[guest39538]

I think it is quite clear


force scales.2.jpg (24.04 kB . 731x461 - viewed 3303 times)

[Bored chemist]

I think it is quite clear

Can you find a single person who agrees with you?

[Bored chemist]

a sustains b's form and b sustains a's form.

OK, so, if we use copper nuclei  (as an  example) instead of protons then the box with electrons is a lump of copper.
Hardly cutting edge.
Since (some of ) the electrons are the outermost bit of the box you have finally found the system I pointed out earlier.
The "box" (The stuff that holds the electrons together) is inside the electrons.

I explained this to you here
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=72338.msg533308#msg533308
a week or two ago.

[guest39538]

I think it is quite clear

Can you find a single person who agrees with you?

I do not actually need to find a single person who agrees with me , although I have had some agreement about gravity. 

A person as to agree with the physics, not agree with me.

[guest39538]

a sustains b's form and b sustains a's form.

OK, so, if we use copper nuclei  (as an  example) instead of protons then the box with electrons is a lump of copper.
Hardly cutting edge.
Since (some of ) the electrons are the outermost bit of the box you have finally found the system I pointed out earlier.
The "box" (The stuff that holds the electrons together) is inside the electrons.

I explained this to you here
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=72338.msg533308#msg533308
a week or two ago.

HUH.....there is no electron without a proton.   The stuff inside of an electron is likewise to itself.   Well actually the stuff inside of an electron is space, the shell is likewise to itself.

[guest39538]

Electron model


electron.jpg (22.86 kB . 731x461 - viewed 3561 times)

The electron space is the enclosure of electron space pushing back.

[Bored chemist]

there is no electron without a proton.

In the real world we have videos of them.

[guest39538]

there is no electron without a proton.

In the real world we have videos of them.

Existing because they are in a n-field.

[Bored chemist]

So, the n field keeps the elephants away.
http://www.medical-jokes.com/its-to-keep-the-elephants-away/

[guest39538]

So, the n field keeps the elephants away.
http://www.medical-jokes.com/its-to-keep-the-elephants-away/

Effective isn't it .

[Bored chemist]

I think it is quite clear

Can you find a single person who agrees with you?

[guest39538]

I think it is quite clear

Can you find a single person who agrees with you?

Actually yes, the person who is emailing me and helping with my edit on the paper.  They understood and told me I should not give up on this idea.
Also I think it was Alan who agreed I had found gravity mechanism . You even replied to him and said basically , well yes but it hardly adds anything new. (You never said the word yes though). 

What science does with the notion and how science puts the notion is up to them, they will word it more precise than I ever could. It may take them several year just to discuss the notion .  I just hope I live long enough to see the notion on Wiki and wherever.

I am certain that neutral is attracted to neutral.  I may or not be correct about my N-field and n-field although the physics works and it explains the space ''fabric''.

I am certain about time and can objectively define time to a precise and exact definition.

I have some good thinking on light and the nature of light. 

I always knew what I know and what I don't know because I can't know everything.

added - Mr C

You must not:

ignore inconvenient facts or relevant considerations when providing advice or making decisions

[Bored chemist]

Also I think it was Alan who agreed I had found gravity mechanism .

Does Alan think so?

I think it is quite clear

Can you find a single person who agrees with you?

Actually yes, the person who is emailing me and helping with my edit on the paper.  They understood and told me I should not give up on this idea.

Can you find anyone who is actually prepared to say in public that they agree with you
Also, is your email correspondent qualified?

[guest39538]

Also I think it was Alan who agreed I had found gravity mechanism .

Does Alan think so?

I think it is quite clear

Can you find a single person who agrees with you?

Actually yes, the person who is emailing me and helping with my edit on the paper.  They understood and told me I should not give up on this idea.

Can you find anyone who is actually prepared to say in public that they agree with you
Also, is your email correspondent qualified?

The person whom I speak to in email has told me they have written several books.  They also said they will be happy to have their name in the co-write .
We both agree that we should be patience in writing the paper.   Whether or not this person will come forward in this thread and back me up, I do not know .
I will email them  and ask them , they are a member of this forum.

added- In short,  gravity is the natural phenomenon of a neutral electrostatic field is attracted to all other signed electrostatic fields.  All other signed electrostatic fields are attracted to  neutral electrostatic fields.   A phenomenon that is only functional if neutral exists, the combined function of a + b signs allowing G to be functional. Where a and b represent the individual opposite,  electrostatic signs.

a and b and a+b is attracted to a,b

F₁  ∈  {a}

F₂  ∈  {b}

F₁  + F₂  ∈  {a,b}

[Bored chemist]

The person whom I speak to in email has told me they have written several books. 

So  has J K Rowling,  but it doesn't qualify her to comment on a hypothesis in physics.

[guest39538]

The person whom I speak to in email has told me they have written several books.

So  has J K Rowling,  but it doesn't qualify her to comment on a hypothesis in physics.

True, I do not know the persons qualifications.  However, I am sure everyone should be able to agree with my latest short explanation?

[Bored chemist]

However, I am sure everyone should be able to agree with my latest short explanation?

I'm still waiting for you to produce a single real person who agrees with it.
I can produce at least one person (me) who says it's nonsense.

[guest39538]

However, I am sure everyone should be able to agree with my latest short explanation?

I'm still waiting for you to produce a single real person who agrees with it.
I can produce at least one person (me) who says it's nonsense.

I have sent an email so await a reply.  Also Alan as not yet replied to you, a bit of patience is required.   

OK, so you say it is nonsense, then please point out any errors in my latest short explanation?

There is no nonsense in that Mr C, stop being objective without considering the information.

[Bored chemist]

So it isn't clear what you are saying unless you accept that you are talking nonsense.

So you don't understand but declare it nonsense?

No
I am saying that, if you don't explain it then it will make sense to nobody.
And that will mean it is nonsense.

[guest39538]

So it isn't clear what you are saying unless you accept that you are talking nonsense.

So you don't understand but declare it nonsense?

No
I am saying that, if you don't explain it then it will make sense to nobody.
And that will mean it is nonsense.

I understand this, that is why I have a co-writer who hopefully can edit and put it better than me.  However, I think I have just explained it very well with my short explanation?