Aether (classical element): Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
[[Aristotle]] added ''aether'' to the system of the [[classical element]]s of [[Ionic school|Ionic]] [[Greek philosophy|philosophy]] as the "fifth element" (the ''[[quintessence]]''), on the principle that the four terrestrial elements were subject to change and moved naturally in straight lines while no change had been observed in the celestial regions and the heavenly bodies moved in circles. In Aristotle's system ''aether'' had no qualities (was neither hot, cold, wet, nor dry), was incapable of change (with the exception of change of place), and by its nature moved in circles.<ref>G. E. R. Lloyd, ''Aristotle: The Growth and Structure of his Thought'', Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Pr., 1968, pp. 133-139, ISBN 0-521-09456-9.</ref> Medieval scholastic philosophers granted ''aether'' changes of density, in which the bodies of the planets were considered to be denser than the medium which filled the rest of the universe.<ref>E. Grant, ''Planets, Stars, & Orbs: The Medieval Cosmos, 1200-1687'', Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Pr., 1994, pp. 422-428, ISBN 0-521-56509-X.</ref> [[Robert Fludd]] stated that the aether was of the character that it was "''subtler than light''". Fludd cites the [[3rd century]] view of [[Plotinus]], concerning the aether as penetrative and non-material.<ref>Robert Fludd, "Mosaical Philosophy". London, Humphrey Moseley, 1659. Pg 221.</ref> |
[[Aristotle]] added ''aether'' to the system of the [[classical element]]s of [[Ionic school|Ionic]] [[Greek philosophy|philosophy]] as the "fifth element" (the ''[[quintessence]]''), on the principle that the four terrestrial elements were subject to change and moved naturally in straight lines while no change had been observed in the celestial regions and the heavenly bodies moved in circles. In Aristotle's system ''aether'' had no qualities (was neither hot, cold, wet, nor dry), was incapable of change (with the exception of change of place), and by its nature moved in circles.<ref>G. E. R. Lloyd, ''Aristotle: The Growth and Structure of his Thought'', Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Pr., 1968, pp. 133-139, ISBN 0-521-09456-9.</ref> Medieval scholastic philosophers granted ''aether'' changes of density, in which the bodies of the planets were considered to be denser than the medium which filled the rest of the universe.<ref>E. Grant, ''Planets, Stars, & Orbs: The Medieval Cosmos, 1200-1687'', Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Pr., 1994, pp. 422-428, ISBN 0-521-56509-X.</ref> [[Robert Fludd]] stated that the aether was of the character that it was "''subtler than light''". Fludd cites the [[3rd century]] view of [[Plotinus]], concerning the aether as penetrative and non-material.<ref>Robert Fludd, "Mosaical Philosophy". London, Humphrey Moseley, 1659. Pg 221.</ref> |
||
In [[Wicca]], it is the unifying energy inherent in every living creature on the [[Earth|planet]], and in all four [[classical element|element]]s (earth, air, water, and fire) in nature |
In [[Wicca]], it is the unifying energy inherent in every living creature on the [[Earth|planet]], and in all four [[classical element|element]]s (earth, air, water, and fire) in nature<ref>Cunningham, Scott: "Wicca - A Guide for the Solitary Practitioner" 1988</ref> Essentially it is [[spirit]]: and [[soul]], the all-encompassing spirit energy of the [[Goddess]] and [[God]]. On the [[pentagram]], akasha is assigned to the fifth top point, and the "other" element.<ref>[http://www.witchvox.com/va/dt_va.html?a=usfl&c=basics&id=2870 Witchvox: Witch/Wiccan F.A.Q.s]</ref> |
||
==Legacy== |
==Legacy== |
||
Revision as of 00:38, 26 December 2006
- For other uses, see Aether (disambiguation).
| Classical elements |
|---|
Aether (also spelled ether) is a concept used in ancient and medieval science as a substance. The aether was believed to be the substance which filled the region of the universe above the terrestrial sphere. Aristotle included it as a fifth element distinct from the other four, Earth, Water, Air, and Fire. Aether was also called Quintessence (from quinta essentia, "fifth element"). Its Platonic solid was the Dodecahedron.
Mythological origins
The word aether (Template:Polytonic) in Homeric Greek means "pure, fresh air" or "clear sky", imagined in Greek mythology to be the pure essence where the gods lived and which they breathed, analogous to the aer breathed by mortals (also personified as a deity, Aether, the son of Erebus and Nyx). It corresponds to the concept of akasha in Hindu philosophy. It is related to Template:Polytonic "to incinerate"[1], also intransitive "to burn, to shine" (related is the name Aithiopes (Ethiopians), meaning "people with a burnt (black) visage". See also Empyrean.
Fifth element
Aristotle added aether to the system of the classical elements of Ionic philosophy as the "fifth element" (the quintessence), on the principle that the four terrestrial elements were subject to change and moved naturally in straight lines while no change had been observed in the celestial regions and the heavenly bodies moved in circles. In Aristotle's system aether had no qualities (was neither hot, cold, wet, nor dry), was incapable of change (with the exception of change of place), and by its nature moved in circles.[2] Medieval scholastic philosophers granted aether changes of density, in which the bodies of the planets were considered to be denser than the medium which filled the rest of the universe.[3] Robert Fludd stated that the aether was of the character that it was "subtler than light". Fludd cites the 3rd century view of Plotinus, concerning the aether as penetrative and non-material.[4]
In Wicca, it is the unifying energy inherent in every living creature on the planet, and in all four elements (earth, air, water, and fire) in nature[5] Essentially it is spirit: and soul, the all-encompassing spirit energy of the Goddess and God. On the pentagram, akasha is assigned to the fifth top point, and the "other" element.[6]
Legacy
Modern understanding of electromagnetism, including Einstein's particle theory of light and various scientific experiments of general relativity, has removed the need for a substance like aether to fill the otherwise empty parts of the universe. Newton's and Maxwell's aether model (the latter being a "classic static aether") were both developed from this classical element. However, the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment led (from 1887 onwards) to the decline of an aether model's wide acceptance. Albert Einstein, in an interpretation he offered for his theory of special relativity, dismissed it, as per Occam's razor; and, though he later reinstated a logical need for an aether in a commentary on his theory of general relativity, most modern theories do not include this classical element.
However, today, the Michelson-Morley experiment is known to have been based on erroneous calculations.
Michelson and Morley used an over simplified description and failed to notice that their calculation is not compatible with their own hypothesis that light is traveling at a constant velocity in all frames. During the last century, the Michelson-Morley equations have been used without realizing that two essential fundamental phenomena are missing in the Michelson-Morley demonstration. The velocity of the mirror must be taken into account to calculate the angle of reflection of light. Using the Huygens principle, the angle of reflection of light on a moving mirror is a function of the velocity of the mirror. This has been ignored in the Michelson-Morley calculation. Also, due to the transverse direction of the moving frame, light does not enter in the instrument at 90 degrees as assumed in the Michelson-Morley experiment. The basic idea suggested by Michelson-Morley to test the variance of space-time, using a comparison between the times taken by light to travel in the parallel direction with respect to a transverse direction is very attractive. However, the usual predictions are not valid, because of those two classical secondary phenomena, which have not been taken into account. When these overlooked phenomena are taken into account, we see that a null result, in the Michelson-Morley experiment, is the natural consequence, resulting from the assumption of an absolute frame of reference and Galilean transformations. On the contrary, a shift of the interference fringes would be required in order to support Einstein’s relativity. Therefore, for the last century, the relativity theory has been based on a misleading calculation.
References
- ^ Pokorny, Julius (1959). Indogermanisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch, s.v. ai-dh-.
- ^ G. E. R. Lloyd, Aristotle: The Growth and Structure of his Thought, Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Pr., 1968, pp. 133-139, ISBN 0-521-09456-9.
- ^ E. Grant, Planets, Stars, & Orbs: The Medieval Cosmos, 1200-1687, Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Pr., 1994, pp. 422-428, ISBN 0-521-56509-X.
- ^ Robert Fludd, "Mosaical Philosophy". London, Humphrey Moseley, 1659. Pg 221.
- ^ Cunningham, Scott: "Wicca - A Guide for the Solitary Practitioner" 1988
- ^ Witchvox: Witch/Wiccan F.A.Q.s
General
- FAQ - The Ancient Elements of Nature Ancient proto-scientific conceptualisations of the domain of nature into its constituent elements ... Earth, Water, Air, Fire and the Aether.