Thank you, Vertrose, for the link to Steven Rado's work. I appreciate that.
To make it easy to understand where his and my work differ, we have to talk about the universe as a whole first. There are two versions possible:
1/ There is a unified reality in our universe, somehow.
2/ Such a unification is not available.
I am with #2, with the materialization process taking place some 13.8 billion years ago indicating that a divorce got established with lots of paperwork as material outcome — and not a marriage continued with a material baby.
From a mechanical perspective, the universe is a completely different place when a fundamental separation is the ultimate bottom-line than when a fundamental connection among all is the ultimate bottom-line.
I hope you see that this is not about the aether or not. I have no problem pronouncing a dark-energy setting called aether.
The issue is that I am reading an ultimate Mathematical 1 in Rado’s work.
My position is that Gödel already showed us 100 years ago that there cannot be a Mathematical 1 at the largest of levels. I actually have mathematical information myself that declares the same. The universe is a collective concept of parts that ultimately are independent (but that desire to unify when possible). They do not add up to a 1, not in any kind of configuration.
This means that the difference between seeing the universe as somehow unified and seeing the universe as somehow not-connected exists inside the human head and that choice is not found with the universe and can also not be produced through the scientific method (other than accepting Gödel's work as correct and applying the fact that a Mathematical 1 does not exist to the overall, universal level).
--
The Big Whisper model starts out with an original setting of energy that can be declared as a unified field of forces.
Then, and I am using 13.8 billion years as the commonly understood time for matter to first appear, the prior state ended. The unified field of forces experienced a fundamental separation.
To keep this response short, all original energy of one kind ended up becoming three kinds of energy.
1/ The damaged energy as part of matter (quarks -> neutrons and protons).
2/ The undamaged energy as part of matter (electrons to neutralize the positive charges of the protons).
3/ The very large remainder of undamaged energy, not part of matter.
The original closed system ended up 'birthing' a secondary closed system in which we find the quarks (neutrons and protons), linear in essence, in the nuclei of atoms. In the list above this is #1.
The primary closed system provided the electrons, so this is #3 providing the #2 results as part of matter. The electrons are non-linear, not found in the neuclei of atoms.
The very large remainder #3 is also not fully connected. As suggestion, the Milky Way setting would be the largest setting for us to be connected to that #3, itself otherwise not visible (though there are some indications available to us, some used as reason to describe an aether).
In short, if I were to use the term aether, it would be the size of the Milky Way setting (give or take), but it would not be stretching all the way to another galaxy.
Vertrose, I hope this shows a bit how I find myself in quite a different position from most physicists, but particularly where the (lack of a) Mathematical 1 of the universe is concerned.
Thank you again for providing me the link to Rado's work.
Here is an article that perhaps interests you, on the two closed systems of energy.
'Two Closed Systems, Not One'
https://fred-rick.medium.com/two-closed-systems-not-one-3d66da5b8dff
