I'm not sure what that would mean. Maybe you can characterize observations made by yourself or others according to physical abstractions like wave mechanics, but I'd be surprised if you could ground the observed phenomena as such in physics as we know it. Quantum field theory combined with the physical experimental data we have is a pretty rigid abstraction in the energy ranges accessible on Earth outside of a particle accelerator, and would probably have to be generalized in some unexpected direction in order to accommodate even ordinary claimed etheric phenomena:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2101.07884 ("The Quantum Field Theory on Which the Everyday World Supervenes", by Sean M. Carroll, 2021)
I'm only a dabbler in quantum field theory, but the only loophole I can see in Carroll's argument is if the ethers were not a small number of macroscopically observable fields, but a huge number of individually weak fields that normally don't cohere up to a measurable effect in the context of a physics experiment. (Obviously they would only be able to cohere if there were some common structure linking some of the fields, such that many of them could end up being activated in a common direction in some context that wasn't a physics experiment; otherwise their contributions would just be random and cancel out.)
One other potential direction of unexpected generalization of quantum field theory is the Wolfram-Goraud generalized relativity principle, that tries to present a unifying axis of relationship running through general relativity ("spacetime"), quantum mechanics ("branchial space", via a "completion interpretation" of quantum mechanics, a name referencing a computer-science technique for efficiently calculating when multiple routes of transformation converge to the same thing, abstractly related to Euclid's algorithm and Gaussian elimination), and a hypothetical third domain of physics ("rulial space") resembling Max Tegmark's proposals about all possible mathematically specifiable universes being real.
I have some further thoughts along these lines but maybe they're not worth bringing up at the moment.
Re: Temple technology update
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2101.07884 ("The Quantum Field Theory on Which the Everyday World Supervenes", by Sean M. Carroll, 2021)
I'm only a dabbler in quantum field theory, but the only loophole I can see in Carroll's argument is if the ethers were not a small number of macroscopically observable fields, but a huge number of individually weak fields that normally don't cohere up to a measurable effect in the context of a physics experiment. (Obviously they would only be able to cohere if there were some common structure linking some of the fields, such that many of them could end up being activated in a common direction in some context that wasn't a physics experiment; otherwise their contributions would just be random and cancel out.)
One other potential direction of unexpected generalization of quantum field theory is the Wolfram-Goraud generalized relativity principle, that tries to present a unifying axis of relationship running through general relativity ("spacetime"), quantum mechanics ("branchial space", via a "completion interpretation" of quantum mechanics, a name referencing a computer-science technique for efficiently calculating when multiple routes of transformation converge to the same thing, abstractly related to Euclid's algorithm and Gaussian elimination), and a hypothetical third domain of physics ("rulial space") resembling Max Tegmark's proposals about all possible mathematically specifiable universes being real.
I have some further thoughts along these lines but maybe they're not worth bringing up at the moment.