In sci.physics, Izkata
<Izkata@Comcast.net>
wrote
on Tue, 26 Jul 2005 01:11:04 -0500
<q4ydnV3u08x1TnjfRVn-sw@comcast.com>:
>> The following statements can explain what's waving and
>> why Aether is not necessary. Do you agree with it or
>> not, and why?
>
> Errrr, wasn't the Aether disproved decades ago?
I'd say that it's been rendered mathematically unnecessary.
One can never disprove the luminiferous aether, though -- as
one can never *prove* it; it doesn't interact with matter,
just with light.

Signature
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.
Izkata - 26 Jul 2005 19:18 GMT
> In sci.physics, Izkata
> <Izkata@Comcast.net>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> one can never *prove* it; it doesn't interact with matter,
> just with light.
Thank you for clarifying...
Hah, why did I forget my motto: "That which cannot be prove can also not be
disproven."