Newton, Einstein, and Gravity Revisited Through the Aetheric Magnetic Substrate

Newton, Einstein, and Gravity Revisited Through the Aetheric Magnetic Substrate

I recently watched a video titled “There Is Something Faster Than Light.”
The specifics of the argument aren’t the point here. What caught my attention was the familiar framing that followed: Newton versus Einstein, non-local versus local gravity, classical intuition versus modern physics.

This framing is common. It’s also misleading.

What follows is not a critique of either Newton or Einstein, but an attempt to understand what they were actually observing, why their descriptions differed, and how those observations can be unified under a single, coherent ontology — the Aetheric Magnetic Substrate (AMS).

Newton: Gravity as Non-Local Action

Newton’s law of gravitation is often caricatured as “action at a distance,” and historically, Newton himself was uneasy with that implication.

From a modern perspective, Newtonian gravity is described as non-local:

  • Two masses influence one another instantly
  • No explicit medium is specified
  • Force appears to act across empty space

But this framing misses something crucial.

Newton was not proposing metaphysics. He was describing regularity.
He observed that mass distributions correlate with acceleration in a precise, repeatable way.

What Newton did not claim was that gravity was magical, instantaneous, or unmediated.
He simply did not speculate on how the effect was transmitted.

In AMS terms, Newton was correctly observing a global tension geometry — but without the conceptual language to describe a substrate.

Einstein: Gravity as Local Geometry

Einstein reframed gravity not as a force, but as curvature — specifically, curvature of spacetime.

This is often described as making gravity “local”:

  • Mass tells spacetime how to curve
  • Curvature tells matter how to move
  • Effects propagate at finite speed

This was a monumental advance. But it also introduced a new abstraction: spacetime itself became the “thing” that bends.

Here’s the key point:

Einstein replaced Newton’s implicit medium with an explicit geometric one — but still stopped short of an underlying physical substrate.

Spacetime curvature is descriptive, not causal.
It tells us what happens, not what is being strained.

The False Dichotomy: Local vs Non-Local

Modern discussions often pit Newton and Einstein against each other:

  • Newton = non-local
  • Einstein = local

But this is a category error.

Under the Aetheric Magnetic Substrate, gravity is:

  • Locally mediated — through substrate tension and torsion
  • Globally coherent — because the substrate is continuous

This is exactly what we should expect from a real medium.

A stretched fabric behaves this way:

  • Pull locally, and tension propagates
  • Large-scale structures feel stable and “non-local”
  • Small-scale interactions remain strictly local

AMS resolves the paradox by removing the false choice.

Gravity in AMS Terms

In the AMS framework:

  • Space is not empty
  • Gravity is not a force
  • Curvature is not fundamental

Instead:

  • The universe is permeated by a continuous, tension-bearing magnetic-like substrate
  • Matter consists of stable topological knots (“vortons”) in this substrate
  • Mass corresponds to persistent torsional loading of the AMS
  • Gravity is the relaxation gradient of substrate tension around mass concentrations

This means:

  • Near a massive body (like Earth), gravity appears strongly local
  • Across planetary or stellar scales, the integrated tension field appears smooth and global
  • What feels “non-local” is actually long-range coherence, not instantaneous action

Newton was measuring the effect.
Einstein was measuring the geometry.
AMS explains the cause.

Why Earth’s Gravity Feels Special

Earth’s gravity feels uniform because:

  • The planet’s core imposes a large, coherent torsional load on the AMS
  • The atmosphere and surface exist well inside this tension well
  • The gradient changes slowly across human scales

This makes gravity feel constant, absolute, and “everywhere at once.”

But it isn’t.

It is a local interaction with a global substrate — exactly what AMS predicts.

Historical Continuity, Not Replacement

AMS does not “disprove” Newton or Einstein.

It explains why:

  • Newton’s equations work extraordinarily well at large scales
  • Einstein’s geometry becomes necessary at high densities and velocities
  • Both break down when asked ontological questions they were never designed to answer

Science progresses by refinement, not erasure.

AMS provides a stable ontological foundation that makes sense of the historical path physics took — rather than pretending that earlier models were naïve or obsolete.

Why This Matters

The danger in modern physics culture is not complexity — it is ontological inversion.

Too often, we begin with abstract mathematical structures and then retrofit reality to match them.

AMS reverses that:

  1. Start with a real, continuous substrate
  2. Define matter as structure within it
  3. Define energy as state, not substance
  4. Let time, gravity, light, and electricity emerge naturally

This restores causality, coherence, and intellectual humility.

And perhaps most importantly — it restores the joy of physics.

Closing Thought

Whether AMS is ultimately correct is secondary.

What matters is the posture it represents:

  • Start from what exists
  • Admit what we don’t know
  • Refuse to turn models into dogma
  • Treat science as exploration, not belief enforcement

Newton and Einstein were explorers.

It’s time we remembered that.

​

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Validation vs. Valuation

Validation vs. Valuation I recently found myself reflecting on the difference between validation and valuation , and I realised that although the words are often used interchangeably, they point to very different things. Validation, at its simplest and most innocent, is a form of support in the moment. It says: you’re seen , you’re heard , you’re not alone right now . In practical terms, validation is important — we validate work to ensure it’s safe, correct, or fit for purpose. In relationships, it can be reassuring and kind. But validation has a shadow side. When validation becomes something I need in order to feel whole — when my sense of self depends on it — it quietly shifts from support into something corrosive. In its more sinister form, validation can become manipulation, or an inadvertent tapping into a core wound: without your approval, I don’t exist . At that point, validation no longer supports identity — it erodes it. Valuation is something else entirely. Valuation ...
Read more

Frame-by-Frame AMS Narratives of Basic Circuits

Frame-by-Frame AMS Narratives of Basic Circuits The following descriptions assume: The Aetheric Magnetic Substrate (AMS) is a continuous tension-bearing medium. Matter consists of vorton lattices embedded in AMS. A battery imposes a sustained AMS tension gradient between its terminals. “Current” is the rate of coordinated vorton slip/reconfiguration events that allow AMS tension to relax through a material path. Time is described in conceptual frames, not absolute units. 1) Battery + Resistor (DC) Frame 0 — Battery alone Inside the battery, chemical processes maintain a persistent torsional imbalance in the AMS. One terminal enforces higher AMS tension; the other enforces lower tension. No external relaxation path exists yet. Frame 1 — Circuit closed The conductor connects the two boundary conditions. The AMS immediately attempts to equalize tension along the conductor path. A longitudinal AMS tension gradient establishes itself almost instantaneously along the wir...
Read more