Changes

Light is a wave, and the ''luminiferous aether'' (or '''''ether''''') is defined to be whatever medium transmits the light waves.

| quote = In the early years of the nineteenth century, the English polymath Thomas Young demonstrated that light behaves like a wave. ...Light, they argued, is both like a wave and like a particle, and what is more, it is like wave and like a particle on the level of individual photons themselves.}}</ref>  The ''luminiferous aether'' (or '''''ether''''') is defined to be whatever medium transmits the light waves.

The [[Michelson-Morley experiment]] in 1887 failed to detect any motion of the aether relative to the Earth. [[Henri Poincaré]] conjectured that the aether may be unobservable, and invented special [[relativity]] based on the notion that the aether may be superfluous. [[Albert Einstein]] published conflicting opinions on whether the aether exists.

The [[Michelson-Morley experiment]] in 1887 failed to detect any motion of the Earth relative to the aether. [[Henri Poincaré]] conjectured that the aether may be unobservable, and invented special [[relativity]] based on the notion that the aether may be superfluous. [[Albert Einstein]] published conflicting opinions on whether the aether exists. According to R.Humphreys Einstein’s theories of special and general relativity not only stem from Maxwell’s work which required existence of ether as one of its postulates, but at bottom they only make sense if space (and time) is some kind of “stuff”. Humphreys portrays Einstein as recanting in 1920 his 1905 denial of the 19th-century idea of an “ether” meant to propagate light waves.<ref name="Humphreys"/>

[[Quantum electrodynamics]] (QED) teaches that when light goes through a [[vacuum]], it is really going through a sea of virtual particles. Cosmologists say that the vacuum is really filled with ''dark energy'', and it is unknown whether that has any relation to the aether concept. According to these theories, there is no such thing as empty space. The aether describes space when it is as empty as possible.  

[[Quantum electrodynamics]] (QED) teaches that when light goes through a [[vacuum]], it is really going through a sea of virtual particles. Cosmologists say that the vacuum is really filled with ''dark energy'', and it is unknown whether that has any relation to the aether concept. According to these theories, there is no such thing as empty space. The aether describes space when it is as empty as possible.  

The existence of luminiferous aether is a [[counterexamples to relativity|counterexample to relativity]] as it is sometimes described, as it is sometimes said that Einstein abolished the aether.

The existence of luminiferous aether is a [[counterexamples to relativity|counterexample to relativity]] as it is sometimes described, as it is sometimes said that Einstein abolished the aether.<ref name="CSR">{{cite book

==Reasons for long support of aether hypothesis==

==Reasons for long support of aether hypothesis==

==Politically incorrect term==

==Politically incorrect term==

[[YEC]] creationist R.Humphreys states that in contemporary mainstream science the term ether have become politically incorrect and although there are many various paradoxes in physics that could be addressed by de-facto aether hypothesis, the materialistic scientists are verbally "beating-around-the-bush" and use many code words such as various combinations of: “spacetime,” “continuum,” “manifold,” “quantum vacuum,” “[[vacuum|the Vacuum]],” “substratum,” “Dirac sea,” “plenum,” and “medium,”—all just to avoid using the word “ether”.<ref>{{cite web

[[YEC]] creationist R.Humphreys states that in contemporary mainstream science the term ether have become politically incorrect and although there are many various paradoxes in physics that could be addressed by de-facto aether hypothesis, the materialistic scientists are verbally "beating-around-the-bush" and use many code words such as various combinations of: “spacetime,” “continuum,” “manifold,” “quantum vacuum,” “[[vacuum|the Vacuum]],” “substratum,” “Dirac sea,” “plenum,” and “medium,”—all just to avoid using the word “ether”.<ref name="Humphreys">{{cite web

|title=God’s mighty expanse

|title=God’s mighty expanse

|author=Russell Humphreys

|author=Russell Humphreys

|publisher=Creation Ministries International

|publisher=Creation Ministries International

|url=http://creation.com/gods-mighty-expanse

|url=http://creation.com/gods-mighty-expanse

|quote=Strangely, academic materialists have tried to ignore the physics clues that space is a material, probably for religious and philosophical reasons. They even ignored Einstein’s 1920 recantation (see second item above) of his 1905 denial of the 19th-century idea of an “ether” (or “aether”) meant to propagate light waves. The academics have made the word “ether” politically incorrect.

|quote=Einstein’s theories of special and general relativity not only stem from Maxwell’s work, but at bottom they only make sense if space (and time) is some kind of “stuff,” as Einstein finally acknowledged in a little-known speech in 1920.2 The famous limit for the speeds of light and particles, c, could only work if there were a real material to enforce the speed limit. (Why should there be a limit if space were completely empty?) Space could be “warped” or “bent” only if it were actual solid matter.

...Strangely, academic materialists have tried to ignore the physics clues that space is a material, probably for religious and philosophical reasons. They even ignored Einstein’s 1920 recantation (see second item above) of his 1905 denial of the 19th-century idea of an “ether” (or “aether”) meant to propagate light waves. The academics have made the word “ether” politically incorrect.

Now that it looks as if the ether idea merely needed a bit more sophistication, physicists use many code words for it, such as various combinations of: “spacetime,” “continuum,” “manifold,” “quantum vacuum,” “the Vacuum,” “substratum,” “Dirac sea,” “plenum,” and “medium,”—all to avoid using the word “ether.” This verbal beating-around-the-bush amuses me. It prevents academics from explaining relativity and quantum mechanics in simple, visualizable terms that solve the various paradoxes. I suspect the academic experts on relativity and quantum theories prefer to keep them arcane and perplexing (to other academics as well), because the mystery makes them the high priests of a secular religion for which the public needs interpreters.

Now that it looks as if the ether idea merely needed a bit more sophistication, physicists use many code words for it, such as various combinations of: “spacetime,” “continuum,” “manifold,” “quantum vacuum,” “the Vacuum,” “substratum,” “Dirac sea,” “plenum,” and “medium,”—all to avoid using the word “ether.” This verbal beating-around-the-bush amuses me. It prevents academics from explaining relativity and quantum mechanics in simple, visualizable terms that solve the various paradoxes. I suspect the academic experts on relativity and quantum theories prefer to keep them arcane and perplexing (to other academics as well), because the mystery makes them the high priests of a secular religion for which the public needs interpreters.

|accessdate=2012-10-08}}</ref>   

|accessdate=2012-10-08}}</ref>