On Sep 18, 8:20*pm, John Smith wrote:
wrote:

[ ... ]

You simply take up too much effort on a very small point. *Read this:

http://itis.volta.alessandria.it/episteme/ep3-24.htm

If that doesn't do it for you, or whets your appetite, try this book:

http://books.google.com/books?id=_24EAAAACAAJ&dq=ether

Regards,
JS

Now I see where you are getting all this sci-fi. Finally. You mistake
a philosophical, abstract ether with the type of physical ether being
inferred in this thread, i.e. the ether that was banished from normal
scientific thought by Einstein in 1905 after publishing the Special
Theory. Kostro is not a scientist, he is a Philosopher of Science who
longs for the old ether concept (I would suppose to assist in his
understanding of the universe) and who claims Einstein really did
believe in a revised concept of ether after 195 or so...no way. He did
not, as a physicist. As a philosopher, for him anything was possible,
even a unified theory. But there is no ether variable or constant that
must be present in order for the relativity calculations to work. It
is the job of a philosopher to analyse these parameters, real or
imagined, and remind us that those concepts we threw over the fence
decades ago MAY still have validity. Philosophically this is true if
in your mind experiments you think there actually may be a connection
between light and an ether medium. But philosophy does not show up in
the math. Kostro correctly states that Einstein himself did not
completely dismiss this notion but that is far cry from resurrecting
another century of ether theory. Nice try Johnny boy.