🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jan 13, 11:25 pm, "Paul Hovnanian P.E." <p...@hovnanian.com> wrote:
> john291208 wrote:
>
> > On Jan 12, 3:55 pm, "Paul Hovnanian P.E." <p...@hovnanian.com> wrote:
> > > "mpc...@gmail.com" wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 12, 10:40 am, "mpc...@gmail.com" <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Jan 12, 8:13 am, "mpc...@gmail.com" <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Jan 11, 2:58 pm, "Paul Hovnanian P.E." <p...@hovnanian.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > "mpc...@gmail.com" wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On Jan 8, 9:03 pm, "Paul Hovnanian P.E." <p...@hovnanian.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > "mpc...@gmail.com" wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Indeed!  And how does a particle not have mass?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > If its not really a particle in the classical physics sense.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Explain how a non-classical massless particle exists in nothing.
>
> > > > > > > > > What particle? Light is an electromagnetic wave. The idea that its a
> > > > > > > > > particles is a simplification used to explain its quantum nature.
>
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Paul Hovnanian     mailto:P...@Hovnanian.com
> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > If your only tool is a hammer then every problem looks like a thumb.
>
> > > > > > > > Wikipedia:
>
> > > > > > > > "A massless particle is a particle whose invariant mass is zero.
> > > > > > > > Currently, the only known massless particles are gauge bosons: the
> > > > > > > > photon (carrier of electromagnetism) and the gluon (carrier of the
> > > > > > > > strong force)."
>
> > > > > > > > "The behavior of massless particles is understood by virtue of special
> > > > > > > > relativity. For example, these particles must always move at the speed
> > > > > > > > of light. See Mass in special relativity."
>
> > > > > > > > "General relativity implies that gravitation is quantized by the
> > > > > > > > graviton, which is a massless tensor boson"
>
> > > > > > > > How does an electromagnetic wave travel through nothing?
>
> > > > > > > I'm afraid you will have to go back and study the basics. Start with
> > > > > > > static electric and magnetic fields. They produce a force that has an
> > > > > > > effect over a distance with no intervening medium.
>
> > > > > Show me the experimental evidence where it is proven there is no
> > > > > medium.
>
> > > > > Why have the probability of a wave when you can have an actual wave in
> > > > > the aether?
>
> > > > And don't reply with the MM Experiment.
>
> > > > The MM Experiment looked for the aether wind.
>
> > > No, it did not. It looked for the motion of the earth through the
> > > aether.
>
> > > > Aether displacement is the opposite of the concept of an aether wind.
>
> > > > The fact that the MM Experiment did not find and aether wind is
> > > > evidence of aether displacement, not that there is no aether.
>
> > > No. The MM experiment failed to find aether moving relative to the earth
> > > due to the earth's motion. There is no aether to displace.
>
> > It assigned properties to the aether (interaction with a moving body
> > of matter)
> > and then tested on the basis of these properties
> > when it knew nothing about the aether in the first place.
>
> > How stupid are these people?
>
> Pretty smart, actually. They hypothesized that the one property that
> anything has is its existence in space. Given that, any other thing has
> a position and velocity relative to it.
>
> If light traveled in a medium made up of anything, then its velocity
> relative to that medium would add to, or subtract from an observer
> moving with respect to that medium. They found no such effect.
>
> > They haven't ruled out the aether.
> > All they've ruled out is the effect they decided to search for.
>
> The existence of something. Unless this aether you propose has NO
> properties. No mass (density), no position or velocity in space, etc.
>
> What you have to do is to propose an experiment that measures some
> property of your aether not already explained by other theories.
>
If I have to do something, I never
want to.
But I like puzzles. And there
is lots of data- undoubtedly some of
which is wrong, intentionally or otherwise.

The aether I propose
has no properties- other than its structure,
the old fishbowl full of marbles which are
themselves fishbowls full of marbles argument-
and its nature, which is electromagnetic.
Aether is pre-matter. It has no mass. Mass is
actually not something that is a constant, so it
is rather a poor yardstick. Spherical standing
waves of energy use the aether as a matrix
in the same way a water wave uses the water
as a matrix. The water doesn't come with the energy,
it transmits the energy.
john