Science Forum

Science Forum

  1. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    16953
    01 Oct '20 03:30
    @deepthought said
    Well, that's the only available explanation and if you won't accept it further discussion on the matter is somewhat futile. However, I feel the need to point out that wavelike solutions to Maxwell's equations were a major triumph for his theory, it is the theory on which radio relies.
    That isn't an explanation. A wave needs a medium to propagate through. If you want to deny that medium you need to explain why a wave is possible without it and you have not done that. Not even close.

    Even Einstein changed his mind and accepted an ether in the end after years of claiming it didn't exist. Einstein's ether theory is a theoretical medium. I don't care if his ether theory is different from another ether theory. Any kind of ether theory is a medium for light to propagate through.

    Again, what is waving? Is it a ripple of time itself? You need to at least have somewhere to go.
  2. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    16953
    01 Oct '20 03:31
    @deepthought said
    I skipped the crazier stuff. Newton's Wikipedia page is worth a read, his father died a little before he was born and his mother remarried, more-or-less abandoning him to be brought up by his grandmother. He appears to have been quite misogynistic in consequence. Besides, he lived in the 17th and early 18th Century, when drawing and quartering was regarded as the corre ...[text shortened]... eir ability to predict the outcomes of experiments and not the content of their creator's character.
    We can agree on that.
  3. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    642
    01 Oct '20 06:4710 edits
    @metal-brain said
    That isn't an explanation.
    It is a perfectly valid explanation to the rest of us thinking people. I for one had no difficulty comprehending it. If you cannot comprehend it due to your insufficient intellect, that's your problem, not his or ours.
    A wave needs a medium to propagate through.
    If you are merely saying it needs to pass through space, he (and the rest of us) never denied that and your next comment of "If you want to deny that medium ..." is just idiotic BS straw man because he OBVIOUSLY doesn't deny the existence of space and OBVIOUSLY doesn't deny that light moves through space.
    The medium of space exists and light moves through it.

    But if what you are saying is that light needs to pass through space specifically by making the space ITSELF wave in the sense of literally make it physically move back and forth (just as if all distances of space are absolute rather than relative i.e. dependent on the frame of reference), as opposed to light merely only pass through it (space), then you are wrong and Einstein's ether theory doesn't imply the space itself literally waves back and forth exactly like sea waves make water physically move back and forth because that is a DIFFERENT type of ether theory and thus Einstein NEVER agreed with your preferred type of ether theory.

    So which are you saying? Straw man or just ignorant falsehood?
    I don't care if his ether theory is different from another ether theory. Any kind of ether theory is a medium for light to propagate through.
    So, you DO resort to idiotic BS straw man! NOBODY DENIES, including every here, that light passes through a medium (more specifically the medium of space, in this case).
    What not all ether theories say including the one Einstein finally agreed with, is that light makes space itself wave in the sense of literally make it physically move back and forth exactly like sea waves do to water. Einstein realized that's not what happens and thus always rejected the other ether theories and was right for doing so. Only an ether theory that does NOT contradict Einstein's relativity can be given possible credence so Einstein would not have agreed with you.
  4. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    16953
    01 Oct '20 14:46
    @humy said
    It is a perfectly valid explanation to the rest of us thinking people. I for one had no difficulty comprehending it. If you cannot comprehend it due to your insufficient intellect, that's your problem, not his or ours.
    A wave needs a medium to propagate through.
    If you are merely saying it needs to pass through space, he (and the rest of us) never denied that an ...[text shortened]... ict Einstein's relativity can be given possible credence so Einstein would not have agreed with you.
    Are you saying space itself is waving?
  5. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    53125
    03 Oct '20 17:51
    @Metal-Brain
    You really don't get out much do you? You ever hear of LIGO? If not, google it and learn.
  6. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    16953
    04 Oct '20 08:022 edits
    @sonhouse said
    @Metal-Brain
    You really don't get out much do you? You ever hear of LIGO? If not, google it and learn.
    I have. What does that have to do with it? If anything, that helps my case.

    https://www.quantamagazine.org/gravitons-revealed-in-the-noise-of-gravitational-waves-20200723/

    Humy implied space consists of nothing. If he had the courage to answer my question he would have revealed that he doesn't believe the Graviton exists. The Graviton (if it exists) is the smallest part of the ether that is waving.
  7. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    642
    04 Oct '20 08:30
    @metal-brain said


    Humy implied space consists of nothing.
    No, I didn't. Space consists of something.
  8. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    16953
    04 Oct '20 08:33
    @humy said
    No, I didn't. Space consists of something.
    Be specific.
    Do you believe the Graviton exists or not?
  9. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    642
    04 Oct '20 09:1913 edits
    @metal-brain said
    Be specific.
    Do you believe the Graviton exists or not?
    What the hell have gravitons got to do with "Space consists of something"?
    I rationally assume graviton exists because most of the experts on that who are much smarter than you and I and know much more about it than you and I seem to be generally saying they exist so my default assumption should be they exist until if or when I have VERY good reason to think the contrary; -which all has nothing whatsoever to do with space consisting of something.
    I have NEVER implied gravitons don't exist and I have always assumed they exist since I heard of them.
    The Graviton (if it exists) is the smallest part of the ether that is waving.

    I have only just noticed that somewhat idiotic assertion (idiotic given the current topic) that I had somehow previously missed from your other post.
    If you knew the first thing about the theory of electromagnetism in relation to ether you would know no ether theory says/claims that a graviton "is the smallest part of the ether that is waving" specifically when and as a result of LIGHT moving through it. I don't know whether there is some ether theory that says space or ether is 'waving' (in some sense) when and as a result of a graviton moving through it but, still, no ether theory says a GRAVITON "is the smallest part of the ether that is waving" specifically when and as a result of LIGHT (not a graviton) moving through it; Unless you are now trying to sneakily change the current topic away from light in relation to ether to one about gravity in relation to ether? Why would you suddenly do that? Is it because you realize you were losing the argument so you now desperately want to change it to some other argument?
  10. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    16953
    04 Oct '20 14:48
    @humy said
    What the hell have gravitons got to do with "Space consists of something"?
    I rationally assume graviton exists because most of the experts on that who are much smarter than you and I and know much more about it than you and I seem to be generally saying they exist so my default assumption should be they exist until if or when I have VERY good reason to think the contrary; -whic ...[text shortened]... ealize you were losing the argument so you now desperately want to change it to some other argument?
    If space is discrete it contains something and that something is the theoretical particle called the Graviton. If the Graviton exists so does the ether.

    There you go. The Graviton is something that can wave. It is the discrete particle that makes up the ether. Since you say most scientists believe the Graviton exists that means most scientists believe the ether exists. You cannot have one without the other.
  11. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    642
    04 Oct '20 19:203 edits
    @metal-brain said
    If space is discrete it contains something and that something is the theoretical particle called the Graviton.
    NO, that's false and shows you don't know what a graviton is supposed to be.
    A graviton is supposed to be a massless particle that is thought to move at the speed of light and is thought to be the quantization of GRAVITY, NOT SPACE.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graviton
    "...In theories of quantum gravity, the graviton is the hypothetical quantum of gravity, an elementary particle that mediates the force of gravity.
    ...If it exists, the graviton is expected to be massless because the gravitational force is very long range and appears to propagate at the speed of light.
    ..."
    f the Graviton exists so does the ether.
    False inference; Regardless of whether ether exists, if some type of ether exists then it doesn't exist BECAUSE of gravitons.
    The Graviton is something that can wave.
    If what you mean by that is that it has a wavelength, yes it has a wavelength. So what? Who said something cannot have a wavelength? Not me or anyone here. In fact, nobody here including I ever said/implied something couldn't exists that can 'wave'; that's just your new stupid straw man.
    It is the discrete particle that makes up the ether.
    No, it isn't. If ether exists then it isn't MADE of gravitons because that makes no sense because, as I just said, gravitons are supposed to be a massless particles that arethought to move at the speed of light and be the quantization of GRAVITY, NOT SPACE.
    Since you say most scientists believe the Graviton exists that means most scientists believe the ether exists.
    No, it isn't. Your above assertion shows you have no idea what you are talking about.
  12. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    16953
    04 Oct '20 23:42
    @humy said
    NO, that's false and shows you don't know what a graviton is supposed to be.
    A graviton is supposed to be a massless particle that is thought to move at the speed of light and is thought to be the quantization of GRAVITY, NOT SPACE.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graviton
    "...In theories of quantum gravity, the graviton is the hypothetical quantum of gravity, an elementary p ...[text shortened]... sts. [/quote]No, it isn't. Your above assertion shows you have no idea what you are talking about.
    You don't know what you are talking about.

    https://phys.org/news/2016-04-universe-space-time-discrete.html
  13. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    642
    05 Oct '20 06:527 edits
    @metal-brain said
    You don't know what you are talking about.

    https://phys.org/news/2016-04-universe-space-time-discrete.html
    That link says nothing about ether or gravitons (although it does mention the closely related 'quantum gravity'; -still no ether mentioned! ) thus is obviously completely irrelevant to your latest stupid claim of;

    "If space is discrete it contains something and that something is the theoretical particle called the Graviton. ... (lots of BS inserted between)...It is the discrete particle that makes up the ether. " (your quote!)

    a claim that makes no sense to anyone that knows the first thing about that physics and which shows you don't know what you are talking about.
    The fact that your link doesn't even mention 'ether' (it also doesn't directly mention 'gravitons' although it does mention the closely related 'quantum gravity' ) while talking about discrete space-time means it does nothing to vindicate your BS claims and if anything is by itself an indication that your claim is indeed just pure BS.
  14. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    16953
    05 Oct '20 11:09
    @humy said
    That link says nothing about ether or gravitons (although it does mention the closely related 'quantum gravity'; -still no ether mentioned! ) thus is obviously completely irrelevant to your latest stupid claim of;

    "If space is discrete it contains something and that something is the theoretical particle called the Graviton. ... (lots of BS inserted between)...It is the discr ...[text shortened]... te your BS claims and if anything is by itself an indication that your claim is indeed just pure BS.
    "a claim that makes no sense to anyone that knows the first thing about that physics and which shows you don't know what you are talking about."

    You don't know what you are talking about. If you want to do this the hard way instead of being honest that is your choice. I suppose it is possible you don't know what ether is. People have been incredibly stupid with incredible hubris before. Let's find out if you lying or merely stupid.

    Define "ether".
  15. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    53125
    02 Nov '20 04:14
    @Metal-Brain
    You asked if space was waving as in you being sarcastic.
    LIGO proved space IS waving and the more sensitive LIGO's get the more of the subtle waves will be detected, like 2 close stars orbiting each other which as of now won't be detected by LIGO, it takes a black hole pair crashing into each other to produce the energy to make the gravitational radiation.
Back to Top