The Special Relativity theory describes the Aether physics as developed by Hendrik Lorentz, but which interprets the mathematics in terms of time dilation (time travel) as opposed to Aether drift (space drift). The General Relativity theory is a complex theory of calculus transformations based on Bernard Riemann's curvature mathematics, and it offers an accurate approximation for space-density-related calculations. Karl Schwarzschild quickly simplified the General Relativity solutions to Newtonian-type equations of exact accuracy. He read Albert Einstein's work while serving on the war front in Germany during World War I.

The Special Relativity theory is notable for two popularized and unsubstantiated assumptions (postulates):

1. Space and time are not absolute.
2. The speed of photons appears the same to all observers regardless of their relative motions.

What Albert Einstein actually presented for his postulates are[1x]:

1. The velocity of light in space always has its expected value independent of the motion of the source or receiver of light.
2. In two c.s. moving uniformly relative to each other, all laws of nature are identical, and there is no way of distinguishing absolute uniform motion.

The velocity of photons in space always has the standard value because space is, in fact, absolute at the quantum scale. The statement that there is no way of distinguishing absolute uniform motion is another way of saying the Aether is fluid, and each quantum of Aether moves relative to every other quantum of Aether. The fluidity of space is no different from that of a submarine, which cannot distinguish absolute uniform motion by observing its position within a volume of water molecules. Yet, physicists do not deny the existence of the ocean simply because a submarine cannot fix its position relative to water molecules.

Einstein's General Relativity theory is accurate but unnecessarily complicated in presentation. Furthermore, the General Relativity theory describes a space density gradient of a physical Aether rather than a time dilation or gravitational effect. Mainstream physicists have to envision General Relativity in terms of an Aether but then quickly deny the existence of the Aether to protect their careers:

The proposed interpretation of the Riemannian space is based on the following assumptions. First, we assume that the space is not an object of geometry, but is a material substance (ether, physical vacuum or whatever else). Second, we think that the curved space does not exist in reality and the Riemannian geometry is only a mathematical model of a special Euclidean space. This space is not homogeneous and is characterized with so-called space density that is a function of the coordinates to which the space is referred.[1]

## E does not equal m

Energy is a unit of work. Mass is the dimension of physical reality that quantifies the existence of an object or behavior. Things and behaviors with mass tend to continue to exist due to mass. Energy $$E$$ is composed of the dimensions of mass $$M$$ times length $$L$$ squared times frequency $$F$$ squared.

$$\label{eq:e=mc2}E = M \cdot {L^2} \cdot {F^2}$$

Modern physicists prefer to express the temporal dimension as "per time" rather than as frequency.

There is no conversion or equivalence of mass and energy. Mass is merely a dimension of inertia, from which many different units construct beside the unit of energy. Mass is not an object; mass is the inertia dimension indicating that something is real and that once established, the reality continues. The dimension of mass appears in units such as resistance, magnetic flux, capacitance, and many others. The presence of mass means that these units are tangible and measurable aspects of physical behavior; it does not mean that resistance is heavy or solid. Heavy and solid objects do contain mass, but so do many other aspects of physical reality that are not heavy and solid. Understanding mass as merely a dimension of inertia is perhaps the most significant intellectual physics challenge for most people coming out of the 20th Century.

Physicists often refer to nuclear reactions on the Sun, nuclear power plants, and nuclear bombs as examples of mass-to-energy conversion. In the nuclear power plants the United States has been operating for 60 years, a high degree of precision applies to the measured amount of energy and material mass passed through the reactor. And yet, there is not one report available anywhere (that this writer was able to obtain) that presents the data from a nuclear power plant and shows that the fuel mass was exactly converted to energy according to $$E = m{c^2}$$. One would think that to prove the Special Relativity theory, the data from a precisely monitored nuclear power plant would provide abundant evidence. Nevertheless, such data apparently does not exist.

EBR-II ReactorThere is evidence to suggest that more energy and mass come out of a nuclear power plant than the mass of fuel that goes in. A Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor (EBR-II at right) once operated for 16 years and produced more fuel in its byproducts than consumed during its operation[3]. A violation of energy conservation seems to result. Therefore a government employee or academic will not admit this. In practice, the scientific establishment forbids the suggestion of any violation of the energy conservation law even if the data suggest it. However, the Aether Physics Model shows that there is no violation of energy conservation, as the extra energy is the angular momentum of dark matter converting to photons through the Casimir effect in the case of the electron. In the case of the proton, nuclear processes convert dark matter into visible matter like the Casimir effect but applied to the proton.

Regarding the truth, nobody can convert mass to energy because mass is a dimension, and energy is a unit defined by dimensions. There is no foundation for a theory based on the assumption that a dimension of mass converts to a unit of energy.

### Is Time a dimension that can be traveled?

People who think we are traveling through time do not know what time is. Time is a metric, just like an inch on a ruler; only the time metrics are seconds, minutes, hours, etc. Time is a metric that measures duration; however, time is not the only metric for measuring duration. We can also measure duration with frequency; all clocks are based on frequency, even if we imagine the result in a linear timeline.

There is no physical timeline where physical matter exists in the past or where physical matter exists in the future. The only temporal reference frame that physically contains physical matter is the present moment.

Metrics are a measure of things that physically change in the present moment. Metrics, such as time, are not the things that move or cause something to move. Also, dimensions being metrics, cannot be traveled.

Time is more than just a metric. In physics, time is a metric. However, memory recall causes our perception of time. The hippocampus region of our brain records memories, stores memories, and recalls memories. The mental act of remembering things creates our perception of a mental timeline.

Memory is the ability to use the past in service of the present or future. Memory is central to our everyday lives and defines who we are. Without it, we are condemned to an eternal present. That memory persists after an experience suggests that an internal representation of this experience is stored in the brain and that later this representation can be reconstructed and used.[2]

People are so used to recalling memories that they believe the past is as present as the nose on their faces. However, if you try to track the past physically, you will find that you can only do so in your mind. The popular belief in a physical timeline is a mass hallucination.

Physical matter exists only in the present moment, and it continually changes in the present moment. If it weren't for your brain, you would have no reference for experiencing a past or future moment, physical or otherwise. For the present moment to exist and not move toward the past or the future, the present moment must oscillate between forward time and backward time. Furthermore, this full-spin temporal oscillation of both forward-time and backward-time applies only to quantum space structures. The physical matter has a property called half-spin. The half-spin nature of subatomic particles causes them to only spin in the forward-time direction.

The subatomic particle half-spin does not refer to angular momentum or rotation; the half-spin relates to the temporal characteristic of the subatomic particle.

Subatomic particles exist in the present moment, but they spin only in the forward-time direction, and our brain records the action in the forward-time direction as memories. When our brain recalls memories, we develop our perception of a linear timeline. No matter when or where we have our memories and perceive a timeline, we are still right here and right now. We can never leave the present moment, but physical matter can change in the present moment.

Nothing can travel through time. Physical matter can endure in the forward-time direction within the present moment, but we never travel to a future from a past. Our physical existence has always been, will ever be, and remains here and now.

General Relativity theory explains that clocks on satellites are moving through a space density gradient, as quantified by the Riemann curvature mathematics. The space nearer the Earth has less density than at higher altitudes above the Earth's surface. With more space density to move through at higher altitudes, clocks need to tick more ticks per orbital revolution. Since the clocks always remain in the present moment, because the clocks at different altitudes move through different densities of space, and because linear time is a mental construct created by the brain, there is no physical timeline. Thus there is no time dilation for physical matter. There is no alternative Universe to which physical matter in the present temporal reference frame travels.

The clocks are not ticking at different rates; if they did, the clocks would be defective and unusable for physics. The clocks used in orbital experiments and altitude experiments are accurate to a second in billions of years. Since there is no physical timeline and since there is a space density gradient, the difference in the clock's measurements is due to the space density gradient within the Aether. In other words, the appearance of clocks at different times does not mean something happened to the clock ticking rate; it means something happened to the space that the clock traveled and ticked through.

Physicists, and indeed the laypersons of the world, confuse physical change with the concept of a physical timeline. The two ideas are mutually exclusive; physical matter changes in the present moment, or physical matter is static for each time frame along a moving physical timeline. There is no physical evidence for a moving timeline; furthermore, if the Universe fixed each temporal reference frame, there would be no way to change the course of time through free choice or free will.

