Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Aether Theory

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Aether Theory

    Hi everyone,

    I have designed an experiment that will, I believe, prove the existence of the Aether. Unlike many such claims mine is both backed by modern QM and is logically inarguable. No one is predicting a different result (and I've asked a lot of scientists) because, when applied to what I envision, both logic and current science agree with me.

    As far as defining Aether, I mean a transmission medium for the propagation of electromagnetic or gravitational forces. The wave potion of the EM wave/particle duality that modern science says is purely mathematics, with no real physical existence. A quintessence similar to Tesla’s radiant energy, Bohm’s ideas or Paul Dirac, one the inventors of quantum mechanics. There is many others, including the fascinating Lie group E8 (string theory of everything). If you wade through my other thread you will find links to many scientific papers theorizing just such.

    If the aether is proven, a mainstream mathematical, scientific framework for free energy is possible.

    This is a potentially paradigm shifting quantum theory- Curving Light Wave Theory.

    The idea is to shoot a single photon wave packet from a moving device. Sounds simple but no one ever thought of it before.

    Even though current mainstream belief says the wave portion of the packet is purely mathematical it plots the position of the photon from it, and math plots the wave as being constantly extruded from the device. So a calculation in this situation will reveal some interesting effects and have even bigger implications.

    For all the quantum uncertainty, the photon wave packet is still emitted by the device. A wave packet is quanta and can’t be split into smaller portions.

    The whole wave packet will move with the device like someone igniting a lightsaber while swinging it. The packet will have a curving vector potential and the photons will curve with the motion of the device. This would prove the wave portion of the packet existed physically somewhere i.e. the aether. The wave in this case would move the photon sideways through space as a result of still being connected to the barrel, impossible for pure mathematics.

    Curving light.

    These same mathematics predict exactly this in an amusing self-cancelling and empowering paradox.

    In order to get enough speed, the experiment involves spinning a fluorescent molecule with lasers at around six billion revolutions per second. The detectors could be set up at many times the distance of the individual wave packet to increase the measurement sensitivity.

    Links to some discussions about my new theory.

    What happens to a photon wave packet when half out of a moving device?

    The Aether Reality, page 1

    For a stationary source the distribution pattern of photons might be something like a bell curve. For a source in motion, normalize the location of the photons to the direction of the source, adjusting for the speed of light. Will the bell curve get wider due only to experimental error? Or will the source motion have a widening effect on the distribution of photons?

    Motion in the direction of the photon travel would be expected to cause red shift or blue shift, but the direction of motion I’m looking at is other than that, a "sideways" or perhaps "radial" motion, and I’ve designed and am working towards implementing experiments on both (some said initially that the experiment was not possible).

    Perhaps an open source project might be the best way to get this done because I’m not a scientist, just a guy who had a quantum theory appear in his brain while very sick last year. I wasn’t thinking about or trying to work out anything about light and I knew only very basic QM at that stage. Also for obvious reasons this is being ignored by the mainstream as much as possible so far.

    Some input would be good. If you would like to disagree please see if you point is covered in the previous threads.

    If the Aether can be proven it would dramatically change the world scientific consensus and pave the way for intensive research into and acceptance of free energy. Such a shift is vital for humanity at this stage as we run out of fossil fuels, with the answer right under our noses but deemed scientifically unacceptable by the fawning adjutants to corporate greed.

    As I mentioned before this theory is different to most because mainstream quantum physics predicts this outcome when applied to the situation I describe, it just hasn’t been visualised before. For the experiment to work, all light has to do is behave as quantum mechanics says it does, and then the aether would be proven real.

    I feel responsible for spreading this info and to make progress on getting the experiment done as I believe it could help in a major way, so please forgive any abruptness on my behalf, it was not intended


    Thanks

    dust

  • #2
    I'll let some of the responders in the linked thread re-iterate their wise points.

    Originally posted by chr0naut
    ...you would not be able to "catch" a photon half way out of an emitter.

    Think of it this way, the absolute fastest anything can move is the speed of light. This is the speed that photons move. The photon is also one of the smallest elementary particles. The smallest thing moving at the fastest speed is as close to instantaneous as it is possible to get.

    There's no chance, even with technology way beyond what we currently have, to catch a photon "half way out" of an emitter.
    Originally posted by Drakkith
    You are under a misconception that a photon is made of a wave packet. This is not true. The wave function describes the photon according to our own rules and math. It allows us to make predictions about photons, such as what the probability of a photon hitting a detector at a specific location is. The wave function, or wave packet, is not "something". It is a mathematical concept.
    Second Law of Thermodynamics

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by I_Like_Science View Post
      I'll let some of the responders in the linked thread re-iterate their wise points.
      I've already covered those. Here ill re-iterate, spin a fluorescent molecule with lasers at around six thousand billion revolutions per second (pretty fast) and move the detectors to many times the length of the wave packet to increase sensitivity exponentially.

      Your Drakkith quote was answered by Arbitreageur in the very next post. It makes me wonder if you read it or if you just couldn't comprehend "I do not know what would happen in that case".





      Quote by Arbitrageur

      So, how will the predictions about the locations of the photons hitting the screen be affected by the source being in motion?
      If the source is stationary, the distribution pattern of photons might like something like a bell curve.
      And if the source is in motion, and we normalize the location of the photons to direction the of the source, adjusting for the speed of light, will the bell curve get wider due only to experimental error? Or will the source motion have a widening effect on the distribution of photons even after normalizing for the source direction and experimental error?

      Drakkith

      I'm not sure actually. I don't know how it would affect the direction of travel, wavelength, or what. If something is traveling at a high velocity in a direction perpendicular to your line of sight and emits light, what would happen to the light? Anyone know?

