Space / Time: Newton + SRT, Leibniz + GRT.

Discussion in 'Physics' started by socratus, Dec 9, 2015.

  1. socratus

    Thread Starter Member

    Mar 26, 2012
    267
    3
    Space / Time: Newton + SRT, Leibniz + GRT.
    ===…
    Newton.
    Space is an absolute concept. (!) Space would continue to exist
    even if all its contents vanished.
    Time is an absolute concept (!) that “flows equably without
    relation to anything external.”
    Leibniz.
    Space is a relative concept. (!) Space is not a “thing” unto itself, but
    merely a web of relations among “things”. Space could no more
    exist apart from the “things” that it relates.
    Time is a relative concept. (!) Time is merely a relation among events.

    The debate between the Newtonians and the Leibnizians continues
    to the present day.
    =====…
    My opinion.
    Newton’s absolute space (!) and absolute time (!) are correct
    in SRT, in the Minkowski spacetime ( in the negative 2D,
    in the Pseudo Euclidian continuum.) SRT is theory without
    gravity-mass. Without gravity-mass this spacetime continuum
    is “open - flat”. It is an absolute, infinite, eternal negative continuum.
    This “Pseudo Euclidian continuum” spacetime has one negative
    physical parameter: T=0K (zero vacuum).

    Leibniz’s relative space (!) and relative time (!) are correct in the
    GRT (gravity theory). GRT says that space and time are phenomena
    of mass and energy. Every gravity system (like stars. planets) has
    its own “closed - spherical” space and time that depends on its mass,
    energy and speed. Therefor from Cosmic view these parameters
    are relative, but for lodgers on the planet Earth these gravity-space
    and gravity- time are absolute parameters.
    ===…
    Conclusion.
    What is the humor of debates between the Newtonians and the
    Leibnizians opponents? The humor is: they both are right.
    The Newton’s mechanics is correct in the Leibniz’s gravity world and
    the Leibniz’s gravity world is correct in Newton’s absolute spacetime.
    ====…
    Best wishes.
    Israel Sadovnik Socratus.
    ====…
     
  2. g6ypk

    New Member

    Nov 15, 2013
    2
    0
    An opinion is just that, an opinion, not a fact. A theory is some thought based on empirical evidence, but until proven is not a fact, but not an opinion. Comprede?
     
  3. reerer

    Member

    Apr 1, 2016
    71
    3
    First, does not optical ether, composed of matter, exist?
     
  4. nsaspook

    AAC Fanatic!

    Aug 27, 2009
    2,906
    2,159
  5. reerer

    Member

    Apr 1, 2016
    71
    3
    Einstein (1917) uses the reversal of Michelson-Morley experiment (Einstein, § 16), to justify the existence of Fresnel's optical ether (Michelson-Morley, p. 334), composed of matter (Fresnel, § § 33 & 43). Also, all current physics text books uses Huygens principle and Fresnel's diffraction mechanism that are based on an optical ether, composed of matter. Plus, dark matter, dark energy are other names for the ether. The result of the ether deception is gravity waves that have the frequency of sound based on an undectable strain 10^21. Have you read the book "Memories of an economic hit man" by John Perkins? Well, that's the same thing that's happening in physics but thanks for the video. Maybe next time fatso can sing and dance too.
     
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2016
  6. nsaspook

    AAC Fanatic!

    Aug 27, 2009
    2,906
    2,159
    Just for a second I thought you were serious.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_drag_hypothesis#Lorentz_and_Einstein
     
  7. reerer

    Member

    Apr 1, 2016
    71
    3
    Lorentz transforms the dimensions of Michelson's experimental apparatus to reverse the negative result of Michelson's experiment to justify the existence of Fresnel's optical ether (Michelson, p. 120), composed of matter (Fresnel, § § 33 & 43).


    "§ 9. Hitherto all quantities of the order p2x /V2 have been neglected. As is well known, these must be taken into account in the discussion of Michelson's experiment, in which two rays of light interfered after having traversed rather long paths, the one parallel to the direction of the earth's motion, and the other perpendicular to it. In order to explain the negative result of this experiment Fitzgerald and myself have supposed that, in consequence of the translation, the dimensions of the solid bodies serving to support the optical apparatus, are altered in a certain ratio." (Lorentz, § 9).


