I don't know enough about any thing in text book i dropped out of school in the 10th grade i didn't like being a geek . but i have been studding on and off for the past 15 years our natural environment and have partially developed a theory of my own on motion mass and static energy as a binding force, for example the earths center is kind of nucleolus that controls every thing in our world and it is directly effected by the sun through its electromagnetic forces and it could be duplicated if i could just talk to some one who knows a lot of info on the relationship between centricity and magnetic fields mans form of energy franklin could not see the key was the answer to his his own question
[iron] elementally strongest for both applications and an ore that is abundantly found in every living thing attraction like a magnet=gravity
Quintessence was discovered by two groups which looked at distant supernova. By seeing how bright the supernova were they were able to estimate how far away they were. This was used to plot the relationship between distance and redshift that can be used to show how fast the universe is expanding.
What they found instead, was that the universe is accelerating. That is, the rate and which the universe is expanding today is more than it was a billion years ago, and in a billion years from today the rate of expansion will be even faster.
The name "quintessence" is used for various models of the vacuum energy which drive the acceleration of the rate of expansion. The term was chosen because it sound nice and mysterious, it has no connection with any Earth-Fire thing. They could have called it "Peanut Butter" and nothing would have changed in the mathematics - which is what counts.
If you're interested in science, like it sounds you are, I would strongly recommend reading more about it, and just enjoy the very strangeness of it. Engage with people on message boards. It is extremely difficult to make a major, ground-breaking contribution to physics even with a PhD and research experience. It is basically impossible to do so without one.
I don't mean to be condescending, its just that there were, and still are, a lot of crank theories out there based on a few ideas which may or may not be wrong, but which ignore the VAST amount of experimental data there is about the universe we live in.
You don't want to fall into the trap of being a crank, or quack. Trust me, I've seen it. (When a post-doc at a big state university.)