🚀 go-pugleaf

On Nov 14, 11:40 pm, "hhc...@yahoo.com" <hhc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Nov 13, 2:13 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >http://ias.umn.edu/pdf/TimeandRelativity-Pooley.pdf
> > p. 11: "Problem for Lorentz's theory: no sign of ether drift (= motion
> > of ether with respect to earth). Many failed attempts to detect ether
> > drift, one of the most famous ones by Americans Albert A. Michelson
> > (1852-1931) and Edward W. Morley (1838-1923).
> > Explanation: compensating effect: length of interferometer arm changes
> > as it rotates: parallel to ether drift it is shorter than
> > perpendicular to the ether drift
> > Contraction (deformation) hypothesis: an object moving with a velocity
> > v through the ether contracts by a factor (1-v^2 c^2)^(1/2) in the
> > direction of motion."
>
> > Another explanation that essentially could have been advanced by
> > FitzGerald, Lorentz etc. if they had been less prejudiced in favour of
> > the ether theory:
>
> >http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00001743/02/Norton.pdf
> > John Norton: "Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as
> > evidence for the principle of relativity, whereas later writers almost
> > universally use it as support for the light postulate of special
> > relativity......THE MICHELSON-MORLEY EXPERIMENT IS FULLY COMPATIBLE
> > WITH AN EMISSION THEORY OF LIGHT THAT CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT
> > POSTULATE."
>
> > Which explanation would have been more correct?
>
> > Pentcho Valev
>
> Pentcho, if you take the time to understand the conventional concepts
> of electromagnetic waves and the works of James Clerk Maxwell, there
> is simply no reason to persit in the belief that a "luminiferous
> aether" exists.  Also, the aether theory has so many holes in it that
> it can be dismissed out of hand.  The most notable of these is the
> notion that the aether can propagate transverse waves, somthing it
> itself that would require the aether to be a solid, since only a solid
> media transmits transverse waves, which makes it a bit difficult for
> the earth to traverse through it.
>
> Maxwell explained the concept of electromagnetic radiation over a
> century ago, and Hertz confirmed it. When you understand it, which is
> a rather trivial concept,

         Electromagnetic radiation, a trivial concept ?????
        Well, is it ? For who?
I recall a university  professor saying that he was teaching
electromagnetism for over 30 years, yet he could not say that
he really understood what electromagnetic waves are !
And I incline to believe him. He was being honest .
There are modern works that show the e.m. radiation as
longitudinal waves too. Then, where is the triviality?

> there is simply no need for archaic aether
> theory, except for the terminally brain dead. The basic concept is
> rather simple: A time varying magnetic field gives rise to to an
> associated time varying electric field. A time varying electric field,
> in turn gives rise to a time varying magnetic field. Without even
> knowing the mathematics, most people can realize that these two field
> effects marry together, and give birth to electromagnetic radiation.
> The rest is in the details although even the details are rather
> general.  Everything from radio waves, TV signals, light, x-rays, and
> gamma rays are electromagnetic radiation.  All follow the same rules
> and all have the identical mechanism. Only their wavelengths are
> different.
>
> Radio and TV signals can freely propagate through space and be
> received on an antenna on top of your home, or can be conducted
> through a coaxial cable to our homes. At shorter wavelengths, X-rays
> and gamma rays are more difficult to route, manage and control, but to
> some extent that is being done today.
>
> At any rate, the theory of the "luminiferous aether" was a good stab
> during the 19th century of trying to explain effects that were not
> then readily understood, but both the concepts of the Luminerous
> Aether and its existance have long been disproven and replaced with
> current and more productive concepts.
>
> I hope that this post does not stomp on anyone's toes. It is intended
> to be helpful.
>
> Harry C.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Regards, LL