      Drakkith


      Yes, that is what I am asking as I do not know what would happen in that case.
      He says he doesn't know what would happen but you do? and you base your arguement on his?
      Last edited by dust; 02-27-2013, 02:27 AM. Reason: edit

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by dust View Post
        It makes me wonder if you read it or if you just couldn't comprehend "I do not know what would happen in that case".
        LOL! You're mighty cocky!

        Even though you managed to confuse Drakkith, chr0naut still hit the nail on the head.

        No matter how fast the flourescent molecule is spinning, the light never leaves at any speed but c. No additional velocity can be imparted to the light due to the rotation of the molecule. No matter what reference frame you are talking about. This is an extremely fundamental concept that it seems you have missed.

        Just because you confused some guy on another forum after he gave the right answer, doesn't mean he was wrong
        Second Law of Thermodynamics

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by I_Like_Science View Post
          LOL! You're mighty cocky!

          Even though you managed to confuse Drakkith, chr0naut still hit the nail on the head.

          No matter how fast the flourescent molecule is spinning, the light never leaves at any speed but c. No additional velocity can be imparted to the light due to the rotation of the molecule. No matter what reference frame you are talking about. This is an extremely fundamental concept that it seems you have missed.

          Just because you confused some guy on another forum after he gave the right answer, doesn't mean he was wrong
          Just to refresh chronaut said the experiment was impossible and you said the thing about the velocity and then the speculation after .

          There is no additional velocity in this case, the whole wave packet moves sideways and the light leaves the same speed C. No one ever said anything about the light going any faster.

          I already answered the chronaut post and your previous one about that. I have put the spinning molecule idea to numerous quantum physicists and they approve. It is possible. Professional physicists and mathematicians have been helping me with this so I am confidant. Sorry if I seem a bit impatient, I’ve had this exact same form of this debate several times, bit like dejavu or “groundhog day”.

          I’m very happy with my other new thread on physicsforum where a helpful person has suggested another way to do the experiment that might be a lot cheaper.

          A Moving Photon Source

          TheForce

          Interesting, not sure if you will get important results but it would be a great learning experience. I suggest reading up on quantum dots as photon emitters, you can couple phonon modes in the crystal to the dot to cause excitations and emission. It seems complicated and wordy but I think quantum dots would be a relatively simple system to analyse as long as you have a knowledge of wave mechanics. You will also need some kind of imager to detect photons, ccds come to mind.
          Notice the “not sure if you will get important results” which means IT’S POSSIBLE I WILL GET VERY IMPORTANT RESULTS, and on physicsforum where they are very mainstream and would throw out as a hoax a lot of what is on here or ats (not to put this forum or ats down, love ats and am new here and decided to release info because the topic matter seemed a lot more open minded than physicsforum). The other guy who replied on there doesn’t seem to realize the difference between deflection and emission.
          Last edited by dust; 02-27-2013, 06:54 AM. Reason: edit

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by dust View Post
            No one ever said anything about the light going any faster.
            Yes, you did, but I don't think you realized it.

            Originally posted by dust View Post
            The whole wave packet will move with the device like someone igniting a lightsaber while swinging it. The packet will have a curving vector potential and the photons will curve with the motion of the device. This would prove the wave portion of the packet existed physically somewhere i.e. the aether. The wave in this case would move the photon sideways through space as a result of still being connected to the barrel, impossible for pure mathematics.

            Curving light.
            What you just said is that the 'curving vector' is adding velocity, hence, splitting the photon from the wave. But this has been demonstrated to be completely impossible! The light WON'T CURVE, it will simply go straight and behave as though is was fired straight out of a stationary laser.
            Second Law of Thermodynamics

            Comment


            • #7
              psi ops reagent

              hello dust!

              i read energetic forum every day!

              believe me there are many more who are not logged in but reading

              nice job!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by I_Like_Science View Post
                Yes, you did, but I don't think you realized it.



                What you just said is that the 'curving vector' is adding velocity, hence, splitting the photon from the wave. But this has been demonstrated to be completely impossible! The light WON'T CURVE, it will simply go straight and behave as though is was fired straight out of a stationary laser.
                I am theorizing the WHOLE wave packet will move sideways, so the photon will still go straight in relation to the packet and not seperate. Imagine a car going down a straight racetrack at 100kph and the whole track being moved sideways at 10kph. Is the car going 110kph?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by adilu View Post
                  hello dust!

                  i read energetic forum every day!

                  believe me there are many more who are not logged in but reading

                  nice job!
                  Thank you. Glad to know some have liked this. A boost for the next round

                  Even a negative reaction still involves considering the idea I guess and it gives me an opportunity to explain more clearly.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I have thought of another experiment to test the same thing. Does the Aether exist? This one doesn't involve bending light, so may be easier to intuit for those more strongly left brain.

                    Emitt 1m single photon wave packet from detector set at 50cm from a quantum dot. In 1.15 ns (A) , travelling at lightspeed, the leading edge of the photon wavepacket would hit the detector, 3.3 ns (B)the whole packet would be emitted, 4.45 ns (C) the complete wave packet would have hit the detector. Then check exactly how much time it takes for the detector to register the photon.

                    I would guess C even though the wavepacket starts to impact at A. If the photon always registered at C no matter what the fraction of the total wavepacket the detector was set at, then the wave/aether would have to be real.

                    Because the detector would be shown to be detecting the wavepacket rather than the photon (which is somewhere within the packet ie. between A and C).

                    This is also quite likely to be true because you cant detect anything less than one wavepacket, so the photon is unlikely to register before the whole wave packet has impacted the detector.
                    Last edited by dust; 03-01-2013, 01:40 PM. Reason: edit

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X