Dear leonmau

wrote in message
...
....
Where did the light particles come from?

They are quantum exchange particles between two charged
particles.

What are they composed of?

They are modelled by Maxwell as "EM fields". They are a series
of (non-propagating) virtual photons in QM.

When they move. What do they move through?

The Universe in Maxwell, and they don't move through anything in
QM.

Einstein said,

He died in 1955. There is no religion with His name on it.

"Light is pure energy" and "Energy is space in
motion." Therefore, a light particle has be
composed of energy waves.

No.

Waves of what, if not aether?

Ripples in the Universe, in one model.

Relativity theory says they have to be
something substantial. Q.E.D.

No. In fact, it says they cannot have any substance at all.

No matter what you call it,
it's still aether, or empty (of form) space.

There is no empty space.

So, the MMX proved nothing.

It disproved an aether that was unique to light alone.

Since the aether is the root of all earthly
matter

Impossible to prove.

and had to be traveling through space along
with the Earth, how could the MMX prove it
wasn't really the medium of light originating
from the Earth?

It disproved one of three classes of aether.

David A. Smith

On Apr 1, 3:56 pm, "Robert J. Kolker" wrote:
Laurent wrote:

Whether there is an Aether or not is finally answered; the Aether is
but does not exist until it turns into brains with eyes.

Aether has never been observed, nor is it necessary to predict how
radiation works. No aether.

Belief in Aether is like belief in God. Neither is based on any
definitive empirical evidence.

Bob Kolker

Oh great. Two kooks arguing "religion"!

Hey Bob, Once again, Saying that Aether has never been observed is a
lie. Empty space has PROPERTIES therefore, aether has been observed!
How about you keep your religion in church? The failure was not to
observe Aether but rather a failure to observe Aether Drift! Quite a
different matter.

wrote:

Where did the light particles come from?

God made them. Next question?


What are they composed of?
When they move. What do they move through?

They move through space. So do you. Is space a medium that carries your
body to the bathroom every morning.

Bob Kolker

Benj wrote:


Oh great. Two kooks arguing "religion"!

Hey Bob, Once again, Saying that Aether has never been observed is a
lie. Empty space has PROPERTIES therefore, aether has been observed!
How about you keep your religion in church? The failure was not to
observe Aether but rather a failure to observe Aether Drift! Quite a
different matter.

Aether, according to Maxwell is super stiff space filling goo that is so
rare it does not slow planets down in their orbits. Maxwell did not
believe space was aether. Neither did Michelson nor Morley.

Aether is an unnecessary and useless concept. Which is why it has been
largely dropped from physics. It has suffered the same fate as
phlogiston, caloric, electric fluid and vital essence.

Bob Kolker

"Robert J. Kolker" wrote in message
. ..
| Benj wrote:
|
|
| Oh great. Two kooks arguing "religion"!
|
| Hey Bob, Once again, Saying that Aether has never been observed is a
| lie. Empty space has PROPERTIES therefore, aether has been observed!
| How about you keep your religion in church? The failure was not to
| observe Aether but rather a failure to observe Aether Drift! Quite a
| different matter.
|
| Aether, according to Maxwell is super stiff space filling goo that is so
| rare it does not slow planets down in their orbits. Maxwell did not
| believe space was aether. Neither did Michelson nor Morley.


Don't bring Morley into it, he was a chemist who assisted his friend
Albert Michelson.
Michelson DID believe aether was space but changed his mind from
certain to uncertain.


|
| Aether is an unnecessary and useless concept.

Correct, and out go its properties as well.


| Which is why it has been
| largely dropped from physics.

The crank properties haven't been dropped though. Permittivity
and permeability of "free space" (aether) is still around, screwing
everything up.

| It has suffered the same fate as
| phlogiston, caloric, electric fluid and vital essence.
|
| Bob Kolker
|

Dear Benj:

"Benj" wrote in message
...
....
Hey Bob, Once again, Saying that Aether has
never been observed is a lie.

Any aether that can be observed has been experimentally
disproven.

Empty space has PROPERTIES therefore,
aether has been observed!

There is no empty space. Look at any diffraction experiment...
any finite slit geometry derives non-zero diffraction. Any
"empty space" is filled with the barest hint matter surrounding
it, and the light being passed through it. The properties you
bark about derive from the Universe et al.

How about you keep your religion in church?

Lorentz aether cannot be observed. So you have to accept aether
on faith.

The failure was not to observe Aether but
rather a failure to observe Aether Drift!
Quite a different matter.

Aether drift, and dragged aether have both been disproven.

David A. Smith

"Robert J. Kolker" wrote in message
. ..
Laurent wrote:


Right, it does not exist as matter but it is, like God.

So you believe. But you don't know. In addition the Aether of Maxwell
(a super stiff space filling goo that was rarer than virtue) was
falsified by the MMX.

Aether makes no sense. Light is particles. It does not need a medium.

For sure, the old-time aether didn't work out as planned. ;-) Light
also has wave properties though. Photons only have spin and momentum as
intrinsic properties. Where does the electromagnetic properties of
light come from?

Best,

Fred Diether
Co-moderator sci.physics.foundations

Dear FrediFizzx:

"FrediFizzx" wrote in message
...
....
For sure, the old-time aether didn't work out
as planned. ;-) Light also has wave properties
though.

No, the system of light + Universe has wave properties.

Photons only have spin and momentum as intrinsic properties.
Where does the
electromagnetic properties of light come from?

Assigned in relation to the Universe. Are wew measuring the
meat, the butcher's thumb, or both?

Fred Diether
Co-moderator sci.physics.foundations

You say that like it meant something more than you were willing
to set yourself up for unending hours of unpaid tedium. ;)

David A. Smith

Dear Laurent:

"Laurent" wrote in message
...
On Apr 1, 10:23 pm, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)"
wrote:
Dear leonmau

wrote in message

...
...

Where did the light particles come from?

They are quantum exchange particles between
two charged particles.

Explain particle pair creation without aether or
any energy sources. Isn't there a law against
that in your text book?

Without "energy sources"? Where did that idiocy come from?
Explanations without aether are simple a straightforward.

....
When they move. What do they move through?

The Universe in Maxwell, and they don't move
through anything in QM.

Right, space is an extension of matter.

... and energy. But only in classical theories. In QM, space is
nonsequitur... so far.

Einstein said,

He died in 1955. There is no religion with His
name on it.

Right, but he was a Pantheist.

Says nothing about where Science has gone since 1915 or so...

"Light is pure energy" and "Energy is space in
motion." Therefore, a light particle has be
composed of energy waves.

No.

Light is wave and particle, it's called photons or
quanta.

These labels you attach to light are a function of the model used
to describe them in relation to the system you define. You say
something about the butcher's thumb, and not the meat on the
scale.

Relativity theory says they have to be
something substantial. Q.E.D.

No. In fact, it says they cannot have any
substance at all.

That depends on what your definition of a
substance is.

In aether, light is "ripples in"... no substance inherent to
light there either.

No matter what you call it,
it's still aether, or empty (of form) space.

There is no empty space.

Right, just like there are no point particles.

Who said that? Electrons and photons... there is no collision
where "bumpers" meet, where new unique particles resolve.

So, the MMX proved nothing.

It disproved an aether that was unique to
light alone.

It proved they didn't understand the nature of
the aether.

You don't either. Will you be droll about your own
misconceptions too, as you are about people that died ~100 years
ago?

Since the aether is the root of all earthly
matter

Impossible to prove.

The proof is that we are here.

Fails.

There can be aether without fields but there
can be no fields without aether.

Yes, there can be. There is no empty space, and what "waves"
with the passage of light is *us*.

Aether is empty space and fields are shapes
drawn by matter as process (spacetime) takes
place. Matter and space are one and the same
autopoietic process.

Word salad. And we again come full circle.

In a diffraction experiment, any finite geometry yields non-zero
diffraction. Both the diffracted particle and the slit
"material" are expressed across each bit of "empty" space.
Subtract that effect out, and the need for an aether ceases to
be.

David A. Smith

"Laurent" wrote in message
...

Aether is the empty space on which the Universe sits.

Well, that doesn't make much sense. You don't help your case much with
a statement like that. Empty space (the void) is the stage that ether
and *other* quantum objects play on.

Volovik says it like it is very well in his book "The Universe in a
Helium Droplet" page 461 sect. 33 Conclusion;

"According to the modern view the elementary particles (electrons,
neutrinos, quarks, etc.) are excitations of some more fundamental medium
called the quantum vacuum. This is the new ether of the 21st century.
The electromagnetic and gravitational fields, as well as the fields
transferring the weak and the strong interactions, all represent
different types of collective motion of the quantum vacuum."

Most likely we just don't know what all the quantum objects are yet. Or
their possible interactional configurations. Hopefully we will get some
more clues after the LHC has been running for awhile.

Best,

Fred Diether
Co-moderator sci.physics.foundations