On Jun 2, 9:48*am, John Smith wrote:
On 6/2/2011 12:29 AM, Warhol wrote:

...
since a few NASA employees post here maybe they have something to sat
about this?

Also the opposite of what NASA says *is the truth... They will have
egg on their faces again.

No one wishes to stick their neck out and call it "ether" (or aether)
for that matter ... even Einstein attempts to acknowledge "it" as the
"cosmological effect" (basically, but denied by many, to be equiv. to a
"cosmic ether.")

I find many high schools and colleges are even "unaware" (or in some
form of denial) to Einsteins admission of a "gravitational ether."

Like I say, there is relatively "handful" of people who come right out
and deal with ether as a substantial material, in academic and research
branches.

An example of what I am referring to is this abstract:

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991PhLA..152..458A

Or, this one:

http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0608164

Investigating with search terms composed of "gravitational ether",
"cosmic ether", "cosmological effect", etc. will show the debate is far
from over ...

However, the "effect" which seems to go wanting for a proper name has
already been covered under the name of "ether." *However, since many
have denied its' existence, but now are forced to admit "something is
there", attempt to hide their mistaken denial in a "name change
ploy/tactic." *This has more to do with human nature and the refusal to
admit mistakes than anything else ...

Actually, quite funny to watch! *Very smart people also suffer from such
ego worship ... and the fear of being ostracized by their peers ...

Simply put, you can still deny the "ether" if you just name "it"
something else, since then, you deny the "it" is ether! *ROFLOL

Regards,
JS




I wont talk anymore about this, since ether is known to be air... just
consult the ancient encyclopedia's.

and in space there ain't no ether found... there is only the infinite
void... Space does not bend. A ray/ a Beam does.

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0109/3c175_vla.jpg

And what is an atomic clock? what a joke... science filled with untrue
claims. THE GREAT ATOMIC CLOCK SCAM! Like false religion, if they
contradict each other each time.

Maybe I should start a thread; "FAKE of CENTURY"

BTW E = mc2 is not Einstein's equation at all... The big E just made
"h" (plancks constant usable)... no such thing as dark energy/mass

no anti gravity

no black holes

Space don't bend by gravity

No Cosmic Ether

if you have specifics perhaps ask

Yids deliberately associated his name with it though for the usual
reasons of deception and promoting the meme that the self chosen are
superior intellects... the *******s who think they know, have no
p.h.u.c.k.ing clue...

PSS Ether, or luminiferous Ether, was the hypothetical substance
through which electromagnetic waves travel. It was proposed by the
greek philosopher Aristotle Eric Weisstein's World of Biography and
used by several optical theories as a way to allow propagation of
light, which was believed to be impossible in "empty" space.

http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Ether.html

So it was and they changed the laws by fraud and made all students
very dumb... the ancient knew what we don't know anymore.

Hollywood libturds and their CLINICALLY INSANE leftist agenda.
http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/r...?ArtNum=308456

Top Shrink says democraps and libturds are CLINICALLY INSANE!

http://www.devilfinder.com/find.php?...nically+Insane
cuhulin

On 6/2/2011 7:22 AM, Warhol wrote:

...
and in space there ain't no ether found... there is only the infinite
void... Space does not bend. A ray/ a Beam does.

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0109/3c175_vla.jpg
...

Actually, the only way you can bend a light beam (or, any other
electromagnetic beam or photons) is to bend the material which contains
the beam.

But, if you said something correct now, you would ruin your record of
being 100% wrong -- good save!

ROFLOL

Regards,
JS

Space does not bend.



Einstein disagreed.

On 6/2/2011 9:25 AM, D. Peter Maus wrote:

Space does not bend.



Einstein disagreed.



Really?

So then he didn't acknowledge that the "gravitational ether" existed?

He didn't acknowledge that space is bent like a mattress by a bowling
ball, and subject to the forces of gravity?

You are claiming lines of space (ether) penetrate through the earth as
perfectly straight lines?

Let's see the sources which cause you to reach that/those conclusion(s?)

Regards,
JS

On 6/2/11 11:34 , John Smith wrote:
On 6/2/2011 9:25 AM, D. Peter Maus wrote:

Space does not bend.



Einstein disagreed.



Really?

So then he didn't acknowledge that the "gravitational ether" existed?

He didn't acknowledge that space is bent like a mattress by a
bowling ball, and subject to the forces of gravity?

You are claiming lines of space (ether) penetrate through the earth
as perfectly straight lines?

Let's see the sources which cause you to reach that/those
conclusion(s?)

Regards,
JS




Wow. Two words and you misread it. I stand in awe.

Einstein was quite clear that space was a non-Euclidian
construct. That, in fact, it was quite flexible, and that there were
no straight lines. And that it was finite.

D. Peter Maus wrote:

Einstein was quite clear that space was a non-Euclidian construct.
That, in fact, it was quite flexible, and that there were no straight
lines.

That would mean there are no straight lines anywhere...if you think about it.
;-)

On 6/3/11 18:25 , Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D. wrote:
D. Peter Maus wrote:

Einstein was quite clear that space was a non-Euclidian construct.
That, in fact, it was quite flexible, and that there were no
straight lines.

That would mean there are no straight lines anywhere...if you think
about it.
;-)


Right.

On Fri, 03 Jun 2011 16:25:43 -0700, the following appeared
in sci.skeptic, posted by "Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D."
:

D. Peter Maus wrote:

Einstein was quite clear that space was a non-Euclidian construct.
That, in fact, it was quite flexible, and that there were no straight
lines.

That would mean there are no straight lines anywhere...if you think about it.
;-)

Since there is nowhere free from both matter and energy,
there aren't.
--

Bob C.

"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless

On Jun 2, 9:34*am, John Smith wrote:
On 6/2/2011 9:25 AM, D. Peter Maus wrote:



Space does not bend.

Einstein disagreed.

Really?

So then he didn't acknowledge that the "gravitational ether" existed?

He didn't acknowledge that space is bent like a mattress by a bowling
ball, and subject to the forces of gravity?

You are claiming lines of space (ether) penetrate through the earth as
perfectly straight lines?

Let's see the sources which cause you to reach that/those conclusion(s?)

Regards,
JS

Obviously lensing proves the flexibility of space and perhaps even
that of time which at least photons seem to respect, thereby
establishing that it's by no means empty unless 1000 atomic particles
plus whatever flow of gravity and magnetic fields per cubic meter is
supposed to represent emptiness.

If space were truly empty, photons could ether travel FTL and thereby
become invisible to our best instruments, or perhaps not manage to go
anywhere.

http://www.wanttoknow.info/
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”