Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #518971

What of this ether?

Show all headers | View raw

"What of this ether?" I queried.

"It is a necessity in science, but intangible, undemonstrated, unknown, 
and wholly theoretical. It is accepted as an existing fluid by 
scientists, because human theory can not conceive of a substance capable 
of, or explain how a substance can be capable of affecting a separate 
body unless there is an intermediate medium to convey force impressions. 
Hence to material substances Aristotle added (or at least made 
conspicuous) a speculative ether that, he assumed, pervades all space, 
and all material bodies as well, in order to account for the passage of 
heat and light to and from the sun, stars, and planets."

"Explain further," I requested.

"To conceive of such an entity we must imagine a material that is more 
evanescent than any known gas, even in its most diffused condition. It 
must combine the solidity of the most perfect conductor of heat 
(exceeding any known body in this respect to an infinite degree), with 
the transparency of an absolute vacuum. It must neither create friction 
by contact with any substance, nor possess attraction for matter; must
neither possess weight (and yet carry the force that produces weight), 
nor respond to the influence of any chemical agent, or exhibit itself to 
any optical instrument. It must be invisible, and yet carry the force 
that produces the sensation of sight. It must be of such a nature that 
it can not, according to our philosophy, affect the corpuscles of 
earthly substances while permeating them without contact or friction, 
and yet, as a scientific incongruity, it must act so readily on physical 
bodies as to convey to the material eye the sensation of sight, and from 
the sun to creatures on distant planets it must carry the heat force, 
thus giving rise to the sensation of warmth. Through this medium, yet 
without sensible contact with it, worlds must move, and planetary 
systems revolve, cutting and piercing it in every direction, without 
loss of momentum. And yet, as I have said, this ether must be in such 
close contact as to convey to them the essence that warms the universe, 
lights the universe, and must supply the attractive bonds that hold the 
stellar worlds in position. A nothing in itself, so far as man's senses 
indicate, the ether of space must be denser than iridium, more mobile 
than any known liquid, and stronger than the finest steel."

"I can not conceive of such an entity," I replied.

"No; neither can any man, for the theory is irrational, and can not be 
supported by comparison with laws known to man, but the conception is 
nevertheless a primary necessity in scientific study. Can man, by any 
rational theory, combine a vacuum and a substance, and create a result 
that is neither material nor vacuity, neither something nor nothing, and 
yet an intensified all; being more attenuated than the most perfect of 
known vacuums, and a conductor better than the densest metal? This we do 
when we attempt to describe the scientists’ all-pervading ether of 
space, and to account for its influence on matter. This hypothetical 
ether is, for want of a better theory of causes, as supreme in 
philosophy to-day as the alkahest of the talented old alchemist Van 
Helmont was in former times, a universal spirit that exists in 
conception; and yet does not exist in perception, and of which modern 
science knows as little as its speculative promulgator, Aristotle, did. 
We who pride ourselves on our exact science, smile at some of 
Aristotle's statements in other directions, for science has disproved 
them, and yet necessity forces us to accept this illogical ether 
speculation, which is, perhaps, the most unreasonable of all theories. 
Did not this Greek philosopher also gravely assert that the lion has but 
one vertebra in his neck; that the breath of man enters the heart; that 
the back of the head is empty, and that man has but eight ribs?"

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

What of this ether? gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-09-04 17:58 -0500
  Re: What of this ether? dobri karagorgov <dobrikarate.gov@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 16:20 -0700
  Re: What of this ether? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2015-09-04 16:45 -0700
    Re: What of this ether? dobri karagorgov <dobrikarate.gov@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 16:57 -0700
      Re: What of this ether? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2015-09-06 15:03 -0700
    Re: What of this ether? "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 11:18 -0700
      Re: What of this ether? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2015-09-06 12:11 -0700
      Re: What of this ether? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2015-09-06 15:04 -0700
        Re: What of this ether? HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 05:03 -0400
  aether is the spacve between the atoms of the vacuum (relative, not pascalian noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 17:03 -0700
  What of this ether? john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 18:05 -0700
    Re: What of this ether? HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 06:48 -0400

csiph-web