Talk:Aether

Untitled

I removed the "Baha'i Faith" section of the article since it doesn't appear to be about the Baha'i Faith, but is just the writer's pet anti-Einstein ether theory. If anyone can produce evidence that more than a few people believe in this theory, then maybe it could be restored as a separate article. -- BenRG 00:48, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Anti-Einstein? Are you joking? This is a quote of his:

"Recapitulating, we may say that according to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether. According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense. But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it."

- From "Ether and the Theory of Relativity" an address delivered on May 5th, 1920, in the University of Leyden by Albert Einstein himself!

There is nothing 'anti-Einstein' about aether theory... Aether is basically the exact essence of GR... Why so few have realised this is quite a puzzle... Perhaps its due to indoctrination, or a sad inability to see the big picture (Right Hemisphere not operating properly). Khranus

Hmmmm. A very interesting passage. But I rather think it's that you don't understand what Einstein said about ether. He tended to assume a lot about his audience. For example, he assumed that everyone had at least enough calculus to read his book "The Meaning of Relativity", which he said he wrote for the "layman". From memory, the first equation in it is on page six, and is introduced "now by Green's theorem..." and goes almost all the way across the page, with divs, grads and curls everywhere. Most maths graduates (myself included) just stare at it when they first read it. Unless you can follow his logic here in the introduction to his "layman" text, I suggest you stop trying to interpret Einstein's words for others and concentrate on having others (people who can) interpret his words for you.

I agree with BenRG. Is the theory you described well documented and supported? It seems to me that you or someone else (presumably a Baha'i or at least a sympathiser) has woven together several strands of thought, including that of Einstein, as a creative work. To include this in an encyclopedia would be premature. Or is it, for example, an established part of Baha'i teaching? That might qualify it for inclusion.

And no, we're not joking. (;-> Andrewa 19:59, 20 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I came to wikipedia tonight to post the same Albert Einstein quote that Khranus posted above. Having seen the reply to his posting I feel the need to defend him. If such a complicated mathmatical equation can be summed up in such a way as to be able to explain it to 'laymen', then the concept the equation is defining must be easy to understand. If the concept can be so easily misconstrued by a layman, then perhaps it shouldn't be explained at all.

I will add to Khranus' quote, "The ether of the general theory of relativity is a medium which is itself devoid of all mechanical and kinematical qualities, but helps to determine mechanical (and electromagnetic) events." Just recently a satellite orbiting the earth proved the existance of 'Frame-Dragging' Frame-Dragging is the result of the study of GR by Lense-Thirring in 1918. There was also a consequence of the aether called Ether Drag which was conceptually the same thing. In Einsteins address to the students at Leyden in 1920, he approached the aether from many different angles. He attempted to refute the aether completely but during the process he redefined it and quite obviously accepted its existance.

I think Andrewa should read that particular address and see if he/she can come up with a totally different concept from it. Aeroslin

Ether and the Theory of Relativity Transcript
Collected Papers of Albert Eintein Archived Transcripts

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Aeroslin (talk • contribs) 02:07, October 28, 2004 (UTC)

New pages?

I can't help feeling that there ought to be three separate pages here, with some disambiguation, rather than three subsections on one page. I was somewhat surprised when the first thing I was was a list of Greek deities on coming here from Michelson-Morley experiment! -- ALoan (Talk) 14:40, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Neutrality: Modern Aether

There is no modern aether theory in physics. The concept has been disproven without doubt. That concepts in modern physics have a vague resemblance to the ider of aether, is only a byproduct of the very abstract and mathematical nature of modern physics. And yes, I've read some papers in "Galilean Electrodynamics" and can testify that they are nonsense. --Pjacobi 14:39, 2005 Feb 20 (UTC)

Someone more bold has just removed the section inb question [1]. This is fine with me. --Pjacobi 14:44, 2005 Feb 20 (UTC)

There are modern aether unified field theories, they just have not been accepted by the majority of physicists. Faro0485 (talk) 22:53, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Recent changes of weblinks

Both the old one:

Anti Relativity: Anti-Relativity's conjecture about Aether

and the new one

Modern scientific theories of the Ancient aether

are somewhat out of contact with scientific mainstream, eh?

Pjacobi 15:15, 2005 May 8 (UTC)

out of contact? yeah, like they have any idea at all...

Foszae (talk) 08:09, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aetherometry

This article is about the use of "Aether" in physics and philosophy. Please give this a short moment of thought before adding and expanding entries. --Pjacobi 21:54, 2005 Jun 20 (UTC)

What is this page good for?

Most of the content deals with Luminiferous aether, except for the first couple sentences, which deal with Quintessence (alchemy). Why aren't those two articles enough? Art Carlson 20:12, 2005 July 11 (UTC)

Since I got not objections, I done did it. Aether redirects to luminiferous aether, and the bit of philosophy has been moved to Aether (classical element). Art Carlson 08:24, 2005 July 13 (UTC)

I have been enjoying reading material from places like 16pi2.com for a couple of years now. Theres a number of other places where I read about Tesla's stuff and then thought to come to wiki and read whatever interesting articles it has. I can't find them. So... I typed Aether Physics Model and was surprised to find nothing I but don't see any material here relating either. Is there no articles yet for this type of thing? Maybe I am too early. -jrey

Ether (video games)

The redirect just leads back to the chemical ethers. If you ask me, that doesn't make any sense. LOLLERCOASTER 20:10, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ike's signature move? Dear god... WHY? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.103.156.31 (talk) 18:17, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The allusion to a supposed communication method in The Bourne Identity movie was misrepresented.

Ether, some form of communication used by the CIA in The Bourne Supremacy (film). Character "Jarda" played by Martin Csokas says "Word through the ether was that you lost your memory".

It refers to a common saying likely originating from early 90's tech talk (i.e. ethernet ) instead of a code-worded communication system. The phrase "heard through the ether" is commonly used to denote information gleaned from some clayndestine or forgotten method of inform.

74.224.87.59 07:40, 13 February 2007 (UTC)red[reply]

Propose a merge of aethers

I propose a merge of the Aether articles. They all seem to part of a similar subject. Faro0485 (talk) 22:51, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Need a page for physics-aether

This may not be left so! The aether does exist in form only specific extending electromagnetic-radiation-field. My thoughts in more the mine home page www.aethersolution.com --Emery F. Red (talk) 03:44, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]