Where in Einstein's 45000 papers does it say that the Aether theory was Invalidated as non existing?
463605
Einstein didn't prove that aether didn't exist, that was discovered in other experiments. Einstein came up with the idea of space time, which is considered aether's replacement
1043582
M-Theory\n\nThere are an infinite number of alternate realities which are integrating. Space-time distortions are occuring. For those who are clear, the observation and experience of these happenings is breathtaking. For others who are experiencing 'blindly' - to be 'out of phase' will cause confusion and fear.\n\nM-Theory unites the 5 superstring theories. According to M-Theory there are 11 spacial dimensions that exist in parallel with our physical reality. That goes along with the theory of 12 or 12 around 1 yet M-theory is not complete as all expands in reality and consciousness.\n\n      M-theory (sometimes also called U-theory) is a theory of physics, which is believed to incorporate and generalize the various superstring theories. Edward Witten proposed the existence of this physical model at a conference at USC in 1995, explaining a number of previously observed dualities and sparking a flurry of new research in string theory.\n\n      What does M stand for?\n\n      When Witten named M-theory, he did not specify what the "M" stood for, presumably because he did not feel he had the right to name a theory which he had not been able to fully describe. According to Witten himself, "'M' stands for 'Magic,' 'Mystery' or 'Membrane,' depending on your taste." Also suggested, has been 'Matrix' and 'Mother of all theories'. Cynics have noted that the M might be an upside down "W", standing for Witten. Others have suggested that for now, the "M" in M-theory should stand for Missing or Murky.\n\n      The name M-theory is slightly ambiguous. It can be used to refer to both the particular eleven-dimensional theory which Witten first proposed, or it can be used to refer to a kind of Uber theory which looks in various limits like the various string theories. Ashoke Sen has suggested that more general theory could go by the name U-theory, which might stand for Ur, or Uber, or Ultimate, or Underlying, or perhaps Unified. (It might also stand for U-duality, which is both a reference to Sen's own work and a kind of particle physics pun.) M-theory in the following descriptions refers to the more general theory, and will be specified when used in its more limited sense.\n\nIf you recall, I have written that the 'M' and the 'W' reverse at the end of time. Some see it as Man and Woman. They will rotate 180 [9] degrees - a 'U'. The 'M' and the 'W' can also be brought together - their ends meeting - then rotated 90 [9] degrees to form an hourglass. The possibilities are endless and will be studied until the end of time.\n\n      M-theory is not complete. It can be applied in many situations (usually by exploiting string theoretic dualities), but the full theory is not yet known. The theory of electromagnetism was also in such a state in the mid-19th century. There were separate theories for electricity and magnetism, and although they were known to be related, it was not clear until Maxwell published his equations just what the relationship was. Witten has suggested that a general formulation will probably require the development of new mathematical language.\n\n      It was shown in the early 1990s that the various superstring theories were related by dualities, which allowed physicists to relate the description of an object in one string theory to the description of a different object in another theory. These relationships imply that each of the string theories is a different aspect of a single underlying theory, which has been named "M-theory".\n\n      More from Wikipedia \n\nM-Theory was the underlying theme in the film, What the Bleep!\n\nM-Theory by George Minaya\n\nThe merging of dimensions integrates your consciousness and expands your awareness to the next level of understanding which will be followed by the merging of your soul aspects with other realities in which it experien
176712
Einstein-"Time is an Illusion, although persistent still just an illusion." \n\nwhat he is talking about is that physical unverse exists in a single infinitesible moment just as much as it does over the span of a million years. Time presents our senses with the concepts of mass and form. Time only exists so that we may perceive the universe and of course if we could not perceive the universe it would not really exist would it? Do you beleive in God now?
1110551
The term "Aether" in the context of the Michelson-Morley experiment actually means "preferred reference frame of the universe" - it was thought that light if the earth were traveling with some speed (call it v) with respect to the preferred reference frame, then the light would actually travel through the preferred reference frame with a speed c + v. \n\nMichelson-Morley demonstrated that there is no preferred reference frame - no "aether" so to speak.\n\n"Aether" in that context is a fixed "background" of the universe against which the earth, sun, stars, etc. were all thought to be moving. Whether or not "aether" consisted of something was not important to the Michelson-Morley experiment. Certainly for our small minds it is easier to think of a preferred reference frame as a substance or medium that the earth, sun, stars, etc. were moving through, but it was not necessary for the purposes of the experiment.
895176
Eather is debunked idea proven to not exist experimentally. Michelson-Morley experiment showed eather can't exists. I think dark matter is really something else. But it comes into play some role in Einstein's struggle to deal with expanding universe which he originally believed was static and unchanging.\n\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson-Morley_experiment
442904
Yes it is true. It proved that light doesn't need any medium to travel and thus no such thing called aether exists.
55675
In 1931, P. A. M. Dirac suggested that the existence of magnetic monopoles would explain the quantization of electric charge, the fact that it appears only in units of the electronic charge e (fractional charges appear in certain theories, but are not observed in nature). This article is not about these monopoles, so if the reader should refer to Jackson if interested in them, or to the article Energy Loss of Charged Particles, where the stopping of Dirac monopoles by matter is discussed. Here we will talk about magnetic charges, or isolated poles, or monopoles as an aid in understanding electricity and magnetism by analogy between electric and magnetic fields. We'll also discuss the systems of electromagnetic units, especially those things not appearing in current texts, and how it all hangs together.\n\nThe magnetic field of the earth does not exceed about 1 ørsted, which shows that there is no great amount of unbalanced magnetic charge in its makeup. In fact, isolated magnetic poles have never been observed, and are not accounted for in Maxwell's equations. Magnetic fields are all created by currents, either macroscopic ones or microscopic ones, just as electric fields are created by free or bound charges. Relativity indicates that E and B are the fundamental electromagnetic fields that describe the macroscopic interactions of electromagnetism and are associated in a field tensor that has different expressions in different inertial frames.\n\nThe original concept of electromagnetism was that of "action at a distance" evidenced by the mutual forces exerted by charges or currents at different locations on each other. Faraday's concept was that the influence was transmitted through a medium in which the charges or currents were immersed, and this concept was expressed mathematically by Maxwell, who based the theory on fields satisfying certain differential equations. A source charge created a field, which then acted upon the charge that was influenced. He searched in vain for a suitable medium, which became the famous "luminiferous ether" of pre-relativistic days, and for a suitable mechanism for the propagation of the influence. All attempts to detect the medium failed, and it was replaced by the concepts of relativity, in which there are still fields, but immaterial ones. This was at least a partial return to the earlier ideas, and the "reality" of electromagnetic fields can be a subject of discussion. It appears that the potentials are what travels at the speed of light, and the fields are derived from them. Whatever conclusion may be drawn, they do describe the physics very well indeed.\n\nIn the early days of Maxwell's theory, the equations D = κE and B = μH were thought of as relating a stress (E or H) to a strain (D or B). These four fields D, E, B and H were called displacement, electric intensity, induction and magnetic intensity, respectively. Their units were the familiar absolute electrostatic (esu) or absolute electromagnetic (emu) units. Practical workers, for their part, had arbitrarily defined units of electrical pressure and resistance, and from them derived the units of charge and current. The unit of electrical pressure was that of the Daniell cell, and that of resistance was a mercury column 1 sq. mm. in cross-section and 1 m long.\n\nIt was discovered, by an investigator named Giorgi, that by a certain choice of the units of mass, length and time quantities very close to the practical units could be brought into a consistent and absolute system of units. A consistent system of units is one in which the units are determined by the defining equations for the quantities, and not by arbitrary choice. An absolute system is one in which all units are derived from a set of basic units. The emu and esu were consistent absolute systems based on the centimeter-gram-second (cgs) mechanical units. Giorgi found that simply taking the meter-kilogram-second (mks) as fundam
401481
I suppose Michaelson might have continued to believe in aether simply because it was difficult for him to accept the idea of a wave that propagated through no medium. If so, probably because the idea was contrary to everything else he had observed of Nature. But I don't really want to suggest what was going on in someone else's mind. If everybody else negated it, (and I am not sure that was the case immediately) when Michaelson didn't then it might have been because they weren't so actively invested in the search for aether and so were not so attached to the idea of it existing. \n\nThis are purely *speculative* ideas of mine.
122905
Relativity says no such thing.  Where do you get taht from?
802641
Can there be any doubts? Aliens, of course. I want to know if Erich von Daniken is right when he says alien visitations have occurred in the ancient past.
1139045
They are not pseudo scientists. It was the Michelson/Morley experiment's result. \n\nSince Ether theory was scientifically accepted at the time, The object of the experiment was to measure the speed of light with the assumption that light travels through a medium called ether.\n\nWhen the experiment failed, Michelson and Morley thought that the equipment they built was not sensitive enough to see the phase change of the reflected light that can be used to calculate the speed.\n\nThey were not aware that their experiment was a big discovery in science that disprove the presence of ether in space.
486232
The universe is theorized to contain dark energy and dark matter. There have been some confirmation of it's existence but really just speculation at this point. The idea of dark matter had been identified by Einstein but it wasn't till the discovery that the universe is accelerating it's expansion and contains up to 70% more matter that the idea of dark matter and energy became serious areas of study. If you mean a vacuum to mean absence of air it is a vacuum but within that "vacuum" there definitely is matter.
216612
Stephen Hawking gives many theories abt the unverse in "a brief history of time". \n\nIf we accept the no boundaries preposition, ie the universe has no boundaries, neither in space nor in time, then there is no space for god anywhere.\n\nIf we accept the theory of multiple universes, ie there are a very large number of universes, and in each of them separate laws of physics apply, then God has gotta be out of the whole system, because how can he be in just one universe, and ignore the rest(unless each universe has its own god, but the how will they coordinate??)
690650
Some of Einstein's Ideas are already being rewritten. So, quoting him as an end-all to the question of anti-gravity really doesn't mean a whole lot. Newton's laws were rewritten after his time, as science learned more about itself. It's not unreasonable to assume that the same will occur in reguards to this taboo topic too. I remember seeing a video of a man who has come close, with a spinning top device. By itself, it weighs far too much to lift by hand. But, once it is set spinning, it could be lifted by a child. :)\n\nCurrent science is not an absolute. :) Don't give up hope!
855092
No.\n\nBefore Einstein physicists tried to explain the properties of light by assuming there was this fluid like medium (Aether) everywhere in the universe.\n\nEinstein showed that such assumptions could not explain observation. Instead he eventually introduced a new idea of space time, and explained gravity as curvature in space. The differences between space time and Aether are like night and day. In no ways does space time curvature resemble a fluid of any sorts. In fact they talk about two totally different things. Aether deals with the properties of light, space time curvature deals with the properties of gravity.
1151689
The Aether does not exist.\n\nThe Quantum Aether Dynamics Institue exists only to con the gullible and stupid out of money.\n\nPut your credit cards away and learn some real physics.
656628
Einstein didn't like the quantum impossibility to make exact predictions or the probabilistic reality that Quantum Mechanics postulates. He considered it an incomplete theory, he thought that quantum uncertainties where the result of incomplete knowledge and not a characteristic of the Universe. The EPR paradox is one of the aspects in which Relativity and Quantum Mechanics appear to contradict each other. There is a kind of particles that are called entangled particles in which a change in a characteristic in one of them immediately results in a change in the other. This apparently goes against Quantum Mechanics because it would be a way to lift Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle (we could measure the position of one of the particles and the momentum of the other). On the other hand, the existence of entangled particles means that there must be some way by which such particles trade information between them, because each of them knows what the other one is doing (and they know it instantly, which means they exchange information at infinite speed!) And this kind of "subatomic telepathy" was not something Einstein liked, since Relativity states that the speed of light is the maximum speed allowed in the Universe. Mysteries...