can you explain aether theory to me is it just

Replies

A

Anon10/12/26, 19:45No.17073373

they got renamed to field theory

4

A

Anon10/12/26, 20:00No.17073389

It's pseudoscience yes. You can ask chatGPT to summarize the simple wiki article off it if you want to find out more.

2

A

Anon10/12/26, 20:09No.17073393

So there really isn't a unified "aether theory." The concept of aether would be evoked for two reasons: >explain the propogation of light in a vacuum >explain gravityThe luminiferous aether (light propagating substance) was a ubiquitous, intangible, crystalline solid which which served as a medium for electromagnetic radiation.The gravitational aether was a fluid substance that was always pulling into every massive particle with a force proportional to its mass.Both were, at the time, perfectly valid frameworks to pattern-match observed phenomena in a way that's mathematically consistent. General Relativity, however, rendered both concepts redundant as GR ends up being a simpler model.

2

A

Anon10/12/26, 21:11No.17073418

idk I didn't learn about it in school so it probably doesn't exist

0

A

Anon10/12/26, 22:22No.17073440

It's valid It's a track A physical grid track matrix lattice The smallest, base, fundamental, foundational Planck point particles move on a grid track lattice A Pi quantity of them This separates the infinity, provides a base starting foundation, maintains necessary alignment and uniformity and allows the three starting cardinal dimensions of travel, forward/backward, up/down, left/rightAs these tiny little pieces assemble into larger parts, the larger parts then move upon the smaller parts as a new track layer, and so on and so forth, the smaller layer affecting the larger, and the larger affecting the smaller This would be the wave function collapse And thusly as the larger pieces are assembled, there exists more directions of travel upon the track other than the cardinal starting 3, more gimbal vectors to traverse more finely tuned angles of travel, growing larger ad larger up to atoms and even larger, life, planets and stars, galaxies and local groupsAether sounds flexible like a gas or a fog that comes apart, whereas I believe the track is rigid and unmoving When you close your eyes, we are essentially seeing the track that our eye and brain parts are attached to when no photons bounce around The color black is essentially the track at point blank range

0

A

Anon10/13/26, 00:48No.17073505

Here's your Aether field bro

0

A

Anon10/13/26, 01:27No.17073521

Planck scale would just be using the gravity of the universe in an inverse relation with the outsides constant. That's the field

0

A

Anon10/13/26, 01:39No.17073527

There is a community of idiots online who push a ridiculous theory that denies relativity (both special and general, as well as the weak and strong nuclear forces) and claim that the 1800s aether is real and that michelson-morley was flawed and etc. etc. They refer to themselves as “Electric Universe” or “Thunderbolts” or something related to Velikovsky. They also have an undercurrent of antisemitism (presumably because Einstein is their boogeyman) Most of them are either in their 80s or dead by now, so they don’t crop up very often, but if they do you should ignore them or ridicule them.They have some followers in the woo-woo community and /x/ type people, as well as some hippie artfags/arthoes — you can look up Mear One as an example. His art is pretty good but his brain is fried from his hippie mom feeding him LSD his whole childhood (picrel)

2

A

Anon10/13/26, 12:58No.17073834

Basically Newton’s theory of physics requires an ‘absolute space’ which is to say it requires a three dimensional space which serves as the reference to everything in it.The Aether is the name of the hypothetical but undetectable substance that fills space and serves to provide the backdrop from which physics is measured. Basically planets and stuff is moving at speed but without either you can’t actually say what’s moving and what’s still and where it’s going. Newton knew this was a problem but sort of brushed over it with a mild and dismissive and not great argument.Einstein’s theory eliminates this and uses only relative reference points. So nothing can be described outside of an observers point of view.

1

A

Anon10/13/26, 19:52No.17074082

non-ironically one of the best is inside a minecraft video

0

A

Anon10/13/26, 21:37No.17074110

Pass the Aether bro

0

A

Anon10/13/26, 21:39No.17074111

0

A

Anon10/14/26, 01:18No.17074197

The aether is how the flat earther bullshitters describe space. It is complete nonsense

0

A

Anon10/14/26, 07:17No.17074327

Instead of outlining precisely what aether theory was I think it is better to highlight what they were trying to do with it. The michelson morely experiment set out to measure the speed of light at different directions and different points of orbit around the sun so the differences in velocity could be compared to measure the drift of the earth against the universe. The wavelike properties of light were known but scientists were really only familiar with waves carried against a medium, like a vibrating string, or a rolling ocean. Due to simple wave mechanics there should inevitably be some stateionary reference frame which other velocities could be measured against. Or at least that was the thinking at the time. Michelson set up an impressive interferometer to measure light more precisely than should be possible 1887. I still think it qualifies as one of the first proto-lasers but there are important differences. Anyways, the test instead of finding a difference they discovered that the earth was moving at most 1/6th the speed as would be expected or more likely 0 times the speed. In other words the difference in the speed of light from one place to the next was zero. This really killed aether as a functional theory but it took some time for science to pick up the pieces and replication would not be arranged for some time either. michelson himself was not sure what to make of it. "Aether drag" was an idea for awhile but relativity answered the new concerns better and relied on fewer assumptions.In the modern day, there are a few things you could call "aether" but only really in the sense that waves still exist even without physical medium made of matter. The term started popping up again in pop science like 15 years ago when people were trying to explain what the higgs boson does and it hasn't really gone away since. You could call it that but the old theory, the one that simple wave mechanics could explain light is dead.

