Let me first update a line of an old nursery rhyme, to make a point. Let us now say: "Little Bo-Peep has lost an additional S/h/e/e/p/ 'gravitational potential energy', and does not know where to find it!" ((Yes, this is in addition to the s/h/e/e/p/ mass "she" previously lost because it was "misbranded" or confused with "energy", (as described earlier).)) In fact, I believe there is a lot missing, as mainstream physics pushes forward with its (otherwise) successful "algorithms". ((I am sorry to say that the "Little Bo-Peep (of physics) has lost an entire 'flock'.of sheep!"))
Optional: Any sailor knows that when he puts out the boat's sail, he has NOT created wind energy. His boat goes forward because his sail has CAUGHT some of the energy which was already out there, (i.e., that without that wind energy, his sailboat would go no where). The "sail's mass" has NOT been "attracted" by the "harbor's mass"!
The atmosphere may be a "lower pressure here and higher there", but he knows that a real atmosphere exists, not just "imaginary lines of force field"!
(For the sailor to miss that point, would be like "little Bo-Peep having never even seen her sheep".) But I think most scientists and physicists ignore or miss those points when they treat the subject of gravity. They think that when they put two masses in "empty" space, that the masses just naturally attract, or create "gravitational energy" in otherwise "empty space", or create an aberration, and that the masses thus proceed to "attract". That is the wrong paradigm!
(If, instead, the two massive bodies repelled each other, then one of their paradigms might partly work.) Perhaps worse are other related paradigms, such as: given the amount of each mass, the Math "causes" them to attract each other through the empty space.
Or it "just happens" that way. Or because the masses distort our view of distance, why not just regard our continuing "fantasies" as the solution? (But, like many things, it is not a math problem; it is a "Physics" and philosophical problem!) In my opinion, the sailor understands more about a "grand unification theory" than such scientists do. And if these scientists and physicists continue on their course, they probably don't even deserve to uncover "grand unification", nor even merely a "grand description"!
Aether Affects Massive Bodies:
With regard to "aether" and massive bodies, let us imagine this: A big rocket is shoved away from a little planet (shoved away with a velocity that even exceeds the "escape velocity"). The rocket thereafter will be slowed down by "the planet's gravity", but it will continue on and on with its journey, anyway.
((Optional: As most high school science students know, "the kick force on the rocket is equal and opposite to the kick force against the earth. And the forward momentum of the rocket is equal and opposite to the resulting momentum change of the earth". But less appreciated is this: Almost all the kinetic energy is transferred to the fast traveling rocket, not to the planet! And a few science students may even remember a further result described in the my next paragraph:))
"The Kinetic Energy Gradually Lost By The Rocket Is Equal To The 'Potential Gravitational Energy' Gradually Being Gained"! But I ask you, "Gained by what?" "Where is this gained potential gravitational energy located in, at, or stored, IF NOT THE AETHER?"
The kinetic energy of the aether "mist" has been increased, because it has become the repository for the so-called "gained gravitational potential energy"! ("The 'lost sheep' has now been found!") So I think H. Hertz's remark is applicable; "Potential energy is the energy of hidden motion."
(Optional: By itself, the phrase, "Potential gravitational energy gained" is merely like saying, "I don't know, but maybe my smooth phrase will pacify you?" Or would you be more pacified by the phrase "stored in an imaginary conservative field?" or "math makes them attract?" or "inside a body which mysteriously exerts 'action-at-a-distance' and at infinite speed?")
Thus, I think that instead of falling for a "word trick"; we should accept that an aether exists as the energized repository for such so-called "potential energy". And this is, in effect, what Maxwell argued and urged at the end of his "Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism." And also for his conviction that it is a material aether!15 (Because of all the above, I think we should accept that aether interacts with things great in mass!)
Aether Interacts with the Photon, sometimes Weakly, sometimes Strongly:
Next, we argue that the aether interacts with "the photon", even though the photon is low in mass. When a photon is radiated from earth and rises upward, most physicists believe that the photon looses energy. Thus, again (as I argued earlier), we "need" an aether as a "vehicle" to gain the energy which the photon looses!
((Optional: Some physicists argue that it is only the wavelength (or something else) that changed about the photon. But I still think that we need an aether's interaction with the photon to cause even that special change. This change would be a bigger before the photon got too far away from the sun, than the change during an equal period thereafter.))
The following interesting conclusion can be drawn:
Many photons gradually loose their mass and energy to the aether during their trip away from stars and during their long journey through space, and this adds a little more aether to the aether already in space.
This can happen as the photon looses energy as it distances itself from a star, as described above. Or the photon may loose mass and energy when it collides with, say, "an electron". Then that electron may loose its kinetic energy to the aether as the electron is slowed down, while distancing itself from a star. There are also likely other processes as well by which photons and other entities "dissolve" very slowly into the aether. Or during a "photoelectric effect", the photon may dissolve more quickly. Imagine its energy barely exceeding the "work function" of its target. (Of course, the reverse can also occur, by indirect means, and probably direct means also.)
Strong Interactions between Aether and the Photon:
As previously mentioned, their was a "puzzle" and a solution, regarding the photon. It "flew 'forward' at speed 'c', as if it had only ' mc2 ' of kinetic energy"; and yet Einstein "correctly predicted such photon's total energy to be mc2 ". To again illustrate the solution, let us consider a "typical" example. The photon may go "up and down" in a "simple harmonic" motion, as it progresses forward at speed "c". When the photon reaches its maximum "up excursion", an "aethereal" spring-like action strongly pushes it down, and it gathers more "downward speed". As it passes the "average" forward line of its travel and begins its "downward phase", the photon has achieved its maximum "vertical component speed" of "c". It is then exhibiting a "vertical kinetic energy of " mc2 ", and it continues to also exhibit its "forward kinetic energy" of " mc2 "; thus achieving the total "famous" (photon) total energy of " 1mc2 "!
Per the above, there are thus strong interactions between the aether and a high-energy photon (during each vertical oscillation, as the photon moves steadily forward)!
The following parts may be tedious, so the reader might skip to "Thus, some other Important Points".
Counting the stabilizing "aether springs" as part of the "photon system"; we may say the "photon System" has a total energy magnitude of " mc2 ", at all times. The momentum of the "photon system", in the direction of forward photon travel, is "mc". ((In my opinion, there are brief instances when the photon's momentum exceeds "mc" in a somewhat upward and then a somewhat downward direction. But the average of that "up and down" cancels out, as the photon's "vector" momentum, "mc", proceeds forward.
((Semi-humorous remark: Like Heisenberg, I feel "there is some 'uncertainty' about whether the photon is limited to a momentum of only 'mc' during a portion of its short length excursion 'up' or 'down'!"))
The Photon is basically "exempt" from having to "host" an "equipartition of energy" burden with a "typical aether mistlet". But the Photon must assume a significant Angular Momentum "burden", comparable to that of the aether vortices', as it moves along them. (I call this "a sort of 'equipartition of angular momentum'.")
Let us suppose we could try to increase the photon's speed by putting a compact, old star in front of it, or hitting the photon from behind with some mass. The photon, a little like an elementary particle, would increase in mass and energy.
However, the photon is already moving forward at "c", and is cyclically moving up and down at "momentary maximum" speeds of "c". Therefore, it already "occupies" the two directional motions "for which it was designed". (It is subject to certain average "Bernoulli 'aether pressure' limitations", etc.). It will not go faster, and it can only increase its energy by simply attaching more mass to its already fast moving "self". But the photon is also subject to the aether vortices and must conform to aether vortices' angular momentums, "h". Given the photon's unchanged speed, but increased mass, its angular momentum would tend to rise above compatible limits, unless it "finds a way" to prevent its angular momentum from increasing.
The "challenge is met", by the photon's decreasing the extent of its "vertical excursion", even though that means "tracing out" more of them per given length of forward travel. Thus, the photon need not decrease or increase its speed, and can accommodate the increased mass (i.e., and associated energy), without increasing its angular momentum.
((Optional: Incidentally, as a reminder, two 1-mile circles, (traced out one at a time) at 1mph, constitute only half the "angular momentum" as one 2-mile circle, traced out at the same 1mph. The total distance traveled in each case is the same, and the time required in each case is the same. We assume, in each case, that the same amount of mass was doing the "tracing", and was "circling in the same direction".))
Applying all the above to the photon and its complicated "aethereal surrounding", we infer the following: If we double the photon's mass (and incidentally, therefore, its energy), we must decrease the extension of its "vertical excursions" by one-half. This means doubling the number (i.e., frequency) of such vertical excursions per each unit length of forward photon travel. Thus, the photon can accomplish the above without slowing down. (i.e., It can continue to exhibit " mc2 " of its total energy by means of its vertical excursions and spring-like interactions with the aether. Yet, its same angular momentum has been maintained.)
Thus, with the photon's forward speed "c" maintained, the following famous algorithm applies: " E = (f)(h) ".
Carl R. Littmann
always welcome) For
my Email and address, see my Homepage
my Email and address, see my Homepage