This post is motivated by recent essay "What Is Science" of Mrs. Helen Quinn (former president of the APS), which was published in the July 2009 issue of Physics Today (via ZapperZ) and discussed here and which pregnantly distinguishes subject of science from philosophy by single sentence:
"Religion and philosophy are interested in reasons and purposes, but science cares only about mechanisms."
Such definition has a deep meaning in AWT, because contemporary science is based on consecutive logics of formal math, which is strictly atemporal, which effectively means, that this logics can be reproduced any time without change. This gives math the power of general language for logical and exact communication. We cannot define and share our ideas exactly, until we are express them in predicate logics and symbolic language of formal math (Feynman: "Shut up and calculate!"). But from Gödel theoremsfollows, even the most strict / limited axiomatic system can lead to uncertain conclusions about reality and this finding has a good meaning in implicate geometry of AWT.
From more general perspective formal view remains quite limited, because it operates in space dimension only, not time dimension and consecutive logics is strictly single time arrow based. So we can call the science "a philosophy of locality" or "atemporal philosophy", which leads to sort of conceptual opportunism or even hypocrisy, because due its strictly local character their proponents often didn't realize, their stance changes in time and/or it doesn't fit exactly their well minded, but more general ideas due the lack of personal feedback, which always requires wider, nonlocal perspective. Just because our mind can operate in wider concept, we can ask for mechanism in time dimension, so we can even ask "philosophical" questions about reasons and consequences and these questions even remains fully motivated from fractally nested perspective of implicate order. The question "WHY?" about causality isn't less important here, then the descriptive question "HOW?"
In AWT the interactions along time dimensions leads to quantum fuzziness and chaos on both small scale of details, both on large scale (the fuzziness of vague answers about very general questions) and this character can be modeled by spreading of waves at water surface. Therefore the fuzzy character of philosophy is quite predictable and it goes as the price for its universality - it's not a manifestation of intellectual laziness or incompetence of philosophers or something similar.
Therefore from AWT follows, the excessive usage of strictly formal approach leads to fuzziness at small scale (extensive landscapes of string theory and quantum gravity solutions as an example) and to separation from reality in similar way, like overly philosophical approach. A formally thinking theorist cannot explain things in intuitive way even if such explanation becomes quite simple (for example explanation of Lorentz invariance or string concept by density fluctuations of particle environment). In Weinberg's essay it is explained, why the main doctrine of positivism is wrong - if taken strictly - and why it has slowed down science in the past. And vice-versa: a philosophical mind cannot postulate formal description of phenomena even at the case, such description becomes quite simple (the derivation of parabolic equation of free fall as an example).
Both approaches have their predictability power, therefore the strategy of highest fitness from evolutionary perspective is usually based on balanced equilibrium of both intuitive, both formal approach, while the intuitive approach usually goes first and the formal one finalizes intuitive ideas in reproducible manner, which can be exchanged freely without lost of information.
Note the close connection of icosahedral water clusters to sacred geometry of five elements, where the icosahedron shape is assigned just to water element, which could mean, vedic authors have general information about five-fold structure of fluids, the structure of glass and water clusters in particular.
Interesting aspect of quantum behavior of water clusters is their shape memory, which originates from quantum mirage phenomena. The conformal change of shape in particular place of cluster surface is followed by redistribution of charge density, so that the molecules of water are attached/removed to cluster from opposite side in such a way, the original cluster shape is retained like of piece plasticine, although it undergoes rapid Brownian motion as a whole. In AWT analogous mechanism keeps the shape of particles during their travel through vacuum foam.
From the above reasons, each water cluster propagates through density fluctuations of water like solid body of much large effective mass, then the single water molecule - so it can absorb energy in radiowave frequency energy density range (13 MHz, i.e. 5.10E-8 eV). During mutual collisions of such larger clusters the cavitation and splitting of water molecules may occur as a result of anti-Stokes scattering and various resonance phenomena. As a macroscopic demonstration of anti-Stokes scattering can serve famous Astroblaster toy and/or jet formation during water splash, explosion of cumulative warheads (bazooka) and/or collapse of black holes and supernovae (compare the recent simulations of "super rebound" effect during cluster collisions). The main trick here is, the energy of cluster surface waves affects the total bilance of translation energy during collision. Such resonance can have it's analogy in explanation of cold fusion for clusters of deuterons dissolved in palladium lattice.
The electrolysis of salty water by radiowaves is interesting from practical purposes, because it leads to thermodynamically metastable mixture of hydrogen peroxide and hydrogen gas and it doesn't require cooling, diaphragms and metal electrodes affected by corrosion and surface reactions, which decrease yield during classical electrolysis. In polar organic solvents we can expect analogous reaction mechanism, interesting from preparative perspective. Furthermore we can expect a strong isotope effect here, which may become significant for heavy water production. Therefore the electrodeless electrolysis by radiowaves can have a great future and it's definitely worth of further research - despite it doesn't enable to produce fuel from watter in cheaper way, then classical thermodynamics allows.
Aether concept streamlines the intuitive understanding of many aspects of solid phase physics, for example the unusual quantum mechanic and transport properties of isolated sheets of graphite, so called graphene. Recently we discussed, how electrons orbitals can be modeled by adhering droplets of high surface tension fluid, so we can even build an unique mechanical analogy of PN junction in semiconductors. The mechanism of ballistic transport in single sheet graphene is analogous to metallic state of high temperature semiconductors: it's a result of high compression of electrons from delocalized p-orbitals of carbon atoms by their own surface tension, so we can model both phenomena by single theory.
We can illustrate the graphite lattice by model of stacked sieves composed of wire mesh, which are vetted by water surface, analogous to Fermi surface of electrons inside of graphite. In such way, stacked pile of meshes can hold a significant amount of water between its wires. But when we remove one layer of mesh, the amount of watter attached on it would decrease significantly because of higher surface/volume ratio. In AWT such ratio is driving force for virtually all phenomena from elementary particles to black holes.
Due the higher pressure inside of graphene orbitals the electrons behave like chaotic superfluid inside of hole stripes in HT superconductors in over-doped state. With compare to superconductors, the pressure of free orbital surface on graphene layer isn't still sufficient for formation of fully chaotic system of electrons, but low energy excitations would propagate here in much higher speed, then electrons inside of common metals, because electrons are forced to move as a single body through delocalized orbitals and their charge is propagated in waves of collective surface plasmon excitations, i.e. like bosons.
We can understand this behavior by motion of wagons in train with compare to motion of string of cars. Free cars on the street are forced to accelerate and brake to avoid obstacles and mutual collisions under significant lost of energy. Wagons in train doesn't suffer such problem, because they're compacted, so that whole train is moving like single body and the lost of energy due the acceleration/deceleration of individual wagons is limited here significantly. While loose electrons in metals are forced to avoid mutually, they radiate energy during their mutual collisions via electromagnetic waves. Inside of graphene orbitals such mechanism is limited the more, the more electrons are collapsed. Inside of hole stripes of HT superconductors electrons are compressed in such a way, the radiative lost of energy is decreased to nearly zero here.
String theory (ST) is believed to provide description of particles by model of 1D stringy loops. While this model has worked only for bosons inside of atom nuclei (for which it was proposed originally at the beginning of 70's), it was extended later for N-dimensional strings, so called branes and the number of string theories increased significantly, but without larger success, measured in number of testable predictions. Recently Leiden University presented article "Physical Reality of String Theory Demonstrated", in which scientists modeled some aspects of phase transition in hight temperature superconductors by concept of AdS/CFT duality, developed for ST originally. Such result is no surprise for AWT, because it allows to model HT superconductivity by ballistic charge transfer through field of electrons, highly compressed by presence of hole stripes. While individual concepts of string theory (concept of branes, hidden dimensions, AdS/CFT correspondence or even holographic principle) may become relevant for particle physics, as a whole ST remains void and fringe theory, because concept of hidden dimensions violates Lorentz symmetry, which the formal model of ST is based on.
Aether Wave theory therefore explains strings as a foamy density fluctuations of hypothetical dense gas, which is forming vacuum. While electrons in superconductors are heavily compressed near holes by Coulomb forces, they behave in similar way, like particles on event horizon of black holes and they forms "stringy" fluctuations of density - so we can use some of ST concepts for description of this system.
If such model is still relevant for string theorists, it would simply mean, particle strings are formed by highly compressed fermion field as well - which is essentially AWT model. Such result excludes model of particles formed by isolated strings and branes, as presented in naive drawings from Brian Greene's popular books and TV shows. Instead of this, every particle is formed by compact cluster of foamy density fluctuations, formed by another particles.
But string theory wasn't designed for such purpose - it was supposed to describe fermion itself, not the compact systems of fermions. While ST failed this target apparently from obvious reasons, the endeavor to model superconductivity by AdS/CFT correspondence is just an attempt to make the best of a bad job. We should realize, how string theorists are frustrated after forty years of ST development, while still having no real physical system to describe. Now they're modeling dense system of fermions instead of individual particles - and they're still happy.... Even worse - it seems, they even didn't spot the difference!
The true is, HT superconductivity is conceptually quite simple phenomenon and no working knowledge of string theory is required for its intuitive understanding at all. String theorists shouldn't forget it, when pretending boldly, they can provide the very first / only description of this phenomena, explanation the less. From AWT follows, every dense cloud of compressed electrons should exhibit a superconductivity and we can model it by computer simulations of repulsing particle field, or by numerical solution of Schrödinger equation on field of charged particles, i.e. via standard means of quantum mechanics without introduction of concepts borrowed from ad hoced theories.