| General > General Technical Chat |
| "Veritasium" (YT) - "The Big Misconception About Electricity" ? |
| << < (283/396) > >> |
| SiliconWizard:
--- Quote from: aetherist on February 28, 2022, 01:42:40 am --- --- Quote from: SiliconWizard on February 28, 2022, 12:14:53 am ---This paper could give some insights: https://www.princeton.edu/~romalis/PHYS312/Coulomb%20Ref/Photonmasslimits.pdf --- End quote --- Mass is the property of annihilating aether. And photons annihilate aether. Everything (except gravity) annihilates aether. --- End quote --- What is aether? And whatever it is, why would gravity be an exception? --- Quote from: aetherist on February 28, 2022, 01:42:40 am ---They mention that if a photon had mass then it could not move at the speed of light. What the. --- End quote --- Yes, that's a pretty basic principle rooted in the very definition of the speed of light as we define it, and that is supposed to be a constant. You seem to have a completely alternative theory, but it's unclear (at least to me) what it exactly is. |
| aetherist:
--- Quote from: penfold on February 28, 2022, 02:33:17 pm ---So, you're happy with electron beams. Beams of particles that embody all the reasons why your theory fails, the fact that an entity that is observable as a quanta of charge and conveyor of momentum which behaves exactly like the conventional model predicts. The beam which has been demonstrated to penetrate beneath the surface of material whilst retaining all properties of electrons and simultaneously those of current carriers, additionally proving the drift model of conduction? The same beam if driven to higher energies behaves according to Einsteinian relativity. How can you possibly be happy with electron beams? no part of your theory would allow them to exist. Skimmed the book by Krafft and I must say, he was a very clever person, but quite why he felt the need to continue writing his book after the phrase "Nuclear physicists will probably say that the writer is merely belabouring a man of straw--an extinct species, and the physicists of today are no longer dealing with planetary electrons." remains a mystery. Good to see here that we have some good measurable properties of aether. Time dilation near a spinning disc. Would a 15cm diameter disc at 90,000 rpm produce any noticeable effects? --- End quote --- I am ok with old (deep electron drift) electricity, but i say that it is insignificant, compared to my new (surface hugging electon) electricity, which includes my new (surface electron flow) electricity. The problem with electron drift electricity is that the speed of light in Cu is about 10 m/s, ie c/30,000,000, badly below c/1. And, it duznt explain how the speed of electricity in an insulated wire is 2c/3. Electron beams are ok, they are compatible with my electons. I think that Krafft is saying that no modern (1942) nuclear physicist believed in orbiting electrons. I think that spinning discs would affect clocks. Either small discs spinning very fast, or large discs spinning not so fast. I suggested to a Prof that he should test accurate quartz clocks placed near the spinning discs of disc driven public buses (which might have a 1 tonne disc spinning at 3000 rpm)(just guessing). A simple test for a PhD student, which could lead to a Nobel. But he said it was a silly idea. In some areas on Earth it might be good if the disc had a vertical axis. In other areas a horizontal axis might be good. However, it would be best if the axis was angled off horizontal to accord with the background aetherwind blowing through Earth (this blows at about 15 deg off Earth's axis)(RA4:30). A clock should be placed close to one end of the axle, & close to the other end. And one or more clocks near the equator. And u would need a number of clocks nearby but well clear of the disc (these clocks would not be affected)(for comparison). One problem is that quartz clocks would be sensitive to their own orientation. Another problem is that the modern quartz clocks are i think not very sensitive to ticking dilation (the crystals are cubic), the older version of quartz clock that used a tuning fork style of quartz would be much better. I forget which fork orientation would be best (i did work it out years ago). There are 3 obvious orientations of a tuning fork. I think that aligning the long axis with the background aetherwind was (in my theory) best. Podkletnov said that he found that a quartz clock was affected (in about 1990). Likewise Depalma (in about 1980). |
| TimFox:
Quartz crystals and older Accutron-type metal tuning forks are physical artifacts whose frequency is not a fundamental constant of nature, but depends on their dimensions. Cesium beam clocks and other "atomic clocks" exploit frequencies that are natural features of atomic energy levels, etc. "The second is defined by taking the fixed numerical value of the caesium frequency ∆Cs, the unperturbed ground-state hyperfine transition frequency of the caesium 133 atom, to be 9 192 631 770 when expressed in the unit Hz, which is equal to s–1" from BIPM. (I used to joke with my archaeology student friends that we physicists avoided artifacts, while they tried to find them. The usage above is closer to the archaeology definition.) |
