Is there an ether?

[Silvertiger]

So...is there a luminiferous ether through which waves, known as light and electromagnetic radiation, propagate?

[ovyyus]

Can a 'luminiferous ether' be demonstrated to exist?

A 'yes/no' belief option seems like a false dilemma. What about a 'don't know' option? That would at least make your offer seem a little less contrived :P

[Silvertiger]

If you have no idea of whether it exists or not, that's fine. However - and this is what I do for myself, as I cannot speak for others - research the subject, and pick a starting point based on that research and form a conclusion based on observations that can be put to the test of experiment. Satisfy the scientific method in your mind, and then vote.

That being said, you asked a GREAT question...can it be demonstrated to exist or not?? Follow the scientific method: if it can be observed, then it can be tested. If it cannot be observed, then it cannot be tested.

The "don't know" option is there lol. That's why I put the third poll option there, inferring that those who choose it either do not know enough about it, or they doubt their own assumptions or conclusions about it, and thus would be looking to see what I have to say about it. Personally, I would only choose THAT option as a last resort, but would do so if I were pressed for time and didn't have a lot of it to spare for research, or if I had reason to believe that person to be an authority on the subject.

Do want an answer to your question, or would you rather research it first? :)

[agor95]

Hi

That is a good question. Could you clarify what you mean by 'ether'?

Would you say 'ether' is the same as the 'Durac Sea' and 'Quantum Fluctuation'.

What physical existence does 'ether' have? Does it have the same as 'Dark Energy' and 'Dark Matter'?

You see one can say YES to a concept of 'ether' like negative square roots.

However NO to the physical existence of ether.

I am working on your question being the 'physical existence of'.

Regards

[Silvertiger]

A medium for the propagation of waves, like a material substance such as water or glass, through which all electromagnetic radiation causes perturbations...like ripples in a pond from a stone that is thrown, or how wind makes waves in the grass and on the ocean.

[Zhyyra]

I chose THAT option only because I don't know any better, don't have any time for research and may form an opinion after hearing ST on the "matter".

Zhy

[MrTim]

All this ether stuff puts me to sleep...

;-)

[Silvertiger]

Here's the thing...no one today who has ever gone to school knows what the ether, or aether, is beyond what they may have learned in a paragraph in a chapter on the history of science that says that the ether is a medium through which light was believed to propagate.

Here's another thing. Science can be broken down into only two foundations upon which everything else is built and derived. One is ether, and the other is particles. The fact is that most people don't know what a particle IS. It is somebody's fantasy, a fantasy that is used to "force" the universe to work without mediums and fields and their perturbations.

Even Tesla himself called Einstein a fuzzy-haired crackpot for suggesting anything other than ether, and Tesla was an expert on the subject since he worked with ether and fields every day. The truth is that "bumping particles" is pure science fiction fantasy. The most evil unmentionable word in modern science is ether, and yet they acknowledge its existence without trying to call it that, while at the same time attempting to change its definition and nature. They will call it quantum energy, quantum foam, quantum fluctuation, dark matter, dark energy. And none of these things exist since they are based on bumping particles.

Here's observational and experimental proof number one: if ether does not exist, in favor of bumping particles with no pond to swim in, then HOW is it that light passing through a denser medium, such as glass, immediately speeds back up upon its exit, if it is indeed a particle? You build your dark, hollow high vacuum chamber cylinder and stick a glass cylinder in the middle of it, and put a laser on the end. You fire the laser. It goes 186,000 mi/s until it reaches the glass, which slows it down to 124,000 mi/s. If light were a particle, meaning that it has a certain amount of energy that it carries (aka a charge), then it should stay at that speed after exiting the glass since the glass took some energy away from it...but that's not what happens. As soon as it leaves the glass, it picks immediately back up to 186,000 mi/s! So the question is, if as a particle it lost some energy going through the glass, then HOW did it get that lost energy back? The question is actually misleading, and shouldn't even be asked...because you're dealing with perturbations of media. And before you even launch an argument about how light is both a particle and a wave, consider this: you can perform the EXACT SAME experiment using sound. In fact, sound will "travel faster" through the glass, but then slow back down to its "original speed" as soon as it hits air again.

Science says that "photons" are massless, like the rest of its bosonic brothers and sisters, and all to reconcile thermal equilibrium between electromagnetism and matter without consideration of the ether, since that would, of course, place earth at the center of the universe. And yet experiments beginning in the late 90's, invented by physicist Lene Hau, showed that light, when slowed down, converted to actual matter, which does have mass. This cannot be reconciled in modern particle theory. Why? Because what really happened was that energized ETHER became trapped in the Bose-Einstein condensate, because ether IS unenergized light in and of itself. It's just a medium of propagation, no different than the air for sound or the ocean for wind. Thus, unbeknownst to her, Hau had quite literally "frozen" a wave on the ocean and "trapped" it in that energized state. She literally "saw" ether. It was energized ether - aka "light" - which is what made it visible. Wind making waves on an ocean is merely an input of energy into a system. Now imagine that you couldn't "see" the ocean...but you could see its waves. Now just freeze that in cesium or Bose-Einstein condensate, and take pictures.

[agor95]

This goes into the believed process that causes the illusion of slowing down of light.

Simply light travels at a constant speed.

However when it gets absorbed and re-transmitted there is a time delay.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow_light

https://www.newsweek.com/physics-speed- ... als-796385

P.S. Aether is the pagan god of light.

Regards

[Silvertiger]

And yet the very last sentence of the article says "The researchers believe the system could work for not just light, but other kinds of waves like sound." They're covering their bases in regard to the ether. Why would they do that? Because saying the word "ether" is like crying out "Satan" in the middle of church to them. Mother nature does not care whether you call it ether, zero point energy, counterspace, or noncartesian inertia or anything else...she doesn't care. They care. "Slow light" is not an illusion...not sure where you got that. The wiki article you referenced says that light does indeed slow down. Shout out to the mention of Hau's work. However, I do hope for the sake of learning that this wasn't a one minute extrapolation of a thirty second Google search for Hau, LOL.

The SPEED of light, however, is sort of an illusion, as it really isn't some "thing" that "travels" per se, but rather it is a rate of induction. You look at an ocean, and you see its waves "traveling" at a certain "speed" in a certain "direction." But if you were sitting in a boat on top of these waves, you would just bob UP and DOWN and never move unless the wind blew you. Thus, you just became the "particle"...but you are NOT part of the ocean. Have you ever heard a scientist say that a photon just moves up and down? Of course not. If that were true, then microwave ovens would not need Faraday cages. BUT...if it is a WAVE, then the cage makes perfect sense. Think about it. ;)

Here is another experiment you can do, and its conclusions are undeniable, just like the ether they detect.. So without having or being able to afford any fancy equipment and a PHD, what is the most simple way to detect ether and prove it exists? First, look up the equations for how to calculate magnetic field strength as it varies with distance (how far you get away from a magnet). This is free. The next part isn't free, but still incredibly affordable. Go get yourself a magnet of decent size, like maybe a 2"x2"x1" large magnet or larger if you want. If you want to be a big spender, go with neodymium, but you don't have to. Now, you're going to have a range of magnetic influence about 18 inches out before it completely drops off to where nothing will be affected outside of that range of inductive ability, measured in gauss. Then go find an old CRT television, plug it in, and turn it on and put the channel on any white noise frequency. Now take your magnet and walk 20 plus feet away from the TV. You can do this at 40 feet out and even greater distances, but you will need a camera or a spotting scope or binoculars at that point.

Now, go wave your magnet around or just wiggle your wrist a little and watch how it affects the TV, even at distances that great. Now remember, the influence of the magnet is around 18 inches...so how can it affect the TV from so far away? Well, when you start waving it around, you're creating perturbations and a strain in the hysteresis (there's your time delay Agor) and stasis of the ether - disturbances - no different than flapping your arms in the middle of a pond, and the TV is showing you the surface break or shore of that pond, since it is a simple electrostatic generator. The water of the pond is of course analogous to the ether, and the TV is analogous to the shore. It's a dark night, so you can't see the water. But there is enough ambient light to see the water waves breaking over the sand. That's the TV. Now, let's say you're in the pond flapping your arms. Well, the "influence" of your flailing arms only reaches about three feet...but the WAVES that they make keep on going, even as far as 100 feet out depending on the intensity of your flailing. This behavior is contrary to what science says about the distance of a given gaussian flux by the the volume of a magnet, by the way. Try it. :)

Also, some quick questions: Can science reconcile the violation of the law of conservation of energy in regards to light slowing down in glass or any other medium and then speeding back up, as you put it, "when it gets absorbed and re-transmitted"? Can it reconcile instantaneous action at a distance using particle theory in place of the ether, which of course leads to the EPR paradox, for that matter?

[ovyyus]

Now, go wave your magnet around or just wiggle your wrist a little and watch how it affects the TV, even at distances that great. Now remember, the influence of the magnet is around 18 inches...so how can it affect the TV from so far away? Well, when you start waving it around, you're creating perturbations and a strain in the hysteresis (there's your time delay Agor) and stasis of the ether...

I wrecked a few tv's playing with magnets. In the olden days.

A 2" x 2" x 1" neodymium magnet (finger breaker) has a field of influence far greater than 18". It's influence on the earths local magnetic field might extend much further than you imagine. A tv is a very sensitive electromagnetic receiver and can detect and display very small changes in the magnetic fields around it. I see no reason why a tv couldn't be adjusted to detect and display small changes in the earths magnetic field around it. Why invent an 'ether' to explain the interaction?

[Silvertiger]

Ok...stay on that line of thought. You have the magnet (the regular one, not the neo) with its 18 inch drop-off. Set a gauss meter on the ground or on a box and walk the magnet away from it until flux is no longer detected. How far would you get?

[ovyyus]

A gauss meter might not be as sensitive as a tuned tv. Can a gauss meter detect induced changes in the earths magnetic field?

Then, after that, build a cheap Faraday cage and make it a 10 to 20 foot "tunnel." I would assume that regular chain-link fencing or chicken wire would suffice since the wavelength of earth's magnetic field is about 3,000km; so either one would shield against the field's influence. Then conduct the same experiments again inside the cage. Make sure it also covers the ground. :)

A non-ferrous faraday cage has no effect on the field around a magnet. Try it.

[Silvertiger]

I realized that and deleted it LOL, but not before you quoted it apparently, but mostly because you can't use the cage on earth's field. Still, try the gauss meter experiment. See what happens. For a 2"x1"cylinder magnet, N35 grade, I calculated the pull force drop off at 5.2", and the magnetic field drop off at 43" just for a reference. ;)

[ovyyus]

...but mostly because you can't use the cage on earth's field.

...or the magnet you're waving around in your hand or the tv that's detecting it. Introducing an ether seems unnecessary to explain the magnetic interaction.