[humanbydefault]

You must remind yourself that Einstein was a scientist with deep roots into the XIX century's conceptual classical physics and its philosophical implications of the epoque.

He contributed to much of the modern physics theory but he was also human and he made some mistakes as we all have in some point of our lives.

Is gravity a real phenomenon? Yes it is. Could we say that planets go around stars because some sort of warping in the fabric of space-time? That is just another possible way to represent in our (limited human minds) something we can observe, measure and predict with our present technology.

Einstein tried to make a parallel between gravity and inertia when he compared a person or object riding inside a falling elevator. He could only relied of human images and he made a great effort to comprehend what was well beyond his grasp.

The eather? do not try to convince your physics professors about its existence, you'll get an "F". Is there some sort of "fluid" or a detectable "plasma-like layer" observable by a way of experiments? There isn't any and that is enough for "them" to classify you among the mistaken beings.

For me, personally of course, the eather is the resulting "topography" due to an unknown processes right in the middle of the sun (stars). Planets are attracted by it and kept rotating on their orbit as long as the star allows them to.

Since the "eather" is made of pure energy-interactions it must be consider a quantum mechanical process in nature, however since planets and moons are real objects with incredibly big masses, they respond to the laws that govern classical physics (Newton's physics).

The "path" of their orbits are built for them at an incredible speed and one velocity that goes beyond their ability to follow. This is why we interpret (Einstein did it for the first time in history) that time and space respond to abrupt topographical changes as we go from one orbit to the next. The planetarium orbits could be consider as huge harmonics in tune with the rotation of the star (you know that the sun's layers rotates right?)

Even our moon is considered to spin around the Earth in one harmonic pattern...interesting isn't it?

Now... I'd like you to think about this for a moment: If those huge planetarium orbits are the one defining what we call "space" or "cosmos" and it is throught out those space that light and other radiation emission travel from one place to the next... isn't it possible that a light beam that happens to travel throught lightyears from one star across star systems and galaxies reaching us after billions of years was affected by not one but millions of orbital changes along its way?

How trusworthy could an expansion or contraction theory be, based on a so-called red-shift phenomenon when considering those variables to exist across the entire universe?

We are full of questions that could only be answered in time. Meanwhile, it will take short steps to change our roots just as Einstein did a long time ago.

HUMANBYDEFAULT