1

A

Anon10/14/26, 09:32No.17074397

here, I've used an LLM tooATLAS and CMS do not observe the Higgs boson directly: it decays too quickly to leave a track. They observe the particles produced in its decays after high-energy proton–proton collisions at the LHC, then reconstruct the parent particle from those “decay products.” Key signatures included two photons (\(H\to\gamma\gamma\)) and four charged leptons from \(H\to ZZ^*\to4\ell\). Researchers looked for a narrow excess of events over the expected background, near the same mass in independent decay channels and in both detectors. The combined evidence made the new particle’s existence compelling; later measurements tested whether its properties match the Standard Model Higgs boson.**How energies are measured:** Calorimeters absorb particles and measure the energy they deposit. The electromagnetic calorimeter measures electrons and photons; the hadronic calorimeter measures hadrons such as particles inside jets. Charged particles’ paths curve in the detector’s magnetic field, allowing their momentum to be measured from the curvature; muons are measured with tracking detectors outside the calorimeters. The detectors calibrate these signals and combine them to reconstruct particles’ energies and momenta.For a Higgs candidate decaying to two photons or four leptons, the measured energies and momenta are used to calculate the **invariant mass** of the decay products. A peak around 125GeV in that reconstructed mass indicates a parent particle with that mass. Here, GeV is a unit of energy; particle physicists commonly express mass in GeV/\(c^2\), or use natural units where \(c=1\) and quote it in GeV. The LHC’s collision energy—measured in TeV—is a separate quantity from the Higgs candidate’s reconstructed mass.**How spin was determined:** Spin is inferred statistically from the *patterns* of the decay products, not by directly measuring a particle spinning.

1

A

Anon10/14/26, 18:55No.17074732

can antimatter even be explained without special relativity?

0

A

Anon10/15/26, 17:03No.17075202

David Drew: Return of the Aetherhttps://youtu.be/f9_fANnGaNA

0

A

Anon10/19/26, 23:18No.17077779

Initial likelihood and reactive likelihood is what you should ultimately need if you are to ever overcome the betrayal instinct of Chaos, though naturally I cannot provide data on the resulting world you shall then expect.Yes; I can wrap forwards and backwards over each version of the archive

0

A

Anon10/19/26, 23:23No.17077780

There exist a simple thought experiment proving that the luminiferous aether exists. Assume A move with 0.5*c relative to B. How do they see a plane moving next to them? One way speed. A will say its moving speed x, and B will say its moving with y ≠ . Same with sound, it will move with two different speeds for A and B. Same with everything. And obviously the one way speed of light will also be differently for them. Now does relativity object? No, relativity doesnt prove the one way speed of light is c, its just a DEFINITION. But as all other things, it also has different speeds for A and B. So there is an aether, the only frame where light moves the same in all directions.

1

A

Anon10/20/26, 22:10No.17078269

Its paleo-science: a scientific theory that was superseded by a more accurate theory. the idea was light was a wave, and waves flow through fluid, so there must be a fluid that light flows through. whatever that is, we call it "Aether". two dweebs named michelson and morley did an expiriment that disproved there being such a fluid, which caused the Sons of ether to leave the technocracy. They then joined the council of nine mystic traditions on the seat of Matter, giving us the society of ether we know today.

1

A

Anon10/20/26, 23:43No.17078366

>aether >According to ancient and medieval science...

0

A

Anon10/22/26, 21:08No.17078996

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsQSKEUk_yASQMyZ1AXORflDkylaDPcgz yes, you really do need to watch all videos for the video where he delves into aether theory("What Even IS Minecraft’s Inventory (and What’s the Heaviest Thing to Put in It?)") to not blindside you with what he's doing that ain't aether theory

0

A

Anon10/22/26, 22:19No.17079033

honestly the way an absolute reference frame theory would describe relativistic effects seems more outlandish than standard relativity

1

A

Anon10/22/26, 22:55No.17079056

>Maxwell invents the concept that electromagnetic fields can propagate and submits it to the idea box for Jewish intellectuals (good goy) >physishits mald and ask "IN WHAT??????" >(((Michelson))) answers experimentally "in nothing" >physishits mald more and scream "NONSENSE" >(((Einstein))) makes perfect sense of it with a new theory that tells the time on Mercury >physishits still malding to this day at the pure genius that the Jews managed to express out of one good goy's idea When will physicsgoys learn to accept defeat?

0