Could the aether be real?

They've lied about so much else; why not that, too?

Let me preface this by saying that I am not a physicist, and this is precisely the point. Of late, global events have demonstrated that the experts in scientific fields are too utterly indoctrinated to be trusted. I know this, because I am one; I am just not an expert in the field of physics. I am, however, an expert in a medical field, and let me tell you, “trusting the experts” when it came to COVID – and so very much else – was, and continues to be, a very bad idea.

Most readers are likely aware that the official medical protocols for COVID, such as slamming people onto ventilators, were an illogical recipe for rapid death. Even worse in terms of sheer loss of life is the fact that the mRNA injections amount to nothing short of a syringe full of poison, previously untested to any success and pushed upon the world in the most disingenuous, egregious fashion. All of this was aided tremendously by the complicity of the experts. Very, very few doctors spoke out against these murderous protocols and poisonous shots. Of course, those that did were stifled and punished, a fact that would not have been possible without the mass conformity of the medical professions as a whole.

As a result of this betrayal of public trust, the medical profession has suffered a well-deserved loss of confidence. In April of 2020, 71.5% of Americans trusted the medical system. By January of 2024, that number had plummeted to 40.1%, and it has likely fallen even more since then. In other words, prior to the COVID situation, the vast majority of the public trusted doctors; now, it is an actual minority that continues to do so. At this point in the game, it has become evident that the lies we have been told are so egregious that it is only logical to question everything.

This brings me to the topic at hand. Anyone who has undergone the scientific indoctrination process “knows” that space is a void. Underpinning the cosmos, there is, simply put, a whole lot of nothing – at least, this is what the current scientific consensus states. Is this the same scientific consensus that led the masses to believe that ventilators save lives and that the mRNA injections are “safe and effective?” If so, then perhaps the consensus regarding the underpinnings of the universe itself deserves some examination.

This consensus has shifted dramatically over the course of the past ~200 years. Prior to the late 1800s, the consensus was that the universe was not a great void of nothing punctuated with a handful of something, but that it was, instead, a great something with different resonances to its matter, and that the underpinning had yet to be defined, but was generally referred to as aether. This unproven assumption was challenged in 1887, when the Mitchelson-Morely experiment allegedly put this theory to rest, failing to find evidence of the aether and thus codifying the notion that the universe is made of mostly nothing, rather than something. Einstein and all other theoretical physicists that came after him built upon this “nothing” theory.

The void theory of the universe is not merely held as sacred fact among the scientific establishment but is, to my knowledge, essentially unquestioned to this day. It is what the disingenuous self-described experts call “settled science.” It is one of those facts that students of science must simply accept as gospel, to go along to get along.

Thankfully, I am no longer a student of science in that I am no longer beholden to its gospels and no longer required to parrot its psalms in order to get a passing grade. Although I do work in the medical profession, my adherence to its unquestioned tenets is not required for me to keep my job. I am free to question, and question I do. I have begun to question a lot of things. It is sometimes disorienting how much I now question every aspect of the doctoral-level scientific education that I worked so hard to obtain.

Few things do I question more than the notion of the void as opposed to the aether. I questioned it even during my schooling; at that point, however, it was drilled into me that such fundamental “facts” of science are not to be questioned, that “the science is settled” as far as these notions are concerned, and thus, I didn't pay it much mind. I wasn't in the field of physics, so it didn't really affect me – so I thought. Sure, physics underpins all of science; it didn't directly affect my training, however, so the cognitive dissonance produced by my skepticism as to the fundamental nature of the universe did not preclude me from obtaining the degree necessary to lawfully call myself “Doctor.”

I realize now that this notion – the idea that the void versus aether debate did not affect my medical training – could not be further from the truth. In every skill that I have mastered, one thing holds true: One begins at the bottom, with the core fundamentals, and builds on top of that. If the core fundamentals are not mastered, the skill will be learned at fault. This absolutely applies to science itself, including, but not limited to, the study of medicine.

If the universe is in fact possessed of an aether that underpins its structure, this would shake the foundations of every scientific discipline. The more I research what I was not taught in school, the more I am convinced that the lie about the non-existence of aether could be among the greatest tricks that the devil ever pulled, right up there with convincing us that he does not exist, either. It could explain so much, so many little inconsistencies and questions. Dark matter, that as-yet-unproven and consistently confusing theory postulated to explain discrepancies in calculations? Perhaps those discrepancies could be explained by looking to the aether. How does an embryo develop? Perhaps it follows a morphogenic field impressed upon the aether. Is Qi, the fundamental underpinning of the (highly successful) practice of Traditional Chinese Medicine, a real thing? Perhaps, and perhaps its medium of flow is the aether itself. I am not saying that these theories are necessarily true, mind you; I am saying that, at this time, under the currently accepted “void model” of the universe, they cannot even be examined – and that is a problem.

Skeptics and detractors will suggest that I am delusional and simply do not understand “the Science.” That's fine. I am not claiming to be absolutely correct, nor indeed am I convinced one way or the other. What I am claiming is that so-called “Settled Science^TM” deserves to be heavily scrutinized, and that the hypothesis of the existence of aether, which, prior to 1887 was generally believed to be the truth, has not been sufficiently dis-proven.

Also, there is something to be said for intuition. My intuition does not jive with the concept of the void. The idea of an aether just resonates, somehow – it just, intuitively, makes sense.