“In a sense, the ether has come back, but under a different name—it is now called the ‘quantum vacuum’ or ‘quantum fields.’ We talk about empty space, but empty space is far from empty. It is filled with quantum fluctuations, zero-point energy, and background fields. When you describe space as possessing a non-zero energy state, permittivity, and virtual particle pairs, you have simply restored the physical properties of the 19th-century ether while changing the vocabulary to sound modern.” — Sir Roger Penrose, Mathematical Physicist and Nobel Laureate in Physics
“The primary ingredient of reality is not individual particles at all, but a continuous, space-filling substance—what we now call ‘fields’ or ‘the vacuum.’ In the 19th century, physicists called this the Aether. Einstein thought he got rid of it, but in quantum field theory, the vacuum is not empty; it is a dynamic, highly structured, energetic medium. We have replaced the word ‘ether’ with the word ‘grid’ or ‘quantum vacuum,’ but the physical reality remains: space is a material substrate, and everything we observe as matter is merely a localized vibration of that medium.” — Frank Wilczek, Theoretical Physicist and Nobel Laureate in Physics (The Lightness of Being: Mass, Ether, and the Unification of Forces)
Next post will discuss this video in some detail.
The quotes above - both Roger and Frank worked from within the Standard Model. Both are Laureates. This means they can raise their head above the corn and peer around and say what they want. They are not in any real danger of being beheaded, defunded, censored, deplatformed, debanked, or burnt alive. They have enough power and gravitas to withstand the blowback from ‘The Science’.
Parsing the language it is clear they both know the aether exists. That by itself completely disproves Relativity and the Standard Model. Frank is more concrete in his assessment; Roger more circumspect. Roger still bows to the altar and mentions ‘quantum fluctuations’ and ‘zero point energy’. Neither exist.
1-Quantum Fluctuations:
Mainstream View, Roger bows to: Spontaneous, random “virtual particles” popping into and out of existence from absolute mathematical nothingness for tiny fractions of a second, governed by Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle. We discussed these in a few posts, when describing positrons for example. It is a nonsense disproven by Carl Anderson’s 1932 work.
Aetheric Reality: There are no particles materializing out of non-existence. Nothing creates nothing lads. What mainstream quantum mechanics measures as “fluctuations” are high-frequency, chaotic micro-oscillations and shear-stress vibrations propagating through the continuous dielectric lattice. The aether is alive, it vibrates, it oscillates. See Carl for more info.
2-Zero Point Energy:
Mainstream View: A baseline, non-zero energy state that remains in a ‘vacuum’ even when all thermal energy is cooled to absolute zero. Standard Model theory calculates this background energy as infinite or astronomically dense (the “cosmological constant problem”) yet struggles to explain what is actually storing the energy. Where is the storage boys?
Aetheric Reality: Zero-point energy is simply the inherent, non-zero physical pressure, rigidity, and dielectric strain density of the aether substrate itself. The substrate is the foundation of the medium. A layered model view of the aether is coming in a future post to help visualise what this means.
So, yet again, we have the contortions of ‘The Science’. Roger is right, but still feels a need to kneel in front of the altar and utter a prayer. Speaking engagements, dinner parties, ‘what will the friends say?’, books to publish and all that.
A Disputed Burial
Burying the reality of the aether and the absolute of space, the foundation of Newtonian and Maxwellian science, was not that easy. The great French mathematician and physicist of the late 19th and early 20th centuries Henri Poincaré was offended by the incoherence of Einstein’s Relativity. Poincaré continued to insist upon the existence of the aether for three main reasons:
(1) stellar aberration in which light is bent due to the aether (contrary to propaganda, stellar aberration does not prove the Earth’s mobility)
(2) ‘action-at-a-distance’ whereby gravity and electromagnetism could be transmitted over vast distances (from Newton who was wrong since he marketed the idea of a ‘vacuum’. What Henri is saying is that cosmic ‘attraction’ can only work within a container. Henri was right).;
(3) rotational motions (example is Sagnac’s 1913 experiment which disproved the invariant speed of light and Relativity).
Poincaré’s learned opinion was backed up by experimental proof. Between 1921 and 1933, American physicist Dayton Miller, using new and improved interferometer experiments, had not only confirmed the lack of Earthly movement, but found the aether. Einstein knew of Miller’s experiments and admitted privately that they destroyed Relativity.
In 1923 Ernst Gehrcke published the article, “The Contradictions between the Aether Theory and Relativity Theory and Experimental Tests" in which he reexamined the Michelson-Morley, Michelson-Miller, and Georges Sagnac experiments. Gehrcke concluded that Relativity had no explanation for the results.
He was not alone.
Dozens of European scientists took an axe to Relativity during the 1920s and 30s. German physicist Lenard debated and debauched Einstein post World War I, long in advance of Nazism. Such men are now labelled as racist anti-semites of course. The Quantum physicists made a mockery of Einstein during the 1927 Solvay Conference. Einstein really had no idea what they were on about as he later admitted to one of his disciple’s calling the confrontation an introduction to a ‘new world’. Quantum Mechanics also disproves Relativity and the Standard Model of cosmology and physics.
Bottom Line
Based on real world data, Einstotle was forced back to at least some concept of an aether, but one that was amorphous enough to satisfy his pet ideologies, namely the flat-merged-space time of Special Relativity (1905); and the curved-space-time of General Theory of Relativity (1915). Notice that the ‘4D’ universe goes from flat to curved in 10 years. JWST observational data confirms it is flat and not expanding (future post on the hysterical-tortured maths they use to claim expansion).
Einstein’s philosophy, now the platform for modern physics and cosmology, meant that the aether was largely massless without particles, and immobile. This entailed it could not be a transmission or transduction agent - as false as a fighting sword made from paper and just as useless.
In 1923, Arthur Eddington, one of Einstein’s disciples, summarised the incoherency of the Relativity cult and its approach:
“If a substantial aether analogous to a material ocean exists, it must rigidify, as it were, a definite space; and whether the observer or whether nature pays any attention to that space or not, a fundamental separation of space and time must be there. Some would cut the knot by denying the aether altogether. We do not consider that desirable, or, so far as we can see, possible; but we do deny that the aether need have such properties as to separate space and time in the way supposed.”
Thanks Arthur. As a Relativist he admitted that space and time are not merged and the aether is real but for the sake of theory, let’s ignore it. The aether exists as an immobile or rigid medium (as Descartes believed), yet the leader of the Relativity cult (Einstotle) admitted that the aether might indeed be mobile and might indeed possess physical properties.
So, this is what passes for ‘The Science’. A melange of mish-mash, half baked ideas, endless changes, opinions, open-ended malleable equations, mutilated maths driven and shaped by philosophical need and imperative. Packaged and marketed as divine truth. No need for mechanical engineering or common sense. Try pouring water into a nothingness.
All Hail.
next post; more details on why the aether exists, looking at energy tranmission.
Sources
A few hundred posts on here and;
Allais, M. (1959) ‘Should the Laws of Gravitation be Reconsidered?’, Aero/Space Engineering, 9(11), pp. 46–52.
Consoli, M. and Pluchino, A. (2018) The Classical Ether Theory Revisited: Relativity and Quantum Physics in a Resonant Vacuum. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.
Edison, T.A. (1875) ‘The Etheric Force’, Scientific American, 33(25), p. 388.
Franklin, B. (1751) Experiments and Observations on Electricity, Made at Philadelphia in America. London: E. Cave.
Fresnel, A.J. (1818) ‘Lettre de M. Fresnel à M. Arago, sur l’influence du mouvement de la Terre sur quelques phénomènes d’optique’, Annales de Chimie et de Physique, 9, pp. 57–66.
Miller, D.C. (1933) ‘The Ether-Drift Experiment and the Determination of the Absolute Motion of the Earth’, Reviews of Modern Physics, 5(3), pp. 203–242.
Penrose, R. (2004) The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe. London: Jonathan Cape.
Sagnac, G. (1913) ‘L’éther lumineux démontré par l’effet du vent relatif d’éther dans un interféromètre en rotation uniforme’, Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences, 157, pp. 708–710.
Tesla, N. (1905) ‘The Transmission of Electrical Energy Without Wires as a Means for Furthering Peace’, Electrical World and Engineer, 45(1), pp. 21–24.
Wilczek, F. (2008) The Lightness of Being: Mass, Ether, and the Unification of Forces. New York: Basic Books.
