"The Existence of an Ether" by Carl F. Krafft | Round Robin [Vol. 11, No. 3, Sept-Oct 1955]

THE EXISTENCE OF AN ETHER

by C. F. Krafft
(Author of The Ether and its Vortices, etc.)
(Sept-Oct 1955 Round Robin)

In a recent issue of the Round Robin there was a report of a Mark Probert seance which dealt with the existence of an ether. Although the reasoning was not very clear to me, still the conclusions seemed to be correct. The existence of an ether is not a question that can be answered by a simple "yes" or "no", and when I stated in my book on "The Ether and its Vortices" that there can hardly be any question as to the existence of an ether, I meant a dynamic or turbulent ether and not the quiescent stationary ether of the 19th century.

The Michelson-Morley experiment of 1887 did not disprove the existence of any and every ether, but only of a quiescent ether that is stationary relative to the solar system, and which would produce an ether drift of sufficient magnitude to show up in the experiment. The correct explanation for the Michelson-Morley experiment seems to have been given by George Stokes, who considered the ether as being carried along by the earth‘s gravitational field; but Stokes theory was rejected by the physics profession on the ground that it was contradicted by astronomical aberration. It seems, however, that astronomical aberration does not necessarily disprove Stokes' theory, because even if the ether adjacent to the earth is carried along by the earth's gravitational field, there would still be astronomical aberration further out in space.

Since the gravitational field of the earth is tied up with that of the sun, it would be more correct to speak of the combined gravitation: field of the earth and the sun, and such a combined field would still be stationary relative to the earth, in complete agreement with the M.M. experiment.

There still remains to be considered, however, the rotation of the earth on its axis. Since the earth's axis is approximately perpendicular to the plane of its orbit about the sun, it necessarily follows that since the earth's gravitational field remains tied up with that of the sun, the ether around the earth cannot partake of the rotation of the earth on its axis, but should produce an ether drift of about one-third of a mile per second at the equator, and less elsewhere. That such an ether drift actually exists was proved by the Michelson-Gale experiment in 1925, further details of which will be found in my book.

The finite velocity of light proves that the ether must have mass and inertia, but how is that possible with an ether which is not granular or corpuscular? In my book I advanced the proposition that inertia is really a property of motion rather than a property of matter, because motion without inertia would be a contradiction in terms. Inertia merely means continuity of motion, and without continuity there could not be any motion. Continuity must be either toward and from infinity [14] or around in a circle or other closed path, and wherever it is in a closed path it will appear as localized inertia, which is just another name for mass. With mass thus accounted for, it is not difficult to account for matter, because matter is nothing but a highly concentrated form of localized mass. Less concentrated forms of localized mass are electric and magnetic fields, but this does not include the gravitational field, which is something very different.

Similar considerations are also applicable to the ether. Any ether which actually exists must have mass and inertia, because an ether without mass and inertia is inconceivable. If, however, we are correct in our interpretation of mass and inertia as properties of motion, then it necessarily follows that the only kind of ether which can conceivably exist is a dynamic or turbulent ether. The perfectly quiescient and stagnant ether of the 19th century was therefore a theoretical impossibility.

The concept of motion forms an adequate basis for everything in nature, provided we are not too inquisitive as to what it is that moves. We do not need to let this difficulty embarrass us, however, because physicists in dealing with wave mechanics have been confronted with the same difficulty, but have not been seriously deterred thereby. It seems to be the general opinion among 20th century physicists that the concept of motion is complete in itself, even in the apparent absence of anything that moves. On the other hand the 19th century physicists would have pronounced such a view untenable.

It seems that the solution of this problem is to be found in a compromise between the 19th and 20th century viewpoints. Motion with out anything that moves is indeed inconceivable, but if We assume that the world has always existed and never had any beginning, then there never was a time when we would have been confronted with any such difficulty. The world at any instant is adequately accounted for by considering it as the result of the world at the instant immediately preceding. Since continuity is a necessary property of motion, the existence of an ether in motion at the present instant necessarily presupposes the existence of a similar ether in motion at the instant immediately preceding, and wherever there is an ether in motion there must also be mass by virtue of that motion.

-end-

"The Ether and Its Vortices", by C.F. Krafft, referred to above, is a 65-page booklet, with diagrams and bibliography, and may be obtained at the nominal price of $1.00 from the author, at Annandale, Va. Also obtainable from all larger public and college libraries. Contains chapters on The Hydromechanical Ether -- Subatomic Vortices -- The Three Elementary Forces -- The Origin of Consciousness -- The New Vortex Atoms -- Radioactivity and Atomic Fission -- The Nuclear Theory Disproved -- Periodic Table of the Elements.

Continue with "Further Evidence of an Ether"

THE EXISTENCE OF AN ETHER

Further Reading