John-Erik Persson

  • John-Erik Persson posted an update in the group Group logo of RelativityRelativity 10 months, 4 weeks ago

    My opinion is that Stokes made the most important error when derived an effect of ether wind in the transverse arm in MMX. This effect does not exist, since the mirrors in the interferometer do NOT cause the vector sum of ether wind and wave velocity to be ortogonal to mirrors. Instead wave velocity only is ortogonal to mirrors. Therefore NO…[Read more]

  • John-Erik Persson posted a new activity comment 1 year ago

    I just made a simpel remark that we should regard the contribution from (and to) the ether. What do you say about that?
    John-Erik

  • John-Erik Persson posted an update 1 year ago

    Zoltan
    Maybe energy conservation is a valid law and instead the contribution from the ether is ignored.
    John-Erik

    • John-Eric
      Mr. Vajda closed his book with these remarks:
      “− Further questions arising in connection with the violation of the law of energy conservation

      When the necessary conditions are satisfied, where does the excess of energy come from, compared to the energy fed into the system; and in the case of energy deficiency, into what does the e…[Read more]

    • I just made a simpel remark that we should regard the contribution from (and to) the ether. What do you say about that?
      John-Erik

  • John-Erik Persson posted an update in the group Group logo of GravityGravity 1 year ago

    Cornelis
    Do not be upset just because we have different opinions. That difference is the motivation for discussion. It is my post, and the best you can do is to declare where you can find a paradox.
    Regards from
    John-Erik

  • Cornelis
    It is not possible to go backwards in time. Therefore many scientists, like you, refuse to go backwards in history. ‘Critical thinking’ means to search for theoretical errors as we always should do (Feynman). To only look forwards is a kind of blindness. The wave or particle confusion is an example on that. We have yet to exclude all…[Read more]

    • John-Erik,
      Yes you can’t travel backward in time, but like most comments made by you they are only distraction from the issue at hand.
      Critical thinking does not imply that past theories be blindly accepted “liked” but rather that they meet the test of logic and are confirmed compatible with observations.
      I believe I have made my point to those…[Read more]

    • John-Erik,
      Yes you can’t travel backward in time, but like most comments made by you they are only distraction from the issue at hand.
      Critical thinking does not imply that past theories be blindly accepted “liked” but rather that they meet the test of logic and are confirmed compatible with observations.
      I believe I have made my point to those…[Read more]

  • Cornelis
    It is not possible to go backwards in time. Therefore many scientists, like you, refuse to go backwards in history. ‘Critical thinking’ means to search for theoretical errors as we always should do (Feynman). To only look forwards is a kind of blindness. The wave or particle confusion is an example on that. We have yet to exclude all…[Read more]

  • Cornelis
    I like the 300 years old model by Fatio, although I must admit that I do not know so much Abou itt. I think that you are the only person in the world that knows that it is not tensionable.
    The earlier comments were mostly regarding the difference between the motion of light and the normal to the wave fronts. This means, in other words,…[Read more]

    • John-Erik,
      Like is not a widely recognized scientific method but it certainly makes anything believable.
      According to the Fatio model (later called Le Sage’s theory of gravitation), “any two material bodies partially shield each other from the impinging corpuscles, resulting in a net imbalance in the pressure exerted by the impact of corpuscles o…[Read more]

    • John-Erik,
      Like is not a widely recognized scientific method but it certainly makes anything believable.
      According to the Fatio model (later called Le Sage’s theory of gravitation), “any two material bodies partially shield each other from the impinging corpuscles, resulting in a net imbalance in the pressure exerted by the impact of corpuscles o…[Read more]

  • John-Erik Persson posted an update in the group Group logo of GravityGravity 1 year, 1 month ago

    Cornelis
    You find Hatch and Wang under scientists under the database page. The presentation by Hatch at the conference can be seen on the web page.
    If you take the vector sum of wave vector and ether wind you get the beam direction.
    If you take the vector sum of wave vector and only longitudinal component of the ether wind you get the ray…[Read more]

    • John-Erik,
      So we are talking different articles by Hatch then. Irregardless as I said the correctness of Einstein’s theories will forever be open to interpretation and is of little concern. On the other hand the inability of transverse waves to propagate through a medium that is not tensionable is undisputed common knowledge and at the very l…[Read more]

  • John-Erik Persson posted an update in the group Group logo of GravityGravity 1 year, 1 month ago

    Cornelis
    Hatch has a clear statment in his CNPS 2016 contribution that GPS refutes SRT. It is in the title!
    The theory of relativity contains nothing and explains nothing. Fatio’s pushing gravity contains an ether containing particles and explains therefore more than nothing.
    I do not see what you mean by conflicts still remain. You must at least…[Read more]

    • John-Erik,
      Please be more specific a search for “Hatch” as a CNPS member results in “Sorry, no members were found.”. The article I quoted the title from by the title ”Conducting a Crucial Experiment of the Constancy of the Speed of Light Using GPS” was from the link provided by Akinbo Ojo in response to your article “Its About T…[Read more]

  • John-Erik Persson posted an update in the group Group logo of GravityGravity 1 year, 1 month ago

    Gravity people

    Hatch and Wang have proved by means of experiments from the GPS system that the theory of relativity is wrong. GPS works as though there is a fram that has a kind of priority. They have not dared to state that this frame has a physical reality. Perhaps the reason is that it would mean that our small planet is entraining the ether…[Read more]

    • John-Erik,
      I do not see that Hatch and Wang have disagreement with Relativity in their article, “”Conducting a Crucial Experiment of the Constancy of the Speed of Light Using GPS”.
      Perhaps you can point out how you interpret it to make such a claim. On the other hand ether wind theory which you say is supposed to explain speed of light fails to…[Read more]

  • John-Erik Persson posted an update in the group Group logo of AetherAether 1 year, 8 months ago

    There is no dilation of time: Light locked in between mirrors in a cavity has plane wave fronts always parallel to these mirrors in dependent of ether wind inside these wave fronts. This follows from the fact that light takes the fastest and not the shortest way between the mirrors. See more about this idea on the post ‘The Illusion of Dilation of…[Read more]

  • John-Erik Persson posted an update in the group Group logo of AetherAether 1 year, 9 months ago

    Stokes\’ mistake regarding transverse arm in MMX is important, See more details in ERRORS BEFORE EINSTEIN available at GSJournal under my name. Take a look.
    John-Erik

  • Maxwell’s brilliant idea that light is a wave motion and not a flow of particles had a negative side effect. The behavior of a wave front was not well understood. It was assumed that ah ether wind blowing inside a wave front could alter the orientation of the same wave front. Changing the orientation of a wave front demands some points on a wave…[Read more]

  • John-Erik Persson posted a new activity comment 2 years, 4 months ago

    Cornelis
    Yes I understand what you mean and that explains how you can avoid the opinion that I delivered. But nevertheles it is difficult for me to accept matter as waves only.
    Regards from
    John-Erik

  • John-Erik Persson posted an update in the group Group logo of AetherAether 2 years, 4 months ago

    Cornelis
    Thank you for this clarification. Our views are different at the lowest level. Nevertheless we can discuss our different starting points. In my opinion we need an ether and that ether shall explain propagation of gravity AND propagation of light. In my opinion Le Sage’s ether can explain both these two phenomena. In my opinion light is…[Read more]

    • John-Erik
      Do you understand my answer to your question? A solid does not penetrate planets, planets are highly structured wave patterns propagating through the a solid universe. In this type of aether there can be no relocateable parts only waves.

    • Cornelis
      Yes I understand what you mean and that explains how you can avoid the opinion that I delivered. But nevertheles it is difficult for me to accept matter as waves only.
      Regards from
      John-Erik

  • John-Erik Persson posted an update in the group Group logo of AetherAether 2 years, 4 months ago

    Cornelis
    Even a solid must have a state of motion or a speed. How can a solid solid penetrate planets and produce gravity inside them? You said that your view is different from mine but you gave no comments on what I havs said.
    John-Erik

    • John-Erik

      I was responding primarily to your question “HOW COME THAT ALL 160 members are silent regarding this important question?”. I wanted to acknowledge that I had looked over parts of your work but since our definitions of aether are quite different I did not feel gualified to fairly interpret or comment on your work. I do believe your…[Read more]

  • John-Erik Persson posted a new activity comment 2 years, 5 months ago

    Cornelis
    Excuse me for the confusing text. The computer did not work properly and I could not see what I was writing.
    If you are interested in my opinions you can find more detailed info at my CNPS page at
    naturalphilosophy.org/site/johnerikpersson
    and also at myarticles sent in as pdf files
    John-Erik

  • John-Erik Persson posted a new activity comment 2 years, 5 months ago

    Cornelis. What do you mean by point? Ether is Ether Ether particles are consumed by matter all over matter. For bodies of the size of Sun Earth and Moon only about between one particle of thousand and on of each million is absorbed by bodies of this size.So gravity is not increase of arriving particles but an decrease of the number pf particles…[Read more]

  • John-Erik Persson posted an update in the group Group logo of AetherAether 2 years, 5 months ago

    Everybody
    I have started 2 topics in this group. The first said that as a reaction to Maxwell’s ether Stokes made an error before Einstein in stating that an ether wind inside a wave front could change the orientation of the same wave front. leading to an effect of ether wind in transverse arm in MMX. I have given evidence to the fact that…[Read more]

  • Load More
Skip to toolbar