How Ether Almost Died and Came Back – Welcome to Consciousness Advancement!

In this exploration we look at Einstein, Tesla, and the ether

Einstein’s (born March 14, 1879) views on the ether changed over his lifetime. Early in his career, particularly with the advent of his Special Theory of Relativity (1905), Einstein rejected the concept of the ether.

In this Special Theory of Relativity theory, he demonstrated that the laws of physics could be explained without the need for an absolute reference frame, such as the luminiferous ether, which had previously been hypothesized as the medium through which light waves propagated.

A less known fact, By 1920, Einstein began to reconsider the idea of the ether, albeit in a different form than the classical luminiferous ether. In a lecture titled “Ether and the Theory of Relativity,” he stated that while the ether as a mechanical medium was unnecessary, the concept of a “physical space” with specific properties was indispensable.

Einstein’s Theories

Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity (1915) introduced the concept of “spacetime” as a dynamic entity. The curvature of spacetime, described by the presence of mass and energy, resembled the functions of an ether in certain ways. He emphasized that this “new ether” had no mechanical or motion properties like the classical ether but was essential for explaining phenomena like the propagation of light and the gravitational field.

In later years, Einstein continued to discuss the ether in the context of spacetime.

His evolving view suggested that spacetime itself had qualities that could be interpreted as analogous to an ether. For example:

– Spacetime is not empty; it has properties and can be curved or warped by mass and energy.
– It serves as the medium for gravitational waves, which were later confirmed in 2015.

Einstein described this ether as:

– Non-material: It was not composed of particles or matter.
– Dynamic: It could have properties like curvature in General Relativity, which describes how spacetime is affected by the presence of mass and energy.
– Associated with fields: The gravitational field and electromagnetic field could be seen as manifestations of this ether-like entity.

Einstein’s reinterpretation of ether went on to, and continues to, influence the understanding of fields and spacetime in mainstream modern physics, but does not return to the classical notion of an ether as a mechanical medium. Instead, it emphasizes that space itself is an active participant in physical processes.

Nikola Tesla (born July 10, 1856) described the ether as an “omnipresent, subtle medium that permeates all of space”. He believed it was the source and transmitter of energy and the foundation for the material universe.

Key Features of Tesla’s Ether

– Dynamic and fluid: The ether was not static but vibrational and energetic, serving as a carrier for energy waves.
– Source of all phenomena: Tesla suggested the ether was responsible for electromagnetic phenomena, gravity, and the structure of matter.
– Interaction with matter: He viewed matter as a condensation or organization of etheric energy. In his view, disturbances in the ether gave rise to the physical forces and particles we observe.
– Energy reservoir: The ether was an inexhaustible source of free energy, accessible through the right technologies and resonances.

The main implications of the ether theory, believed by many at the time included explanations such as these:

On light and electromagnetism: Tesla believed light and electromagnetic waves “propagated through the ether as vibrations”.

On gravity: Tesla theorized that gravity resulted from etheric pressure or flows acting upon matter.

On matter: Tesla saw matter as energy in a condensed state, formed by disturbances or whirlpools in the ether.

Tesla’s view of the ether unified energy, matter, and physical forces into a single, interconnected framework that he believed held the potential for revolutionary technologies.

Spiritual or Scientific?

Tesla’s concept of the ether is somewhat compatible with older, more spiritual or metaphysical frameworks, which often incorporated ideas of a universal medium or life force that connects all existence. His views reflect a blending of scientific inquiry and philosophical thought, potentially influenced by alchemy, mysticism, and spiritual traditions

His ether, compared to alchemical and spiritual principles, could be seen as:

A living medium: Tesla described the ether as dynamic, intelligent, and omnipresent, aligning with ancient ideas of the “prima materia” in alchemy (a fundamental, universal substance that underpins all creation).
The fifth element: In alchemical traditions, ether (or quintessence) is the fifth element that unites fire, water, air, and earth, enabling transformation. Tesla’s ether had a similar role in his theories, as the medium for transformation and energy.
Interconnectedness: His belief in the ether as the source of all matter and energy reflects spiritual ideas of a unified cosmos, akin to the Hermetic axiom “As above, so below.”
Divinity: Tesla’s writings often suggest that the ether could be a manifestation of divine order, linking physical phenomena to metaphysical principles.
God and Creation: Tesla did not directly invoke a personal deity, but his descriptions of the ether often bordered on reverence for the universe’s intricacy and order, which he saw as evidence of a higher intelligence or cosmic design.

When compared to Eastern Philosophy, Tesla’s ether echoes concepts like prana, chi, or Akasha, life forces or cosmic mediums in Eastern traditions that sustain and permeate all existence.

Philosophical & Scientific Implications of KEEPING the Ether

1- Bridging Macro and Micro Realities: Tesla envisioned the ether as a universal medium that connects the vastness of the cosmos (macro) with the minute dynamics of particles (micro). For the macro, he explained phenomena like gravity, electromagnetism, and cosmic forces as disturbances or movements in the ether, tying celestial mechanics to a common substrate. As for the micro, he saw matter itself as condensed ether, suggesting that particles emerge from energy vortices or disturbances within this universal medium. This somewhat aligns with modern ideas of quantum field theory, where particles arise as excitations in fields.

2- Connecting Quantum Mechanics and Relativity: Unlike Einstein’s work, Tesla’s ether provides a potential unifying mechanism between quantum mechanics and Einstein’s relativity by introducing a dynamic, energetic substrate. Tesla’s idea of matter as “frozen light” or energy condensed from the ether resembles the quantum idea that particles are wave-like energy packets. Ether might serve as the “field” in which quantum probabilities manifest. As for Relativity, ether, as Tesla conceived it, could be the “background medium” influencing spacetime dynamics, offering a reinterpretation of Einstein’s equations to include an energetic substrate without violating relativity’s principles.

3 – Science and Spirituality: Tesla’s ether was not merely physical; it carried philosophical and spiritual undertones, resembling ancient and mystical ideas of a universal life force.

4- Cosmic Interconnectedness: Tesla’s ether, has the potential to, and some argue does, tie everything together, offering a scientific basis for the idea that all beings and phenomena are interconnected.

5- Ether as the Basis for a Unified Field Theory? Tesla’s ether serves as a candidate for a “theory of everything” by encompassing:

Electromagnetism: Waves travel through the ether, unifying electricity, magnetism, and light.
Gravity: Ether flows or pressures might explain gravitational forces, challenging Einstein’s curved spacetime model.
Matter and Energy: Matter forms from etheric vortices or condensations, embodying energy-mass equivalence (E=mc²).

Practical Implications of KEEPING Ether

Energy Accessibility: Tesla believed in tapping the ether to provide limitless energy, bridging physical laws with practical technologies.
Healing and Consciousness: Ether could explain phenomena like energy healing, consciousness, or the influence of thought on reality, bridging biology with quantum physics.
Interdimensionality: If the ether is a dynamic, higher-dimensional medium, it could explain non-local phenomena like entanglement, psychic abilities, or even spiritual experiences.
Implosive technology and cold fusion
Technologies working with the water molecule, hydrogen gas, Brown’s gas, HHO, or hydroxy gas.
Bridging science and spirituality: Tesla was deeply spiritual, though not religious in the traditional sense. He saw the universe as governed by intelligent principles, and his ether theory was an attempt to scientifically explain phenomena that could also support a metaphysical worldview. In this way, his ether bridges the gap between materialism and spiritualism, offering a framework where science and divinity coexist.

Tesla’s vision of the ether remains compelling because it invites dialogue between scientific discovery and philosophical reflection, encouraging a holistic view of the universe that respects both measurable phenomena and transcendent mystery.

Implications of the LOSS of Ether (Einsteinian Physics)

Moving away from ether as a theory has lead to the following:

Loss of Ether’s Spiritual Metaphor: Ether was often imbued with spiritual or metaphysical significance. Its removal as a scientific concept left room for more abstract, mathematical descriptions of reality, but some argue it distanced science from holistic or metaphysical interpretations of the universe.
The Einsteinian framework set the stage for later theories such as the Big Bang theory and the expanding universe model. These attempt to describe the universe’s origins, structure, and evolution without invoking an ether.
Nuclear Energy and Weaponry: The mass-energy equivalence laid the theoretical foundation for nuclear fission and fusion, leading to atomic bombs and nuclear power plants.
Explosive technology
Redefinition of Space and Time: Einstein replaced the ether with the concept of spacetime, a four-dimensional continuum where space and time are interwoven. This overturned the Newtonian view of absolute time and space, leading to revolutionary insights like time dilation and length contraction. Space and time became dynamic entities that could bend, stretch, and warp in the presence of mass and energy (as described in general relativity).
Constancy of the Speed of Light: Light’s speed became a fundamental constant, independent of any medium or observer. This shattered the classical idea of wave propagation requiring a medium (like ether) and fundamentally changed our understanding of how electromagnetic waves behave.
Quantum Gravity: General relativity and quantum mechanics remain incompatible. Einsteinian physics works well at large scales but struggles to explain black hole interiors or the universe’s initial singularity.
Dark Matter and Dark Energy: Einstein’s equations don’t fully explain the universe’s dynamics. These gaps are attributed to unseen phenomena like dark matter and dark energy (as in ether?), but their true nature remains unknown.
Holographic Principles and Spacetime Fabric: Recent theories suggest spacetime itself may emerge from deeper quantum realities (such as ether?), raising questions about whether Einstein’s spacetime concept is the ultimate framework or a useful approximation.
Realism: Einstein believed in an objective reality that exists independently of observation, a stance that often put him at odds with proponents of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, like Niels Bohr
Determinism: He famously opposed the idea of quantum mechanics as a complete theory due to its inherent uncertainties and probabilistic nature, encapsulated in his quote, “God does not play dice with the universe.”
Finitely and lack of abundance: The universe is headed towards maximum diffusion, lack of cohesion, dispersal, and will freeze when all energy and matter has been expended and expanded.
Atomism: Everything is made of an atom or particle that is has a quantity … But, dark matter, dark energy, etc.. remain un-definable as a result.

A Good Reason to Kill the Ether?

Surely there must have been reason to move away from the ether theory and into Einsteinian physics. Didn’t scientists conduct experiments that debunked, or proved the ether did not exist?

The idea of the ether as a medium for light and electromagnetic waves began to lose credibility in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, particularly following these 3 factors:

Michelson-Morley Experiment (1887)
Special Relativity (1905)
General Relativity (1915)

More on these:

1- Michelson-Morley Experiment (1887): This is perhaps the most famous experiment that sought to detect the motion of the Earth through the “ether.” The experiment showed no difference in the speed of light in different directions, which would have been expected if the Earth were moving through a stationary ether. This negative result cast doubt on the existence of the ether and created a significant problem for the ether theory.

2- Special Relativity (1905): Albert Einstein’s theory of special relativity effectively rendered the ether unnecessary. In his paper “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies”, Einstein proposed that the speed of light is constant in all reference frames, eliminating the need for a medium like the ether to transmit light. The theory also introduced the concept of space-time, where light and other electromagnetic phenomena were understood without needing a material medium.

3- General Relativity (1915): Einstein’s general theory of relativity further advanced the idea of space-time as a dynamic, non-ether-based entity that could bend under the influence of mass and gravity. This added to the rejection of ether as a physical medium for gravitational and electromagnetic phenomena.

The standard model of physics today does not rely on the concept of ether, it has been replaced by quantum field theory, where fields (like the electromagnetic field) are fundamental, but “there is no need for a physical “ether” as a medium.” Of course, if you asked Tesla, or any non atomist, they would say, ether is not, and never was physical.

It is a challenge to observe and measure that which is not in itself a particle. Lack of observation though should not be taken as proof of lack of existence especially when experiments that do utilize the ether do exist. Is this about politics, money, and corruption? You can determine that on your own. The scientists are human after all.

Overall, there were 3 famous experiments, let’s look at these, starting with the Michelson-Morley Experiment mentioned earlier :

1. Michelson-Morley Experiment (1887)

Albert Michelson (born December 19, 1852) an American physicist, is known for his work on the Michelson-Morley experiment, which sought to detect the motion of the Earth through the “ether” and demonstrate the speed of the Earth through this medium. The experiment failed to detect the ether, and it was a crucial part of the journey toward Einstein’s theory of relativity. Michelson’s work played an important role in the abandonment of the luminiferous ether in favor of a relativistic approach.

This experiment found no detectable “ether wind,” leading to the conclusion that either the ether didn’t exist or the Earth dragged the ether along with it.

Criticisms and flaws:

Technological Limitations: The sensitivity of the apparatus may have been insufficient to detect subtle effects of the ether.
Interpretation Bias: It assumed a rigid, stationary ether frame and didn’t account for more complex ether models (e.g., dynamic or entrained ether).
Later Findings: The lack of detectable ether wind could be reconciled with theories that suggested ether is not stationary but interacts with matter differently than assumed.

2. Trouton-Noble Experiment (1903)

This experiment sought to detect a torque on a capacitor due to motion through the ether, finding none.

Criticisms and flaws:

Simplistic Assumptions: The experiment assumed a specific interaction between electric fields and ether, which may not apply if ether dynamics were more complex or if ether didn’t interact with charges as expected.
Sensitivity Issues: The technology of the time may not have been precise enough to measure subtle torques or disturbances.

3. Kennedy-Thorndike Experiment (1932)

A variation of Michelson-Morley, it tested whether the speed of light changed due to Earth’s motion relative to the ether. It found no variations.

Criticisms and flaws:

Assumptions About Light: It presupposed that light waves were the only medium-sensitive phenomenon and ignored possible ether interactions beyond light.
Ambiguities in Measurements: Interpretations depended on the assumption that light behaves identically in all frames, which might not hold in all ether models.

“We may assume the existence of an aether; only we must give up ascribing a definite state of motion to it, i. e. we must by abstraction take from it the last mechanical characteristic which Lorentz had still left it. … But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it.”

Albert Einstein made this statement during his address titled “Ether and the Theory of Relativity” delivered on May 5, 1920, (after his General Relativity theory was created in 1915) at the University of Leiden.

At this point, I like to remind you, kind reader, to remember this and notice the nuance, that

Absence of evidence is in itself not evidence of absence.
Lack of proof is not proof of lack.
Failing to detect something is NOT proving it doesn’t exist.

Bad Experiments?

These experiments made assumptions that set them to fail or not be adequate to disprove the ether. Here’s more on that:

1. Assumption of a Stationary, Rigid Ether: Most experiments, like the Michelson-Morley experiment, assumed the ether was a fixed, immobile medium permeating all space. This overlooked the possibility that ether could be dynamic, entrained by matter, or interact differently with physical objects. If the ether is a dynamic and flowing medium (as Tesla proposed), its effects might be subtle, local, or vary based on conditions such as electromagnetic fields or gravitational forces.

2. Linear and Simplistic Interactions: The experiments assumed linear, measurable interactions between ether and physical forces, such as light waves or moving objects. Ether might influence reality in a non-linear, multi-dimensional way, interacting with fields (e.g., electromagnetic, gravitational) in ways that can’t be measured through simple mechanical or optical setups.

3. Dependence on Light Waves: Experiments like Michelson-Morley relied on the behavior of light as the sole probe for ether, assuming ether was the medium for light propagation. If light doesn’t require a medium, or if ether interacts more with matter, energy fields, or other non-visible phenomena, these experiments wouldn’t detect it. Find more on this below.

4. 3D and Physical Constraints: The experiments were confined to measurements in our three-dimensional reality and physical realm. Ether, as described by Tesla and others, is likely non-physical or higher-dimensional. Detecting its presence might require tools sensitive to non-material influences, such as quantum fluctuations, scalar waves, or higher-dimensional interactions.

5. Assumption of Complete Isolation: Many designs assumed isolated systems where interactions between ether and the apparatus wouldn’t be influenced by external conditions. Ether might be affected by the presence of the Earth’s magnetic field, cosmic forces, or even consciousness, meaning controlled isolation may alter its detectability.

A Boat Measuring Waves

The Michelson-Morley experiment can be described metaphorically as being in a boat trying to measure waves while riding those same waves.

While the Michelson-Morley experiment was pivotal in discrediting the traditional concept of a stationary ether, it has been argued by ether proponents that the experiment failed to account for the possibility of a dynamic or entrained ether (like being in a boat carried perfectly by the waves). Einstein later sidestepped the ether entirely with his special relativity theory, positing that light’s speed is constant in all inertial frames of reference.

The Michelson-Morley experiment (1887) was designed to detect the presence of the “ether wind,” the supposed relative motion of the ether through which light was believed to propagate. However, the experiment famously found no significant difference in the speed of light in different directions, which contradicted the ether theory as traditionally conceived.

This experiment used an interferometer to compare the speed of light beams traveling at right angles to one another. If Earth were moving through the stationary ether, the speed of light in the direction of motion should differ from the speed perpendicular to it. However, since light’s speed appeared constant regardless of direction, it was as if the “boat” (Earth) couldn’t detect the “waves” (ether) while riding on them.

It is difficult for a boat perfectly riding entrained waves, to measure them, it is difficult for physical instruments and sensors to detect that which is non-physical.

Reinterpretation and Repetitions of Experiments

Later variations of ether-related experiments or reinterpretations include:

Dayton Miller’s Interferometer Experiments
Miller, in the 1920s and 1930s, repeated the Michelson-Morley experiment with more sensitive equipment and claimed to observe a small, consistent ether drift. His results were controversial and later dismissed by mainstream scientists, who had already adopted Einsteinian physics, who attributed the findings to temperature gradients or other environmental factors.
Kennedy-Thorndike Experiment (1932)
This experiment modified the Michelson-Morley design by varying the velocity of the apparatus relative to Earth’s motion and the orbital velocity around the Sun. It failed to detect ether.
Sagnac Effect (1913)
Georges Sagnac demonstrated that light beams traveling in opposite directions around a rotating loop experienced a measurable phase shift. While not interpreted as proof of ether in mainstream physics, some proponents argue it supports the existence of a medium.
Fizeau Experiment (1851)
Before Michelson-Morley, Hippolyte Fizeau demonstrated that light’s speed changes when it passes through a moving medium (e.g., water), which ether theorists saw as partial evidence for their views. This experiment laid the groundwork for later relativistic interpretations.

