Aether it exists, or it doesn't.

How does science work? And what's all this about quantum mechanics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

uwot
Posts: 5040
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Aether it exists, or it doesn't.

Post by uwot »

Cerveny wrote: Mon Sep 07, 2020 11:21 amI probably express my opinion incorrectly (oh my english:) I wanted to say that aether is the most/only real thing at all.
Well look, I don't want to put English words into your mouth, but what I understand you to be saying might be summarised something like this:
The universe is made of some stuff with physical properties.
The past can still be seen from a suitable distance.
Therefore the past is part of the structure of the universe, hence 'real'.
The present is a developing/crystallising layer of that structure - becoming real.
And the future is still fluid.
Whatever state the stuff of the universe is in, crystallised, freezing or fluid, it definitely exists, but the shapes and patterns it freezes into, our 'reality', are contingent.
Feel free to correct anything I have misunderstood.
uwot
Posts: 5040
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Aether it exists, or it doesn't.

Post by uwot »

Scott Mayers wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 5:00 amI agree with Paradigmer on this. I've also experienced the 'taboo' of daring to even speak of any difference of opinion on this matter.
I really think it depends on who you are talking to. It is true that some physicists are catatonic in the presence of philosophers, some are apoplectic and some will give you as much time as it takes them to work out if you have any idea what you are talking about. They're a lot like human beings these physicists. It is true that the word 'aether' acts as a kind of filter, being a word that physicists fairly consistently relegate to philosophers or cranks, but it's just a word which, as Robert Laughlin says "rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum". If you want to buy an extra 20 seconds or so of a physicist's attention, just call whatever you think the universe is made of something like 'the fabric of spacetime' or better yet a 'quantum field' - anything but aether.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 4256
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Aether it exists, or it doesn't.

Post by attofishpi »

uwot wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 9:42 am
Scott Mayers wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 5:00 amI agree with Paradigmer on this. I've also experienced the 'taboo' of daring to even speak of any difference of opinion on this matter.
I really think it depends on who you are talking to. It is true that some physicists are catatonic in the presence of philosophers, some are apoplectic and some will give you as much time as it takes them to work out if you have any idea what you are talking about. They're a lot like human beings these physicists. It is true that the word 'aether' acts as a kind of filter, being a word that physicists fairly consistently relegate to philosophers or cranks, but it's just a word which, as Robert Laughlin says "rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum". If you want to buy an extra 20 seconds or so of a physicist's attention, just call whatever you think the universe is made of something like 'the fabric of spacetime' or better yet a 'quantum field' - anything but aether.
I've always liked 'quantum field'.

I have to say uwot, you kinda blew me away with a statement in the other thread that nobody can explain gravity or probably ever will. (something to that effect)
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 2229
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Aether it exists, or it doesn't.

Post by Sculptor »

There is only one valid response to such a question..

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/IDvHMEqf03c/hqdefault.jpg
Image
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 4256
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Aether it exists, or it doesn't.

Post by attofishpi »

Sculptor wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:46 am There is only one valid response to such a question..

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/IDvHMEqf03c/hqdefault.jpg
Image
Please explain for us of feeble mind. Clearly it is not a pipe.
User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 603
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Aether it exists, or it doesn't.

Post by Cerveny »

uwot wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 5:33 am
Cerveny wrote: Mon Sep 07, 2020 11:21 amI probably express my opinion incorrectly (oh my english:) I wanted to say that aether is the most/only real thing at all.
Well look, I don't want to put English words into your mouth, but what I understand you to be saying might be summarised something like this:
The universe is made of some stuff with physical properties.
The past can still be seen from a suitable distance.
Therefore the past is part of the structure of the universe, hence 'real'.
The present is a developing/crystallising layer of that structure - becoming real.
And the future is still fluid.
Whatever state the stuff of the universe is in, crystallised, freezing or fluid, it definitely exists, but the shapes and patterns it freezes into, our 'reality', are contingent.
Feel free to correct anything I have misunderstood.
The Universe (History) is not “made” but it “is” 4-D ... It permanently grows / crystalizes along time axe. It has particular physical properties (permeability, susceptibility...) The Future does not exist yet (in causal snese) - we are not able to understand it at all. The Presence is (spreating) 3-D acive/live surface of (History) our Universe. Elementary partices are particular structural defects in aether lattice. They leak (they are permanently replicated) to the Presence. All matter is in frozen state (as a history) or in quantum state (as a presence / “expectation”)
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 2229
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Aether it exists, or it doesn't.

Post by Sculptor »

Cerveny wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 11:47 am
uwot wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 5:33 am
Cerveny wrote: Mon Sep 07, 2020 11:21 amI probably express my opinion incorrectly (oh my english:) I wanted to say that aether is the most/only real thing at all.
Well look, I don't want to put English words into your mouth, but what I understand you to be saying might be summarised something like this:
The universe is made of some stuff with physical properties.
The past can still be seen from a suitable distance.
Therefore the past is part of the structure of the universe, hence 'real'.
The present is a developing/crystallising layer of that structure - becoming real.
And the future is still fluid.
Whatever state the stuff of the universe is in, crystallised, freezing or fluid, it definitely exists, but the shapes and patterns it freezes into, our 'reality', are contingent.
Feel free to correct anything I have misunderstood.
The Universe (History) is not “made” but it “is” 4-D ... It permanently grows / crystalizes along time axe. It has particular physical properties (permeability, susceptibility...) The Future does not exist yet (in causal snese) - we are not able to understand it at all. The Presence is (spreating) 3-D acive/live surface of (History) our Universe. Elementary partices are particular structural defects in aether lattice. They leak (they are permanently replicated) to the Presence. All matter is in frozen state (as a history) or in quantum state (as a presence / “expectation”)
The first 3 dimensions relate to the measurement of extension.
The 4th is qualitatively different and should not be uttered in the same breath since is has no concern with the measurement of extension but is wholly about duration.
The past and future have no existence.
Aether, like all scientific abstractions, is just a model. It cannot be said to "exist". A model has to fulfil the requirement of fittness and consistency. The question is does the model of aether work, or does it not
uwot
Posts: 5040
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Aether it exists, or it doesn't.

Post by uwot »

Sculptor wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 2:23 pmThe first 3 dimensions relate to the measurement of extension.
And position; x,y and z will identify a location relative to some arbitrary point.
Sculptor wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 2:23 pmThe 4th is qualitatively different and should not be uttered in the same breath since is has no concern with the measurement of extension but is wholly about duration.
Well, if you want to locate an event, you have to include t. It's no good knowing where the party is if you don't know when it's happening.
Sculptor wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 2:23 pmThe past and future have no existence.
As it happens I agree with you, but the block universe and growing block universe are taken seriously in some quarters.
Sculptor wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 2:23 pmAether, like all scientific abstractions, is just a model. It cannot be said to "exist".
If you've been following the thread, or at least have read the OP, you will be aware that in my view 'spacetime' and 'quantum fields' are essentially aether models; so is the Higgs Field, any of which can be said to exist; it just might be the case that they don't.
Sculptor wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 2:23 pmA model has to fulfil the requirement of fittness and consistency. The question is does the model of aether work, or does it not
Yup, I've made that point already.
uwot
Posts: 5040
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Aether it exists, or it doesn't.

Post by uwot »

attofishpi wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:30 amI've always liked 'quantum field'.
Good choice.
attofishpi wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:30 amI have to say uwot, you kinda blew me away with a statement in the other thread that nobody can explain gravity or probably ever will. (something to that effect)
The problem is more that anyone can explain gravity. There could be any number of explanations that are entirely consistent with the evidence. That being so, there is no way to determine which one is correct. The appeal of falsificationism is that you can at least eliminate some candidates; but for every weed you pull up another bunch spring up.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 2229
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Aether it exists, or it doesn't.

Post by Sculptor »

uwot wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 3:03 pm
Sculptor wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 2:23 pmThe first 3 dimensions relate to the measurement of extension.
And position; x,y and z will identify a location relative to some arbitrary point.
Sculptor wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 2:23 pmThe 4th is qualitatively different and should not be uttered in the same breath since is has no concern with the measurement of extension but is wholly about duration.
Well, if you want to locate an event, you have to include t. It's no good knowing where the party is if you don't know when it's happening.
The point is that the Location of an Event is qualitatively difference from it duration.
Sculptor wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 2:23 pmThe past and future have no existence.
As it happens I agree with you, but the block universe and growing block universe are taken seriously in some quarters.
Sculptor wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 2:23 pmAether, like all scientific abstractions, is just a model. It cannot be said to "exist".
If you've been following the thread, or at least have read the OP, you will be aware that in my view 'spacetime' and 'quantum fields' are essentially aether models; so is the Higgs Field, any of which can be said to exist; it just might be the case that they don't.
Sculptor wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 2:23 pmA model has to fulfil the requirement of fittness and consistency. The question is does the model of aether work, or does it not
Yup, I've made that point already.
Scott Mayers
Posts: 1706
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 1:53 am
Location: Saskatoon, SK, Canada

Re: Aether it exists, or it doesn't.

