No announcement yet.

Modeling The (A)ether

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Modeling The (A)ether

    (Ignorable Sidenote: Eric's last presentation inspired me a bit to dig more into this topic and to consider things a bit more deeply. I think it was the hope of many of us who watched it and have chatted about it, that he would have really dug more into the topic of the (a)ether and we were left disappointed at the end of the presentation. I’m definitely not saying we didn’t enjoy his content, because we did, but it left us wanting much more given the title and perceived buildup.)

    For some time I have sought to understand a way to conceive of the aether / ether (going to refer to it simply as ether going forward for brevity) in a mental fashion in order to work on having a superior capacity to visualize a unified field theory, so to speak.

    I would like to present a kind of model and some thoughts in hopes to receive some input as far as where I may be wrong or at least to spark some discussion. I actually will be using two models or ideas since I don't think one can sufficiently convey concepts. Perhaps even two can’t yet.

    I believe that the ether may be best conceived of as a flowing river of water in a pristinely undisrupted environment that is flowing in a glass basin / riverbed as it were. Its environment is completely undisturbed and is light in an omnipresent fashion so that there are no shadows and no readily visible refraction, etc. If you were an observer of this river, you would look down on it and could not readily differentiate the water from the glass banks, neither could you detect that the water were moving. It would simply be like unto a sheet of silvery / crystal-like surface since there would be nothing to indicate otherwise without any disturbance or frame of reference.

    The key concept here is that this "water" is flowing / moving, but entirely undisrupted (eg, not acted upon by anything) and therefore entirely indistinguishable from its surroundings or at least its banks.

    How can one tell that this water is moving? The observer would have to disrupt the water in some fashion. He might toss a rock into it so as to create an effect or place his hand into the water to feel the effect.
    So the idea here is that the "water" and it's "flow" can only be seen / perceived WHEN IT IS DISRUPTED (something slows it down and / or modifies its direction). Likewise, the ether may not be seen or observed except and until it is disrupted / slowed down.

    The following is a second analogy:

    Imagine a machine gun firing continuously in a line. Suppose that a pane of glass were to be moved so that a corner of it would be struck a bullet. The entire sheet of glass would be shaken by the concussion; even though the bullet struck but a single spot of glass, the point of contact covering only a small area.

    Imagine now that the velocity of the bullets increased a thousand times; then a plate of glass thrust into their track would be smoothly cut, as though with a file that would gnaw its way without producing a single radiating fracture. A person standing near the volley would now hear a deep purr or growling sound, caused by the friction between the bullets and the air.

    Increase gradually the velocity of their motion, and this growl would become sharper. It would evolve from the low to a high or shrill pitch tone and then to nothing and with a further increase of speed more silence.

    From this bullet speed of hundreds of miles per second, we increase velocity a thousand times, reaching into millions of miles each second. To the eye, from the point where the sound disappeared, as the velocity increased, a dim redness would appear, a glow barely perceptible to the sense of sight, by the continuous line of moving bullets. To all appearance, the line may be as uniform as an illuminated pencil mark, even though the several integral bullets of the trail might be separated one from another by miles of space.

    Now we push a pane of glass across their track, and from the point of contact a shower of sparks would fly, and the edges of glass close to either side of the "bullet" hole would be shown, on withdrawing the glass, to have been fused.

    Now let's double the speed of the bullets and tripled again and again. The line of red light becomes brighter, then brilliant, and finally as the velocity increases, at a certain point pure white results and it would appear that the trail is a continuous something; as solid as a bar of metal if at a white heat, and (even if the bullets were a thousand miles apart) you readily prove that the bullets were separate from one another.

    Now if you were to place the glass pane (or another substance, even steel or titanium) in its path and it would simply melt away; the portion excised and carried out of that pathway neither showing itself as fragments of matter. The solid would instantly liquify, and would spread itself as a thin film over the surface of each bullet of that white, hot mass of moving metal, now to all essential conditions as uniform as a bar of iron.

    Now we increase the velocity to millions upon millions of miles per second, and the heat will disappear gradually as did the sound; the white hot train of bullets disappears to the sense of man. Neither light nor sound now accompanies the streaming bullets; neither can the human eye nor the human ear perceive its presence.

    Drop a pane of glass or any other object edgewise through it, and it gives to our senses no evidence; the molecules of the glass separate from in front to close in from behind, and the moving stream of bullets passes through it as freely as light, leaving the surface of the glass unaffected.

    At this point, the bullets are no longer matter. They are only "motion" and would be considered nothing more than void or vacancy. We could at this point refer to the bullets as ether, being pure motion (or perhaps framed as an unperceivable energy).

    So if we perhaps understand the general concept of moving something “into the ether”, how would one reverse the process? Simply put, it would seem that we can say that matter is, therefore, retarded (slowed / disrupted) motion (energy).

