During the past few days, I have been, once again, contemplating the concept of the “aether’ (or “ether”). It’s a notion that has always intrigued me; in fact I’ve felt forever that the ether does exist, as the oceanic medium in which all of creation dwells.

In other words, space is not empty, a vacuum; space is full, a plenum!

Here’s one woman’s attempt to describe the Aether (as distinct from Air, which is aether in movement)

 

Interesting. Today I see a post that went up yesterday on X, describing the social, economic, and political ramifications of not recognizing the aether.

BTW: the concept of ‘zero” has long been equally fascinating to me. Always, I seek to break through, see through, whatever  conceptual frame (or overton window) we humans construct in our efforts to represent, conceptually, the ever pulsing presence of the real that simply refuses to lend itself completely to any of our efforts to fix it in place.

Always and forever, “the map is NOT the territory.”

Today, I decided to ask grok some questions, regarding this notion of the aether. Great educational fun, ranging far and wide: philosophical, historical, cultural, psychological . . .

Some of what grok states, I was already familiar with (or had been, long ago, and so was reminded), but much of it, decidedly not.

Here are my questions, in order. In each case, grok’s response inspired a new question.

Describe and elaborate theories that contrast aether with vacuum.

Is aether required for action at a distance? (Answer: NO!)

Why does belief in aether persist?

After reading through the entire grok synthesis/analysis of these questions, I see that grok concludes that it favors the vacuum over the aether. Final paragraph:

“The persistence ultimately reflects science’s human side: the drive for intuitive, unifying pictures; discomfort with unresolved mysteries,; and the recursive nature of interpretation. While not part of standard textbooks, aether ideas continue to inspire speculation and occasional fringe research, much as they did in the transitional period after 1905. If new evidence (e.g Lorentz violation) emerges, the debate could intensify — but current data strongly favors the vacuum-based framework.”

Well, well. Once again, I find myself decidedly fringe.