[RascalPuff]

(Illustration from Google - Earth electromagnetic field)
The characteristic torus structure accompanying an electron or the exemplary earth may be contemplated as two rotating gears manifest in 3 & 4-D space.
From there, one may begin to draw their own conclusions.
The north pole exit of the field swings around its parent system to enter the south pole.
Bisecting the system at the equator leaves you with an expanding system on top and a contracting system on the bottom, conceivable as matter and antimatter (white hole and black hole?), meeting in the middle and generating a continuous explosion which emerges as a 4-D expanding material system (In this case - earth).

A top view presents an expanding system.
A bottom view presents a contracting system.
Perspective:

There is a strong implication of Dirac's anti-matter meeting conventional matter with the resulting explosion constituting the entire magnetic and material system.

One interpretation is we're working with Dirac's otherwise (seemingly) elusive 'anti-matter' and it's role in the sustaining of any system generating or otherwise accompanied by a magnetic field - from electrons, to planets and stars.

Top-north is the outgoing magnetic field, bottom-south is the incoming; they meet in the middle at 'zero point'; at the interior center of the earth.

Consider a self-sustaining system of expansion here, with the 4-D earth omnidirectionally accelerating at the interior of the considered magnetic field.

Note the structure of Riemannian geometry constituting the ingoing and outgoing magnetic fields.

Other interpretations of these proposals about the issued system are invited.





Technically, the terms clockwise and counterclockwise can only be applied to a rotational motion once a side of the rotational plane is specified, from which the rotation is observed. For example, the daily rotation of the Earth is counterclockwise when viewed from the North Pole, and clockwise when viewed from the South Pole.
_______________



Parallel universes in a Unified Field?
Meshing and rotation of two gears, each causing the other to revolve in the opposite direction, while doing this in harmony - two gears, reciprocally supportive opposite spins; two different portions of the (micro-macro) universe: side by side.


Illustration copyright 2007, by Austin Torney




Chiral motion
UP & Down, Inside & Outside


_________________________

Negative Inertia - Mach's Principle & Einstein - 09-13-2007, 04:41 AM


The fields from isolated, individual charges look like this:

_________________________________________________

You see logarithmic spirals every day. They are the natural growth curves of plants and seashells, the celebrated golden curve of ancient Greek mathematics and architecture, the optimal curve for highway turns. Peer into a flower or look down at a cactus and you will see a pattern of logarithmic spirals criss-crossing each other like so:



<------------------------------------------------->

From the beginning of the 1st to the end of the 2nd page of Newton's three page Preface to The PRINCIPIA MATHEMATICA, Newton is discussing the motions of falling objects and orbiting planets. By way of his applied mathematical descriptions of the effects of the force of gravity. At this time, Newton offers the following statement about what causes the gravitationally induced motions of planets & apples, quote:


“For I am induced by many reasons to suspect that they may all depend on certain forces by which the particles of bodies, by some causes hitherto unknown, are either mutually impelled towards each other, and cohere in regular figures, or are repelled and recede from each other; which forces being unknown, philosophers have hitherto attempted the search of Nature in vain."


That quote and its extraction will henceforth be referred to here, as THE GRAVITATIONAL ALTERNATIVE. Not my gravitational alternative; Newton's Gravitational Alternative to be exact. I repeat the quote (of particles and systems-of-particles: of matter), 'are either mutually impelled towards each other and cohere in regular figures (orbits; juxtapositions), or, are mutually repelled and recede from each other .'


It implies directly and categorically, that gravity may in fact be the opposite of the universally considered impelling or 'pulling force of attraction'; that is to say, Isaac Newton and his formal definitions, directly and resolutely suggest that gravity may in fact be a repelling or pushing force.


It is difficult to over dramatize the very existence of this statement, its author, and especially its contextual implications. It categorically allows that everything Newton mathematically confirms and describes in The PRINCIPIA MATHEMATICA - from orbiting planets, falling apples, aquatic, terrestrial, and atmospheric tides - all the large and small phenomena of gravity - is caused by one of two kinds of forces: the conventionally considered impelling or pulling force of attraction, or, its exact opposite, a repelling/ pushing force.


This evokes at least one question: Allowing possible advantage in Newton's Gravitational Alternative that gravity may in fact be a repelling (pushing) force rather than an impelling (pulling) force, how might any such advantage be experienced and applied?


That question and its derivation might still be deemed obscure and inconsequential, if its direct unequivocal answer did not exist, most profoundly, at the heart-foundation of the latest and most advanced generalized theory of gravity in the history of Physical Science. That being Albert Einstein's GENERAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY.

In the first quarter of this century, Albert Einstein, in observing the already well known inversely proportional equivalence of gravitational and inertial mass values (which will be explained, shortly), described this equivalence as: 'an astonishing coincidence', and then applied the cause of his astonishment to the monumental task of formulating an unprecedented theoretical generalization concerning the identity of gravity. That, being none other than the General Principle Of Relativity; which principle is quite literally the foundation upon which rests Einstein's entire General Theory of Relativity. The most advanced statement about gravity, to date.

The General Principle is also misnomered as the 'Equivalence Hypothesis', or, more appropriately, 'The Principle Of Equivalence', which states:

'There is no way to distinguish the effects produced by the inertial force of acceleration (a pushing/repelling force) from the effects produced by gravitational force (assumed to be a 'pulling/impelling force: identity unknown').

Best regards,

-RP
http://forums.delphiforums.com/EinsteinGroupie