[David]

Tell me how aether can model laser light.

[David]

It’s not a question of whether Einstein was for or against aether. It is a question of whether it is a good model. Mainstream science is a joke. That I agree. But the aether model has too many flaws that none of the aetherists address.

[David]

This distribution of continents is very wrong! See Dr. James Maxlow.

[David]

If aether falls, wouldn’t that affect light waves in aether?

[David]

That is what the debate is about. By the way, I said “particle model” (not plural) as in my fathers model for light which is not a photon model.

[David]

Everyone: this is a debate on aether’s existence. There are many many problems associated with aether and that is one of the problems: aetherists don’t address them. Or at best, they cherry-pick one or two and ignore the rest. Aetherists need to confront these problems and that is what the debate is about. This is not a talk on “aether” and how well it works or how an aether model does “X”. It is strictly a debate on whether or not aether is a better model when compared to the other two models of lattice and the particle model (Bob de Hilster).

[David]

Jerry, you are cutting and pasting from the internet and it is bringing in tags that are quite annoying to read. PLEASE REMOVE the tags before posting. Thanks!

[David]

@jimmarsen and @jerry, what time zone are you both in so we can set up a meeting?

[David]

Super! Jerry, we can schedule a time where you would be home. We need to all meet via zoom to discuss.

[David]

Shiva: There are many problems with aether theory. The “desire” to give physical form to light has overshadowed the real problems with an mechanical aether. There are other physical models but people are blinded by aether and get stuck there.

[David]

Small particles moving in all directions is not an aether. It is a gravitic field.

[David]

I say that my father and I’s particle model could all be wrong.

Can you say that the aether model can be wrong?

If you don’t answer that with a “yes” or answer with a long diatribe, than my point is proven at least with you. My point is simple: I have never heard an aetherist say that the aether model could be wrong. That is the definition of arrogance. That is not a “personal” attack. It is an observation.

I like Jeff Yee’s model which is an aether model. I like Borchardt’s model which is an aether model. So how is it you “know” who I am???

As for knowing “who” I am, I do know who I am and those people I our organization know who I am as well. Your “aggression” is a personal one not a scientific one. If what you said bothered me, than you would be right. But what you say has no basis and personal attacks only show emotion, not logic.

You are right and I am wrong. You know that. So let’s leave me be wrong and go on.

• This reply was modified 2 years, 1 month ago by  David.

[David]

David, my suggestion is for the pro aether side to present why aether is a good model. The con aether side will present arguments why aether is a poor model. I will not be moderating. The audience will be moderating. Once the con side presents the problems, the aether side can respond for one final time and then we open it up to the audience.

Please remember: no one is right or wrong. There are differing opinions. I myself will never say aether is wrong. To me, it is a model with too many problems for ME to accept. But I know that it can be right. Very few aethrists if any say that aether may in fact be wrong. I myself have a model of the entire universe with my father. Both my father and I say it could all be wrong.

Humility is greatly lacking in our community. That is a HUGE problem.

Format:

1) Aethrists present why the model is a good one

2) I and others who are on the other side will present why aether is not a good model

3) Aethrists will rebut the objections

4) Audience will chime in

[David]

David, you are right. I contradicted myself. I’m trying to come up with these things to make an interesting debate. Any help on how to do this would be greatly appreciated.

[David]

David, maybe you could present your case through some slides. But we are not going to talk about the “mechanics” of aether. This is strictly a debate on the existence of aether and its problems.