🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jan 12, 7:36 pm, "mpc...@gmail.com" <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 12, 5:24 pm, "mpc...@gmail.com" <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 12, 4:46 pm, "Paul Hovnanian P.E." <p...@hovnanian.com> wrote:
>
> > > "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?
>
> > > An attempt to measure the motion of the earth through the aether:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trouton-Noble_experiment
>
> > Another experiment which was an "attempted to detect motion of the
> > Earth through the luminiferous aether."
>
> > This is the same concept of the MM Experiment and both concepts are
> > the opposite of aether displacement.
>
> > > This experiment counters the theory that the aether is 'dragged' along
> > > by the mass of the earth:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammar_experiment
>
> > Another experiment that is vastly different that aether displacement:
>
> > "instead of passing through a static and unmoving aether, massive
> > objects at the earth's surface may drag some of the aether along with
> > them"
>
> > "Oliver Joseph Lodge was one of the first to perform a test of this
> > theory by using massive lead blocks in an experiment that attempted to
> > cause an asymmetrical aether wind"
>
> > Here's the best quote:
>
> > "If there was any wind at all to be detected, the leg of the
> > interferometer with lead, should have experienced less wind than the
> > other leg."
>
> > So far, all of these experiments have done is failed to detect an
> > aether wind.
>
> > As stated previously stated all of this is evidence of aether
> > displacement.
>
> > > further experiments have been done to counter the argument that only
> > > planet or solar sized masses can produce such a drag by
>
> > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Joseph_Lodge
>
> > I did not see any experiments associated with this link.
>
> > > and others.
>
> > > The biggest nail in aether's coffin is that, despite its supporters
> > > attempts, the aether theory predicts no further useful or even
> > > verifiable phenomena. Unlike the Maxwell/Lorentz/Einstein theoretical
> > > support for non-aether EM wave propagation. This has been verified
> > > experimentally and makes additional hypothesis, may of which have also
> > > been confirmed experimentally.
>
> > There is one experiment that is evidence of an aether, but for some
> > reason, it is ignored.
>
> > And that experiment is the Double Slit Experiment which is explained
> > perfectly by aether displacement.
>
> What if Michelson and Morley decided to look for the aether by
> conducting the Double Slit experiment?
>
> The reasoning was that an electron that was moving fast enough would
> not simply be able to flow through the aether.
>
> That it should displace the aether.
>
> It should create a displacement wave in the aether.
>
> What would be the general consensus be about there being an aether if
> this had been the experiment Michelson and Morley performed?

Forget using an electron.

What if Michelson and Morley, in order to determine the existence of
aether, decided to perform the Double Slit experiment with photons?

The reasoning being that if the photon is a (directed/pointed) wave
while traveling through the aether, then a photon fired one at a time
should still create an interference pattern on the screen.

Where would be the general consensus if this experiment had been
performed by Michelson and Morley.