    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




    In Fresnel's paper, "Memorie su la Diffraction de la Lumiere" (1819), Fresnel describes diffraction using interfering light waves formed by the vibration of the elastic fluid.


    "21. If we call λ the length of a light-wave, that is to say, the distance between two points in the ether where vibrations of the same kind are occurring at the same time" (Fresnel, § 21).

    "Admitting that light consists in vibrations of the ether similar to sound-waves, we can easily account for the inflection of rays of light at sensible distances from the diffraction body." (Fresnel, § 33).

    "To understand how a single luminous particle may perform a large series of oscillations all of which are nearly equal, we have only to imagine that its density is much greater than that of the fluid in which it vibrates---and, indeed, this is only what has already been inferred from the uniformity of the motions of the planets through this same fluid which fills planetary space." (Fresnel, § 33).


    "APPLICATIONS OF HUYGENS'S PRINCIPLE TO THE PHENOMENA OF DIFFRACTION

    43. Having determined the resultant of any number of trains of light-waves. I shall now show how by the aid of these interference formulae and by the principle of Huygens alone it is possible to explain, and even to compute, all the phenomena of diffraction. This principle, which I consider as a rigorous deduction from the basal hypothesis, may be expressed thus: The vibrations at each point in the wave-front may be considered as the sum of the elementary motions which at any one instant are sent to that point from all parts of this same wave in any one of its pervious* positions, each of these parts acting independently the one of the other. It follows from the principle of the superposition of small motions that the vibrations produced at any point in an elastic fluid" (Fresnel, § 43).


    The motion of an optical fluid, composed of matter, forms Fresnel's interfering light waves that produce the diffraction effect of light yet diffraction forms in vacuum that is void of an elastic fluid, composed of matter, which is experimental proof Fresnel's diffraction mechanism of light is physically invalid.

    ________________________________

    Does this look serious enough?
     
  8. nsaspook

    AAC Fanatic!

    Aug 27, 2009
    2,906
    2,159
    Old theories that have been discarded by the results of modern experiment and real life applications like GPS (that depends on GR and SR strictly for very precise clocks) are not serious. The possibility of a Lorentz ether with no physical properties is on the same level as Unicorn Tears. Not completely impossible but very unlikely to be a true interpretation of special relativity .
     
  9. reerer

    Member

    Apr 1, 2016
    71
    3
    You forgot the internet...........Huygens principle and Fresnel's diffraction mechanisms are currently used in college physics text books..Also, Lorentz is justifying the existence of Fresnel's optical ether, composed of matter, and Einstein's SR and GR are justifying the existence of Fresnel's optical ether, composed of matter. Furthermore, Einstein (1910) describes an electromagnetic ether that forms light waves in vacuum. By the way, I've been doing this for also 25 years.
     
  10. nsaspook

    AAC Fanatic!

    Aug 27, 2009
    2,906
    2,159
    We still teach people today how to navigate using lines on a map designed by people who believed the world was flat. We also tell them science has moved on to something better.

    Weighed in the balance of Occam's razor, I'll pick the simpler one where there no Unicorn Tears (or no optical ether, composed of matter) in the sky.
     
  11. reerer

    Member

    Apr 1, 2016
    71
    3
    Einstein's (1917) relativity is based on Lorentz's theory that uses the earth's daily and yearly rotational motions to justify the existence of Fresnel's optical ether, composed of matter, which is the same method of deception (earth daily and yearly motion) used to verify that the earth is the center of the Universe and that the earth was flat.
     
  12. nsaspook

    AAC Fanatic!

    Aug 27, 2009
    2,906
    2,159
    and now the nut has popped out of the shell.
     
  13. nsaspook

    AAC Fanatic!

    Aug 27, 2009
    2,906
    2,159
    So after 25 years have you seen the light?
    http://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/threads/michelson-morley-ether-experiment.122574/#post-984594
     
  14. reerer

    Member

    Apr 1, 2016
    71
    3
    So, why is Huygens' principle that is used to represent the propagation of light and Fresnel's diffraction mechanism still used in college physics text books?
     
Loading...