Okay, let's propose there is an Aether. It is worth noting that Lorentz Ether Theory was an Ether Theory before Einstein stole the idea.
Einstein still believed there was an aether, and frame dragging shows there is a medium to space. And Michelson Morley did also. Also if the aether is entrained with the motion of the earth, then the Michelson Morley experiment wouldn't show drift either. Okay, so let's say the aether is able to be affected by matter (which is the basis of both a dragged aether or a compressed aether as per Lorentz). then we must ask, can things other than matter affect it? It is worth noting that magnetism can move matter around, electric fields can pull matter apart, light can push matter around and it can burn circuits into the aether. So, in "light" of all that, is it not possible that sufficient electromagnetic fields could put a strong enough influence on space which is magnetized by, and electrically polarized by electromagnetism? (the quantum vacuum, virtual particles popping into existence and being polarized as with the lamb shift? the permeability and permittivity of free space). Sure, Tesla claimed that when he had a suitable field between two plates the space in between became like jelly. Okay, so it should then not seem impossible, only unlikely that regular light from your monitor could put enough of a stress of the aether/space/quantum vacuum to manifest a tangible sensation, right? I have improved this tech, check out this: https://www.reddit.com/r/Aetheric_Engineering/comments/k1x0ki/poll_v2_can_you_feel_these/ And this: https://www.reddit.com/r/Aetheric_Engineering/comments/k1x0ki/poll_v2_can_you_feel_these/ See how many felt the energy, and a number felt extremely intense levels of energy. The last I looked 186 people were impressed enough with the results to subscribe. Well over 50% report feeling something. You might too, others on this list have felt energy, and some haven't. But it isn't outside of possibility for conventional physics for this to work, it is merely 'surprising'. Dan Davidson in his book "Shape power" found that drawn designs could manifest scientifically measurable EM fields. The discoveries I have made line right up with many claimed Free Energy and Antigravity claims. On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 09:55, ROGER ANDERTON <r.j.ander...@btinternet.com> wrote: > That's anyone way of putting it. > > > But memes like -> > > "emission theory makes wrong predictions in other domains" > > > give the false impression of applying to ALL types of emission theories > > > which is false claim. > > > There is difference between claims-> > > > (i) ALL emission theories make wrong predictions in other domains > > > and > > > (ii) SOME emission theories make wrong predictions in other domains > > > The looseness in language used by many physics texts (especially popular > science texts) allow false memes to be easily created. > > > i.e. don't use rigorous Logic with quantifiers > > > > > > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: "H LV" <hveeder...@gmail.com> > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Sent: Sunday, 6 Dec, 20 At 19:49 > Subject: Re: [Vo]:animation of emission theory > > Ok, to clarify *this* emission theory is wrong in other domains. Perhaps a > new emission theory will be formulated that will work in those other > domains. > > harry > > On Sun, Dec 6, 2020 at 1:51 PM ROGER ANDERTON <r.j.ander...@btinternet.com> > wrote: > >> Good animation. >> >> >> emission theory DOES NOT makes wrong prediction in other domains. >> >> >> What probably really talking about is misapplying emission theory in >> other domains >> >> >> >> the claim "emission theory makes wrong predictions in other domains" is >> just a meme promoting a falsehood >> >> >> It is an example of lie which - if a lie is repeated often enough then >> people start believing it. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------ Original Message ------ >> From: "H LV" <hveeder...@gmail.com> >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >> Sent: Sunday, 6 Dec, 20 At 18:23 >> Subject: [Vo]:animation of emission theory >> >> I made a little gif animation of the Michelson Morely experiment using >> the emission theory of light which says the velocity of the source can be >> added to the speed of light. >> >> >> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lC0zjWc1V6XtSa8_Tuwbtu-Gq62T1ukG/view?usp=sharing >> >> Using the theory of an aether wind in 1887, Michelson and Morely >> predicted the waves would arrive back at the corner of the 'L' at different >> times which would result in a fringe shift, but no fringe shift was >> detected. The emission theory successfully explains this "null result" >> because the waves arrive at the corner at the same time. However, the >> emission theory is now widely rejected because it makes wrong predictions >> in other domains. >> >> Harry >> >>
