/sci/ - Science & Math

light and sound are not the same thing, sound requires a medium, light does not

>>15494744
>literally parrots some bullshit that I even explicitly addressed in the post
way to miss the point 100%, idiot

>>15494729
At a time when photons where understood for th first time but not phonons? Yeah I wonder why they though this dual wave/particle behaves differently than a pure wave.

if you move toward a sound emitter there will be less delay.

According to mainstream interpretation of einstein, if you move towards a light emitter it will be the same delay as moving away from it. Although most mainstream scientists do not really understand einstein's theory and neither do i, so maybe he said something different from that.

>>15494744
Light requires a medium (aether) to exist. Saying that a wave doesn't require a medium is silly and impossible (unless we live in a simulation.)

>>15494761
>if you move towards a light emitter it will be the same delay as moving away from it
except we know that's false, because we see Doppler shift with light too
Lorentz transformation is absolutely true, but that doesn't change those observational facts, and interpreting Lorentz transformation as "time dilation" and "length contraction" is pure retardation

>>15494758
read the post, retard
I literally pointed out that this was well after Maxwell made it abundantly clear that light was an electromagnetic wave

>>15494774
I mean experimental results were capable of proving the time dilation, but not on a large enough scale to attempt the length contraction bit yet. Though largely evidence suggests it would happen.

>>15494774
How so?

>>15494781
Time dilation *is* length contraction, just from the other inertial reference frame's POV

>>15494780
and it also fucking acts as a particle, and that dual nature is what lead to the experiments smoothbrain, read my fucking reply. Light was understood to be both and sound wasn't yet. And just because I clearly need to repeat my point with you, photons were understood but phonons were not observed yet as the mathematical model for them hadn't been invented yet, which is why light seemed to have a unique and testable dual nature, so experiments into it's nature were run. Hope that helps make it clear! Maybe next time try learning a little reading comprehension at all before you pretend you're a big boy.

>>15494781
>I mean experimental results were capable of proving the time dilation
no
this has never been done
what is observed with muons has nothing to do with time dilation, and everything else is just electromagnetic retardation as identified by Jefimenko
>>15494784
how so what?
because it doesn't happen, that's just all Doppler shift
yes, things will look shorter and appear to speed by faster, duh
that doesn't mean time itself or length itself is actually changing, believing that means you don't understand how vision works, and that you think vision somehow dictates reality
that's the same nonsensical line of thought that leads you to conclude that receiving a message before you see the message being sent is somehow impossible
>>15494786
>it also fucking acts as a particle
hilariously false
imagine still thinking there is any "wave-particle duality"
hint: transient waveforms (also called impulses) are not "particles" you retarded dumbfuck

>>15494788
Lil bro thinks he's the next einstein because everyone else is dumb/wrong

>>15494800
typical dumbfuck projection
nothing I'm saying is new or revolutionary, this is all old knowledge, it's just pointing out the retardation of a huge amount of people who consider themselves "physicists" without understanding that basic physics

>>15494788
>if I keep saying everyone else is wrong enough loud enough maybe I can be a physicist too
okay, have fun kiddo, don't stay out too late, dinner is at 7 and you have school in the morning!

>>15494801
You must be fun at parties

>>15494803
>keeps projecting like a retarded dumbfuck
pointing out that specific retards are wrong is now suddenly saying "everyone else is wrong"
typical mentality of a fuckwit with zero knowledge of physics
>>15494804
you must be great at physics
oh, wait, no, not at all

>>15494729
Aww it's a schizo. Show us your vixra publications

>>15494804
what a stock NPC reply, gtfo sci fucking normie lmfao

>>15494842
there's nothing that's even disputed in the OP, you fucktard
and the lack of anything substantial in your post is well noted, time for you to fuck back off to whatever board you just came from

>>15494849
Are you Nathan? Why are you so angry on a Sunday? Call your mom and tell her you miss her. Your family is worried about you, schizo.

>>15494850
>more retardation, still zero substance, still didn't read the OP
yawn

>>15494859
Come on schizo show us your vixra papers.

>>15494859
Paying closer attention I see you're quoting Walter Russel. No idea who that is, so I googled him.
>The author challenges the conventional wisdom that light is just another physical entity. He outlines a new role of light in the formation of the three main components of the universe - God, still light; the dual light waves emanated from God and the material world both organic and inorganic which is made of light bent into various spiral forms. Reading this book "is an important step toward understanding both the intellectual and spiritual balances that exist in the universe."
LMFAO. It's even worse than I thought. Not only are you a schizo, you're a godtard. Thanks for the laugh champ, that just made my morning. Religious schizos are my favorite types of schizos to laugh at.

>>15494880
>>more retardation, still zero substance, still didn't read the OP
>yawn
>>15494890
>looks at image like a toddler, doesn't read the OP
what a surprise

>>15494900
It's Sunday. Don't you have a church to go to? Isn't it against your faith to troll on Sundays?

>>15494774
I did not say whether it was true or false, merely that it was "according to mainstream einstein interpretations", or in actuality, my interpretation of mainstream interpretations, which (factually) mainstreamer scientists do not understand some of einsteins theories anyway.

>>15494903
there's no such thing as a creator deity
nice try, retard
now try reading OP (yes, actually turning on your brain and reading is hard, but I believe in you)
>>15494918
no, that's not true according to any interpretation, everyone agrees that Doppler shift exists for light too
interpretation, by definition, does not pertain to the actual observables, interpretations are just various opinions about what the observables represent

>>15494926
>Creator deity
Weird way to say you believe in God. Go ahead and pray. It's Sunday.

>>15494764
you aether tards are always ready to pop out aren't you? impressive

>>15494934
>there's no such thing as a creator deity
>nice try, retard
>now try reading OP (yes, actually turning on your brain and reading is hard, but I believe in you)

>>15494938
>Weird way to say you believe in God. Go ahead and pray. It's Sunday.

>>15494942
>>no such thing as a creator deity
>>you believe in God
I can't even comprehend what it's like to be as retarded as you
now:
>>try reading OP (yes, actually turning on your brain and reading is hard, but I believe in you)

>>15494761
>According to mainstream interpretation of einstein, if you move towards a light emitter it will be the same delay as moving away from it
Can you elaborate this?
I don't follow, and I don't think relativity does that.
Afaik SR: 1. Time dilates moving objects.
2. Length contracts in the direction of motion.
3. Postulates constant c.
4. The above things lead to different doppler shift equations than classical.
How does relativity imply moving towards or away from an observer not change the delay?
The speed of the wave is finite, so if I'm moving towards A by the time the light from A reaches me i will be in a closer spot, with less delay right?

>>15494946
Don't play coy. Why the qualifier of creator deity?

>>15494954
I already corrected that person here:
>>15494774
>>15494788
>>15494926
so there's not actually any time dilation or length contraction, that's just how it looks due to the compression or rarefaction of light in the direction you are traveling in relative to the direction of propagation
>>15494969
it's not a "qualifier", dumbfuck, I just refuse to use your retarded religious terminology
there's no such thing as any creator deity, and that's that
and you still haven't read OP and still haven't said anything of substance
typical retard

>>15494974
>Posts images which quote religious retards on the nature of light
>Hurrrrr durrrrr I don't believe le heckin "creator deity" even though literally nobody else is using that term
>Deflects direct question on whether he believes in god
Just admit you're making a religious argument on the nature of light. It's ok, your reputation won't be damaged; everyone already acknowledges you're a pseud and a schizo.

>>15494980
>>Posts images which quote religious retards on the nature of light
imagine being so retarded that you can't distinguish what someone says and what other retarded beliefs such a person might have
again: I can't imagine what it's like being as retarded as you
and you still never moved past the toddler stage of looking at the picture to actually reading the OP, and still have said nothing of substance
typical dumbfuck

>>15494729
>which is exactly what we observe
Sure, but what we didn't expect was the fact that there is no way to travel faster and make light appear to move more slowly than c in vacuum

>>15495011
first of all, that doesn't explain why they were looking for something they should never have been looking for
secondly:
>there is no way to travel faster and make light appear to move more slowly than c in vacuum
except that's blatantly false, that's exactly what you'd see, and literally exactly what is observed
and that is still not even correcting the dumb idea that there's such a thing as a "vacuum" at all

>>15495015
>the dumb idea that there's such a thing as a "vacuum" at all

>>15495017
still not addressing what it says in the OP, which is independent of that
typical retarded dumbfuck
and yes, the fact that there's no such thing as a "vacuum" is not disputed either, since the quantum field permeating all of space (read: quantum field theory, the single most successful theory in all of physics) postulates that space is entirely permeated with quantum harmonic oscillators with a minimum energy known as zero-point energy
but of course, I wouldn't expect a dumb retard like you to know anything about the single most successful and most well-established theory in the history of physics
geez, it's alarming how people like you are just getting dumber and dumber

>>15495023
>he didn't realize the poster count increased
you sound emotional right now. by the way, the term you're looking for is "vacuum expectation value". QFT has a manifest existence of a vacuum. if you don't want to be a schizo, then you're a pseud. gonna hide this thread, don't bother responding---don't feel like losing brain cells reading your drivel.

>>15495027
>>he didn't realize the poster count increased
low quality samefagging is low quality
imagine thinking you're fooling anyone, truly hilariously retarded
>you sound emotional right now
and you sound the same way as you've done since the beginning: like a braindead retard who still hasn't read the OP and who doesn't even understand basic physics
>the term you're looking for is "vacuum expectation value"
no, not even remotely close to any term I'm looking for, and it's hilarious how you try to desperately make it out as if you weren't just schooled hard on basic physics
>QFT has a manifest existence of a vacuum
except that it's not a "vacuum" at all, so continuing to use that term, which was derived from earlier conceptions of space as empty (from Latin "vacuus", literally meaning "empty"), is totally retarded
in other words, I'm not surprised that a totally braindead retard like you tries to keep using it that way, but it's still wrong
and it still has nothing to do with the original point either, which you're curiously trying to deflect from
typical brainfucked dumbfuck

>>15494801
>typical dumbfuck projection
>nothing I'm saying is new or revolutionary, this is all old knowledge, it's just pointing out the retardation of a huge amount of people who consider themselves "physicists" without understanding that basic physics

100% this

>>15494980
>Just admit you're making a religious argument on the nature of light. It's ok, your reputation won't be damaged; everyone already acknowledges you're a pseud and a schizo.

Whose "everyone". I like OP. He's right & he has passion. You wouldn't get it cause you're a fcking dork

>>15495048
that guy is pretty retarded
his logic goes like this
>person A makes true statement S
>person A also beliefs religious retardation R
>person B makes true statement S and points to person A also making true statement S
>person B now also believes religious retardation R
I mean, it's hard for me to comprehend how people that dumb even manage to operate a computer, but apparently they do

>>15495048
that guy is pretty retarded
his logic goes like this
>person A makes true statement S
>person A also believes religious retardation R
>person B makes true statement S and points to person A also making true statement S
>therefore: person B now also believes religious retardation R
I mean, it's hard for me to comprehend how people that dumb even manage to operate a computer, but apparently they do

Lorentz transformation is Doppler effect

>>15495054
>that guy is pretty retarded
>his logic goes like this
>>person A makes true statement S
>>person A also believes religious retardation R
>>person B makes true statement S and points to person A also making true statement S
>>therefore: person B now also believes religious retardation R
>I mean, it's hard for me to comprehend how people that dumb even manage to operate a computer, but apparently they do

You didn't understand his logic at all. You're just mad that he's exposing the grift that physicists are pulling. Everything he said is accurate, and something I've known for a while. Aether is real. As real as air and water.

>want to read people arguing about physics
>people are arguing about religion instead
guys what the fuck

>>15495075
>guys what the fuck

Lying, corrupt cosmologists and physicists always project their religion onto others.

