Infinite Energy!

  • 126 Replies
  • 13651 Views
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #30 on: March 01, 2015, 11:56:44 PM »

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #31 on: March 02, 2015, 03:11:03 AM »
are you literate?
let me try again.

I DO NOT HAVE THE TIME OR MONEY TO CONDUCT THE SAME KIND OF EXPERIMENTS ROUND EARTHERS LIE ABOUT I AM NOT GOING TO CLIMB EVERY FUCKING MOUNTAIN IN THE WORLD WHEN THIS IS COMMON SENSE IF YOU WOULD ONLY JUST THINK YOU CANNOT HAVE SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR FLAT EARTH SCIENCE OVER YOU
WE OBSERVE THE CONSEQUENCES AND MAKE DEDUCTIONS IT IS THAT SIMPLE

air does not exist, aether is what causes the friction. it has the same properties, just to a much lesser degree, which is what we'd expect.
i am not being closed minded like you and assuming that what i say must be right. gravity does not exist, so we make observations. we then make conclusions. your insistence that you must be right and aether can't be to blame is complete bullshit.
i'm tired of you. look at my previous posts, i'm sick of repeating myself.
Calm down, dude.

No need to climb every mountain, but you yourself said you'd done experiments and concluded that aether was swooping down (or was it up) at higher elevations and this was "disrupting" gravity measurements. If you weren't doing these experiments, why did you say you were?

Here's what you said:

the density of aether closest to the earth is very different to the aether detected higher up. i said this. please try to read. it is part of aether, it does not have the properties of the whole. we know aether affects physical entities (it accelerates the earth), that is about all we can say.

higher up, further densities of aether meet in a whirlpool. one such whirlpool explains the movements of the sun and moon. a thinner whirlpool meets mountain tops, this disrupts attempts to read the acceleration. the aether has an almost brownian effect, imparting a slight upwards force as it rushes inward (aether wishes to reunite with itself, to fill in to become one again, hence the slight upward tilt toward the higher densities).

i have experimented, and i've given some examples, hence my conclusion air is a fantasy. i outline this in detail in my thread 'why we cannot trust scientists'.

So what are we to think you mean? You're talking about how you've done experiments about how aether behaves on mountaintops, but now shout that you can't do experiments on every mountain in the world. OK. I don't think anyone expects you to conduct experiments on every mountain, but have you done any experiment on any mountaintop? It may not be necessary to even climb any mountains at all If you've done it by remote sensing. If that's the case, please describe the experiment. I gather you haven't really done any mountaintop measurements, so what experiments have you actually done - even if they don't involve mountains? All I've seen is blather.

You keep claiming you've done experiments. Describe them. Where's the data? Links will be fine if they answer these questions.

i have more evidence of aether than you have of gravity. aether answers the questions of why things work. i suggest you try reading. if this is not acceptable evidence for you, why do you accept gravity?
i also have personal experience and communication with the aether, but i know you won't accept that as evidence.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2015, 03:48:06 AM by JRoweSkeptic »
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #32 on: March 02, 2015, 07:34:36 AM »
i have more evidence of aether than you have of gravity. aether answers the questions of why things work. i suggest you try reading. if this is not acceptable evidence for you, why do you accept gravity?
i also have personal experience and communication with the aether, but i know you won't accept that as evidence.

Aether doesn't explain squat unless you mathematically discribe it's properties.  That would also mean that it's possible to prove or disprove the aether.  Do you know what math is?
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #33 on: March 02, 2015, 07:53:48 AM »
i have more evidence of aether than you have of gravity. aether answers the questions of why things work. i suggest you try reading. if this is not acceptable evidence for you, why do you accept gravity?
i also have personal experience and communication with the aether, but i know you won't accept that as evidence.

Aether doesn't explain squat unless you mathematically discribe it's properties.  That would also mean that it's possible to prove or disprove the aether.  Do you know what math is?

i cannot describe the properties with detailed mathematics as i do not have enough information or the resources to acquire this information. i suggest you read threads before embarrassing yourself, i know i've said this several times before. think.
i have outlined how its properties would work. sciences takes time, equipment, and manpower to do completely, and i have none of those things. i have shown how it works.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #34 on: March 02, 2015, 08:06:24 AM »
i have more evidence of aether than you have of gravity. aether answers the questions of why things work. i suggest you try reading. if this is not acceptable evidence for you, why do you accept gravity?
i also have personal experience and communication with the aether, but i know you won't accept that as evidence.

Aether doesn't explain squat unless you mathematically discribe it's properties.  That would also mean that it's possible to prove or disprove the aether.  Do you know what math is?

i cannot describe the properties with detailed mathematics as i do not have enough information or the resources to acquire this information. i suggest you read threads before embarrassing yourself, i know i've said this several times before. think.
i have outlined how its properties would work. sciences takes time, equipment, and manpower to do completely, and i have none of those things. i have shown how it works.

The amount of time you spend on this forum shows that you have plenty of time, there are plenty of members of this forum that can help you, and between everyone here I am sure someone has the right equipment.  Stop making excuses.  If you understand the properties of the Aetger as well as you claim tgen you should have no trouble making an equasion that describes it.  You tell everyone to use logic, and math is just logic in a written form.  What are you waiting for?
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #35 on: March 02, 2015, 08:10:02 AM »
i have more evidence of aether than you have of gravity. aether answers the questions of why things work. i suggest you try reading. if this is not acceptable evidence for you, why do you accept gravity?
i also have personal experience and communication with the aether, but i know you won't accept that as evidence.

Aether doesn't explain squat unless you mathematically discribe it's properties.  That would also mean that it's possible to prove or disprove the aether.  Do you know what math is?

i cannot describe the properties with detailed mathematics as i do not have enough information or the resources to acquire this information. i suggest you read threads before embarrassing yourself, i know i've said this several times before. think.
i have outlined how its properties would work. sciences takes time, equipment, and manpower to do completely, and i have none of those things. i have shown how it works.

