RE: my absolutely last post re: c^2 and Longitudinal Waves

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "Wall Richard Wayne by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <rwall-at-ix-dot-netcom-dot-com>

Matt,
 
You've skillfully avoided answering my questions.  I say again, what exactly
did  Michelson-Morley concluded about their 
experiments?   If you don't know, better go look it up.  Their experiments are
flawed in that they assumed a three dimensional frame of reference for aether
as the earth moved through it.  They were looking for a shift in light phase as
the earth moved through the aether.  Their assumption was not justified as the
aether is not orthogonally oriented to 3D space.  So, their experiment cannot
be interpreted and is null.  Likewise Einstein's statement, "Any observer will
always find the same value 
for light in vacuo relative to himself, regardless of the direction of travel
of the light and regardless of the velocity of the source." 
is true, but has no relevance as to the existence of aether.  Hard to believe,
but aether is not bound by three dimensional geometry.
 
BTW, Einstein embrace the existence of aether until his death.  It's well
documented in his writings.  The existence of aether is having a Renaissance of
sorts in modern physics.  There are many experiments that detect aether, ZPE or
what ever name is fashionable.  Dirac predicted it and won the Nobel prize for
it.  A good example is recent experimental measurement of the Casmir effect. 
There are others.  
 
Knowing all there is to know and subsequent denial and exclusion of all else is
to know nothing.
 
RWW
 
This aether discussion is germane to Tesla coiling since it involves the
Poynting vector force without which Tesla coils cannot function.
>
>  
> >
> > 2. The Aether does NOT exist. (cf Michelson-Morley experiment and
> Einstein's 
> > interpretation thereof)
> >
> > Can you tell us exactly what Michelson-Morley concluded about their
> > experiments?  
> > Also what was Einstein's interpretation regarding the MM experiments? 
> Cites
> > would
> > be appreciated.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > RWW
>  
>  
>  
>          In 1881 Albert A. Michelson and Edward W. Moreley performed a
> classic
> experiment that contributed to the downfall of such concepts as absolute
> space
> and the ether (aether). The generally accepted theories of late 19th century
> science required space to be filled with a medium (the aether) through which
> light and other electromagnetic waves were thought to propagate. This Aether
> was needed to provide an absolute reference frame in which light propagated
> at
> velocity c. Such an absolute reference frame and the aether proposed to fill
> it
> were undetectable; i.e., the Aether, if it existed had no measurable physical
> properties. 
>          Einstein concluded that "Any observer will always find the same
> value
> for light in vacuo relative to himself, regardless of the direction of travel
> of the light and regardless of the velocity of the source." 
>          Without going heavily into relativity theory, the outcome was the
> following:
>  
> 1. The existence of the Aether is not necessary to explain any observable
> physical phenomena.
> 2.  The Aether has no detectable physical properties.   
>  
> This puts the Aether into the realm of gods and angels; a subject more for
> epistemological philosophers than Tesla Coilers. i.e.  If something cannot be
> detected by any means in the physical universe,  does not interact in any
> physical way with that universe, and is unnecessary to the explanation of the
> physical universe,  in what sense can it be said to exist?
>  
> >From the preface to "The Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience." , Dr. W.F.
> Williams,
> ed. in reference to Ether Theory and Phlogiston Theory:
> "Each was examined rigorously for a considerable period, was eventually found
> wanting, and was abandoned when a better explanation emerged. In their day
> they
> could hardly be described as pseudoscience., but a committed advocate  of
> either theory today would definitely  be into Pseudoscience."
>  
> See also:
>  
> "The Principle of Relativity", Albert Einstein, Hendrik Lorentz, H.
> Minkowski,
> and Hermann Weyl, English Translation Dover Publications, 1979
>  
> "Elements of Physics" , George Shortly and Dudley Williams, Prentice-Hall
> 1961
>  
> "Hidden Unity in Nature's Laws" , John C. Taylor, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2001
>  
> "College Physics" Francis W. Sears and Mark W. Zemansky, Addison-Wesley, 1960
>  
> "Elementary Modern Physics" , Richard T. Weidner and Robert L. Sells, Allyn &
> Bacon, 1968
>  
> "Special Relativity" , W. Rendler, Oliver & Boyd pub., 1960
>  
> "Theory of Relativity" ,Wolfgang Pauli, (G. Field transl.), Dover
> Publications,
> 1981
>  
> "Physics - Concepts and Connections", Art Hobson, Prentice-Hall 1999
>  
> "A History of Science and its relation with Philosophy and Religion"  Sir
> William Cecil Dampier, Cambridge Univ. Press 1948
>  
> "Einstein - The Life and Times" , Ronald W. Clark, World Publishing, 1971
>  
> "Naturforschung von Heute", Nelson Van de Lutster, Appleton-Century-Crofts,
> 1963
>  
> Matt D.
> G3-1085
>