But that aside, maybe this way you won't have to repeat yourself to a hundred REs like me. We are mainly asking two things: how you know Aether exists? And how you know it act the way you say it does?
And I answered both of those questions, you just kept repeating them without even trying to say what was wrong with what I've said. How exactly do you expect to get an answer if you won't even acknowledge what you are given? I explained how we know the property in the original message, and explained how we know there exists something to assign the property to multiple times after that, and not once did you provide the simplest acknowledgement of that, even to say why you found a problem.
Do you expect not to be called out on blatantly wasting time?
I look forward to an ad hocathon.
Which simply demonstrates you have no understanding of the model. Do you enjoy unjustified claims?
If you disagree this is unjustified, please provide your evidence. Wait: you never learnt the current model, so this is just a pointless accusation.
Either put it up here, put up a link where it can be found, or stop talking about it here, please.
I talk about it publicly to gain interest; it is still publicly available, did you miss that? Group discussions would be possible if REers were remotely honest, but instead you're all trying to complain about a theory you don't understand. Just look at the poll results: we're 50/50. And if half aren't interested in taking the time to learn a model, then what exactly do you expect?
What usually happens is that someone who understands things hits the first few fatal flaws, asks you about them, and you evade answering, and then they give up on the rest of it. You might consider anticipating the questions and preemptively addressing them in your explanation. That would go a long way.
Actually what normally happens is that someone asks a question akin to "How does the moon go around the Earth under RET?" which can't be answered without first explaining gravity: and the DE analogue requires far more explanation because REers reject any FE principle regardless of evidence or justification. What scientific theory exactly do you imagine could be answered with a snap of your fingers?
No one reads a wall of text in answer to a simple question, but that's inevitably going to be what's necessary to give an answer that can be understood.
Nah. If you had any confidence in your own idea you'd put it up for public discourse expecting to have to defend it.
It's available to the public, if it were anything else then, in my experience, all you'd get is trolls claiming to have read it and spamming with questions which demonstrate they clearly could not. Sokarul provides a great example, in this very thread.
BTW OP, would it be all right if I disclose the conversation we had through PMs?
if you're going to do that fully and honestly, you'd need to disclose the original post: so not yet. Wait and see how the poll develops: if it turns out there's no actual interest in learning the DE model, then go ahead. If not, I'll post up a link and we can talk in a public setting.
He proclaims Aether exists without giving studies and tests of its existence. All we want is to at least give evidence that proves beyond reasonable doubt that it exists.
Which you were given. Beyond hypocrisy, you have nothing.
If that's what he wants, he needs to complete the process and avoid discussing it in a rowdy environment, or not complain.
Tried that, it's a waste of time. A handful here would be interested in joining a second forum, and most would be FEers plugging their own models, or conspiracy nuts. Do you just assume you're the only one who's ever had a thought?
Poll