    If one would then disrupt or slow down the either, one would then reverse the process so that we would shift back down from a state of high intensity energy, to light, to gaseous matter, to liquid and then to solid.

    While pondering on these and watching Eric Dollard’s last presentation from July, I was quite shocked at some possibilities. I was very curious about the point where he showed the bulb with the high energy white / blue and the red aura in the middle regions and then his discussion of the green gaseous diffusion that remained after the energy flow was stopped. He was talking about creating a universe or galaxy in the bulb and I don’t really think he was too far off if you consider it in proper context.

    It seems to me that, so far, the only thing that we have been able to use successfully to disrupt, or retard, the ether has been magnetism and electricity. I believe that these are our “stones” and “hands” when it comes to being able to begin to manipulate and leverage the ether for our desired intentions.

    Any thoughts or additional observations / analogies would be very welcome and appreciated. I think the primary key for us in gaining access to the ether is to be able to visualize it after such manners and to thus have a way to begin to think about it in a context that makes more practical / tangible sense. Then we will be able to translate our understanding of electrical engineering and so forth over to being able to actually create means to our ends.
    Last edited by trahedron; 08-27-2015, 10:48 PM.

  • #2
    I was looking for a place to ask a question about Dollard's and Murakami's work and I stumbled upon this thread which apparently died the moment after conception. I decided to post it here as it is intrinsically related to being able to visualize the aether in some way.

    One of the main reasons I joined this forum, from a non-tinkerer's background, is to get as clear picture as we can get on how the universe works. I'm a multi-disciplinary independent researcher; my speciality is to connect differing areas of research to each other. An accurate and complete knowledge of how electricity and the aether works is a huge missing link in my research so I have made it a mission to understand it.

    With that in mind I have a few questions for those with more knowledge than me.

    I have read, to start off with, Lone Pine Writings by Eric Dollard and Hacking The Aether by Aaron Murakami. Eric models lines of dielectric induction as aether under stress or strain, and magnetic induction as aether in motion. Aaron models aether in it's unpolarized state as like static on a television screen; the river analogy given by the op fits this reasonably well.

    These lines of magnetic and dialectric induction, when they have a rate of change, or first order time derivative, create the quantities known as EMF and displacement current respectively. This here is quite easy to visualize; discrete, defined hydrodynamical vortexes exibiting a rate of change.

    When these time - varient lines intermingle, they multiply out to give the second time derivitive of electrication, which is the familiar power measured in watts or horsepower. So far this makes sense. Electrification in itself, measured in planks, is a union of a dielectric vortex and a magnetic vortex which gives a sort of dynamic tube of polarization and depolarization of the aether. Again, this makes complete logical and visual sense so far. Power, then, would be visualized not as steady moving vortexes of electrification but as acceleration and deceleration of these vortexes.

    Aaron models energy like so: Aether can be polarized and depolarized, and has to for any phenomena to manifest. When it does so along resistance energy manifests; the first time derivitive of electrification. When a dipole is created in the aether, it creates a potential; known in the mainstream non-sensically as potential energy. When creating said potential, a fixed amount of energy is consumed to make it. This energy, or rate of consumption of electrical vortices, is manifested into existence and then is used up.

    But creating (or destroying) a dipole is an event that can take a second or a year. If 100 joules of energy is used lifting a small object, and the event takes five seconds, the energy to do so exists over that time interval. During that time interval, the rate of movement of electrical vortex lines remains constant no matter whether the path taken leads to great power for the first 50 joules of lift and low power for the last 50 joules, or a constant power throughout. Energy, or consumption of electricity, only exists in a time interval. It never exists in the moment. Power exists in the moment. A line of electrical induction exists in the moment, but a steady rate of change doesn't. This steady rate of change of electrification has no sensibly defined counterparts in terms of magnetic and dielectric, because when they combine as a time derivitive they make the second order time derivitive of electrification, which is power.

    What I am saying is that at a given moment, according to these two models combined, energy doesn't exist. It exists only in some mathematical void between electrification and it's second time derivitive. When I lift my bottle of moonshine, midway through the lift if I were to shout 'what is the energy that I am giving to my moonshine right now?' no-one would give me an answer because it is a non-sensical question. But energy must exist because we get charged for it! A non electrical engineer knows what a kilovolt-hour is, it feels very real in the physical world. But an increase of ten KVH on the meter corrosponds to a rate of change of a defined quantity of electrification. This appears to be impossible to visualize except on an abstract graph.

    Back to the aether. Polarizing and depolarizing aether are concepts that make logical and visual sense, as are hydrodynamical vortices; a cross section of which are measurable as, for example, the charge of an electron for dielectric vortices. If we can sort the energy thing out it may help to visualize the aether. Could somebody in the know clarify things a bit?