Aether Wave Theory (AWT), The brief recapitulation after one year

This is not a very viable explanation in connection to the fact, the Universe appaear quite isotropic and uniform. If it would expand by the nouniform speed, we should see the result of such expansion by much more pronounced way, because the 400 km/sec extrapolated from CMB anisotropy is quite high speed, it corresponds the speed of expansion at 5 MPsec scale. For comparison, the relative speed of Andromeda gallaxy is 120+/- 10 km/sec.

Do particles of Aether really exist? This is how the standing waves between particles can be interpreted as a particle diffusion.
Standing microwaves bouncing between sparse metal balls spearated by polystyrene foam in the tube.



This post has been edited by Zephir on Aug 11 2007, 07:54 PM

Can be the dust galaxies considered as another confirmation of AWT cosmology? The dust galaxies are more then 10 GYears old/distant. They can be observed just in infrared spectrum while utilizing the latest technologies and observation techniques, the gravitational lensing in particular (Keck II , Spitzer Space Telescope). The existence of these object is difficult to explain by contemporary cosmology, because the lack of origin of large amount of silicate dust forming these galaxies. While these objects are incredibly radiative, they're lacking the flat shape of accretion disk (the "unified model" of active galactic nuclei, AGN), required for explanation of their luminosity.



Instead of this, the presence of spherical dust galaxies fits perfectly the quasar cosmology, predicted by AWT cosmology, by which the observable matter is mostly the product of quasar radiative evaporation. The dust galaxies are young galaxies in the exact state, which AWT predicts. They're formed by dust, formed by secondary materialization of quasar radiation, whose particles are repelled at the distance by the radiation pressure, so they cannot exhibit the vortex formation.

By AWT the Universe is formed by the interior of some giant dense star, similar to black hole. The star has collapsed during so called "Big Bang" event and during this moment the spherical areas of condensing vacuum has collapsed into shock zones of spongy shape. The centers of collapsed zones have created a giant droplets of highly compressed metastable matter, so called quasars. After releasing of pressure, these quasars have expanded and they evaporated most of excessive matter into theirs neighborhood via gamma radiation. After the radiation excited the gravitation field of quasars, it has partially recombined back again into observable matter under formation of interstellar gas, which has collapsed into stars and galaxies. It seems, the process of matter formation was quite nontrivial.

Caltech News Releases: Astronomers Claim to Find the Most Distant Known Galaxies, July 10, 2007.
D. P. Stark et al.: A Keck Survey for Gravitationally-lensed Lyman Emitters in the Redshift Range 8.5 < z <10.4: New Constraints on the Contribution of Low LuminositySources to Cosmic Reionization, arXiv:astro-ph/0701279v1, January 10, 2007
SST Image Gallery: Brief History of the Universe, 2006
SST Newsroom: NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope Exposes Dusty Galactic Hideouts, 2005.

This post has been edited by Zephir on Aug 11 2007, 08:35 PM

Dear zephir

what mathematical tool is used by the AETHER WAVE THEORY?

i think that might exist a superfluid that can to explain all the symmetries of spacetime,superstrings,and the combinations of all the interactions,that appears
between the extra-dimensions;that contain the continuos spacetimes,quantic mechanics,and the unifications of all the forces,that are distortions geometricals
in differents scales of sizes( cosmological and quantic).

some mathematical appear to escape of the reality of the physical world.the octonions and sedenions create highly quantities of combinations of the vertex,that
are generate 200,300,500...dimensions,that are lattices of spacetimes immersed
in balls of hyperspheres of n-dimensions.

So far the extrapolations of AWT are completely qualitative. Nevertheless, even the qualitative thinking can lead to some quantitative result. For example, I can saty, the Lorentz symmetry breaking should occur at the same wavelength range, like at the case of waves at the water surface, simply because both the light wave, both the water wave are the waves of Aether density gradients and the principle of the whole process remains very same.

While the Aether is driven by inertial waves and by diffusion of closelly packed particles, I can see here at least two main directions, how to limit the number of geometries expected. The first perspective way is based on the Riemann's relation between the Fibonacci series zeta function and the primes density (note the latest publication on this subject).



The second perspective is based on the finite number of the exceptional Lie groups, which are describing the geometry of closely packed gauge bosons like the multidimensional kissing spheres structure.



It's probable, both these probability structures are converging into single one for high number of dimensions/Universe generation. After all, we can see the intersecting sphere structures even inside the Fibonacci spiral structure.

This post has been edited by Zephir on Aug 12 2007, 12:23 AM

Aether needs to be forgotten...that's my rude oppinion.

