Morley/Michelson Inferometer

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Lotto Cheatah</i>
<br />
2. Light curves towards a planet because it DOES have gravity. Gravity is not a property of mass, it is a property of energy.
<center>Ergo: E=MC^2</center>
If energy has no gravity, where did the gravity go?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Absolute proof that energy contains gravity would be confirmed if the elusive graviton could be found within the photon. This was actually first demonstrated about a century ago by Balmer, and later expanded upon by Fraunhofer.. only they didn't fully understand what they had discovered.

Balmer and/or Fraunhofer Lines are much more than a spectrographic signature of elements. They constitute a volume without substance within the photon. A volume without substance is an absolute vacuum and, as such, has all the properties necessary to create a gravitational force. Here is your graviton.

Lotto Cheta,


<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><b>
Still looking for the aether, eh?
Folks, the only place that space exists is in the mind. It is a concept, not a reality. All "Space" is "occupied", starting with the background radiation and increasing in energy and/or mass from that point.

The misconception that there is some unique quantity know as the aether or void-space keeps reappearing because of the curved-space pundits; those who state that the existence of [say] a planet forces space to curve around it. They say that since light has no rest mass and therefore no gravity, this is the only explanation for the observation that light curves towards a planet as though being drawn by gravity. An optical illusion, they say. The light is actually travelling in a straight line. It is the space that is curved.

In order for curved space theory to be true, some property know as "Space" [the aether] must exist and energy must not contain gravity.

1. No one has ever isolated the Aether. All space is occupied. The Aether does not exist.</b><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Perhaps but lets look at what Einstein actually said and not what todays physicists claim he said:

*******************************************************************
Ether and the Theory of Relativity
Albert Einsteinan address delivered on May 5th, 1920, in the University of Leyden

******************* Extracts from Einstein's Speech ****************

More careful reflection teaches us, however, that <font color="yellow"><b>the special theory of relativity does not compel us to deny ether. We may assume the existance of an ether................</font id="yellow"></b>

Recapitulating, we may say that according to <font color="yellow"><b>the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether.</b></font id="yellow">

<font color="yellow"><b>According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable;</b></font id="yellow"> for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense.

****************************************************

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><b>2. Light curves towards a planet because it DOES have gravity. Gravity is not a property of mass, it is a property of energy.</b><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

On this we agree even though it is not a mainstram science.




Knowing to believe only half of what you hear is a sign of intelligence. Knowing which half to believe can make you a genius.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Mac</i>
*******************************************************************
Ether and the Theory of Relativity
Albert Einsteinan address delivered on May 5th, 1920, in the University of Leyden

******************* Extracts from Einstein's Speech ****************

More careful reflection teaches us, however, that <font color="yellow"><b>the special theory of relativity does not compel us to deny ether. We may assume the existance of an ether................</font id="yellow"></b>

Recapitulating, we may say that according to <font color="yellow"><b>the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether.</b></font id="yellow">

<font color="yellow"><b>According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable;</b></font id="yellow"> for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense.

****************************************************

Aether is a matter of perspective, not of substance or even the lack of substance.

Your argument implies that energy requires a medium to traverse point a to b. For this to be true, energy needs to recogize that distance exists.

The photon travels at the speed of light. At the speed of light, time stands still, therefore it is everywhere at once. For it, time and distance do not exist. There is no need for a medium such as Aether.

Knowing to believe only half of what you hear is a sign of intelligence. Knowing which half to believe can make you a genius.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />Why is spin observed and is that motion any different,say, than spin of a planet around the sun?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

LR offers the simplest answer. The universe is filled with "elysium", the light-carrying medium. Part of it is entrained (captured) by Earth's own gravity field, and remains at rest with respect to the Earth. So the local elysium has the same speed as the Earth, and the speed of light is the same in all directions.

By contrast, Earth's spin is a motion even with respect to the local elysium. So the speed of light appears slightly greater or less depending on the motion of the observer on the spinning Earth. -|Tom|-

Lotto Chetha,

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><b>Aether is a matter of perspective, not of substance or even the lack of substance.</b><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

ANS:I find no specific arguement with this statement.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><b>Your argument implies that energy requires a medium to traverse point a to b.</b><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

ANS:Thanks for the compliment but that is not my arguement. It was Einstiens in his 1920 speech. HeHeHe.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><b> For this to be true, energy needs to recogize that distance exists.</b><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

ANS:My own theory UniKEF and that of David B's "Unification Theory" which is about to become published in a mainstream journal considers space as being formed by energy flow. That is in my work space is created by energy, the same energy that causes gravity and the expansion of the universe.


<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><b> At the speed of light, time stands still, therefore it is everywhere at once. For it, time and distance do not exist. There is no need for a medium such as Aether.</b><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

ANS:This is an assumption that Relativity is valid in the first instance. There simply is no information or data that shows time actually exists. What you refer to is time dilation experiments and data but all they show is that a process (a clock) changes under certan conditions.

My favorite example of this is to assume that I build a clock by marking increments vertically up the wall of a metal pan. I now fill the pan with water and watch the rate of evaporation relative to the markings.

I have a crude clock (albeit not very reliable since it is easily enfluenced. However my wife not knowing of my research puts the pan on the stove and WHOA I just leaped into the 25 century but never got a day older.

If you missed the point it is that clock processes do not measure time and processes can vary under enviornmental or outside enfluences and that not only doesn't prove time has changed it doesn't even prove time exits.






Knowing to believe only half of what you hear is a sign of intelligence. Knowing which half to believe can make you a genius.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Mac</i>
<br />
ANS:This is an assumption that Relativity is valid in the first instance. There simply is no information or data that shows time actually exists. What you refer to is time dilation experiments and data but all they show is that a process (a clock) changes under certan conditions.

My favorite example of this is to assume that I build a clock by marking increments vertically up the wall of a metal pan. I now fill the pan with water and watch the rate of evaporation relative to the markings.

I have a crude clock (albeit not very reliable since it is easily enfluenced. However my wife not knowing of my research puts the pan on the stove and WHOA I just leaped into the 25 century but never got a day older.

If you missed the point it is that clock processes do not measure time and processes can vary under enviornmental or outside enfluences and that not only doesn't prove time has changed it doesn't even prove time exits.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Again, Time, the existence or lack thereof, is a matter of perception. If you can perceive motion then Time most certainly exists. Indeed, the bulk of the science of mathematics collapses without time.

If you are a photon, then neither time or motion exist. At the speed of light, time stops. The photon is everywhere at once.

To say Time exists is true. To say Time does not exist is also True. It is a matter of perspective. It depends on which side of the Relativity fence, General or Special, that you are sitting on at the time you make your observation.