[geocentrism] Re: Aether effects
- From: "Dr. Neville Jones" <ntj005@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 13:00:10 +0100 (BST)
Philip,
This is interesting because the aether would conceiveably account for the
permittivity of "free space." Also, I have been looking at the gravitational
field decaying over time, in which case its behaviour could be likened to an
inductor-capacitor-resistor circuit.
The strongest evidence for the aether has always been, in my opinion, the
fact that Maxwell derived c directly from it.
I therefore agree with you: the aether cannot be regarded as any form of
material medium.
Neville.
philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Correct Neville, and its just another support for my contention that
you cannot call it a fluid, or substance or attribute to it any physical
properties, such as wind, etc, which sent michelson, morley, einstein et al,
down the wrong corridor.
But perhaps Allen was speaking of synominousness, not being quite couragious
enough to coin a new word...for the analogy of fluid viscoscity in the aether..
arrr. errr how about aetherage, or aethoricity... As I said, who knows how
far science would have advanced had it chosen the aether for serious
consideration .. rather than a hypothetical Newtonianism..
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: Dr. Neville Jones
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 7:31 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Aether effects
Allen,
If the aether has a viscosity, then why do celestial objects that move
through the aether not slow down?
Neville.
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up for
your freeaccount today.
Other related posts:
