Albert Einstein was born March 14, 1879, and published his groundbreaking theories in physics at a fairly young age of 26. His first wife, Mileva Marić Einstein-Marity, may have had some involvement with the work. Letters suggest she chose to not include her name on the papers in order to support his career in hope that he would be able to find work so they would be able to afford to get married. He agreed in the eventual divorce settlement to give her any money awarded to him for a Nobel Prize (there had been expectations he would be given one). (scientificamerican)
*This continues from the post Physics took a wrong turn in 1887; and the meaning of Null.
*Tost initially published March 14, 2020 on earth-ocean.info.
Special relativity is not the research for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1921 but he did write to Mileva about it: “But nobody made it clearer than Albert Einstein himself that they collaborated on special relativity when he wrote to Mileva on 27 March 1901: “How happy and proud I will be when the two of us together will have brought our work on relative motion to a victorious conclusion.”” They were able to marry in 1903 and his five important papers were all published within a short time span in 1905. The first one on the photoelectric effect was the article for which he was awarded a Nobel Prize in 1921. (scientificamerican)
The theory of relativity was not considered to be supported with enough physical proof possibly. Measurements of a solar eclipse were considered support however the data may have been manipulated somewhat. (theguardian)
“Problems cannot be solved at the same level of thinking that created them.” – Albert Einstein
Quantum effects have been supported by modern research, and quantum computing.
The Special Relativity equation, E = MC squared, is not in question due to the work proving the theory that there is an ether type of energy throughout the universe. It is the theory of General Relativity, based on the idea that space is empty that is in question.
The theory of relativity has two parts. (1) Special Relativity involves physics in the absence of gravity and (2) General relativity is an explanation of gravity and how it relates to other forces in nature. The General Relativity theory would be affected because it is based on the premise that space is empty and motionless and suggests gravity is due to the attraction of large objects for other objects. James DeMeo walks us through the data that shows there is a drag effect that is roughly equal to the amount of energy it takes for a rocket to leave our atmosphere. This drag effect that rockets need to overcome suggests that space is not empty or motionless and that gravity is due in part to the motion of ether around planets and other astral objects.
The equation E = MC squared would remain accurate in the absence of gravity and to calculate the Energy required to move something when ether is present would need us to add a factor to the equation to represent the local speed of the ether drag effect. The extra energy to leave the atmosphere around a planet is like the extra energy it takes to swim against a current or across a current in a river instead of swimming with the current. It takes more energy to swim sideways in the current, across the river, and even more energy to swim upstream, against the current.
- Relative Velocity – swimmer crossing a river : ExamSolutions, (Youtube). A math lesson on how swim across a river – you may need a life jacket.
The drag effect of the ether’s movement would vary depending on the location and date. Seasonal changes affect the strength, and higher altitude can strengthen the measurable rate of ether flow, while enclosing structures, like a cement basement, can dampen the strength of the current.
Hypothetically if we were traveling through space and visiting other planets and galaxies and wanted to know the drag effect of the local ether then we would need to measure it – which could be possible with the machines that have been created to study it here on Earth. Modifications might be needed – but that is science, try something, measure it, modify it slightly, try again, measure it, modify it, repeat as needed.
Science is like a relay race with scientists passing the baton of knowledge on to others to carry it forward a little farther. Isaac Newton said it well: “If I have seen further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants.” An apple fell on his head, and he thought of the idea of gravity, or so the story goes. Galileo may have been one of the giants credited by Isaac Newton, as Newton was born in 1642, the year that Galileo died while still under house-arrest for a “strong suspicion of heresy.” The Catholic Church was not pleased with the idea that our planet might revolve around the sun instead of the other way around. (newsroom.ucla.edu) The Vatican has more recently (1992) stated that Galileo was correct. (newscientis.com)
Will we have to wait 359 years before Michelson and Morley’s null result will be properly understood as being simply a negative hypothesis regarding the strength of the ether’s drag effect, rather than a result of zero drag, zero motion? The theory that the universe is full of an energy form was the widely accepted theory for centuries in just slight variations regarding motion or lack of motion. Albert Einstein and Mileva’s theory of relativity went against the centuries long belief that something is present throughout space rather than it being a complete void. The math about gravity that rules out any other motion in the universe requires complexity and ignoring anomalies such as Spiral Nebulae that visually display a sense of motion being present in outer space. Other anomalies in space images and expected light signatures also conflict with the idea of space being a void.
Vincent Van Gogh probably knew what water looks like as it flows and spirals in tiny whirl pools – and say it in the sky too.
Why does a nutritionist care about quantum physics?
Because our bodies are made out of atoms and any Laws of Physics about atoms are going to hold true for all types of atoms – or it isn’t much of a Law is it? Astrophysicists are used to big numbers, biophysicists need to stand up for little numbers. Chlorophyll is the green pigment that helps plants convert the sun’s energy into stored sugar – the reaction seems to involve quantum effects. (the-scientist.com)
Our health depends on our better understanding the biophysics of health. We are electrical beings with approximately 70% water content and both the electrons and protons of water molecules may be shared at quantum speed. Quantum motion could increase the speed of chemical reactions within our bodies, and increase the strength of effects similar to, (but not quite the same as), surface tension which is how water droplets can stay in a droplet form. Our health may depend on our internal structures retaining water molecules in an organized way, rather than becoming dehydrated or edematous (like swollen ankles during pregnancy).
An article with a review of current theories and research that support the idea of quantum effects in biology suggests that part of the controversy over the idea has to do with how the size of the effects could be large enough to help health, and that the mechanical, traditional theories also can explain how the body works, (the-scientist.com), – my suggestion that includes both of those points is redundancy of design – nature seems to support life by having a lot of work-arounds – a lot of ways to achieve a goal that supports life. Life is a miracle and it keeps going through a lot of breakdowns. Our bodies may be most efficient when quantum effects are possible and simply less efficient, possibly more prone to illness or dysfunction when quantum effects are disrupted or not possible for soe reason.
Math is fun, how about some more math?
- Even if the quantum effects in human biology are small, -Qe-,
- when you multiply that by every cell in the body, -c-, ~ 30-40 trillion cells (medicalnewstoday);
- and every carbon bond broken in the Krebs Cycle, -cb- ~ 120 grams of glucose used daily by one nerve cell (which tend to use more than average, but let’s keep going), (nature.com), with 6 carbon bonds per molecule of glucose and 6.022 ×1023 molecules of glucose per mole, (socratic.org), and 180.156 grams of glucose/mole (let’s simplify this info ~ a half mole of glucose used per cell per day, so 90 grams of glucose would have 1/2(6.022 x 10 23rd) molecules of glucose which would each have 6 carbon bonds that might be affected by quantum physics during the Krebs/Citric Acid Cycle), (sciencetrends.com); {1/2(6.022 x 10 23rd)6} = 18.66 x 10 23rd
- [within all of the energy producing mitochondria in each cell, -m- ~1000-2000-,]*we don’t need this part because the grams of glucose number was per cell so that is already including an estimate of the activity of all of the cell’s mitochondria.
- then the amount of energy saved by quantum effects for a human body might become more significant ->
- Qe * c * cb = energy savings due to Quantum effects multiplied times 35 trillion cells in a human body multiplied times 18.66 x 10 23rd glucose carbon bonds
- = __tiny quantum effect energy savings times 35,000,000,000,000 times 1,866,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 = ___tiny quantum effect energy savings times (35 x 10 12th) times (18.66 x 10 23rd)
- = ___tiny quantum effect energy savings times (653.1 x 10 35th).
Six with thirty seven zeros is a big number, so even if the quantum energy saves only a small amount of energy per carbon bond of glucose it adds up when it is multiplied by the carbon bonds of glucose used for a day’s energy needs within all of the cells in the body -> 65,310,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 carbon bonds of glucose energy used each day (roughly).
Math is fun, it has been 133 years since the 1887 ether experiment that was falsely claimed to have a zero result rather than smaller than expected result. How long will humanity and physicists take before recognizing that the universe is not an empty space and that the ether theory had to be modified but was on the right track?
- The book to read: The Dynamic Ether of Cosmic Space: Correcting a Major Error in Modern Science, – September 18, 2019, by James DeMeo, (Amazon.com)
Disclaimer: This information is provided for educational purposes within the guidelines of Fair Use.
