[geocentrism] Re: Aether effects

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: