In a lecture meant for his inauguration at the University of Leiden in
1920, Einstein remarked:

"...we may say that according to the general theory of relativity space
is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there
exists an ether. According to the general theory of relativity space
without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be
no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for
standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore
any space-time intervals in the physical sense. But this ether may not
be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable
media, as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time. The
idea of motion may not be applied to it."

Shortly before his lecture in Leyden in 1920 he admitted in the paper:
Grundgedanken und Methoden der Relativitätstheorie in ihrer Entwicklung
dargestellt:

"Therefore I thought in 1905 that in physics one should not speak of the
ether at all. This judgement was too radical though as we shall see with
the next considerations about the general theory of relativity. It
moreover remains, as before, allowed to assume a space-filling medium if
one can refer to electromagnetic fields (and thus also for sure matter)
as the condition thereof ".

Perhaps he was correct, you think?

JS

John Smith wrote:
In a lecture meant for his inauguration at the University of Leiden in
1920, Einstein remarked:

"...we may say that according to the general theory of relativity space
is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there
exists an ether. According to the general theory of relativity space
without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be
no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for
standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore
any space-time intervals in the physical sense. But this ether may not
be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable
media, as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time. The
idea of motion may not be applied to it."

Shortly before his lecture in Leyden in 1920 he admitted in the paper:
Grundgedanken und Methoden der Relativitätstheorie in ihrer Entwicklung
dargestellt:

"Therefore I thought in 1905 that in physics one should not speak of the
ether at all. This judgement was too radical though as we shall see with
the next considerations about the general theory of relativity. It
moreover remains, as before, allowed to assume a space-filling medium if
one can refer to electromagnetic fields (and thus also for sure matter)
as the condition thereof ".

Perhaps he was correct, you think?

JS

Of course, other theories and proposals exit to the unknown/"un-understood":

http://www.mountainman.com.au/aetherqr.htm

JS

John Smith wrote:
In a lecture meant for his inauguration at the University of Leiden in
1920, Einstein remarked:

Perhaps he was correct, you think?

JS

I think like this. Amateurs look, to me, like a couple of guys who
build some equipment (or buy it), hook it to a wire, and communicate
between themselves and possibly others. They keep on developing
different and sometimes better gear and they learn many uses, games and
recreation purposes for it. However, and lately, they make NO moves to
advance it, a responsibility the the mere possession of an amateur
license places on oneself...

Now, I liken the "wire" in the above to the ether. And, these amateurs
NEVER question where the wire (ether) came from, how it works, how long
it is, the characteristics of it, etc.

I think, obviously, that any "NEW" and "REAL" discoveries, developments,
technology, etc. will ONLY come from answering the question which is
implied above or, "How does the ether factor into communications? Will
a(the) manipulation(s) of the ether further radio technology, its' use,
worth, etc.?"

Now, I do think antennas are an excellent place to begin such studies
and research. They obviously, in my humble opinion, interface with the
ether! Or, if your belief in the ether is holding you back, I offer the
following as an example of hunting for it:
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/webster.k.../Detection.pdf

This page contains instructions on how to construct a cheap and simple
device to detect the ether. It uses a laser (laser level--mine cost
12.95 + tax) and a few front surface mirrors... (I am still proving the
ether to myself and undecided as to whether to have the same faith I
hold for God, for it (ether)...) I would love to come up with a way to
use RF.

Point being, DO SOMETHING CONSTRUCTIVE or SHUT UP and go about your BS
over the airwaves(vibrations of the ether really!) smile

Or, said simply, "Those who can do, those who can't fire up the rig and
rag chew."

JS

John Smith wrote:
Perhaps he was correct, you think?

Of course, he was correct. Empty space has been
proved not to be empty and certainly appears to
have a structure with particles winking in and
out of existence. The physicists were correct
about the existence of the medium (ether) but they
made incorrect assumptions about its nature. It was
a mistake to assume the ether didn't exist just
because its nature was different than expected.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

John Smith wrote:
This page contains instructions on how to construct a cheap and simple
device to detect the ether.

Consider that the galactic red shift might be caused
by the expansion of the ether and not by movement of
the galaxies.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith wrote:
Perhaps he was correct, you think?

Of course, he was correct. Empty space has been
proved not to be empty and certainly appears to
have a structure with particles winking in and
out of existence. The physicists were correct
about the existence of the medium (ether) but they
made incorrect assumptions about its nature. It was
a mistake to assume the ether didn't exist just
because its nature was different than expected.

Of course, the ether has not yet been seen, and the unseen is difficult
to prove and accept...

http://www.uoregon.edu/~rwh/physics/twoslit.html
http://web.syr.edu/~dmalling/history.html
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...iv/mmhist.html
http://physics.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physic...ww/node67.html
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1935JScI...12...75D
http://www.lepp.cornell.edu/spr/1998-12/msg0013841.html
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine...i/absolute.htm
http://www.physics.rutgers.edu/~jack...f/lecture6.txt
http://humboldt.edu/~scimus/Instrume...cScp-Noyes.htm

JS

Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith wrote:
This page contains instructions on how to construct a cheap and simple
device to detect the ether.

Consider that the galactic red shift might be caused
by the expansion of the ether and not by movement of
the galaxies.

Cecil:

I suspect you of being a rather "Doppler Fellow!" Or, is that "Dapper
Fellow?"

Whatever... grin

Warmest regards,
JS

John Smith wrote:
Of course, the ether has not yet been seen, and the unseen is difficult
to prove and accept...

Quoting "Alpha & Omega", by Charles Seife:
"Quantum physicists are forced to conclude that
the vacuum isn't truly empty. It is seething with
particles and energy. ... The need (to understand)
is more pressing than ever before, because they
think that the energy of the vacuum, the zero-point
energy that is everywhere in the universe, is forcing
the universe apart." That force is thought to be the
same thing as the Casimir effect which has indeed been
measured.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

John Smith wrote:
I suspect you of being a rather "Doppler Fellow!"

Consider that the mere expansion of empty space itself
would cause a red shift possibly unrelated to the
Doppler effect.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith wrote:
Of course, the ether has not yet been seen, and the unseen is
difficult to prove and accept...

Quoting "Alpha & Omega", by Charles Seife:
"Quantum physicists are forced to conclude that
the vacuum isn't truly empty. It is seething with
particles and energy. ... The need (to understand)
is more pressing than ever before, because they
think that the energy of the vacuum, the zero-point
energy that is everywhere in the universe, is forcing
the universe apart." That force is thought to be the
same thing as the Casimir effect which has indeed been
measured.

Cecil:

You made a mistake in your spelling, a first (well, maybe!) But surely,
you meant the "Cashmere Effect", the effect my suit has on women!

"Dutch physicist Hendrik B. G. Casimir first proposed the existence of
the force, and he formulated an experiment to detect it in 1948 while
participating in research at Philips Research Labs. The classic form of
his experiment used a pair of uncharged parallel metal plates in a
vacuum, and successfully demonstrated the force to within 15% of the
value he had predicted according to his theory.

The van der Waals force between a pair of neutral atoms is a similar
effect. In modern theoretical physics, the Casimir effect plays an
important role in the chiral bag model of the nucleon, and in applied
physics, it is becoming of increasing importance in development of the
ever-smaller, miniaturised components of emerging micro- and nano-
technologies." -- Wikipedia

Hey, does an affect cause an effect? Or, is each and every effect is
followed by an equal and opposite affect? Geesh, confusing...

.... makes me see visions of Fleischmann-Pons dancing in my head, only
thing keeping me up is a long tether tossed me from NASA and it might
have broken!

Warmest regards,
JS