Tweet
Modeling The (A)ether
(Ignorable Sidenote: Eric's last presentation inspired me a bit to dig more into this topic and to consider things a bit more deeply. I think it was the hope of many of us who watched it and have chatted about it, that he would have really dug more into the topic of the (a)ether and we were left disappointed at the end of the presentation. I’m definitely not saying we didn’t enjoy his content, because we did, but it left us wanting much more given the title and perceived buildup.)
For some time I have sought to understand a way to conceive of the aether / ether (going to refer to it simply as ether going forward for brevity) in a mental fashion in order to work on having a superior capacity to visualize a unified field theory, so to speak.
I would like to present a kind of model and some thoughts in hopes to receive some input as far as where I may be wrong or at least to spark some discussion. I actually will be using two models or ideas since I don't think one can sufficiently convey concepts. Perhaps even two can’t yet.
So the idea here is that the "water" and it's "flow" can only be seen / perceived WHEN IT IS DISRUPTED (something slows it down and / or modifies its direction). Likewise, the ether may not be seen or observed except and until it is disrupted / slowed down.
The following is a second analogy:
While pondering on these and watching Eric Dollard’s last presentation from July, I was quite shocked at some possibilities. I was very curious about the point where he showed the bulb with the high energy white / blue and the red aura in the middle regions and then his discussion of the green gaseous diffusion that remained after the energy flow was stopped. He was talking about creating a universe or galaxy in the bulb and I don’t really think he was too far off if you consider it in proper context.
It seems to me that, so far, the only thing that we have been able to use successfully to disrupt, or retard, the ether has been magnetism and electricity. I believe that these are our “stones” and “hands” when it comes to being able to begin to manipulate and leverage the ether for our desired intentions.
Any thoughts or additional observations / analogies would be very welcome and appreciated. I think the primary key for us in gaining access to the ether is to be able to visualize it after such manners and to thus have a way to begin to think about it in a context that makes more practical / tangible sense. Then we will be able to translate our understanding of electrical engineering and so forth over to being able to actually create means to our ends.
For some time I have sought to understand a way to conceive of the aether / ether (going to refer to it simply as ether going forward for brevity) in a mental fashion in order to work on having a superior capacity to visualize a unified field theory, so to speak.
I would like to present a kind of model and some thoughts in hopes to receive some input as far as where I may be wrong or at least to spark some discussion. I actually will be using two models or ideas since I don't think one can sufficiently convey concepts. Perhaps even two can’t yet.
I believe that the ether may be best conceived of as a flowing river of water in a pristinely undisrupted environment that is flowing in a glass basin / riverbed as it were. Its environment is completely undisturbed and is light in an omnipresent fashion so that there are no shadows and no readily visible refraction, etc. If you were an observer of this river, you would look down on it and could not readily differentiate the water from the glass banks, neither could you detect that the water were moving. It would simply be like unto a sheet of silvery / crystal-like surface since there would be nothing to indicate otherwise without any disturbance or frame of reference.
The key concept here is that this "water" is flowing / moving, but entirely undisrupted (eg, not acted upon by anything) and therefore entirely indistinguishable from its surroundings or at least its banks.
How can one tell that this water is moving? The observer would have to disrupt the water in some fashion. He might toss a rock into it so as to create an effect or place his hand into the water to feel the effect.
The key concept here is that this "water" is flowing / moving, but entirely undisrupted (eg, not acted upon by anything) and therefore entirely indistinguishable from its surroundings or at least its banks.
How can one tell that this water is moving? The observer would have to disrupt the water in some fashion. He might toss a rock into it so as to create an effect or place his hand into the water to feel the effect.
The following is a second analogy:
Imagine a machine gun firing continuously in a line. Suppose that a pane of glass were to be moved so that a corner of it would be struck a bullet. The entire sheet of glass would be shaken by the concussion; even though the bullet struck but a single spot of glass, the point of contact covering only a small area.
Imagine now that the velocity of the bullets increased a thousand times; then a plate of glass thrust into their track would be smoothly cut, as though with a file that would gnaw its way without producing a single radiating fracture. A person standing near the volley would now hear a deep purr or growling sound, caused by the friction between the bullets and the air.
Increase gradually the velocity of their motion, and this growl would become sharper. It would evolve from the low to a high or shrill pitch tone and then to nothing and with a further increase of speed more silence.
From this bullet speed of hundreds of miles per second, we increase velocity a thousand times, reaching into millions of miles each second. To the eye, from the point where the sound disappeared, as the velocity increased, a dim redness would appear, a glow barely perceptible to the sense of sight, by the continuous line of moving bullets. To all appearance, the line may be as uniform as an illuminated pencil mark, even though the several integral bullets of the trail might be separated one from another by miles of space.
Now we push a pane of glass across their track, and from the point of contact a shower of sparks would fly, and the edges of glass close to either side of the "bullet" hole would be shown, on withdrawing the glass, to have been fused.
Now let's double the speed of the bullets and tripled again and again. The line of red light becomes brighter, then brilliant, and finally as the velocity increases, at a certain point pure white results and it would appear that the trail is a continuous something; as solid as a bar of metal if at a white heat, and (even if the bullets were a thousand miles apart) you readily prove that the bullets were separate from one another.
Now if you were to place the glass pane (or another substance, even steel or titanium) in its path and it would simply melt away; the portion excised and carried out of that pathway neither showing itself as fragments of matter. The solid would instantly liquify, and would spread itself as a thin film over the surface of each bullet of that white, hot mass of moving metal, now to all essential conditions as uniform as a bar of iron.
Now we increase the velocity to millions upon millions of miles per second, and the heat will disappear gradually as did the sound; the white hot train of bullets disappears to the sense of man. Neither light nor sound now accompanies the streaming bullets; neither can the human eye nor the human ear perceive its presence.
Drop a pane of glass or any other object edgewise through it, and it gives to our senses no evidence; the molecules of the glass separate from in front to close in from behind, and the moving stream of bullets passes through it as freely as light, leaving the surface of the glass unaffected.
At this point, the bullets are no longer matter. They are only "motion" and would be considered nothing more than void or vacancy. We could at this point refer to the bullets as ether, being pure motion (or perhaps framed as an unperceivable energy).
So if we perhaps understand the general concept of moving something “into the ether”, how would one reverse the process? Simply put, it would seem that we can say that matter is, therefore, retarded (slowed / disrupted) motion (energy).
If one would then disrupt or slow down the either, one would then reverse the process so that we would shift back down from a state of high intensity energy, to light, to gaseous matter, to liquid and then to solid.
Imagine now that the velocity of the bullets increased a thousand times; then a plate of glass thrust into their track would be smoothly cut, as though with a file that would gnaw its way without producing a single radiating fracture. A person standing near the volley would now hear a deep purr or growling sound, caused by the friction between the bullets and the air.
Increase gradually the velocity of their motion, and this growl would become sharper. It would evolve from the low to a high or shrill pitch tone and then to nothing and with a further increase of speed more silence.
From this bullet speed of hundreds of miles per second, we increase velocity a thousand times, reaching into millions of miles each second. To the eye, from the point where the sound disappeared, as the velocity increased, a dim redness would appear, a glow barely perceptible to the sense of sight, by the continuous line of moving bullets. To all appearance, the line may be as uniform as an illuminated pencil mark, even though the several integral bullets of the trail might be separated one from another by miles of space.
Now we push a pane of glass across their track, and from the point of contact a shower of sparks would fly, and the edges of glass close to either side of the "bullet" hole would be shown, on withdrawing the glass, to have been fused.
Now let's double the speed of the bullets and tripled again and again. The line of red light becomes brighter, then brilliant, and finally as the velocity increases, at a certain point pure white results and it would appear that the trail is a continuous something; as solid as a bar of metal if at a white heat, and (even if the bullets were a thousand miles apart) you readily prove that the bullets were separate from one another.
Now if you were to place the glass pane (or another substance, even steel or titanium) in its path and it would simply melt away; the portion excised and carried out of that pathway neither showing itself as fragments of matter. The solid would instantly liquify, and would spread itself as a thin film over the surface of each bullet of that white, hot mass of moving metal, now to all essential conditions as uniform as a bar of iron.
Now we increase the velocity to millions upon millions of miles per second, and the heat will disappear gradually as did the sound; the white hot train of bullets disappears to the sense of man. Neither light nor sound now accompanies the streaming bullets; neither can the human eye nor the human ear perceive its presence.
Drop a pane of glass or any other object edgewise through it, and it gives to our senses no evidence; the molecules of the glass separate from in front to close in from behind, and the moving stream of bullets passes through it as freely as light, leaving the surface of the glass unaffected.
At this point, the bullets are no longer matter. They are only "motion" and would be considered nothing more than void or vacancy. We could at this point refer to the bullets as ether, being pure motion (or perhaps framed as an unperceivable energy).
So if we perhaps understand the general concept of moving something “into the ether”, how would one reverse the process? Simply put, it would seem that we can say that matter is, therefore, retarded (slowed / disrupted) motion (energy).
If one would then disrupt or slow down the either, one would then reverse the process so that we would shift back down from a state of high intensity energy, to light, to gaseous matter, to liquid and then to solid.
While pondering on these and watching Eric Dollard’s last presentation from July, I was quite shocked at some possibilities. I was very curious about the point where he showed the bulb with the high energy white / blue and the red aura in the middle regions and then his discussion of the green gaseous diffusion that remained after the energy flow was stopped. He was talking about creating a universe or galaxy in the bulb and I don’t really think he was too far off if you consider it in proper context.
It seems to me that, so far, the only thing that we have been able to use successfully to disrupt, or retard, the ether has been magnetism and electricity. I believe that these are our “stones” and “hands” when it comes to being able to begin to manipulate and leverage the ether for our desired intentions.
Any thoughts or additional observations / analogies would be very welcome and appreciated. I think the primary key for us in gaining access to the ether is to be able to visualize it after such manners and to thus have a way to begin to think about it in a context that makes more practical / tangible sense. Then we will be able to translate our understanding of electrical engineering and so forth over to being able to actually create means to our ends.
Comment