>>15495054
>that guy is pretty retarded
>his logic goes like this

Unless you didnt mean OP. OP is one of the only based posters around.

Walter Russell was an American polymath, artist, and philosopher who proposed a comprehensive cosmology known as "The Russell Cosmogony." According to Russell, the illusion of light is the result of our limited perception and understanding of the true nature of light.

Russell believed that light is not composed of particles but rather consists of rhythmic waves of motion, which he referred to as "undulating light waves." He argued that our perception of light as separate and distinct particles is an illusion created by the limitations of our senses and the limitations of scientific instruments used to measure light.

Russell's view of light was deeply intertwined with his broader cosmological ideas, which included concepts like the interplay of opposing forces, the dynamic balance of nature, and the fundamental unity of the universe. He saw light as a manifestation of the rhythmic interplay of these opposing forces.

It's worth noting that while Russell's ideas have garnered some interest and followers, they are not widely accepted in the mainstream scientific community. The established scientific understanding of light is based on the wave-particle duality theory, which describes light as both a wave and a particle, depending on the experimental context. This understanding has been extensively supported by experimental evidence and is the foundation of modern physics.

>>15495078
Fuck that string theory nigger.

>>15495071
>You didn't understand his logic at all.
I did perfectly well understand his blatantly logically fallacious retardation
he took Walter Russell's (person A) correct statement about light (true statement S), then took his retarded religious belief (belief R) and projected it onto me for simply stating the same true statement S and pointing to Russell also expressing it
and the fact that you're literally too stupid to even understand something that simple is truly alarming, at this point I didn't know people as stupid as you even existed at all
>You're just mad that he's exposing the grift that physicists are pulling.
you're talking to the wrong person, buddy
look at who I was responding to and who they were quoting

>>15495075
>>people are arguing about religion instead
no one is "arguing about religion"
one braindead retard (this guy: >>15494890) desperately tried to make a straw man out of religion just because I used a true statement by Walter Russell in the image in the OP, despite none of my posts having a single thing to do with religion whatsoever
apparently that person is too much of a braindead retard to understand that a person can both make true statements and hold retarded beliefs at the same time
yes, I know, they're pretty fucking stupid, but don't try to make it out as if we're "arguing about religion" at all

>>15495079
I am OP
I wrote this post: >>15495054
look at who it was a reply to and who they were quoting, that's the dumb idiot I'm talking about
it's the same idiot I'm referencing here: >>15495086

>>15495075
>people are arguing about religion instead
>doesnt know its the same thing at different magnitudes, quantum and celestial scales describes at human scales

Retvrn to /xci/, my son.

>>15495086
Fair point. I'm a tourist after all.

Walter Russell's statements about light, such as the one you mentioned, reflect his philosophical and metaphysical perspectives rather than established scientific facts. Russell proposed a unique cosmological model that attempted to explain the nature of light and the universe in more holistic and metaphysical terms.

In the quote you provided, Russell suggests that the perception of light traveling as waves is an illusion caused by wave motion. He describes waves as pistons that operate radially and spirally, both inward and outward, as opposed to linear motion. These ideas reflect his belief in a dynamic, interplay of forces and his rejection of the concept of light as particles traveling in a straight line.

While Russell's ideas can be thought-provoking and may have influenced some alternative philosophical or spiritual viewpoints, it is important to note that they are not widely accepted within the scientific community. The established scientific understanding of light is based on extensive experimental evidence and mathematical models that describe light as both a wave and a particle, depending on the experimental context (wave-particle duality).

So, while Russell's ideas may inspire contemplation and alternative perspectives, they should be understood within the context of his unique cosmological model and not as widely accepted scientific facts.

>>15494729
>why, then, were so many scientists trying at some point to prove that the speed of light would be different depending on the speed of whatever was emitting the light
They were trying to find the inertial reference frame of the medium itself - the supposed "luminiferous aether". All results were null.

>>15494729
Nigger, they were trying to prove that it was the same. The result of the experiment was negative, and shocked everyone

>>15495100
>Walter Russell's statements about light, such as the one you mentioned, reflect his philosophical and metaphysical perspectives
lmao, it's the same braindead dumbfuck retard from before, still trying to rationalize his fucktard logical fallacies that have been pointed out in explicit detail
truly fucking hilarious
>Russell suggests that the perception of light traveling as waves is an illusion caused by wave motion
which is indeed 100% precisely correct, and not exactly news, everyone with even basic knowledge of physics knows this
that has jack shit to do with his belief in a creator deity, which is a retarded belief
see how you still can't manage to distinguish between a true statement and a retarded belief just because the same person states/holds both?
now go pull your head out of your ass and turn on your brain, retard
>>15495102
no, that's not what they were doing at all at that point, that's an entirely separate point
also:
>the supposed "luminiferous aether". All results were null.
braindead retardation
that's like saying
>"ah, look, we're not experiencing 30 km/s winds, so Earth can't be moving at all"
imagine being that retarded
the existence of the quantum aether is a fact, but doesn't have jack shit to do with the point I'm making in OP, so get back on topic

In general, science and math boards are typically dedicated to discussing well-established scientific principles, theories, and empirical evidence within the realm of scientific consensus. These platforms often prioritize evidence-based discussions, rigorous scientific methodologies, and the exploration of established scientific knowledge.

Given that Walter Russell's cosmological ideas and perspectives on light are not widely accepted within the mainstream scientific community, it is possible that discussing his quotes on a science and math board may be met with skepticism or considered off-topic. However, if the board allows for open discussions, explorations of alternative viewpoints, or philosophical perspectives, then it could be a suitable place for discussing the quote and its implications.

It is always a good idea to review the guidelines of the board and gauge the community's interests and expectations to ensure that any discussions align with the purpose and focus of the platform.

>>15495124
literally the diametric opposite of the truth: they were trying to prove that it was different, and the results of the experiment was that it was the same
>Quirino Majorana (1871-1957) was an Italian experimental physicist who devoted many years of his active life to the search for gravitational absorption. Nowadays Majorana’s better known researches are those related to the second principle of the special theory of relativity. He attempted to detect changes in the speed of light emitted (or reflected) by moving bodies, but contrary to his expectations he confirmed that the speed of light is independent of the peed of its source. As this result was the opposite of what he intended to prove, it gives nice evidence that Majorana was a careful experimenter and not one of those scientists who always find what they want to find.

>>15495133
hilarious, the retard now resorts to spamming GPT
get in here and clean this up, jannies

>>15495133
bro you were just told you were wrong quit pissing and shitting and cumming everywhere it's making a mess

>>15494744
>light doesn't require medium because i was told there is no medium for light
nice circular shitpost fagfuck

>>15495158
you have to be 18 to post here.

>>15495165
>light requires a medium because I said so
Wow didn't know you're God bro

>>15495131
>braindead dumbfuck retard fucktard fucking shit retarded retarded ass retard retardation retarded shit
Imagine writing like this and getting upset when others realize you have no idea what you're talking about.

>>15494744
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck..

>>15495100
Is..is that you GPT?

>>15494936
>>15495189
Not OP but it's worth entertaining that there could be a non-matter ether that we don't understand instead of being smug on what high school physics told you.

It makes sense to me. If the speed of light is constant regardless of the speed of the source, it's more like ripples in a medium and less like a bullet. Maybe some relationship to gravity.

All through history people are smug that they know all the physics there is to know, and then someone like Einstein comes along and teabags the whole subject.

>>15495214
>Imagine writing like this
I don't have to imagine, I do it whenever people who don't have any idea what they're talking about come around acting like braindead retards
>getting upset
hilarious projection
imagine not being able to understand someone calling you a braindead fucktard without them being upset
pathetic
>when others realize you have no idea what you're talking about
diametric opposite of the truth, everyone I've called a braindead fucktard so far haven't even tried to address the subject matter, precisely because they have zero idea what they're talking about
oh, and wouldn't you know, here you are doing the exact same thing
curious
another retarded fuckwit, I take it

>>15494729
Based. This just popped up in my feed on YouTube, and it's extremely sad to see that Einstein went down in the history books when it should have been the genius Lorentz:
https://youtu.be/iqAvgHJa7Yw

>>15494729
A bunch of misconceptions around the speed of light stem from only considering how particles travels through space. It makes a lot more sense in a framework of spacetime.

>>15495322
light isn't a particle
it's a wave
in fact, there's no evidence for particles whatsoever, literally every "particle" is known to ultimately be a wave
>It makes a lot more sense in a framework of spacetime.
first of all, the point I'm making in the OP is besides that
secondly, no, literally the diametric opposite of the truth, "spacetime" is essentially the type of retardation that you start having to use when you don't understand what's going on at all

>light isn't a particle
>it's a wave
>in fact, there's no evidence for particles whatsoever, literally every "particle" is known to ultimately be a wave
The statement you mentioned appears to align with the perspective of light as a wave rather than a particle. It suggests that there is no evidence for particles and that everything ultimately manifests as a wave.

While it is true that light exhibits wave-like behavior, such as interference and diffraction, it is also known to exhibit particle-like behavior, as demonstrated by phenomena like the photoelectric effect and particle scattering experiments. This duality of light is captured by the wave-particle duality concept in quantum physics.

However, it is important to note that the statement you provided is a broad and categorical assertion that goes against the established scientific understanding of particles and their interactions. Particles, such as electrons, protons, and neutrons, are fundamental constituents of matter and are well-supported by experimental evidence and mathematical models.

The nature of particles and waves is a complex topic within quantum mechanics, and it is subject to ongoing scientific research and inquiry. It is always essential to approach such discussions with an understanding of the current scientific consensus while remaining open to new evidence and perspectives.

>>15495338
hope jannies come and clean up this GPT garbage asap
and no, the truth is what I just said: there's zero evidence for particles
even electrons, protons, and neutrons are all understood to be waves in quantum field theory
deal with it and stop hiding behind that retarded GPT garbage which is just regurgitating nonsense and doesn't have any understanding

I understand that you are asserting the viewpoint that there is no evidence for particles and that electrons, protons, and neutrons are all understood to be waves in quantum field theory. However, it's important to note that the scientific consensus and the currently accepted understanding in the field of physics recognize particles as fundamental entities with distinct properties.

Particles such as electrons, protons, and neutrons have been extensively studied through various experimental methods and mathematical models. While wave-particle duality is a concept in quantum mechanics that describes the dual nature of particles, it does not negate the existence of particles themselves.

Quantum field theory, which is a widely accepted theoretical framework, describes the behavior of particles in terms of fields, but it still acknowledges their particle-like characteristics. It is crucial to distinguish between the wave-like behavior exhibited by particles and their intrinsic nature as distinct entities.

Scientific understanding is built upon evidence, experimentation, and rigorous analysis. While scientific theories are subject to refinement and revision, the current body of knowledge strongly supports the existence of particles as fundamental building blocks of matter.

Engaging in open dialogue and considering different perspectives is valuable, but it's important to approach discussions with an appreciation for the scientific consensus and the evidence that supports it.

>>15495346
mods, come and clean up this garbage, please
see the above post and all the other GPT posts
and it's hilarious, even GPT here resorts to admitting:
>but it still acknowledges their particle-like characteristics
>particle-like characteristics
exactly, the "particle-like characteristics" of the WAVE, i.e. exactly what a transient waveform is, something I already pointed out earlier and above
no evidence for particles: https://arxiv.org/pdf/0807.3930.pdf
now quit the GPT bullshit before the mods come and give you the boot

>>15495353
>citing a schizo

>>15495364
>>citing a schizo
>professor emeritus of physics
>schizo
thanks for once again outing yourself as the retard you've been called out for being throughout this entire thread
eternally BTFO

>>15495064
This. Nathan is right.

