According to Newton, gravitational attraction was caused by an unexplained magnetic force that acted across space and caused mutual attraction between two bodies.
Einstein rejected the ideas of Newton. According to the interpretation of the gravitational field which prevailed in the 20th century, gravity was a ‘physical phenomenon’ in that it was generated by ‘masses of matter’. What was supposed to have happened was that matter ‘curved and warped space-time’ and when physical masses of this matter were ‘falling’ or were in orbit, they were actually following a straight line in this curved space time which created stretched holes in the ‘fabric of space-time’. Thus we must infer that somehow space must be composed of a ‘fabric’ of some sort, although no one has ever defined what properties it must possess.
There is an unresolved inconsistency in Einstein’s interpretation of gravity, in that like Newton, Einstein would also need to explain the falling of an apple. It is that point that General Relativity must deviate from a purely physical explanation of gravity and resort to an energy field of some sort. Now according to one interpretation of how this is supposed to work, when an apple is raised up to a height, it takes ‘potential energy away from the gravity field’. This is shown in the second panel where the apple now has more ‘potential energy’ (symbolized by the addition of the yellow to the bar on the right) while the ‘gravitational field’ has lost that much energy, as shown by the green section in the bar on the left. When the apple begins to fall, as shown in the third panel, the apple must give back the energy that it took from the gravitational field when it was lifted up, and once the gravitational field gets back its lost energy, both apple and field are back in equilibrium.
If an object is moving and has a certain momentum, and then encounters the curved space-time, it is easy to imagine that object following the curves of space time, because the object is already moving. However when a stationary apple is dropped within a gravitational field, it becomes necessary to invoke an explanation based upon the existence of Newton’s energy field, since the curved space time is unavailable to explain the falling of an otherwise motionless apple.
According to the Unified Field Theory when an object rises in a gravitational energy field, it does not ‘take away energy from the field’. This is backwards. A falling body receives donations of energy from the field, while a rising body loses energy by donating energy to the surrounding gravitational field. (It is for this reason that a rising hydrogen atom is cooling as rises, and not getting ‘hotter’, for it is the hydrogen atom which is donating energy to the earth’s gravitational energy field as it exits the field before escaping out into space).
According to the Unified Field Theory Einstein was wrong to reject Newton’s theory of the magnetic field, and the correct solution is found in a unification of Einstein’s theory of General Relativity with Newton’s magnetic field, since the ‘curvature’ described by General Relativity is the measurement of the density of an electromagnetic energy field. One of the reasons that Einstein made this error, and the reason why Einstein failed to discover the Unified Field Theory despite spending the rest of his life looking for such a theory, was that like everyone else in the 20th century, Einstein accepted that ‘masses of matter’ existed in the universe. Einstein took the letter ‘M’ in his famous equation, E equals MC squared, to be literal and true as a description of ‘physical mass’. This same ruinous mistake has been made by all scientists ever since, for it would seem that people cannot accept that ‘matter’ is just an interpretation placed upon electromagnetic phenomena by the human brain, which is just an interpreter of electromagnetism.
You will sometimes hear people say that ‘most of the atom consists of empty space.’ Now according to the Unified Field Theory, most of the atom consists of an energy field, and it is not empty, since it possesses density. Atoms are electromagnetic bubbles, little closed energy fields. The idea that an atom consists of ‘empty space’ is a matter based interpretation of the atom as consisting of the electricity that runs your toaster in the morning which has somehow become freeze dried into the form of itsy bitsy little solid dried peas, each with the right positive or negative ‘charge’ which then allows itsy bitsy bits of ‘solid matter’ to occupy so called ‘empty space’ as they are both attracted and repelled by other similar and differently charged small freeze dried peas. It was the persistent belief in the matter based tautology (matter is made of itsy bitsy jig saw pieces in the form of such freeze dried little peas) that did not allow Einstein to discover the Unified Field Theory, and neither has anyone else over the course of the previous century, which is understandable when you consider that a Unified Field must be a Unified Field, and once you introduce such small freeze dried peas into the universe you get a ‘DisUnified Field’ as the natural outcome.
One of the persistent features of this ‘DisUnified Field Theory’ of the 20th century is the persistence of contradictory matter based tautologies, such as the inherent contradiction in Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity, in that it is required to both reject and accept Newton in order to make any sense whatsoever out of the universe, and it would seem that people resolve this conflict by not resolving it, and the result is the creation of what I call ‘the mass confusion’. The DisUnified Fields Theories then leads to the inevitable disunified science, as everyone heads off in mutually contradictory directions and everyone winds up wondering what’s wrong with the theories proposed by everyone else.