Quote:
Originally Posted by antoniseb
... dense and massive, are you using an allegory, and you do not mean that the aether has inertia or gravitational potential by itself?
|
Hi, boss...
By AWT here's no conceptual difference between Aether behavior and lets say supercritical vapor/fluid behavior. On the contrary, the supercritical fluid is the good model system for demonstration of common properties of vacuum: it's elastics and inertial at the same time, while the older models of Aether have considered gas or fluid behavior separately. Aether is expected to form all kinds of matter - so it can exhibit all matter properties, depending on its state.
If you're convenient with idea, the Universe is formed by interior of black hole, then you should be familiar with concept of vacuum as a massive environment - simply because the black hole is massive stuff. This is trivial consequence and nothing very strange is about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by antoniseb
... you aware of any measurement possible, present or future, that could distinguish your AWT idea from the mainstream ideas it would replace
|
This is virtually impossible and it has no meaning. After all, the purpose of AWT isn't to replace the usage of special theories at their particular scopes, especially when high precision is expected/required by the same way, like the quantum mechanics/relativity isn't generally used in ab-inicio computations of water flow in CFD, simply because it's not just effective. The AWT is expected to comprehend different theories together by simple general concept - no less, no more.
Currently I'm using it rather for explanation of existing concepts, then for postulating new ones, because it can simplify the understanding of theoretical concepts of mainstream physics, by my opinion. For example, the Lissi Garrets theory explains the particle generations by E8 group geometry, but how we can understand this connection by illustrative way? This is what the AWT is good for right now.