Big-Bang falacies and the Occult Aetheric Physics reality.

[dragonborn]

gravitational_aether,

Diffraction can occur from a single edge, i.e. not a slit. In that case there is no interference at all. So how is diffraction not different from interference?

Are you now claiming that diffraction behind a sharp edge is interference???

[gravitational_aether]

gravitational_aether,

Diffraction can occur from a single edge, i.e. not a slit. In that case there is no interference at all. So how is diffraction not different from interference?

Are you now claiming that diffraction behind a sharp edge is interference???

What is the difference between diffraction and interference

Diffraction is the bending of waves around an obstacle, while interference is the meeting of two waves. For instance, diffraction is what results from a pinhole blocking a wave source, the wave spreads out from that one point. This effect is what creates shadows, regions where the light source is blocked but it is not completely dark. Interference, however, results from two waves colliding with one another undergoing constructive and destructive interference, as in two chords being played. I think the confusion concerning these two different phenomena is the fact that two pinholes, two diffraction sources, results in interference of two sources, which is what the diffraction grating is, which creates the characteristic bands of light and dark interference patterns.

Now, back to understanding what occurs physically in nature in a double slit experiment.

'Quantum mechanics rule 'bent' in classic experiment'
BBC News - Quantum mechanics rule 'bent' in classic experiment

'For his part, Professor Steinberg believes that the result reduces a limitation not on quantum physics but on physicists themselves. "I feel like we're starting to pull back a veil on what nature really is," he said. "The trouble with quantum mechanics is that while we've learned to calculate the outcomes of all sorts of experiments, we've lost much of our ability to describe what is really happening in any natural language. I think that this has really hampered our ability to make progress, to come up with new ideas and see intuitively how new systems ought to behave."'

New 'Double Slit' Experiment Skirts Uncertainty Principle: Scientific American

"Intriguingly, the trajectories closely match those predicted by an unconventional interpretation of quantum mechanics known as pilot-wave theory, in which each particle has a well-defined trajectory that takes it through one slit while the associated wave passes through both slits."

'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'
Einstein: "Ether and Relativity"

"the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places, ... disregarding the causes which condition its state."

The state of the ether at every place determined by its connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighboring places is the state of displacement of the ether.

A particle physically displaces the aether. A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle enters and exits a single slit. It is the associated aether displacement wave which enters and exits both slits. As the aether wave exits the slits it creates wave interference. As the particle exits a single slit the direction it travels is altered by the wave interference it encounters. Detecting the particle causes there to be a loss of coherence of the associated aether wave, there is no wave interference, and the direction the particle travels is not altered.

What waves in a double slit experiment is the aether.

[dragonborn]

What is the difference between diffraction and interference

Diffraction is the bending of waves around an obstacle, while interference is the meeting of two waves.

Again, within the model you proclaim:
Does the bending of waves around an obstacle (i.e. diffraction) occur in the two slits case? Yes or no?

Could you please just answer this question? It is a simple question and if you have understanding you also can produce an answer.

[Aaron Murakami]

Steps 6 and 7 are explaining all other steps prior to them.



The ship is traveling at 0.5*c relative to Earth. The shuttle accelerates towards Earth from the ship to 0.5*c relative to the ship thus the shuttle becomes stationary relative to Earth.



The shuttle is stationary relative to Earth, it is in the same relativistic rest frame.
The optional effects of the acceleration are:
1. the shuttle enters Earth's rest frame but its proper time now has a rate considerably lower than on Earth.
2. the shuttle enters Earth's rest frame and begins to experience the ~same rate of time (GR time dilation corrected of course)

There is no relativistic way out of the paradox.



The shuttle does not accelerate to 0.5*c relative to Earth, it accelerates to 0.5*c relative to the ship.

Ok, I see what you're saying.

But if the shuttle is stationary relative to Earth, how does it reach the earth? It would not be moving if it is stationary relative to the Earth.

When the shuttle leaves, for it to be 0.5*c relative to the ship, it doesn't have to accelerate, it just leaves the ship and then decelerates to a dead stop. At a dead stop, it is relatively moving away from the ship at 0.5*C.