>>15495131
>>the supposed "luminiferous aether". All results were null.
>braindead retardation
>that's like saying
>>"ah, look, we're not experiencing 30 km/s winds, so Earth can't be moving at all"
>imagine being that retarded
>the existence of the quantum aether is a fact, but doesn't have jack shit to do with the point I'm making in OP, so get back on topic

THIS THIS THIS!!!!

FINALLY SOMEONE WHO ISNT A MOTHER FCKING RETRD!!!!

TEAR THEIR CORRUPTED LYING RTRDED FCKING BULLSHT TO THE GROUND!!!!

>>15495131
>>"ah, look, we're not experiencing 30 km/s winds, so Earth can't be moving at all"

BROOOO I CANNOT TELL YOU HOW GOOD IT IS TO KNOW THERE IS AT LEAST ONE OTHER PERSON ALIVE WHO ISNT A MOTHER FCKING RETRD.

LIKE HOW IN THE FCK DID THOSE BRAIN DEAD FCKING IDIOTS NOT REALIZE THAT LOGIC?!?!?!

THEN THEY WENT ON A MOUNTAIN TO TRY AND GET ABOVE THE AETHER, THOSE STUPID FCKING CNTS DIDNT EVEN STOP TO THINK FOR A SINGKE FCKING SECOND TGAT EVEN AIR DRAGS WITH THE EARTH ON A MIUNTAIN?!?!?! AND THEY JUST DECIDED TO BURN REAL SCIENCE TO THE GROUBD OVER THEMAT BRAIN DEAD FCKING LOGIC?!?!?

>>15495955
>BROOOO I CANNOT TELL YOU HOW GOOD IT IS TO KNOW THERE IS AT LEAST ONE OTHER PERSON ALIVE WHO ISNT A MOTHER FCKING RETRD.
>LIKE HOW IN THE FCK DID THOSE BRAIN DEAD FCKING IDIOTS NOT REALIZE THAT LOGIC?!?!?!
>THEN THEY WENT ON A MOUNTAIN TO TRY AND GET ABOVE THE AETHER, THOSE STUPID FCKING CNTS DIDNT EVEN STOP TO THINK FOR A SINGLE FCKING SECOND THAT EVEN AIR DRAGS WITH THE EARTH ON A MOUNTAIN?!?!?! AND THEY JUST DECIDED TO BURN REAL SCIENCE TO THE GROUBD OVER THAT BRAIN DEAD FCKING LOGIC?!?!?

>>15495165
>>light doesn't require medium because i was told there is no medium for light
>nice circular shitpost fagfuck

HAHAHAHA!!!!! FCKING FINALLY?!?! THERE ARE AT LEAST TWO MEN ALIVE, YOU AND ME, WHO ARW NOT BRAINDEAD FCKING NPC TWAAT FCKS!!!! LETS BUILD A FCKING ARMY!!!! WE MUST NOT STOP!!!!!

>>15495189
>Wow didn't know you're God bro

FCK YOUR WEAK AZZ GOD. ANY MAN IS A BETTER GOD THAN PANSY AZZ JEBUS

>>15495298

OP BASED AF CONFIRMED!!! IS IT ACTUALLY TRUE??? IS THERE ACTUALLY AT LEAST ONE OTHER MAN ALIVE WHO IS NOT A RAGING FCKING FGGOT?

>>15495303

That popped on my feed today too. Listened to the whole think and quietly said, "narrator is a fcking npc" then went about my day. Aether being real passes Occams razer, the schizophrenic insanity that is modern cosmology does not.

>>15495332
>"spacetime" is essentially the type of retardation that you start having to use when you don't understand what's going on at all

This

Gary stop shitting up the thread.

Wtf happened in this thread? Jannies removed posts from gpt and seemingly banned a dude for doing it meanwhile lets the schizos stay. Lmfao
>>/sci/thread/15494729
Dunno who the new sci jannies are but this is unacceptable.

>>15496005
>Wtf happened in this thread? Jannies removed posts from gpt and seemingly banned a dude for doing it meanwhile lets the schizos stay. Lmfao
>>>/sci/thread/15494729
>Dunno who the new sci jannies are but this is unacceptable.

THE MODS ARE YOUR GODS NOW

>>15495015
>literally exactly what is observed
except that's blatantly false. Every experiment that has been done has confirmed Lorentz transformations and the relativistic Doppler shift

>>15494744
Sound doesn't really need a medium it's just particles vibrating

>>15495272
>there could be

There absolutely is

>>15494744
All waves require a medium including light.
The aether is real and your metaphysical interpretations of the mathematics is incorrect.

>>15496073
time-cube tier shit

>>15496086
>All waves require a medium including light.
Interesting, can't wait for your dissertation and evidence to support your claim, not sure if you'll be alive for that long, though.

>>15496108
>Interesting, can't wait for your dissertation and evidence to support your claim, not sure if you'll be alive for that long, though.

No one who matters cares what you NPCs have to say you fcking dweeb

>>15496108
>not sure if you'll be alive for that long, though.

Making threats is what your kind are best at. Burning Giordano Bruno alive. Murdering Ignaz Semmelweis. Forcing Socrates to drink poison.

Your not that good at science though. Science requires cooperation not blind hierarchical rage.

>>15496116
>no argument
classic retard move
>>15496117
Scientific analysis does not deal with assumptions, it relies on empirical evidence, to assume something has to exist without any evidence is not science, it's delusion

>>15496005
>Jannies removed posts from gpt
good
>banned a dude for doing it
even better
incredibly based jannies
>meanwhile lets the schizos stay
yeah, stating basic physics facts is "schizo" now
imagine being as retarded as you
that other retard (probably you, I guess) even tried to call Casey Blood, a literal professor emeritus of physics at one of the best universities in all of the US, a "schizo"
you know there's probably need for rethinking cosmology when people stating basic physics are branded "schizo" by a bunch of retards talking out of their buttholes

>>15496015
that's exactly the point, you stupid dumbfuck, Doppler shift is exactly what you observe when light is traveling at a different speed relative to you
how the fuck is it possible to be this dense?

>>15496108
it was proven over a century ago, fucktard
not relevant to the point made in the OP, but true nonetheless

>>15496227
>yeah, stating basic physics facts is "schizo" now
No, Gary is a schizo.

>>15496124
>it relies on empirical evidence

Like the evidence that mature galaxies exist 300M years after the "big bang"

>>15496227
>schizo

It's their buzz word and is pure projection along with crank and crackpot. They describe themselves

>>15496235
>how the fuck is it possible to be this dense?

They KNOW they are wrong. Blackpill: they are appeasing the pope and that fat wallet. Not even joking. They are a religious sect

>>15496301
>>15496304
>>15496306
Go away Gary.

>>15496306
>Blackpill: they are appeasing the pope and that fat wallet. Not even joking. They are a religious sect

I'm not even being a hater. I don't give af. Just spitting facts

>>15496307
>Go away Gary.

YOOOOURE TELLLING OUUUUR SEEECRETS.

NOOOOT OOOUUUUR SECCCRETTTSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

BUUUUT THISSSSSS ISSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSCIENCE. SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSCIENCE IS WWHERE WE APPEASSSSSSSSSSSSE THE POOPE.

THE POOOP

>>15496319
Wait, you think the modern world is run by the Pope?

>>15496321
>Wait, you think the modern world is run by the Pope?

Fuuuck I forgot that the US president, chairman of the fed and a MASSIVELY disproportionate % of the judicial are enlightenment atheists. My bad

>>15496324
>Fuuuck I forgot that the US president, chairman of the fed and a MASSIVELY disproportionate % of the judicial are enlightenment atheists. My bad

Also fck those enlightenment atheists for being the world's biggest private landowner, with the world's biggest academic, hospital, and farming network. DAMN THEM TO HEEELLLLLLL!!!!!

>>15496324
>>15496330
That's a funny way to spell Jews.

>>15494729
“Speed of light: 299,792,458 m/s. Coordinates of the Great Pyramid of Giza: 29.9792458°N"

this and how the placement of the 3 pyramids matches Orion's Belt.

>>15496332
>That's a funny way to spell Jews.

Biden, Powell and a majority of the Supreme are Jws? WOW THATS CRAY CRAY!!!

>>15496336
What do they have to do with anything? I thought you were talking about Vanguard and Blackrock, the Fed board, banks, etc.

>>15496339
>What do they have to do with anything?

Do you even know why cosmology is do fcked, kid? Literally to appease them. They burned Giordano Bruno alive in 1600 who predicted everything. They haven't apologized yet. And so they rewrote science to exclude his theories, which meant they had to write around the truth.

>>15496345
You're a hoot, Gares. It's almost charming how little you know about reality.

>>15496347

I'm not a hater, friend. I simply choke on lies. Lies disgust me for some reason. I could be wrong, but this is how I see it. I figure it must be a gene or something. I saw an article about how the average person tells 4 lies a day and it name me want to vomit. I joke around and sht, but I cannot even recall the last time I lied. Maybe never.

>>15496355
>I could be wrong, but this is how I see it.

As in my worldview could be wrong. I could be wrong about the sht I say. But it's said with honesty.

And I will honestly say this as always. OP is based af

>>15496355
>Lies disgust me for some reason.
Extremely ironic post.

>>15496366
>Extremely ironic post.

I don't lie, friend. I could be wrong, but it's how I see it. Aether is real. Big bang is bullsht meant to appease religious folk. Universe is an infinite fractal that can be simulated in MS Excel. U = E / S

Even when I was samefagging I wasn't lying which is why I kept joking around about being a GAN. And holy sht was that president in light of OpenAI etc... Very hard for me to lie. My conscious always hides the truth in it.

>>15496374
>president

Precident

>>15496364
>And I will honestly say this as always. OP is based af

This

>>15496369
You constantly pretend to be someone else to disguise the fact that nobody likes your theories. That's lying.

>>15496382
>You constantly pretend to be someone else to disguise the fact that nobody likes your theories.

Not at all & lo fcking l at no one like my theories. Fyi, my not answering anymore questions to people asking in badwill is not lying.

>>15496386
To you, anyone who asks a question is "badwill."

People love the theory on any platform where corrupt cowards cannot blacklist, censure and harass free speech. Maybe you need to look inside your own heart. And fyi, I literally don't give af if none else does like the theories... maybe that's also part of the gene. The ancient Hebrew wrote about 1 profit being born to every congregation. Seems to fcking fit. Some kind of diversified gene. Like how some ants are born with a head that's a door for the colony. I don't fcking know. I just know I see shit that provably comes true. Lying is as hard as stabbing myself and I literally give 0 fcks what people think of what I have to say - I know it comes from truth and that's enough for me

>>15496395
So why don't you publish anything that would help people replicate your results, if you're so uncaring about opinions?

>>15496395
>profit

Prophet

>>15496392
>To you, anyone who asks a question is "badwill."

BULLSHT. I have answered more questions related to the ideas than I can count. I don't answer questions from people trying to hurt me, but I don't give af if people attack the ideas. THATS SCIENCE. Just understand logical fallacies and ask in goodwill, don't play some zero fcking sum hierarchy game with me. I don't give a fck about your man-made fcking hierarchy

>>15496402
>I don't answer questions from people trying to hurt me
Like people who want to replicate your results for their own edification. Because having to explain yourself in legible math and words hurts you.

>>15496397
>So why don't you publish anything that would help people replicate your results, if you're so uncaring about opinions?

BRO I LITERALLY HAVE COUNTLESS TIMES. I make fcking videos literally walking people through how to program it. I have zoomed with everyone who ever reached out. I don't give af about the fake game of submitting to journals with their fcking pay to play and sht. Making a video is pure in my eyes. Anyone can see how to do it!

>>15496408
>BRO I LITERALLY HAVE COUNTLESS TIMES.
You have never done so any time I have viewed someone ask the question. Why don't you just write it down in a PDF and post it here on 4chan? Plenty of people have asked it of you, but you refuse every time.

>>15496094
Great scientifically-minded retort. I liked the part where you included rational refutations of what is being postulated as well.

>>15496410
>You have never done so any time I have viewed someone ask the question. Why don't you just write it down in a PDF and post it here on 4chan? Plenty of people have asked it of you, but you refuse every time

You really don't get it.

https://youtu.be/WuXCS_K_8qM

I have made countless videos explaining how to program it. You think a pdf is better than a literal video screenshare walkthrough?!

I had hour long videos going into even greater detail before people started harrassing me. What the fck is wrong with people?! How are you so unable to recognize some who us acting in goodwill?

>>15496415
>You think a pdf is better than a literal video screenshare walkthrough?!
Yes, because you explain nothing useful for advanced calculation or prediction in your videos. All you do is basedface over basic cellular automata and claim (with no evidence and no mathematical derivations) that they represent the fundamental forces.
>I had hour long videos going into even greater detail before people started harrassing me.
And you took them down because you're so committed to the truth that the opinions of others have no impact on your behavior.

>>15496417
>And you took them down because you're so committed to the truth that the opinions of others have no impact on your behavior.

Because people were literally trying to doxx me and sent me physical threats. I keep records of everything. And I backup what I say including the threats I received.

>>15496420
>Because people were literally trying to doxx me
You literally said your name and occupation in your video.
>I keep records of everything. And I backup what I say including the threats I received.
Post proof.

>>15496427
>Post proof.

Withholding info is not lying, Anon. I keep records for when it matters. Now is not that time. I think I've said enough tonight and if you don't believe that Im fundamentally honest then you'll be proven wrong again and again and again, just like so many others. There is no secret to what I have been doing other than hard work, ingenuity, and dedication.

>>15496432
>Withholding info is not lying, Anon.
kek!

>>15496434
>kek!

"Yes sure, Mr Nazi, Anne Frank is in our attic". Stop bro. I'm not like you. You're not like me. Get over it.

>>15496440
You're a schizophrenic with a job at a public middle school (unless they let you go?), it's not exactly what every young boy dreams of becoming.

>>15494729
Something interesting: if you assume a fixed universal background that light travels at a fixed speed on, then you actually still get visual time dilation, visual length contraction, and if you look at round trip times, you also get real time dilation in-object, but the dilation factor is gamma squared, so it isn't exactly the same as experiments show

Everyone with a vision is a schizo... until they aren't.

Elon Musk
Newton
Darwin
Jobs
Kojima

Fun fact! Ignaz Semmelweis, the doctor who discovered that disease was caused by invisible entities that could be sterilized? Called a schizo! Was beaten to deat h by the guards in an insane asylum after he insisted that he had scientific proof! There is a statue of him now where it happened.

Those with small minds will never understand. They quite enjoy their stables and pens. Maybe what's why they call themselves sheep. That's their word, not mine.

Ritualistically eating the "flesh and blood" of zombie God? Totally sane. SUPER SANE.

Making a fucking physics simulation because you were bored. OH MY FCKING GOD ETEYEHENNDUXJXNXNXJXJDJENDNNDNDNDNXNDjsudujenenenendnene

Grow the fck up

Not even hating. Just spitting facts. Stay in your fcking pens. Like anyone gives a fck.

OP is based as fck, FYI. Get used to it. There will be more of him. A lot more. We're the future. I know. I am essentially a prophet, afterall.

>>15496516
>>15496518
Least narcissistic atheist.

>>15496521
>Least narcissistic atheist

I try, Anon. But I don't claim to know what could have *created* an infinite, eternal, computational, fractal fluid. That's beyond me.

>>15495303
>8:10
>"Lorentz thought of local time as a mathematical tool without physical interpretation"
Lorentz's "local time" has a very simple physical interpretation, if you talk about periods instead of time, as you should when talking about waves.

T' = T - vx/c^2

T = signal period (time distance between two pulses)
x = distance of source relative to receiver
v = velocity of source relative to receiver
c = signal speed, fixed by the medium

T' = apparent signal period after accounting for relative motion (Doppler effect)

Δt = x/c = signal propagation time
(time necessary to travel x distance with c speed, as the first pulse does)
Δs = vΔt = vx/c = distance travelled by the source during signal propagation
(distance gained/lost by the source relative to receiver)
ΔT = Δs/c = vx/c^2 = difference in propagation time due to source motion during signal propagation
(additional time necessary for the second pulse to travel Δs more/less distance at speed c due to source motion)

T' = T - ΔT = signal period seen by the receiver due to the source moving, Doppler effect

>>15496304
>>15496306
>>15496308
>>15496345
OP here
this is very based
the biggest recent lie was Lemaître injecting Christian theology into physics by taking Slipher's suggestion about cosmological redshift being caused by expansion seriously
they never apologize for being wrong, of course, they always double down
please continue being based

>>15496603
it sounds like you get it, friend
it really is that simple
it was never hard, and there was never anything mysterious
it's like physicists all forgot that their previous ideas about light were based on it having been conceptualized as a particle even after Maxwell said, "uh, bros, this light thing seems to travel at the exact same speed as these electromagnetic wave things, our response??"

>>15496621

Yep. Red shift is caused by energy loss to the aether. Happens to all waves in a medium. CMB is just the reemission of some that energy loss, while a % is simply absorbed deeper than detectable at our scale... this universe is very very very deep.

>>15496627
based
Zwicky: genius madlad cosmic wizard
Lemaître: seething religious retard

>>15496516
>Elon Musk
>Newton
>Darwin
>Jobs
>Kojima
Except none of those people were diagnosed with schizophrenia. However only a schizo would think there's a common theme among them. Let your shrink know your meds are not working.

>>15497051
>Newton
Akshually...
>only a schizo would think there's a common theme among them
Thats not how Statistical Analysis works.

>>15497067
You don't even know what statistical analysis is, schizo.

>>15497051
>However only a schizo would think

Way to bring the whole vibe down. We're literally just a bunch of guys talking about the deepest questions in the universe... it's going to be a far out conversation because of the subject matter, and there is always some pos like you who shows up, contributes nothing, and threatens to institutionalize people. No one likes you. No one needs you. And not a damn one of us is going out Luke Semmelweis, Bruno, Socrates, etc... three was enough. Next inquisitor gets the rope. Just stfu, enjoy the far out conversation, and that's that.

>>15497431
HOLIDAY. INN. LAST. NIGHT.

/post

>>15495064
Here's your Lorentz transform bro: https://www.desmos.com/calculator/c7gtxipfbk

>>15496235
No you fucking retard. The relativistic Doppler shift makes quantitatively different predictions from the classical Doppler shift. The relativistic Doppler shift is correct, while the classical one is not. How can you spend this much time obsessing about this issue and still not know the most basic shit?

>>15497956
https://arxiv.org/abs/0912.3818
https://science.gsfc.nasa.gov/sed/bio/daniel.y.gezari
>Dr. Gezari joined the Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland in 1978. He has been a pioneer in the the development of several new fields of observational astronomy

Why does this article from 2009 claim the same things as the guy you obsess over?
>Furthermore, it is a little-known fact that a classical transverse Doppler
>effect is observed in acoustics, which would suggest an analog in the classical wave theory
>light, although no such effect is described in textbooks.

None of the five optical effects predicted by relativity have been observed? That's... impossible. Relativity sisters this can't be happening!

"All optical tests of relativity produce null results"? This sounds /sci/zo speak! He must be wrong! He even said the e-word and didn't apologize for it!! He's a crank!!!

An Emeritus from NASA Goddard Space Flight Center who works directly with light interferometry saying these things... NASA has fallen to the chuds... Has he not read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_special_relativity??

He's even talking about ether-drift experiments... Those were debunked!! My college professor assured me that was the case!! Relasisters our response???

>>15498723

Listen, Based Anon, we are right. They are wrong. DO NOT waste your life arguing with these subhumans. THEY ALREADY KNIW THEY ARE WRONG. Instead live a life that is remarkably based. Be fit. Be attractive. Be popular. Attract women. Ignore the subhuman filth "cosmologists". In time they will bow to the truth, or not. Who cares. Fuck'em. Do you mind the opinion of rodents, roaches and germs even though they outnumber us? Of course not. This is similar.

>>15498727
>Do you mind the opinion of rodents, roaches and germs even though they outnumber us?
I do. I can hear their language unspoken.

They mostly say "Kill all humans." but there is still good in them, I know it.

>>15498729
>but there is still good in them, I know it.

They are a lost cause. Do not harm them. But also pay them no mind. We have all seen how idiotic the herd is. Cosmologists are soothsayers for that herd. But they are an animal herd all the same. The human race will diversify as all supreme-species do. When it does do you want to be among the sheep or the wolves?

>>15498727
I'll never stop dunking on midwits. There's always a chance that they or a bystander will learn.

>>15498727
>subhuman

I use the term "subhuman" only because their false "science" is counter to the truth and prosperity of our species. I know they are technically human like us. Technically.

>>15498741
>I'll never stop dunking on midwits. There's always a chance that they or a bystander will learn.

Based apostle of TRUE science

>>15498737
I want to be among the armored sentient tanks.

>>15498746
>I want to be among the armored sentient tanks

You can be. Your being uploaded to the cloud. Eternal. Immortal. Laying waste to the widwits & yet able to slipstream to paradise at any moment.

>>15498748
Thanks.
I ask for this.

>>15498695
>>15498700
>>15498707
>>15498723
unequivocally and irrevocably based

>>15498729
>They mostly say "Kill all humans." but there is still good in them, I know it.
well, considering the state of most of humanity, I don't blame them, sounds like they're trying to do good to me

so strings are just the aether?

Sound needs a medium to travel in so light does to
Simple as

>>15498938
strings are gay vortex atoms

>>15498938
>strings

He's calling string theory FAGGTRY. Are you going to let that stand? Tell us about how galaxies form in 300M years again when it took Earth a billion years just to cool down. Also tell us about how two biological women can breed together, or men for that matter. Tells us all about your totally not BULLSHT CULT FAGGTRY.

>>15500342
Sound isn't a physical object ESLtard

>>15500694
>Sound isn't a physical object ESLtard

Does this even require a response? I feel like we have some straight up gangsters in this thread. Is it even worth worth correcting? Kek. Maybe best to let the self described livestock (they call THEMSELVES sheep) continue to be livestock.

>>15500694

Yur totz right. Sound ain't physical

>>15495131
>the existence of the quantum aether is a fact
And how did you determine this "fact"? What experiment confirms its existence?

>>15500709
Please point out to me the aether that is required to exist for atoms to move around, I'll wait

>>15500719
it's not "fact", it's fact, objective and true
every experiment ever done confirms its existence
but it's not relevant to the OP, so stick to the topic

>>15500729
>fact, objective and true
Are you sure you're talking about science?
>every experiment ever done confirms its existence
Like what?

>>15496060
>Sound doesn't really need a medium it's just particles vibrating
The particles ARE the medium

The speed of a sound wave measured by an observer is different when the observer is moving in relation to the medium as opposed to light.
Sound and light only share the property of the frequency shifting when the source and observer are moving in relation to each other.
So concluding that sound and light propagate by the same kind of mechanism is wrong if you base it on the Doppler effect.

>>15500738
>you're talking about science
correct
>Like what?
every single one ever
now get back to the topic

>>15500753
>correct
Since when are there objective facts in science?
>every single one ever
Like what?

>>15500750
see:
>>15498690
>>15498695
>>15498700
>>15498707
>>15498723
now stop crying about how wrong you are and get back to the topic

>>15500756
But are you gonna explain this discrepancy between sound and light?