In a physical timeline, each time frame would be static, and all the clocks in that time frame would read the same universal time code. Physicists would then have to explain that the consciousnesses of all living things then pass through these time frames so that we experience change. Physicists cannot even quantify consciousness, let alone explain how consciousness could flow through the same sequence of time frames in perfect unison. And what is there in the physical Universe that keeps all the time frames in perfect sequence?

A timeline is a mental construct that the brain uses to make sense of change in the present moment.

## Entropy and Time Dilation

If time dilation were real, we would see physical evidence for violating the second law of thermodynamics.

If an object dilates into a different time frame, this will affect the entropy state of the thing at its original time frame. More specifically, if a physical object leaves the present moment for a different time frame, then the physical object would cease to exist in the present moment and would appear as a duplicate in a historical record.

There is no demonstration or observation of a relativistic object experiencing time dilation.

Using atomic clocks in General Relativity experiments does not demonstrate time dilation. The measurement of the clock does change, but the clock remains in the present moment, not as a duplicate of itself.

## The Absolute Speed of Photons

In free space, photons can move from one quantum unit of space to the next quantum unit of space only at the temporal oscillation rate of the quantum Aether unit. The quantum Aether unit oscillates between the forward and backward time directions at a universal fixed rate. Since electrons, protons, and neutrons have "half-spin" and spin only in the forward time direction of the universal temporal oscillation, the photons produced by half-spin physical matter can only progress in the forward time direction, and this sets the speed of the photons.

Photons can only move at speed c in the space they are physically traveling through. And so, a physical interpretation of the speed of photons is that photons have the speed of c in the local space. Albert Einstein presented his first postulate in this way, which is considerably different in meaning from the mainstream physicist's claim that space and time are not absolute.

Unlike the perceptual speed of photons imagined by Albert Einstein, photons of the physical Universe depend upon physical processes. According to the popularized Albert Einstein view created by his popularized postulates, the constant speed behavior of photons takes place within the perception of the observers.

Interestingly, the math works out for both the Aether physical-based view and the Einstein observer-based view. The key difference is in the interpretations of the two views; photon speed being determined by the local space is interpreted in relative velocities as photons experiencing an Aether drift, whereas photon speed being determined in relative velocities by observer perception is interpreted as time dilation.

## Special Relativity Theory

The Lorentz transformations are not Special Relativity theory. In fact, the math for the Lorentz transformations was first developed by Woldemar Voigt in the late 1800s before Hendrik Lorentz developed these equations independently.

Lorentz developed a fluid Aether theory that superseded the rigid Aether theory envisioned by Albert Michelson. Lorentz hypothesized that Michelson and Morley's smaller-than-expected Aether drift measurement meant that the Aether was dragging along with the Earth. According to many scientists, the Aether was disproved, and they claim the Michelson-Morley experiment demonstrated a null result; this is false. Dayton Miller clarified the Michelson-Morley experiment and data here.

As an anecdote, one cannot find an absolute position in a churning ocean, yet the water molecules have discrete, absolute structures. Why would the lack of finding an absolute position in churning space be any different for a sea of quantum-rotating magnetic fields?

Lorentz applied the Voigt transformations to the actual measured Michelson Morley data to quantify the Aether drift in terms of Aether dragging along with the Earth, which is why the Voigt transformations are known as the Lorentz transformations. If it wasn't for Lorentz quantifying the fluid Aether, Lorentz would not be given credit for these equations once the fact of Voigt's prior work had been validated.

Special Relativity theory is the Lorentz transformations with two postulates added. The purpose of the postulates is to change the interpretation of the Lorentz transformations from an Aether drift theory to a time drift (time dilation) theory. Since the postulates are purely a mental exercise, Special Relativity theory is a perceptual reinterpretation of Lorentz's previous work. Albert Einstein claimed that physical matter could exist in a past time frame, and that physical matter from the present time frame could drift (dilate) into a past time frame. The world has become filled with scientists who believe in time dilation since Albert Einstein, although no scientific observation has been made of physical matter physically existing in the past or the future.

According to Special Relativity theory, if there are three observers A, B, and C, and each observer is moving at different velocities, then each observer pair AB, BC, and AC will see the speed of photons as being the same within their own pair. Since each pair sees the speed of photons as c, and each pair are moving at different relative velocities, then the speed of photons (c) in a given local (physical) space must have different speed values for each pair. Essentially, Einstein's postulates are saying that the speed c is observer-dependent and photons have no physical absoluteness in the local space. The effect of believing in Einstein's postulates is that the speed c being the same in all reference frames is a perceptual illusion with no physical reality.

There is ample physical evidence to demonstrate that space is absolute as a quantum unit and that the rate of physical duration is exactly the same in local space throughout the physical Universe. The fact that photons are always traveling at c, and traveling at no other speed, is itself evidence that time passes at the same rate for all physical matter, and throughout all space. If there were any truth to time dilation, then there would be examples of variable speeds of light throughout the open space of the physical Universe, which there are not. Further, if time dilation were real, then entropy and the conservation of energy law could easily be violated due to time-drifting physical matter.

Special Relativity theory belongs to only one person, Albert Einstein. The fact that he added postulates to the work of Lorentz means that he truly did create a theory different from the theory that Lorentz had been working on.

It is only a matter of time before physicists eventually have to concede that there is no physical evidence for a physical timeline such that Special Relativity theory could become a physical law. Without time travel, or any physical evidence of physical matter leaving the present moment and ending up in a different time frame, all the belief in Special Relativity by all the physicists who support it cannot change the fact that Special Relativity theory is just an empty hypothesis.

In the meantime, Albert Einstein's General Relativity theory has proved that space affected by massive objects is absolute, which disproves Special Relativity theory by default. The fact that the curvature of space can be precisely calculated is indisputable evidence that space is a physical structure. As mentioned, Special Relativity theory is based on two postulates; the first postulate is that space is not absolute. Without space being absolute, the second postulate falls as a consequence; like a house of cards. The Riemann curvature mathematics describes the physical reality of space density gradients and further explains the effect of space density gradients on the path trajectories of inertial objects. No matter how many physicists claim that you can interpret the Riemann calculated results in terms of Minkowski coordinates, the physical Universe will always disagree with that argument. Either General Relativity can be calculated in Minkowski coordinates, or it can be calculated in Riemann coordinates, but it cannot be calculated in both.

### The Postulates of Special Relativity Theory

The two postulates of Albert Einstein are not clearly specified in his own published paper, but it is widely accepted that the two postulates are:

1. Space and Time are not absolute.
2. The speed of photons is the same for all reference frames.

It is abundantly clear that space is absolute at the quantum level. The Aether unit is precisely quantified as a quantum rotating magnetic field equal to:

$$\label{eq:Au1}A_{u} = \frac{m_{a}\cdot {\lambda_{C}}^{3}\cdot {F_{q}}^{2}}{{e_{a}}^{2}}$$

where $$m_{a}$$ is the maximum mass that a quantum Aether unit can contain, $$\lambda_{C}$$ is the quantum length, and which both are verified by analyzing the Newton gravitational constant and the Schwarzschild radius. There is no question that a quantum unit of Aether, which is a quantum unit of space, is in fact absolute. Furthermore, since the speed of photons is absolute and the quantum length is absolute, then the quantum frequency is also absolute. Therefore the physical Universe has a built-in clock that is also absolute.

The fabric of space, as evidenced by the space density gradient of General Relativity theory, demonstrates that the Aether is capable of being fluid and yet abides by physical laws, just as do all physical structures.

So space (including its quantum volume, maximum mass potential, maximum magnetic charge potential, and quantum resonance) is absolute. And because space is also fluid, then it is possible for space to change its shape, drag with physical matter, stretch, and otherwise behave in a changing way; in other words, exhibit the property of Aether drift. If space is incorrectly treated as being relative (not absolute), then space cannot be quantified as a structure of itself. When space is made to seem irrelevant and relative, then the behavior of matter in that space will naturally appear to break the rules of common sense.

#### Reference Frames exist only in thought.

The speed of photons is not dependent upon reference frames. Reference frames exist only in the human mind. There are no physical structures in the physical Universe that can be quantified as reference frames. Instead, the speed of photons depends upon angular momentum passing through a fabric of quantum-rotating magnetic fields, one quantum-rotating magnetic field at a time. Therefore, the speed of photons is absolute in the local space (i.e. as the angular momentum of a photon moves along through each succeeding Aether unit).

The postulates of Albert Einstein are wrong! The postulates of Albert Einstein were developed precisely because Albert Einstein did not understand the quantum structure of the Aether; as the measurements required to quantify the quantum Aether unit were not yet available up to 1905. Arthur Compton identified the Compton wavelength in 1923. However, by then, it was forbidden by academics to question the validity of Albert Einstein's work, particularly after the Eddington observation of the total solar eclipse in 1919.

Despite the nonsense of Einstein's postulates, physics will still work properly if we take space and time to be absolute, and take the speed of c as being the same in all local space. In other words, there is an Aether fabric that has a quantum unit of space, and photons travel at speed c through each quantum of space. After all, Albert Einstein did not change Hendrik Lorentz's mathematics, which Lorentz used to quantify an Aether that dragged along with the Earth.

## The Folding of Space

Subatomic particles, such as electrons and protons, occupy space. From beta decay, we can determine that a neutron decays into an electron, proton, and antineutrino. Experiments can determine that when an electron binds to a proton by orbiting it, then the result is a hydrogen atom. However, a hydrogen atom and a neutron are very different structures.

This suggests that the neutron is a bound electron and proton where the space of the electron folds over on top of the space of the proton. The result is that a neutron folds two units of space to produce a single unit of space. The half-spin nature of the electron and the proton remains in the structure of the half-spin neutron.

So neutrons are potential examples of folded space. Furthermore, the Schwarzschild equations for the deflection angle of light around the Sun, and the angle of the precession of the perihelion of planets around the Sun, both are based on only half the mass of the Sun.

Half the mass of all normal matter, such as the Sun and Earth, is due to the presence of neutrons. Thus General Relativity theories quantifying the curvature of space via the Riemann curvature mathematics are likely describing the effect of the neutrons folding space. The folded space pinches the fabric of space and creates the space density gradient, which is quantified by the Riemann curvature mathematics.

## General Relativity Theory

Gravity is not a curved "spacetime." Gravity is a force as described by Newton's gravitational force law. Twisting the interpretation of the space density gradient of the Aether fabric into a gravitational explanation requires the arbitrary viewing of the Riemann coordinate-derived curvature result to be viewed in Euclidean coordinates, which is fanciful nonsense.

General Relativity describes a space density gradient, as quantified by the Riemann curvature mathematics. The curvature of space does not mean that our day-to-day world is curved, but rather that the underlying matrix of our physical world is curved.

This is easier to understand by observing the flat screen world of area-time. The world of area-time takes place on a plane, just like the movies we watch on our flat-screen television sets. Flexible, flat-screen television sets are available on the market (see video at right).

The flat screen world has two orthogonal length dimensions. However, as we are beings in a volume-time world, we can flex the screen while the movie is playing, and the flat screen world then becomes curved. However, regardless of the curvature of the flat screen matrix for the flat screen world, the movie does not change. Laser blasts from a stormtrooper's rifle will not change targets even though the underlying matrix has been deformed.

Curving the matrix of the volume-time world does change the path trajectory angle around massive objects; however, all the path trajectory lines in the volume-time world maintain the appearance of being straight no matter how curved the volume-time matrix becomes.

Although there is a space density gradient around a planet, the planet itself, and the objects on the planet's surface, all exist within the quantum Aether units of the space density gradient. The Aether's space density gradient matrix can be deformed according to a viewer from outside of the physical Universe, but everything that takes place within that matrix will still appear as though the matrix is Euclidean in nature.

The forces of gravity and the other fundamental forces still operate as in Euclidean space. Still, the fundamental forces can also operate on mass existing outside of the Aether fabric (dark matter halo of galaxies). The Aether can be bent between two massive objects (a method of space travel not currently known to mainstream physics and which occurs naturally during total eclipses).

Within specific ranges (established by the Schwarzschild radius, speed of photons, etc.), the deformation of the underlying space density gradient matrix of the physical Universe hinders neither the physical Universe's Euclidean nature nor the physical Universe's geometry.

Suppose physicists wish to discuss gravity with regard to the path deflection angles and orbital precession angles around massive objects. In that case, they need to pick one coordinate system to discuss these ideas. Jumping back and forth between coordinate systems just to secure the end results of gravity and time dilation they are seeking is not how physics works. The Riemann curvature mathematics describes what happens to the outer structure of the volume-time matrix, and the Euclidean coordinates describe what happens within the volume-time matrix. (The Minkowski coordinates represent an imaginary physical timeline and are only relevant to science fiction movies.) The space density gradient of Riemann curvature mathematics is not interchangeable with the Euclidean coordinates of the fundamental force laws.

According to General Relativity Theory, light bends because of the effect of gravity on the surrounding space curvature. The problem with this concept is that gravity needs the total mass of two masses, yet both Einstein's and Schwarzschild's equations employ only half the mass of the massive object. There is nothing in space for gravity to act on with regard to the mass of the object that curves space. It is assumed that a massive body's presence will exert a gravitational potential and then curve the space simply because the massive object has a lot of mass. The space does curve, but it is due to the space-pinching effect of the neutron content of the massive object, and it is not due to the gravitational potential caused by the total mass of the massive object.

When a second physical body (such as a comet) follows a path trajectory close to the Sun similar to the path of a photon, the second physical body is, in fact, gravitationally affected by the Sun. After calculating the gravitational effect of the Sun on the comet's path trajectory, the General Relativity calculation for the circular deflection angle must also be calculated and accounted for. Therefore, General Relativity cannot be a gravitational theory; it must be solely a space density gradient theory.

In the Aether Physics Model, the bending of light around a massive object has nothing to do with gravity, but rather with the magnetic charge in the neutrons. We recall that mass is directly proportional to the magnetic charge. As neutrons form from magnetic charge binding, Aether units fold and stretch the surrounding fabric of space inward toward the neutron. On a massive scale, such as around stars, the stretched space causes the space density gradient and also the circular deflection angle.

### Experiment Proposal for the LHC

Just as the speed of photons is considered the maximum speed within the physical Universe, CERN should also determine through experiments the maximum length density (mass per length) within the physical Universe.

Based upon the validity of the Schwarzschild radius, the maximum length density should be:

$$\label{eq:ldns0}ldns_{0}=1.347\times 10^{27}\frac{kg}{m}$$

This length density constant could be observed by stacking high-energy neutrons into an appreciable mass and measuring the circular light deflection angle around the neutron mass.

Neutrons do not have a net electrostatic charge, but neutrons do have a magnetic charge; so it should be possible to magnetically construct miniature neutron "stars" even if only temporarily, and determine whether space is more curved around neutron-only masses, or whether the same space density gradient curvature applies to both neutron-only masses and normal matter (neutrons, protons, and electrons where neutrons make half the mass).

Such an experiment should be essential for astrophysics and for those who study black holes and neutron stars.

It is the Aether Physics Model prediction that neutron-only objects produce twice the circular deflection angle as normal matter objects. Furthermore, if this experiment demonstrates a higher circular deflection angle around neutron-only masses, then this is physical evidence that neutrons form by folding the space of an electron over on top of the space of a proton, such that the neutrons still occupies only one quantum unit of space. Such a construction of the neutron would explain the physical mechanics of how space is pinched to produce the Riemann curved coordinate system around massive objects.

Furthermore, this experiment would conclusively prove or disprove, the existence of structured space (Aether).

## Gravity Theories in the Aether

### Limits of the Aether

The Aether Physics Model is based on the limits of the physical Universe. The maximum mass of the Aether unit $$m_{a}$$ is a constant, as is the quantum length $$\lambda_{C}$$ (the Compton wavelength).

The Newton gravitational constant $$G$$ is the amount of space-resonance per maximum mass:

$$G=\frac{dtrd}{m_{a}}$$

where

$$dtrd={\lambda_{C}}^{3}\cdot {F_{q}}^{2}$$.

For a reminder of the values and dimensions of the quantities expressed visit the Constants and Units page.

The Aether has a maximum length density equal to the maximum mass of the Aether per quantum length:

$$ldns_{0}=\frac{m_{a}}{\lambda_{C}}$$.

If we multiply the Newton gravitational constant by two length density constants we get the value of Gforce:

$$\label{Gforce}G\cdot ldns_{0}\cdot ldns_{0}=Gforce$$

### Newton's Gravitational Force Equation

From the Gforce equation (\ref{Gforce}) we can produce the gravitational force law for any two massive objects by replacing the maximum mass of the Aether in the length density constant with the masses of the two physical objects $$m$$ and the distance $$d$$ between these objects.

$$\label{gravity}G\cdot \frac{m}{d}\cdot \frac{m}{d}=force$$

### Aether Magnetic Force Equation

The maximum magnetic charge of the Aether $${e_{a}}^{2}$$ is quantified on the Constants and Units page. The magnetic force constant of the Aether unit $$A_{u}$$ is equal to the space-resonance constant $$dtrd$$ times the mass to magnetic charge ratio $$mchg$$:

$$A_{u}=dtrd\cdot mchg$$

where the mass to magnetic charge constant is:

$$mchg=\frac{m_{a}}{{e_{a}}^{2}}$$

and refers to the maximum mass per maximum magnetic charge. The mass-to-magnetic charge ratio also holds true for all stable subatomic particles including the electron, proton, and neutron.

The maximum magnetic force law is given as:

$$A_{u\cdot }\frac{{e_{a}}^{2}}{{\lambda_{C}}^{2}}=Gforce$$

which shows that the Aether acts on a magnetic charge per area to produce force.

### Mass equal Aether Tensor Equation

The magnetic charge is inherently distributed, as opposed to the inherently linear mass dimension. As a result of the split in the Singularity that produced the magnetic charge of the Aether and the electrostatic charge, the Aether unit's magnetic charge is curved between an obverse quantity and an inverse quantity. This curvature is quantified as the fine structure constants of particles. The electron has its own fine structure constant, as do the proton, neutron, and Aether units.

The result of this curvature is that the Aether has a curl to it. The curl is the reciprocal of the permeability of the Aether.

$$\frac{A_{u}}{c^{2}}=perm$$

or:

$$\frac{A_{u}}{c^{2}}=\frac{1}{curl}$$

Furthermore, the curl is exactly equal to the "unit" of radians; one unit of curl equals one radian.

The maximum curvature of space caused by the maximum length density is then equal to:

$$G\frac{m_{a}}{\lambda_{C}}=1 curl\cdot {A_{u}}$$

To find the specific curvature of space, such as the circular deflection angle around the Sun, the equation is then expressed as:

$$G\frac{2m_{sun}}{r_{sun}}=8.493\times 10^{-6}\frac{curl}{2}{A_{u}}$$

where the numerical part of the result on the right is the curvature of space in radians.

The mass of the Sun multiplies by 2 because only half the mass of the Sun causes space curvature. That half of the mass of the Sun represents the total neutron content of the Sun. Because only half the mass of the Sun causes curvature, the curvature is also halved.

To find the curvature of space that applies to a specific mean orbit around the Sun, the following "matter equals Aether" tensor equation produces the perigee precession angle of Mercury:

$$G\frac{3\pi m_{sun}}{r_{mercury}}=4.807\times 10^{-7}\frac{curl}{2}{A_{u}}$$.

Again, only half the mass of the Sun is involved in this equation due to the neutron content of the Sun, so the curl is still halved. Furthermore, the result is still given in curl, which is the same unit as radians.

The fact that space curvature equations depend upon only half the mass of a massive object means that space curvature equations are not gravitational equations. Calculating gravity requires the whole mass of two objects.

### Space Curvature is not Gravity

As we can see from the above equations, gravity is one phenomenon with its own calculation, and space curvature is a different phenomenon with its own calculation. Just because both equations employ the same constants does not mean they are measuring the same effects.

Gravity measures a force, and the matter/Aether tensor measures space curvature. The two equations complement each other; however, the curvature equation does not replace the gravity equation.

[1x] The Evolution of Physics by Albert Einstein and Leopold Infeld; published by The Scientific Book Club And Company Limited (2005)

[1] Vasiliev, V. and Fedorov, L. (2018) To the Schwarzschild Solution in General Relativity. Journal of Modern Physics, 9, 2482-2494. doi: 10.4236/jmp.2018.914160.

[2] Memory engrams: Recalling the past and imagining the future; Susumu Tonegawa, Sheena A. Josselyn; 2020/01/03; https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaw4325