Thread: pulsating universe

First show me the experiment. You can't link me up, because the experiment is non-existant. They just fooled you into believing there was actually an experiment. Where is this experiment? What is it called? How does it go? You have no clue.

The Michelson-Morely experiment succeeded in affirming aether's non-existence.

Congratulations for not knowing one of the most important and well known experiments in the history of science.

Why? Because that's exactly how every other scientist and philosopher before me did it. Where do you think they got their theories from? From God? Lol. And this isn't just an intuitive grasp, I've read a lot about science and philosophy. But science came to a dead end, and I had to start looking for answers in other places. Answers you can't give me either (like the mechanics of gravity for example..).

No, scientists use evidence which is often completely contradictory to intuition.

For more information, see the entirety of quantum mechanics.

Originally Posted by Xei

Congratulations for not knowing one of the most important and well known experiments in the history of science.

Lol. Details details... http://www.glafreniere.com/sa_Michelson.htm.

Afaik, it was the most famous failed experiment in the history of science.

Stop telling me what I don't know. A second ago you were telling me I didn't know what the experiment was when I had clearly given its exact name. You were objectively wrong then and have consistently been so for the entirety of this thread.

The experiment shows that the speed of light does not depend on your velocity. Special relativity results, along with the mutual exclusion of aether.

Einstein derived the Fitzgerald–Lorentz contraction from the relativity postulate; thus his description of special relativity was also consistent with the apparently null results of most experiments (though not, as was recognized at the 1928 meeting, with Miller’s observed seasonal effects). Today special relativity is generally considered the “solution” to the Michelson–Morley null result. However, this was not universally recognized at the time. As late as 1920, Einstein himself still spoke of a different concept of ether that was not a “ponderable medium” but something of significance nonetheless.

Albert Einstein said that space is "endowed with physical quantities," but that "this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media. The idea of motion may not be applied to it." (from "Ether and the Theory of Relativity", an address delivered May 5, 1920 at the University of Leyden).

Today the aether is regarded as a superseded scientific theory.

(Also copied and pasted from Wikipedia. You truly have no grasp of these matters at all...).

Could I ask what the physical consequences of your aether would be?

By your ridiculous statement about the universe contracting without it you seem to think that all mass in the universe experiences a force due to some magical source of atmospheric pressure.

Yes indeed, I'm very aware of the fact that the aether theory has already been regarded as false for over 100 years. I'm just proposing a new perspective because the old perspective can't explain the fundamental forces of the universe, like gravity. Even Albert Einstein said that space is "endowed with physical quantities". Space must be made out of something. I just call it aether, but I make no claims to what exactly this aether is. To me it just seems obvious, just like it seemed obvious to Albert Einstein, that space must be made out of something.

My theory is, that nothingness, empty space, can't exist. How do you prove that nothingness doesn't exist?

That isn't what Einstein said. Einstein was talking about the fact that the laws of the universe permeate every point in spacetime in the universe.

If the aether doesn't have any physical effects then it is not a physical theory.

The aether does have physical effects.. gravity for example.

Oh wait, gravity is the bending of space-time. Space-time is empty space. So gravity is the bending of empty space. Gravity is the bending of nothingness? Lol.

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

Oh wait, gravity is the bending of space-time. Space-time is empty space. So gravity is the bending of empty space. Gravity is the bending of nothingness? Lol.

This is a straw man. Don't pretend you aren't trolling.

I don't even know why you're bothering, Xei.

This kid doesn't care what you have to say, he just wants to pull strawmen to piss you off.

Science can't fully explain gravity. That's a fact. Nothing to do with strawmen.