| aetherist:
--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on February 28, 2022, 06:47:53 pm --- --- Quote from: aetherist on February 28, 2022, 01:42:40 am ---Mass is the property of annihilating aether. And photons annihilate aether. Everything (except gravity) annihilates aether. --- End quote --- What is aether? And whatever it is, why would gravity be an exception? --- End quote --- Aether is some kind of excitation of Praether. Praether is the fundamental essence that fills our universe. Photons (the fundamental building block of all of our elementary particles), are an excitation plus annihilation of aether. The acceleration of the bulk inflow of aether into photons that are annihilating aether gives us what we call gravity. So, gravity is due to the annihilation of aether, but gravity does not itself annihilate aether (is what i say). Except that some aetherists invoke a contractile aether, that does self annihilate due to gravity, or i should say as a part of the gravitation creation process. But i don’t understand why they say that aether needs to be contractile. Its something to do with their math. --- Quote from: SiliconWizard on February 28, 2022, 06:47:53 pm --- --- Quote from: aetherist on February 28, 2022, 01:42:40 am ---They mention that if a photon had mass then it could not move at the speed of light. What the. --- End quote --- Yes, that's a pretty basic principle rooted in the very definition of the speed of light as we define it, and that is supposed to be a constant. You seem to have a completely alternative theory, but it's unclear (at least to me) what it exactly is. --- End quote --- My theory is very foreign to standard science, koz it is based on skoolkid logic. Fact-1. Photons propagate at the speed of light. Koz photons are light. And that’s what photons must do. They can do no other. Fact-2. It matters not whether photons have mass or zero mass, they propagate at the speed of light. They can do no other. Fact-3. It is madness to say that photons propagate at the speed of light koz they have zero mass. Photons propagate at the speed of light koz they are light. The speed of light is not constant. Firstly light is slowed near mass. Secondly the quasi-constant speed of light is quasi-constant relative to the aether, in which case the speed of light relative to an observer will depend on the aetherwind relative to the observer, aetherwind might be a tailwind or a headwind or a sidewind, & the speed of light will apparently be c+V or c-V or somesuch. |
| aetherist:
--- Quote from: TimFox on February 28, 2022, 09:56:49 pm ---Quartz crystals and older Accutron-type metal tuning forks are physical artifacts whose frequency is not a fundamental constant of nature, but depends on their dimensions. Cesium beam clocks and other "atomic clocks" exploit frequencies that are natural features of atomic energy levels, etc. "The second is defined by taking the fixed numerical value of the caesium frequency ∆Cs, the unperturbed ground-state hyperfine transition frequency of the caesium 133 atom, to be 9 192 631 770 when expressed in the unit Hz, which is equal to s–1" from BIPM. (I used to joke with my archaeology student friends that we physicists avoided artifacts, while they tried to find them. The usage above is closer to the archaeology definition.) --- End quote --- Yes, fork frequency depends on dimensions etc. And dimensions etc are affected by length contraction due to aetherwind. Thusly we have ticking dilation. There is no such thing as time dilation. Time is not a fundamental constant of nature. Unless perhaps u are talking about the present instant, which is the present instant in the whole of our infinite eternal universe. But there is no such thing as time. What we have is the ticking of processes, at the subatomic, atomic & macro levels. I don’t know much about atomic clocks. Some i think have a quartz crystal as a part of their circuitry. So i am not sure whether they are truly atomic. Anyhow, Larmor derived an equation for the orbit of an electron in an atom, & as far as i am aware Larmor's gamma for the ticking dilation for an atom has been invoked in the modern era to help to predict the affect of elevation on the ticking of an atomic clock, & so far the gamma appears to be ok to within 50%, & it might do better than 50% in the future when more accurate clocks are used. But i have a theory re the ticking of atomic clocks with elevation. I reckon that Larmor's gamma wont work so well in the southern hemisphere, or at least near the south pole. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |