[geocentrism] Re: Aether effects

Color reset..?......me in blue?
  Allen, 
  Enough colours - especially after your pale blue! 
  I now see what you are trying to get at with the clockwork orange "example," 
but the essence of the aether argument is what effect the aether would have on 
anything moving through it. The aether would have to carry the object along in 
one instance, but also have no impeding effect on the object going against the 
aether (this is what I believe Martin and I are talking about).  Just as in a 
stream all objecst do not move at the same rate. There are other factors in 
play.....I think those factors can be akin to the same factors that affect 
objects in stagnate and stream waterways....in terms of curents, mass, volume 
and wave forms all interacting together 
  Water is basically incompressible, so the body of water in front of the boat 
acts in such a way as to stop the boat, although a water current would carry 
the boat along with it. 
  vibrations in water will affect the motions of objects/ alge, micro organisms 
  and particles in the water but not necessarily boats and ships.....However, 
large vibrations cause tidal waves and affect small objects different then 
larger mor volumous objects......
   
  I have no problem with this, of course, but this is where the analogy ends 
when solid matter, rather than deBroglie wavelength "particles," are considered 
in an aether. 
  I am not addressing deDroglie wavelength particles they are theoretical 
specifics i am not ready to take on. I am using basic experiment and 
observations to deduce a fluid like medium (AKA aether) that is causing all of 
those effects that are similar to other observable reproducable fluid like 
qualities.........I am starting with basic actual observations on light and 
spinning gyros to extrapolate the fundamental nature of the aether not first 
jump to particles of infinite density and try to attempt to work backwards.... 
The fact is O& E in the ordinary world as well as with light and gyros indicate 
that what ever this medium is it behaves at least thus far like a fluid.. 
Gravity behaves like a vibration in a medium presumably the same medium in 
question.....If we are to assume that the universe is not so strange as to be 
absurd or beyond any and all comprehension then it is reasonable to suggest 
that fluid (aether) might behave similar to other fluids in our everyday
 observable world..the experiments not just conjecture on particles and such do 
suggest that there are some very striking similarities what other similarities 
might we use to explain or hypothizie about its other functions that we cannot 
directly observe....? Having said that if MM is true then yes we can measure 
the aethers velocity about the earth but that does not dictate that there are 
no other currents or eddies out there particularly when no one has bothered to 
conduct MM anywhere else in the universe say at the Geo stat location...I don?t 
know all the answers I admit that but i am point out that there are reasonable 
conjecture based on what we have to date which is far more reasonable then the 
MS assertions which are contrary to the very O&E that are supposed to support 
them, unless of course you assume that MS is true first ans that what you 
really see is a MS assertion that although things may look like a duck quack 
like a duck walk like a duck they cant possibly
 be a duck because well...."science" demands...?...there is good reason to 
extrapolate theories of the aether in terms of a fluid the example to water i 
think is consistent with what experiments have actually been performed will 
that continue to hold true i don?t know...but if gravity is a vibration and 
celestial mechanics are due to fluid like currents on masses of certain 
thresholds again is a reproducible experimentally falsifiable theory where as a 
universe that never ends and looks the same form all points with in it is not 
falsifiable or verifiable.... if gravity is a "instantaneous" wave and the 
aether fluid like ..now we can begin to extrapolate the necessary density of 
this medium the Aether and the frequency of Gravity if the objects move via 
currents, with the currents. Further, all objects exhibit gravity at a given 
rate without moving the bodies out of their respective currents & or eddies... 
... now we can begin to extrapolate the intensity of the gravity wave
 as a function of intensity, frequency and the rate...........
   
  I ask once again, where is your evidence (not assumptions) that light is 
deviated off course by some kind of E-W bias?
  I never said it deviated its course I said just the opposite that it does not 
deviate its course but rather although the direction of travel for the medium 
can and is measured (light not isotropic) and that motion and direction 
detected, the strait path for a laser holds true in water as well as the 
"aether"... therfore the fluid like nature of water is still a valid analogy...
   
   
   
  

"Dr. Neville Jones" <ntj005@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
    Allen,
   
  Enough colours - especially after your pale blue!
   
  I now see what you are trying to get at with the clockwork orange "example," 
but the essence of the aether argument is what effect the aether would have on 
anything moving through it. The aether would have to carry the object along in 
one instance, but also have no impeding effect on the object going against the 
aether (this is what I believe Martin and I are talking about).
   
  Water is basically incompressible, so the body of water in front of the boat 
acts in such a way as to stop the boat, although a water current would carry 
the boat along with it. I have no problem with this, of course, but this is 
where the analogy ends when solid matter, rather than deBroglie wavelength 
"particles," are considered in an aether.
   
  I ask once again, where is your evidence (not assumptions) that light is 
deviated off course by some kind of E-W bias?
   
  Neville.
  

Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
  My responce to you in green....Me in Light blue
  In green response to me in Blue :
    Me in blue response to you in red
  Planets, stars, the Sun and the Moon are all moving not only with but through 
the aether, yet the movements of the heavens are like clockwork. There is no 
slowing down of these objects.
   
