Guys please stop this  fight 

Take attention at second half of second video, he explains

and shows how (one) solution to sticky point is making an L shape

that is 90° angle from attracting magnets. Turn the volume up.

nix85

Ether was removed from mainstream "science" just like perpetual motion before it...
“Eppur si muove” (“And yet it moves)”.

In many respects it's not a matter of proof or a lack of it if it's never acknowledged. Once many people get a belief in there head there is no amount of proof which could change it. I change my mind daily on many things...but that's another story.

On the Aether, I break the argument down into a few key questions...
1)The Michelson–Morley experiment was an attempt to detect the existence of the luminiferous aether. There argument was that the motion of the Earth through an aether/medium should effect the speed of light in there apparatus. It did not, however we know the speed of light is constant whether the source is moving or not. We also know electric, magnetic and electromagnetic fields do not rotate with the source. As such Michelson–Morley simply verified what we already know, the primary fields are a property of space not the source which created them. Therefore, logically, the experiment did not disprove an Aether it only showed it was flawed and could not detect anything.

2)As well if the notion of a lack of aether/medium is to be valid we would then need to explain how a field change/EM radiation could propagate through empty space. You see it violates the basic premise of physics as cause and effect/natural law and supposes that EM waves can act on themselves or through nothing. As well it discounts the existence of EM waves because the concept of a wave relies on a medium to act as a wave carrier. As such they would have to abandon the whole notion of waves and cause and effect.

As we can see general relativity and any non-aether theory would seem to be a classic case of "The Emperor's New Clothes".  People didn't want to look stupid or be the odd man out so they bought into a fairy tale where "anything is possible".

It's cool, if they want to believe something can be created from nothing, a wave can travel without a wave carrier or act on nothing then free energy is super easy to explain. Free energy is possible for the same reasons they think GR or space time is possible. I mean if they want to throw all logic, reason and common sense out the window then let's go for it, lol.

Regards
AC

stivep

every idea having to be experimentally proven :
empirical knowledge,  is learned through practice; Trial and error.
ether was rejected as non usable, non-practical and theoretically  inconsistent concept.

That's not entirely correct in my opinion...
It's not that the Aether theory was unusable, unpractical or inconsistent. They just couldn't find an acceptable experiment to verify it's existence at the time.

For example, the Aether theory was eventually replaced with a Dark energy/matter theory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter

Dark matter is a hypothetical form of matter thought to account for approximately 85% of the matter in the universe. Dark matter is called "dark" because it does not appear to interact with the electromagnetic field, which means it does not absorb, reflect, or emit electromagnetic radiation (like light) and is, therefore, difficult to detect. Various astrophysical observations – including gravitational effects which cannot be explained by currently accepted theories of gravity unless more matter is present than can be seen – imply dark matter's presence.

Sounds familiar doesn't it?, "a medium" pervading all space we know exists through secondary effects. A medium which does not interact directly with EM fields or light. It's also interesting to note the Michelson–Morley experiment wouldn't detect dark energy or matter either yet we know it exists through other measurements.

Then we have Dark Energy, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy

In physical cosmology and astronomy, dark energy is an unknown form of energy that affects the universe on the largest scales. The first observational evidence for its existence came from measurements of supernovas, which showed that the universe does not expand at a constant rate; rather, the universe's expansion is accelerating.

Apparently the Aether is dead, long live dark matter and energy, which is basically the Aether with a new name.

Regards
AC

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Jy4wk9r0rg 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iv4Gel8HDY

Michelson–Morley experiment
DEFINITION an experiment performed in 1887 which attempted to measure the relative motion of the earth and the ether by measuring the speed of light in directions parallel and perpendicular to the earth's motion. The result disproved the existence of the ether, which contradicted Newtonian physics but was explained by Einstein's special theory of relativity.

I found the experiment kind of comical for various reasons which seems to defy all logic and reason...

1)If the speed of light is constant and does not change velocity with a moving source then why would Michelson–Morley think the speed of light would change in there experiment?. As well why would they think light would interact with the Aether?.

2)As supposed scientists Michelson–Morley displayed gross incompetence in there false conclusion. Any credible scientist would have come to the conclusion that the Aether does not interact with light or EM waves similar to Dark Energy/Matter. In fact that's all they did prove and nothing more should have been implied.

3)The experiment was little more than cargo cult science based on a false premise to show a preconceived conclusion. This is why we need to be very careful as to what we think were seeing. An absence of proof in one flawed experiment is not proof of absence, that's absurd and amateur in my opinion. 

This is the same kind of twisted logic and false cause fallacies many in this thread are using. They think a reactive current can do work, not understanding that a reactive current does no work while an active one does. They have also completely ignored the forces/properties which caused the motion and produced the supposed current in the first place. I mean, if they wanted to debate a current that can do work they should have called the thread "active currents".

This thread is going nowhere so I will give you a clue...
Obviously, reactive currents are not the answer because they are simply involved in storing energy as a magnetic field just like capacitors store energy as an electric field. Logically neither kind of current, reactive or active, matters all that much as both are simply energy carriers. What we are concerned with is how much work is involved to produce an active current versus how much work it can do. So either we do less work to produce the same current or the current does more work than expected before it dissipates.

Regards
AC

Induction of opposing compressed fields 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCClYZp9Yls