James Jeans, Physics and Philosophy, p.175, Cambridge, 1942.
INTRODUCTION
During the 19th century the pre-Einsteinian 'Electromagnetic Theory of Nature' developed from a combination of observations, theories and serendipity traced through the work of Hans Christian Oersted, Michael Faraday, James Clerk Maxwell, Ernst Mach, Sir Oliver Lodge, and Nikola Tesla, to name a few. Basically, the theory implies that all matter, alive and inert (if there is such as thing as inert- (see following article on the limit of human perceptions)), is electrical in nature. The core idea is that there is a tensor or bonding relationship of a complicated multi-dimensional form called the 'ether' existing around and in all matter and space. This is difficult to understand in mechanistic terms or fit into a mechanised story about time and space. The 'ether' is understood as the framework upon which, or in which all matter exists in space and time. The theory implies that ether is at the same time highly elastic and yet exerts so much pressure on matter that it permeates it. It implies that its elasticity corresponds to the electrical properties of the universe. Think of the ether as the double base note in a symphony, the underlying chord, while all other vibrations caused by violins, flutes, brass, etc., are in sympathetic harmony with, and cannot exist without, this foundational carrier wave or voice. The big problem is how to detect, observe, measure and of course bend to our will, a thing which cannot be detected (like solar neutrinos). Western science is not looking for an ether because they have constructed theoretical explanations which explain observed phenomena as other things such as Einstein's explanation for the way light bends around stars. He explains this in Newtonian terms of `Gravitational/Nuclear Fields' which led to his view of the architecture of space. Yet in the electromagnetic view of the universe, this bending of light can be understood as an electrostatic phenomena. Ernst Mach was the first physicist to understand the connection between Buddhist thinking and an electromagnetic view of nature. It could be argued that he was a Zen master of the 19th century. So what happened to this nice theory of everything?
The challenge to an electromagnetic view of nature came primarily from late 19th century emerging 'scientific fields' outside of physics. Sciences such as chemistry and biology proceeded to establish themselves at the expense of the potentially unifying theory of an electromagnetic universe. Jobs for the boys. Science creates itself with its stories. As late as the 1990s, physicists have been mincing about trying to re-introduce a theory of an ether, without being viewed as a bunch of hypnotised zombies (see Giurdjieff ) for boohooing the idea in the first instance. As a result of their wildly esoteric (post-modern/post-Einsteinian) theories developed to explain, and produce research funding for, particle and astro-physics they've painted themselves into a corner. Example - are neutrinos (aside from unbelievably more exotic particles) real things or are they a figment of some misguided chemist's scheme to build underground swimming pools full of dry-cleaning fluid and call them telescopes? (This at least, recognises the fact that human perception is very limited indeed.) When these expert charlatans are found out, I hope they don't receive accolades from their fellow nincompoops for wasting our time and money on nonsense or should I say, nuclear science. The search for neutrinos has everything to do with justifying a bunch of highly theoretical MIT equations in solar physics rather than verifying some simplistic bed-time story about scientific discovery. The MIT mob developed a mathematical theory about the sun. They needed some proof . An experiment was developed to prove their theory, not to prove the existence of neutrinos. Science is unfortunately efficacious. Yet, so far this experiment has found Jack...
Scientific discovery stories nourish the idea that a thing called 'science' has something to do with another thing called 'progress'. Both the accepted concepts of science and progress are myths. Scientists and especially that group of brainless dolts called sceptics rely on the decaying crutch of empirical truth. Scientists, like the rest of us are permanently hypnotised by a combination of our peers and our five senses. This is what makes us what we are and what we think is truth. Free will becomes an extremely relative term under these circumstances. So much for independant thought. Beyond our limited perceptual reality there is planned, humanly-incomprehensible universal change reflected in what we wrongly assume to be technological and social progress. This is about the nature of the universe, not some insignificant piddling socio-ideological claptrap supporting the politics and religion of a small planet. Alterations in the electrical structure of living creatures over time are reflections of the changing body of the universe itself rather than truisms of the absurd theory of Darwin or the abortion of a science called biology. Note that during the 19th and 20th centuries, biology was the favoured science of catholic-educated scientists. Note that Einstein's theory of Relativity, satisfied Christianity more easily than it satisfied the theories of his peers at the time. It was accepted on the basis of a single astronomical observation and has given us nothing except a nuclear nightmare. Einstein's relevant peers had been developing the electromagnetic view of nature, and it was coming along nicely until about 1915. Note that belief-systems in modern science are a compromise having little to do with truth and a lot to do with religion and politics (ideology/hypnosis) - withstanding whatever Sir Karl Popper says about facts.
The Ether: Ernst Haekel, The Riddle of the Universe, 1899.
p.185-
The existence of the ether as a real element is a positive fact...
We sometimes read today (1899) that ether is a pure hypothesis; this
erroneous assertion comes from uninformed philosophers...popular writers
(today's sceptics) and from a few physicists (Einstein,etc.,).
Definition:
(1) Ether fills the whole of space...as a continuous substance...it
occupies the space between atoms.
(2) It has no chemical quality and is not composed of atoms.
(3) It has a non-material structure - etheric or dynamic.
(4) Its consistency is unlike matter. It is neither gaseous, nor solid,
- it is extremely attenuated, elastic, and jelly-like.
(5) Its weight cannot be determined.
(6) Ether is boundless and immeasurable. It is in eternal motion which
is in reciprocal action with gravity or the movement of mass.
Need for a Unified Electromagnetic Theory of Nature.
Sciences such as biology, chemistry, anthropology, etc., have grossly
distorted the implications of atomic and sub-atomic physics. Terms used
in medicine, pharmocology, anthropology, sociology, in no way represent
what is implied by the physics of electro-statics.
Life itself has been grossly mis-interpreted as something outside of,
or being other than of, electric nature.
THE IRRELEVANCE OF BIOLOGY
coming soon.