The Aether versus General Relativity

[seychelles]

1 PERCENT OF THE UNIVERSE IS IN THE FOURTH DIMENSION THE REST 99 PERCENT IS
OF THE 5 TO THE ELEVENTH DIMENTIONS. THE SCIENTIST KEEP TRYING TO GET THE FUSION REACTOR GOING
THEY ARE WASTING THEIR TIME THE BEST AND MOST ENERGY IS FOUND IN MANIPULATING ETHER.

[seychelles]

MAYBE OFF TOPIC.

[Floor]

I am not and never have been comfortable with Einsteinian gravity explanations. The very phrase
"space time" doesn't sit well with me at all, curved space,  other language as well.

What ever.

Ether, Aether are not complete or well developed theories either ?

Quantization and a couple of hundred "particles" later and we have considerable
predictability in some areas.  Einstein said "God doesn't play with dice", but probabilities
are the best we have come up with in most of this arena.

I don't know that it should all be called a mess.  Maybe a well organized mess ?

[sm0ky2]

We are not served best by separating the two theories
But rather by combining them.


For it is in fact - the properties aether which defines the value of c


5th dimensional mathematics

[onepower]

smoky2

We are not served best by separating the two theories
But rather by combining them.

I would agree, as both are an attempt to describe the same thing from a different perspective.

The problem revolves around the fact that dark energy/matter, GR and the Aether theories attempt to describe something invisible to us we cannot measure. We can measure the effects but we cannot measure the thing producing the effects as is often the case. To be more precise we can measure the effects of the Primary Fields (Electric, Magnetic, Gravic) and Inertia but we still do not know what they are.

Most problems also revolve around inner and outer space where what happens on very small or large scales continues to elude us. The simple answer is we still don't know and what we do know tends to contradict itself on many levels.

For it is in fact - the properties aether which defines the value of c

Therein lies the problem and it depends on our perspective. Does the Aether really define the speed of light or is it ...
1)A property of the particle(s).
2)A property of the fields of the particle(s).
3)An interaction between the particle(s) fields and external fields.
4)A complex interaction relating to the particle(s), it's fields and any external fields.
5)An even more complex interaction relating to few of the above and something we have yet to understand such as a new field.

This quote comes to mind...
"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so." ― Mark Twain

In my opinion the supposed limitation on velocity we equate with the speed of light is simply a lack of understanding. It's very similar to the mistakes made when some theorized that man cannot fly through the air, break the sound barrier or fly through space to the moon.

For example, I see no limitation on any velocity and it has little to do with the speed of light. The only limitation on velocity relates to the energy required to increase the velocity of something and this energy is solely dependent on a property of mass we call inertia. As such the only real limitation is a lack of understanding relating to what inertia is on the most fundamental level. How do we know there is a limit when most don't even understand the thing called inertia which is supposedly causing the limit?.

In my opinion the breakdown in reasoning seems to revolve around the "properties" of something.
Property: a quality or trait belonging and especially peculiar to an individual or thing.

From my experience when someone calls something a "property" they actually mean they don't fully understand it. My reasoning for this is because if they actually understood it they would describe what it is and why it acts like it does versus simply labelling it and generalizing everything.

On a side note, it has been claimed that we cannot understand most advanced beings or intelligences because they do not generalize everything like we do. As we know, the less a person understands the more they generalize everything using bulk terminology. So we could presume an advanced intelligence would not generalize anything and describe it as it exists in reality. For example when they launched the Voyager deep space probe they used symbols on the golden record. They used symbols to depict the thing they were trying to describe because it's a universal language. Therefore we could conclude that the greater the intelligence the less generalization used and the more accurate and precise the description of things. Thus a truly advance race would probably use symbols and concepts to describe what they mean versus generalizations and often meaningless terms.

Regards
AC