Before Einstein developed Special Relativity, Hendrick Lorentz had developed the so called 'Lorentz Aether Theory' to explain the same thing. As far as physics is concerned, Einstein added (or in fact 'removed'), very little from Lorentz's theory. Einstein went ahead and generalized Lorentz's equations and it was called 'General relativity'. Then in a misleading way way, it is presented as if General Relativity exlusively Generalizes Einstein's theory, yet it is almost just mathematical! The equations fully satisfies Lorentz's Theory as well. Apparently, Lorentz's aether theory was never generalized by any of those prominent physicists. So here is a breif examination of such a theory. I will show you that it explains far better that the aetherless General Relativity!

Physicists can easily understand the so called 'relativistic effects' if they think that there is a medium that pervades everywhere (like the one they termed it 'Luminiferous Aether'). Since when we move through an apparent vacuum, we are actually moving through this medium, we can suppose that the relativistic effects comes about when the 'molecules of this medium' rushes past the object. Since unlike the 'vacuum', the medium is an entity, this allows us to conceive of a case where the object in question is 'stationary' and the medium itself is rushing past it, thereby eliciting the same relativistic effects as this scenario causes the same 'rushing past of molecules', as when the object itself moves through the medium.

This understanding of special relativity provides a very easy way of understanding how you can think of yourself as accelerating 'upwards' (together with the earth), while at the same time, another person at the opposite side of the earth can similarly think of himself, together with the earth, as though accelerating 'upwards' (now 'downwards', according to you). The aether is simply converging towards the centre of the earth from all sides. Remember that the movement that is essential for relativistic effects to manifest is 'the rushing of aetheric molecules across objects'. So we don't need a 'curve space' to 'make it possible' this apparent absurdity of 'the earth accelerating in all directions' (without exploding, of course). Therefore we don't need a 'curved space' to generalize relativity to apply to things in the vicinity of gravitating object resulting from them being seen as to be in 'accelerating frames of references'. That is to say when we think of earth as an accelerating frame of reference, and link such 'acceleration' to gravity, we can see how relativistic effects can manifest itself but with motion being a special case of the more general acceleration.

This understanding of what might be going on in the vicinity of gravitating objects renders General Relativity (GR) a Ptolemaic Theory. A 'Ptolemaic Theory' is an impossible to understand, complex theory that can be made to fit observation by adjusting several 'tunning knobs' inherent in the theory, all while there is a very simple way of understanding the phenomenon, provided that we make an appropriate assumption. The best example of a Ptolemaic Theory is where the name came from: the Ptolemaic theory of geocentric model. Indeed even special relativity is 'Ptolemaic', with the insistence of 'empty' space being analogous to the insistence of geocentrism. Both are strict insistence that are based on mere appearances. Indeed space (evacuated) appears to be empty, but it is nothing of the sort!

It is noteworthy that Einstein originally regarded the Minkowski's 4 dimensional space-time idea as to be superfluous. So it is good to examine what made Einstein change his mind. You will see that it was all because Einstein wanted so much to understand relativistic effects as though features of empty space. If at the juncture where he was working with GR relaxed his idea that 'aether was superfluous' rather than relax the idea that Minkowski's spacetime was superfluous, he would not have fallen into the temptation of incorporating 4 dimensional space time into relativity. He would instead go along the path of a 'generalized aether theory'.

The story goes that Einstein wanted to think of gravity as to be completely equivalent to the effects experienced in an accelerating frame of reference. However, he soon noticed (like you would easily), that there is actually no way of completely equating gravity to acceleration since gravity acts in all directions, and you accelerate only along a single direction. This is to say that two objects falling 'down' to earth, at two different locations, will converge as if they seek to meet at the center of the earth. The story goes on that then Einstein recalled the way, for instance, meridians meets at the poles. The meridians are the 'straightest lines' along the spherical surface. (such lines are called geodesics). With this, Einstein could amuse himself that actually, the 'converging lines' are 'parallel' when seen as 'geodesics'. But this redefinition of 'parallel' doesn't solve the problem. It only diverts the attention, and this may be the reason the story of 'the earth as accelerating frame' is suddenly dropped! Next, we are taken entirely into the journey to Riemannian Geometry, without any further attempt to show how this follows from the Einstein's Equivalence Principles! With the geodesics converging to earth, the earth still has to expand for it to be seen as an accelerating frame of reference! But we don't see the earth expanding! The only reasonable solution is to think of an entity accelerating towards the earth's center. Any motion relative to this entity brings about relativistic effects. It is what brings about the effects in steady motion, and what will bring about the effect in the vicinity of gravitating bodies. So Einstein needed not to think of 'curved space'. He only needed to give up the idea that relativistic effects are about 'space and time' and adopt the idea that they are about objects acted upon by a moving medium.

Let us now see how the 'generalized aether theory' solves even more daunting problem of GR that I have pointed out in previous blog posts. To recap a bit, note that if you attribute the relativistic effects to 'distortions' of space and time, like they do, we encounter the problem of 'relative to what' the space time is distorted. If 'time' is 'dillated' by some 'stretching of time' at a region, then every 'clock' at that region will get similarly 'stretch'. So how do we measure this 'dilation'? It turns out the they do in a ridiculous way that, as you will see, actually disproves GR! They correctly infere that if substance A, is at a higher altitude than substance B, then despite both sabstance A and B being the of the same element, the light emitted by A is at a higher frequency than the otherwise similar light emitted by B. This frequency difference is entirely due to the alleged altitude dependent, gravitational time dillation. But they erred in regarding this light emitted by A as to maintain the same high frequency as it move 'down' to lower altitudes. This error is all because it is supposed to be the 'expansion' of 'time' itself that 'stretches the light's frequency' at around the thus expanded 'time' (Just the way expanding of 'space' will streatch any object in situ together with the 'space'. In GR, time is treated geometrically like space!). So the light actually must get accordingly 'stretched' when it passes through the places where time is 'stretched' and must get 'compressed' when it passes through the places where time is 'compressed'. Thus in a 'curved spacetime' explanation of relativistic effects, there is no way of detecting those effects! The rulers, clocks etc are simply altered in the same way by the very same 'altering of space' that they sit in.

But in the generalized aether theory, the explanation is straight foward. The relativistic effects are not due to any alterance of space or time. Only the physical objects that are moving through the medium are altered, or equivalently, the objects through which the medium moves are altered. So when the aether moves past an atom, it decreases the frequency at which that atom emits light. This ferquency will, unless altered by a physical medium,(not by space or time) be maintained throughout the universe. This explains why the frequency of light emitted by sabtance A is of a higher frequency as seen even from the altitude of substance B. Time itself at the vicinity of substance B has not been altered or otherwise this alterance would have affected the frequency of the light emitted by A immediately the light arrives there. So GR's explanation is not sound. We need a general theory of aether to explain apparent manifestation of relativistic effects in the vicinity of massive bodies, not GR!

Now let me hammer something on to the relativist's rocky head. Movement is never 'relative'. If you are 5 year old and are inside a moving car, you might easily be led into thinking that we might as well say that the trees and the poles are actually the ones moving backwards. So far for stupid people! If you close examine though (as normal adults do), you notice that the whole visible world is churning around for unjustifiable reason! The only rational explanation is that you are the one actually moving forward. Occum's razor rules out the explanation that maintains that the whole earth is the one moving 'backwards'.

But the information pertaining to that 'outside' world exists inside the supposed 'frame of reference'. that was the reason you could see it in the first place. There is light that exists in you 'frame of reference' that when analysed carefully, will reveal whether or not your 'frame' is moving through the universe. Similar thing is there for gravitational fields, magnetic fields, particles such as neutrinos etc. Therefore the scenario that the relativist draws for us, to introduce relativity, does not exist in the real world! There is no 'vacuum' in which something can somehow moves without any ability to tell that it is so moving, even in principle! So why suppose that relativistic effects happens due to 'movement through vacuum'? Why, for instance, should we not maintain that when flying the clocks around the earth, it was a motion relative to the earth's magnetic field that altered the clicks? Even if there is no aether, relativity theory is bunk because there are definitely other substances in space that can act as though 'absolute frames of references'. The 'vacuum' that the relativist created is an non-existent scenario meant only to make relativistic ideas seem plausible!

Let us see one simple way of how a movement through 'aether' might bring about relativistic effects. Think of sailing through some wind movig at velocity c. So the wind drives your ship. If you place your sails perpendicular to the direction of the wind, then your ship will tap the wind maximally. Then your ship will move at c, and as you can see, it has no way of moving faster than the wind. To make your ship move slowlier, you must tap it at an angle, call it θ. The your speed, v will be given by:

v=csinθ

Suppose also that the wind that passes through you ship drive some wind turbine. So this turbine will move at a maximum speed when at rest, and complete stand still when it moves at c. In general, it will move at speed u given by

u=cosθ

If you like, you can think of a turbine attached to the sail itself, so you can see how angle θ comes about.

From Pythagoras Theorem, we have:

cos^2(θ)+sin^2(θ)=1

so we can rewrite cosθ=sqrt {1-sin^2( θ)}=sqrt{1-(v/c)^2}.

To see more clearly, follow it below:

You can see that u/c gives the formular for 'time dilation'. So the clock ticking slower due to motion is amenable to very simple explanation in terms of being made to move in a turbine-like way by aether rushing across the clocks! Also notice how the interpration of appearance of Pythagoras Theorem via geometry, as if moving at v is 'at an angle' to moving at c, be it 'along a forth dimension' is an amusing 'Ptolemaic' explanation!

## Comments

https://external-preview.redd.it/w4RbXZaHfCRDteUtfJ449T5KEOQiqcgrCo...

What do you think will happen if you added a secondary energetic mass to the orbit of the planet? It will alter its movement drastically of the atmospheric conditions. The more weight that is placed in orbit, means the less weight gravity can possess as a whole as more mass is needed to regenerate it. This means that even 100 years ago, before satellites dominated our orbital trajectory, we had weighed like 5 pounds heavier than we do now. Gravity therefore, is not a force, but a wave. One that alters itself, dependent on an energetic mass at the bottom of the inner dimensions of Terra.

A view point yet to consider, is one known as "nothing is relative" concept. Two objects of the exact same material form, can exist on top of each other without causing any ill lasting effects to any dimension accept for parallel conflicts. But you don't have to worry about that because in order for one to exist, you have to put two simultaneous existence materials that are anomalously parallel to each other (not materials of the same existential substance) in contact with each other to even gain a magnetic polarization effect.

So, nothing is relative. Well, how do objects bond to force? Simple. Force is magnetic. Magnets hold more in between them than just positive and negative charges. They literally hold atomic structures of reality together in places that can form a bond.

The magnetic structure to create any particular polar charge, is one that has built the primal laws of cosmology. Materially, this is as follows. Space to the power of shadow creates matter. Shadow plus space to the power of void creates material elements. Void plus space times shadow to the power of time creates dimensions. Time plus space times shadow to the power of void equals living embodiment by a soul to inhabit the creation of every reality.

The reason why you cannot simply use ether as a substance, is because it is made itself up of bondable components which create it. Which also goes for cyber space as well. Sending messages between computers creates a void that opens to bring two different connection points together over a live wire. If the wire is broken (electrical pulse waves) connecting one storage facility with another, regardless of whether the sending or receiving computer messages has a fault with a power cut or a misbehaving program, the void is cancelled and the connection is permanently lost. What happens to that unset data? It does not linger. It is completely energetically repurposed by the void itself. Trillions of these voids are created every single day between communicative failures both on and off of the cyber plane. So much so, that they end up forming their own network of energy known as void shadows. Which is created by using the following formula. Shadow times void divided by space to the power of time.

The same effect is also seen, when moving files from one storage device to another using two different analog points of connection, like from hard drive to memory stick. When you move data between storage devices, you aren't moving actual points of energy. Instead, you're transferring the surface level data that made them apply itself to physical points in space within their own dimension. Yes, these data points bond together to make its own completely isolated pocket dimension, and you never knew that until now. All digital storage may be analog by nature, but is recreated from inter dimensional bonds with space alone. So much so, that it relies on time and shadow to keep a void open to maintain absolute points of relativity with the analog storage centers such data points stick to. Dimensional instability occurs when ever points of corruption effect the negative integrity of the dimension itself. This is what is called the warp effect, as the shadow frays and the energy it was once bonded to becomes illegible as it fades away from the memory of its time.

All of these concepts, rely on a base theory of non relativity that is an absolute right of any material thing in our existence we can create and realign with as the energy built to do so, will never conflict with itself. The worst that can happen, is that it changes to evolve into something different through the presence of unbondable matter. Which is also known as entropy, chaos and discord.

So relativist immediately comes across as pple not interested with reality! They will call mangoes oranges provided that both of them are 5! They only care about a similarity that helps them fill the blackboards with equations, and ignore every other difference however glaring! The blame you 'intuition' for your failure to 'understand' such nonsense!!

http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/images/principle_of_equivalence.gif