  I think you you looking at this backwards...If you take a steel rod and force 
it through a orange you can do that........ but if every thing observed were 
equivalent to pushing a rod through a orange then there would be no way to 
distinguish this from anything else because that is/ would be the normal 
resistance to all mechanics observed. We could theorize about what the orange 
is made of and what the nature of the force we are using is but at the end of 
the day it would just be normal with no metric by which to evaluate that force 
. Now take that rod and put it in a drill and cause it to spin it will go 
through the orange a little more readily..only now do we a point of reference 
from which to establish any meaningful measure of the force required in our 
everyday mechanical exercise. You can measure the natural resistance because 
you would have nothing to measure its against however in the DePalumer and 
Aspden motor we can see that the addtiona of spin makes pathways
 though the aether and can be explained/ correlate to at least some ordinary 
fluid /hydro-dynamic process.....Take a spinning rod place it in a liquid and 
spin at high velocity then disconnect the rod such that the rod free 
floats,,now the rod will eventually come to a standstill but there is still a 
vortex of water that won?t have enough force to spin the rod but will enable 
less force to be use to get the rod spinning again...this is experimentally 
reproducible and easily understood..now as for the Moon and stars they are 
travailing with the aether why would there be any resistance to the aether such 
that it would cause them to slow down or act like anything other then Clock 
work ? If a fluid is spinning or in motion a object will travel with it now 
some objects are smaller and denser while others are more massive but just as 
in the case of any river if you observe all objects in it do not travel at the 
same speed but neither do they all come to a stop because of the
 resistance to the water...I think you are looking at it backwards.. 
   
  The objects in a river are all flowing in the same way as the river. Planets, 
for example, are not always flowing in the same way as the aether, but often 
against it. 
   
    How do you know they are not flowing with the aether?....The aether 
although we may consider it "homogeneous" does not necessarily mean 
unidirectional. The "homogeneous" oceans have many different currents that run 
in different directions and in different layers although they are found in the 
same sea water that circulates throughout the oceans..

   
  As for your example of the clockwork orange, I do not follow your reasoning.
    You would not/ could not objectively measure the resistance to the orange 
if everything were in a orange but as in the spinning gyroscope you can measure 
the difference in resistence spinning has on the resistance moving through a 
orange/ aether...if everything weighed as much as I do then there would be no 
point of reference that would give any meaning to 180lbs. How do you weigh the 
ultimate scale you weigh everything else against?..You cant use everything else 
you weighed on that scale to weigh itself, that has no meaning. That would 
still just be equivocating to itself which means what .....nothing 
objectively..? everything moving in the aether would must be measured against 
it so how do you measure the aether?..you cant directly but you can denote 
changes in it based on various criteria it is those changes that give 
comprehensible useful meaning to the aether...or you could just ignore those 
differences and say it does not exist at all, because without those
 differences there would be no objective meaning to it... resistance, 
viscosity, density or otherwise...?... That what MS attempts but that is not 
LO&E..

   
   
  The resistance is there for sure but what you measure is something that 
causes less resistance such as a spinning object in the river not some 
resistance to the river that will eventually cause the objects to come to a 
stop or slow down....the currents and wave forms in the river have far more 
force in them then the water in a stagnate pond...There is resistance in both 
the river water and pond water but the resistance can really only be observed 
and measured in terms of change in motion within the river or pond because tho 
objects in it are travailing with it. The only resistance that can be measured 
is the observed fact that some objects do move faster then others Moon sun 
stars.. .......However, even in a pond that is perfectly still a small boat 
will drift almost indefinitely if pushed 
   
  No, I not not think that it will. Please explain the physics behind your 
assumption of the continual drifting of the boat.
   
    not withstanding the other influences such as gravity and surface tension 
and such things about which we are attempting to ascertain about the aether 
itself in these very discussions............If there were no wave form created 
in front of the boat then there would be little to not resistance for the 
boat.......(take a boat and push it along a still body of water wach what 
hapens and how/when it slows down). The only idfference here with the aether is 
the energy threshold limits for any given wave form.....As I cited in the 
previous experiments they give us figures and observations to evaluate and 
measure those threshold limits in respect to ordinary matter........in fluids 
"resistance" is almost exclusively a function of the wave forms acting in any 
given fluid(s). Although the nature of any wave forms in a fluid medium are 
determined via the properties of the medium the fluid medium itself does not 
determine resistance only the nature of the wave forms travailing
 though a medium will. That is one of the most basic differences between a 
"solid" and a "fluid"..and there are all extremes in between.. the diference 
between solids and liquids is merely the energy thershold limit for any given 
waveform or matter to traverse it/through it.,,once that energy threshold limit 
is overcome the only issues to "resitance" is the type of wave forms 
created...this is why super cooled simcondutors become superconductors they 
lower the energy threshold limits for certain wave forms. 

   
  until such time as some wave form created by its relative movement to the 
edge of the pond or some other object in the pond reflects back to eventually 
cause it to stop but the waves created by also allow it to resume with less 
force the initial force needed ..There is nothing new or different 
here......GRAVITY pushing waves!
   
  Furthermore, when I was associated with firing powerful lasers directly up 
through the atmosphere, I noticed no such tendency of light to deviate from its 
initial direction (other than random refraction of course).
   
  As for lasers they are disturbed in a measurable e-w direction way just as 
laser light is disturbed in a measurable way via a flowing river ( you can 
detect the direction of the river)but the direction of the beam itself is not 
altered if it originates in the water just as the direction of a beam is not 
altered in the aether.
   
  You are talking of the Arago effect of light going through glass, water, 
etc., which is completely different. Where is the evidence that light is bent 
with any form of E-W bias?
   
    If the aether behaves/ exhibits properties like a fluid (the afore 
mentioned experiments shows that it does) then it does not matter the principle 
is the same for the aether as it is for a laser in a river...motion affects the 
light not necessarily the path of light ..in the same way that in a river it 
clearly moves other objects in the river even in various eddies and such but 
the path of a laser is not affected. call it what you want but light does not 
behave the same as ordinary matter in any theorectical frame work based on O&E. 
We should be looking a it as a Hydrodynamic process waves and 
all................

   
  Neville.
    
---------------------------------
  Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Try it 
now.

Other related posts: