# Newtons laws, relativity & the ether

A

#### Archaea

##### Guest
There's a theory called the superlight theory, there's an article describing it here:

_http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/tw/superlight.pdf

The main idea is that superlight comes from infinity to a point, opposite to how light comes from a point and goes to infinity. This superlight applies a pressure on an object with mass which is balanced on all sides, unless there's a another mass nearby blocking some of the incoming superlight in one of the directions. This causes an imbalance in the pressure being applied to the mass which results in motion.

In part 2 of the character of physical law lectures Richard Feynman describes a theory of gravity where the force applied to a mass is the result of collisions from incoming particles. The video is here:

And the description starts at 6:28.

The superlight idea and the idea Dr Feynman presents are similar. In fact, the superlight idea actually fixes the problem pointed out in the lecture. We can see this by looking at Newton's laws.

According to wikipedia Newton's laws of motion are:

First law: When viewed in an inertial reference frame, an object either remains at rest or continues to move at a constant velocity, unless acted upon by a force.

Second law: The vector sum of the forces F on an object is equal to the mass m of that object multiplied by the acceleration vector a of the object: F = ma.

Third law: When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body.

Let's say that the ether does come from all directions to a single point, and applies a pressure to a mass which causes a force. Lat's also say that every observer observes themselves to be stationary to the ether regardless of their velocity as long as they're not accelerating. This means that a mass won't feel any force due to the ether as long as it's not accelerating, this agrees with Newtons first law.

Furthermore, an accelerating mass observes the ether to be flowing at a constant velocity in the opposite direction. This would apply a constant pressure on the mass, creating an imbalance in the ether, and therefore a counter force. This agrees with Newtons second law, where the force on the mass due to the ether is the mass times the acceleration. Also to accelerate an object through the ether requires a force proportional to the mass because of the imbalance of pressure on the mass from the flow of ether.

For the third law if there are two masses each blocking some of the incoming ether flow, then they'll both affect each other. This is the superlight idea of gravity.

In this model the speed of light doesn't vary with the velocity of the observer since the velocity of the ether is proportional to the acceleration of the observer and not the velocity. It would, however, be dependent on the acceleration of the observer. So the speed of light could be observed to travel at different speeds in different gravitational fields and at different rates of acceleration.

The principle of equivalence fits into this idea nicely as well. An object in free fall won't experience any forces because the imbalance in the incoming flow of the ether is completely corrected by the acceleration of the mass in free fall. So the postulates and principles of relativity agree with this model.

A: Gravity "travels" on ether.

Maxwell's theory did away with the ether. The Michelson Morely experiment looked for ether flow past the moving earth in the horizontal plane and did not find it. The a priori assumption here is that the ether is stationary.

If however it is flowing, let's say in the direction of gravity, we would expect to find it in a similar experiment, at 90 degrees to horizontal.

It was done here;
https://youtu.be/7T0d7o8X2-E
And the experiment returned positive for ether drift

The above experiment was challenged here;
https://youtu.be/DH-NC8rvGvU
But it is important to note the difference in direction of interference lines to the vertical in both experiments.

In short, ether drift = gravity. Mass displaces ether and leads to an ether vacuum. Ether rushes in and sustains mass from moment to moment. Without ether, mass would decay.

Last paragraph is just me thinking.

You could kind of say force is diffusion of bosons such as gravitons but it would be more over an aether that's a conformal (complex aka with imaginary numbers) spacetime or via some cellular automata that models Feynman path integrals to get a phase (Feynman Checkerboard).

I've been reading Ark's blog via google translate. The Hagel law of three third would be kind of holding yes and no (0 and 1) together at one time a la quantum logic for your cellular automata. Ark also talks about making a cellular automata reversible via having a memory (so your third could be 00,01,10,11 all at once perhaps) and one could probably have a longer memory as needed. Ark related reversibility to the idea of Poincare recurrence.

Ark's conformal gravity in a conformal spacetime would kind of be an aether of EM gravity in that it's gravity but compressible aether-like, it could model longitudinal photons (like for electric universe plasma things) which regular EM can't.

Relating cellular automata to the conformal group is done here:

http://www.tony5m17h.net/CliffordAlgebraofWolfram256.pdf

However I've never overly liked/understood that mapping. One would think the cuboctahedron root vector diagram in the link would have surface squares that all share a coordinate. It is possible to do that but I don't know if it makes sense to do that. I do know that sometimes (like with split vs. compact groups), the root system is supposed to not look right (not that I understand why). I think one could also be using a bigger group than the conformal group (U(4) and showing it on the conformal group's root system anyways but it doesn't look fully U(4)ish to me either (not that I overly know what that looks like).

I also think the cellular automata pictures should look a little like the rotations/translations, etc. of the conformal group so I kind of like changing the mapping for that reason too though that's getting rather subjective. I used to work with some cellular automata algorithms at IBM and that's probably why I kind of want the cellular automata pictures to fit in certain ways with the conformal group. There could certainly be more objective ways to do this that I don't know about.

Inquorate said:
A: Gravity "travels" on ether.

Maxwell's theory did away with the ether. The Michelson Morely experiment looked for ether flow past the moving earth in the horizontal plane and did not find it. The a priori assumption here is that the ether is stationary.

If however it is flowing, let's say in the direction of gravity, we would expect to find it in a similar experiment, at 90 degrees to horizontal.

It was done here;
https://youtu.be/7T0d7o8X2-E
And the experiment returned positive for ether drift

The above experiment was challenged here;
https://youtu.be/DH-NC8rvGvU
But it is important to note the difference in direction of interference lines to the vertical in both experiments.

That's pretty cool, thanks for posting, Vertical ether drift lines up pretty well with the superlight idea.

In short, ether drift = gravity. Mass displaces ether and leads to an ether vacuum. Ether rushes in and sustains mass from moment to moment. Without ether, mass would decay.

Last paragraph is just me thinking.

I think mass is the property of matter to block ether flow, the more the matter blocks the ether the higher the mass. I also think maybe the ether is getting sucked into trans-dimensional windows reducing the flow to the other side of the mass. There's this snippet from Session 15 June 1996:

A: We have told you before that planets and stars are windows. And where does it go?

Q: (L) The windows?

A: The gravity.

Q: (L) Oh. Gravity must go into the ethereal dimensions or densities. I mean, you have my head going in so many different directions that I feel like I have popcorn in there.

A: Good!

Q: (L) Well, where does gravity go. The sun is a window. Even our planet must be a window!

A: You have it too!!

Another thing I was thinking is that maybe the term "density" refers to the density of the ether. I think this because of this answer from the latest session (Session 6 February 2016):

A: Just so! Ether is the interface between information and manifestation.

The thinking being that the thicker the interface, the faster the manifestations.

You could kind of say force is diffusion of bosons such as gravitons but it would be more over an aether that's a conformal (complex aka with imaginary numbers) spacetime or via some cellular automata that models Feynman path integrals to get a phase (Feynman Checkerboard).

I've been reading Ark's blog via google translate. The Hagel law of three third would be kind of holding yes and no (0 and 1) together at one time a la quantum logic for your cellular automata. Ark also talks about making a cellular automata reversible via having a memory (so your third could be 00,01,10,11 all at once perhaps) and one could probably have a longer memory as needed. Ark related reversibility to the idea of Poincare recurrence.

Is the idea here that the information field might be some form of cellular automata? If so, I think that's interesting. I'm interested in computer science as a hobby, and I think that if you take the set of all algorithms which have a set number of binary inputs and outputs, so there's a string of 1's and 0's with say n digits for the input and another string with n (or less) digits for the output. An algorithm can then, maybe, be thought of as a mapping of all the possible 2n input strings to all the 2n output strings.

Overall, if different inputs cant map to the same outputs, there should be something like 2n! possible mappings, although I'm not sure about that number. All binary strings of length n can be mapped to the vertices of an n dimensional unit hypercube. So an algorithm is maybe like a set or a series of transformations or something on the hypercube. I don't know though, it's just something I've been thinking about. But maybe that relates to the idea of conformal transformations and information.

Ark's conformal gravity in a conformal spacetime would kind of be an aether of EM gravity in that it's gravity but compressible aether-like, it could model longitudinal photons (like for electric universe plasma things) which regular EM can't.

I think that makes sense, if EM are transverse waves on the ether, and the superlight idea is right, then longitudinal waves should be like gravitational waves, i.e. they create a push then a pull.

Relating cellular automata to the conformal group is done here:

http://www.tony5m17h.net/CliffordAlgebraofWolfram256.pdf

This link wouldn't open for me.

Archaea said:
Relating cellular automata to the conformal group is done here:

http://www.tony5m17h.net/CliffordAlgebraofWolfram256.pdf

This link wouldn't open for me.

It opened for me in Chrome and Firefox. Do you have another browser you can try?

Buddy said:
Archaea said:
Relating cellular automata to the conformal group is done here:

http://www.tony5m17h.net/CliffordAlgebraofWolfram256.pdf

This link wouldn't open for me.

It opened for me in Chrome and Firefox. Do you have another browser you can try?
He has a mirror site you can try too.

http://www.valdostamuseum.com/hamsmith/CliffordAlgebraofWolfram256.pdf

Archaea said:
Is the idea here that the information field might be some form of cellular automata? If so, I think that's interesting. I'm interested in computer science as a hobby, and I think that if you take the set of all algorithms which have a set number of binary inputs and outputs, so there's a string of 1's and 0's with say n digits for the input and another string with n (or less) digits for the output. An algorithm can then, maybe, be thought of as a mapping of all the possible 2n input strings to all the 2n output strings.

Overall, if different inputs cant map to the same outputs, there should be something like 2n! possible mappings, although I'm not sure about that number. All binary strings of length n can be mapped to the vertices of an n dimensional unit hypercube. So an algorithm is maybe like a set or a series of transformations or something on the hypercube. I don't know though, it's just something I've been thinking about. But maybe that relates to the idea of conformal transformations and information.

Yes you would have the 2n hypercube for the information field; in the elementary cellular automata example that both Ark and Tony Smith (the owner of the link that broke for you) discuss it would be 28=256. That 256 would be the total number of degrees of freedom even after any low energy symmetry breaking. The conformal group has bivectors (an XY rotation for example) and Tony seems to take this rather literally and matches it to a cellular automata rule with two ones (and thus six zeros) but he doesn't always keep those two ones as referring to X and Y for the full conformal group but he does always use two ones for the full group.

So yes it would always be an input hypercube vertex to output hypercube vertex transformation/transaction but depending on symmetry breaking it could be different available transformations such as the conformal group/aether/longitudinal photon ones for different energy levels/situations. Also law of 3/cellular automata with memory/quantum mechanics-wise there could be long superpositions of different transformations based on a complex/phase space spanning all of time and space.

http://www.tony5m17h.net/Sets2Quarks4a.html#WEYLdimredGB

In terms of the basis (x,y,z,t,k,w,r,b), they are

xy xz xt xk xw xr xb
yz yt yk yw yr yb
zt zk zw zr zb
tk tw tr tb
kw kr kb
wr wb
rb

back to me: So xy,xz,yz would be the spatial rotations; xt,yt,zt would be the spacetime boosts; xk,yk,zk,tk would be the spacetime translations; xw,yw,zw,tw would be the special conformal transformations; and kw would be the dilation. This is the conformal group (the ones with r and b, tony uses for electroweak and strong force bosons). Given these 8 basis vectors (x,y,z,t,k,w,r,b), one would think Tony might relate them directly to the 8 bits of the cellular automata but he actually uses 7 of the 8 bits for the conformal group instead of just 6 like he does with the above basis vectors. I don't know why he did that since I did check and the mapping still looks OK with a 6 bit conformal group as far as having subgroups like rotations all looking like each other cellular automata picture-wise.

Bluelamp said:
Buddy said:
Archaea said:
Relating cellular automata to the conformal group is done here:

http://www.tony5m17h.net/CliffordAlgebraofWolfram256.pdf

This link wouldn't open for me.

It opened for me in Chrome and Firefox. Do you have another browser you can try?
He has a mirror site you can try too.

http://www.valdostamuseum.com/hamsmith/CliffordAlgebraofWolfram256.pdf

I'm using Firefox on Linux, so I don't have any other installed browsers. The mirror site worked though.

http://www.tony5m17h.net/Sets2Quarks4a.html#WEYLdimredGB

back to me: So xy,xz,yz would be the spatial rotations; xt,yt,zt would be the spacetime boosts; xk,yk,zk,tk would be the spacetime translations; xw,yw,zw,tw would be the special conformal transformations; and kw would be the dilation. This is the conformal group (the ones with r and b, tony uses for electroweak and strong force bosons).

I don't understand what k and w are, are they dimensions? If so, how do they relate to spacetime translations and "special conformal translations." I'm not really familiar with Clifford algebra (although I get Quaternions and Octonians) so i might not get some of this stuff. My other question is how does this relate to cellular automata? My understanding is that cellular automata are computer programs where there's a grid and each grid square has a colour and there are rules describing how that colour changes depending on the colour of the neighbouring grid squares. I don't know much about that either, so I hope that's right.

Anyway, here are some short thoughts about ether:

*A spinning object will observe ether flow coming from the center of rotation
*The gravitational potential energy of a mass would be the kinetic energy of the ether
*If charge is also somehow related to ether flow, then two opposite charges will observe ether flow towards each other, while two like charges will observe ether flow away from each other.

Assuming there's something to the idea. ;)

Archaea said:
The mirror site worked though...

http://www.tony5m17h.net/Sets2Quarks4a.html#WEYLdimredGB

I don't understand what k and w are, are they dimensions? If so, how do they relate to spacetime translations and "special conformal translations." I'm not really familiar with Clifford algebra (although I get Quaternions and Octonians) so i might not get some of this stuff. My other question is how does this relate to cellular automata? My understanding is that cellular automata are computer programs where there's a grid and each grid square has a colour and there are rules describing how that colour changes depending on the colour of the neighbouring grid squares. I don't know much about that either, so I hope that's right.

Anyway, here are some short thoughts about ether:

*A spinning object will observe ether flow coming from the center of rotation
*The gravitational potential energy of a mass would be the kinetic energy of the ether
*If charge is also somehow related to ether flow, then two opposite charges will observe ether flow towards each other, while two like charges will observe ether flow away from each other.

Assuming there's something to the idea. ;)
Seems you will have to stick to the mirror site.

For http://www.valdostamuseum.com/hamsmith/Sets2Quarks4a.html#WEYLdimredGB the k and w would be extra Kaluza Klein-like spacetime dimensions to get to the 6 for the SO(6) conformal group from the 4 of the SO(4) Lorentz group where the 4 are just the normal X,Y,Z,T spacetime ones. I think he picked K,W,R,B (for black,white,red,blue) since one of the things the Kaluza Klein dimensions would add is the color/strong force.

There are lots of Cellular Automata schemes. The Feynman Checkerboard would be the most well known one linked well to physics.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feynman_checkerboard

As a result, helicity (the one-dimensional equivalent of spin) is obtained from a simple cellular-automata type rule.

Tony Smith under his given name Frank D. Smith is a Wikipedia source in the above article for a 4-dim Feynman Checkerboard via this paper:

http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9503015v1.pdf

The cellular automata Ark is looking at, Tony used to link to the conformal group via the Cl(8) Clifford Algebra. The graded dimensions of Clifford Algebra are just the rows of the Pascal Triangle and thus sum to 2n:

From http://www.valdostamuseum.com/hamsmith/clfpq.html

n Total
Dimension

0 1 2^0 = 1= 1x1
1 1 1 2^1 = 2= 1+1
2 1 2 1 2^2 = 4= 2x2
3 1 3 3 1 2^3 = 8= 4+4
4 1 4 6 4 1 2^4 = 16= 4x4
5 1 5 10 10 5 1 2^5 = 32=16+16
6 1 6 15 20 15 6 1 2^6 = 64= 8x8
7 1 7 21 35 35 21 7 1 2^7 = 128=64+64
8 1 8 28 56 70 56 28 8 1 2^8 = 256=16x16
9 1 9 36 84 126 126 84 36 9 1 2^9 = 512=256+256

back to me: note the 6 from the Cl(n=4) row would be the 6 Lorentz group bivectors, the 15 from the Cl(n=6) row would be the 15 Conformal group bivectors, and the 28 from the Cl(n=8) row would be all the bivectors (cellular automata rules with 2 one bits and 6 zeros) you could make for the 28=256 8-bit elementary cellular automata that Tony and Ark work with. It's described here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_cellular_automaton

The one I used at IBM had 9 bits (8 surrounding a center one) while this one just has a left and right bit surrounding the center one. These would be monochrome colors. What I used it for at IBM was literally a tester with a monochrome camera taking pictures of a circuit board looking for defects.

Those three things you mentioned (spin, mass, charge) are very important for the Kerr Newman black hole equation which gets very aetherish if you use it to model elementary particles (the Compton radius is a complex number). The dilation of the compressible aetherish conformal group is used for a Higgs VeV which is mass related too. David Finkelstein (Tony Smith's advisor at Georgia Tech) uses the conformal group for dark energy in the form of a variable cosmological constant. That would explain why there's no universe expansion to overcome in gravitationally bound systems like solar systems. I've heard it explained as the conformal bosons get scrambled by the regular gravitons (apparently the conformal bosons need to line up kind of magnetic pole-like in order to cause expansion).

I've been having a look around the Internet at cellular automata stuff and I have some questions. If it's alright with you, could you start a thread explaining cellular automata and what Tony smith and Ark are doing with it? I'd do it but you understand that stuff and I don't.

Sure I can do that but if I quote Ark and he sounds funny, remember it's via Google translate.

There's something called the Shapiro radar time delay. Apparently, the speed of a light wave depends on it's gravitational potential. Wikipedia gives a quote from Shapiro from an article called Fourth Test of General Relativity:

Because, according to the general theory, the speed of a light wave depends on the strength of the gravitational potential along its path, these time delays should thereby be increased by almost 2x10−4 sec when the radar pulses pass near the sun. Such a change, equivalent to 60 km in distance, could now be measured over the required path length to within about 5 to 10% with presently obtainable equipment.

This delay needs to be considered for space probes. Also from Wikipedia:

Shapiro delay must be considered along with ranging data when trying to accurately determine the distance to interplanetary probes such as the Voyager and Pioneer spacecraft.

Here's a paper about the ether that someone posted on the Thunderbolts forum:

http://www.tuks.nl/wiki/index.php/Main/AnExceptionallyElegantTheoryOfEverything