Quantized redshift anomaly

More
18 years 7 months ago #14884 by Tommy
Replied by Tommy on topic Reply from Thomas Mandel
(FOUR)

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">

1908 - The Aether of Space
and auxiliary files
by Lord Rayleigh and Sir Oliver Lodge
courtesy of Bruce L. Rosenberg



Friday, February 21, 1908
THE RIGHT HON. LORD RAYLEIGH,
O.M. P.C. M.A. D.C.L. LL.D. Sc.D. Pres.R.S., in the Chair
SIR OLIVER LODGE, LL.D. D.Sc. F.R.S. M.R.I

The Aether of Space


THIRTY years ago Clerk Maxwell gave in this place a remarkable address on "Action at a Distance." It is reported in your Journal, Vol. VII., and to it I would direct attention. Most natural philosophers hold, and have held, that action at a distance across empty space is impossible-in other words, that matter cannot act where it is not, but only where it is.

The question "where is it?" is a further question that may demand attention and require more than a superficial answer. For it can be argued on the hydrodynamic or vortex theory of matter, as well as on the electrical theory, that every atom of matter has a universal though nearly infinitesimal prevalence, and extends everywhere; since there is no definite sharp boundary or limiting periphery to the region disturbed by its existence.

The lines of force of an isolated electric charge extend throughout illimitable space. And though a charge of opposite sign will curve and concentrate them, yet it is possible to deal with both charges, by the method of superposition, as if they each existed separately without the other. In that case, therefore, however far they reach, such nuclei clearly exert no "action at a distance" in the technical sense.

Some philosophers have reason to suppose that mind can act directly on mind without intervening mechanism, and sometimes that has been spoken of as genuine action at a distance; but, in the first place, no proper conception or physical model can be made of such a process, nor is it clear that space and distance have any particular meaning in the region of psychology. The links between mind and mind may be something quite other than physical proximity, and in denying action at a distance across empty space I am not denying telepathy or other activities of a non-physical kind-for although brain disturbance is certainly physical and is an essential concomitant of mental action, whether of the sending or receiving variety, yet we know from the case of heat that a material movement can be excited in one place at the expense of corresponding movement in another, without any similar kind of transmission or material connection between the two places: the thing that travels across vacuum is not heat.

In all cases where physical motion is involved, however, I would have a medium sought for; it may not be matter, but it must be something; there must be a connecting link of some kind, or the transference cannot occur. There can be no attraction across really empty space. And even when a material link exists, so that the connexion is obvious, the explanation is not complete-for when the mechanism of attraction is understood, it will be found that a body really only moves because it is pushed by something from behind.
...

...


So clearly and universally has it been perceived that waves must be waves of something- something distinct from ordinary matter-that Lord Salisbury, in his presidential address to the British Association at Oxford, criticised the ZPE as little more than a nominative case to the verb to undulate.

It is truly that, though it is also truly more than that; but to illustrate that luminiferous aspect of it, I will quote a paragraph from that lecture of Clerk Maxwell's to which I have already referred:

"The vast interplanetary and interstellar regions will no longer be regarded as waste places in the universe, which the Creator has not seen fit to fill with the symbols of the manifold order of His kingdom. We shall find them to be already full of this wonderful medium; so full, that no human power can remove it from the smallest portion of Space, or produce the slightest flaw in its infinite continuity. It extends unbroken from star to star; and when a molecule of hydrogen vibrates in the dog-star, the medium receives the impulses of these vibrations, and after carrying them in its immense bosom for several years, delivers them, in due course, regular order, and full tale, into the spectroscope of Mr. Huggins, at Tulse Hill."

(It is pleasant to remember that those veteran investigators Sir William and Lady Huggins are still at work.)

This will suffice to emphasise the fact that the eye is truly an etherial sense-organ-the only one which we possess, the only mode by which the Aether is enabled to appeal to us, and that the detection of tremors in this medium-the perception of the direction in which they go, and some inference as to the quality of the object which has emitted them-cover all that we mean by "sight" and "seeing."

I pass then to another function, the electric and magnetic phenomena displayed by the Aether; and on this I will only permit myself a very short quotation from the writings of Faraday, whose whole life may be said to have been directed towards a better understanding of these ZPEeous phenomena.

Indeed, the statue in your entrance hall may be considered as the statue of the discoverer of the electric and magnetic properties of the Aether of space. Faraday conjectured that the same medium which is concerned in the propagation of light might also be the agent in electromagnetic phenomena. He says:

"For my own part, considering the relation of a vacuum to the magnetic force, and the general character of magnetic phenomena external to the magnet, I am much more inclined to the notion that in the transmission of the force there is such an action, external to the magnet, than that the effects are merely attraction and repulsion at a distance. Such an action may be a function of the Aether; for it is not unlikely that, if there be an Aether, it should have other uses than simply the conveyance of radiation."

This conjecture has been amply strengthened by subsequent investigations. One more function is now being discovered; the Aether is being found to constitute matter-an immensely interesting topic, on which there are many active workers at the present time. I will make a brief quotation from your present Professor of Natural Philosophy (J. J. Thomson), where he summarises the conclusion which we all see looming before us, though it has not yet been completely attained, and would not by all be similarly expressed:

"The whole mass of any body is just the mass of Aether surrounding the body which is carried along by the Faraday tubes associated with the atoms of the body. In fact, all mass is mass of the Aether; all momentum, momentum of the Aether; and all kinetic energy, kinetic energy of the Aether. This view, it should be said, requires the density of the Aether to be immensely greater than that of any known substance."

Yes, far denser-so dense that matter by comparison is like gossamer, or a filmy imperceptible mist, or a milky way. Not unreal or unimportant-a cobweb is not unreal, nor to certain creatures is it unimportant, but it cannot be said to be massive or dense; and matter, even platinum, is not dense when compared with the ether. Not till last year, however, did I realise what the density of the Aether must really be, compared with that modification of it which appeals to our senses as matter, and which for that reason engrosses our attention. If I have time I will return to that before I have finished. Is there any other function possessed by the ether, which, though not yet discovered, may lie within the bounds of possibility for future discovery?

I believe there is, but it is too speculative to refer to, beyond saying that it has been urged as probable by the authors of "The Unseen Universe," and has been thus tentatively referred to by Clerk Maxwell:

"Whether this vast homogeneous expanse of isotropic matter is fitted not only to be a medium of physical interaction between distant bodies, and to fulfil other physical functions of which, perhaps, we have as yet no conception, but also to constitute the material organism of beings exercising functions of life and mind as high or higher than ours are at present-is a question far transcending the limits of physical speculation."

Indeed, it is a question whether it does not underlie everything that we know in the whole of the physical sciences; and whether it is not the basis of our conception of the three dimensions of space.
And so, on our present view, the intrinsic energy of constitution of the Aether is incredibly and portentously great, every cubic millimetre of space possessing what, if it were matter, would be a mass of a thousand tons, and an energy equivalent to the output of a million-horse-power-station for 40 million years.

The universe we are living in is an extraordinary one; and our investigation of it has only just begun. We know that matter has a psychical significance, since it can constitute brain, which links together the physical and the psychical worlds. If anyone thinks that the Aether, with all its massiveness and energy, has probably no psychical significance, I find myself unable to agree with him.

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

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
18 years 7 months ago #14869 by Tommy
Replied by Tommy on topic Reply from Thomas Mandel
There is a missing link in the scientific chain of investigation. The link between the Aether and classical science has ben modified
because it appeared too mystical...

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
www.enterprisemission.com/hyper1a.html

Hubble's New "Runaway Planet":
A Unique Opportunity for Testing
the Exploding Planet Hypothesis and
... Hyperdimensional Physics

Part I

In a tragedy for science (if not for society in general) whose outlines we are only now beginning to appreciate, after Maxwell's death, two other 19th Century "mathematical physicists" -- Oliver Heaviside and William Gibbs -- "streamlined" Maxwell's original equations down to four simple (if woefully incomplete!) expressions. Because Heaviside openly felt the quaternions were "an abomination" -- never fully understanding the linkage between the critical scalar and vector components in Maxwell's use of them to describe the potentials of empty space ("apples and oranges," he termed them) -- he eliminated over 200 quaternions from Maxwell's original theory in his attempted "simplification."

[Oliver Heaviside, described by Scientific American (Sept. 1950) as "self-taught and ... never connected with any university ... had [however] a remarkable and inexplicable ability (which was possessed also by Newton and Laplace ...) to arrive at mathematical results of considerable complexity without going through any conscious process of proof ..." According to other observers, Heaviside actually felt that Maxwell's use of quaternions and their description of the "potentials" of space was "... mystical, and should be murdered from the theory ..." which -- by drastically editing Maxwell's original work after the latter's untimely death (from cancer), excising the scalar component of the quaternions and eliminating the hyperspatial characteristics of the directional (vector) components -- Oliver Heaviside effectively accomplished singlehanded.]

This means, of course, that the four surviving "classic" Maxwell's Equations -- which appear in every electrical and physics text the world over, as the underpinnings of all 20th Century electrical and electromagnetic engineering, from radio to radar, from television to computer science, if not inclusive of every "hard" science from physics to chemistry to astrophysics that deals with electromagnetic radiative processes -- never appeared in any original Maxwell' paper or treatise! They are, in fact--

"Heaviside's equations!"

Lest anyone doubt this is the case, they merely have to read a highly revealing paper on the subject by another renowned British mathematical physicist of this century, Sir Edmund Whittaker, titled simply "Oliver Heaviside" (Bulletin of the Calcutta Mathematical Society, Vol. 20, 1928-29, p.202); or, another overview of Heaviside by Paul J. Nahin, "Oliver Heaviside: Sage in Solitude" (IEEE Press, New York, 1988, p.9, note 3.).

The end result was that physics lost its promising theoretical beginnings to becoming truly "hyperdimensional" physics ... over a century ago ... and all that that implies.



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

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
18 years 7 months ago #14870 by JMB
Replied by JMB on topic Reply from Jacques Moret-Bailly
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Tommy</i>
<br />(THREE)
... the possibility of extracting useful energy from vacuum fluctuations, the "Holy Grail" of energy research.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Unhappily, the existence of the zero point field is a consequence of thermodynamics. A lot of people tried to get usable energy against its second principle ...
Planck (1900) showed that the energy in an electromagnetic, monochromatic mode of frequency f, is hf/(exp(hf/kT)-1)+K; His error on the evaluation of K (hf) was corrected by Nernst(1916). K=hf/2 is easily found knowing that the energy in a mode tends to kT for T-&gt; infinity.

Einstein (1917) and laser experiments show that light is absorbed down to the ZPF, and that the emission is an amplification of a previously existing field (which is the ZPF in spontaneous emission).

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
18 years 7 months ago #14949 by JMB
Replied by JMB on topic Reply from Jacques Moret-Bailly
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Tommy</i>
<br />(TWO)

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Something from Nothing Revisited - 04/04/01
written for KeelyNet by Jerry W. Decker - free to copy/reprint
www.keelynet.com/primer.htm
You are visitor # since April 6th, 2001.

Most mainstreamers have the erroneous conception that alternative science fans, experimenters and researchers are looking to 'create' something from nothing in order to provide power necessary to run their perpetual motion machines or free energy devices.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Good.<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
the 'Lost Aether' now called ZPE (zero point energy)
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Absurd. The aether was introduced to get an analogy between the propagation of sound in matter and the propagation of the EM fields in ... aether.
The zero point field results from the impossiblity to absorb a classical field (by adding an opposite field) if the fields are produced by sources small in comparison with their distances. Thus, it remains a field everywhere. In the 19th century, it was impossible to evaluate this remaining field.
The corresponding energy, ZPE, was introduced by Planck (1900) in his formula giving the energy in an EM mode of frequency f : E=hf/(exp(hf/kT)-1)+K. The value of K=ZPE was wrongly evaluated by Planck (hf), and corrected by Nernst (1916) : hf/2.
Einstein (1917) and laser experiments show that the EM fields may be absorbed down to the ZPE, and that the emission is an amplification of a previously existing field (the ZPF for the spontaneous emission).
Remark that this is a classical result. Quantum electrodynamics gives a wrong result unless an ad hoc correction divides the ZPE by two.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
18 years 7 months ago #14886 by JMB
Replied by JMB on topic Reply from Jacques Moret-Bailly
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by tvanflandern</i>
This will remain mysterious to you until you jettison the photon concept and start thinking in terms of light being pure waves.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I agree, classical electrodynamics works perfectly if the <b>classical</b> concept of absorption (by addition of an opposite field) is used (consequently, the ZPF exists).
Einstein made a single big error in physics, and he received his first Nobel prize for this error.
Remain at Planck's point of view, and remain classical : it is the matter which quantifies the exchanges of energy between the waves and the matter. Else you get QED which needs an ad hoc factor 2 comparing the spontaneous and induced light emission, and introduces a lot of paradoxes.
Particles require non-linearities and soliton waves (de Broglie's double solution).

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
18 years 7 months ago #14872 by Tommy
Replied by Tommy on topic Reply from Thomas Mandel
Well, it seems that our "science" can tell whatever we want to hear. So much for science.

What is a "pure" wave?
What is the difference between matter and waves?
What is matter without waves?

To me, it is absurd to believe that matter/waves/fields can exist without a sorresponding source of energy. Not saying that mathematics is unable to depict that, just that mathematics does it by ignoring the source.

Apparently the big bang gang aren't the only ones skilled in the slight of hand

I wonder if there are any anti-big bang people in this forum.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.360 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum