1
New Theories / Is gravitation even real?
« on: 25/09/2007 16:54:37 »
Hi;
All “actions” in Nature are required to comply with Newton’s 3rd Law. “For every action, there is (mandatorily), an equal and opposite reaction”. This applies throughout the universe, including the structure of every atom. An atom is the smallest “balanced particle” of matter, because the actions of electrons and their covalent trading must fit the 3rd Law.
If we consider that the Atomic Number is the number of protons that are contained in each atom of an element, and we also note that this number is the same as the number of electrons in that element, then it might appear that the element is “permanently balanced”, as under Newton’s 3rd Law, but this simply cannot be so
Material things are composed of a myriad of compounds, which when the electron “trading” allowances are considered, then those elements have “given away or exceeded” any seeming appearance of a 3rd Law balance.
If no element ever changed from its pure form into anything else, then the “atomic balance” argument might be valid, but this is the real world, and we have to consider all of the altered states of matter that can occur, which must also balance, or Newton’s 3rd Law can not be correct at the atomic level.
Incidentally, a neutron is said to be 1836 times, and a proton is said to be 1840 times as heavy as an electron. (Could both actually be only one of those two weights, implying another “balance in the atom”?) The closeness of the two seems suspiciously near to a balanced number possibility. Are the numbers even close enough as stated to be called “balanced” at the nano-scale?
Now I must ask: If weight alone makes every molecular body fall, either in space, or in any atmosphere, then where is the need for another force that we call “gravity”? If it does exist as a force, it would seem to be an atomically external effect only, which is said to “attract” other matter.
Now, why would a force called gravity even be required? Matter is electrical in nature, and the measurement between point charges under Coulomb’s Law produces a result that equates to Newtonian math. Protons, which are positive, are made of 3 quarks, but neutrons have no quarks. They are negative, so the protons and neutrons need not balance, but something must balance every atom to meet the 3rd Law.
So if an electron(s) is taken from any element, and that element can no longer balance, what else could there be, except something like (analogically) a universal “atmosphere” of Negative Pressure” that compensates for all chemical transitions, so that they too may balance, when they change?
Our universe is filled with such a Negative pressure, as discovered in 2005, by the Supernova Legacy Team, under the direction of Dr. Ray Carlberg of the University of Toronto. It appears to be the “operating platform” upon which the “Motherboard” of atomic structure can exist.
This theory is speculative in the extreme of course, because it tries to expose the effects attributed to “gravitation” as a “serious mistake”, that can be almost (or perhaps identically) explained by the mathematics of Coulomb’s Law, once we accept that the universe runs on electricity, and not something called “gravity”, about 100 years before Coulomb made his law available to science. We do not even understand all the reasons why the Van Allen Belts exist. They have to be “control panels”, as is a magnetosphere. Perhaps they do things such as controlling our tides, an often suspiciously inconsistent happening attributed to “the moon’s gravity”, which is alleged to be only 1/6 as strong as our own. “Ring currents” in open space appear to be a more believable cause, electromagnetically connecting the point charges of the two bodies.
≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡
Scientific advancement is fundamentally an effort to improve our understanding, and virtually every early discovery has been changed, corrected, or debunked over the ages. Our modern technology is well equipped to investigate other possibilities, and I seriously contend, that it is time we made the effort to prove that even genius can be wrong. Albert Einstein called his Cosmological Constant theory, “the greatest blunder of his life”, but with the discovery of Negative Pressure, he seems to have been proven to be correct.
Respectfully, I must say, that all humans each theorize based upon our observations, our understanding, and our always incomplete absolute knowledge. All of the above is only a theory, constructed from the components with which I have seemingly been cursed to dream.
fleep
All “actions” in Nature are required to comply with Newton’s 3rd Law. “For every action, there is (mandatorily), an equal and opposite reaction”. This applies throughout the universe, including the structure of every atom. An atom is the smallest “balanced particle” of matter, because the actions of electrons and their covalent trading must fit the 3rd Law.
If we consider that the Atomic Number is the number of protons that are contained in each atom of an element, and we also note that this number is the same as the number of electrons in that element, then it might appear that the element is “permanently balanced”, as under Newton’s 3rd Law, but this simply cannot be so
Material things are composed of a myriad of compounds, which when the electron “trading” allowances are considered, then those elements have “given away or exceeded” any seeming appearance of a 3rd Law balance.
If no element ever changed from its pure form into anything else, then the “atomic balance” argument might be valid, but this is the real world, and we have to consider all of the altered states of matter that can occur, which must also balance, or Newton’s 3rd Law can not be correct at the atomic level.
Incidentally, a neutron is said to be 1836 times, and a proton is said to be 1840 times as heavy as an electron. (Could both actually be only one of those two weights, implying another “balance in the atom”?) The closeness of the two seems suspiciously near to a balanced number possibility. Are the numbers even close enough as stated to be called “balanced” at the nano-scale?
Now I must ask: If weight alone makes every molecular body fall, either in space, or in any atmosphere, then where is the need for another force that we call “gravity”? If it does exist as a force, it would seem to be an atomically external effect only, which is said to “attract” other matter.
Now, why would a force called gravity even be required? Matter is electrical in nature, and the measurement between point charges under Coulomb’s Law produces a result that equates to Newtonian math. Protons, which are positive, are made of 3 quarks, but neutrons have no quarks. They are negative, so the protons and neutrons need not balance, but something must balance every atom to meet the 3rd Law.
So if an electron(s) is taken from any element, and that element can no longer balance, what else could there be, except something like (analogically) a universal “atmosphere” of Negative Pressure” that compensates for all chemical transitions, so that they too may balance, when they change?
Our universe is filled with such a Negative pressure, as discovered in 2005, by the Supernova Legacy Team, under the direction of Dr. Ray Carlberg of the University of Toronto. It appears to be the “operating platform” upon which the “Motherboard” of atomic structure can exist.
This theory is speculative in the extreme of course, because it tries to expose the effects attributed to “gravitation” as a “serious mistake”, that can be almost (or perhaps identically) explained by the mathematics of Coulomb’s Law, once we accept that the universe runs on electricity, and not something called “gravity”, about 100 years before Coulomb made his law available to science. We do not even understand all the reasons why the Van Allen Belts exist. They have to be “control panels”, as is a magnetosphere. Perhaps they do things such as controlling our tides, an often suspiciously inconsistent happening attributed to “the moon’s gravity”, which is alleged to be only 1/6 as strong as our own. “Ring currents” in open space appear to be a more believable cause, electromagnetically connecting the point charges of the two bodies.
≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡≡
Scientific advancement is fundamentally an effort to improve our understanding, and virtually every early discovery has been changed, corrected, or debunked over the ages. Our modern technology is well equipped to investigate other possibilities, and I seriously contend, that it is time we made the effort to prove that even genius can be wrong. Albert Einstein called his Cosmological Constant theory, “the greatest blunder of his life”, but with the discovery of Negative Pressure, he seems to have been proven to be correct.
Respectfully, I must say, that all humans each theorize based upon our observations, our understanding, and our always incomplete absolute knowledge. All of the above is only a theory, constructed from the components with which I have seemingly been cursed to dream.
fleep