🚀 go-pugleaf

On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 06:57:27 -0800 (PST), "mpc755@gmail.com" <mpc755@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Jan 8, 2:52�am, john291208 <vega...@accesscomm.ca> wrote:
>> On Jan 8, 1:43 am, john291208 <vega...@accesscomm.ca> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Jan 8, 12:25 am, Aetherist <TheAether...@best.net> wrote:
>>
>> > > On Wed, 07 Jan 2009 21:26:43 -0800, "Paul Hovnanian P.E." <p...@hovnanian.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > >"mpc...@gmail.com" wrote:
>>
>> > > >> On Jan 5, 9:43 pm, "Paul Hovnanian P.E." <p...@hovnanian.com> wrote:
>> > > >> > "mpc...@gmail.com" wrote:
>>
>> > > >> > [snip]
>>
>> > > >> > > Bullets have mass. How does a massless particle travel through a void?
>>
>> > > >> > > It doesn't. It requires a medium and the medium is aether.
>>
>> > > >> > What does having/not having mass have to do with traveling/not traveling
>> > > >> > through a void?
>>
>> > > >> > --
>> > > >> > Paul Hovnanian � � mailto:P...@Hovnanian.com
>> > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > >> > Deja fubar: The feeling that you've made the same mistake before.
>>
>> > > >> To me, there are only two ways for something to have momentum:
>>
>> > > >> 1. The object has mass and can have momentum and since it has mass it
>> > > >> can exist on its own and does not require a medium in order for it to
>> > > >> maintain its momentum.
>> > > >> 2. The object is a wave, or a burst, that travels through a medium.
>>
>> > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum#Momentum_in_electromagnetism
>>
>> > > >> How can something without mass exist in a void (i.e. exist in
>> > > >> nothing), let alone travel through it?
>>
>> > > >What is mass? You might think you know, in the classical physics sense.
>> > > >But until you can explain what it is, its your job to answer the
>> > > >question 'how can something have mass'. Void or no void.
>>
>> > > Mass is the quantity of matter which is determined from its weight
>> > > (gravitational mass), or, from Newton's second law (inertial mass),
>> > > i.e. related to the definitions of force and acceleration. �Hence it
>> > > defines both the concepts of inertia and gravity.
>>
>> > > It may not be a fundamental property, but, instead, a by-product of
>> > > simple changes states of momentum of the quantum entities we conceive
>> > > of as 'matter'.
>>
>> �Energy moving through the aether creates the standing waves known as
>> �light and matter. Matter is a standing wave that (obviously) stands
>> �still.
>> �Light is a standing wave that (surprisingly) travels at c.
>>
>> �The aether is a spherical fish bowl full of marbles and each marble
>> �is a spherical fish bowl.
>>
>> �You can never make anything simpler because at every point
>> �everything is infinitely complex.
>>
>> You recognize that everything is self, and so you are selfish.
>>
>> �john
>> �galaxy model
>
>I like Einstein's definition even though I'm not 100% sure about the
>idea of motion not being able to be applied to it. Even if motion
>cannot be applied to the aether, that doesn't mean it cannot be
>displaced. The concept of aether displacement is different than the
>idea of motion not being applied to the aether which I take to mean
>the aether cannot flow.

One has to wonder why you demand that it must be displaced.  Maxwell,
Kelvin, Helmholtz and most other aetherists both classical and modern
(like Dirac) would argue otherwise.  Aether is the constitute of
everything, including matter.  It is simply different states of that
underlying substrate.  If for some pyschological reason one doesn't 
like the term aether use the term sub-space in its place :)

>"But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality
>characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts which may
>be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it."

If you wanted to track the individual parts (molecules) of a volume 
of air it is beyond any known means of doing so.  We deal with it
in the same manner as aether, namely using known basic properties 
of these parts in bulk, a.k.a. Continuum Mechanics and hydrodynamical
equations/expressions.  And these have bulit-in limitations becoming
increasingly less accurate as one approaches the scale of the particles
mean-free length.