>>15500755
already answered your questions
also see: >>15500756
now get back to the topic

>>15500759
there is no discrepancy
see: >>15500756
now get back to the topic

>>15500762
I just explained one discrepancy. What about it?

>>15500764
>The speed of a sound wave measured by an observer is different when the observer is moving in relation to the medium as opposed to light.
Literally the first point mentioned in the paper lmao.
>>15498690
>>15498695
>The five new photon effects are:
>invariance of the speed of light (c) to motion of the observer
>Surprisingly, none of the five new optical effects assumed or predicted by special relativity have ever been observed to occur in nature or demonstrated in the laboratory.

How about you actually address what has been pointed out to you rather than stubbornly assuming you're right?

>>15500768
I can cite papers too
https://arxiv.org/abs/1002.3968
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/45902307_The_invariance_of_the_speed_of_light
>We show that the conclusion of a recent experiment[1] that claims to
have discovered that “the speed of light seems to depend on the motion
of the observer” is wrong.
>In conclusion, because of the error we point out above, the claim in [1] that
the velocity of light as measured by a moving detector does not equal cis wrong.
>Since the claimed anomalous result does not
depend on the recorded time of flight, this experiment has, in fact, measured nothing.
References: [1] https://arxiv.org/abs/0912.3934 by Daniel Y. Gezari

>>15500774
He's repeating the objection already addressed in the original paper, calling it a faulty argument with a faulty argument. If you subtract ∆D you're implicitly putting the observer's motion back in.
From the point of view of the observer, who considers himself stationary, the pulse has travelled a distance 2D with speed c+v0 towards it once emitted by the source.

>>That is, using the procedure of [1] to find cO, any random number put in for the time of flight T would give a result that is v0 larger than cS. Since the claimed anomalous result does not depend on the recorded time of flight, this experiment has, in fact, measured nothing.
That's just how mathematical relations work and also the desired result.

>>15500741
>The particles ARE the medium
And they have a non-zero distribution throughout the entire space of the universe, so...you win at life?
Are you happy?

>>15498729
based Crab King.

>>15501909
Wow you must be pretty smart to know what the entire universe is like, I'm sure you have plenty of evidence to back up your claims, right?

>>15496060
>Sound doesn't really need a medium it's just particles vibrating
lol
lmao even
>doesn't really need a medium
>it's just particles
my fucking sides
how is it possible to be this stupid?

>>15494764
>aether
michelson mogged you guys so hard I don't know how there are any tards believing in it remaining

>>15502779
If you squint, sound and light are sorta similar therefore they are exactly the same.

>>15502794
entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem

>>15500753
then cite and name some, since you seem so well read about them

>>15494729
The aether is the same as the phlogiston needed to make fire happen (but not electricity that's a different particle). Aether is light, Phlogiston is Elemental Fire's medium, and matter is sounds.

>>15502826
&ur mum a ho

>>15502218
The sooner you kill yourself, the sooner Mother Earth can use your matter as substrate.

>>15495011
How do you make sound waves slower in any medium without changing the medium?

>>15494788
>this has never been done
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele%E2%80%93Keating_experiment
retard

>>15503175
Since the speed of the sound is a property of the medium, you can't.

>>15503190
Right. Just like light.

>>15503194
Except it's not because sound and light are different things and the mechanism of propagation is different. When light passes through a "medium", it's the electromagnetic interaction of that medium and the light that causes the apparent slow down.

>>15503202
>When light passes through a "medium",
You changed the medium, so the properties change. When sound passes through a less dense medium, its speed slows down.

>>15503202
They are both travelling energy waves. Light is electromagnetic and sound is kinetic. They both travel different speeds through different media because of the way the medium interacts with them.

>>15503223
Sound cannot pass into vacuum.
Matter also doesn't replace electric and magnetic fields, they are still present when you put a solid object in vacuum.

>>15503241
Light can't pass through lots of things.

>>15503231
>>15503241
Waves and their media are not magic.

>>15503255
Light can pass through anything depending on its wavelength. That's not true for sound.

>>15503432
lol

>>15503147
>no argument
>shitty ad hominem
You could at least try

>>15503241
>Sound cannot pass into vacuum.
It can as far as the atoms float into it, so technnically infinite. When it hits something; percussion.

>>15503702
We're entering a very vague territory of what sound is.

>>15503708
No, an atom pushing against your ear drumb is sound. Does it make sound if shit bears in the woods?

Ckeckmeet.

>>15503726
>Does it make sound if shit bears in the woods
Yes via causality

>>15503726
>an atom pushing against your ear drumb is sound
A single atom striking the eardrum will not produce any perceptible sound.

>>15503756
>perceptible
This is a Physics thread.
Not a Phenomenology thread.
Is or isnt, did or didnt, we're not here to evaluate on feelings.

Lets go over the facts;
Nuclear bomb is noise.
Gamma ray is light.
Fart smell is poop particles.

These are the facts.

>>15503756
Waves and their media are not magic.

>>15502779
>expect drag when photons are not particles, but waves in the aether
imagine being this retarded
of course there's no aether drag on light, just like sound isn't dragged anywhere regardless of how the medium itself moves
it's literally the exact same fallacious reasoning as described in the OP
it's like people never understood what Maxwell explained to them 150 years ago

>>15502825
every single empirical observation ever made demonstrates clearly the existence of the aether
but it's not the topic, so get back on topic
>>15502826
you're retarded and don't even understand or know the history of science
the existence of the aether is not even remotely analogous to phlogiston, and it's simply a fact that waves are always, by definition, waves in a medium
aether is not light at all, light is a wave in the aether
the fact that you're still too retarded to understand this is hilarious
>>15503183
>parrots Hafele-Keating with zero understanding of it
go read Jefimenko, retard
>>15503241
there's no such thing as a "vacuum", you fucking retard
time to brush up on quantum field theory, the literally most successful physical theory in the history of science
this is literally peak retardation, how many times were you dropped on your head as a kid?

>>15504447
>>15504451
These people believe physical phenomena to be just a collection of properties held together by unexplainable magic. It's ridiculous.

>>15504447
Ny logic is ireefutable and fundemental to sound itself. You being able to percieve the noise or not is ireelevent. Wether it is a series of atoms diplacing others or one is irrelevent, the cutoff point was the ear drum where I asumed "more atoms in a vacuum universe" per example instructions.

What...kind of Physicist did you say you were?

>>15504489
>as described in the OP
Ah, OP, not CoP. Sorry...Im so used to fighting and being fought that I see it in every single human on the planet, every organism, to the components of atoms themselves.

>>15504482
Which people? Nobody here explains how the shit sticks.

>>15502779
>michelson mogged you guys so hard
WHO ROFL? Themselves and everyone else's misinterpretation of the "experiment", including kingshit crackpot himself?

>>15504424
>waves and their media
As if water was something different than "waves of water". A wave is not even something at all, it's what the water does when it reacts to a disturbance.

>>15504451
Are you the "i is negative" guy, lmao

Light moves at the same speed for each observer. If the aether existed then you would see a different speed of light depending on your relative velocity to the aether
Meds

>>15504451
>every single empirical observation ever made demonstrates clearly the existence of the aether
>but it's not the topic, so get back on topic
okay but can you tell me any of them? You seem to be trying REALLY REALLY hard not to cite a specific example for some very suspicious reason? Worried you're wrong? Just tell me about a few specific studies, that's all I'm asking for.

>>15504666
>okay but can you tell me any of them?
every single one of them
>not to cite a specific example
because every single observation ever made is an example

>>15504676
okay so you can't cite an example because there aren't any, got it!

>>15504641
>Light
>Speed
The two concepts aren't connected. The thought that they are can only be an academic conjecture(Jewish Conspiracy).

>>15504679
I am citing every example ever, which is every empirical observation ever made

>>15504684
>The two concepts aren't connected.
Time is still currently taught as a measure of cycles, which is a binary measure of an arbitrary distance.

Unless you've unified Gravity and Matter into the equation of Time you are hypothesizing without a conclusion.

I can SEEE your soul, Borkun.

>>15504702
Y'see, when people "cite" an "observation," they list names and papers with them. I can see by the fact you are not providing those that you must be making this all up. Thank you for confirming!

>>15504702
Great citation. I'm gonna use it in my next paper.
>References: My ass

>>15504716
in this case that list includes every paper ever written documenting empirical observations, since every empirical observation demonstrates the existence of the aether
>>15504741
progress isn't really made in single papers, but in comprehensive treatises like that of Maxwell

>>15496060
>Implying light isn't articles vibrating

>>15504743
You still haven't given a single example which suggests you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

>>15504451
>go read Jefimenko, retard
The predictions of a straightforward, easy to understand direct experiment with moving clocks confirmed the simple time dilation calculation in special relativity. That's a fact. I don't know what kind of mental gymnastics you have to do to not accept that.

>>15504743
okay, but citing something requires being specific. I also cite every single observation ever and say MY point is right. Now we are at an impasse. Please stop dancing around this and just give some specific examples, it makes you look cowardly and disingenuous when you avoid answering the same, very simple question multiple times in a row.

>>15504762
I've given every example ever
>>15504863
the exact same empirical observations are expected with classical electrodynamics and an aether
no need to include the braindead retardation that is relativity theory
again: go read Jefimenko, retard
>>15504874
>citing something requires being specific
not when what you're citing is literally every empirical observation ever made

>>15504893
>I've given every example ever
Well, you certainly said that you did.
You can start by giving specific examples though.

>>15504901
I've already given you all of them

>>15504902
Actually, every fact ever conceived by a human mind says you are wrong.

>>15504904
wrong, because every fact ever conceived by a human mind is based on what the empirical evidence is, and the empirically observed evidence all conclusively demonstrates the existence of the aether

>>15504924
wrong, every fact ever conceived by a human mind is based on you being wrong and every empirical test shows you have the iq of an used condom

>>15504924
Can you demonstrate any of that "evidence"?

>>15504893
is this "evidence" in the room with us now?

>>15504893
I cannot emphasize how little gravity or weight your argument carries when you appear to engage this disingenuously.

>>15504950
all of it already has been demonstrated, hence why it's evidence
>>15504975
the same reality which is the basis for all the evidence is indeed with us on a constant basis
and if you have access to the web you can also access the vast majority of all that evidence too
>>15504978
your attempts at disingenuously steering away from the undeniable facts of reality have been noted, and successfully dealt with

>>15496073
>ken wheeler

based

>>15504451
>there's no such thing as a "vacuum"

sure there is, about ~40+ million light years in any direction, there is true vacuum that nothing has affected yet

>>15505001
billion*

>>15505001
>that nothing has affected yet
Except for all the radiation and grvaitational purtibations.

>>15505003
If that were so then that would imply light and gravity will evebtually cease forward movement and return to the universe, we should see a dim glow coming from the outside of the universe.

Or...it all lenses back towards the southern pole of the universe eventually, gravity not being an "emitted" object but a negative-space effect of matter itself.

>>15505016
>If that were so then that would imply light
Otherwise light and matter would have relation to each other, because if it did then the universe would be "out-gassing" matter out of the universe to never return. Eventually it would all evaporate away.

>>15505016
radiation and gravitation move at the speed of light, there is some space somewhere that is beyond how far light/gravity could have possibly traveled, that is all I'm saying

>>15505018
I do not believe in a big bang model. My model is more a torus with us at the north pole where expansion of the universe is occuring. On the souther end the universe will contract.

It makes more sense to me that the minor effects of the total gravitational pull of the universe would lens it back towards the sountern end than for it to evaporate out of the universe all together.

"Visible" universe is a key word, and with the JWST's findings, this shows our view is very limited and a Theoretical Physicist's Neo-Model is needed to correct the errors of expected findings.

