[Jerry]

Hi. I just read your paper. When you mentioned the ether causes gravity, you explained why quickly, though I didn’t quite comprehend. Could you possibly clarify and elaborate how the ether causes gravity within two or more objects? I remember in previous conversations, that you had spoken of a “falling ether”. I can’t recall for sure if you meant specifically this is the cause of gravity though. If I may ask, please describe more of what the ether is, and how it works. You had also stated that the ether consists of tiny particles that travel in all directions. I would guess that this is a much different view than what Fatio, Newton, Michelson and Morley ever thought. So would you say in your view that the ether is “unfixed and flowing” instead of “rigid and stationary”? Thanks. 🙂

• This reply was modified 4 months ago by  Jerry.

[Jerry]

Also, would you say the velocity of light is currently known, or possible to find? How does light propagate in your view? Is it always relative to the ether? Does c seem to vary given our earthly perspective? Is the ether “stationary”? Have we ever found out how fast the earth travels through the ether?

[John-Erik]

Jerry

In the paper I stated: “The ether is the cause of gravity”.

No, my theory is very, very like Fatio’s. The only difference is that I assume ether particles being absorbed by matter – instead of colliding with matter.

Ether particles are moving in all directions. Therefore the state of motion of the ether is an average value over many particles.

The state of motion of light is well known and equal to c. The problem is: in relation to what? My answer is: in relation to the ether’s state of motion.

The ether tells matter how to move, or a free body approaches the ether’s motion. The Earth does not travel in relation to the ether. The largest ether motion is in radial direction, and this component is generated by Earth (11.2 km/sec). A smaller horizontal ether wind is caused by the rotation of our planet ( 0.465 km/sec at the Equator).

John-Erik

[Jerry]

Hi John-Erik. Thanks for your response.

If the aether exists, and if the velocity of light is always constant relative to the aether, that would mean that from our earthly perspective, that c is always variable and transforming its perceived value, given that the earth is always in motion relative to the aether. If this is so, how could we possibly discover the velocity of light?

[John-Erik]

Jerry

The ether controls the motion of Earth, and therefore the only ether motion we can observe is the motion that is caused by the Earth. That means a radial ether wind of -11.2 km/sec equal to the escape velocity. We know that particles approaching Earth with very low initial speed will hit our planet with that velocity. Since ether particles have mass they also do that, although they are to small for observation. We can also observe the ether wind due planetary rotation, 0.465 km/sec near the Equator. This speed is constant.

We have not measured light speed – but instead two-way light speed.

John-Erik

[Jerry]

Hi John-Erik.

So would you suggest that light travels at a different velocity (such as slower, or faster) after it reflects off of something? Or is it possible to know or find out? Why would light travel at a different velocity after it reflects?

How much does the ether actually absorb the earth as it orbits the sun? Is your view that the ether is sort of “densely concentrated” around large celestial objects? and more “sparsely scattered” in outer space? Does the ether somewhat “conform” to the external shape of objects, or does it thoroughly absorb them? What is your view of length contraction? Where the ether is theorized to “push” and shorten objects? Of course, many etherists accept the idea.

[John-Erik]

Jerry

If the mirror is not moving in relation to the ether there is no reason to a change of light speed.

The ether does not absorb Earth, but Earth absorbs ether.

No, I do not think that ether is concentrated around the Earth. Instead, the ether flow is very slightly reduced in direction away from the Earth. This very, very small effect is gravity – a weak force.

Gravity is a pushing force, but length contraction is not caused by an external force. My view of length contraction is based on an effect in moving forces between atoms in a crystal for controlling their separations. so, two effects in opposite directions are not exact equal, so a second order effect arises. My length contraction is 2 times larger than the FitzGerald contraction.

All these questions are answered much better and more in detail in my papers. So, read my papers first.

John-Erik

[Jerry]

Hi John-Erik.

It would seem the most improbable coincidence that the mirror a light reflects off of, would align perfectly with the ether. And if it did, how would we know? How exactly to determine how fast the earth or anything else travels through the ether? Has this ever been discovered? and if so, how?

If the earth absorbs the ether, why isn’t it also the other way around? What is the difference? Why isn’t it simply seen that they absorb each other?

Which papers? and where to find them?

Thanks. I’ll respond more later.

[John-Erik]

Jerry

Michelson-Morley tried to detect the ether wind with a useless method.

I said that ether particles are moving in all directions, and they can be absorbed by matter. But absorption in only one direction means, interaction that can by in both directions.

I have articles on:
CNPS
GSJournal
ResearchGate
Academia

John-Erik

[Jerry]

Hi John-Erik.

Of course, it has taken me quite some time to respond. My apologies for that. I guess this is the main reason why.

When you say to read your papers, where you go into more detail, why couldn’t you just copy and paste the relevant sentences or paragraphs, so as to prevent me having to search to find them? Or at least, could you name the specific paper(s) so it’ll seem easier to find what you want me to read?

Thanks.

• This reply was modified 2 months, 2 weeks ago by  Jerry.

[John-Erik]

Jerry

Here is a link

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374554272_The_three_great_problems_in_physics

John-Erik