Relativity

Is the concept of relativity completely backwards? Relativity and QM as it is now does produce some right empirical results however the way of thinking about it seems to be backwards.

Suppose one starts with a flat space, and there were some value of a field over that space that corresponds to the action needed to cross that area. If one were to associate that action with distance itself, then is this not the "curved space time" described by general relativity?

Moreover, QFT seems to be backwards too. The photon is not the carrier of the electromagnetic force, the electromagnetic force carriers light.

so much physics is just wrong

>Is the concept of relativity completely backwards?
Yes user, you got it. You figured it all out. You don't even need to go to university now. Just show this post to your prospective employers and you're good to go. After that, you may even want to try for a Nobel.

Aether physics was around long before folks like Einstein (puppet of the government) started promoting alternatives.

...

and it got btfo by experiments long before Einstein too

To believe the atom exists all on its own without any external connection is silly. Bending of space/time and time travel is another error. If you want reality, take a look at aether physics by electrical engineers such as Tesla. Pilot wave theory is also helpful. To pass your tests, just follow along with relativity like everyone else.

i'd rather just tell you to kill yourself with your retarded, pointless, disproven by 100 year old experiments theory

they are probably both wrong. it's something else. experiments can be wrong too..

>100s of experiments all say the same thing
>they got more accurate as time went by

sure, they can be

depends on what your actually trying to prove, how you are approaching the problem, like a self-fulfilling prophecy. the solution may not be aether as such either... something is wrong tho

100s of experiments? hahaha You pulled that out of your ass. Aether practically travels at the same speed on earth AND it is a subatomic plasma. How the F are you gonna measure that with any level of meaningful accuracy?

>Aether practically travels at the same speed on earth
why would it do that? does it follow the earth around as it revolves around the sun?

Hydrodynamics. Aether is responsive to heat and light. In order to start aetheric currents in any direction you'll need lots of heat and light. The Kepler Orrery presents many examples.

From an observer's perspective (standing on earth) it might as well be traveling 0MPH. One can try creating a wave (electrons are more influenced by aether due to having mass) against the aetheric current and measure differences but accuracy has to be insane to make it meaningful. Human technology is not at that point yet.

if it's responsive to heat and light it would mean it has to absorb some, that would not be so difficult to detect

By creating a wave I meant; electron charge propagation. Technically, electrons are part of the aether and should provide better results.

>Pilot wave theory
>Muh hidden variables

>Aether exists
>Can't measure it
Get the fuck off Veeky Forums

According to conventional physics, space is devoid of all matter and contains nothing. In actuality, there is subatomic plasma small enough to fit through any atomic lattice. Even metals are porous at the subatomic scale. Tesla discovered these facts when he was able to transfer non-electromagnetic energy through a Faraday cage.

bullshit, reproduce his experiment then, what exactly is stopping you?

the reason you are shitposting on this site is because of einsteins idea that electrons can be manipulated the same way you can manipulate a block on an inclined plane. the mechanics of small things (quanta)

>Muh hidden variables

The key is in pilot wave dynamics. I can break it down but what's the fun in that? I'd rather see you believing in time travel and black holes. It is so much more entertaining. Did you just read this in my voice?

>black holes exist
>cant really measure them

we detected and measured black holes already, in completely different ways too

dont deny they exist, like i said, whats inside a blackhole m8

If the theory was true then the interference pattern wouldn't be destroyed by observing which slit the electron went through, since by pilot wave theory's explanation both the wave and particle are real and distinct(albeit connected) objects.

...

>whats inside a blackhole
imo there's nothing. anything approaching the event horizon gets burnt up and smeared across that region of space-time.

from the point of view of an outside observer, it doesn't matter what's inside or what happens inside, anything past the event horizon is not part of our universe's timeline anymore

Plasma medium Vs. denser liquid medium. hmmmm ;)

Gotta move on. Thanks for the debate, gentlemen.

well i disagree. it comes back thru ejection jets so something must be happening, and therefore there is knowledge to be discovered
maybe there is nothing tangible, but must be some kinda energy field supporting the torus

>it comes back thru ejection jets

No, jets form from the accretion disk around a black hole, long before it passes the event horizon

>maybe there is nothing tangible, but must be some kinda energy field supporting the torus
that's assuming the region works anything like what we're familiar with. if you buy into anything around the holographic principle interpretations, it could just be a region of maximal entropy, and so there really is nothing except a surface. any conventional form of interior might not be able to exist since adding to that interior would increase the entropy of the surface beyond the Bekenstein bound. in normal matter, entropy is proportional to the volume of the object, but for black holes, calculations show that entropy is proportional to the surface area.

Any two theories that produces the exact same results cannot be compered empirically. The effects of can be measured and we know they exist so at grand scales you need to assume something that wilk be incompatibke with "common sense". Einstein speciak theory of relativity is pretty if you just understand the concept of what non euclidean geometry is, and assumes two principles that are supported by experiments.

Nice freemasonic handshake.

Trippy

hey, I've been a most excellent masonic master all this time and didn't know it

trust me i'm a jesuit
>muh big bang
>muh accelerating expansion
relativity:
>muh determinism

haha my grandad used to do entered apprentice, now i know

Don't bother discussing anything with the retards of Veeky Forums OP, the majority of them are university/college kids.

Relativity is silly. You can't bend space. Time isn't a physical dimension, it's a metrical one. All the particle physics is nonsense. The gravitational theory is paradoxical, it's not solely based on mass.

Doesn't mean Einstein wasn't wrong or wasn't a good guy, just one of his theories was peddled.

Yes, I think that could well be the case

but... the university is the uni-verse... the whole-story

The idea is that electrical phenomena IS the aether. It's embedded at the atomic level.
So it would be that the Earth's field is the aether rather than it being a separate thing all together.

>The idea is that electrical phenomena IS the aether. It's embedded at the atomic level.

okay then, what exactly does that mean?
does it make any predictions, like quantum electrodynamics does?

>b-but i don't like quantum things
you should have a talk with the universe, talk some sense into it

I think therefore I am, faggot!

>the majority of them are university/college kids.
Wrong the majority are in highschool

Well that means lots of different things, but one of the biggest things is changing the atom itself to be nothing but pure aether in torsion/motion. No particles.

That opens up a lot of different things, and in my eyes all your electrical/field phenomena would tie together (gravity, magnetism, etc.).

The biggest one is the generation and termination of electrical current. Someone needs to figure that stuff out at a deeper level.