Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!tor.dont-email.me!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Aether Regained <AetherRegaind@invalid.com>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: The most ridiculous science mistake in history.
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2024 18:16:00 +0000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 110
Message-ID: <uu4c2f$3nv6c$1@tor.dont-email.me>
References: <eadae7722aa4042797d8a9dd39fac8b4@www.novabbs.com>
 <1qqxctr.cx8smcpwxnigN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
 <4e512aaf748e2bc2d6ad31eeb3d40ea2@www.novabbs.com>
 <1qqz0eh.1kx2ym5reuvw4N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
 <uts53j$15lls$1@tor.dont-email.me> <utusco$1tmg6$1@dont-email.me>
 <uu13p5$2rclo$1@tor.dont-email.me> <uu1klp$2vhuv$1@dont-email.me>
 <uu1qsq$311oj$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2024 18:14:39 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: tor.dont-email.me; posting-host="58fa676c882670240bae87b2124aadaa";
	logging-data="3931340"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19DOfOBXlOjmqJ/uxCsiQYAq4Ai6KAcgvA="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:maQORdcBNHr4FdGSSiT9Fq4vuz4=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <uu1qsq$311oj$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 5886

Aether Regained:> Volney:
>> On 3/27/2024 8:36 AM, Aether Regained wrote:
>>>
>>> @Volney, see my reply to Gary Harnagel citing Dirac's 1951 "Is there and
>>> Aether?", which is cited below too:
>>>
>>> The gist is that one can safely let go of this notion due to Einstein
>>> that the aether may not be conceived as having parts which are in
motion.
>>
>> Any "motion" of the purported aether doesn't show up anywhere. Even LET
>> while calling for an aether can use any speed you want for the aether
>> and it still works. Does that mean aether has all speeds simultaneously?
>>
>> Also motion of the aether violates the Principle of Relativity. The rest
>> frame of the aether is a special frame while the PoR states there are no
>> special frames.
>>
>> (In LET since the aether can have any speed, there is no special aether
>> rest frame)
>>>
>>> Dirac 1951: "Is there and Aether?"
>>> https://doi.org/10.1038/168906a0
>>> ########################################
>>>
>>> In the last century, the idea of a universal and all-pervading aether
>>> was popular as a foundation on which to build the theory of
>>> electromagnetic phenomena. The situation was profoundly influenced in
>>> 1905 by Einstein's discovery of the principle of relativity, leading to
>>> the requirement of a four-dimensional formulation of all natural laws.
>>> It was soon found that the existence of an aether could not be fitted in
>>> with relativity, and since relativity was well established, the aether
>>> was abandoned.
>>
>> It was not "soon found". Einstein stated his SR works wouldn't involve
>> any aether at the beginning of the 1905 paper. He didn't claim the
>> aether was false, just that he wasn't using it.
>>>
>>> Physical knowledge has advanced very much since 1905, notably by the
>>> arrival of quantum mechanics, and the situation has again changed. If
>>> one re-examines the question in the light of present-day knowledge, one
>>> finds that the aether is no longer ruled out by relativity, and good
>>> reasons can now be advanced for postulating an aether.
>>
>> Quantum theories have no need for an aether, and are incompatible with
>> an aether.
>>>
>>> Let us consider in its simplest form the old argument for showing that
>>> the existence of an aether is incompatible with relativity. Take a
>>> region of space-time which is a perfect vacuum, that is, there is no
>>> matter in it and also no fields. According to the principle of
>>> relativity, this region must be isotropic in the Lorentz sense—all
>>> directions within the light-cone must be equivalent to one another.
>>> According to the ather hypothesis, at each point in the region there
>>> must be an aether, moving with some velocity, presumably less than the
>>> velocity of light.
>>
>> Relative to what? All motion is relative.
>>
>>> This velocity provides a preferred direction within
>>> the light-cone in space-time,
>>
>> Making it incompatible with the PoR.
>>
>>> which direction should show itself up in
>>> suitable experiments.
>>
>> This has been looked for, without success. The best example is the MMX
>> itself.
>>
>>> Thus we get a contradiction with the relativistic
>>> requirement that all directions within the light-cone are equivalent.
>>
>> Which rules out an aether, or at least an aether with the property of
>> motion. As Einstein said.
>>>
>>> This argument is unassailable from the 1905 point of view, but at the
>>> present time it needs modification, because we have to apply quantum
>>> mechanics to the aether.
>>
>> QM has no need for an aether and is incompatible with one.
>>
>> [snip bla bla bla]
>
> [snip bla bla bla]!!!
>
> I wonder whether you realize that you are responding to P. A. M. Dirac.
> Go check out who that is on wikipedia.
>
> Everything within the line of hashes ### is a full reproduction of
> Dirac's 1951 Note/Letter to the Nature Journal, titled:
>
> "Is there an Aether?"
>
> https://doi.org/10.1038/168906a0
>
> and here is Schrödinger's commentary on Dirac's aether electrodynamics.
>
> https://www.nature.com/articles/169538a0.pdf
>
> I hope you don't need an introduction to who Schrödinger is.
>

Rereading this, I realize that I was unnecessarily rude. But, in my
defense, I was more than a little put off by your response to P. A. M.
Dirac's "Is there an Aether?", like he was some run-of-the-mill crank.

Dirac was a man of few words, and when he did talk, people listened
carefully.