Re: The most ridiculous science mistake in history.

On 03/30/2024 08:45 AM, Volney wrote:

On 3/27/2024 3:10 PM, Aether Regained wrote:

Volney:

On 3/27/2024 8:36 AM, Aether Regained wrote:

>

This argument is unassailable from the 1905 point of view, but at the
present time it needs modification, because we have to apply quantum
mechanics to the aether.

>
QM has no need for an aether and is incompatible with one.
>
[snip bla bla bla]

>
[snip bla bla bla]!!!
>
I wonder whether you realize that you are responding to P. A. M. Dirac.
Go check out who that is on wikipedia.
>
Everything within the line of hashes ### is a full reproduction of
Dirac's 1951 Note/Letter to the Nature Journal, titled:
>
"Is there an Aether?"
>
https://doi.org/10.1038/168906a0
>
and here is Schrödinger's commentary on Dirac's aether electrodynamics.
>
https://www.nature.com/articles/169538a0.pdf
>
I hope you don't need an introduction to who Schrödinger is.
>

I didn't see that that was Dirac. It sounded too kooky. Looking into
that, I see L. Infeld responded to Dirac's letter essentially stating an
aether was not necessarily required.
>
Dirac also didn't develop this concept into a theory. I don't know
whether he realized it may be false or was just unable to pursue the idea.

There was a really good video of Dirac in Italy,
explaining some things.
He said that most physicists were followers and that
it would take someone very brave to reconcile with
de Broglie and company the particle/wave duality.
It was discussed here on sci.math, you can probably find
it from searching sci.physics.relativity for my posts
and looking for "Dirac" and "de Broglie".
I went to review it and noticed it had been removed.
It's a continuum mechanics, ....