Post by Scott Mayers »

uwot wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 9:42 am
Scott Mayers wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 5:00 amI agree with Paradigmer on this. I've also experienced the 'taboo' of daring to even speak of any difference of opinion on this matter.
I really think it depends on who you are talking to. It is true that some physicists are catatonic in the presence of philosophers, some are apoplectic and some will give you as much time as it takes them to work out if you have any idea what you are talking about. They're a lot like human beings these physicists. It is true that the word 'aether' acts as a kind of filter, being a word that physicists fairly consistently relegate to philosophers or cranks, but it's just a word which, as Robert Laughlin says "rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum". If you want to buy an extra 20 seconds or so of a physicist's attention, just call whatever you think the universe is made of something like 'the fabric of spacetime' or better yet a 'quantum field' - anything but aether.
If a scientist is intellectually honest, (s)he would be smart enough to recognize that people shouldn't require to be politicians in order to participate with equal respect. Science shouldn't require belonging to a privileged class. And respect is earned. If scientific authorities cannot represent themselves with the very etiquette they expect of others to treat them with as 'authorities', then any insulting behaviors they impose upon the 'cranks' or 'misfits' is representative of their own disqualification.


By the way, have you updated your book yet on the stuff you and I discussed? Did you try altering that part where you were expressing an intuitive way to understand gravity? I saw attofishpi's response and it reminded me about that.
User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 603
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Aether it exists, or it doesn't.

Post by Cerveny »

It seems clear that the past / history must exist. Many physical phenomena / effects strictly depend on the rate of changes. This information must be stored / accessible somewhere, to the causality / physics can work. This information is expressed by the tensions in latest structure of history.
PS: Similar (orthogonal) deformations in the internal structure of History cause, for example, the gravitational force ...
Impenitent
Posts: 3032
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Aether it exists, or it doesn't.

Post by Impenitent »

Sculptor wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:46 am There is only one valid response to such a question..

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/IDvHMEqf03c/hqdefault.jpg
Image
Image

we need more torque...

-Imp
uwot
Posts: 5040
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Aether it exists, or it doesn't.

Post by uwot »

Scott Mayers wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 4:07 pmIf a scientist is intellectually honest, (s)he would be smart enough to recognize that people shouldn't require to be politicians in order to participate with equal respect. Science shouldn't require belonging to a privileged class.
The thing is there is nothing to stop liars, cheats and nutjobs becoming scientists and inevitably some do.
Scott Mayers wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 4:07 pmAnd respect is earned.
The surest way to get respect in science is to come up with a new model that is more accurate or simpler to work with than the stuff it replaces - something that makes the lives of scientists easier; any character flaws you have will be forgiven. Newton for example was a brilliant scientist, and by all accounts a sexually repressed religious freak and all round horrible human being.
Scott Mayers wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 4:07 pmBy the way, have you updated your book yet on the stuff you and I discussed? Did you try altering that part where you were expressing an intuitive way to understand gravity? I saw attofishpi's response and it reminded me about that.
The book is in pieces at the moment, to be honest. My plan for this year was to do a promotional tour complete with drugs, groupies and trashed hotel rooms - Rolls Royce in the swimming pool, that kinda thing. Then Covid 19 came along and saved me from myself, so instead I went off on a wild goose chase, completely revamping the book, spending huge amounts of energy on very elaborate graphics before deciding I like the simpler look. So now I'm putting it all back together, aiming to finish by the end of this month. Cheers again for your input.
uwot
Posts: 5040
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Aether it exists, or it doesn't.

Post by uwot »

Image
Ceci n'est pas un torque wrench. Ironically, it's a pipe wrench.
Post Reply