Relativity and the Coordinate System



We must, therefore, give up the analogy between sound and light waves and turn to the second possibility: that all matter moves through the ether, which takes no part whatever in the motion. This means that we assume the existence of a sea of ether with all c.s. resting in it, or moving relative to it. 


I think that the analogy between sound and light waves is valid once we view the phenomena with some understanding of the differences in their Disturbance Levels.

Matter appears to move through ether because the two exist at entirely different Disturbance Levels.

Forward motion of the disturbance is many orders of magnitude higher at the level of ether (DL50), than at the level of matter (DL100). On the other hand, internal agitation is many orders of magnitude higher at DL100, than at DL50. These two levels hardly contribute  to each other in terms of either motion or agitation.

Ether is simply there in the background of matter.

The actual background is formed by space at DL0. We may then view all phenomena  as follows.

  1. Light wave or Ether at DL50.

  2. Sound wave or Matter at DL100

There is confusion because we are assuming our Coordinate System at DL100. From this coordinate system we assume the speed of light to be a constant at 3 x 108 m/s. It makes better sense to use DL0 as the basis of the Coordinate System. Then we can properly evaluate the relationship between the disturbance levels of ether and matter.

The present Coordinate System is “matter-centric” because it is based on our perception at the level of matter. This is similar to the pre-Galileo “earth-centric” view of the universe.


Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.


  • Chris Thompson  On March 19, 2014 at 6:08 PM

    At the root of these questions, I cannot understand whether light is travelling, or whether light is a form of energy which is inducing a disturbance in what we cannot see.

    I am trying to relate this to something more familiar such as how heat energy is transmitted by conduction, convection, or radiation but find my understanding stall.

    As an energetic photon particle travelling, light could be said to be convected.

    As a wave light could be said to radiate, but what does it mean to “radiate?” Radiation seems to be what we are trying to visualize with the disturbance of space hypothesis.

    Optic-fiber seems to conduct light. And yet it doesn’t. Conduction of electrical energy through metal conductors relies on constant induction at one end to shove electrons out the other end. One particle pushes upon the next. Light doesn’t seem to behave this way as a pulse of light energy will continue to travel down an optic fiber without being continually pushed from the emanation point. How is it that light continues on its way? Why does it’s inertia seem to be present without any or without much mass?

    The way in which light defies analogy gives me to feel inadequate. Feynman said that QM is not like anything else and so we have to put away our extant analogies.


    • vinaire  On March 19, 2014 at 6:27 PM

      There is ether. I am working through that hypothesis.


%d bloggers like this: