The Aether, or fundamental space-time ‘substance’ has been rejected by the scientific community since the acceptance of Einstein’s theories of the space-time ‘fabric.’ However, as Einstein himself stated, there is some type of unifying relationship which connects the very small with the very large, a problem which plagues materialist science to this day.
The Reciprocal Systems theory we discuss so often, acknowledges the fundamental unification of space-time and matter, describing the base constituent of the universe as motion, which is ideationally described as Aether in the below modes of thought. The torsion fields described below are perfectly reflected in RS theory as motion in either space-time or time-space, and a easily described in a euclidian geometry; ‘normal’ geometry vs multidimensional space-time fabrics. The theories harmonize with each other at their core.
The key perspective to maintain when reviewing differing theories like General Relativity and Aether Physics, is that the pure observational data used to develop these theories DOES NOT CHANGE. The explanations change, but what IS, the objective reality remains constant. It is important to keep this in mind, because as one begins to develop a personal understanding of universal mechanics, one will begin to see threads of truth reflected in nearly all theories.
The following article is one such explanation, which if distilled properly, can yield a perspective which helps expand one’s mind to the actual relationships operating. Helping to develop the ‘eyes to see’ vs faith in an incomplete theory.
Though previously a popular scientific concept (in the form of the lumeniferous aether), the notion of an aether (ether) had essentially become taboo in science after the infamous Michelson-Morley (M-M) experiment supposedly disproved its existence in 1887, even though at best (or worst) all it did was seemingly to disprove (or rather, fail to demonstrate) the existence of an inert material or mechanical aether, hanging in the air like a gas.
The adoption of Einstein’s relativistic theories where space-time was dependent on (relative to) an observer’s speed supposedly ruled out an aetheric medium which rationally offered a single universal metric for space and for time.
Scientist and author Gregg Braden, in The Divine Matrix, has referred to the M-M experiment as “history’s greatest ‘failed’ experiment.” Independent researcher Gary Novak adds that not only did the M-M experiment fail to find an aetheric medium in space for conducting light waves, it failed to produce any result at all: “A looked-for diffraction pattern did not appear. The absence of a result is not a valid basis for conclusions in science. Any number of explanations exist for the result.” Continuing, Novak states frankly: “Failing to find the etheric medium should have meant nothing…and a recent mathematical analysis is said to show that if the curvature of the earth were taken into account, the result would have been different.”
Other researchers have expressed the view that it is “totally absurd” to consider Einstein’s relativity and the M-M experiment to be a disproof of an underlying aetheric medium. As independent physicist Paul LaViolette points out in Genesis of the Cosmos, the aether theory wasn’t abandoned because of experimental disproof; it just went out of style.
In contemporary particle physics, the aether has its counterpart in the zero point field (ZPF) and zero point energy—the quantum foam seething with its endless array of virtual particles bubbling momentarily into our reality and vanishing just as quick. We need to stress: The aether is not physical (like a gas), but it does produce physical effects. In fact, it is the ZPF/aether and its abundant quantum activity that creates and sustains matter itself.
Former nuclear weapons technician in the US Air Force Henry C. Warren has pointed out that the M-M experiment “was an invalid test” and explains that what Einstein’s general relativity effectively did “was to rename ether and call it space. This model preferentially uses expressions such as fabric of space or medium in space, without spelling out precisely the nature of that fabric or medium” (emphasis added). He adds that “any other model that is based on the inflow of a spatial medium or fabric…can meet all the same experimental tests that led to the acceptance of general relativity.”
Indeed, Einstein had said: “Time and space and gravitation have no separate existence from matter…Physical objects are not in space, but these objects are spatially extended. In this way the concept ‘empty space’ loses its meaning…The particle can only appear as a limited region in space in which the field strength or the energy density are particularly high.”
In a 1920 lecture, after his theory of general relativity was fully developed, Einstein acknowledged the necessity for aether, and did so again in his book Relativity. More recently, the highly respected physicist William Tiller of “What the Bleep Do We Know!?” movie fame—also an original thinker and experimenter in consciousness research—has written that an aether is necessary when considering the subtler/occult forces and the origins of known forces and matter in general.
Warren emphasises: “A vertically entrained ether theory is fully consistent with the [M-M] null results as Michelson and Lorentz of the Lorentz-FitzGerald formula firmly believed.”
As the aether theory illustrates, the spatial/aetheric inflow towards the center of a celestial body creates the “pull” of gravity and the so-called “curvature” of Einstein’s relativistic “curved space,” which is merely the aetheric medium renamed. Space is not curved but Euclidian in this view. In a heated defense of the 1933 Dayton Miller aether experiments, James DeMeo asserts that in combination, the small.
Michelson-Morley drift and the greater drift of the Dayton Miller experiments, which were performed at a higher altitude, actually support an entrained aether theory. In 1986, the journal Nature reported on the results of experiments conducted with more sensitive equipment than what was available to Michelson and Morley. A field with the characteristics of the aether was detected, and it behaved just as the older predictions had suggested it would a century before. It was “precisely linked to the motion of the earth through space, just as had been predicted!”
There were several theories that were proposed to explain the initial M-M null result, including Einstein’s Special Relativity. Michelson, himself a Nobel laureate, rejected the Special Relativity theory and championed the “(a)ether drag” theory, which had been proposed as early as 1831. Experiments by Michelson and Gale actually supported the case for a “physical” vacuum, though fundamentalized relativistic Science prefers to ignore this. Though the Priesthood of Official Science would never let on, many have criticized the theoretical removal of the aether, including Michelson himself. Other researchers have attempted to correct the misconception of the apparently failed aether hypothesis through the years, with little success, due to the perceived prestige of Einstein’s entrenched theories and the assumptions carried with them.
Moreover, with the advent and establishment of Darwinism through the mid-to-late 1800s, the Western world was developing an incredible bias towards reductionist ways of viewing the universe and everything in it, and aetheric models were inevitably going to be crushed. “Scientific materialism” (an oxymoron in the context of a discussion on the origins of reality) became the dominant paradigm, and reached its zenith (or nadir, depending on your viewpoint) in the 1950s when Crick and Watson discovered the DNA helix, which the scientific world viewed as the material source of life. With Darwinism and DNA primacy in full flight, unconscious mankind could not see that the source of life actually did not lie in this electrochemical “physical” reality at all. (See The Grand Illusion – Book 1 for the undeniable proof of this notion.)
In fact, the experiments and research of Georges Sagnac (early 1900s), Herbert Ives (mid-1900s), Panagiottis Pappas (1983), Ernest Silvertooth (1987), Peter Graneau (1980s), and others (including Ampère) have rendered invalid both special relativity and general relativity, “and with [GR] goes the expanding-universe theory. Consequently the entire edifice of modern relativistic cosmology has begun to crumble.” (Einstein’s GR equations demanded an expanding or contracting universe which caused him to introduce the cosmological constant notion whose purpose was to ensure astationary space-time continuum, which he believed in. The expanding/Big Bang universe idea is not compatible with today’s scientific evidence and does not afford the universe enough time to create stars and galaxies.)
Scientist and aether researcher David Thomson laments on his blog the nonsensical stance mainstream physics has taken towards the aether and the fabric of reality, and asks how much longer it will be before the popular PC theories essentially collapse under their own weight: Mainstream science tells us the Aether does not exist because it is not physical. However, mainstream science talks about “electrical currents” and “twisted magnetic field lines” as though they were physical objects…[C]urrent is not a physical object of itself. Also, magnetic field lines are considered by mainstream science to be mathematical structures, not physical structures. Like the Aether, magnetic flux lines are non-material. Students of the Aether Physics Model clearly understand that magnetic flux lines are Aether structures. So the acknowledgement of the reality of magnetic flux lines is the acknowledgement of the reality of Aether! The more science learns the truth about existence, the closer they are getting to returning to the Aether theories of the past. How much more strain can mainstream science take before they are forced to recognize the Aether Physics Model?
Theoretical and conceptual genius and long-time researcher Lt. Col. Tom Bearden has also lamented the peculiar psychology of mainstream research regarding the potential of tapping the aether/vacuum for infinite energy. This is science in the theoretical no-man’s land of aether-lessness. Aetheric models of reality are the only viable remaining ones, and all aether theories agree that our “physical” dimension emerges from this intangible vibrating substrate. The highly respected physicist Paul Dirac wrote in an article in Nature in 1951 that “[w]e must make some profound alterations to the theoretical idea of the vacuum,” and added that “with the new theory of electrodynamics we are rather forced to have an aether.”
Sixty years on, Dirac’s words are even more pertinent. Others who have devoted many years of their life to promoting the aether theory are: Maurice Allais (Nobel Prize 1988—Economics), physicist Harold Aspden, Steven Rado, Ken H. Sato, Gordon L. Ziegler, and many others. The list of anti-relativity scientists is even longer (generally scientists are anti-relativity because the verifiable formulas of relativity can be derived from classical physics and in fact many of the formulas used in relativity existed before relativity). Many scientists are both pro-aether and anti-relativity. There are many experimental effects and research data that essentially necessitate an aetheric model, as noted. A very brief list of such phenomena includes:
Kozyrev proved decades ago that torsion fields travel at superluminal speeds. Such a superluminal energy, separate from gravity and electromagnetism (and even more fundamental), represents a significant breakthrough in physics—one that demands that a zero-point energy or an aether must really exist.
Torsion fields that travel far beyond light speed do so in reference frames we can refer to ashyperspace; the aether and its different density levels/dimensions are hyperspace itself. The flow of energy and information between “parallel” dimensions/virtual realities is reciprocal: our reality can influence hyperspace and vice-versa. With this conception we have moved far beyond the idea of aether as a gas-like substance lingering in the air and into concepts that once belonged to science fiction.
Bearden can speak with some authority on the subject. He observes: “Every fundamental constant of nature is dynamically constructed from—and due to—the zero-point, virtual vacuum interactions that constitute “empty” space. The virtual “sea” of seething waves and particles that is empty vacuum is actually an ether — a Lorentz-invariant, nonmaterial (virtual) ether, perfectly admissible by the Michelson-Morley experiment and the entire experimental basis of physics. Indeed, Einstein once proposed naming the vacuum and its contained fields the “ether,” but his suggestion was not heeded.”
“The message is”, in the pioneering Harold Aspden’s words, “[a]ccept the aether is real and has structure and you can understand how matter is created—but ignore the aether and you live in ignorance!”
In mainstream physics there is the concept of the “Higgs Ocean,” named after Scottish physicist Peter Higgs who conceived the idea of the Higgs Ocean and its particulate force-carrier — the Higgs boson — in 1964 while out taking a walk in the countryside. Like the aether, the Higgs Ocean/Field is described as an all-pervading fluid-like field composed of Higgs particles which creates and maintains the physical universe and accounts for the phenomenon of inertia. A scalar field (having magnitude but no direction), it possesses a non-zero energy value, accounts for the mass of particles, and is required to keep the Standard Model mathematically consistent.
In mid-2012—and with much fanfare—the Higgs boson was said to have been discovered with a high degree of certainty (it was born out of the chaos resulting from protons being smashed together at high speeds in the Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland). In Higgs’ model it is the specific subatomic particle responsible for providing matter with its mass, and its momentous (not quite certain) discovery means that physicists do not have to scrap the standard model altogether. The discovery of the Higgs boson further indirectly supports the case for a fluid-like “aetheric” source of creation, or “Higgs Field.” Particles have to come from somewhere, after all.
In TGI 1 (and 2) I show the reader that the aetheric medium and its torsion/scalar fields are the key to life itself, and the foundation and sine qua non of a science of consciousness. Science of the 21st and 22nd centuries will increasingly become aether/consciousness science (or perhaps “conscious aether science”!), as physicists gradually acknowledge that the creative medium of our universe which spawned all known forces, subatomic particles, and minds is innately conscious. This is, of course, axiomatic for any serious student of the nature of consciousness and/or reality.
 Gary Novak, Relativity, https://gnovak47.wordpress.com/rela/
 See R.W. Kehr, The Study of Ether, Ch. 1.
 H. C. Warren, The Entrained Spatial Medium Gravitational Sink Model.www.olypen.com/hcwarren/SpatialFlow.pdf
 Warren, Op. cit.
 See W. Tiller, Psychoenergetic Science.
 Warren, Op. Cit.
 G. Braden, The Divine Matrix, 19–21.
 Kehr, Op. Cit., 8.
 D. G. Yurth, Seeing Past the Edge, 140.
 Further reading on Michelson-Morley and aether: www.esotericscience.com/Aether.aspx, www.olypen.com/hcwarren and www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm.
 P. LaViolette, Genesis of the Cosmos, 270–2.
 Ibid., Ch. 13.
 D. Thomson, Aether in Space is Fluid. http://softaether.blogspot.com/2009/05/aether-in-space-is-fluid.html
 Lt. Col. T. Bearden, Energy Density of the Vacuum.www.cheniere.org/references/energydensityofvacuum.htm
 D. Wilcock, The Science of Oneness, Ch. 2.
 See Kehr, Op. Cit., Ch. 1.
 See B. D. Murphy, The Grand Illusion: A Synthesis of Science and Spirituality – Book 1.
 H. Aspden, Discovery of Virtual Inertia. See also Wilcock’s ‘Convergence’ series.
 See Wilcock, The Science of Oneness, Ch. 4.12 and Divine Cosmos, Ch. 1.12. See also www.rexresearch.com/depalma/depalma.htm.
 J. Tennenbaum, Russian Discovery Challenges Existence of Absolute Time. www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/time.html.
 Astrology. www.astro121.com/astrology.htm.
 L. Watson, Supernature, 38.
 P. LaViolette, Subquantum Kinetics. See also Yurth, Seeing Past the Edge, for more on the speed of light as a constant idea.
 Ibid., 94.
 See D. Wilcock, The Aether Science of Dr. N.A. Kozyrev, Nexus, 14(3).
 Ibid. See also Wilcock’s “Convergence” series, in particular The Divine Cosmos, Ch. 1, for how Kozyrev identified torsion forces. Wilcock’s The Source Field Investigations (Dutton, 2011) discusses these experiments at length. Torsion is discussed in relation to psychic phenomena at length in my book The Grand Illusion: A Synthesis of Science and Spirituality.
 M. D. Jones, PSIence, 169.
 D. Wilcock, Nexus, Op. Cit.
 Lt. Col. T. Bearden, Excalibur Briefing, 258–61.
 H. Aspden, Physics Without Einstein, 33.
 See L. Susskind, The Cosmic Landscape; see also Greene, The Fabric of the Cosmos.
 R. Waugh & F. Macrae, Higgs boson found, www.dailymail.co.uk.
About the Author
Brendan D. Murphy – Co-founder of Global Freedom Movement and host of GFM Radio,BrendanD. Murphy is a leading Australian author, researcher, activist, and musician. His acclaimed non-fiction epic The Grand Illusion: A Synthesis of Science & Spirituality – Book 1 is out now! Come and get your mind blown at www.brendandmurphy.net Please visit – www.globalfreedommovement.org
For more information about the luminiferous aether seehttp://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/luminiferous%20aether
– Scroll down through ‘Older Posts’ at the end of each section