Why Energy Isn’t a Thing — and Why That Matters

Why Energy Isn’t a Thing — and Why That Matters

One of the quiet assumptions embedded in modern physics is that energy is a thing — something that objects “have,” store, exchange, or lose. We talk about energy as though it were a kind of invisible substance: bottled in batteries, flowing through wires, trapped inside atoms, released in explosions.

But the more I think about it, the less sense that makes.

What if energy isn’t a thing at all?

What if energy is better understood as a state — a way a deeper substrate is configured, stressed, twisted, or allowed to relax?

This question matters far more than it first appears to.

Energy as a State, Not a Substance

In the Aetheric Magnetic Substrate (AMS) framework I’ve been exploring, energy is not something contained within matter. Matter doesn’t “own” energy. Instead:

  • Energy is a mode of tension, torsion, or curvature in the underlying substrate.
  • Objects don’t store energy; they participate in constrained configurations that allow tension to persist.
  • When we say “energy is released,” what we really mean is:
    a constrained configuration is allowed to relax into a different one.

A battery doesn’t contain energy.
A capacitor doesn’t hold energy.
A mass doesn’t possess energy.

They all shape how the substrate can move.

Why This Matters

Treating energy as a substance leads to conceptual problems everywhere:

  • Where exactly is energy located?
  • How does it move without a medium?
  • Why does it appear conserved, yet constantly change form?
  • Why does “potential energy” exist at all if nothing is moving?

These problems vanish when energy is understood as geometry and constraint, not stuff.

Suddenly:

  • Conservation of energy becomes conservation of allowable configurations.
  • Heat is chaotic micro-torsion, not a mysterious fluid.
  • Electrical power is ongoing substrate reconfiguration, not particle transport.
  • “Stored energy” becomes delayed relaxation.

Energy stops being mystical — and becomes mechanical again.

The Deeper Implication

Once energy is demoted from “thing” to “state,” something profound happens:

Physics stops talking about invisible substances
and starts talking about structure.

That shift doesn’t weaken science.
It strengthens it.

And it opens the door to ideas we currently dismiss not because they’re impossible — but because our ontology won’t allow them.

Which brings me to matter itself.

​

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

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 N...
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