[geocentrism] Re: New Scientist Mag. The ether rediscovered!
- From: "Jack Lewis" <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 20:17:12 +0100
Dear Allan,
Please rewrite this as a letter to New Scientist. The address is
letters@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I will pray that they will publish it
Well done!
Jack
----- Original Message -----
From: "Allen Daves" <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 6:10 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: New Scientist Mag. The ether rediscovered!
> The most interesting thing concerning this article to me is the fact that
they are openly outlining how they are going to commit fraud, literally.
Here is what I mean. They say they are going to test the MM Experiment. to
do this they are going to increase the sensitivity of the apparatus by as
much a 100,000 times. Now that is what MG experiment did, it had to because
the effect it was trying to measure was so much smaller. The MG experiment
was to show the spin effects of the aether relative to the earth. The MM
experiment was to show the orbital effects of the earth around the sun
relative to the aether. The problem was that MM failed to show any orbital
speed around the sun while the MG experiment showed the relative spin
effects of the aether relative to the earth.
>
> Prediction: They will most certainly get a positive result. The technique
of this type experiment is valid.
>
> The Fraud: They will be in essence using MG results to produce a positive
MM result. They will then say see it was there all the time. The equipment
jsut was not sensitive enough. Since the MM experiment showed basically a
null result and the MG experiment gave the exact expected results, and that
did not make sense, they through both experiments out. Now the are going to
resurrect the aether. All this, while simultaneously maintaining the
Copernican paradigm by doing s switch-a-rue, slight of hand. Use MG results
to produce the necessary MM outcome, Still ignore the MG experiment while
all the time using its results. And they are practically bragging about
this!
>
> Allen
> Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Philip,
>
> You stated:
>
> "Electromagnetic phenomena needs an aether to exist or operate in, but
this does not mean that the aether is a "physical medium" that propagates
waves in the mechanical sense. Electromagnetic phenomena is not a mechanical
entity. It is far bigger than a case of "apples" versus "oranges" An
alternating magnetic field at 1000hz IS NOT an alternating pressure wave in
a medium at 1000 hz. Their only commonality is mathematical. It is a mistake
to make them analogous in reality. That EMR varies in wavelength and speed
in different physical mediums should say something to these people."
>
>
>
> You could be right, but not necessarily the way you suggest. Although
Energy and mass can be equivalent they do not behave alike. They are two
different manifestations of what we have to work with in the universe. The
differences through the differing physical mass/mediums could just be due to
the inherent disturbances caused by the interaction /Function of both, that
I spoke of earlier.
>
>
>
> I have suggested that the primary "forces" of the aether might apply
primarily to electromagnetic phenomena "EMR", where any effects on mass are
a function of the properties of that mass and the energy within the aether,
not necessarily the aether directly. The aether would serve as the primary
conduit for electromagnetic energy, something akin to currents with eddies
flowing within those currents. This would account for planetary epicyclical
paths. The "aether" in this sense might only affect the mass as a function
of the energy flowing through it (currents with eddies) and the properties
of that mass. Although the aether would be a ridged solid, spinning, the
energy flows within would behave with fluid like qualities. The mass would
be carried by the energy flows themselves, not the aether. However, because
the energy flows (currents with eddies) are located within the aether and
the aether is spinning, the Energy flows (currents with eddies) would be
carried along with th
> e aether
> and take on the overall spin, around the earth, of the aether. While any
mass located in these energy "EMR" flows would be carried along with those
currents and eddies of energy. The Aether does give EMR/energy a physical a
medium because "free" space has physical properties. That has already been
demonstrated. EMR in turn gives mass vectors, and the interactions/function
of both yields "Forces": Gravity, centrifugal, centripetal.. etc. However,
these two cannot interact with each other with out small
disturbances/perturbations of both; hence the variations in each. Just as
EMR is affected by different physical mediums, those same mediums are
affected by the EMR that they are in contact with: i.e. current through a
wire or laser through a fiber optic line and Vice versa. We use this
principle in high end military detection systems as well a rudimentary
trigger mechanisms.
>
>
>
> Allen
>
>
> Philip wrote:
> That article was very apt and relevant Jack. Notice it confirms what I
said, in that they went at it with a false presumption. such as,
> "they reasoned, then all celestial bodies must have some velocity relative
to it. So someone standing on Earth and facing in the direction of its
motion
> through space would have an "ether wind" rushing past their face.
According to this thinking, a light wave travelling with the ether wind
would seem to move faster than a light wave heading into it. And Michelson
and Morley set out to prove this."
>
> They assumed the aether was stationary, and everything else moved through
it, instead of with it. These modernists in their new experiment have not
left any opening to accept a different point of view which contradicts this
false assertion.
>
> Of course the .rotating aether near the surface cuts through the
experiment, not the other way, so even had they detected the miniscule
effect, it would prove nothing.
>
> But there is the further complication. The speed of the earths alleged
movement of 30 kilometres per second arouind the sun can have no relevance
if it is non existent. . They did mention 8k per second, detected, fut the
equatorial aether speed is 1670k/h is less than 0.5km/sec. So methinks there
is something wrong with the experiment in any case.
>
> Why move away from a vacuum, and into dense gases? Their argument is of
course that the size of the equipment and a reduced wavelength would
increase accuracy. I would not trust any measurement outside a vacuum, or
outside of a solid which would suit their reasoning. Gases are subject to
molecular activity and thus irregular movement even in a constant? ?
temperature. .
>
> Finally the biggest presumption of all that has no merit in my thinking,
is to presume that EMR in an aether medium, which is not a material subject
to mechaical law, (other than as proposed in inertia) can be made synonomous
with wave motion theory as involved mechanically in the propagation of
sound. The aether will not propagate sound.
>
> I rewrite the propagation of radio and light another way. Electromagnetic
phenomena needs an aether to exist or operate in, but this does not mean
that the aether is a "physical medium" that propagates waves in the
mechanical sense. Electromagnetic phenomena is not a mechanical entity. It
is far bigger than a case of "apples" versus "oranges" An alternating
magnetic field at 1000hz IS NOT an alternating pressure wave in a medium at
1000 hz. Their only commonality is mathmatical. It is a mistake to make them
analogous in reality.
>
> That EMR varies in wavelength and speed in different physical mediums
should say something to these people.
>
> Philip.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.8.4 - Release Date: 27/03/2005
>
>
Other related posts:
