mpc755

For those of you who freak out over the term 'aether', replace 'aether' with 'dark mass' in the following. Here are some articles where the observed physical phenomenon is correctly described by the matter moving through and displacing the aether. 'Galactic Pile-Up May Point to Mysterious New Dark Force in the Universe' http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/01/musket-ball-dark-force/ "The reason this is strange is that dark matter is thought to barely interact with itself. The dark matter should just coast through itself and move at the same speed as the hardly interacting galaxies. Instead, it looks like the dark matter is crashing into something  perhaps itself – and slowing down faster than the galaxies are. But this would require the dark matter to be able to interact with itself in a completely new an unexpected way, a “dark force†that affects only dark matter." It's not a new force. It's the aether displaced by each of the galaxy clusters interacting analogous to the bow waves of two boats which pass by each other. 'Offset between dark matter and ordinary matter: evidence from a sample of 38 lensing clusters of galaxies' http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.1475 "Our data strongly support the idea that the gravitational potential in clusters is mainly due to a non-baryonic fluid, and any exotic field in gravitational theory must resemble that of CDM fields very closely." The offset is due to the galaxy clusters moving through and displacing the aether. The analogy is a submarine moving through the water. You are under water. Two miles away from you are many lights. Moving between you and the lights one mile away is a submarine. The submarine displaces the water. The state of displacement of the water causes the center of the lensing of the light propagating through the water to be offset from the center of the submarine itself. The offset between the center of the lensing of the light propagating through the water displaced by the submarine and the center of the submarine itself is going to remain the same as the submarine moves through the water. The submarine continually displaces different regions of the water. The state of the water connected to and neighboring the submarine remains the same as the submarine moves through the water even though it is not the same water the submarine continually displaces. This is what is occurring as the galaxy clusters move through and displace the aether. 'Hubble Finds Ghostly Ring of Dark Matter' http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/news/dark_matter_ring_feature.html "Astronomers using NASA's Hubble Space Telescope got a first-hand view of how dark matter behaves during a titanic collision between two galaxy clusters. The wreck created a ripple of dark matter, which is somewhat similar to a ripple formed in a pond when a rock hits the water." The 'pond' consists of aether. The galaxy clusters are moving through and displacing the aether. The ripple created when galaxy clusters collide is a wave in the aether. 'The Milky Way's dark matter halo appears to be lopsided' http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.3802 "the emerging picture of the dark matter halo of the Milky Way is dominantly lopsided in nature." The Milky Way's halo is not a clump of dark matter traveling along with the Milky Way. The Milky Way's halo is lopsided due to the matter in the Milky Way moving through and displacing the aether, analogous to a submarine moving through and displacing the water. Einstein's first 'paper'. A letter to his uncle. http://www.worldscibooks.com/etextbook/4454/4454_chap1.pdf "The velocity of a wave is proportional to the square root of the elastic forces which cause [its] propagation, and inversely proportional to the mass of the aether moved by these forces." Einstein is referring to the state of displacement of the aether. The velocity of a wave is proportional to the square root of the elastic forces which cause its propagation, and inversely proportional to the mass of the aether displaced by these forces. 'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein' http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html "Think of waves on the surface of water. Here we can describe two entirely different things. Either we may observe how the undulatory surface forming the boundary between water and air alters in the course of time; or else-with the help of small floats, for instance - we can observe how the position of the separate particles of water alters in the course of time. If the existence of such floats for tracking the motion of the particles of a fluid were a fundamental impossibility in physics - if, in fact nothing else whatever were observable than the shape of the space occupied by the water as it varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that water consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise it as a medium." if, in fact nothing else whatever were observable than the shape of the space occupied by the aether as it varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that aether consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise it as a medium having mass which is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it. "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places" The state of the aether at every place determined by its connections with the matter and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the state of displacement of the aether. The Milky Way moves through and displaces the aether. The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether. The Milky Way moves through and curves spacetime. The Milky Way's halo is curved spacetime. The state of displacement of the aether is curved spacetime. The state of displacement of the aether is gravity.

There is no such thing as dark matter which travels with the matter. Matter moves through and displaces the mass which fills the space unoccupied by particles of matter. If the problem is the term aether then call it 'dark mass'. 'Dark matter' is now understood to fill what would otherwise be considered to be empty space. 'Cosmologists at Penn Weigh Cosmic Filaments and Voids' http://www.upenn.edu/pennnews/news/cosmologists-penn-weigh-cosmic-filaments-and-voids "Dark matter ... permeate all the way to the center of the voids." 'No Empty Space in the Universe --Dark Matter Discovered to Fill Intergalactic Space' http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2012/02/no-empty-space-in-the-universe-dark-matter-discovered-to-fill-intergalactic-space-.html "A long standing mystery on where the missing dark matter is has been solved by the research. There is no empty space in the universe. The intergalactic space is filled with dark matter." In order to avoid the baggage associated with dark matter, the term 'dark mass' will be used to describe the mass which fills the space unoccupied by particles of matter. Particles of matter move through and displace the dark mass, including 'particles' as large as galaxies and galaxy clusters. What physics mistakes for the density of the dark matter is actually the state of displacement of the dark mass. Particles of matter move through and displace the dark mass, including 'particles' as large as galaxies and galaxy clusters. 'The Milky Way's dark matter halo appears to be lopsided' http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.3802 "the emerging picture of the dark matter halo of the Milky Way is dominantly lopsided in nature." The Milky Way's halo is not a clump of dark matter traveling along with the Milky Way. The Milky Way's halo is lopsided due to the matter in the Milky Way moving through and displacing the dark mass, analogous to a submarine moving through and displacing the water. The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the dark mass. The Milky Way moves through and curves spacetime. The Milky Way's halo is curved spacetime. The state of displacement of the dark mass is curved spacetime. The state of displacement of the dark mass is gravity. A moving particle has an associated wave in the dark mass. In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and the associated wave in the dark mass passes through both. Q. Why is the particle always detected traveling through a single slit in a double slit experiment? A. The particle always travels through a single slit. It is the associated wave in the dark mass which passes through both. The wave of wave-particle duality is a wave in the dark mass. What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment, the dark mass. Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality, both are waves in the dark mass. Dark mass displaced by matter relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.

This is the first link: https://physics.stanford.edu/people/faculty/robert-laughlin This page contains: "Faculty Type: Active Faculty". The quote from Robert Laughlin is not 'historical'. Robert Laughlin is an active faculty member in the physics department at Stanford. It is the second link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_theories#Quantum_vacuum which contains the quote. The quote from Robert Laughlin is from 2005: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_theories#cite_note-9 "Laughlin, Robert B. (2005). A Different Universe: Reinventing Physics from the Bottom Down. NY, NY: Basic Books. pp. 120–121. ISBN 978-0-465-03828-2." 2005 is 10 years ago, not 60.

The first link is to show the quote is from a physicist who is currently an active member of the physics department at Stanford: "Faculty Type: Active Faculty". This is not a 'historical' quote from the late 1800's or early 1900's. The second link is to show a place online which contains the quote which you refer to as the third item. I have to continually repeat the quote due to a poster who keeps insisting repeatedly that the notion of the ether is absurd. I am simply posting a quote from an active physicist who is also a Nobel prize winner who says, "The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether.". If that poster would simply stop repeating themselves then the posting of this quote would not have to be repeated.

Active faculty member and Nobel prize winner Robert Laughlin disagrees with you. https://physics.stanford.edu/people/faculty/robert-laughlin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aether_theories#Quantum_vacuum "The word 'ether' has extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics because of its past association with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because, stripped of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum. . . . Relativity actually says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading the universe, only that any such matter must have relativistic symmetry. [..] It turns out that such matter exists. About the time relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids. Subsequent studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian emptiness. It is filled with 'stuff' that is normally transparent but can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo." - Robert B. Laughlin, Nobel Laureate in Physics, endowed chair in physics, Stanford University

"The word 'ether' has extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics because of its past association with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because, stripped of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum. . . . Relativity actually says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading the universe, only that any such matter must have relativistic symmetry. [..] It turns out that such matter exists. About the time relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids. Subsequent studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian emptiness. It is filled with 'stuff' that is normally transparent but can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo." - Robert B. Laughlin, Nobel Laureate in Physics, endowed chair in physics, Stanford University

In a single slit experiment the associated wave interacts with the walls of the slits. The particle creates a diffraction pattern as it is guided by the wave after exiting the slit. Think of a boat going between two rock jetties as it enters the harbor. It's the bow wave which 'interacts' with the jetties.

"The word 'ether' has extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics because of its past association with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because, stripped of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum. . . . Relativity actually says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading the universe, only that any such matter must have relativistic symmetry. [..] It turns out that such matter exists. About the time relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids. Subsequent studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian emptiness. It is filled with 'stuff' that is normally transparent but can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo." - Robert B. Laughlin, Nobel Laureate in Physics, endowed chair in physics, Stanford University Matter, quantum solids and fluids, a piece of window glass and 'stuff' have mass and so does the space unoccupied by particles of matter. You can call 'it' whatever you want. The space unoccupied by particles of matter has mass and is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it. You can call it plenum, ether, aether, quintessence, quantum foam, quantum vacuum or make up your own term. I prefer the term aether when describing the mass which fills the space unoccupied by particles of matter. When you place a detector at the exit to a slit you destroy the cohesion of the associated wave exiting that slit with the wave exiting the other slit and the waves exiting both slits will no longer create wave interference. '1st place: Shifting the morals of quantum measurement' http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2011/dec/16/physics-world-reveals-its-top-10-breakthroughs-for-2011 "Using an emerging technique called "weak measurement", the team is the first to track the average paths of single photons passing through a Young's double-slit experiment – something that Steinberg says physicists had been "brainwashed" into thinking is impossible." 'Quantum mechanics rule 'bent' in classic experiment' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13626587 'For his part, Professor Steinberg believes that the result reduces a limitation not on quantum physics but on physicists themselves. "I feel like we're starting to pull back a veil on what nature really is," he said. "The trouble with quantum mechanics is that while we've learned to calculate the outcomes of all sorts of experiments, we've lost much of our ability to describe what is really happening in any natural language. I think that this has really hampered our ability to make progress, to come up with new ideas and see intuitively how new systems ought to behave."' 'New 'Double Slit' Experiment Skirts Uncertainty Principle' http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=new-double-slit-experiment-skirts-uncertainty-principle "Intriguingly, the trajectories closely match those predicted by an unconventional interpretation of quantum mechanics known as pilot-wave theory, in which each particle has a well-defined trajectory that takes it through one slit while the associated wave passes through both slits." A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit. It is the associated wave which passes through both. As the wave exits the slits it creates wave interference. As the particle exits a single slit the direction it travels is altered by the wave interference. This is the wave guiding the particle. Strongly detecting the particle causes a loss of cohesion between the particle and its associated wave, the particle continues on the trajectory it was traveling and it does not form an interference pattern. What waves in a double slit experiment is the aether.

When you perform the actual experiment, not a simulation, and the results are as I predict title the paper, 'A de Broglie was correct experiment'.

It's correct. Perform the actual experiment or get me in touch with people who can execute it. The test would be to start with an actual so-called DCQE and turn it into a de Broglie was correct experiment.

They're not random. They appear to be random but they are not. It's the interaction with the second beam splitter which causes certain idler photons to be detected at certain detectors. When you combine like photons from Dac[n] with like photons from Dbc[n] you get an interference pattern at D0.

Iteration 1: Dbc1 fires and D0 fires. Iteration 2: Dac2 fires and D0 fires. Iteration 3: Dac1 fires and D0 fires. And so and so on. Now take the cumulative detections at Dac1, Dac2, Dbc1 and Dbc2 and their corresponding detections at D0 and if you take all of the possible combinations of Dac1, Dac2, Dbc1 and Dbc2 and compare that with the corresponding detections at D0 there will be two interference patterns at D0.

Cumulative photons which arrive at Dac1 and (Dbc1 or Dbc2) will correspond to an interference pattern at D0. One of 4 detectors will fire per iteration of the experiment. It's the culmination of the iterations when combined together which will correspond to the interference patterns created at D0.

Both will be discerned at D0. If you compare the photons detected at Dac1 and (Dbc1 or Dbc2) with the photons detected at D0, the corresponding photons detected at D0 will form an interference pattern. If you compare the photons detected at Dac2 and (Dbc1 or Dbc2) with the photons detected at D0, the corresponding photons detected at D0 will form an interference pattern. The image for the experiment I propose shows the idler interacting with two beam splitters. It is the interaction with the second beam splitter which allows the two interference patterns being created at D0 to be discerned. Read the original experiment post.

The patterns at D0 will be the following.

In the experiment I propose the two interference patterns at D0 will still be discerned. Try reading what was posted: Interference patterns do not even need to be created at the other detectors in order to determine the interference patterns created at D0.

The following is a so-called 'delayed choice quantum eraser' experiment. There are two interference patterns being generated at D0 regardless of what else occurs in the experiment. The two interference patterns overlap and form a bell curve. It is the interaction with the second beam splitter which allows one interference pattern to be discerned from the other. The BBO crystal creates a downconverted photon pair. Let's call one set of photons the 'up' photon and the other the 'down' photon. The 'up' photons are creating an interference pattern at D0. The 'down' photon is creating an interference pattern at D0. Both 'up' and 'down' photons arrive at D3 and D4 which correspond to the 'up' and 'down' photons which arrive at D0 which form a bell curve. One set of photons arrives at D1 and the other set arrive at D2. This allows the two interference patterns which are being created at D0 to be discerned. The following is an image of the experiment I am proposing. Instead of having a single beam splitter BSc have two beam splitters BSac and BSbc. Replace mirror Ma with BSac and replace mirror Mb with BSbc. Have BSac and BSbc at the same angle with respect to the path the light wave travels. Do not combine the red and blue paths. Have additional detectors Dac1, Dac2, Dbc1, and Dbc2. Have the photons which interact with BSac be detected at Dac1 and Dac2. Have the photons which interact with BSbc be detected at Dbc1 and Dbc2. Setup the experiment so photons arrive at Dac1, Dac2, Dbc1 and Dbc2 in equal numbers. If you compare the photons detected at Dac1 and (Dbc1 or Dbc2) with the photons detected at D0, the corresponding photons detected at D0 will form an interference pattern. If you compare the photons detected at Dac2 and (Dbc1 or Dbc2) with the photons detected at D0, the corresponding photons detected at D0 will form an interference pattern. Interference patterns do not even need to be created at the other detectors in order to determine the interference patterns created at D0. The which-way of the idler photons will be known and the interference patterns at D0 will still be discerned.

Having wave-particle duality be a physical particle and a physical wave does not violate Bell's inequality. In a double slit experiment the particle is detected. As the wave physically exits both slits it creates wave interference. As the particle physically exists a single slit the direction it travels is altered by the wave interference causing it to form an interference pattern. Placing detectors at the exits to the slits causes a loss of cohesion between the particle and its associated wave, the particle continues on the trajectory it was traveling and does not form an interference pattern.

NON-LINEAR WAVE MECHANICS A CAUSAL INTERPRETATION by LOUIS DE BROGLIE “Since 1954, when this passage was written, I have come to support wholeheartedly an hypothesis proposed by Bohm and Vigier. According to this hypothesis, the random perturbations to which the particle would be constantly subjected, and which would have the probability of presence in terms of [the wave-function wave], arise from the interaction of the particle with a “subquantic medium†which escapes our observation and is entirely chaotic, and which is everywhere present in what we call “empty spaceâ€Â.†The “subquantic medium†is the aether. ‘Fluid mechanics suggests alternative to quantum orthodoxy’ http://newsoffice.mit.edu/2014/fluid-systems-quantum-mechanics-0912 “The fluidic pilot-wave system is also chaotic. It’s impossible to measure a bouncing droplet’s position accurately enough to predict its trajectory very far into the future. But in a recent series of papers, Bush, MIT professor of applied mathematics Ruben Rosales, and graduate students Anand Oza and Dan Harris applied their pilot-wave theory to show how chaotic pilot-wave dynamics leads to the quantumlike statistics observed in their experiments.†A “fluidic pilot-wave system†is the aether. ‘When Fluid Dynamics Mimic Quantum Mechanics’ http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/07/130729111934.htm “If you have a system that is deterministic and is what we call in the business ‘chaotic,’ or sensitive to initial conditions, sensitive to perturbations, then it can behave probabilistically,†Milewski continues. “Experiments like this weren’t available to the giants of quantum mechanics. They also didn’t know anything about chaos. Suppose these guys  who were puzzled by why the world behaves in this strange probabilistic way  actually had access to experiments like this and had the knowledge of chaos, would they have come up with an equivalent, deterministic theory of quantum mechanics, which is not the current one? That’s what I find exciting from the quantum perspective.†What waves in a double slit experiment is the aether.

