Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottAnfield  Hey rascalpuff, I have read the URL and found it interesting. You did say 'Newton, established for the first time, that it - the universal realms of the large and small - is all connected by a singular, commonly acting, unidentified invisible force. That is the gist of Newton's proven discovery - the proven extrapolation of the same force that causes relatively miniscule apples to fall, also causing the orbiting of the relatively enormous planets'
While this looks on the surface to be gravity, it could in fact be magnetism as it says 'unidentified invisible force'. Magnetism is invisible. Does it then make sense that as we have an iron core in the middle of the world, that it is exerting an attractive force, i.e. pulling the apple towards its centre? As you know, even small magnets (such as Neodymium-Iron-Boron) can exert a huge force. If huge objects such as planets exerted an extremely strong magnetic force (both attraction and repulsion because of its bipolarity), wouldn't they all be attracted and repulsed by each other? Could it be possible that the way that each planet or star is in orbit is in a somewhat elegant nature where they are all in such a perfect balance with one another? Strong magnets can also heat objects by compressing their atoms together (so I believe) so this could explain how stars are held together. If a star is basically compressed gas, then if there was another star circulating it and pulling on it (by gravity), then wouldn't it be 'torn apart' and no longer be a star?! Also, if you look at the elliptical orbit of a comet ( http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~bds2/lt...TORB/COMET.HTM), can you see the similarity between that and magnetism? It is drawn in fast towards the planet and when it gets very close, it flips around and repels it, pushing it back away and starting the cycle again. Even with small magnets this flipping action is seen. |
_____________________________
Dear ScottAnfield:
Been studying and writing about gravity and related phenomena for over 50 years, and although gravity has been ruled out as being magnetism, your approach I've not seen or considered before, and, relative to large scale phenomena (other than apples and smaller stuff like that), in the macrocosms, I think you're on to something.
Not so sure about your interpretation of the behavior of comets and their tail appendages but nonetheless, it looks to me like magnetism may play a larger role than Standard Theory recognises...
(To be continued)
Thank you.
Hope you become more familiar with the contents of
http://forums.delphiforums.com/EinsteinGroupie.
Wish to hear more from you about that.
- Best regards
- RP