🚀 go-pugleaf

On 8 Jan, 17:28, "mpc...@gmail.com" <mpc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 8, 11:32 am, Aetherist <TheAether...@best.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 06:57:27 -0800 (PST), "mpc...@gmail.com" <mpc...@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.
>
> I like the term aether.
>
> I consider aether to be the basic building block of all forms of
> matter.
>
> In that regards aether can be considered to be matter.
>
> The aether has mass.
>
> If we consider the earth and its interaction with the aether, a
> physical point of the earth's mass cannot exist in the same area of
> three dimensional space as a physical point of mass of the aether.
> Something has to give. Something has to be displaced.
>
> I think the fact that aetherists do not understand that the aether is
> displaced by the objects that exist in it is the reason aether gets
> such a bad rap.
>
> It makes absolutely no sense to me that the MM Experiment was looking
> for the aether wind. The only way for an aether wind to exist is if
> the aether were massless which it isn't if it is a form of matter.
> Also, if the aether were massless, that means it is nothing, it is non-
> existent.
>
> If the aether is a different state of matter and has mass, how can it
> not be displaced?
>
> Aether Displacement explains the observed behaviors in the Double Slit
> Experiment perfectly.
>
> I think the idea of the aether consisting of parts implies friction
> which rules out momentum.
>
> The aether as a singleton can be displaced and offset any lose of
> momentum when it "back-fills" because as a singleton it has an
> "elastic" type property. As it is displaced it gains energy which it
> returns to the objects momentum as it returns to a state of rest.

Amazing discussion, yet Bell's Theorem? Add a dimension and you are
knocking on your own door and let yourself in - and not just now.

Really upper dimensional stuff might be bizzare, to say the least, and
would need a lot more energy to manifest itself.

Thin, silly beings attempted to abduct a farmer by lifting him up into
their craft, then danced about for a bit when they could not lift him
up.

He reported that they seemed to have lost the plot, 'possibly weighed
an ounce'.

Another lot asked , 'What is the time here?'.

Do I know what it means? No! But I think we are possibly dealing with
an advanced version of the
--
foolsrushin.