- #1
Buckethead
Gold Member
- 560
- 38
I'm about to purchase a book on Amazon by this title where the author describes Einstein's interest in a "new" ether, a relativistic ether that in no way compares to the clasical ether of the 19th century but an ether just the same. If all this is true, I was glad to hear about it.
With the recent data sent back from the Gravity-B probe and the confirmation of the warping of space and the Lentz-Therring effect there is no doubt now that space is indeed "warping" due to both rotational effects and gravitational effects. The massive question on my mind is why in the face of all this is there still no respect for the "fact" that there must be something that is warping? Einstein in 1905 dismissed any form of ether because SR doesn't need it and space warping was not an issue, but with GR this all changed but the dogma continues.
I fully recognize that the mathematics don't need ether as GR can be worked out just fine without it and this no doubt is the reason for it's perpetual dismissal, but certainly it is clear not to just me that if space is warping, then space must be made of something, not necessarily of matter or energy, but of something, so why is this ignored as if it were in the same league as "consciousness". In other words, something that can't be discussed. Is it because there is no place to begin? I know for a fact that ether was dismissed not only because of MMX, as Lorentz resurected it again with his length contraction formulas, but because of physical problems such as the fact that it would have to be a solid to transmit light due to the transverse nature of light waves. However, since in this day and age we consider such far out ideas as Dark Matter (which I still don't believe in) which are not Bosons, then why is is such a stretch to consider that ether could be made of some exotic material as well that acts like a solid, but has no traditional matter properties. We are dealing with light here as well, whose nature we do not fully understand (waves and/or particles anyone?) so traditional propagation physics may not necessarily apply.
I am a strong proponent of ether because it can also be used to explain the flat rotational curves of galaxies which is currently being explained by DM but incorporates nothing more than the Lentz-Thering effect. With the Gravity B results, is anyone else taking ether a little more seriously?
With the recent data sent back from the Gravity-B probe and the confirmation of the warping of space and the Lentz-Therring effect there is no doubt now that space is indeed "warping" due to both rotational effects and gravitational effects. The massive question on my mind is why in the face of all this is there still no respect for the "fact" that there must be something that is warping? Einstein in 1905 dismissed any form of ether because SR doesn't need it and space warping was not an issue, but with GR this all changed but the dogma continues.
I fully recognize that the mathematics don't need ether as GR can be worked out just fine without it and this no doubt is the reason for it's perpetual dismissal, but certainly it is clear not to just me that if space is warping, then space must be made of something, not necessarily of matter or energy, but of something, so why is this ignored as if it were in the same league as "consciousness". In other words, something that can't be discussed. Is it because there is no place to begin? I know for a fact that ether was dismissed not only because of MMX, as Lorentz resurected it again with his length contraction formulas, but because of physical problems such as the fact that it would have to be a solid to transmit light due to the transverse nature of light waves. However, since in this day and age we consider such far out ideas as Dark Matter (which I still don't believe in) which are not Bosons, then why is is such a stretch to consider that ether could be made of some exotic material as well that acts like a solid, but has no traditional matter properties. We are dealing with light here as well, whose nature we do not fully understand (waves and/or particles anyone?) so traditional propagation physics may not necessarily apply.
I am a strong proponent of ether because it can also be used to explain the flat rotational curves of galaxies which is currently being explained by DM but incorporates nothing more than the Lentz-Thering effect. With the Gravity B results, is anyone else taking ether a little more seriously?