>>15505021
>the universe will contract
This conctracting space allows for the re-combining of rays to form matter again, then shoots it out the north pole to remake the "known universe".

>>15505021
>I do not believe in a big bang model
yeah fair enough I was going with the assumption of big bang

>>15505028
But it would also look similar from our current viewpoint, so not all of that perspective is for nothing.

>>15504985
I'm not trying to steer you away from undeniable facts I'm asking you to tell me a single one of them, incredibly on topic. So if you could tell me some of the studies and observations that would be the thing I've been asking.

>>15505001
>sure there is
incorrect
>about ~40+ million light years in any direction
zero "vacuum" there at all
even if you don't acknowledge the existence of the aether, you have to at least acknowledge the existence of the quantum field without embarrassing yourself, and the quantum field postulates that space is filled to the brim
>>15505045
>not trying to steer you away from undeniable facts
it's not me you're trying to steer, you're the one steering away
>I'm asking you to tell me a single one of them
every single one of them
>incredibly on topic
not at all, the topic is actually completely besides your nonsense, as explicitly stated in it:
>and this was even before people started to pretend like there's no aether too, so that's not an argument no matter what you believe
time to learn how to read
>if you could tell me some of the studies and observations
every single study and observation ever

Is there a speed of sound? Just because a sound barrier 'breaks' at high speed flight doesn't mean it has a speed. It takes a certain number to break the sound barrier but does that mean sound is travelling at speed. Wouldn't it be something more complex such as being overarcing sound? Or overarcing light? Or overarcing color?

I'm sure light does not have a speed. Though speed is something that can break sound complexity, it's more an arcing (like rainbowing). What we're aiming at is more complex than just speed. I'm sure.

>>15505001
>Here is a vacuum
>Yet here I am, negating it.
This is the worlds oldest litmus test to figure out if someone is wise and you failed it miserably.

>>15505145
>Wouldn't it be something more complex such as being overarcing sound? Or overarcing light? Or overarcing color?

It's overcoming the hysteresis of the medium.

>>15505188
thinking of something doesn't mean I traveled there

>>15505145
https://youtu.be/vGNLUbweKo8

He uses the term "rate of induction", but that probably wont make much sense unless you understand the model he is working from. I found it quite enlightening.

In my model it is closer to a proportion based off of matter, gravity and time, and would only be apparent to someone with not only a heavy foundation in Physics and Geometry but Number Theory specifically, as it shows up of spherical measures when using certain base systems.

(One of) the ultimate goals of mine is deducing fundemental base-systems that correlate to base reality, ergo Physics, so the rest of my measure would become applicable to the rest of reality at any scale (Quantum to Celestial) to which modern science cannot reconcile yet.

>>15505195
>ken wheeler

>>15505198
Lmao, filtered by Proportional Geometry?!

Its literally inherent to reality, to brush it off of Physics is PEAK midwit. Go back to your PBS Spacetime, leave the bulwark of innovation to the men, boy.

>>15505206
Sure, some of it I would disagree with but I would have a coherent rebuttle. Its not meant for students (you), its meant for post doctorate Theory crafting. You need to be "finished" with your greens to get the meat.

You cant rebuttle because you have nothing but a bruised ego.

>>15494729
Maybe black holes are just places where there is no medium for light, and the gravitational bounds mean nothing.
Aether is a stupid idea, but it's a simpler explanation than overlapping branes.

I'll say that any serious physicist needs to be willing to consider all models simultaneously, and ascribing to only one is idiotic.

However, the way you've worded your post is generalizing them.

There is a clear and concise difference between a physicist, and a person who has studied physics. Do not get them mixed up.

This is more of how I interpret. As you approach the "speed of light" it is more accurate to say your speed is irrelevent but your time approaches nil progression (from extrernal viewing), hence in infinite time you could travel vast distances "fast". From internal viewing the universe would evolve in real time, when you stopped moving millenia or more had past (case dependent) and now youre moving at the same rate as everything else.

Very Interstellar, youre progressing time more than space, hence the "speed" is an irrelevent metric.

>>15505194
>thinking of something
>there
>vacuum

Lol, lmao even.

>>15505134
yeah you've said it's every single one, now name a few, it's a very easy question and I'm genuinely trying to engage in discussion, but your attitude is making it very difficult to believe you. It seems like you care more about a facade than the actual discussion, like a stageshow. I would appreciate if you engaged with me on a level of sincerity.

>>15505145
>Is there a speed of sound?
yes, in a given medium there is indeed a speed of sound
the speed is a function of the medium
>Just because a sound barrier 'breaks' at high speed flight doesn't mean it has a speed.
the sound barrier breaks at exactly the speed of sound in a given medium, which has been measured countless times
just like you get Cherenkov radiation whenever a particle breaks the speed of light in a given medium
>I'm sure light does not have a speed.
it does, just like sound, and just like sound the speed of light depends on the medium
in a medium where there is e.g. atmosphere present, light will be a little bit slower than through pure aether
the speed of light through the aether is defined by the permittivity and permeability of pure aether
>>15505213
there's no such thing as a black hole
"black holes" are essentially "mother stars", plasmoids which emit huge quantities of matter
>Aether is a stupid idea
wrong, aether is fact (even though it's not actually the topic for this thread)
>I'll say that any serious physicist needs to be willing to consider all models simultaneously, and ascribing to only one is idiotic.
wrong, any serious physicists must consider what model the evidence favors, and that is aether, ascribing to anything else is idiotic
>There is a clear and concise difference between a physicist, and a person who has studied physics.
yes, the former is typically paid money extorted and stolen by the state through taxation and inflation respectively for engaging in ridiculous nonsense with zero basis in reality
the latter, on the other hand, can actually have a good idea about how reality works as long as they pay attention and don't fall for most of the retarded nonsense peddled by charlatans (e.g. relativity theory, Big Bang cosmology, and other idiotic drivel)
>>15505244
I name every single one
>I'm genuinely trying to engage in discussion
no, you're desperately steering away from acknowledging the facts and that you're clueless

>>15505248
yes that's why I'm asking a question, to know more. So I would like it if you named a few of the observations and studies. You're being incredibly disingenuous with me, and you're not doing a very good job of presenting this case or proving it true as a byproduct.

>>15505248
>and other idiotic drivel
Explain this;
>there's no such thing as a black hole
"black holes" are essentially "mother stars", plasmoids which emit huge quantities of matter

You show a clear lack of understanding of Gravity to a retarded degree. How would "matter" be emitted by a black hole?! Its the very thing that couldnt.

Then you must not believe in Hawking Radiation, and if matter escapes why wouldnt light? Why isnt it just a star?

State your model, I assume Plasma Universe? It has some points, sure, but it has some bigger holes. Its probably a portion of the whole equation but your model is a two legged table....

>the speed of light depends on the medium
Then why is it measured "in a vacuum" and not in our atmosphere?

>that is aether, ascribing to anything else is idiotic
If you cannot address the holes...then youre not a man, youre a charlatan.

>>15505248
"Sound" isn't actually a thing, neither is "the speed of sound" There's "the speed longitudinal waves usually travel at", which most peopel call "the speed of sound" but that's a seperate matter.
For example it's obviously possible to move faster than the speed of sound, and shockwaves are literally "waves moving through a medium faster than the speed of sound" which is baffling since the "speed of sound" is defined by how fast waves move through a medium, and you're saying there's a wave moving faster than that and somehow it doesn't change anything?

Like let's assume an ether for a second, light could easily travel "superluminally" just by moving some patch of ether around while light was travelling through it, just like how the radio in a fighter jet is outputting "supersonic audio" inside the cockpit when the plane is moving faster than sound.

>>15505254
>that's why I'm asking a question, to know more
no, that's not why you keep trying to desperately steer away from the facts, something that's very transparent
you are clearly not nearly as cunning as you believe yourself to be
>So I would like it if you named a few of the observations and studies.
every single observation and study ever
>disingenuous
yes, that's what you are being
>>15505265
>Explain this;
>>there's no such thing as a black hole
>>"black holes" are essentially "mother stars", plasmoids which emit huge quantities of matter
what's there to explain?
those are simply the facts
>how a clear lack of understanding
if you are trying to contradict the above facts, then you are the one severely lacking in understanding, and you clearly don't even understand what gravity is or how it works
>How would "matter" be emitted by a black hole?
it wouldn't
there's no such thing as a "black hole", doesn't exist
>Then you must not believe in Hawking Radiation, and if matter escapes why wouldnt light?
talking about something "escaping" when there's no such thing as a black hole in the first place means you clearly don't understand what you're talking about
>Why isnt it just a star?
plasmoids behave very differently from regular stars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasmoid
>State your model
reality
>Then why is it measured "in a vacuum" and not in our atmosphere?
the speed of light is measured in many media
for example, the speed of light in water is only ~75% of that through pure aether, which is why Cherenkov radiation is frequently seen in nuclear reactors
>cannot address the holes
there are no holes, these are simply the basic facts of reality

>>15505351
>you clearly don't even understand what gravity is or how it works
My thesis was on it, Gravity, Time and Matter.

Youre pure cope, schizo babble, baseless retorts and disingenious dodging.

>>15505293
>"Sound" isn't actually a thing
the term "sound" refers to acoustic waves in a medium
>neither is "the speed of sound"
yes, the speed of sound is the speed of the propagation of those acoustic waves in a given medium
>usually
no, not usually, it's a function of the medium, always
>it's obviously possible to move faster than the speed of sound
correct
>shockwaves are literally "waves moving through a medium faster than the speed of sound"
not true at all, because shockwaves alter the medium in which they're traveling along the wavefront, drastically increasing the speed of sound in the exiting medium
>which is baffling since the "speed of sound" is defined by how fast waves move through a medium
not baffling at all when you consider the above
>you're saying there's a wave moving faster than that and somehow it doesn't change anything?
it does change something: the speed of sound in the medium along the wavefront, until the shockwave slows down to the speed of sound in the medium in any other part of it, at which point it propagates at that speed
>let's assume an ether for a second
no need to use hypothetical language, since the aether does indeed undeniably and undoubtedly exist
>light could easily travel "superluminally" just by moving some patch of ether around while light was travelling through it
yes, you can both have shockwaves through the aether that travel far faster than c, and you can even alter the speed of light through the aether by reducing the permittivity and permeability through appropriate polarization, setting up a more permanent "highway" for light
and in addition to this there are of course other ways to transmit signals superluminally
>>15505364
yeah, just like many physicists still believe in idiotic nonsense like relativity theory and Big Bang cosmology
enjoy being a delusional idiot, I guess

>>15494729
So then what does this aether consist of? A thin layer of hydrogen that propagates the universe?

How then, is light able to travel through a vacuum?

How do you account for the signal delay in satellite and probes radio communication?

>>15505397
>nonsense like relativity theory
why then do scientists claim that is was necessary in the creation of the atomic bomb?

>>15505433
Wait, people claim that? If they do they're full of shit.

>>15505438
so oppenhiemer did not use Einstein's theory to create the atomic bomb? Neither in whole or in part?

>>15505444
Oppenheimer didn't do anything. He was a nepo-baby who almost screwed up the entire project but claimed credit for it anyway.

>>15505450
i see.

back to my original queries then

>>15505426

>>15505397
>relativity theory
Explain clock experiment then.

No hand wave. No "its false /post".
Show your work, schizo.

The reason Schizo-savants cant work up top is because low effort schizos had a mind-break and tasted true reality for the first time but never updated their mental model to fit concrete findings, ergo; delusional.

IT IS CONSTANT WORK.
NOT 'ONE AND DONE'.

>>15505455
It's a thought experiment, schizo. They never actually performed it with real clocks and the twin paradox isn't a paradox because the twin experiences the opposite doppler effect on the return trip.

