John Frank Wilczek, and I have extremely similar theories, my own model of the universe has an entrained aether. What NASA photographed as evidence of "Dark Matter", when 2 galaxies collided, and their shadowy fields kept on moving after the matter collided, is in my humble opinion direct evidence of entrained aether. It drags on matter and matter drags on it like a car going down the road. Leaves caught up in the wake of the vehicle are a perfect example of the effect. I also share the opinion that matter is as he suggests; "subatomic particles and quarks are actually dynamics and movements and vibrations and oscillations, or as he termed it music in the void."
I couldn't agree more. On top of that, my model also suggests that a "Black Hole" is a quasi stable (long decay) aetheric disturbance that would go on long after any matter in it's reach had been exhausted. Consumption of matter which it regurgitates as a pair of gamma streams is how it keeps going, matter-aether drag is responsible for the whole thing. Simple Newtonian Physics explains why undisturbed, it keeps on going, and going, and going. Also as a last statement on my personal theory, it suggests that there is a flow to aether around every physical object, between all objects, even on a galactic scale. As such there should be differentiated bands of aether flow that would look like fine clouds or ribbons of what appear to be matter or dark matter. So what you have to say here John is not far off from my own theories, aetheric patterns and structures that will persist, should be quite possible. Gibson ________________________________ From: John Berry <berry.joh...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 10:03 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:New more powerful image Please read this entire email, but if you don't, just read this: So what evidence exists for there not being an entrained aether? None. You could argue that nothing really proves anything. Even atoms are still just considered a theory, sure a popular one with tons of evidence. Atoms are of course redefines, quantum physics changed understanding of the atom, was the previous model incorrect? That is a very hard thing to answer, it certainly wasn't complete. So this is evidence for a substance to space, for an energy that does not fit into the engineering and physics definition of energy. Of course there is a lot of other evidence for that accepted by convention. Now does one person feeling something prove it, well no. But a significant percentage of people do feel this. So taken over many people it proves there is something to this, probably more than just a convincing presentation and any normal eye bending bending images. Something that can't be readily explained by anything other than either an aether or possibly quantum physics, and in the latter why as this worked based on a model for the former. Feeling it in your hand as I do, as a strong physical sensation sure feels like proof, but only proof for me, not very convincing for others. But must it be proven to investigate it? It is exotic but still quite plausible. It doesn't disagree with any established physics. And it does agree quite well with a lot of other evidence. There are (IMO stupid) people that question the existence of reality, as they consider reality could be a simulation on a computer. So some would not consider reality proven. And others consider the mind does not exist. Let's say this, there is based on the evidence I have been able to gather definitively something that is not normally understood (and there is already some degree of evidence on list) and it follows the rules that I have found by modeling it on an aether. It might be incomplete, but so far all evidence points to it being correct. Is it an aether that is moving, or am I making waves in quantum probability fields, and is there a difference? Maybe I am moving packets of ZPE, or maybe the aether exists but I am only moving various energy structures within in and not the substance? With quantum waves (waves in what?) and waves in fields that exist in what? Consider this, with all the evidence that space has a substance, frame dragging, Casimir effect and the like maybe we shouldn't ask what evidence there is for an aether, maybe we should ask what evidence exists that there isn't an aether? Seriously, Einstein believed in one, And Michelson and or Morley still believed. Their experiment only discounted that there in a lumiferious aether that the earth moved through (i.e. didn't drag with it). But that would be a most improbable model. So what evidence exists for there not being an entrained aether? None. And there is evidence against SR that supports an earth entrained aether. And while I am an unqualified scientific armature, Frank Wilczek is a highly credentialed Nobel prize winning physicist and while I don't know if he would give this stuff a seconds thought (indeed, maybe he shouldn't if he wants to keep his credentials) he has a lot of evidence to support an aether. Indeed until I attended a lecture he gave I was not willing to conclude matter was made of aether, but he had such incredible evidence that subatomic particles and quarks are actually dynamics and movements and vibrations and oscillations, or as he termed it music in the void. Only one issue, a void can't move. And in his later released book talks semi openly about the aether, and aether condensates. John On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Alexander Hollins <alexander.holl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >I do feel a minor vibration in my right palm when holding both hands to teh >monitor. I KINDA feel what i could describe as a sucking feeling on my left, >it is too minor to differentiate from placebo to me, but the vibration was an >effect of muscles i could see on the skin, so a positive effect of some kind. > >Yes. But does this experience prove the existence of an ether? > >Eric > >
