The Angular Momentum Aether: Difference between revisions
Imported from text file |
Imported from text file |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
We demonstrate that angular momentum, which is the observational common factor in all the different orbital motions is sufficient in itself to explain those motions without the usual theoretical elaborations supplied by the likes of Newton, Faraday, Coulomb, et al. | We demonstrate that angular momentum, which is the observational common factor in all the different orbital motions is sufficient in itself to explain those motions without the usual theoretical elaborations supplied by the likes of Newton, Faraday, Coulomb, et al. | ||
[[Category:Scientific Paper]] | [[Category:Scientific Paper|angular momentum aether]] | ||
[[Category:Gravity]] | [[Category:Gravity|angular momentum aether]] | ||
Latest revision as of 21:59, 1 January 2017
| Scientific Paper | |
|---|---|
| Title | The Angular Momentum Aether |
| Author(s) | Vivian Pope |
| Keywords | Angular Momentum, Aether |
| Published | 2000 |
| Journal | None |
Abstract
Modem physics is split over the question of whether or not there is faster than light action-at-a-distance. Those who think there is are further split over whether this action-at-a-distance is 'pure' action-at-a-distance or is mediated by some sort of 'ether'. But since no-one has the faintest idea of what an 'ether' is, how can it be decided whether there is one or not? What we do know is that freely moving bodies form holistically balanced systems of angular momentum in which the measured motion of every one body is linked with that of each and every other. Is this non-local interconnection to be called 'action-at-a-distance' or 'ether'? Does it matter? Can nature care whether we choose to think of that nexus as 'gravitational', 'inertial', 'electric', 'magnetic', 'electromagnetic' or whatever? What difference can it make so long as the observed linking of movements is properly accounted for.
We demonstrate that angular momentum, which is the observational common factor in all the different orbital motions is sufficient in itself to explain those motions without the usual theoretical elaborations supplied by the likes of Newton, Faraday, Coulomb, et al.