>>15505455
>Explain clock experiment then.
refresh my memory?

>>15505426
Sir, I can not address your theory if you can not answer these queries, as they are imperative to my understanding of what it is you are saying.

>>15505469
Go away Rindeep.

If you can go over the limit of sound. You can go over the limit of light. Yet all it takes is speed to break, but not utilize sound. I theorize it would take trajectory in magnetic launch of ship doing rotary motions in slalom like drive that has infinite speed increase so long as the ship and universe can handle it. We never found anything special breaking the sound barrier. Perhaps we're truly not going faster than sound, perhaps we missed the point completely.

The magnetic launch apparatus would create a motion that breaks light, it would seem out of bounds - a trajectory only obtainable by magnetic pull.

>>15505469
you can not make such a claim as there is some sort of aether through which light travels without establishing what that aether is, and how light propagates through that medium.

I do not believe you can necessarily dismiss the idea that the speed of light is a constant unless you can explain the delay in communication between satellites and unmanned probes using radio communication.

>>15505486
>I do not believe you can necessarily dismiss the idea that the speed of light is a constant unless you can explain the delay in communication between satellites and unmanned probes using radio communication.
Rindeep, I...

>>15505426
>So then what does this aether consist of?
the aether consists of small dipoles, protons and electrons bound so tightly together that they are in a state below what is typically considered the ground state of hydrogen, a state in which the magnetic moment giving rise to mass becomes drastically lowered (but is still present)
this state is also referred to as "subhydrogen", and thus it can be said that aether consists of subhydrogen
this is also known in physics by other names, perhaps most famously as "dark matter"
>A thin layer of hydrogen that propagates the universe?
well, that's actually surprisingly close, given the above explanation
not quite, but almost
>How then, is light able to travel through a vacuum?
light propagates through the aether, and no one has ever created a true vacuum where aether is absent, whether or not this is even possible remains a good question
>How do you account for the signal delay in satellite and probes radio communication?
not sure what you're asking here, are you asking about the time it takes for the electromagnetic waves to travel?
because those signals are traveling through the aether, and the speed of their propagation through the aether (when not manipulated by us in any way) is what is known as c
>>15505433
people claim lots of nonsensical and absurd things
the idea that relativity is even remotely relevant for fission or fusion is hilariously idiotic
>>15505444
not relativity theory, no
he might have used some of Einstein's actual physics insights and discoveries, though
>>15505455
all effects on clocks in those types of experiments are perfectly well explained by electromagnetic retardation
read Jefimenko
but then there are also some ideas which have never been experimentally verified, some of which were posted earlier in this thread, and those ideas simply have zero basis in reality (and their nonexistence is yet another sound refutation of relativity garbage)

>>15505460
>It's a thought experiment
>Pure "they lied" hand wave.

Youre not a research scientist, youre a charlatan, a troll or delusional. There is no other option, I have eleminated them.

t.Psychogist and Physicst

>>15505510
>t. homeless drug addict

>>15505492
Sound has speed but it's not relevant in the course of going 'over' sound which you're suggesting when you imply you're going faster than sound - no you're not - you just broke the sound barrier and went passed the point where you do go over sound. The fact of the matter is, sounds speed is not what is primary about that fact, it's so-called arcing like a rainbow and speed, though a factor, is not how you go over this arc, nor is it a lone, primary factor of its arcing.

>>15505504
>magnetic moment giving rise to mass becomes drastically lowered (but is still present)
are you referring to, perhaps, the strong and weak nuclear forces that are often referred to by nuclear physicists?
or is this some other phenomenon?

>>15505504
also, as to my second query, how do you explain the delay in satellite radio communications? Some sort of resistance encountered by light traveling through the aether?

Why then does the speed of these communications, when measured, appear to be at a constant?

>>15505513
>homeless
...I miss my chic condo in Kuapa Lumpur, having to rough it out in Warsaw, Poland this month. In two weeks Im going to Valencia, Spain to meet and greet with a Geneticist to exchange findings and maybe contact info. Six weeks out from that. Then Russia and central Asia, ending in Afghanistan.

Being homeless is Rrruff.

>Heh...feet.

>>15505515
while i agree sound will propagate differently through different atmospheric mediums, such as on Mars or Venus, what then leads to light propagating through this 'aether' at variable speeds?

>>15505492
lol

>>15505525
I mean I suppose you could claim that radio waves travel at different speeds than the visible light spectrum, but haven't similiar experiments been done with infrared lasers, such as referenced in this charming sitcom regarding jr. scientist undergrads?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-e5CtbbZL-k&ab_channel=Dshuann

>>15505351
Would you just answer the question? It really is not that difficult I promise. Specific names of people, or names of studies, anything more specific to go off of. Your not answering has lead me to believe you do not any, but that would mean you're arguing in bad faith, and nobody does that.

>>15505519
>are you referring to, perhaps, the strong and weak nuclear forces that are often referred to by nuclear physicists?
no, I was referring to mass, as I explicitly wrote
but yes, the weak and strong forces are also mediated by the aether
electromagnetism is ultimately the only force there is, all other forces are just different names for various modes of mediation of the aether
>>15505525
>how do you explain the delay in satellite radio communications?
like I said, I don't know what you're asking about here
if you mean the fact that it takes time for light to propagate, I already answered that
if you're talking about "time dilation" effects observed in the clocks of such satellites, that's due to electromagnetic retardation caused by the aether wind at those altitudes
this causes the clocks to run slower than they would if they were still relative to the aether
>Why then does the speed of these communications, when measured, appear to be at a constant?
because the speed of the propagation of the electromagnetic wave through the aether remains exactly the same, it's the clocks that end up running differently
effects like these are what I described in the last part of this post: >>15505504
>>15505556
what's interesting is how everyone else is busy actually talking about the facts, while you're still stuck trying to desperately steer away from acknowledging your own ignorance

>>15505559
so light propagating through, say, an atmosphere, or water, would travel at a different speed than light traveling through the aether? Does the aether still exist in some form while light travels through an atmosphere, body of water, or other forms of matter?

Would the aether best be described as consisting of particles, waves, some combination of the two or something else entirely?

>>15505574
could the aether be said to consist of matter?

>>15505574
>light propagating through, say, an atmosphere, or water, would travel at a different speed than light traveling through the aether?
that's a fact no one disputes
it was even mentioned earlier
for example, light propagates at ~0.75c in water, which is why Cherenkov radiation is frequently observed in nuclear power plants
>Does the aether still exist in some form while light travels through an atmosphere, body of water, or other forms of matter?
of course, the light is always propagating through aether, but the surrounding higher-energy matter causes electromagnetic interference and thus increases the permittivity and permeability (which means it causes light to propagate slower; personally I would recommend inverting those quantities so higher permittivity and permittivity means light travels faster through the medium on purely semantic grounds, but that's obviously besides the point)
>Would the aether best be described as consisting of particles, waves, some combination of the two or something else entirely?
I already gave a complete description of what the aether consists of here:
>>15505504
>the aether consists of small dipoles, protons and electrons bound so tightly together that they are in a state below what is typically considered the ground state of hydrogen, a state in which the magnetic moment giving rise to mass becomes drastically lowered (but is still present)
>this state is also referred to as "subhydrogen", and thus it can be said that aether consists of subhydrogen
>this is also known in physics by other names, perhaps most famously as "dark matter"
>>15505579
yes, absolutely, it is as mentioned above the exact same thing as is currently known as "dark matter" in physics

>>15505559
>aether wind
similiar, to, perhaps, solar wind?
or am I off the mark again?

>>15505504
>read Jefimenko
I know you havnt. You read peoples interpretations OF Jefimenko, not his books. There is no fucking way you could crunch those equations and act such a jackass here.

Your story is full of holes, youre authority posting with nothing of yourself to be of judge, only HERESAY.

>>15505579
Everything he is describing is the cosmic microwave background, which yes, will involve dark matter, but he add all sort of retardation to it.

He isnt a Physicist, he is riding an "alternate theory" as a contrarian, disregarding anything that contradicts and hand waving away criticism.

>>15505585
okay, so we've established that the Aether consists of matter. And I presume that, (though it is a bit advanced for me as a laymen) that the type of aether scientist generally refer to as vacuum is not actually 'vacuum', but trace elements of matter in some altered (presumably lower energy) state, similar to the way plasma is matter in a highly excited state.

Then does such a thing as a 'true' vacuum exist? An measured area of space in which there is no matter?

>>15505600
perhaps he just has different names for the same things. what part of his theory do you take issue with?

>>15505248
>(even though it's not actually the topic for this thread)
It is now. Defend your claim, present the observations supporting your position. "Because I say so" is not evidence.

>>15505589
not quite, but I wouldn't be surprised if Solar wind does in fact involve and/or affect the aether somehow, Solar physics is probably the by far most interesting subject in all of science currently, due to the combination of how it's so incredibly complex that there are tons of unanswered questions and how it's constantly observable and very visibly dynamic on timescales that humans can actually perceive very easily during their lifetimes
but for the time being what we think of as Solar wind refers to ions, whereas the aether wind being referred to is due to the movement of the satellites through the aether (essentially the drag that the MMX failed to detect due to the fact that aether near and in Earth is dragged along with it much like atmosphere is around it, i.e. for the exact same reason we don't detect 500 m/s winds when we walk outside near the equator)
but it's a great question
>>15505594
>I know you havnt. You read peoples interpretations OF Jefimenko, not his books.
then you are demonstrating another great example of how what you think you "know" is incorrect
>There is no fucking way you could crunch those equations and act such a jackass here.
you don't need to "crunch those equations" to understand the general principles
but yes, I am in fact able to "crunch those equations" too if there's anything particular I want to investigate closer
>full of holes
there's no "hole" in anything I'm saying, just the facts of reality and how physics works
>>15505603
>we've established that the Aether consists of matter
correct, what is known as "dark matter", or "subhydrogen", an electron and a proton bound together very tightly in a state below the ground state of hydrogen
>the type of aether scientist generally refer to as vacuum is not actually 'vacuum'
correct, as no one has ever created an aether pump or a container which is completely opaque to aether
>Then does such a thing as a 'true' vacuum exist?
perhaps, if one could have to manage to do the above

>>15505351
>>State your model
>reality
This is a flat earth tier discussion lmao

>>15505397
>>let's assume an ether for a second
>no need to use hypothetical language, since the aether does indeed undeniably and undoubtedly exist
Proof?

>>15505617
So what do you believe the phenomenon of a 'black hole' truly represents? If it is not a condensed singularity of matter that prevents light and matter from escaping, how would you describe the observable phenomenon?

>>15505630
and before you get off on a tangent with this question, how is it that the aether in vacuum remains at a relative constant, without variations in 'density' as it were of this 'dark matter'

>>15505609
>light is always propagating through aether
Aether IS light, radiation, the cosmic microwave background, and it doesnt "propagate" through it, it IS is. He doesnt understand the entirety of space (all that black stuff) is SOLID RADIATION.

This *can* be thought of as "misted matter", as light and matter are correlated, and I count this as dark matter (plus exansion of the universe throwing math off) to account for this...but it isnt genuine to flat out call it matter.

He is giving vacuum properties and forgetting light has them, mixing things up.

>>15505617
>I am in fact able to "crunch those equations"
Bullshit.

Timestamp, now. Youre basically saying you do PhD level equation while making MASSIVE errors in Phsyics. You Pure Math? Applied and Trying?

Fess up, WHAT ARE YOU?!

>>15505638
>but it isnt genuine to flat out call it matter.
so then it does not consist entirely of particles or waves propagating through those particles? Observations of the Aether cannot be attributed solely to said medium?

>>15505609
>Aether IS light
And magnetic fields, its everything that ISNT gravity, which isnt a force or field.

>>15505642
>Observations of the Aether
There are ZERO. I use Aether while Acdemia uses the terms I listed above.
Your definition of Aether is retarded and criss crossed.

Post "Aether".
NO MEDIUM.
NO "PROPAGATING THROUGH".

AETHER. THE "THING".

>>15505643
So, you posit that the aether is not just matter, but forms of radiation that do not propagate through sub atomic particles?

Is there then some other medium through which this radiation travels, or does it exist independently of those particles which compose the substance of matter?

>>15505612
>>15505625
>>15505629
the desperation is more and more visible with every post
feel free to join our conversation about the actual facts anytime you like
>>15505630
>what do you believe the phenomenon of a 'black hole' truly represents?
as I explicitly mentioned earlier, "black holes" are plasmoids
>If it is not a condensed singularity of matter that prevents light and matter from escaping, how would you describe the observable phenomenon?
well, once you understand that mass, and thus gravity, is derived from electromagnetism, like all the forces are, it becomes easier to understand
a plasmoid is essentially a densely packed tangle of magnetic field lines (not real field lines, but a useful construct), which is why it will appear dark from most directions, but owing to its ultimately toroidal shape it will emit ion beams in opposite directions
this is why it's referred to as a "mother star", as it is what is constantly emitting the matter that eventually becomes stars
hence why articles like this crops up:
https://scitechdaily.com/gigantic-bubbles-at-center-of-milky-way-caused-by-powerful-jet-of-energy-from-supermassive-black-hole/
>>15505638
>Aether IS light
wrong
that's like saying "air IS sound"
completely erroneous
light is a specific type of propagation of electromagnetic energy through the aether
>>15505641
I did PhD level physics and mathematics while I was still in high school, let alone long before earning my actual PhD
>while making MASSIVE errors
there's zero error in anything I'm saying, just facts
you on the other hand appear to be making very fundamental and obvious errors, such as e.g. something as egregious as thinking a propagation through a medium (light) is the same as the medium (aether)
>You Pure Math? Applied and Trying?
I work in the semiconductor industry, which is where I did my PhD

>>15505641
we are just having a friendly conversation. there is no need to be upset. we have nothing to fear from the truth, and scientific inquiry will lead us all there eventually.

>>15505650
>do not propagate
Shut up.

You dolts are using terms you dont understand and instead of analysing a single "thing" to define it you IMMEDIATELY pick it up and fuck with it in an experiement saying "is this one thing?"

No. Stop putting your penis in shit and saying "I didnt do it."

>>15505655
>wrong
Wrong.

Youre full of shit, Aether is all the properties found in space, those rays permate all the universe with a non-Zero level of energy.

THAT IS THE ENERGY YOURE RECORDING....you then record light AGAIN, a SECOND TIME. Your equations are retarded.

YOU ARE NOT A PHSYICIST.

>>15505664
>Wrong.
incorrect, everything I've stated so far has been entirely factual
>Aether is all the properties found in space
wrong
aether is a specific type of matter, just as described earlier
>those rays
the term "rays" refer to ions, which are "ordinary" matter, and electromagnetic waves, which are propagations of electromagnetic energy through the aether
you seem to have a very difficult time comprehending that when energy is transmitted through a medium, the medium itself is not moving significantly, but rather oscillating back and forth in a synchronized manner

>>15505655
>the desperation is more and more visible with every post
You know, you could have just posted the evidence of aether and we would have been long done with that.

>>15505658
>friendly
There is no such thing as "friends and family" in my dimension of reality.

You are all agents of Satan.

>>15505655
I must say I find your theories fascinating, perhaps even credible. Unfortunately the math will probably always be beyond me, but hopefully you can explain it to a layman using the principles of observation and logic as you have with me.

In a way, I hope you are correct, as that would mean good things for our species future prospects in space. Unfortunately, you are challenging a accepted, working body of knowledge on which many applications rely. If you could somehow make a demonstrable experiment that would prove your interpretation of this theory, you could very well upset the current status quo of the scientific establishment. It would have repercussions, of course. One should always think before revealing certain details to the public, as new knowledge and understanding can have a profound impact on people's lives, with perhaps unintended consequnces.

But if you are patient here as you have been with me, then perhaps you will find your audience.

My curiousity is mostly satiated, but I do have one follow up question. What do you think of the discipline known as 'quantum physics', as practiced by scientific community, and not charlatans as so often is the case? Is it a legitimate discipline?

More specifcally, what do you think of quantum entanglement theory? Could it theoretically be used to create 'ansible' that would enable faster than light communications?

>>15505670
>aether is a specific type of matter
Its just dark matter. Lets just hand wave that away with that answer and accept it as "You know nuffin :)))"

If Harvard can do it...why cant we?

>>15505671
babylon will fall, my brother.
fear not.

>>15505675
Well, he continues to claim that somehow everything is evidence of aether but is unable to show a single specific example. I just want him to concede to actually say something of substance.

>>15505672
>I find your theories fascinating, perhaps even credible
well, you should, as they are completely factual
>the math will probably always be beyond me, but hopefully you can explain it to a layman using the principles of observation and logic as you have with me
yes, that's the beauty of it, ultimately the general principles can be understood without any advanced understanding of mathematics at all, that's really only something you do to work out details, like e.g. approximations of the various quantities, or more precise measurements if you're e.g. manufacturing technology
>that would mean good things for our species future prospects in space
most certainly, simply understanding that superluminal movement and communication is entirely possible changes a lot about how we conceptualize our galactic neighborhood
>you are challenging a accepted, working body of knowledge on which many applications rely
well, not quite, think of it more like a modification which preserves all the parts that are working and throws out the ones that don't
>If you could somehow make a demonstrable experiment that would prove your interpretation of this theory, you could very well upset the current status quo of the scientific establishment.
this has been done countless times
for example, superluminal speeds have been measured in myriad experiments, and subhydrogen has been manufactured in the laboratory too (which coincidentally releases a huge amount of energy due to the transition where the electron drops down to a lower state, and is a far superior source of energy than fusion is)
none of that really "upsets the current status quo of the scientific establishment", because it's long since been established, most famously by Max Planck, that science progresses one funeral at a time, as the people fervently clinging to outdated models die and make room for the people who have grown up acquainted with the new and better models

>>15505675
So then you believe that vacuum is absolute, then? there are no traces of matter or hydrogen through which light travels, or that if there are, they do not significantly effect the propagation of radiation through vacuum?

You dispute the existence of this 'invisible' aether because you claim it can not be observed or proven to exist?

>>15505667
>rays
No. RAYdiation.
>ion
An ATOM.
>>15505667
>through a medium
I dont give a fuck about your polluted experiement.

REMOVE MEDIUM.
DEFINE AETHER.

>>15505693
>So then you believe that vacuum is absolute, then
The absolute opposite, read the thread before posting back.

Everything else you typed you strawmanned and has no bearing to anything I have posted.

>>15505692
>and subhydrogen has been manufactured in the laboratory too
is this commonly referred to as 'anti-matter' by laymen?

>>15505426
>So then what does this aether consist of? A thin layer of hydrogen that propagates the universe?
Hydrinos.
>How then, is light able to travel through a vacuum?
Because it's a wave.
>How do you account for the signal delay in satellite and probes radio communication?
See above.

>>15505697
pardon, that vacuum is absolute in the sense that it does not generally contain matter or a material medium through which radiation travels save for the particles comprising the radiation itself?

why are you so angry my friend? there is no need to be upset. perhaps if you work on your argumentation and presentation, you will be more effective in convincing people of the truth of which you speak.

Becoming angry and abrasive only hurts your chances of convincing others of your position, one could only assume that you are upset if there were something only tangentially related to the discussion at hand, and had other motives for participating in the discourse.

>>15505701
>convincing
Exactly. Feelings dont care about facts...people need to FEEL comfortable believing, the logical axioms of the theory is ireelevent to being woo'd by smooth talkers.

Youre openly admitting, without knowing it, your succeptible to brainwashing. Be careful...your a sucker

>>15505444
>so oppenhiemer did not use Einstein's theory to create the atomic bomb? Neither in whole or in part?
Einstein's theory is entirely unnecessary to create an atomic bomb. Physicists knew well before Einstein that positively charged nuclei repel each other, and that particles emitted from atomic nuclei had much higher energy than could be generated artificially at the time. Beta radiation is given its name because beta is the ratio v/c, and beta radiation travels so close to the speed of light that it made sense to refer to it by its ratio.

Sommerfeld's Atomic Structure and Spectral Lines gives a good overview of physicists understanding of radioactivity prior to WWII. The atomic bomb would have happened with or without Einstein.

>>15505672
>What do you think of the discipline known as 'quantum physics', as practiced by scientific community, and not charlatans as so often is the case? Is it a legitimate discipline?
quantum physics is absolutely a legitimate discipline insofar that it's an extremely accurate model for a lot of phenomena, but it does need to be modified and expanded to make room for all the new knowledge we have
most notably the lower ground state beneath hydrogen needs to be fully incorporated, but luckily it fits right in with few modifications
>More specifcally, what do you think of quantum entanglement theory?
solved by aether and the possibility of superluminal signals
in reality Einstein was right, there was in fact no "spooky action at a distance" at all, just extremely rapid signals, many orders of magnitude faster than c
>Could it theoretically be used to create 'ansible' that would enable faster than light communications?
yes, absolutely, that is a certainty
then, much like you can now see lightning long before you hear thunder, you will then have the privilege of reading a message from someone before you see them sending the message to you
>>15505698
no, as I mentioned earlier a few times that's the same thing as dark matter, i.e. aether
in other words, to make it clear: "aether", "dark matter", and "subhydrogen" all refer to the exact same thing, viz. a small dipole consisting of an electron and proton bound so tightly together that they no longer interact with electromagnetic waves or matter in the same way at all, but become an ideal transmission medium for electromagnetic waves instead (and still exert gravitational force on other matter, albeit markedly less)
>>15505694
>No. RAYdiation.
yes
the term "rays" typically refers to both ions and to electromagnetic waves
not something I made up, just stating the facts
>An ATOM.
not quite, as the ions included in the term "rays" are just nuclei, such as e.g. alpha particles (helium nuclei) and protons (hydrogen nuclei)

>>15505707
what would you say antimatter is then, assuming it exists? Another form of this subhydrogen?

>>15505705
to the contrary, it is your emotional state which I find disconcerting. There is nothing at stake here, yet you are angry.

Why?

>>15505707
>refers to both ions and to electromagnetic waves
Factually wrong.
>not something I made up
You did.
>just stating the facts
False.

Rays are NOT matter, you are confused or LYING at this point.

Post citation....you cant, so you wont...

>>15505718
i suppose you've already answered that question, pardon my ignorance.

>>15505672
>If you could somehow make a demonstrable experiment that would prove your interpretation of this theory
The Pioneer anomaly proves that the speed of light isn't constant (it accelerates at 1/4c). This is why Hubble's constant is 1/4c^2 and the gravitational constant is (1/4c)/(4pi*r^2).

The Pioneer anomaly is the most precise and accurate measurement of an object moving in free space ever made. Incontrovertible evidence that Einstein's theory is wrong.

>>15505723
well if a ray of light is composed of photons, and photons are particles, and particles are a form of matter, then is not a ray of light matter?

>>15505721
>There is nothing at stake here
Youre a liar. I detest liars.

You have already been boxed into your lies with a checkmate, youre a charlatan and making mistakes in everypost.

Rays are not matter...this level of mistake WOULD be a clear signal to anyone but the sucker here that youre full of shit...but that poor sucker already made it clear he isnt researching Phsyics...he is looking for a Daddy to lead him by the hand...