I don't believe in relativity but I do believe in time dilation effects when using the correct frames of reference.

[Aaron Murakami]

Mass is a requirement for anything to be able to physically occupy three dimensional space.



I believe the aether is, or behaves similar to, a supersolid. As such, it does not have a significant variable density.

We are going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

Experiments with various electromagnetic systems prove that polarized pure aetheric potential with no electron current has no mass. That is why it can move in impulses at many times the speed of light.

But yes, we'll agree to disagree.

[gravitational_aether]

Again, within the model you proclaim:
Does the bending of waves around an obstacle (i.e. diffraction) occur in the two slits case? Yes or no?

Could you please just answer this question? It is a simple question and if you have understanding you also can produce an answer.

"two diffraction sources, results in interference of two sources"

[Aaron Murakami]

In Einstein's world - let's say the Earth is displacing Aether, the Aether as an elastic medium resists the displacement and tries to push back - the question is: Does the Aether simply stay frozen there being displaced around the Earth with a tendency to push back on the mass as if you are pushing your finger into a tennis ball? And if so, we are in a situation where the Aether is completely static.

Or, is the Aether dynamically flowing back to where it was displaced from by moving through the atomic matrix of the mass meaning that even as the Earth sits there, the Aether is actively and dynamically flowing through in a non-static mode?

A tennis ball is elastic but if I push my finger into it, it resists my push but it in no way, shape or form is moving back through my finger dynamically - even though it is still elastic.

If Einstein agrees that it is dynamically flowing, then that is the only way it can be said that Einstein agrees that gravity's dynamic reaction can provide potential energy to mass to perform work. If not, then it remains he believes in a dead-static gravitational field that can't perform any work.

Also, if Einstein believes that it is dynamic as described, then Einstein is also agreeing that closed system thermodynamics is a fraud because a mass being moved about on the surface of Earth indeed does have an interaction from the external gravitational force.

But if he does not, then it means he does believe in closed system thermodynamics and that a mass moving about on the surface of the Earth has no interaction with gravitational forces.

Gravitational_aether - you still didn't answer the question. This will be the last time I ask and if you don't answer - you either don't want to for some reason or you can't.

[dragonborn]

"two diffraction sources, results in interference of two sources"

I would like to conclude that you are now answering "yes" to the above question. Could you verify that your answer is "yes"? I just want to be certain of your answer.

[gravitational_aether]

Experiments with various electromagnetic systems prove that polarized pure aetheric potential with no electron current has no mass. That is why it can move in impulses at many times the speed of light.

But yes, we'll agree to disagree.

The speed limit is 'c' with respect to the state of the aether.

[gravitational_aether]

Gravitational_aether - you still didn't answer the question. This will be the last time I ask and if you don't answer - you either don't want to for some reason or you can't.

Einstein defines motion in terms of the aether as the aether does not consist of individual particles which can be separately tracked through time. I understand this to mean you can't detect an actual flow of the aether itself.

Everything Einstein describes in terms of the aether and its connections with the matter is describing the state of displacement of the aether.

[gravitational_aether]

I would like to conclude that you are now answering "yes" to the above question. Could you verify that your answer is "yes"? I just want to be certain of your answer.

yes. (filler as post needs to be 10 charaters)

[dragonborn]

yes. (filler as post needs to be 10 charaters)

Thank you..

How do you explain the collapse of the wave function upon using instrumentation to try and observe which slit the particle goes through in the two slit experiment?
Does the observation always cause the wave function to collapse in your view or are there cases where the collapse does not occur upon using the measuring instrumentation?

[gravitational_aether]

Thank you..

How do you explain the collapse of the wave function upon using instrumentation to try and observe which slit the particle goes through in the two slit experiment?
Does the observation always cause the wave function to collapse in your view or are there cases where the collapse does not occur upon using the measuring instrumentation?

When the instrumentation is used to observe the particle it can destroy the coherence of the associated wave in the aether. I am overloading the term coherence because you seem to have difficulty with describing what occurs as the wave being turned into chop.

In the following articles there are weak measurements. Weak measurements do not completely destroy the coherence of the associated aether wave and interference is still able to take place.

What you refer to as wave function collapse is the destruction of the coherence of the associated wave in the aether. What you refer to as wave function collapse is the associated wave in the aether being turned into chop.

'Quantum mechanics rule 'bent' in classic experiment'
BBC News - Quantum mechanics rule 'bent' in classic experiment

'For his part, Professor Steinberg believes that the result reduces a limitation not on quantum physics but on physicists themselves. "I feel like we're starting to pull back a veil on what nature really is," he said. "The trouble with quantum mechanics is that while we've learned to calculate the outcomes of all sorts of experiments, we've lost much of our ability to describe what is really happening in any natural language. I think that this has really hampered our ability to make progress, to come up with new ideas and see intuitively how new systems ought to behave."'

New 'Double Slit' Experiment Skirts Uncertainty Principle: Scientific American

"Intriguingly, the trajectories closely match those predicted by an unconventional interpretation of quantum mechanics known as pilot-wave theory, in which each particle has a well-defined trajectory that takes it through one slit while the associated wave passes through both slits."

'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'
Einstein: "Ether and Relativity"

"the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places, ... disregarding the causes which condition its state."

The state of the ether at every place determined by its connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighboring places is the state of displacement of the ether.

A particle physically displaces the aether. A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle enters and exits a single slit. It is the associated aether displacement wave which enters and exits both slits. As the aether wave exits the slits it creates wave interference. As the particle exits a single slit the direction it travels is altered by the wave interference it encounters. Detecting the particle causes there to be a loss of coherence of the associated aether wave, there is no wave interference, and the direction the particle travels is not altered.

What waves in a double slit experiment is the aether of relativity.

[dragonborn]

Weak measurements do not completely destroy the coherence of the associated aether wave and interference is still able to take place.

What you refer to as wave function collapse is the destruction of the coherence of the associated wave in the aether. What you refer to as wave function collapse is the associated wave in the aether being turned into chop.

So you are saying that strong measurements of particles near a sharp edge will cause there to be no bending/diffraction due to the wave in the aether being turned into chop?

[Aaron Murakami]

Einstein defines motion in terms of the aether as the aether does not consist of individual particles which can be separately tracked through time. I understand this to mean you can't detect an actual flow of the aether itself.

Everything Einstein describes in terms of the aether and its connections with the matter is describing the state of displacement of the aether.

Please don't take this personally since you are being anonymous - it therefore can't be personal, but you are answering questions like a politician - basically, you are evading the question by countering with misdirection that has absolutely nothing to do with what I asked. It was a very simple question - 2 of them. Each one has 4 commonly acceptable answers - yes, no, maybe or I don't know.

My original statement then stands as fact - Einstein simply does not account for a reaction from the aether that can act as a source of Potential Energy that can produce work by pushing on mass, encountering resistance (work) and then dissipating back to a state of pure potential.

What is being presented by you as Einstein's belief that the aether is elastic and does rebound stops at the surface of the mass - completely ignoring the fact that the mass of Earth for example has an atomic matrix made up of mostly empty space yet the aether is not dynamically moving back through that atomic matrix. Therefore, Einstein believes that the Earth simply displaces the Aether and the Aether just sits there displaced in a dead static mode.

The flow of the aether is detectable, it is dynamically moving downwards towards the surface of the Earth at 9.81 meters per second per second - that is the whole point to what Gravitational Potential Energy and is why Einstein is wrong. And, simply doing 3rd grade math to sum work done to lift an object + work done after it is dropped reveals the indisputable fact that gravitational potential contributed since at minimum it is at a COP of 2.0 meaning that that potential supplied did not come from us - but from external forces, which happen to be moving at 9.81 ms per second.

1 + 1 = 2 and that indisputably shows the error to Einstein's gravitational model. With Einstein's model, 1 joule of work + 1 joule of work = 1 joule of work.