Why? By my opinion this concept was never understood in its full depth, to explored the less. Just consider the number of quite qualitative explanations / extrapolations, which can be derived from it even without any math.

And this is just the beginning: here are whole bunch of frustrated mathematicians, who are trying to compute at least something...

This post has been edited by Zephir on Aug 12 2007, 12:27 AM

Is there a way to prove it? Any evidence in its favor?

I just supplied the another evidence of this theory. Nevertheless, the Lorentz symmetry violation for microwaves should serve as the best experimental confirmation of the AWT concept. Just to repeat the Michelson-Morley experiment with the light of longer wavelength.

Will the inertial diffusion always lead to the spontaneous entropy increasing?

One of expected objections against the Aether theory can sound, the apparently chaotic diffusion of randomly moving particles will lead to the spontaneous entropy decreasing, thus diminishing the probability of the formation of some organized artifacts inside it to zero.

But is it really true? For example, if we layer two miscible fluids, like the spirit and water, we can observe, the maximal mixing speed of both fluid will become defined just by normal direction of inter-phase gradient, in which the molecules of both fluids will penetrate mutually by maximal speed. Even the water surface can be considered as a gradient of chaotic particle density. If we throw some pebble towards the water surface under low angle, we can observe, the stone will not penetrate the surface, but it will bounce by it like elastic body. It's well known, the spaceship returning to the Earth has a narrow window in the landing angles available. If the landing angle becomes too low, the spaceship will bounce from the atmosphere gradient and it will disappear in the space again.

The similar effect we can observe during energy spreading, which is dispersed and dissipate by tiny density gradients usually. But whenever the density gradient will become sufficiently pronounced and sharp, it will result to the refraction/reflection of energy, or even to the total reflection phenomena.

These common effects will explain us, when the particles will collide with the inertial gradient, it will bounce instead of penetrate it, thus increasing the density gradient even more. By another words, the inertial chaos will lead to the spontaneous formation of the another gradients at the moment, these initial gradients will become pronounced sufficiently. From this moment the initial gradients will propagate spontaneously.

Note that the above mechanism is based on inertial diffusion of mutually colliding particles, which effectively means, these particles must be formed by sufficient amount of density gradients too, to be able to bounce at all. Which is rather easy to imagine, if we consider, the Aether particles are just a less or more dense blobs of Aether gradients, i.e. the blobs of foam.

Because the energy in the foam spreads via surfaces nearly exclusively, the material of gradients can be utilized quite effectively, because the energy can circulate it by many times and by many ways, thus serving both like the particle, both like particle substrate at the same time. So we can say, the particle of Aether are formed by itself, at least up to certain level.

This post has been edited by Zephir on Aug 18 2007, 12:51 AM

The so-called plasma crystals are self-assembled structures of charged particles of dust, in which the formation of high-dimensional structures of Aether can be studied experimentally. The another step can be the preparation of free proton or even electron cloud under pressure. By clicking to the animation bellow you can see the AVI video from real Sandia Lab. experiements.



This post has been edited by Zephir on Aug 20 2007, 01:20 AM

Zephir;
A basic framework for all things is real but your concept of AWT only adds to discredit this thinking.

The evidence for a basic medium is overwhelming. The requirements of propagation and the limitations of the speed of light along with redshift alone are enough evidence.

The failure of Aether theory is not the non-existence of a basic medium but the attributes that were given to that medium. This is an example of the many wrong directions that science has taken. Your concept of Aether is also unsupportable as is shown by your inability to provide evidence in observation or reality.

I realize that to you this is just fun but some have taken your words to be real. I don’t think it is right to mislead anyone in any area including science. From reading some of your posts, I believe you know the difference. If you don’t know the difference I hope this comment will prompt you to take another look at the requirements of basic science.

What do you and your theory predict about MMX? Can you show your predictions? Spare the fairy tales, try using physics (if you can).

I can interpret such stance as your inability to understand the predictions of AWT as well.. The Aether has no attributes other the infinite dense energy and mass. You can think, it's a infinitely dense system of infinitely hot particles. The interior of collapsed dense star or neutrino black hole is rather easy approximation of such environment.

The high mass/energy density doesn't mean, the interior of such black hole is completelly without structure, on the contrary. For example, from most compact structre of packed hyperspheres follows the Lie group geometry. As a direct evidence of Aether can serve every evidence for black hole model of Universe: the similarity between the vacuum foam models and the foam models of black hole interior. The internal structure of collapsar fits well the spongy structure of dark matter. The formation of loony quasars and dust galaxies around primordial active galactic nuclei fits the black hole cosmology much better, then the contemporary cosmology. By
Aether Wave theory the quasars were formed at first during inflation, after then they started to evaporate into dust galaxies and the matter, which has collapsed secondarily. Note the both string liquid model of vacuum, both the dust galaxies were revealed AFTER I presented the AWT into publicity.




Because byAWT the energy spreads along Aether foam membranes like the waves at the water surface, the similar effect can be observed for the light wave spreading, namely the Lorentz symmetry violation for long frequency microwaves. Again, this prediction has an observation support in COBE/WMAP Doppler shift and Thim's experiments. The behavior of foam, which is energy density dependent fits well the quantum mechanics and relativity phenomena.

As you can see, the Aether Wave theory predicts not just the material nature of the vacuum, but many testable details about its structure and evolution, which are in good agreement with unexplained yet phenomena, experiments and observations. With compare to another mainstream theories, these conclusions are follows from AWT even at the simple intuitive level, no complex math reasoning is necessary. And you're not required to consider different, mutually often inconsistent mainstream theories.

Indeed, I explained it here many times.. By AWT the vacuum is formed by foamy matter, exactly the same, like the soap from water. Because the spreading of energy waves along water surface is background independent up to 1.27 cm wavelength level (so called the capillary waves limit), from AWT model follows, exactly the same effect should be observable even for light waves. Therefore the Michelson-Morley experiment should exhibit the reference frame dependence when using the microwaves above 1.27 cm, which can serve as an universal distance measure inside of ou Universe generation. By another words, the anisotropy shift of microwave background radiation observed by COBE/WMAP space-probes is the direct manifestation of Lorentz symmetry violation, which follows from water surface analogy.

Of course, all the above indicia can become complete BS under deeper analysis, but this is not reason for ignoring them under current state of physics understanding, when we haven't no other relevant explanation for SR and QM phenomena, the observation of dark matter, quasars and dust galaxies the less. It's the matter of publicity, not the science to reconsider the Aether theory. The mainstream science won't admit it's own mistakes voluntarily. It's matter of scientific publicity to eliminate the money invested into theoretic physics research by sponsoring all ideas, which are transparent and logical, which are having the real testable predictions and which are internally consistent. The mainstream theories, like the bunch of string theories developed in recent forty years aren't such case by my opinion.

The AWT theory isn't scientific, as it isn't supposed to save time & money of scientists, but the society, which is paying them. The role of scientists towards the society is the same, like the role of politicians. They're expected to serve the society, not their theories or politics. Because the money, which these scientists are spending are the money of society, not the science. Nobody is prohibiting the scientists to develop their own abstract complex theories, but it doesn't mean, the're should be alowed to ignore the most simple and logical explanations for hundreds of years.

This post has been edited by Zephir on Aug 20 2007, 03:43 AM

This just demonstrates more of your lack of understanding. Even in a uniform and isotropic system which is expanding, an object moving relative to his local expansion will see red and blue shifting which sums to give the dipole effect observed.

As for the Andromeda value, picking one value out of what is a statistical distribution is irrelevent. It's like saying "Last week Bob won the lottery, so everyone must win all the time". No, you cannot infer a statistical distribution from a single result.

'Scientific' is not defined as "Done by scientists", it means that it follows the scientific principles laid out by people like Galileo. Scientists can be quite unscientific at time, which is why there's things like peer review. Noone is perfect, constant checks must be made.

To say "My work is unscientific" is to say "My work doesn't use rationality, doesn't check for errors and ignores any criticism others put upon it". In other words "I make it up and don't care what others say".

Scientists are not just funded by the public, they are funded by companies, private enterprise too. Yes, the funding which supports people like myself comes from government payments but I know plenty of people in various departments who get huge funding from companies like Boeing, Lockheed Martin, BP, Exxon, Sony, Panasonic, Intel etc. Why would private companies, who are in it for the profit, bother funding academic projects if it wasn't for the results they produced? Nuclear power was developed by theoretical physicists. Quantum computing is now big business. Nanomaterials. Light based computing. High temperature superconductors. All of these stem from theoretical physics concepts and ideas. Consider something even more abstract, number theory. It's now one of the largest areas of recrutment for mathematicians by businesses because it's directly linked to cryptography.

Scientists get funding because having a large and well educated knowledge base is essential to any western country now. No country can afford, literally, to have no scientists in it's borders, because they play an essential role in research and development of technology. Already there's grumblings in the US that without further investment in particle accelerators, the US will lose it's premiere place in the world for nuclear research, which leads directly to nanotechnology, energy production, high speed communications and even warfare.

Scientists have a proven track record for results. You do not.

This post has been edited by AlphaNumeric on Aug 20 2007, 01:04 PM