"The Aether and Charges of Charlatanism"
There have been a significant number of newsposts from individuals who
have equated the suggestion that to assert the existence of the Aether is a
form of charlatanism. These assertions apparently come from the same
individuals who assert that the Special Theory of Relativity has proven that
the Aether does not exist. If they have such a proof, they should present it
since it does not appear to be present in available texts and writings. What
special Relativity does show is that, when observations are limited to those
made with information transfer processes which propagate at a velocity equal
to or less than the speed of light, it is impossible to observe our absolute
velocity through space (i.e.- velocity with respect to the classical Aether.
Only a charlatan would assert that such constitutes a proof that the Aether
does not exist. It should be noted that it is not the proponents of the
Aether who make such a statement, it is the true charlatans, i.e.- the
mathematically trained adherents of conventional physical thought. Dr.
Einstein warned:-"remember gentlemen, we have not proven that the Aether
does not exist, we have merely proven that we do not need it (for
computations)".
The fact of the matter is that, if we accept the Lorentz
Transformations for Length and Time provided by the Special Theory of
Relativity two things become immediately apparent:-
A:- Since the Lorentz Transformation for Velocity, which is length divided
by time, is not unity but rather 1/(1-V^2/C^2) the assertion made by
adherents of Relativity Theory that the velocity of light is the same in all
reference frames can only be true if one uses "rubber" instruments for the
observations, a process which is contrary to all basic principles. The
velocity of light is "a constant" when measured within a given reference
frames. It is not constant for all reference frames when the results of
observations which are corrected by the appropriate Lorentz Transformations
are and transmitted to a common agreed upon "base reference frame". In other
words the velocity of light is "a constant" but it is not necessarily
"constant". Conventional physicists who fail to recognize this distinction
are the true charlatans, not those individuals who are sufficiently astute
to recognize the meaning of the distinction and insist that sound reasoning
be applied to the process.
B:- So far, the only explanation posed for the fact that the velocity of
light is independent of the velocity of its source is that light is a
wavelike disturbance propagating through a medium (e.g.- the classical
Aether) If conventionally trained physicists can provide an alternate
explanation which does not require magic, they should provide it.
C:- The Lorentz Transformation for Velocity shows clearly to an intelligent
mind that it must be possible for an absolute velocity reference frame for
space (e.g.- the classical Aether) to exist.
C:- Once the existence of a single velocity reference frame is shown to be
possible within the confines of Special Relativity, it is possible to devise
a physically realizable experiment which shows that only ONE such reference
frame (e.g.:- the Aether) can exist even if we cannot observe our velocity
with respect to it. (See Section 4.5 of http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm ).
Unfortunately it is the mainstream physicists who are the charlatans
and not those who recognize that the thinking of these allegedly mainstream
individuals is screwed up even if where the screwup is not apparent. Those
who would claim the Aether exists are not charlatans, they are individuals
who recognize that mainstream physics is faulty and are looking for a better
set of conclusions.
The source material for this posting may be found in
http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm ("The Einstein Hoax" {1997});
http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm; ("Gravity" {1987}); and
http://einsteinhoax.com/relcor.htm ("Corrections to Special Relativity"
{1997}). EVERYTHING WHICH WE ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH
EVERYTHING ELSE WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL
OBSERVATIONS, AND IT MUST BE MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT
ALWAYS MEET THIS REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF
WORKMANSHIP FROM THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.
All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at
http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm.
Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on
a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy
as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts,
please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you
have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.
E-mail:- einsteinhoax@isp.com
The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 5
years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE
MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without
questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be
objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn.
Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one
exception for which a correction was provided.
avergon@verizon.net - 30 Jan 2006 04:30 GMT
> "The Aether and Charges of Charlatanism"
>
[quoted text clipped - 40 lines]
> Aether) If conventionally trained physicists can provide an alternate
> explanation which does not require magic, they should provide it.
HERE IS THE ALTERNATE EXPLANATION:
CONSTANT c
If you take a group of waves of closely associated frequency, by the
laws of superposition they will form a group wave envelope -- a
standing wave.
Through the group wave envelope -- back to front -- will be secondary
group waves that are the photons.
Their velocity re the standing wave envelope is constant.
The standing group wave envelope extends between emitter and observer
and is stationary regardless of motion.
So since the group envelope is stationary -- and the photons are of
constant velocity to the envelope, they are of constant velocity to the
observer -- regardless of motion.
All motion does is compress or extend the standing group wave -- thus
changing the frequency.
Such responds to Einstein's Doppler formulae.
(Check Gaussian waves)
> C:- The Lorentz Transformation for Velocity shows clearly to an intelligent
> mind that it must be possible for an absolute velocity reference frame for
[quoted text clipped - 42 lines]
> Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one
> exception for which a correction was provided.
N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc) - 30 Jan 2006 13:19 GMT
Dear avergon:
...
>> "The Aether and Charges of Charlatanism"
...
>> B:- So far, the only explanation posed for the fact
>> that the velocity of light is independent of the
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> HERE IS THE ALTERNATE EXPLANATION:
You have provided an explanation to one who does not listen.
Ernest Wittke, the liar, spammer, and defamer is only in this
(apparently) to harvest email addresses. No doubt you will have
been added to his list. It was a valiant effort...
David A. Smith
dej4 - 30 Jan 2006 18:04 GMT
> Dear avergon:
>
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
>
> David A. Smith
I think that we should report every instance of his posting, eventually
the ISP may shut this sh.t down.
N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc) - 31 Jan 2006 00:41 GMT
Dear dej4:
>> Dear avergon:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> I think that we should report every instance of his
> posting, eventually the ISP may shut this sh.t down.
I did this, and let him know I did this. So he started posting
spam to the newsgroups with my name as the poster, based on
header information. He then told me to shut up and like it, that
this is how the game is played.
He has changed ISPs a few times since then. Perhaps others have
done as you propose to do. That is what the rules are for, and
that is what is supposed to happen. Best of luck to you.
Frankly I think he will not miss a lick... it is his livelihood
and I am sure he is quite used to the procedures required to set
up shop and do it all again.
David A. Smith
dej4 - 31 Jan 2006 00:52 GMT
must cost him money every time he changes ISPs....this should hurt