Member John-Erik
MemberForum Replies Created
-
Gene
Along the equator around Earth the number of oceans and mountains does not change with growing Earth. Around an old tree you find the same. So, wavelength and amplitude must increase.
John-Erik
-
Gene
Compare expanding Earth with the bark on an old tree. Increasing diameter means that the number of wave forms around the diameter is unchanged. So, they are increasing in amplitude and wavelength.
John-Erik
-
Jerry
Anti-parallel does not mean orthogonal.
MMX stated a hypothesis that was not fulfilled ->no result -> no new knowledge.
You have not got the result zero. You have no result at all. You have confused the value zero with not existing value.
John-Erik
-
Jerry
Light in MMX is moving in 2 anti-parallel directions and are affected by the ether wind.
The separation between atoms is controlled by forces moving in 2 anti-parallel directions.
So, compensation in measuring arm.
Mirrors in MMX are controlling phase and ether motion inside wave fronts becomes irrelevant.
Wave front orientations become conserved (wave model).
So, no effect in reference arm.
In atomic clocks bound electrons move forth and back in relation to the ether wind.
This is done in one dimension of 2 compared to MMX.
So, relative effect is 1-vv/2cc (instead of 1-vv/cc for MMX).
The same as SRT
John-Erik
-
Gene
Perhaps you misunderstood me. My opinion is that time dilation does not exist. Instead the frequency of an atomic clock depends on the ether wind.
John-Erik
-
Eugene
“Time passes differently”
No, time dilation is an illusion caused by the fact that atomic clocks change speed due to the ether wind. The global positioning system is the only (false) support for RT.
From John-Erik
-
David de H
Thanks for providing this forum.
As I said long time ago there are too many monologues and too little dialogues here. I hope you will be a good example and comment on my article Gravity does not move. Since gravity is a product of m and M the force is not real until information has been exchanged between m and M.
m causes, by absorption, an ether field symmetric around m, but not symmetric around M. The asymmetry in absorption in M causes gravity to emerge inside M. Gravity does not move as a force, although the force in M is caused by moving ether particles. Gravity does not move. Gravity is a radial ether wind.
Big Bang and Pioneer anomalies are just illusions due to ether motions not body motions.
https://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Essays/View/9227
THE FACT THAT ETHER-MATTER INTERACTION IS BY ABSORPTION, NOT COLLISIONS, EXPLAINS NO ABERRATION IN GRAVITY. SO, FATIO’S MODEL IS THE EXPLANATION TO GRAVITY, DELIVERED 300 YEARS AGO.
John-Erik
-
Fatio sent a quantum theory of gravity to Newton 300 years ago. Ether particles were – in error – assumed to collide with matter, which would give gravity an angle of aberration. Since such an angle was not found Fatio’s idea was ignored.
However, lack of aberration is easily explained by assuming ether particles instead to be absorbed by matter. Absorption means that a body causes a surrounding ether wind moving in negative radial direction. This explains gravity to emerge inside matter due to the ether, without causing aberration.
Scientists today work hard on quantum gravity, and they should take Fatio’s idea in regard.
With best regards ________________ John-Erik
See attachment
https://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Essays-Gravity/Download/9536
-
Einstein said: the Universe is either expanding or the opposite. However, he forgot the possibility that It can both expand and contract in different regions.
-
More options
We (in the western world) are thinking binary, meaning that with 2 options we get stack. Thereby we are missing not just the third option, but also the fourth and the fifth and…
Best regards from _______________ John-Erik
-
Jerry
No, Einstein got the Prize only for the introduction of the work function, that explained the photoelectric effect better. It was not for extending quantum theory to light, although Planck said so when he gave Einstein the Prize. Most people think like you. Einstein tried to find light particles between 1905 and 1955, but failed as he said himself. But there are ether particles. He became opponent to QM and GRT.
Light is an ether behaviour and can be described by waves only although particles seems to be needed for the ether.
I have defined my view of the ether, and that is Fatio’s model based on particles that can explain gravity by a radial ether wind. Fatio was denied in error due to no aberration. However, that can be explained by emerging ether.
Michelson was our most outstanding empirical scientists, who became involved in a scandal in theoretical physics.
MMX results were nor zero, but they do not exist, and MMX is a failure. The ether wind was confirmed by Sagnac, and later in pulsar aberration.
With best regards from _____________________ John-Erik
-
Jerry
Vacuum means void of matter or vacant of matter. Since the ether can transfer the force of gravity the ether must have mass. So, no mass means no quanta. Quantum vacuum is absurd. Quantum ether is possible. They are afraid of the word ether. Therefore they are tricking.
You say empty space between particles. So, you are also tricking and fooling only yourself. Empty space cannot exist as demonstrated by gravity.
Preferred frame is just a mathematical tool for our calculations and cannot represent the ether. Instead, the ether must be represented by a velocity field, v, in that frame. Near Earth the ether is equal to the escape velocity, -11.2 km/sec. This ether representation means that we can use the Galilean transform and do a linear addition of v and c. We do not need Einstein’s nonlinear absurdities, as Einstein himself found when he said: “physics without an ether is unthinkable” after life-time studies of physics. Why accepting a young patent clerk stating: ” the ether is superfluous”?
With best regards from _________________ John-Erik
-
Jerry
It is not up to me to define Universe. Mainstream talk about ‘quantum vacuum’. That is absurd. Vacuum is nothing and cannot be quantised.
I talk about ‘quantum ether’. My ether is Fatio’s fast and small particles moving in all directions.
The question: is there a preferred frame? cannot be answered by yes or no. My answer is: a third option is a velocity field, since the reference can have different states of motion in different points in space.
With best regards from __________________ John-Erik
-
Marco
Einstein abolished the ether and later wanted the ether back, since he found that gravity and light demand an ether.
Best __________________________________ John-Erik
-
Marco
Yes, we do not know what happens to the very small mass in the absorbed ether particles. However, this does not disprove the idea. Perhaps, there is a kind of compensation in an emission of other ether particles inside matter, since ether particles must have some kind of an origin.
In the Wang observation a gravimeter was used, but gravity on Earth is compensated by an acceleration away from Sun/Moon of a part of our planet with the size of our Moon. Therefore, no effect at the centre, but negative effects before and after, as I explained in the article.
With best regards from ________________________ John-Erik