## Gobs more on Gravity

It is clear that physicists in particular, and hence science in general, still do not understand the nature of gravity after its initial formulation by Isaac Newton over 300 years ago.  His famous equation describing the magnitude of the force causing two bodies to appear to attract each other remains valid to this day but equally this equation does not explain gravity.

In Newton’s time the Earth and planets were interpreted as spherical objects suspended in vacuum orbiting a radiant Sun.  It was a description of the visible solar system observed by the naked human eye.

The strangeness of Newton’s gravity equation is that it only deals with two bodies and no more. Just as strange as Coulomb’s Law that describes the force between two electrically charged bodies, with the difference being that Coulomb’s law deals with both attraction and repulsion while Newton’s only attraction.  Both equations are of the form F=Constantxb1xb2/d^2.  In gravity’s case b is the weight of the body compared to the earth, and is always positive; there is no such thing as a negative weight, if such a force can be measured in the first place. It easily follows that for the Coulomb Law b is the electric charge on the body, either positive or negative. “d” is the distance between the two bodies, in this case squared.

(As an aside, one could write computer code to numerically predict the three body problem but it is the nature of computer coding that each line of code introduces the time factor as a result of precedence, since parallel instantaneous numerical calculation is not possible. Hence the probable explanation why 3-body modelling evolves into chaotic motion.  Gravity occurs instantaneously and this cannot be modelled by computer code).

Where Newton’s Law remains incomplete is because no one at the time could conceive of a negative force between two bodies, since lighter than air bodies such as hot-air balloons had yet to be invented, so no one observed a body moving spontaneously upwards away from the earth’s surface. Of course people at the time understood that arrows, cannon balls and birds left the earth’s surface and flew but such objects were forced into the air and would in time return back to the surface. Throwing a ball into the air always resulted in the ball coming back to the surface.

The celestial model that Newton thus used involved the sun and planets being spherical bodies, as observed, separated by space or vacuum in which the only force was gravity as described by Newton; the billiard ball model, as it were. In this system gravity is always positive.

Today that view is plainly simplistic.  The solar system is now comprised of planets with magnetospheres and ionospheres, a Sun that ejects unpredictable electrified plasmas that affect the planets and emits a continuous stream of charged particles, positive and negative, that comprises the solar wind; and all of these effects would have been invisible to Newton and his peers. One could thus propose that what Newton and his peers observed was the aggregate motion of the celestial bodies propelled by an invisible electromagnetic force that was called gravity.

In the plasma universe model, 99.999% of the visible universe is made up of matter in the plasma state, and the physics described by the Laws of Maxwell etc. Plasma physics is thus the norm, and in contrast, our solar system a highly anomalous exception.  The problem is that in the gravitational or standard astronomical model we have assumed our solar system to be the norm and it’s the rest of the Universe that is at odds with Newton’s Law of Gravity. That’s why astrophysics has to conjure up black holes, dark matter, dark energy, magnetic reconnection, to make the Universe fit into our ruling gravitational paradigm.

Except we have it completely back to front.  Our solar system is the oddity, not the Universe.

In the Plasma Universe 99.999% of matter is ionised and its physics adequately described by the laws of electromagnetics as detailed by A. J. Peratt, 2015, Physics of the Plasma Universe.  In the plasma universe we are dealing with protons, electrons, neutrinos and ions, positive and negative. Newtonian bodies are exceptions in that they are electrically neutral shapes of plasma explicitly in the solid state, and comprise only 0.001% of the visible universe. These objects could be interpreted as frozen plasma.

The reason our solar system is at such odds with the rest of the Universe is because it seems to have only arrived at its present configuration during the last 1000 years or so, perhaps even to Medieval times when the Gregorian Calendar was implemented in 1582 CE. However since other galaxies seem to obey the Faraday motor mechanism, including our own Milky Way galaxy, this suggests the inner planets in our solar system will slow down in their present orbits until they reach orbital velocities expected for such a mechanism.  It suggests that Newton’s Law of gravitation will become less accurate and the laws of Maxwell and Heaviside more accurate in describing the physics of our solar system over time. But not in our times of course since it may take millions of years to reach rotational equilibrium. Or it might take a shorter time – no one knows.

Newtonian bodies can acquire static electric charges, but otherwise they are electrically neutral in which, however, protons are dominant since it is these entities that give matter mass. Protons will move towards the cathode, or negative charge, of the electric field they are immersed in. The Galilean observation of a marble and cannon ball both reaching the Earth’s surface when dropped from a height is no more complex than assuming both marble and cannon ball are made of protons and electrons, and then it’s simply protons moving to the cathode, or Earth’s surface; hence both bodies will arrive at the surface at the same time.

It is important to realise Newton’s Laws only apply to solids and not gases or liquids. Newton’s Law applies to bodies that have shape, are visible and capable of independent motion; it is, after all said and done, Newton’s Laws of Motion. Newton’s laws should not be applied to invisible objects or sub-atomic particles. To overcome this science has invented the centre-of-gravity entity concept and while easing the arithmetic, it none the less  has not solved the body definition. As an example where would the centre of gravity of the Earth’s oceans lie? At the same location as the centre-of-gravity of the mantle, core, outer core, and oceans, everything else being equal. Which makes d, the distance between two bodies, zero, and F, thus infinity and explains how the notion of gravitational accretion is framed.  Physical reality suggests otherwise, however.

The observation that plumb bobs used in geodetic surveying are not attracted by adjacent mountains, and thus masses, simply means that mass does not attract mass, contrary to what is universally assumed by the Gravitationalists. The anomalous behaviour in the diamond core hole of the downhole surveying instrument, detailed here and at Malagabay.wordpress.com, adds further support for the conclusion that mass does not attract mass. Instead gravity seems to be the response of solid, or more accurately non-ionised, matter to electric fields.

The error the physicists made is that they assumed Newton’s Law of Gravitation to be axiomatic. Instead of changing the theory when the data contradict it, science instead decided that because gravity theory is absolute, then the data or observations are incorrect and need to be adjusted to comply with the theory, or the Law of Gravity.

Except there are no Laws in science, only in religion.