Which is why I'm not discussing pilot-wave theory. I'm discussing de Broglie's double solution theory. Pilot-wave theory: wave-function wave is pilot-wave. De Broglie's double solution theory: wave-function wave is statisical non-physical and used to determine the probabilistic results of experiments. There is a physical wave in a hidden subquantic medium which guides the particle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden_variable_theory#Bohm.27s_hidden_variable_theory "The currently best-known hidden-variable theory, the "causal" interpretation of the physicist and philosopher David Bohm, originally published in 1952, is a non-local hidden variable theory." In Bohmian mechanics the particle always travels through a single slit and the associated pilot-wave passes through both. De Broglie's double solution theory is also a non-local hidden variable theory. In Bohmian mechanics the pilot-wave is the wave-function wave. In de Broglie's double solution theory there are two waves. There is the wave-function wave which is statistical, non-physical and is used to determine the probabilistic results of experiments. There is also a physical wave in a hidden subquantic medium which guides the particle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_theorem "No physical theory of local hidden variables can ever reproduce all of the predictions of quantum mechanics" Entanglement in de Broglie's double solution theory is non-local, more correctly it's not even a hidden-variable theory, it's an exposed variable theory. Due to conservation of momentum each of the pair can determine the other's state. Each of the pair's state is exposed to one another. '1st place: Shifting the morals of quantum measurement' http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2011/dec/16/physics-world-reveals-its-top-10-breakthroughs-for-2011 "Using an emerging technique called "weak measurement", the team is the first to track the average paths of single photons passing through a Young's double-slit experiment – something that Steinberg says physicists had been "brainwashed" into thinking is impossible." 'Quantum mechanics rule 'bent' in classic experiment' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13626587 'For his part, Professor Steinberg believes that the result reduces a limitation not on quantum physics but on physicists themselves. "I feel like we're starting to pull back a veil on what nature really is," he said. "The trouble with quantum mechanics is that while we've learned to calculate the outcomes of all sorts of experiments, we've lost much of our ability to describe what is really happening in any natural language. I think that this has really hampered our ability to make progress, to come up with new ideas and see intuitively how new systems ought to behave."' 'New 'Double Slit' Experiment Skirts Uncertainty Principle' http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=new-double-slit-experiment-skirts-uncertainty-principle "Intriguingly, the trajectories closely match those predicted by an unconventional interpretation of quantum mechanics known as pilot-wave theory, in which each particle has a well-defined trajectory that takes it through one slit while the associated wave passes through both slits." A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit. It is the associated wave which passes through both. As the wave exits the slits it creates wave interference. As the particle exits a single slit the direction it travels is altered by the wave interference. This is the wave guiding the particle. Strongly detecting the particle causes a loss of cohesion between the particle and its associated wave, the particle continues on the trajectory it was traveling and it does not form an interference pattern. What waves in a double slit experiment is the aether.

It's an analogy. The main point being the boat always travels through a single slit and the bow wave passes through both. If the boat was made such that it was pushing its bow wave out ahead of it and the bow wave exited the slits before the boat did the waves exiting both slits could change the direction the boat is traveling. If you place a bunch of pilings at the exits to the slits in order to detect the boat the boat is going to get knocked around by the pilings and it won't matter what the waves exiting both slits do as the pilings are going to have a bigger impact on the boat than the waves do. The point about closing your eyes is also just to re-iterate that the boat travels through a single slit whether you observe/detect it or not. The boat always travels through a single slit. It is the bow wave that passes through both. The particle in a double slit experiment travels through a single slit whether you observer/detect it or not. The particle always travels through a single slit. It is the associated wave in the aether that passes through both. In a double slit experiment the particle travels a well defined path which takes it through one slit. The associated wave in the aether passes through both. As the wave exits the slits it creates wave interference. As the particle exits a single slit the direction it travels is altered by the wave interference. This is the wave guiding the particle. Detecting the particle strongly exiting a single slit destroys the cohesion between the particle and its associated wave in the aether, the particle continues on the trajectory it was traveling and does not form an interference pattern. The double slit experiment in the following video is not ideal as the direction the particle travels is not being altered by the associated wave exiting both slits. If the particle were moving faster it would have a larger associated wave. It's just a matter of time before the interference pattern associated with walking droplets matches those of particles in double slit experiments. I recommend watching all of the following video. The part having to do with the double slit experiment is at the 2:43 mark.

That video does not discuss wave-particle duality correctly.

Just trying to help get the big picture across. The following is the big picture: The aether is the mass which fills the space unoccupied by particles of matter and is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it. What is referred to geometrically as curved spacetime physically exists in nature as the state of displacement of the aether. Wave-particle duality is a moving particle and it's associated wave in the aether. What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment, the aether. Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality, both are waves in the aether. Aether displaced by matter relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.