The idea of an ether hasn’t been definitively disproven but has been reframed or replaced by modern physics concepts like quantum fields and spacetime curvature

How to Measure Non-Physical, 4D, or Etheric Phenomena?

To measure something outside the traditional physical 3D realm, one would need experimental designs that:

Use Resonance-Based Detection: Devices like Tesla’s coils generate high-frequency oscillations, potentially interacting with etheric forces.
Leverage Scalar Waves: Detect non-linear, longitudinal waves (which Tesla believed originated from the ether).
Measure Subtle Energy Fields: Advanced detectors for vacuum fluctuations, zero-point energy, or changes in potential could indicate etheric activity.
Incorporate Consciousness: Some theories suggest ether interacts with intention or consciousness, implying the need for experiments involving mind-matter interaction.

Tesla’s Work on Ether

One may propose that Tesla’s work, based on the ether theory, which produced results is also proof that ether exists. I would say yes and no to that. We have seen experiments and inventions that produce results successfully be built on a a theory which may not be accurate. Any electrical circuit can be seen thru Einsteinian physics or Tesla physics. Observations and actions may be present and accurate, yet the interpretation of root causes may be different and incorrect.

Tesla’s belief in ether allowed him to conduct experiments to harnessed, primarily through electromagnetic resonance and high-voltage phenomena, energy from it:

Tesla’s Experiments

1- Wardenclyffe Tower: Designed to transmit wireless energy through the ether.

2- High-Frequency Oscillators: Tesla believed these devices interacted with etheric forces, creating longitudinal waves or scalar fields.

3- Dynamic Ether Models: His work suggested ether could condense into matter or be harnessed for unlimited energy.

Other Ether Inventors and Scientists Include:

Besides Tesla, there were many scientists who accepted, worked on, or worked with, the ether, before him, and after him, including:

Robert Hooke (born July 18, 1635) (mentioned below under Who did Tesla Learn From)

Michael Faraday (born September 22, 1791) (mentioned below under Who did Tesla Learn From)

James Clerk Maxwell (born June 13, 1831) (mentioned below under Who did Tesla Learn From)

Ernst Mach (born February 18, 1838) (mentioned below under Who did Tesla Learn From) An Austrian physicist and philosopher, took a unique approach to the ether. He doubted the physical reality of the ether and argued that all phenomena, including gravity, could be explained by the relative motion of objects in space. Mach’s ideas were influential in Einstein’s development of general relativity, where the ether was replaced by a more abstract concept of spacetime.

Oliver Heaviside (born May 18, 1850) Heaviside was an English electrical engineer and physicist who contributed to the reformulation of Maxwell’s equations into the form we use today. He suggested that the ether could be understood in terms of electric and magnetic fields. Heaviside’s work was essential in modernizing electromagnetic theory, though he never completely abandoned the idea of the ether, even as it was being displaced by more contemporary views of space and fields.

John Archibald Wheeler (born July 9, 1911) Wheeler, an American theoretical physicist, worked in the field of general relativity and quantum mechanics. While he was part of the group that contributed to the development of quantum field theory and general relativity (supporting abandoning the ether), he also suggested that space itself could have properties that resemble a modern form of ether. His later work, particularly the concept of “spacetime foam,” hints at an underlying medium for quantum fluctuations, similar to the idea of the ether.

Augustin-Jean Fresnel (born May 10, 1788) Fresnel, a French engineer and physicist, made significant contributions to the wave theory of light. He worked on the theory of the “luminiferous ether,” proposing that light waves propagate through a medium, much like sound waves through air. Fresnel’s theory, which explained the behavior of light through the ether, played a key role in the development of modern optics and the study of interference and diffraction patterns.

George Gabriel Stokes (born August 13, 1819) Stokes, an Irish physicist, made contributions to fluid dynamics and the theory of the ether. He suggested that the ether could have viscosity, which would cause it to resist motion and allow for the transmission of electromagnetic waves. His ideas were instrumental in refining the concept of the ether as a medium for light and electromagnetic waves.

Heinrich Hertz (born February 22, 1857) Hertz, a German physicist, is famous for discovering electromagnetic waves, demonstrating the existence of radio waves. While Hertz did not explicitly argue for the existence of ether in his work, he did believe that electromagnetic waves were propagated through a medium, which could be interpreted as ether. Hertz’s experiments were a key development in the experimental proof of electromagnetism.

Wilhelm Röntgen (born March 27, 1845) a German physicist, discovered X-rays, and while he didn’t work directly on ether, his work on the propagation of electromagnetic radiation was influenced by the prevailing ether theory of the time. Röntgen’s work helped lead to the development of later electromagnetic theory, which, like others, was initially based on the ether.

Emil Cohn (born June 12, 1857) a German physicist, proposed a concept called “dynamic ether” in the late 19th century, which suggested that the ether was not a passive medium but actively interacted with matter and energy. Cohn’s work was part of a broader tradition of theorizing about how the ether influenced physical phenomena, particularly in the realm of thermodynamics and electromagnetism.

Friedrich Wilhelm Bessel (born July 22, 1784) Bessel, a German astronomer and mathematician, contributed to the understanding of celestial mechanics and supported the ether theory in the context of astronomical observations. He used the concept of ether in his work on the movement of light and stars, suggesting that the ether was involved in the propagation of light through space.

David Hilbert (born January 23, 1862), a German mathematician, made significant contributions to the development of general relativity, including mathematical models that were instrumental in shaping modern views of spacetime. Although Hilbert’s work evolved away from the classical ether concept, he was part of the shift from the mechanical ether model to the more abstract geometric model of spacetime that Einstein eventually formalized.

Hendrik Lorentz (born July 18, 1853). Lorentz, a Dutch physicist, made significant contributions to the theory of electromagnetism and the Lorentz transformation, which became a key component of special relativity. He, along with others, believed in the existence of the ether as the medium for the propagation of electromagnetic waves. His work on the “ether” led to the Lorentz contraction theory, which explains how objects appear contracted when they move at relativistic speeds, a critical development in the shift toward Einstein’s theory of relativity.

Viktor Schauberger (1885–1958) An Austrian inventor, Schauberger focused on harnessing “vortex energy,” which he believed was a natural expression of etheric forces. His designs, such as implosion-based propulsion systems, emphasized the use of natural energies inherent in water and air.

Thomas Townsend Brown (1905–1985) Brown explored the relationship between electromagnetism and gravity, developing devices like the “electrogravitic lifter.” His work is often associated with tapping into ether-like fields to create anti-gravity effects.

Paul Baumann (1910–2001) Baumann was associated with the development of the “Testatika machine,” a device claimed to draw free energy from ambient sources, potentially akin to the ether. As with most, his work remains controversial in the mainstream scientific circles but is studied by alternative energy enthusiasts.

Yull Brown (1922–1998) The original developer of Brown’s Gas, Yull Brown was a Bulgarian-born inventor who popularized the use of oxyhydrogen for applications such as welding and energy production. His work laid the foundation for subsequent research and development in HHO technology. Brown claimed that Brown’s Gas has several unusual properties compared to ordinary hydrogen and oxygen gases: 1- It is claimed to have greater efficiency in various industrial and combustion applications. 2- It is non-explosive under normal conditions, despite being a mix of flammable gases. 3- The gas has a higher energy density than pure hydrogen or oxygen when burned or used in applications.

T.R. Knudtson was involved in research related to “hydroxy” gas, also known as Brown’s gas or HHO. In 1989, he collaborated with Yull Brown in Sydney, Australia, to demonstrate the BG1000 device and explain the principles and applications of hydroxy gas. Hydroxy gas is a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen produced through the electrolysis of water. It has been explored for various applications, including as an alternative fuel source and in welding technologies. The BG1000 device was designed to generate this gas for practical uses

Thomas Bearden (1930 – 2022) Bearden was a retired Lieutenant Colonel in the U.S. Army and a proponent of various “overunity systems” and free energy devices. Bearden’s work on scalar waves described how energy could be extracted from the vacuum or ether using specific field interactions. .His work in the field of scalar wave theory has been both influential and controversial, contributing to ongoing discussions in alternative energy research.

John Kanzius (1944 – 2009) An American inventor who gained attention for his work with a groundbreaking approach to using radio frequency (RF) waves to separate hydrogen from water. His work has drawn interest in the fields of alternative energy and hydrogen production. Kanzius is most famous for his invention of the Kanzius RF Generator, a device that uses radio frequency waves to break apart water molecules and separate hydrogen from oxygen. When RF waves are directed at water, they excite the water molecules, causing them to release hydrogen in a form that can be captured and used as a fuel. Kanzius discovered that radio frequency waves could be used to heat water selectively, causing it to release hydrogen gas. His Kanzius Foundation continues to support research into his technologies, especially the potential applications of RF in both energy production and medical treatments

Eugene Mallove (1947–2004) A vocal proponent of cold fusion and alternative energy, Mallove championed research into energy systems that some interpret as tapping into ether-like fields or zero-point energy.

John Hutchison (b. 1945) Known for the “Hutchison Effect,” he demonstrated anomalies like levitation and material disintegration using electromagnetic fields and frequencies. These effects are thought by some to involve interactions with etheric energy.

John Bedini (1949–2016) Bedini was known for his work with radiant energy and his “Bedini Motor,” a device purportedly capable of harnessing zero-point energy or etheric energy for battery charging. His systems often aimed to demonstrate “over-unity” energy production, a very controversial topic often shunned by mainstream modern science, yet adored by independent inventors. Bedini’s energy systems used high-voltage pulses to capture what he called “radiant energy,” tapping into etheric or vacuum energy. These systems demonstrated the potential to recharge batteries using unconventional energy sources.

Konstantin Meyl (b. 1952)

Meyl advanced ideas related to scalar waves and their transmission through the ether, revisiting and expanding on Tesla’s work. He has written extensively on the relationship between electromagnetism, energy fields, and the ether.

Nassim Haramein (b. 1962)

A modern physicist and inventor, Haramein integrates ancient and modern ideas, proposing that the universe operates on a vacuum energy field (similar to the ether). He has developed theoretical frameworks like the “Unified Field Theory” and experiments with zero-point energy technologies.

George Wiseman

A contemporary proponent of Brown’s Gas, Wiseman has written extensively about its applications in health and energy production. He is known for developing and selling AquaCure devices, which generate HHO for various uses, including health benefits.

Stan Meyer (1940–1998)

Meyer claimed to have developed a water fuel cell capable of splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen using minimal energy. While not explicitly referencing the ether, his work is often linked to ideas of tapping into underlying universal energies and the power of the water molecule. Meyer explored the use of HHO in his designs.

Dr. Harold Aspden (1927–2011)

Aspden explored concepts of vacuum energy, inertial forces, and the potential for extracting energy from the zero-point field. His work often invoked ether-like ideas to explain physical phenomena.

Dan A. Davidson

Davidson researched vibrational and resonant energy systems, claiming they could access etheric or scalar fields to produce energy or alter material properties.

Bruce DePalma (1935–1997)

DePalma developed devices like the “N-Machine,” which he claimed could extract energy from space (akin to ether).
His work remains a cornerstone for free energy and ether-based research.

Dennis Klein

An inventor and advocate of HHO technology, Klein gained attention for his claims of using Brown’s Gas as an alternative fuel source. His work focused on modifying internal combustion engines to run on HHO

Stephen Horvath

Horvath developed a device called the “Hydrogen Energy Cell” that used Brown’s Gas technology to improve engine efficiency and reduce emissions. He worked on making HHO accessible for automotive and industrial applications.

Joe X

The Joe Cell operates on principles involving structured water, which some claim interacts with etheric energy to produce anomalous effects. The Joe Cell is an experimental energy device named after its Australian inventor, known simply as “Joe,” who has chosen to remain anonymous. In the early 1990s, Joe and his associates developed the Joe Cell, a device constructed from stainless steel components and water, which they claimed could power a car without conventional fuel. Due to alleged harassment and threats, Joe decided to freely share information about the Joe Cell for public benefit, refraining from commercializing the technology

Paul Pantone (1950 – 2015)

Pantone developed the GEET (Global Environmental Energy Technology) system the 1980s as a fuel delivery method for internal combustion engines that purportedly allows engines to run on a wide variety of fuels, including a mixture of hydrocarbons and water. The GEET system claims to work by using a “plasma fuel reactor,” where exhaust heat and intake fuel are exchanged in a specially designed reactor chamber. This process allegedly restructures the fuel into a more efficient state, producing cleaner emissions and improved engine efficiency. Despite controversies surrounding the system, Pantone’s invention has gained interest among alternative energy inventors.

Dr. Ruggero Santilli (Born Sept. 1935)

A physicist and inventor, Santilli developed the “MagneGas” system, which utilizes a form of HHO to produce a clean-burning fuel derived from liquid waste. His work emphasizes environmental sustainability and advanced energy technologies. He came up with the term magnecules. Magnecules are chemical species formed by the magnetic polarization of atoms, molecules, or clusters, resulting in bonds that are not purely chemical (covalent/ionic) but magnetic in nature. The magnetic fields polarize electrons or nuclear magnetic moments, creating a “molecular” structure bound by magnetic forces. These bonds are weaker than traditional chemical bonds but stronger than van der Waals forces. Santilli suggested that magnecules might exist in gases, liquids, or solids and could have practical uses in fuel technology, nanotechnology, and environmental science. They were proposed to explain anomalies in molecular weights and properties of certain synthesized substances. Santilli claimed to have created a new type of water, which he sometimes referred to as “Santilli Water” or “HHO Water.” This water is purportedly characterized by the presence of magnecules and unique properties that differ from regular H2O. Properties: Altered boiling and freezing points compared to ordinary water. Enhanced energy storage or catalytic behavior, useful for alternative fuel applications. This is created through the use of advanced magnetic reactors or equipment that polarize the water molecules, altering their structure and interactions. You can find a video with audio from him on Einstien being wrong here

Bob Boyce

A pioneer in HHO systems, Boyce is known for his high-efficiency electrolysis designs and work on automotive applications. He has developed advanced circuits to enhance the production of Brown’s Gas.

Denny Klein

Often confused with Dennis Klein, Denny is known for demonstrating vehicles and welding systems that utilize HHO. His work emphasizes the practicality of using Brown’s Gas as an alternative energy source.

William Rhodes

An early experimenter with oxyhydrogen gas, Rhodes is sometimes credited with independent discoveries related to HHO. His work focused on practical applications of mixed hydrogen and oxygen gases.

Horace H. Dresser

Dresser conducted early 20th-century experiments with hydrogen and oxygen mixtures for combustion and energy production, providing foundational insights for later HHO innovators.

John Milewski. A researcher with a background in chemical engineering and materials science, has proposed a theory called Superlight, which introduces the concept of a dynamic aether—a fundamental medium permeating space and influencing physical phenomena. Superlight as a Dynamic Aether: Milewski suggests that Superlight is a form of magneto-electric radiation that moves at an extraordinarily high speed, potentially billions of times faster than the speed of light. This dynamic aether is theorized to interact with matter, influencing gravity and inertia. More: PDF paper Implications for Gravity and Inertia: According to Milewski, gravity and inertia are not inherent properties of matter but are reactions to the surrounding Superlight. Gravity is perceived as a “push” resulting from Superlight entering matter from all directions, while inertia arises from the resistance of matter to changes in motion due to its interaction with the dynamic aether. Writing: “Superlight”: This paper discusses Magnetioelectric energy, providing details and explanations that aim to clarify various mysteries surrounding this concept. Aetherforce – “ORMUS is a Gas”: In this article, Milewski postulates that the free atom Ormus form of certain transition elements is a very chemically inert gas. Aetherforce and video

Vernon Roth. An American inventor. He is associated with several ventures focused on hydrogen technology and environmental research. He is the founder of Advanced Hydrogen Research, which is based in Westcliffe, Colorado. This company specializes in developing hydrogen generation technologies and exploring the applications of hydrogen in energy systems. Additionally, he has been linked to Ancient Transformational Technologies, which offers products related to energized water and hydrogen generation systems. This company promotes the use of “Aetherically Charged Water,” which is part of Roth’s broader research into enhancing the efficiency of hydrogen production and its applications in various energy systems. Roth’s work often emphasizes the integration of hydrogen technologies into existing systems to improve efficiency and reduce emissions, particularly in internal combustion engines.

Modern Tools and Techniques that Help Prove the Ether

It seems that our advanced technologies, computers and sensing capabilities are brining mainstream science closer to ether-based concepts. For instance:

Quantum Electrodynamics (QED): Examines vacuum fluctuations, zero-point energy, and interactions suggesting ether-like properties.
Scalar Wave Detectors: Devices sensitive to non-linear waves may pick up etheric phenomena.
Advanced Resonators: Tesla-inspired resonators could create conditions for etheric interactions to manifest in measurable ways.

Mainstream Science is moving closer to ideas that resemble the concept of ether, though not always using that exact term. Mainstream science or text books tend to lag behind discoveries. Some claim that new discoveries and theories take 20-50 years before appearing in text books.

Many of the modern theories in physics, such as quantum mechanics and cosmology, increasingly suggest the existence of a fundamental, unseen field or medium underlying matter, energy, and the forces of nature. They just do not call it ether, the way Tesla and others did.

Back to the Ether?

Here are ways in which mainstream science is redefining and accepting, or echoing, the old concept of the ether today:

1. Quantum Field Theory (QFT)

QFT describes fields that permeate all of space, much like the classical ether. In QFT, particles are seen as excitations or disturbances in these underlying quantum fields. This is similar to how ether was once thought to be a medium through which electromagnetic waves propagated. The quantum fields act as a substrate or foundation for matter and energy, and just like the ether, these fields are unobservable directly but their presence is inferred from interactions and phenomena.

The concept of the quantum vacuum, with its zero-point energy, suggests a dynamic, underlying reality that resonates with the idea of an all-pervasive medium influencing the material world.

2. The Big Bang and Cosmic Background

The Big Bang theory suggests that all matter and energy in the universe originated from a singular, highly compressed point. The idea that the universe expanded from this state relies on the existence of a medium (the “primordial soup” or field of energy) from which the universe emerged. The cosmic microwave background (CMB) is often cited as evidence of the remnants of this early universal “ether” or field, providing a medium that was present before matter formed as we know it today.

While modern cosmology doesn’t describe this primordial field as ether in the classical sense, the idea of a field from which matter emerged parallels earlier ether theories. The universe itself may have emerged from or is still influenced by a fundamental medium.

3. Dark Matter and Dark Energy

Dark matter and dark energy make up about 95% of the universe’s total energy content, yet they remain undetectable through traditional means. These concepts are introduced to explain gravitational effects and the accelerated expansion of the universe. Both dark matter and dark energy are considered “unseen” yet influential, much like the ether was thought to be. These mysterious substances are theorized to exist everywhere, influencing the dynamics of galaxies and the universe at large.

While the scientific community hasn’t adopted the term “ether,” the unknown, invisible medium that drives gravitational and cosmic phenomena mirrors the concept of an all-pervasive ether that influences the material world.

4. String Theory and Extra Dimensions

String theory posits that fundamental particles are not point-like but rather one-dimensional “strings” vibrating in multiple dimensions. These strings exist in a higher-dimensional space-time, which is often referred to as a “brane” or “bulk” in some models. This higher-dimensional space could be thought of as a kind of ether or medium through which all forces, including gravity and electromagnetism, propagate. Just as the classical ether was once seen as the medium through which forces acted, string theory’s higher-dimensional spaces act as a substrate for the fundamental forces.

The “fabric” of the universe in string theory is conceptually similar to the idea of an ether-like medium, though it exists in higher dimensions, invisible to us but influencing everything in the universe.

5. The Vacuum and Zero-Point Energy

The quantum vacuum, often described as empty space, is not truly empty. It is filled with fluctuating fields, virtual particles, and zero-point energy, which can have real physical effects. The idea of zero-point energy in the quantum vacuum is similar to the concept of the ether as a universal energy field. Just as ether was once thought to be the medium through which electromagnetic fields and light waves propagated, the quantum vacuum provides the backdrop for particle interactions and fundamental forces.

Modern physics recognizes that the vacuum is far from empty, and some researchers, particularly those in the field of zero-point energy, see it as a kind of modern ether. The vacuum’s fluctuating energy could theoretically be tapped for power, similar to how early ether theories suggested that it could serve as a source of energy.

Mainstream science is moving closer to the idea of a universal, unobservable medium akin to the ether, though it’s now framed within the language of quantum fields, vacuum energy, and cosmology etc..

I can’t help but wonder, has it been ether, ether, all along?

Here’s an examples of that this obvious question does exist – Article:

Einstein killed the aether. Now the idea is back to save relativity
The luminiferous aether has become a byword for failed ideas. Now it is being revived to explain dark matter and dark energy, and potentially unify physics
By Brendan Foster – 30 October 2019

AS FAR as dead ideas go, the luminiferous aether is among the deadest. Over a century ago, it picked a fight with Einstein’s theory of relativity and lost. Few victories in modern physics have been so total. Today, relativity offers us our best picture of the large-scale structure of the universe. It is a byword for human achievement and scientific progress. The aether, if it gets mentioned at all, is an embarrassing footnote in its rise to glory.

But relativity has run into difficulties of its own. Its failure to explain the behaviour of the universe at the smallest scales suggests that some more fundamental theory is waiting to take its place. Einstein’s universe is also plagued by dark forces that his theory cannot cast out.

In an astonishing twist of fate, the key to relativity’s salvation could lie in the aether. Since the early 2000s, a small group of researchers have claimed that this invisible, space-filling substance could have the power to unify physics. Then, in late 2018, two independent groups suggested that the similarity between the aether and the shadowy powers that populate our cosmos may not be mere coincidence. For one team, the aether is a dead ringer for dark matter. For another, it could explain away dark energy. For others still, it might even be both.

The hunt is now on to see if it really is out there. The biggest laughing stock in physics may yet have the last laugh.

The best way to conceive of the aether (or ether, as it is now more usually called) is as a sort of faint,…

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg24432543-300-einstein-killed-the-aether-now-the-idea-is-back-to-save-relativity

Who Did Tesla Learn From?

Nikola Tesla had several influential figures in his life who helped shape his ideas, though he did not have a single traditional mentor. Here are some of those who influenced Tesla’s work:

Mihajlo Pupin (born October 9, 1858)

Tesla was born in the Austrian Empire (modern-day Croatia), and one of the most notable figures in Tesla’s early life was Mihajlo Pupin, a Serbian-American physicist and inventor. Pupin, who was a professor at Columbia University, had a significant influence on Tesla, especially during his early years in the United States. It was Pupin who helped guide Tesla toward a career in electrical engineering, and the two maintained a friendly relationship. Pupin and Tesla even shared ideas about the potential for wireless communication.

Thomas Edison (born February 11, 1847)

Although they eventually became rivals, Thomas Edison played a important role in Tesla’s early career. Tesla worked for Edison’s company in New York in the 1880s, where he became familiar with Edison’s DC (direct current) technology. Tesla initially admired Edison’s work, but after a falling out with him, Tesla developed his own ideas about alternating current (AC) and its superiority over DC. Edison and Tesla had a strained relationship, especially during the “War of Currents” in the late 19th century. Tesla worked for Edison for a brief period early in his career, but they parted ways over disagreements about their differing approaches to electricity. Edison was a proponent of direct current (DC) electricity, while Tesla supported alternating current (AC). Edison is often accused of taking credit for ideas that were actually developed by others, including Tesla. For example, Edison is often credited with the invention of the light bulb, but Tesla’s AC systems and innovations had a significant impact on the development of electrical power distribution, a field Edison did not support.

George Westinghouse (born October 6, 1846)

George Westinghouse, an American inventor and industrialist, was a significant mentor to Tesla, especially in the development and promotion of Tesla’s alternating current system. Westinghouse recognized the potential of Tesla’s AC system and offered him a partnership, providing financial support and the means to bring Tesla’s ideas to a broader market. Their collaboration was essential in the development of modern electrical power distribution. Westinghouse purchased Tesla’s patents for AC motors and systems, which allowed Tesla to get financial support and wider recognition. However, Westinghouse did experience financial struggles due to the high costs of implementing the AC system on a large scale, and there was some tension between Tesla and Westinghouse in terms of how much credit and profit Tesla should receive from the widespread adoption of AC power.

Anders Jonas Ångström (born August 13, 1814)

Tesla was also influenced by Anders Jonas Ångström, a Swedish physicist known for his work in spectroscopy. Tesla read Ångström’s work on the nature of light and energy, which helped form his understanding of electromagnetic fields and the propagation of waves through different media. Ångström’s research on the spectrum of light likely influenced Tesla’s development of ideas about radiant energy and wireless transmission.

Robert Hooke (born July 18, 1635)

Tesla was familiar with the work of Robert Hooke, an English polymath who was one of the first to describe the phenomenon of the “ether.” Hooke’s theories about the mechanical properties of the ether and its relation to the transmission of light and heat likely influenced Tesla’s thinking about the medium through which electromagnetic waves could propagate.

James Clerk Maxwell (born June 13, 1831)

Although Tesla did not work directly with James Clerk Maxwell, the Scottish physicist whose equations describe electromagnetism, Tesla was greatly influenced by Maxwell’s work. Maxwell’s theory of electromagnetism provided a theoretical foundation for many of Tesla’s inventions, and Tesla often claimed that he did not consider the scientific principles behind his inventions to be a matter of intuition, but that he built upon the work of Maxwell and others.

Tesla was deeply influenced by the works of James Clerk Maxwell, particularly Maxwell’s equations of electromagnetism. Tesla saw Maxwell’s work as essential to understanding the connection between electricity, magnetism, and the ether. Tesla’s understanding of the ether as a medium for the transmission of electromagnetic waves aligned with Maxwell’s ideas.

Heinrich Hertz (born February 22, 1857)

Tesla credited Heinrich Hertz’s work on electromagnetic waves as a significant influence on his own thinking. Hertz’s experiments in the 1880s confirmed the existence of electromagnetic waves, which Tesla built upon in his development of wireless communication and radio waves. Hertz’s demonstration of the presence of electromagnetic waves in a vacuum helped Tesla solidify his ideas about the ether being the medium through which electromagnetic energy travels.

Heinrich Hertz acknowledged the existence of the ether in the context of his work on electromagnetic waves. In the late 19th century, Hertz conducted groundbreaking experiments that confirmed the existence of electromagnetic waves, which were predicted by James Clerk Maxwell. Hertz’s experiments demonstrated the properties of these waves, such as their ability to reflect, refract, and interfere, much like light waves.

At the time, the ether was still widely believed to be the medium through which electromagnetic waves propagated, just as sound waves propagate through air. Hertz himself, being part of the scientific community that subscribed to the ether theory, referred to the ether as the medium through which these electromagnetic waves traveled.

Hertz did not question the ether’s existence in his work. Instead, he treated it as a fundamental assumption in his theoretical framework. However, in later years, after Einstein’s theory of special relativity (1905), the need for the ether as a physical medium was called into question, and it eventually fell out of favor as a concept in mainstream physics. This shift was based on the understanding that electromagnetic waves could propagate through a vacuum without the need for a medium like the ether.

The Works of Michael Faraday (born September 22, 1791)

Tesla was also influenced by Michael Faraday, especially in the areas of electromagnetism and field theory. Faraday’s concept of the “field” was foundational to Tesla’s understanding of how the ether operates. Tesla referred to Faraday as a major influence on his thinking, particularly regarding the relationship between electric fields and the ether.

Other Influences,

His Mother, Georgina Tesla: Tesla credited his mother for sparking his early interest in science and invention. While she wasn’t formally educated, she had a deep understanding of nature and mechanics, which Tesla admired. Her intuition and interest in the mysteries of the natural world were an early inspiration for Tesla. She also had an ability to remember and recite Serbian folk tales and stories, which might have shaped Tesla’s broad curiosity about the universe.

His Father, Milutin Tesla: Tesla’s father was a writer and theologian, and although Tesla did not follow his father’s religious path, he did inherit a love for literature and learning. Milutin Tesla encouraged young Nikola’s curiosity, even though he may not have fully understood or supported his son’s later scientific pursuits.

Professors at the Technical University in Graz, Austria, were Tesla had his formal education. Tesla studied electrical engineering and physics at the university.

Professor Zetsche: Tesla mentioned a professor from his time at the University of Prague who taught him the importance of electrical theory and mechanics.

Tesla was deeply influenced by science fiction writers, particularly those like Jules Verne and H.G. Wells, whose imaginative works inspired him to think beyond the constraints of conventional science.

Tesla also absorbed ideas from Eastern philosophy, particularly concepts of energy and the nature of the universe that were aligned with his views on the ether and the interconnectedness of all things.

Theosophy and Spiritualism:

Tesla was interested in metaphysical and philosophical ideas, including those proposed by Theosophists and other spiritual thinkers of the time. He reportedly believed that the ether had a spiritual dimension and was connected to a higher, universal intelligence. While Tesla didn’t always speak publicly about spiritual matters, his writings and thoughts on the ether were influenced by the broader intellectual climate of the late 19th century, which included ideas of an underlying, unifying force in nature.

Personal Experience and moments of intense clarity:

Tesla credited his personal experiences, particularly his visions and insights, for much of his understanding of the ether. Tesla often reported having moments of intense clarity or inspiration, where his thoughts and understanding of complex scientific ideas seemed to come to him all at once. These experiences were critical in shaping his ideas on the ether and his belief in the interconnection between the physical world and what he called “higher” realms of existence.

——–

Further differences:

Tesla was known for his celibacy, which he often attributed to his devotion to science and his belief that romantic relationships and marriage would interfere with his intellectual pursuits. He had a highly disciplined life, focused on his work and inventions, which led him to live a solitary existence.

Tesla had few close personal relationships, and while he did have great admiration for women, he never pursued romantic relationships seriously. He often expressed an idealized view of women, and in his later years, he was somewhat reclusive, spending more time in his laboratory than engaging socially.

Tesla was deeply spiritual, though he didn’t adhere to conventional religious dogma. He was influenced by a broad range of philosophies, including Eastern spirituality and Western mysticism, and he believed in a kind of universal intelligence or “cosmic force” that permeated the universe.

He didn’t believe in a personal, anthropomorphic God in the traditional sense but felt a profound connection to a higher power through nature and the universe.

Tesla viewed science as a way to uncover the deeper truths of existence, seeing the universe as orderly and governed by laws, but with a sense of wonder and reverence toward the mysteries of the cosmos.

Einstein had a much more complicated love life. He married twice—first to Mileva Marić, a fellow physicist, and later to his cousin Elsa Einstein. His relationship with Mileva was tumultuous, and they eventually divorced. Einstein had a number of romantic affairs during his life, particularly after his divorce from Mileva.

His romantic relationships and infidelities were part of his personal narrative, and he wasn’t known for the same level of chastity or discipline that Tesla exhibited.

Einstein’s views on morality were grounded in humanism. While he was not religious in the traditional sense, he believed in the idea of a moral imperative to act for the greater good, guided by rational thinking. He referred to his belief in God as a “cosmic religion” but did not adhere to any organized religion. He famously stated, “I do not believe in a personal God, and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly.” Instead, Einstein was fascinated by the laws of the universe, and he often spoke of an impersonal, mysterious force he referred to as “God,” which could be seen in the order of the universe rather than in any divine intervention.

Tesla’s Criticism of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity

Tesla famously criticized Einstein’s theory of relativity, calling it “a theory of shadows.” He believed that Einstein’s focus on abstract concepts such as spacetime was a step away from practical, real-world science and didn’t align with his own approach of discovering practical, observable phenomena. Tesla felt that Einstein’s work undermined the established principles of physics and that it did not match his own discoveries in electromagnetism and energy.

Tesla’s approach was grounded in experiments, electrical engineering, and tangible technologies, while Einstein’s was rooted in mathematical theory and abstract concepts. Tesla believed that the ether, which was central to his own understanding of the universe, was ignored or abandoned by modern science, including Einstein’s theories.

Tesla felt that Einstein’s theory was too abstract and theoretical, whereas he preferred a more materialistic and experimental approach. .

Tesla and Einstein had very different scientific views. Tesla was a proponent of the ether and often criticized Einstein’s theory of relativity for eliminating the concept of an all-pervasive medium like the ether. While Einstein’s theory of relativity sought to explain the laws of physics without the need for an ether, Tesla’s work centered around the practical applications of energy and electrical fields. The absence of direct references in Einstein’s work could also be attributed to their differing approaches to physics, with Einstein primarily focusing on abstract theories and math, and Tesla focusing on tangible, applied science.

Einstein did not credit Tesla in his scientific papers or major works, and there isn’t much evidence to suggest that he gave Tesla direct credit for specific contributions. However, both were well aware of each other’s work. Tesla was more concerned with the practical application of energy and electromagnetic theories, while Einstein was deeply engaged in theoretical physics

I find these quotes interesting:

Tesla, in the poem called “Fragments of Olympian Gossip” composed for his friend, George Sylvester Viereck, referred to Einstein as a “long-haired crank” – “Now a long haired crank, Einstein by name, Puts on your high teaching all the blame.” https://www.nikolateslalegend.com/wiki/tesla/nikola-tesla-and-albert-einstein

Tesla, called Einstein’s relativity work “a magnificent mathematical garb” – “Einstein’s relativity work is a magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king… its exponents are brilliant men but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists.”

Tesla stated that Einstein’s theories were “a mass of errors and deceptive ideas violently opposed to the teachings of the Great Men of Science of the past and even to Common Sense”

Did Einstein Steal from Tesla?

David Hilbert’s work on the field equations helped Einstein refine his theory of general relativity. While there was tension between Einstein and Hilbert during the development of the field equations for general relativity, Einstein eventually acknowledged Hilbert’s contributions and described their correspondence as productive and influential.

Marcel Grossmann was a classmate and mathematician who helped Einstein secure a job at the Swiss Patent Office. Grossmann also contributed mathematical expertise that supported Einstein’s development of general relativity. Einstein explicitly credited Besso in the development of special relativity, stating: “I could not have done this without you.”

Hermann Minkowski was Einstein’s former mathematics professor in Zurich. Minkowski later developed the concept of spacetime, which was foundational to Einstein’s theory of general relativity.

Michele Besso was a close friend and colleague, often referred to as Einstein’s “sounding board.” Einstein credited Besso as the only person who helped him while working out the ideas for the theory of relativity. Einstein explicitly credited Besso in the development of special relativity, stating: “I could not have done this without you.”

Einstein greatly admired Hendrik Lorentz and acknowledged his theoretical contributions, especially to electromagnetism and the Lorentz transformations, which played a significant role in Einstein’s development of special relativity. He described Lorentz as a guiding figure whose work paved the way for his own.

Einstein initially dismissed Hermann Minkowski’s spacetime framework as overly mathematical but later integrated the concept into his general relativity work. He did not explicitly credit Minkowski in his writings, though he acknowledged his contributions indirectly.

As mentioned earlier, Tesla was focused on practical inventions and experiments, whereas Einstein’s work was primarily theoretical. This has led some to believe that Tesla’s more hands-on, experimental approach was overlooked in favor of Einstein’s theoretical contributions. In some circles, this has led to the perception that Tesla’s work was unfairly overshadowed or even stolen by other scientists, including Einstein.

Ideas Tesla advocated for—such as an all-pervasive energy medium—were later mirrored in the modern conception of fields in quantum mechanics. However, to avoid bias, it’s important to recognize that this is more of a conceptual similarity than a direct theft of Tesla’s ideas.

Some argue that Einstein’s theories of energy and the relationship between matter and energy (such as Electromagnetic Theory and Field Theory, famously encapsulated in E=mc²) may have had indirect connections to Tesla’s work on the energy of waves and the potential of electromagnetic fields. Tesla believed in the connection between energy, vibration, and matter, and there’s a belief that Einstein’s concepts of energy and mass may have some resonance with Tesla’s earlier work.

Albert Einstein admitted, “The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources.” and a lot of his discoveries seems to be a repeat or, or borrowing from Henri Poincaré‘s (1854 -1912) work.

Some Tesla supporters argue that Einstein’s theory, which relied heavily on mathematical abstraction, ignored the ether concept that Tesla had worked with extensively, literally and practically.

Ora Et Labora

Are theories and models enough? Isn’t science based on observations made from experiments and real life?

The idea of experimenting is foundational to scientific discoveries because it allows theories and hypotheses to be tested, refined, and validated against reality.

Experimentation provides a systematic way of observing and manipulating the physical world to uncover truths, identify patterns, and challenge assumptions.

The process of experimenting is a continual journey of learning. It reflects a dynamic balance between intellectual curiosity, methodical exploration, and the application of reason.

Alchemy, which was and is an ancient science, emphasized “ora et labora”, scientific experimentation, combines thoughtful intention with deliberate action.

Ora et labora suggests that the “work” of science is not just a mechanical process; it’s an active engagement with the natural world that requires creativity, patience, and perseverance, and a relationship between man and nature.

Experimentation is Central to Science

Here’s why experimentation is central to science, and how it aligns with the principle of ora et labora (prayer and work):

1. Empirical Validation of Theories: Science is grounded in the belief that knowledge should be based on observable and repeatable evidence. Experimentation offers a means to verify theories by testing predictions in real-world conditions. For example, the laws of physics that govern the motion of objects were only confirmed through experiments, such as Galileo’s work with inclined planes or Newton’s work with gravity. Without experimentation, we would be left with untested ideas that may not reflect how the world actually works.

2. Iteration and Refinement: Experimentation is not just about proving something right; it’s also about discovering what’s wrong or incomplete. When experiments fail, they offer critical insights that help refine theories. This iterative process of testing and revising hypotheses is what drives scientific progress. As new information arises from each experiment, the understanding deepens, and previous assumptions may be overturned or revised.

3. Uncovering the Unknown: Much of science involves exploring the unknown. By conducting experiments, scientists can uncover new phenomena, relationships, or materials that weren’t previously understood or anticipated. For example, the discovery of radioactivity by Marie Curie came about through her experiments with uranium salts, and the development of quantum mechanics arose from experimental anomalies in the behavior of light and electrons. Without experimentation, these crucial discoveries may have remained hidden.

4. Objectivity and Rigorous Testing: Experimentation provides a means to test ideas objectively, separating subjective beliefs or assumptions from verifiable evidence. Through controlled experiments, scientists can isolate variables and determine cause-and-effect relationships. This objectivity ensures that the scientific process is not swayed by personal biases or preconceived notions, promoting a deeper, more accurate understanding of nature.

5. Science as a Form of “Work”: The idea of ora et labora translates to “pray and work,” suggesting that both spiritual reflection and physical labor are essential for growth and fulfillment. In science, “labora” (work) can be understood as the hands-on, practical efforts of experimentation. This “work” is a fundamental part of the scientific process—actively engaging with the physical world, manipulating instruments, and collecting data. It’s not just passive observation or theorizing, but an active, participatory process that builds knowledge through tangible effort.

In this sense, scientific experimentation parallels the idea of prayer in the sense that it is a dedicated, disciplined activity that requires both commitment and humility. While prayer is an act of seeking higher understanding or guidance, scientific work often involves seeking deeper truths about the universe through direct engagement, discovery, and learning.

Luminiferous what?

When you work with the idea of ether you will also encounter these terms, some of which are synonymous with ether, others rely on the ether to exist:

Luminiferous Aether,
Vacuum, Electromagnetic field (EM field),
Odic Force (19th Century),
Chaos (Chaos Theory),
Zero-Point Energy (ZPE),
The Field,
Aether (Classical Greek),
Dark Energy (Modern Cosmology),
Auric field,
Plenum,
Tao (Dao),
Subtle Energy,
Cosmic Consciousness,
Chi (Qi), Ki, Life Force, Prana (Hinduism, Yoga), Vril (Baron Lytton)
Orgone (Wilhelm Reich),
Ka (Ancient Egyptian),
Vital Force (Vitalism)

The Futility of Atomism, BigBang-ism and Denying the Ether

Mainstream science hold the belief that according to “The Second Law of Thermodynamics“, which states that “in any closed system, entropy (the degree of disorder) will tend to increase over time”, others state it as “total entropy of an isolated system can never decrease over time”.. According to this, the universe will expands, energy becomes more spread out and less available for doing work, and disorder will increase.

According to this, over incredibly long timescales, the universe will reach a state of maximum entropy…. In other words, maximum expenditure and diffusion. This is synonymous with “Heat Death” where the universe has expanded so much that it has reached thermodynamic equilibrium. In this state, all stars would have burned out, black holes would have evaporated, and all matter would have decayed. The universe would be a cold, dark, and empty void, with no thermodynamic processes taking place. This is sometimes called the “Big Freeze” in contrast to the “cause” of this universe, “the Big Bang”.

Errors of logic in this include, first and foremost, assuming the system is “closed”.

Ether theory implies that the system is open. As explained earlier, the most recent scientific views also lean towards an invisible non material source of everything. If we allow the ether to exist, then this system is “open”.. In other words, the prediction of maximum entropy fails. This universe is not heading to a death freeze and perpetual diffusion and lack of order.

Where does the source of anything come from? The source of the big bang, the source of any energy in any field mentioned by any theory?

Let’s look at both 1st and 2nd laws:

The First Law of thermodynamics, also known as law of energy conservation, states that energy cannot be created or destroyed in an isolated system. Instead, energy can only be transformed from one form to another or transferred between systems.

The Second Law of thermodynamics states that total entropy of an isolated system can never decrease over time.

In a reality where ether (or whatever you want to call it) exists, energy may be extracted from the ether. This does not violate the 1st or 2nd “laws of thermodynamics”. This is precisely the model that clean and alternative energy production inventions aim to utilize… Like tesla, to work with the model or theory (possibly reality) of the Ether, rather than a big bang and big freeze, and draw energy from this open system.

The ether, in the models proposed by scientists like Tesla, is seen as a source of infinite, unquantified energy, a field that permeates all of space. If the ether is truly a non-depleting reservoir of energy, tapping into it wouldn’t necessarily violate the Laws of Thermodynamics. Energy would simply be transferred from the ether into a usable form (such as electricity), without creating energy out of nothing.

The ether, is not a material substance but a dynamic field that exists everywhere and interacts with matter. If this was the case, boundless energy is constantly flowing through it, it would provide a continuous supply of energy, similar to how a river continuously flows into a watermill, which in turn converts that flow into mechanical energy.

The Second Law is not violated, it holds true, because the system (the universe) as a whole is still subject to increasing entropy, but locally, within specific open systems (like a device designed to harvest etheric energy), the law does not prohibit energy conversion from an external source.

Thus, the open system approach, which allows for external energy sources like the ether, would avoid the typical constraints imposed on closed systems by the Second Law, without violating fundamental laws of physics. Instead, it suggests that while energy may be conserved in a closed system, in an open system interacting with the ether, energy can flow freely without being created from nothing, but rather converted from one form to another.

Compare and contrast, reflect on, this, the idea of a big bang (which many scientists have started abandoning). But, they still hold to entropy. So, consider mainstream science of physics that holds the belief that the universe is expanding, and this expansion is driven by dark energy; as the universe continues to expand, it will reach a state of maximum entropy (the heat death or Big Freeze)

This idea holds that after expanding it will freeze and with entropy everything in this reality becomes less organized and less cohesive.. This idea proposes that everything becomes less ordered and organized (despite evidence all around us of continued organizing, just look at living beings and evolution).

Compare this mainstream science theory and belief (which is often promoted to students as the best theory we have) to the theory or belief of ether, and the never ending energy, constant creation of matter from ether, and constant re-organizing and order.

Q. How does accepting a finite, closed-system material atomic-only universe impact our views of energy abundance and the fate of the material universe?

Reflect on how would adopting one, or the other, models impact your life, our science, and our values?

Fields vs. Ether

In classical physics, fields (like the gravitational field or the electric field) are not made of particles. But they are quantifiable.

The “quantity” refers to a measurable value that exists at every point in the field.

For example: The electric field at any point is the force per unit charge that would act on a small test charge placed at that point. The field can have different strengths and directions at different locations in space, but it’s not composed of particles; it is a continuous distribution of force or influence.

In this view, we don’t require “particles” to explain a field; instead, a field is an entity in itself, defined by its strength (magnitude) and direction at each point in space.

In quantum field theory (QFT), fields are the “fundamental entities, and particles are seen as quantized excitations of these fields. In other words, a particle is a localized disturbance or fluctuation in the field.”

Ex. the electromagnetic field is a continuous entity, but photons (the particles of light) are the quanta or excitations of this field.

So, in classical field theory, we do not need to think of a field as being made up of particles. The field is just a “continuous quantity” that describes a property of space (like how gravity affects objects in space, or how an electric charge influences other charges). There’s no need for particles in this classical picture. It is a “field” that has “quantity” but is not quantized (ie. without matter which is quantifiable). hmm… This does not make sense to me.

In quantum physics, fields are quantized, meaning they consist of discrete quanta, and particles are these discrete manifestations of the field. But even in quantum theory, we still don’t think of a field as being composed of particles; rather, particles are what result from the interactions within a quantized field.

In QFT, “fields” are the “fundamental entities that exist throughout space.” Each force, such as gravity or electromagnetism, is carried by a corresponding “field” (gravitational field, electromagnetic field, etc.). The particles we observe, such as photons (particles of light), are excitations or quantized disturbances in these fields. This, sounds incredibly similar to what Tesla said and how he and others describe the ether, and particles…

Tesla believed energy could be drawn from the ether, quantum field theory suggests that particles are just localized energy in a field. A photon is an excitation in the electromagnetic field, just as a vibration in the ether might have been viewed by Tesla as a form of energy transfer.

The modern idea of the ether has evolved into the concept of fields, but there is a striking similarity in that both Tesla’s ether and quantum fields are seen as the medium through which forces and energy are transmitted.

The ether theory allows for ether being a medium for energy transmission. Tesla believed that energy could be extracted from the ether and used to power devices without relying on conventional sources like fuel or electricity. It also allows for ether to be a unifying force. Tesla saw the ether as the underlying structure connecting everything in the universe, not unlike how fields in modern physics are thought to connect particles and forces.

Modern field theories have evolved, and today they are aligned in many ways to Tesla’s ether, particularly in their conception of an “all-encompassing medium that underlies everything in the universe.”

While modern science has re-imagined or re-defined this idea into “quantum fields,” the essence of Tesla’s “ether” as an energetic substance that interacts with matter is remarkably similar to how quantum fields are now understood to work.

So, why don’t we just call it ether and give credit to those who explained and worked with it for decades?

Since mainstream science is now working on accepting that matter is manifesting from a non-material source, will the next step be go back to acknowledging the existence of ether? The implications of doing so may result in abundance and infinite energy .. what a world would we live in if each human had access to energy, warmth, light, fuel.. how would that change people.. and is humanity, are individuals, ready for that? and who may abuse such abundance? Would that create peace, or more destruction?

Logic

The ether concept may have been rejected in its classical form due to specific experimental results (e.g., Michelson-Morley), but the logic of wave propagation, spacetime properties, and quantum phenomena strongly suggests the presence of an all-pervading medium, akin to ether, under different names or interpretations. Here is a Logical argument given what we know so far which aims to prove Ether’s existence logically.

Premises:

Continuity of Space:
- Space appears continuous and permeable to forces like light, gravity, and electromagnetic waves. There must logically exist a medium or framework that facilitates the propagation of these phenomena.
Wave Propagation Requires a Medium:
- In classical physics, wave phenomena require a medium to propagate (e.g., sound waves in air, water waves in water). Light and electromagnetic waves exhibit wave-like properties (e.g., interference, diffraction), suggesting a medium-like entity.
Energy Transfer:
- Energy can be transmitted across empty space (e.g., sunlight reaching Earth). For energy to transfer across a vacuum, there must be something (call it ether, vacuum fluctuations, or a field) facilitating that transfer.
Einstein’s Curved Spacetime:
- General Relativity describes spacetime as “curved” by mass and energy. If spacetime can curve, stretch, or warp, then it has properties that resemble a medium rather than a true “nothingness.” A medium with properties inherently aligns with the concept of ether.
Quantum Fields:
- In Quantum Field Theory (QFT), space is filled with quantum fields, which give rise to particles and energy fluctuations. These fields are similar in concept to an ether, as they pervade all space and facilitate interactions.
Historical Experiments & Inconsistencies:
- Experiments like Michelson-Morley failed to detect ether in the classical sense but did not conclusively prove its nonexistence. Many later phenomena (e.g., Casimir Effect, Zero-Point Energy) suggest the presence of an underlying medium or energy field.

Logical Argument:

If energy, waves, and forces require a medium to propagate, then an all-pervading substance or field must exist.
- Observation: Light, a wave, propagates through “empty” space. Without a medium, propagation should be impossible under classical logic.
If space is not truly empty, then there must exist an entity filling it.
- Observation: Space is not a perfect vacuum; it contains virtual particles, quantum fluctuations, and fields. These could be considered aspects or manifestations of the ether.
If spacetime has properties (e.g., curvature, expansion), then space itself is not a void but a dynamic, active entity.
- Observation: Curved spacetime in Einsteinian physics is indistinguishable from a fluid-like medium in classical physics.
If experiments and technologies produce effects consistent with an underlying medium, this suggests the ether exists.
- Observation: Phenomena like Tesla’s radiant energy, zero-point energy effects, or cold electricity hint at a substrate enabling these interactions.

Logical Errors

Paradoxes, contradictions and errors exist in the logic of those who say Ether does not exist.. For instance,

A Medium: The propagation of light, gravity, and electromagnetic waves across vast distances (e.g., the speed of light in a vacuum) without any medium is illogical. A wave, by definition, needs a medium (air for sound waves, water for water waves). Without a medium, how can the waves travel across space?

Emptiness & Vacuum: The fabric of spacetime itself being curved or affected by mass and energy implies that spacetime is not an abstract, empty void. If spacetime is not “empty” and can have properties (e.g., warping, stretching), then it must be composed of something. Without this “something,” the concept of curvature or dynamic spacetime would be nonsensical.

Quantum Mechanics: The observable effects of quantum mechanics (such as the Casimir effect, virtual particles, and zero-point energy) suggest that space is not a vacuum, but instead teeming with fluctuations. If space is filled with these fluctuations, how can we assert that space is truly empty, without any underlying medium like the ether?

Energy Transfer: How is energy transferred across empty space? If light, gravity, or electromagnetic fields can traverse a void, how is it possible that something as seemingly intangible as light can move through nothing? The concept of space as truly empty is contradicted by the very ability of energy to travel across it.

Wave Theory and ‘Particle Duality’: Waves require a medium. The dual nature of light, both particle and wave, becomes incoherent if we do not assume a medium for wave-like behavior. If space is a void, then it would be impossible for waves to travel through it, creating a contradiction in wave-particle theory.

Quantum Field Theory: In modern physics, the quantum fields may be interpreted as the contemporary version of the ether. These fields permeate all of space, and particles emerge as excitations of these fields, echoing the older concept of ether. Thus, negating the ether leads to contradictions in understanding how forces, energy, and particles behave in space.

Simpler Less Scientific Logic

If we were to explore how a less scientifically-advanced philosopher would have used logic to explore the idea of the ether we may imagine that this philosopher would start by defining what they know and observe. They would observe that light, gravity, and other forces move through distances on earth, and through space. Their eyes see light travel from distant stars, and senses perceive objects affected by the invisible force of gravity.

They know that material objects interact by touch or proximity, that heat moves in metal, that light itself imparts heat on objects and that energy is transferred when two objects collide, by contact.

They would wonder how can light, a force, travel across vast distances without physical contact? They observe energy moving in waves in water, in a rope, in metal, that sound travels in a tree, all mediums.

Assuming Magic or a trickster demon is not an answer. Assuming that the stars in the night sky, and the sun, are not deceptions from a demon or a hallucination. They observe that forces travel across space. But how? And what is space, if not the medium through which these forces travel?

If space was a vacuum without any substance, how could anything (be it light, gravity, or any force) move through it? A wave, as seen in water (or sound), by definition, needs something to wave through. If space was a vacuum, how could a wave of light travel through nothing?

They would create a vacuum chamber, and evacuate as much as as they can, they observe that sound ceased to travel in that, yet light travels in that vacuum they created. How can light travel when there is no air? They also note that light is invisible as it travels and becomes visible once it reaches a matter.

Having decided that magic is not at play and forces could not travel through nothingness, this philosopher would be left with the necessity of an invisible medium, which is not air, through which energies travel, they call it ether.

If they would reject the ether, they must accept that forces, such as light, heat or gravity, can act over distances without any substance to carry them. If there was no medium to carry the energy, how could they account for the capacity to carry forces, which are not self-evident without a carrier?

The very nature of forces suggests they require a medium to exist. Therefore, to deny the ether is to deny the very nature of how forces interact with matter, or to revert to accepting Magic or hallucination.

What if, it was, always, the ether?

Thanks for reading. I hope this was helpful.

Keep an open mind.

Question everything.. Science is a living process, it is not settled.

“It’s better to have good questions than bad answers” Jung

“The mind is sharper and keener in seclusion and uninterrupted solitude. I have no doubt that this is the secret of the genius of all the great men in history.” Tesla

“Even the insane are capable of deep thought.” Tesla.