start reading, following the alchemists´advice, the “Mutus Liber” (the dumb book-of which I am going to give you its secret meaning: It is that one which was read at the entrance to the mysteries of Delphi: ” γνῶθι σεαυτόν”: “Know thyself”)
    Thus we must follow the advice of Heraclitus of Ephesus: Πάντα ῥεῖ (panta rhei) “everything flows”. The undulatory nature of reality must prevail above all fragmented notions of the universe….or as the EU theorists say: 99.9999 of the universe is plasma (unless your affection for your most dear “stuff” prevails). Remember that Jesus guy? “Leave everything and follow me”; thus before leaving “words” we should abandon the most dear thing for us: Our suffering.

  20. Zeke February 7, 2012 at 11:50 am

    @Adolfo – sage thoughts (:

    When it comes to observations of neutrinos, I think what Nikola Tesla is saying here is that he considered the neutrinos to be the only possible particles which could have held such enormous charges, outside of his vacuum tube. So we know he did not consider these particles to be ionized hydrogen atoms.

  21. adolfogiurfa February 7, 2012 at 11:55 am

    @Zeke: The smaller the wavelength the higher the energy, be it neutrinos or mexicans (call them as you wish).

  22. Zeke February 7, 2012 at 12:40 pm

    I believe you are saying that neutrinos are waves.

  23. P.G. Sharrow February 7, 2012 at 4:04 pm

    About 20 years ago I read a scientific paper published in, IIRC, Scientific American , anyway, the researcher examined over 10,000 plates of collision tracks taken by Lawrence Radiation Labs researchers at Berkley & Livermore. Basically, the conclusion was that neutrinos, photons and electrons were interchangeable as they would change from one to another upon collision with one another.
    The only difference was the EMF signature as the particle passed through a detector.

    To my thinking these are all units or quanta of aether with a different EMF signature due to spin, wobble and travel, or charge in three dimensions of motion. At this level waves and particles look the same. When a electron shell spits off a charge of energy, it comes off like the skin of a balloon that blows away, inside out, from a pinprick.–O >C and travels as a soliton wave, A wave that appears to be a particle and has an Electro Motive Force signature based on it’s travel, spin and wobble ( wobble is spin on a different axis then travel). Spin with little or no travel is static electron, with travel,(as in a rifle bullet) current electron, If there is spin on a second axis (or wobble or tumble) a photon. If there is travel but little or no spin a neutrino is the result. If any of those “particles” motion ceases they cease to exist! pg

  24. adolfogiurfa February 17, 2012 at 9:29 am

    @P.G. Where so ever you could be in the universe/universes the external field (external to a local field) is the “ether”, as such some call it “resistance” to development.

  25. P.G. Sharrow February 17, 2012 at 2:21 pm

    @Adolfo: Zeke came up with this one “I think NASA was describing the effect of earth on “space-time” as being like a sphere dragging honey. ”

    A fairly good visual description, to me! pg

  26. adolfogiurfa February 18, 2012 at 8:28 am

    @P.G.: Time is a product of subjectivity, it does not exist. “Tempo”, frequency, rhythm does. Even Einstein´s famous effect of displacement, bending of light by solar gravity was wrong: It was but the humble “diffraction” caused by a non empty space (then it was thought space was empty). His only surviving idea is that of “relativity”: a particular phenomena is relative to local parameters: Translated this means that if, for example, our earth is measured with a rule measuring one meter then it is as big as we see it, but if measured with a rule of thousand of light years, it becomes a small particle, perhaps an electron, or, if bigger, a photon.

  27. P.G. Sharrow February 18, 2012 at 9:54 am

    I think that “Time” is the dimension that GOD uses to prevent everything from happening at once in our existence. Though in the realm of GOD, time does not exist as a linear thing. In the world of the psychic, time has no significance. Everything exists at once. There is some possibility that the device I am working on may have effects on time as well as space. pg

  28. P.G. Sharrow February 18, 2012 at 10:06 am

    @Adolfo; you might find this interesting

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17073206

    Music could have been an inspiration for the design of Stonehenge, according to an American researcher. pg

  29. adolfogiurfa February 18, 2012 at 10:16 am

    @P.G.: There are only two laws: The law of three and The law of the octave.

please say something interesting

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: