From the EPR experiment we get that light is particle and wave at the
same time and from the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Physics
and the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle we get that the totality is
more than the sum of its parts, and that when you get down to the size
of atoms there are no solid-like particles spinning in empty space but
a net of interconnected particle-wave systems. Also, from Cramer's
Transactional Interpretation and John A. Wheeler's Delayed-Choice and
from the fact that when we rotate the plane of polarization on a beam
of light the whole beam changes at once, instantaneously, we get
undividedness of process, wholeness, self reflection and self-
organization.

It is obvious that matter originates at a deeper level, and it is
logical to assume that state is instantaneously known throughout the
beam of light thanks to wholeness in space and time. This is where EPR
phenomena comes from. There is an interaction occurring at a deeper
level between the system and the environment in which it develops.
Energy, therefore, matter, comes from a common substrate.

In this sense, aether is synonymous to energy, it is pure energy
[which is neither hot nor bright... radiation, a form of energy is hot
and bright]. Everything is connected to the aether because everything
is made from it. Hence the non-separability of process claimed by so
many. This is where particle complementarity comes from. In this view,
the aether has no capacity to hold any information, just qualities
which are used by active information as energy is turned into
quantities, or quantized, in spacetime.

I believe, like many others, that the aether is the physical,
nonmaterial substance, from which the universe emerged. To exist,
things must be in spacetime, and the aether is not in spacetime, it is
before spacetime, so it is but does not exist as matter. Aether is the
empty space in which the universe sits.

The aether is all permeating, it is everywhere by its own definition,
it is inside and between particles. You can't conceive a fragmentable
aether, or it would not be the aether as it was defined thousands of
years ago. By definition, everything is made from it, even the space
that surrounds you.

The aether, as described over four thousand years ago, is materially
non-dimensional. Things move, but not in relation to the aether,
things move in relation to other things at the classical level. This
aether is not matter, therefore, not directly observable. You can
measure the properties of fields, but you can't take a direct
measurement of the aether. And this aether is indivisible, fields can
create the appearance of separated volumes, but you can't divide the
aether into separate entities. In that sense, it is, apparently,
infinitely divisible. This is why many say you could fit the whole
universe in a point.

The aether gives the universe properties like wholeness,
interconnectedness, continuity, and, since the property of extension
doesn't apply to it, non-locality. There are no parts when you refer
to the aether, but you can look at electric fields, magnetic fields,
gravitational fields, or any kind of force field as different 'things'
or 'parts' of a greater whole made from the same continuous and
inseparable aether.

According to contemporary Quantum Mechanics, particle complementarity
is due to an indivisible process which originates in a common
background, but, it appears as if the only necessary information being
transferred (through EMR in hyperspace) from the aether to the
particles is that concerning momentum and location in relation to that
inertial frame and the rest of universe. All the information needed
for the evolution of the system in spacetime is contained by the
system itself, in spacetime. Therefore, eliminating the need for some
a priori mega information storage system containing the history of the
universe.

[X, P] = 0 -- commutativity (leads to a dualism)
[X, P] = ih -- non-commutativity (leads to a monism)

" The non-commutativity of the underlying process produces an
ontological complementarity. This must be contrasted to Bohr's
epistemological complementarity. " ----- Basil Hiley

According to Louis de Broglie, et al, every object exists as a body
coupled to a matter-wave, and its displacement through space can be
described by a wave-function. Information about the object's relation
to its surroundings and the rest of the universe is picked and brought
in by each object's particular pilot-wave.

Bodies in motion need to continuously reset their energy requirements.
As we now know, particles are not these space independent billiard-
ball like objects floating in space, they are particles-wave systems
in constant motion and there needs to be a continuous energy flow from
the substrate to the particle, this is why position and momentum can't
be known at the same time. This is where the Heisenberg uncertainty
principle comes from.

Matter is continuously changing, becoming, what was a second ago isn't
any more, and the only things real or meaningful to us are the
information and processes through which things become and what they
now are. But the immutable, the eternal, the real, is the empty space
in which the universe sits. Matter and fields are just a little more
than apparitions, active information. Basil Hiley, one of David Bohm's
followers, is correct when he says that being is a relative invariant
in the process of becoming, existing is not the same as being. The
fundamental laws, that which remains unchanged, is what is real.

Can you be without materially existing? Logic tells us that creation
ex nihilo physically impossible. And from electromagnetic phenomena
and gravitation we get that, physically speaking, to be, you don't
need to be material, all you need is to be able to act as a force.

Is empty space real? Can we prove it? Can we measure it? Can you
mathematically describe the rotation or acceleration of an object in
empty space without assuming empty space to be real? I mean, if you
were the only particle in space, how could you tell when spinning or
accelerating? Or is the only way to have space, rotation and
acceleration, when we have more than one object to consider? According
to Relativity, objects in spacetime are relative to each other, not to
empty space. Empty space may be empirically untenable, but it is
already considered as real by present theory.

There can't be space without time or motion, that's why Albert
Einstein called it spacetime. Time, space and matter, start with the
quantum. Quanta can exist only if in motion. Field motion, or energy,
turns into matter. If we could stop the motion, matter would go back
to being just empty space. Outside of time, quantum events are not
possible. Time doesn't exist, unless there is motion, and space can't
exist until it is contained, until it is quantized. The aether itself
does not move, matter does, the quantum does.

Since motion is not one of the aether's properties, then, neither is
time, nor change; making it immutable... eternal. You can't talk about
size or extension until you have the limits, the boundaries. When I
say the universe sits on the aether, I am not saying that the aether
exists as an object, I am saying that it is. Only matter exists in
spacetime, the aether does not. Any material substance will occupy
space. This physical but nonmaterial substance does not occupy any
space. It becomes matter as fields spin or pulsate at very high
speeds, creating material properties like volume, extension, motion,
time, mass, gravity, solidity... and consequently... causing the
formation of objects in spacetime. Since it lacks the property of
motion and can't be described as containing parts that follow a time
line, we can conclude that it is not matter. At the sub-quantum level,
the level at which energy is before it turns into multiple entities,
motion loses meaning.

Electromagnetic fields should not appear as ultimate, irreducible
realities. In this view, the aether is the substrate to all matter,
including Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR). Everything
depends on this substrate, this is where the laws of electromagnetism
are administered from. Existence starts with the field, and before
that there is aether. The aether is before geometry. Spacetime and
geometrization come after the aether. The aether, unlike spacetime, is
primary. Matter and time are not. The aether is not in spacetime,
spacetime is in the aether. Therefore, the universe is background free
and there is no fixed or absolute frame of reference, nor absolute
time. From Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, we get that
objects are not relative to empty space, that they are relative to
other objects with mass. In respect to Relativity, what is absolute
isn't empty space, nor time, what is absolute is the objective
universe, the world. There is absolute reality.

This is what makes GTR (General Theory of Relativity) true, everything
is related through and by the aether. Or how could it be that when a
body is accelerated to near the speed of light, time and length must
change in relation to a stationary observer? Wasn't space supposed to
be absolute, primary, independent and non-derivable from anything else
(Newton)? According to General Relativity the universe is one single
entity, one process. Space... objects... Mankind... come from one
thing, which by definition we call aether. The aether is nothing in
particular but has the potential to become anything.

This notion of a primordial substance is a very old one, also known as
Akasha or Brahman, and many times described as pure energy or
spiritual fire. It has been anthropomorphized by man since the times
of Plato and Aristotle, the Chaldeans and the Akkadians. It has been
called by the names of Zeus, Jupiter, Brahma and other. But there is
no need to continue to anthropomorphize the aether by calling it a
person, the aether anthropomorphizes itself.