- The Special Theory [of Relativity] is overturned by the understanding of the new paradigm about the nature of gravitational action. Gravity is indeed not an unfathomable influence that one object distant from a second object has upon it without a connection between them. The idea that it was “action at a distance” was actually a criticism that Sir Isaac Newton received over his work. - Newton himself said that the idea that one body could act upon another at a distance without some intermediary action was wholly unacceptable. ... Newton’s mathematics was directly applicable to a model of the apparently instantaneous action of gravity between two bodies separated from one another. In its revolutions around the Sun, the Earth conforms to a Newtonian model very well: the fact that it is not thrown out of orbit progressively by every revolution must mean that the gravitation between the Sun and the Earth operates so fast that it could be considered to be instantaneous.
- The Electric Universe paradigm maintains that the gravitational influence of the Sun upon the Earth does act upon it by a discoverable process through the intermediary of what older philosophers referred to as the “aether”, but that the speed with which this happens is vastly greater than the speed of light waves.
... So now let us proceed to the “mystery of mass“. ... These words of the mathematician and philosopher Henri Poincaré were published posthumously in his book “Science and Methods” in 1914: “What we call mass would seem to be nothing but an appearance, and all inertia to be of electromagnetic origin.”
... Then is mass the sum of all the various particles that make up the body – considering these particles to be fundamental particles? It does not appear, however, that such a calculation would give a result consistent with our understanding of mass as we normally measure it. In that respect, such a measure of mass is no better than seeing it as the space or volume occupied by the body.
- Mass is seen also in Newtonian physics as Inertia, and this can start us on a fruitful track. Wal Thornhill has pointed out that if we apply force (for example, a push) to a body, which then moves (or at least reacts to the force), the interaction between the force and the body is an electrical one, pure and simple. Whatever attractive forces might exist are more than overcome by the forces of repulsion, chiefly those between the outer electrons in the atoms closest to the points of contact. As Poincaré pointed out a century or so ago, inertia (and therefore inertial mass) is an electromagnetic quantity.
- This suggests that if the weight or heaviness of the body is proportional to its inertial mass, as Newton states and his (and our) experiments have confirmed, the pull of gravity is likewise an electrical (or electromagnetic) effect. As Thornhill says, “if we can explain inertia, gravity and magnetism in electrical terms, the electric force would become the only one required in the universe.” The pertinent so far unexplained piece in this intriguing science story is how to explain gravity in electrical terms. And this we will be moving on to in succeeding articles.
SJW said:Michael V wrote: This is exactly defined as particles separated by empty space. I understand the appeal of visualising a continuous aethereal fluid, but it is a vital necessity of a fluid of any description that it be particles separated by empty space. An atomic fluid is 99.9999....% empty space, an aethereal fluid will be no different.
- The full universe is totally and utterly solid in the ultimate and absolute meaning of that concept, with no chance or hint of motion at any level. You can build model upon model with layer upon layer of aethereal field of finer and finer grained particles, but it will be to no avail. To retain a viable property of motion a vast majority of empty space in required.
I so wholeheartedly agree, and yet the concept is almost unbearable to agree with as well. For such a notion requires action at a distance, as there can be no physical contact.
+EyeOn-W-ANeed2Know wrote:Chromium6 wrote:"It's the only possible way we can think of releasing so much energy."
LOL! I think that's the most accurate statement in that whole thing.
webolife wrote:And whenever I read the term "polarized" I think to myself "vector" -- a force in a direction.
The electric susceptibility χe of a dielectric material is a measure of how easily it polarizes in response to an electric field. This, in turn, determines the electric permittivity of the material and thus influences many other phenomena in that medium, from the capacitance of capacitors to the speed of light.
Users browsing this forum: Siggy_G and 1 guest