Flint2020 wrote: Im working from the Nikola Tesla type of perspective. When he said he could provide the whole world with free wireless energy and could lite light bulbs without wires connected to them. (emphasis added)
Whoa, let's back up a little. I may not have all the veneration for Tesla that he may enjoy from some of our contemporary friends of pseudo-science these days, but to say that he promised
free energy - wireless or otherwise - I still find would be somewhat a disservice to one so talented electrical engineer as Tesla. That being said, I only object out of my own incredulity that a man so bright and well educated as him would say something that'd have been considered so silly in his day. If you happen to have a credible citation of him saying anything of the sort, by all means, I'm all ears.
Things exist and move inside the aether. Sound alters the air, things alter water, and light is the altering of the aether. If Tesla and others that didnt agree with einstein are correct we have this aether around. Some type of energy or something that light and electricity stem from.
It's not a matter of agreeing with Einstein or Tesla, as it is a matter of agreeing with experimental results. Relativity did not survive the test of time because it just happened to be more fashionable nor because more money was thrown at it, or not enough noble rebels stood up to it. It survived because on top of never coming into conflict with experimental data, it kept making non-trivial predictions that kept getting confirmed by said data to staggering precision. Meanwhile theories of a luminiferous aether only ever sounded plausible based on an argument from analogy (as seen above) and an incredulity of the contrary, i.e. never based on any actual observation to begin with, and also kept failing every meaningful test one would construct for it.
I would be careful as well with the wording for that analogy. What you mean by sound is indeed movement of pressure waves through a medium. It doesn't have to be air, it doesn't even have to be fluid, but even if we were to build a quantum theory of sound (and, just for the record, yes, that does exist, especially for solids), we would end up with quasi-particles only for sound carriers. To say that a volume of air is "altered" after a sound passed through it is difficult unless one is very clear about what one means by that. Even something as a minute rise in temperature may in some sense be an indication that the sound did not completely pass through the volume under consideration.
For water the expression is dangerously close to the sort of premise you'd fine homoeopaths use to sell ampules of overpriced placebo drops. Sound waves do to water about as little as they do to air, and solving other substances in water of course mostly affects the molecules forming the hydrate layers whilst leaving the rest of the water unaffected. Surely none of the water molecules remember anything about the solution once the water has been cleansed of the solute.
As for light, it is carried by light particles, and unlike sound quanta, photons are rather quite real particles that can be detected individually and have consistent properties (especially mass and speed) between all observers. In fact, one of the earliest conclusive indications of the quantization of light is what earned Einstein his 1921 Nobel Prize, not relativity. Indeed, the necessity of special relativity came up in part
because of Michelson's and Morley's 1887 experiment (and later up to modern confirmations with ever increasing sensitivity) clearly disproving the presence of a luminiferous aether.
Light and electricity do indeed "stem from" something, namely charge. Electrical current is the movement of charge, and light is the transmission of forces charges exert on each other. We can argue that in the language of quantum field theories it all comes down to electron, positron, quark, and photon fields at the end of the day, but these are nothing like the aether physicists or engineers from one and a half century ago would have envisioned, nor are they springs from whence electromagnetic energy flows into the universe, ready for our use. The first and second laws of thermodynamics are cornerstones of classical physics that neither Einstein nor Tesla would much have argued about.
By all means, what ever you experienced would surely have been natural one way or another. There is no need to dispose of much of what we know about how nature works, though, to come up with some plausible speculations as to what it was that had you feel as you did.
