GRAVITY IS A MYTH
( the earth sucks )
The attraction of the proton for it’s neighbor’s electron shell and it’s electron shell attraction to the neighbor’s proton causes warpage of the nucleus from it’s centered position and attraction to other atoms and attraction to the aether. The weaker negative surface of the neutron also pulls on neighboring protons while it’s proton core effects the aether .While this effect diminishes rapidly with distance, large planetary masses cause measurable effects over millions of miles. This, over all warpage of the atomic center of mass, from it’s position in the middle of the electron shell, causes a free body to accelerate toward the warping body. This is due to the accelerating body’s attempting to center it’s mass within it’s shell. At it;s surface, a planetary body the size of the earth will create a warpage field that will accelerate a free body 32 feet per second, per second. Gravity is not a thing, or a wave, It is only the description of an effect caused by nuclear warpage. This electro-static effect is carried over long distances through the aether.
What is Aether? Description of Aether: link https://pgtruspace.wordpress.com/gravity-is-a-myth/aether/
THERE IS NOT NOTHING IN SPACE
( space is packed full of something )
The medium of space, the fabric of space, dark matter,dark energy, zero point energy or AETHER. Space is solidly packed with something. A researcher at the start of the 1900’s said space behaves as an atmosphere compressed to 10,000 psi when comparisons of the speed of light in different materials was made. Tests done in the mid 1800’s demonstrated light traveled faster through denser materials and was therefor wave and not particle. All electronic and electrical engineers know that particle light theory is based on an affectation of all test devices, To have a test result you need enough energy to cause an electron shell to transfer the energy to the next shell. This quanta of energy is a unit of amount and not a thing. ( sorry folks no photon particles, no electron particles ). In the early 1900’s experts in wave theory carried out an experiment to prove the existence of aetherial flow. As there were no positive results, particle proponents declared that it proved the non-existence of aether. An examination of the experiment layout, show that it’s designers failed to fully understand the nature of aether and flow in fluid dynamics. Thought of that time was that, aether was a fixed field that space bodies traveled through and therefor speed of light differences would demonstrate an existence and direction of an aetheral wind. No differences were found, no wind, therefor no aether. An aetheral field is more similar to an ocean we travel with, inside of a boundary layer. No wind, no proof, poor experiment design. EMF energy transfer requires the existence of a medium that can be magnetically energized and polarized. A universe filled with AETHER.
So what is Aether?
THE AETHERIAL OCEAN
(the thing not there, yet is every where)
AETHER was described by the ancient Greeks and has been in and out of favor ever since. It is not matter. Matter is made up of organized granules of aether. It is not energy. It’s internal angular momentum is energy, Aether has inertia or mass due to it’s resistance to change in motion. It is magnetizable, to create magnetic lines of force. Aether exhibits fluid dynamics and behaves similar to a gas under extreme pressure. Aether is similar to granules that resist each other like ball bearings made of force fields. A granule of aether that spins has an electrostatic field and would be called an election. If it is moved an EMF effect results. If it travels in the spin axes direction, an electromagnetic field is created. A granule that travels and tumbles is a neutrino. And one that travels spins, and tumbles a photon. When an independent electron, neutrino or photon travels through aetherial space it is the spin, travel and tumble information that actually travels. An electrostatic field puts stresses, (negative) pushes, (positive) pulls on the aether. An electromagnetic field moves it or if the aether moves an electro-magnetic field results. EMF energy travels through aether, as a sound wave travels through a medium, through compression, decompression. Compression caused by field, field caused by decompression. All different manifestations of the same thing.
Soo what is AETHER?
ENERGY
(this is energizing)
Energy “The ability to do work”. is not a thing. It is an event that modifies or changes things. Modification or change of a thing will create an energy event. Energy applied to a thing, for change, must overcome resistance to the change (inertia) to effect the change. To reverse the change another energy event must take place. “An object at rest, will stay at rest. An object forced into motion, will stay in motion until equal and opposite force is applied”( at least Newtonian physics works ) The energy applied becomes part of the total mass of the object. Observed mass is relative to your point of view or the view point of the observer relative to the observed. If you and an object are accelerated at the same rate and direction there will be no apparent mass change. If the object is accelerated in a different amount or direction to the observer it will have a measurable change in mass but no change in inertia. Inertia is the internal resistance to change in motion, the internal angular momentum ( this relativity stuff is sure tough ) The speed of EMF through the aether is at the local speed of light determined by the local medium density, regardless of the relative speed of the origin to the local observer. Relative speed only effects the frequency observed. Distance also effects the frequency. Waves, not particles, through a medium, aether.
Soooo what is aether?
ATOMS
(the real thing)
The ancients did a fair job of describing the atom. The smallest common unit of construction of our universe is isotope hydrogen 1. This is created when a core (“0” net charge)of granules of aether organizes and collapse to a singularity, a proton, leaving a static charge on the outside of the bubble and spinning up the area’s surface to become a negative charged (more then”0″negative) electron shell. The proton core, appears to be positive, ( less then “0” negative ) and in counter rotation. The core to shell potential difference increases with distance of internal separation, decreases with closeness, pulling the core to the center of the shell. If the proton is driven from it’s shell it is still less then “0” negative (positive) and spinning. It can be attracted by negative and repelled by positive fields and is magnetic. The shell will be electrostaticlly negative as long as it spins, electromagnetic when it moves and with no motion disappears. It can be attracted by a positive electrostatic field, repelled by a negative one, and moved by a magnetic field. An electron shell has the same surface charge as granules of aether and repels them, the oppositely charged proton attracts them. When an electron shell moves through the aether, aether flows around it, pushed by electrostatic repulsion. When a proton moves it pulls on the aether electrostaticlly and drags a larger amount then the electron shell pushes. Thus a ball of aether around an atom or object is created, a net mass of attached aetheral granules that resist the change in motion and speed.
THIS MATTERS
(pay attention)
The smallest common building block of matter in our universe, the proton and electron shell of the simple hydrogen atom, has several sizes. plasma, atomic, elemental and the neutron. Plasma hydrogen is basically a proton without it’s electron shell. Deep lack of charge, (high positive) and repels all other protons, and would seriously resist fusion. Atomic hydrogen is a proton with electron shell and carries too much energy to bond. Elemental hydrogen is smaller, has 3 possible weights or isotopes and can bond. The neutron is a simple hydrogen atom that has had it’s electron shell collapsed around it. It has a slight negative surface and can not bind electron shells. It has slightly more inertia / mass than the proton.
Soooooo what is Aether?
NEUTRONS
(the quick change artist)
An neutron is created when an atom of hydrogen that is attached to another atom, is pushed inside the others shell and it’s shell collapses around it. It has a weak negative surface charge and cannot bind outside electron shells against electron repulsion. The neutron has slightly more mass or inertia then the hydrogen atom, (because of it’s reduced apparent negative charge) and is about the same size as a proton. A proton- neutron nucleus is the result. If this happens again. A proton-two neutron core results. If one of the neutrons re-expands, a two proton-one neutron helium nuclei within a doubled shell may result, and on and on. No high powered collider, a crystal lattice will do. A neutron outside it’s atom is not stable and will decay in a short time. When a solitary neutron decays, it becomes a hydrogen atom with a high negative surface charge and with a slight net reduction in mass or inertia and a great change in volume. This change of volume *10to6, at the speed of light, yields a very energetic local event in the aether,( <mi>+ E=V*C ) and a very small change in mass or inertia. Neutron creation and decay is the source of fission/fusion atomic energy, not matter conversion.
WHAT MATTERS
( is reality )
Every thing we see, feel and touch is the result of electron field interference of one kind or another. All matter in our normal space is composed of protons, neutrons and their electron shells. Protons, relative to the size of the electron shell, are tiny! It is said, “If protons were the size of beach balls, the electron shell would be as large as the United States”. While it is quite small, the relative mass or inertia of a proton is greater than the electron shell’s mass. A neutron is slightly larger and has slightly more mass or inertia. The mass or inertia of an elemental atom is primarily determined by the number of protons and neutrons within it and their total effect on the aether around them. The materials that make up our apparent universe are molecules made up of 2 or more atoms of one or more elements. Atoms in molecules are held together and shaped by the field attraction of protons for their neighbors electron shells as well as their own, and the repulsion of like fields, protons against protons, electrons against electrons. The fields, within and without, of the atom are shaped by the arrangement of protons and neutrons at the center of the atom and their effect on the local field strength of the electron shells above them. This attraction to a lesser degree holds molecules together to create crystals and other structures.
Soooooooo what is Aether?
Electro-Motive Force
(the force with us) link to THEORY OF ELECTRICITY according to pg, :
https://pgtruspace.wordpress.com/pictorial-schematic-of-device/gravity-is-a-myth/electric-theory/
EMF ( electro-motive force ) is electromagnetic energy traveling through the medium of space. From DC (direct current through a wire), AC (alternating current in a wire), RF (radio frequency on a wire) to light and cosmic rays. It is all the same. In the case of DC, warpage caused by electrical potential is transferred from one atom electron shell to the next. At each jump the EMF pulse moves through the space in and near the conductor in one direction. In AC the charge moves back and forth, in and over the conductor. As the frequency increases more of the energy is transferred over the outside of the conductor. All atoms will conduct, shell to shell. Those with loosely filled electron shells will conduct easier at no or low frequencies and low voltage potentials. Those with tightly filled shells will resist. At higher frequencies the reaction of the electron shells will be slower then the charge change and their difference will push the EMF field out of and off of the conductor’s surface. The conductor becomes the insulator. At very high frequencies, conductors are used to guide and control the energy transfer through repulsion as the energy travels through the aether.
Soooooooooo what is Aether??
WHAT IS ACCEPTABLE MAY NOT BE THE TRUTH
( reality is in the eye of the beholder)
Particle physics describes atoms made up of a nuclei of protons (positive charged, made up several differently charged and spinning sub particles), neutrons(similar to a proton in sub particle count, different net spin and no net charge),and electrons orbiting in layers like so many planets (very small and negatively charged). photons (similar in size to an electron and is the carrier of EMF energy), and neutrinos(originally described to cover up a math error, same size as electron and photon with little or no mass, spin or charge). Photons, electrons and neutrinos, all have different mass, spin and charge test results. Test collisions of these particles show them to be interchangeable, one becoming another, different detector results. Present day sub atomic particle physics also call for masons, leptons, gravitons and glueons and ons and ons and ons…..The larger the atom smasher, the greater number of different kinds of shards of atomic colored glass that can be classified and named. And aether does not exist…!! well maybe……
P.G.’s theory of relativity;
The more money you appear to have,
the more relatives you appear to have.
Like this:
Like Loading...
pgtruspace's blog 
“As above so below”, but it seems that in every dimension/size the two original forces, when the first discharge happens from 1 into 0, become electricity and magnetism, always at a 90º angle, while developing it interacts against “exterior” media (other manifestations) it results in a triangle of forces where the square angle it is always kept and only “legs” change of size (size=dimension=space=potential difference=voltage). Thus development adopts the most economical way and that is the musical octave, where “quanta” are emitted or absorbed at critical points (gaps).
The earth really “sucks”!…btw have you notice that some are sucked more than others 🙂
Yes, gravity is a myth. The apparent attraction currently attributed to gravity is simply the constant expansion of matter. The standard model accepts that the universe is expanding, but fails to realise that every atom of matter (concentrated energy) is also expanding at a rate proportional to it’s radius.
As conglomerates of atoms, like planets, appear to accelerate towards each other in space due to this expansion, we mistake this observation for an attraction between the two bodies. This is why gravity appears to be an instantaneous force at a distance, and why neither Newton nor Einstein could attribute a physical mechanism to gravity.
In my view the appearance of acceleration and therefor expansion does not fit logic, 32ft per second, per second is a lot of expansion to create the appearance of gravity. And there are stars that range in size up to light speed acceleration. On the other hand electrostatic warpage of the center of mass of matter can be accumulative, operate over vast distances, and give potential for acceleration. pg
@ Adolfo: Many times when I read your stuff, I remember that you think in a different language then I yet see the same pictures. Must be some connection in a previous life.
Most of our observations take place in the zones between the clean vectors. This gives muddled outcomes and thought. I often wish that I could have studied music, I can hear the music of the spheres, but I can not grasp the intelligence in it. The connection between spoken language and written was also difficult to grasp. After 60 years of effort I can now think and write fairly well and sometimes even communicate. 😉
And yes some days, when I get up, it feels that the earth sucks more then usual. Must be getting old and fat! 😎 pg
p.g.sharrow December 31, 2011 at 12:23 pm
“…And there are stars that range in size up to light speed acceleration. On the other hand electrostatic warpage of the center of mass of matter can be accumulative, operate over vast distances, and give potential for acceleration. pg…”
Both conjectures have more merit than the standard model, which posits ‘gravitons’ – but particles cannot produce the required instantaneous force at a distance required to explain gravity, while expansion can… 🙂
Don’t forget that it only takes every atomic particle (energy quanta} to expand a tiny amount for the cumulative effect to produce massive expansion for very large bodies. Also space is infinite so things can expand as quickly as the like for eternity and never fill it. Then the all pervasive photon charge field emitted by these same particles repels bodies and prevents collisions. Once we start measuring the size of objects in units of time things will perhaps become easier to understand.
I like the idea of a simple eternal universe where the splendour we see is driven by two simple principles. The apparent attraction of ever expanding bodies and the repulsion of the all pervasive photon charge field at all scales. The Yin and Yang or existence,
@ Tenuc; after studying your proposed explanation of gravity causes, I find that instantaneous gravitation effects over distance is unproved though postulated. As a matter of fact super nova events seem to show a less the light speed propagation rate. I am not sure that gravity effects are any different then any other energy at speed of propagation of effects. The only thing that seems to have effects that are instantaneous over distance is psychic phenomena.
The idea that expansion would explain gravity, seems to me would cause major atomic warpage to the outer layers due to inertial acceleration.
Astrophysics claims that the universe seems to be expanding at a high fraction of the speed of light but there seems to be no change in size of galaxies and stars.
Much as I love simple answers, this change of size explanation for gravity does not seem to hang together to me.
Now the all pervasive photonic charge field of space has been suggested for at least 150 years and seems to be demonstrated in a number of fields of study. pg
Hi PG, thanks for the reply. Without an instantaneous force at a distance both Newton’s and Kepler’s orbital calculations fail. It can be argued that Einstein’s equations would also fail as he assumes a static, permanent ‘gravity well’ surrounding each body. This is a big problem for the mainstream approach to gravity, an as you say, indicates some magical psychic power… 🙂
It is interesting that instantaneous force at a distance is also inherent in the definition of the Statcoulomb, which comes directly out of Coulomb’s equation – not good… 😦
Regarding the expansion “causing major atomic warpage”, no stress will occur in any body as each atomic particle within it is also expanding at the same rate relative to its size.
Finally, “Astrophysics claims that the universe seems to be expanding at a high fraction of the speed of light but there seems to be no change in size of galaxies and stars.” – If objects remained the same size, they would appear smaller to the observer as they moved further away, it is because every particle is also expanding that relative size remains constant. The universe, and all particles (=energy packets) within it, are in a perpetual state of expansion.
@Tenuc January 3, 2012 at 9:45 am; As gravity is in place for very long periods without change, it may appear to be a permanent feature that effect overs distance instantaneously. I see no logical way for force to be instantaneous over large distance. I can make math that that gives the right answer but does not correctly represent reality. That is what assumptions and fudge factors are for.
E=M*C2 is a good example of a beautiful algebraic shorthand formula that gives a good answer for the wrong reason, the speed of light times its self gives the wrong answer in logic and leads to many strange logical results that mathematicians point to to justify their own wild conjectures of physics.
As to expansion, if you had an atomic structure of 7 units, a double end pyramid of 6 points + 1 in the center, and they all were in expansion. The outer units would have to move their center of mass out against inertia. If that crystal had an additional layer, it would have to move that layers units center of mass at twice the distance and speed, etc. etc. Logically at what point does expansion = explosion ? The expansion of a neutron to a hydrogen atom at the speed of light is what an atomic bomb is made of. pg
p.g.sharrow January 3, 2012 at 2:00 pm
Hi pg, and many thanks for your excellent reply, which has given me much food for further though and sparked lots of ideas for thought experiment!
Firstly I don’t believe E=mc^2 either, pg.
To go back to basics, KE=1/2mv^2, which is an energy relationship which works even if v=c, no need for Einstein’s misconstrued variant. I also don’t believe that the speed of light as measured by experiment is necessarily the maximum possible speed, or that mass becomes infinite when c is reached. I believe in a physical world where real mechanical energy transfer is the driving force and infinity, outside the non-physical world of mathematical constructs, has no meaning.
Regarding your comment:-
“…As to expansion, if you had an atomic structure of 7 units, a double end pyramid of 6 points + 1 in the center, and they all were in expansion. The outer units would have to move their center of mass out against inertia. If that crystal had an additional layer, it would have to move that layers units center of mass at twice the distance and speed, etc. etc. Logically at what point does expansion = explosion ? The expansion of a neutron to a hydrogen atom at the speed of light is what an atomic bomb is made of. pg
If, as seems probable, matter (mass) is simply highly condensed elastic energy packets then any inertial effect would deform the packets, but depending on the configuration of the particle conglomerates, not necessarily break them. This could be the reason that only certain configurations can exist as those unable to cope with the stress quickly revert to simpler units?
Another thought is that perhaps mass, gravity, momentum and inertia are not four different things, rather they are just different expressions of the same thing, with all resolving to length over time.
More to follow when I’ve had time to ponder… 🙂
@Tenuc January 5, 2012 at 9:22 am
“Another thought is that perhaps mass, gravity, momentum and inertia are not four different things, rather they are just different expressions of the same thing, with all resolving to length over time. ”
Yes that is as it appears to me. Something appears to cause all of those effects and it must be somewhat external to matter. This is why I need aether to tie it all together. I can’t see how it can all be internal to matter. If were all internal there would be nothing for inertia to grab onto. Inertial acceleration, deceleration and gravity effect mass with exactly the same effect on the atomic structures. Mass & inertia are different expressions for the same thing and are effected the same way by gravity and acceleration. pg
@P.G. But what is matter?, what is “mass”?, the transient existence of a wave of moving energy seen as immobilized by our subjectivity as observers?
If we go to the fundamentals, then, for practical purposes, let us begin by trying to describe how a flow originates: from one active force, a charge to a passive emptiness, a void to be filled. However there is a third force: it must be somewhat external to matter: Of course an already existing EM field, previously “born”. Such “exterior” force, which acts against the manifestation of a new development, you may call it “aether” or whatever but it should be as material as anything else. The new development: A small “creature” trying to develop IN the bigger realm of an already existing universe…what´s first, the chicken or the egg?, that is not our business, however we can make the exercise of describing what happens when something new begins to “develop”, and with that purpose I like to visualize a charge=1 and a Void= 0, in its turn, and to be practical, the same as an empty “capacitor”, from that moment on it begins movement and phenomena.
Think: Why does a capacitor work as such?, btw in the same way that a “thermos” flask, reflecting IR light on its reflecting inner surfaces….and, if you follow the analogy, take a “ramp pump” where the “capacitor” is a tank where water is saved once and again, until it reaches a certain “pressure”. See?, the analogy is perfect: There is one point where it “feeds”, accumulates, and a point where a part of the energy is relieved, as there are two “check valves”. In the case of the “ramp pump” what is sought is to increase pressure, to increase the energy level, to climb up the “pitch” of the octave, as when we grow up, the negentropic way up, feeding ourselves like the ramp pump…There is the other way, of course, the way of entropy, the way of spending energy.
Thus we can achieve the understanding of the primordial laws…
@Adolfo; yes there is charge( we call negative ) A lack of charge ( we call positive ) and when they balance +/- ( we call neutral ) To create an EMF field requires, charge, in motion. Without charge in motion there can be no Electr-Motive Force field creation. The EMF field is created in the aether and matter as well, by changing the spin orientation within them. Every action causes an equal and opposite reaction. Whether electrical or physical, and once set in motion, will continue until acted upon by an opposite force. Whether the largest creation or the smallest, it is all the same.As to the reflectivity of the electron shell to EMF. The atomic electron shell is charge in motion and resists changes caused by outside charge fields. The reflectivity of polished surfaces and metals is due to the exposed electron shell reflectance. It is interesting that the charge of a capacitance metal is only on the surface and not within the metal, And the total charge strength is contained within the atomic warpage of the separating dielectric.
The accumulative energy in a harmonic field is the bases of many of Tesla’s designs as well as my own. pg
@P.G. Thanks for your explanation.
P.G. Sharrow January 23, 2012 at 11:18 pm (Edit)
Well, I just bought two new electric sanders. A 5 inch orbital and a 2 inch detail sander. Lots of wood to sand tomorrow. New toys to play with! And I also need to return to work on the FRP disk as I got more resin to do the needed detail and finish work. pg
adolfogiurfa
Submitted on 2012/01/28 at 3:38 pm
Water FALLING moves a generator, converting gravity into power, then, in your kitchen, that power is converted, again, into gravity (work). I had the intuition that when an alternate current electric motor runs regenerates gravity which is another “tag” for work.
How would you change the phase angle at will? You know Tesla and many had that trouble for making an alternate current motor as it would just make little jumps instead of running, like the Hutchinson effect. Vectors add creating work when approaching. If the phase angle could be varied at will, making it wider, then the opposite effect could be probably achieved. How is it done I only suspect. You are the educated one in such arts. Sometimes simple things are not even tried.
P.G. Sharrow
Submitted on 2012/01/28 at 11:25 am
Probably more like a hockey puck on melting ice. But maybe a start. Any reaction on demand would be good. LENR has been a maybe for over 20 years as the results were small and not dependable. Rossi seems to have solved that. In this case I am working out in the ozone land of physics and trying to create a working device. Hutchinson, T Townson Brown and others have created effects but no one knows for sure as the results are not dependable or explained. pg
The works of Hutchinson and T Townson Brown as well as others indicates that an intense emf field as in a tesla coil discharge and rotating fields or other means of creating 3 dimensions of emf fields in motion can confuse mass/inertia or gravity.
An experiment conducted in Finland was reported on and was to be published in the English version of Nature and was published in the German version. This was in the days when superconductor ceramics were being investigated by nearly everyone. The experimenters reported that they created a 10cm disk that they levitated over a solenoid while it was in a liquid nitrogen bath. around the bath was a set of polyphase coils that was used to spin the levitated superconductor disk.
One of the experimenters was smoking his pipe and blew the smoke over the device expecting the smoke to sink over the super cold bath, it went straight up! Under the platform it also went up. AS this lab was in a multistory building he checked the floor above and below with the same results. After some tests they reported 3-5% changes in the effects of gravity on the disk as well as in the area above and below the disk.
Later they were to do more tests and report a full paper in Nature. Later one of the experimenters claimed it never happened. Another report was that it was not Fins but Russians that did the experiment. I saw the first report at the time it was reported and was waiting for the full “English Nature” paper on all the data, it never was published there but the “German Nature” did publish. At least that is what I have been told. pg
@P.G.: Just wrote the following in TB: What does it happen in convection?, instead of our immediate response: “warmer air goes up”, if we apply Socrates´ “Mayeutics”, we should ask ourselves, again: what is it a “warmer” air?…air with more “energy”, air much more “charged” as being able to relatively defy the law of gravity….until a storm or a lighting storm, or even a “hurricane” happens, and it becomes discharged.
As “energy” and “charge” are more general terms, and they can be applied, analogically, to other phenomena, we would be much more prepared to do so and then to understand, instead of just a particular phenomenon, many other. We are being “inflationary” not only with currency but with words.
…The more neutrality, the more subjected to gravity.
BTW Montgolfier´s balloon was your predecessor: His hot air filled balloon was an anti-gravitational device…
@Adolfo; yes, semantics often get in the way of the discussion. ENERGY – CHARGE are often confused with temperature in the description of the energy levels of matter. When we get to molecular level, charge energy levels are the true description and not temperature. Temperature is the average thermal energy level in a space. Kind of like electric volts in a electrical circuit are not the same thing as electron volts in atomic structures. I read “TB” and “Chiefio” several times a day and try to not miss any comments. It amazes me that so little is learned by some of the commenters. It is as if they have their mouths open and their brains closed.
Gravity is a linear result of the charge difference of the “mass of matter” to the charge of space as in the warpage of the atomic dielectric in a condenser between a high charged plate and a low charged plate.
Massive matter is a very low charge environment and space is a very high charge area.
ANTI-GRAVITY is anything that counters gravity! For those of us that work in applied science it is “what ever works” that is important to us and the educated armchair scientists can figure out the physics of our creations after that fact and write the textbooks. Our friend, the engineer Rossi is case in point. His device can’t work in accepted science. So the ‘ex-spurts” will have to rewrite their books and claim new discoveries. pg
Pingback: URL
The Earth’s atmosphere is a giant capacitor, Positive below and negative above. The charge stress is about 300volts per meter/yard in calm, dry air, is the result of gravity warpage of the atomic dielectric or the centering of the atom nucleus within it’s electron shell. When disturbance of the stress layering is sufficient a cascade “short” to ground takes place from positive to negative through the atmospheric capacitive dielectric. Lightning is the result of a massive electrical short discharge.
If gravity causes electrostatic charge warpage, does electrostatic charge warpage cause gravity?
If changes in mater in motion cause EMF changes , does EMF changes cause changes of mater in motion. Inertia/mass is the resistance to changes in motion, or accelerations, and accelerations cause EMF changes. Therefore is Mass/inertia and gravity not an electrical based phenomena?…pg