The amount of time you spend on this forum shows that you have plenty of time, there are plenty of members of this forum that can help you, and between everyone here I am sure someone has the right equipment.  Stop making excuses.  If you understand the properties of the Aetger as well as you claim tgen you should have no trouble making an equasion that describes it.  You tell everyone to use logic, and math is just logic in a written form.  What are you waiting for?

when you meet someone who has a hot air balloon and the ability to measure vertical refraction, for example, at various set altitudes, as well as being able to reliably know the altitude they're at, let me know. there are some, they're not going to want to help. i know, i've asked.
that is one possible experiment, that would help to gauge some properties of aether.

i have described the properties as much as can reasonably be expected, and answered every question posed. that is all that needs to be done. moving the goalposts is a dishonest tactic.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #36 on: March 02, 2015, 09:16:47 AM »
when you meet someone who has a hot air balloon and the ability to measure vertical refraction, for example, at various set altitudes, as well as being able to reliably know the altitude they're at, let me know. there are some, they're not going to want to help. i know, i've asked.
that is one possible experiment, that would help to gauge some properties of aether.

i have described the properties as much as can reasonably be expected, and answered every question posed. that is all that needs to be done. moving the goalposts is a dishonest tactic.

Until you have math supporting the aether you are wasting your time.  Either shot up or get to work.
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #37 on: March 02, 2015, 12:52:12 PM »
i have more evidence of aether than you have of gravity. aether answers the questions of why things work.

i cannot describe the properties with detailed mathematics as i do not have enough information or the resources to acquire this information.

See the problem?

There is detailed math that accurately describes what gravity does. This mathematical model has been verified in countless experiments and is used to successfully predict the motions of masses in the presence of gravity with great accuracy. So, I have to disagree with your statement in the first quote above. You do not have more evidence of aether than we have of gravity. You have untested ideas. Nothing more.

i have outlined how its properties would work. sciences takes time, equipment, and manpower to do completely, and i have none of those things. i have shown how it works.

You've described in vague terms what you think it does.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #38 on: March 02, 2015, 01:06:21 PM »
i have more evidence of aether than you have of gravity. aether answers the questions of why things work.

i cannot describe the properties with detailed mathematics as i do not have enough information or the resources to acquire this information.

See the problem?

There is detailed math that accurately describes what gravity does. This mathematical model has been verified in countless experiments and is used to successfully predict the motions of masses in the presence of gravity with great accuracy. So, I have to disagree with your statement in the first quote above. You do not have more evidence of aether than we have of gravity. You have untested ideas. Nothing more.

i have outlined how its properties would work. sciences takes time, equipment, and manpower to do completely, and i have none of those things. i have shown how it works.

You've described in vague terms what you think it does.

making up an equation doesn't mean what it's said to apply to exists. aether explains the downwards force. coming up with figures doesn't mean there isn't another explanation.
i have described what it does. i have described the effects from which we conclude it exists. you do not need detailed math to know something is there. i know the proposed explanations for many things are not true (explained many other places), so aether is the simple conclusion. my personal evidence and experience also makes me certain.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #39 on: March 02, 2015, 01:10:44 PM »
The amount of time you spend on this forum shows that you have plenty of time, there are plenty of members of this forum that can help you, and between everyone here I am sure someone has the right equipment.  Stop making excuses.  If you understand the properties of the Aetger as well as you claim tgen you should have no trouble making an equasion that describes it.  You tell everyone to use logic, and math is just logic in a written form.  What are you waiting for?

when you meet someone who has a hot air balloon and the ability to measure vertical refraction, for example, at various set altitudes, as well as being able to reliably know the altitude they're at, let me know. there are some, they're not going to want to help. i know, i've asked.
that is one possible experiment, that would help to gauge some properties of aether.

i have described the properties as much as can reasonably be expected, and answered every question posed. that is all that needs to be done. moving the goalposts is a dishonest tactic.
Can you describe the experiment rigorously enough to determine if a balloon ride is really necessary? What is it you're trying to show?

How do you propose to measure vertical refraction? How do you plan to discriminate between what you're trying to measure and confounding effects like as atmospheric refraction? If you're simply trying to measure atmospheric refraction and applying what's already known to an aether-based model instead of a N2-O2-CO2 air-based model, then there's a lot of data already collected.

Maybe you could start simple and, if the results are encouraging, expand. That should let you flesh out your rudimentary model and may give insights on how to improve on techniques and instrumentation. You're starting with nothing. Baby steps. It was a long way from Rutherford's model of the atom to the LHC. It does take time.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #40 on: March 02, 2015, 01:28:07 PM »
The amount of time you spend on this forum shows that you have plenty of time, there are plenty of members of this forum that can help you, and between everyone here I am sure someone has the right equipment.  Stop making excuses.  If you understand the properties of the Aetger as well as you claim tgen you should have no trouble making an equasion that describes it.  You tell everyone to use logic, and math is just logic in a written form.  What are you waiting for?

when you meet someone who has a hot air balloon and the ability to measure vertical refraction, for example, at various set altitudes, as well as being able to reliably know the altitude they're at, let me know. there are some, they're not going to want to help. i know, i've asked.
that is one possible experiment, that would help to gauge some properties of aether.

i have described the properties as much as can reasonably be expected, and answered every question posed. that is all that needs to be done. moving the goalposts is a dishonest tactic.
Can you describe the experiment rigorously enough to determine if a balloon ride is really necessary? What is it you're trying to show?

How do you propose to measure vertical refraction? How do you plan to discriminate between what you're trying to measure and confounding effects like as atmospheric refraction? If you're simply trying to measure atmospheric refraction and applying what's already known to an aether-based model instead of a N2-O2-CO2 air-based model, then there's a lot of data already collected.

Maybe you could start simple and, if the results are encouraging, expand. That should let you flesh out your rudimentary model and may give insights on how to improve on techniques and instrumentation. You're starting with nothing. Baby steps. It was a long way from Rutherford's model of the atom to the LHC. It does take time.

there is no atmospheric refraction. don't appeal to round earth fantasies as an excuse. this isn't going to be a proof, it is just an example of how the aether refracts light. the further we go up, the more whirlpools we'll pass (i suspect there is at least one) giving a irregularity, possibly a jump. it is only to get data to deduce more about the aether. i can't say what to expect until i see the results, that is the zetetic method, not the obstinate nature of your science method.
i don't know how to measure refraction, but if there is no way, my point is made. you ask absurdities.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #41 on: March 02, 2015, 01:45:43 PM »
i have more evidence of aether than you have of gravity. aether answers the questions of why things work.

i cannot describe the properties with detailed mathematics as i do not have enough information or the resources to acquire this information.

See the problem?

There is detailed math that accurately describes what gravity does. This mathematical model has been verified in countless experiments and is used to successfully predict the motions of masses in the presence of gravity with great accuracy. So, I have to disagree with your statement in the first quote above. You do not have more evidence of aether than we have of gravity. You have untested ideas. Nothing more.

i have outlined how its properties would work. sciences takes time, equipment, and manpower to do completely, and i have none of those things. i have shown how it works.

You've described in vague terms what you think it does.

making up an equation doesn't mean what it's said to apply to exists.
"Making up" an equation doesn't do squat. If you create a mathematical model (in the simplest form, an equation) that accurately describes what is known to happen and can reliably predict what will happen, then there's an excellent chance that the model has physical meaning (that is, it realistically describes what is happening).

Quote
aether explains the downwards force. coming up with figures doesn't mean there isn't another explanation.
No it doesn't, and there is another explanation. Gravity. It explains the downward force, and explains, in detail, why it varies from place to place on and off earth. It explains orbits. Your aether explanation can do none of this beyond "it makes stuff go down, but we don't know why it changes from place to place".
 
Quote
i have described what it does. i have described the effects from which we conclude it exists. you do not need detailed math to know something is there. i know the proposed explanations for many things are not true (explained many other places), so aether is the simple conclusion. my personal evidence and experience also makes me certain.
Your descriptions are of effects that are better described using other phenomena like gravity and the rotating, orbiting earth. These explanations are better because they can be used to make predictions that actually prove correct. Change in acceleration of gravity due to elevation change corresponds to the distance from the center of the Earth changing. With aether it's apparently "whirlpools or something like that". Change in acceleration of gravity with latitude is a combination of changing distance from the center of the ellipsoidal Earth and centrifugal acceleration. With aether it's ??? . So why would aether-based downward force change with latitude, being weakest at the equator, midway from center to edge? More whirlpools? Not a lot of predictability there.

So follow up on the personal evidence. Can you demonstrate your evidence is real and not explained better by another model?
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #42 on: March 02, 2015, 01:52:24 PM »
i have more evidence of aether than you have of gravity. aether answers the questions of why things work.

i cannot describe the properties with detailed mathematics as i do not have enough information or the resources to acquire this information.

See the problem?

There is detailed math that accurately describes what gravity does. This mathematical model has been verified in countless experiments and is used to successfully predict the motions of masses in the presence of gravity with great accuracy. So, I have to disagree with your statement in the first quote above. You do not have more evidence of aether than we have of gravity. You have untested ideas. Nothing more.

i have outlined how its properties would work. sciences takes time, equipment, and manpower to do completely, and i have none of those things. i have shown how it works.

You've described in vague terms what you think it does.

making up an equation doesn't mean what it's said to apply to exists.
"Making up" an equation doesn't do squat. If you create a mathematical model (in the simplest form, an equation) that accurately describes what is known to happen and can reliably predict what will happen, then there's an excellent chance that the model has physical meaning (that is, it realistically describes what is happening).

Quote
aether explains the downwards force. coming up with figures doesn't mean there isn't another explanation.
No it doesn't, and there is another explanation. Gravity. It explains the downward force, and explains, in detail, why it varies from place to place on and off earth. It explains orbits. Your aether explanation can do none of this beyond "it makes stuff go down, but we don't know why it changes from place to place".
 
Quote
i have described what it does. i have described the effects from which we conclude it exists. you do not need detailed math to know something is there. i know the proposed explanations for many things are not true (explained many other places), so aether is the simple conclusion. my personal evidence and experience also makes me certain.
Your descriptions are of effects that are better described using other phenomena like gravity and the rotating, orbiting earth. These explanations are better because they can be used to make predictions that actually prove correct. Change in acceleration of gravity due to elevation change corresponds to the distance from the center of the Earth changing. With aether it's apparently "whirlpools or something like that". Change in acceleration of gravity with latitude is a combination of changing distance from the center of the ellipsoidal Earth and centrifugal acceleration. With aether it's ??? . So why would aether-based downward force change with latitude, being weakest at the equator, midway from center to edge? More whirlpools? Not a lot of predictability there.

So follow up on the personal evidence. Can you demonstrate your evidence is real and not explained better by another model?

how exactly do you think equations are found? they're not handed down by angels, scientists take numbers and make up relationships until it works for their sample size. sounds like making up to me.

aether explains orbits (the whirlpool above the earth).

if we have mapped the location of the whirlpools nearer to the earth, and their degree of tilt, then it would be perfect for predicting behavior. this isn't done, because no scientist respects the idea of aether. it's that simple. i suspect the force is weakest at the equator because the sun's path goes there, weakening the pull of the denser aether above. (aether wants to be whole and combine its various densities again).

you don't understand the concept of personal evidence do you? of course i can't demonstrate it to someone else, it's personal. you can't prove one of your conversations takes place beyond "take our word for it."
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #43 on: March 02, 2015, 02:11:54 PM »
The amount of time you spend on this forum shows that you have plenty of time, there are plenty of members of this forum that can help you, and between everyone here I am sure someone has the right equipment.  Stop making excuses.  If you understand the properties of the Aetger as well as you claim tgen you should have no trouble making an equasion that describes it.  You tell everyone to use logic, and math is just logic in a written form.  What are you waiting for?

when you meet someone who has a hot air balloon and the ability to measure vertical refraction, for example, at various set altitudes, as well as being able to reliably know the altitude they're at, let me know. there are some, they're not going to want to help. i know, i've asked.
that is one possible experiment, that would help to gauge some properties of aether.

i have described the properties as much as can reasonably be expected, and answered every question posed. that is all that needs to be done. moving the goalposts is a dishonest tactic.
Can you describe the experiment rigorously enough to determine if a balloon ride is really necessary? What is it you're trying to show?

How do you propose to measure vertical refraction? How do you plan to discriminate between what you're trying to measure and confounding effects like as atmospheric refraction? If you're simply trying to measure atmospheric refraction and applying what's already known to an aether-based model instead of a N2-O2-CO2 air-based model, then there's a lot of data already collected.

Maybe you could start simple and, if the results are encouraging, expand. That should let you flesh out your rudimentary model and may give insights on how to improve on techniques and instrumentation. You're starting with nothing. Baby steps. It was a long way from Rutherford's model of the atom to the LHC. It does take time.

there is no atmospheric refraction. don't appeal to round earth fantasies as an excuse. this isn't going to be a proof, it is just an example of how the aether refracts light. the further we go up, the more whirlpools we'll pass (i suspect there is at least one) giving a irregularity, possibly a jump. it is only to get data to deduce more about the aether. i can't say what to expect until i see the results, that is the zetetic method, not the obstinate nature of your science method.
i don't know how to measure refraction, but if there is no way, my point is made. you ask absurdities.

What do you mean, there's no atmospheric refraction? Bullshit! Sorry, honey, but it's been measured, and you can even see its effects yourself. Simply denying it exists is meaningless unless you can back up your claim with data.

And, no, there's never going to be proof. Science doesn't deal in proof, just data that supports and refutes models. So in what way do you expect these postulated whirlpools to affect the passage of light? [That's your hypothesis.] If you don't know what to expect, how are you going to tell if the effect is there?

If you don't know how to measure refraction, then what's the point in going up in a balloon (other than it being a fun thing to do!) in an attempt to measure it? I was going to suggest taking measurements driving up a tall mountain like Pikes Peak (if you're in the US) as an alternative, but if you don't have any measurements to make, there's no point.

This all sounds very poorly thought out. Fun thought exercise, but not science. Not even Zetetic "science".
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #44 on: March 02, 2015, 02:16:15 PM »
The amount of time you spend on this forum shows that you have plenty of time, there are plenty of members of this forum that can help you, and between everyone here I am sure someone has the right equipment.  Stop making excuses.  If you understand the properties of the Aetger as well as you claim tgen you should have no trouble making an equasion that describes it.  You tell everyone to use logic, and math is just logic in a written form.  What are you waiting for?

when you meet someone who has a hot air balloon and the ability to measure vertical refraction, for example, at various set altitudes, as well as being able to reliably know the altitude they're at, let me know. there are some, they're not going to want to help. i know, i've asked.
that is one possible experiment, that would help to gauge some properties of aether.

i have described the properties as much as can reasonably be expected, and answered every question posed. that is all that needs to be done. moving the goalposts is a dishonest tactic.
Can you describe the experiment rigorously enough to determine if a balloon ride is really necessary? What is it you're trying to show?

How do you propose to measure vertical refraction? How do you plan to discriminate between what you're trying to measure and confounding effects like as atmospheric refraction? If you're simply trying to measure atmospheric refraction and applying what's already known to an aether-based model instead of a N2-O2-CO2 air-based model, then there's a lot of data already collected.

Maybe you could start simple and, if the results are encouraging, expand. That should let you flesh out your rudimentary model and may give insights on how to improve on techniques and instrumentation. You're starting with nothing. Baby steps. It was a long way from Rutherford's model of the atom to the LHC. It does take time.

there is no atmospheric refraction. don't appeal to round earth fantasies as an excuse. this isn't going to be a proof, it is just an example of how the aether refracts light. the further we go up, the more whirlpools we'll pass (i suspect there is at least one) giving a irregularity, possibly a jump. it is only to get data to deduce more about the aether. i can't say what to expect until i see the results, that is the zetetic method, not the obstinate nature of your science method.
i don't know how to measure refraction, but if there is no way, my point is made. you ask absurdities.

What do you mean, there's no atmospheric refraction? Bullshit! Sorry, honey, but it's been measured, and you can even see its effects yourself. Simply denying it exists is meaningless unless you can back up your claim with data.

And, no, there's never going to be proof. Science doesn't deal in proof, just data that supports and refutes models. So in what way do you expect these postulated whirlpools to affect the passage of light? [That's your hypothesis.] If you don't know what to expect, how are you going to tell if the effect is there?

If you don't know how to measure refraction, then what's the point in going up in a balloon (other than it being a fun thing to do!) in an attempt to measure it? I was going to suggest taking measurements driving up a tall mountain like Pikes Peak (if you're in the US) as an alternative, but if you don't have any measurements to make, there's no point.

This all sounds very poorly thought out. Fun thought exercise, but not science. Not even Zetetic "science".
appealing to a fictional atmosphere to explain aetheric refraction is dishonest. aether refracts light (by observation of the contradiction between common sense and observation, and the spectroscopic analysis of the sun, as well as what you blame on some fantasy atmosphere). an increased density of aether, which forms the whirlpools, is going to therefore further refract. it's very simple.

i could find out how to measure refraction if i had a reason to, i suspect. what is the point in learning the details for half an experiment when i am never going to have the money or equipment to do the other half?
think.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #45 on: March 02, 2015, 02:49:44 PM »
i have more evidence of aether than you have of gravity. aether answers the questions of why things work.

i cannot describe the properties with detailed mathematics as i do not have enough information or the resources to acquire this information.

See the problem?

There is detailed math that accurately describes what gravity does. This mathematical model has been verified in countless experiments and is used to successfully predict the motions of masses in the presence of gravity with great accuracy. So, I have to disagree with your statement in the first quote above. You do not have more evidence of aether than we have of gravity. You have untested ideas. Nothing more.

i have outlined how its properties would work. sciences takes time, equipment, and manpower to do completely, and i have none of those things. i have shown how it works.

You've described in vague terms what you think it does.

making up an equation doesn't mean what it's said to apply to exists.
"Making up" an equation doesn't do squat. If you create a mathematical model (in the simplest form, an equation) that accurately describes what is known to happen and can reliably predict what will happen, then there's an excellent chance that the model has physical meaning (that is, it realistically describes what is happening).

Quote
aether explains the downwards force. coming up with figures doesn't mean there isn't another explanation.
No it doesn't, and there is another explanation. Gravity. It explains the downward force, and explains, in detail, why it varies from place to place on and off earth. It explains orbits. Your aether explanation can do none of this beyond "it makes stuff go down, but we don't know why it changes from place to place".
 
Quote
i have described what it does. i have described the effects from which we conclude it exists. you do not need detailed math to know something is there. i know the proposed explanations for many things are not true (explained many other places), so aether is the simple conclusion. my personal evidence and experience also makes me certain.
Your descriptions are of effects that are better described using other phenomena like gravity and the rotating, orbiting earth. These explanations are better because they can be used to make predictions that actually prove correct. Change in acceleration of gravity due to elevation change corresponds to the distance from the center of the Earth changing. With aether it's apparently "whirlpools or something like that". Change in acceleration of gravity with latitude is a combination of changing distance from the center of the ellipsoidal Earth and centrifugal acceleration. With aether it's ??? . So why would aether-based downward force change with latitude, being weakest at the equator, midway from center to edge? More whirlpools? Not a lot of predictability there.

So follow up on the personal evidence. Can you demonstrate your evidence is real and not explained better by another model?

how exactly do you think equations are found? they're not handed down by angels, scientists take numbers and make up relationships until it works for their sample size. sounds like making up to me.
I'd say "uncover" relationships is a better description. To "Make up" a relationship means inventing one without a basis in fact.

Quote
aether explains orbits (the whirlpool above the earth).
What whirlpool? You just speculate, without evidence, that one, in something with unknown properties, might exist. That's not much of an explanation.

Quote
if we have mapped the location of the whirlpools nearer to the earth, and their degree of tilt, then it would be perfect for predicting behavior. this isn't done, because no scientist respects the idea of aether. it's that simple.
If you're not sure what aether is and what effect it has on matter, then what behavior is it going to predict? No scientist respects the idea of aether because it hasn't been detected and simply isn't necessary to explain what we see.

Quote
i suspect the force is weakest at the equator because the sun's path goes there, weakening the pull of the denser aether above. (aether wants to be whole and combine its various densities again).
That's actually pretty good! Gravity is weakest at the equator, so "weakening the pull of the denser aether above" would seem to have the opposite effect, but I think I see what you're trying to say. Still, why wouldn't this effect change with the seasons? Stronger further north in June and further south in December? The real effect doesn't actually do that.

Quote
you don't understand the concept of personal evidence do you? of course i can't demonstrate it to someone else, it's personal. you can't prove one of your conversations takes place beyond "take our word for it."
I understand the concept, but if it's personal revelations, like "talking with God"? No, I don't believe these things actually happen. Many people honestly do believe
The amount of time you spend on this forum shows that you have plenty of time, there are plenty of members of this forum that can help you, and between everyone here I am sure someone has the right equipment.  Stop making excuses.  If you understand the properties of the Aetger as well as you claim tgen you should have no trouble making an equasion that describes it.  You tell everyone to use logic, and math is just logic in a written form.  What are you waiting for?

when you meet someone who has a hot air balloon and the ability to measure vertical refraction, for example, at various set altitudes, as well as being able to reliably know the altitude they're at, let me know. there are some, they're not going to want to help. i know, i've asked.
that is one possible experiment, that would help to gauge some properties of aether.

i have described the properties as much as can reasonably be expected, and answered every question posed. that is all that needs to be done. moving the goalposts is a dishonest tactic.
Can you describe the experiment rigorously enough to determine if a balloon ride is really necessary? What is it you're trying to show?

How do you propose to measure vertical refraction? How do you plan to discriminate between what you're trying to measure and confounding effects like as atmospheric refraction? If you're simply trying to measure atmospheric refraction and applying what's already known to an aether-based model instead of a N2-O2-CO2 air-based model, then there's a lot of data already collected.

Maybe you could start simple and, if the results are encouraging, expand. That should let you flesh out your rudimentary model and may give insights on how to improve on techniques and instrumentation. You're starting with nothing. Baby steps. It was a long way from Rutherford's model of the atom to the LHC. It does take time.

there is no atmospheric refraction. don't appeal to round earth fantasies as an excuse. this isn't going to be a proof, it is just an example of how the aether refracts light. the further we go up, the more whirlpools we'll pass (i suspect there is at least one) giving a irregularity, possibly a jump. it is only to get data to deduce more about the aether. i can't say what to expect until i see the results, that is the zetetic method, not the obstinate nature of your science method.
i don't know how to measure refraction, but if there is no way, my point is made. you ask absurdities.

What do you mean, there's no atmospheric refraction? Bullshit! Sorry, honey, but it's been measured, and you can even see its effects yourself. Simply denying it exists is meaningless unless you can back up your claim with data.

And, no, there's never going to be proof. Science doesn't deal in proof, just data that supports and refutes models. So in what way do you expect these postulated whirlpools to affect the passage of light? [That's your hypothesis.] If you don't know what to expect, how are you going to tell if the effect is there?

If you don't know how to measure refraction, then what's the point in going up in a balloon (other than it being a fun thing to do!) in an attempt to measure it? I was going to suggest taking measurements driving up a tall mountain like Pikes Peak (if you're in the US) as an alternative, but if you don't have any measurements to make, there's no point.

This all sounds very poorly thought out. Fun thought exercise, but not science. Not even Zetetic "science".
appealing to a fictional atmosphere to explain aetheric refraction is dishonest. aether refracts light (by observation of the contradiction between common sense and observation, and the spectroscopic analysis of the sun, as well as what you blame on some fantasy atmosphere). an increased density of aether, which forms the whirlpools, is going to therefore further refract. it's very simple.

i could find out how to measure refraction if i had a reason to, i suspect. what is the point in learning the details for half an experiment when i am never going to have the money or equipment to do the other half?
think.
them, but I suspect they're hallucinations, dreams, an overactive imagination, or just plain wishful thinking. If it's some personal insight into a physical phenomenon because you observed it, then if there were no other observers and it can't be replicated, then it goes into the category of "unconfirmed" at best, often depending on the improbability of what is reported (extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof: "I just saw five bright meteors in two minutes!" "Wow, that's really cool!" "I was abducted by an alien spacecraft and Elvis was on it!" "Um... OK?? See 'ya!") and the reliability of the reporter.

It's not difficult to "prove" a conversation takes place if there are witnesses, recordings, or a written record. What's your point?
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #46 on: March 02, 2015, 02:57:59 PM »
The amount of time you spend on this forum shows that you have plenty of time, there are plenty of members of this forum that can help you, and between everyone here I am sure someone has the right equipment.  Stop making excuses.  If you understand the properties of the Aetger as well as you claim tgen you should have no trouble making an equasion that describes it.  You tell everyone to use logic, and math is just logic in a written form.  What are you waiting for?

when you meet someone who has a hot air balloon and the ability to measure vertical refraction, for example, at various set altitudes, as well as being able to reliably know the altitude they're at, let me know. there are some, they're not going to want to help. i know, i've asked.
that is one possible experiment, that would help to gauge some properties of aether.

i have described the properties as much as can reasonably be expected, and answered every question posed. that is all that needs to be done. moving the goalposts is a dishonest tactic.
Can you describe the experiment rigorously enough to determine if a balloon ride is really necessary? What is it you're trying to show?

How do you propose to measure vertical refraction? How do you plan to discriminate between what you're trying to measure and confounding effects like as atmospheric refraction? If you're simply trying to measure atmospheric refraction and applying what's already known to an aether-based model instead of a N2-O2-CO2 air-based model, then there's a lot of data already collected.

Maybe you could start simple and, if the results are encouraging, expand. That should let you flesh out your rudimentary model and may give insights on how to improve on techniques and instrumentation. You're starting with nothing. Baby steps. It was a long way from Rutherford's model of the atom to the LHC. It does take time.

there is no atmospheric refraction. don't appeal to round earth fantasies as an excuse. this isn't going to be a proof, it is just an example of how the aether refracts light. the further we go up, the more whirlpools we'll pass (i suspect there is at least one) giving a irregularity, possibly a jump. it is only to get data to deduce more about the aether. i can't say what to expect until i see the results, that is the zetetic method, not the obstinate nature of your science method.
i don't know how to measure refraction, but if there is no way, my point is made. you ask absurdities.

What do you mean, there's no atmospheric refraction? Bullshit! Sorry, honey, but it's been measured, and you can even see its effects yourself. Simply denying it exists is meaningless unless you can back up your claim with data.

And, no, there's never going to be proof. Science doesn't deal in proof, just data that supports and refutes models. So in what way do you expect these postulated whirlpools to affect the passage of light? [That's your hypothesis.] If you don't know what to expect, how are you going to tell if the effect is there?

If you don't know how to measure refraction, then what's the point in going up in a balloon (other than it being a fun thing to do!) in an attempt to measure it? I was going to suggest taking measurements driving up a tall mountain like Pikes Peak (if you're in the US) as an alternative, but if you don't have any measurements to make, there's no point.

This all sounds very poorly thought out. Fun thought exercise, but not science. Not even Zetetic "science".
appealing to a fictional atmosphere to explain aetheric refraction is dishonest. aether refracts light (by observation of the contradiction between common sense and observation, and the spectroscopic analysis of the sun, as well as what you blame on some fantasy atmosphere). an increased density of aether, which forms the whirlpools, is going to therefore further refract. it's very simple.

i could find out how to measure refraction if i had a reason to, i suspect. what is the point in learning the details for half an experiment when i am never going to have the money or equipment to do the other half?
think.
Appealing to fictional aether to explain what's much more simply explained by conventional cosmology is silly unless you can demonstrate 1) it exists and 2) has the properties you need. All you do is arm wave and give excuses why you can't test your hypothesis.

"I'm unable to conduct any experiments to demonstrate what I believe" is not a compelling reason to believe what you say.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #47 on: March 02, 2015, 03:00:41 PM »
i have more evidence of aether than you have of gravity. aether answers the questions of why things work.

i cannot describe the properties with detailed mathematics as i do not have enough information or the resources to acquire this information.

See the problem?

There is detailed math that accurately describes what gravity does. This mathematical model has been verified in countless experiments and is used to successfully predict the motions of masses in the presence of gravity with great accuracy. So, I have to disagree with your statement in the first quote above. You do not have more evidence of aether than we have of gravity. You have untested ideas. Nothing more.

i have outlined how its properties would work. sciences takes time, equipment, and manpower to do completely, and i have none of those things. i have shown how it works.

You've described in vague terms what you think it does.

making up an equation doesn't mean what it's said to apply to exists.
"Making up" an equation doesn't do squat. If you create a mathematical model (in the simplest form, an equation) that accurately describes what is known to happen and can reliably predict what will happen, then there's an excellent chance that the model has physical meaning (that is, it realistically describes what is happening).

Quote
aether explains the downwards force. coming up with figures doesn't mean there isn't another explanation.
No it doesn't, and there is another explanation. Gravity. It explains the downward force, and explains, in detail, why it varies from place to place on and off earth. It explains orbits. Your aether explanation can do none of this beyond "it makes stuff go down, but we don't know why it changes from place to place".
 
Quote
i have described what it does. i have described the effects from which we conclude it exists. you do not need detailed math to know something is there. i know the proposed explanations for many things are not true (explained many other places), so aether is the simple conclusion. my personal evidence and experience also makes me certain.
Your descriptions are of effects that are better described using other phenomena like gravity and the rotating, orbiting earth. These explanations are better because they can be used to make predictions that actually prove correct. Change in acceleration of gravity due to elevation change corresponds to the distance from the center of the Earth changing. With aether it's apparently "whirlpools or something like that". Change in acceleration of gravity with latitude is a combination of changing distance from the center of the ellipsoidal Earth and centrifugal acceleration. With aether it's ??? . So why would aether-based downward force change with latitude, being weakest at the equator, midway from center to edge? More whirlpools? Not a lot of predictability there.

So follow up on the personal evidence. Can you demonstrate your evidence is real and not explained better by another model?

how exactly do you think equations are found? they're not handed down by angels, scientists take numbers and make up relationships until it works for their sample size. sounds like making up to me.
I'd say "uncover" relationships is a better description. To "Make up" a relationship means inventing one without a basis in fact.

Quote
aether explains orbits (the whirlpool above the earth).
What whirlpool? You just speculate, without evidence, that one, in something with unknown properties, might exist. That's not much of an explanation.

Quote
if we have mapped the location of the whirlpools nearer to the earth, and their degree of tilt, then it would be perfect for predicting behavior. this isn't done, because no scientist respects the idea of aether. it's that simple.
If you're not sure what aether is and what effect it has on matter, then what behavior is it going to predict? No scientist respects the idea of aether because it hasn't been detected and simply isn't necessary to explain what we see.

Quote
i suspect the force is weakest at the equator because the sun's path goes there, weakening the pull of the denser aether above. (aether wants to be whole and combine its various densities again).
That's actually pretty good! Gravity is weakest at the equator, so "weakening the pull of the denser aether above" would seem to have the opposite effect, but I think I see what you're trying to say. Still, why wouldn't this effect change with the seasons? Stronger further north in June and further south in December? The real effect doesn't actually do that.

Quote
you don't understand the concept of personal evidence do you? of course i can't demonstrate it to someone else, it's personal. you can't prove one of your conversations takes place beyond "take our word for it."
I understand the concept, but if it's personal revelations, like "talking with God"? No, I don't believe these things actually happen. Many people honestly do believe
The amount of time you spend on this forum shows that you have plenty of time, there are plenty of members of this forum that can help you, and between everyone here I am sure someone has the right equipment.  Stop making excuses.  If you understand the properties of the Aetger as well as you claim tgen you should have no trouble making an equasion that describes it.  You tell everyone to use logic, and math is just logic in a written form.  What are you waiting for?

when you meet someone who has a hot air balloon and the ability to measure vertical refraction, for example, at various set altitudes, as well as being able to reliably know the altitude they're at, let me know. there are some, they're not going to want to help. i know, i've asked.
that is one possible experiment, that would help to gauge some properties of aether.

i have described the properties as much as can reasonably be expected, and answered every question posed. that is all that needs to be done. moving the goalposts is a dishonest tactic.
Can you describe the experiment rigorously enough to determine if a balloon ride is really necessary? What is it you're trying to show?

How do you propose to measure vertical refraction? How do you plan to discriminate between what you're trying to measure and confounding effects like as atmospheric refraction? If you're simply trying to measure atmospheric refraction and applying what's already known to an aether-based model instead of a N2-O2-CO2 air-based model, then there's a lot of data already collected.

Maybe you could start simple and, if the results are encouraging, expand. That should let you flesh out your rudimentary model and may give insights on how to improve on techniques and instrumentation. You're starting with nothing. Baby steps. It was a long way from Rutherford's model of the atom to the LHC. It does take time.

there is no atmospheric refraction. don't appeal to round earth fantasies as an excuse. this isn't going to be a proof, it is just an example of how the aether refracts light. the further we go up, the more whirlpools we'll pass (i suspect there is at least one) giving a irregularity, possibly a jump. it is only to get data to deduce more about the aether. i can't say what to expect until i see the results, that is the zetetic method, not the obstinate nature of your science method.
i don't know how to measure refraction, but if there is no way, my point is made. you ask absurdities.

What do you mean, there's no atmospheric refraction? Bullshit! Sorry, honey, but it's been measured, and you can even see its effects yourself. Simply denying it exists is meaningless unless you can back up your claim with data.

And, no, there's never going to be proof. Science doesn't deal in proof, just data that supports and refutes models. So in what way do you expect these postulated whirlpools to affect the passage of light? [That's your hypothesis.] If you don't know what to expect, how are you going to tell if the effect is there?

If you don't know how to measure refraction, then what's the point in going up in a balloon (other than it being a fun thing to do!) in an attempt to measure it? I was going to suggest taking measurements driving up a tall mountain like Pikes Peak (if you're in the US) as an alternative, but if you don't have any measurements to make, there's no point.

This all sounds very poorly thought out. Fun thought exercise, but not science. Not even Zetetic "science".
appealing to a fictional atmosphere to explain aetheric refraction is dishonest. aether refracts light (by observation of the contradiction between common sense and observation, and the spectroscopic analysis of the sun, as well as what you blame on some fantasy atmosphere). an increased density of aether, which forms the whirlpools, is going to therefore further refract. it's very simple.

i could find out how to measure refraction if i had a reason to, i suspect. what is the point in learning the details for half an experiment when i am never going to have the money or equipment to do the other half?
think.
them, but I suspect they're hallucinations, dreams, an overactive imagination, or just plain wishful thinking. If it's some personal insight into a physical phenomenon because you observed it, then if there were no other observers and it can't be replicated, then it goes into the category of "unconfirmed" at best, often depending on the improbability of what is reported (extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof: "I just saw five bright meteors in two minutes!" "Wow, that's really cool!" "I was abducted by an alien spacecraft and Elvis was on it!" "Um... OK?? See 'ya!") and the reliability of the reporter.

It's not difficult to "prove" a conversation takes place if there are witnesses, recordings, or a written record. What's your point?

the whirlpool is a logical deduction. aether accelerates the earth, and the earth must split the flow. when the flow meets again above us, the result is a whirlpool.
i have explained the properties of aether. obviously the degree varies with density, but it refracts light like all mediums, and interacts with matter to impart force: acceleration, or resistance.
there are several whirlpools, one for each density of aether. obviously thicker densities go inwards slower. aether wants to become whole, so the thinner densities on the earths surface are tilted or pulled upwards. at the equator, the whirlpool stays lower, so there is no upwards force, so the force of acceleration is not weakened by the pull of the aether. seasons depend on the location of the sun, so it is logical gravity would shift with them.

my point is that you can't confirm many things that do happen. i communicate with the aether so i am certain of its existence and assured what i deduce is accurate, and what i see matches perfectly with the aether. this is not going to convince you because you have not shared the experience, but i would hope the fact this model perfectly explains the world, and does away with existing flaws, holds at least some credibility.

the evidence for the aether is its effects, like your so-called evidence for gravity. aether better explains them, and requires fewer assumptions.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2107
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #48 on: March 02, 2015, 03:01:52 PM »
i also have personal experience and communication with the aether, but i know you won't accept that as evidence.

Everyone, everyone. Lets back up a second.

You talk to the aether?
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #49 on: March 02, 2015, 03:04:32 PM »
i also have personal experience and communication with the aether, but i know you won't accept that as evidence.

Everyone, everyone. Lets back up a second.

You talk to the aether?

i would not call it talking.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2107
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #50 on: March 02, 2015, 03:22:26 PM »
i also have personal experience and communication with the aether, but i know you won't accept that as evidence.

Everyone, everyone. Lets back up a second.

You talk to the aether?

i would not call it talking.

Like, mind melding or shared vision or what?

It didn't tell you to have sex with a baby turtle did it? Because I can tell you what that is.
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #51 on: March 02, 2015, 03:26:36 PM »
i also have personal experience and communication with the aether, but i know you won't accept that as evidence.

Everyone, everyone. Lets back up a second.

You talk to the aether?

i would not call it talking.

Like, mind melding or shared vision or what?

It didn't tell you to have sex with a baby turtle did it? Because I can tell you what that is.

i have no idea what you're talking about, i simply hear its voice. it wants to be whole, again. i did not know it was aether when i first heard it, but since learning, i see that is the only possible explanation for something that i can hear anywhere on earth, and that knows what it does.
it's very simple.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

kman

  • 990
  • Pastafarian
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #52 on: March 02, 2015, 03:32:14 PM »
i also have personal experience and communication with the aether, but i know you won't accept that as evidence.

I have a few things to say to that:

You are embarrassing yourself.

You do know you look like a fool, don't you?

exercise the slightest thought before you embarrass yourself again.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2015, 04:00:26 PM by kman »
Quote from: Excelsior John
[USA TODAY and NPR] are probaley just a bunch of flippin wite sapremist websites you RASCIST
Quote from: modestman
i don't understand what you are saying=therfore you are liar

Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #53 on: March 02, 2015, 03:40:13 PM »
the evidence for the aether is its effects, like your so-called evidence for gravity. aether better explains them, and requires fewer assumptions.

i cannot describe the properties with detailed mathematics as i do not have enough information or the resources to acquire this information.

See the problem?

Everything about the aether is an assumption.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #54 on: March 02, 2015, 03:41:24 PM »
the evidence for the aether is its effects, like your so-called evidence for gravity. aether better explains them, and requires fewer assumptions.

i cannot describe the properties with detailed mathematics as i do not have enough information or the resources to acquire this information.

See the problem?

Everything about the aether is an assumption.

the only assumption, by your definition, is the aether itself, and i have constructed it only from the properties of what we observe.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #55 on: March 02, 2015, 03:48:49 PM »
the evidence for the aether is its effects, like your so-called evidence for gravity. aether better explains them, and requires fewer assumptions.

i cannot describe the properties with detailed mathematics as i do not have enough information or the resources to acquire this information.

See the problem?

Everything about the aether is an assumption.

the only assumption, by your definition, is the aether itself, and i have constructed it only from the properties of what we observe.

That's what I said. The aether itself is an assumption. Since you can't even be sure, or tell, it exists, everything about it is also an assumption.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #56 on: March 02, 2015, 03:53:25 PM »
the evidence for the aether is its effects, like your so-called evidence for gravity. aether better explains them, and requires fewer assumptions.

i cannot describe the properties with detailed mathematics as i do not have enough information or the resources to acquire this information.

See the problem?

Everything about the aether is an assumption.

the only assumption, by your definition, is the aether itself, and i have constructed it only from the properties of what we observe.

That's what I said. The aether itself is an assumption. Since you can't even be sure, or tell, it exists, everything about it is also an assumption.

by that logic, everything is an assumption. you can't be sure gravity exists because there could be another explanation. you learn about things from their effects, this is pretty basic science.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

kman

  • 990
  • Pastafarian
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #57 on: March 02, 2015, 04:01:03 PM »
Can we hear more about your communication with the aether?
Quote from: Excelsior John
[USA TODAY and NPR] are probaley just a bunch of flippin wite sapremist websites you RASCIST
Quote from: modestman
i don't understand what you are saying=therfore you are liar

Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #58 on: March 02, 2015, 04:51:32 PM »
the evidence for the aether is its effects, like your so-called evidence for gravity. aether better explains them, and requires fewer assumptions.

i cannot describe the properties with detailed mathematics as i do not have enough information or the resources to acquire this information.

See the problem?

Everything about the aether is an assumption.

the only assumption, by your definition, is the aether itself, and i have constructed it only from the properties of what we observe.

That's what I said. The aether itself is an assumption. Since you can't even be sure, or tell, it exists, everything about it is also an assumption.

by that logic, everything is an assumption. you can't be sure gravity exists because there could be another explanation. you learn about things from their effects, this is pretty basic science.
Nope. The force proportional to mass and inversely-squared with distance for gravity is not assumed. It's been measured. We use those known (not assumed) characteristics to make predictions of the motion of masses. If these predictions failed, the relationship would be invalidated, but they don't fail; that alone doesn't prove gravity, but it damn sure well supports it. One of the effects of the inverse-squared property is that two objects with mass will orbit each other in elliptical (actually, more generally, conic) orbits about their common center of mass. No assumptions necessary; it's what's predicted and is what happens.

If you want to claim that aether has those properties, too, then aether is indistinguishable from gravity, just has a different name, so we might as well stick to the traditional one. That's not what you're claiming, though. You've been claiming that aether is blowing the sun, moon and stars around in a circle (or two circles, I've lost track) in a flat plane (or planes) above us; we can see it happening (actually, we don't see that at all, but you assume that's what's going on and defer the discrepancies to later) but we don't know what's doing it (so you make up the name aether) or why this aether is behaving that way (you assume it's a whirlpool, because you can't come up with anything more plausible). This "explanation" fails to explain why the Sun and Moon set below a distinct horizon, so you assume additional properties for your aether to bend light in specific ways to make the Sun, Moon and stars to appear lower in the sky than they actually are in some cases, and at the same time you assume it also has additional optical properties that magnify the Sun (and to a very slightly lesser extent, the Moon) as it gets further away. This still doesn't explain why the Sun "sets" in the direction it is known to do at various time of year from a given location (unless you're Mr. Bloomington, who seems to think the Sun sets wherever it damn well feels like, but I digress...), so that's going to need some additional new and interesting properties to fix, without introducing even more new and interesting problems.

Which model requires more assumptions?
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2107
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: Infinite Energy!
« Reply #59 on: March 02, 2015, 04:58:18 PM »
i also have personal experience and communication with the aether, but i know you won't accept that as evidence.

Everyone, everyone. Lets back up a second.

You talk to the aether?

i would not call it talking.

Like, mind melding or shared vision or what?

It didn't tell you to have sex with a baby turtle did it? Because I can tell you what that is.

i have no idea what you're talking about, i simply hear its voice. it wants to be whole, again. i did not know it was aether when i first heard it, but since learning, i see that is the only possible explanation for something that i can hear anywhere on earth, and that knows what it does.
it's very simple.

Well yes, I guess that and schizophrenia are the only two possible solutions to hearing a voice everywhere on earth.
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur