Unified Field Theory of Gravity

You are visitor: since 5/21/03 (This counter from www.digits.com)


**********HOLD THE PRESSES ****************
I have just released a major revision to the theory by making it a Theory of Everything that explains many physical phenomenon including gravity, magnetisim and the electrostatic force. See it at:

What is gravity, electrostatic force, nuclear force and magnetism? These have been considered different forces, but this theory contends that they are all the product of the same force. All of the forces are due to the electrostatic attraction between electrons and protons. So the same force that holds your socks together in the dryer is the same force that keeps your feet on the ground, makes magnets attract and keeps atoms together.

Please note that the following theories are purely conjecure which have not been experimentally verified and generally contradict current scientific thinking. These are just a few ideas I have come up with in dealing with this very important and generally unsolved area of science.


What holds atoms together?

The force that holds atoms together is a basic attraction of oppositely charged particles. This same force over a larger distance is the electrostatic force. Whenever an atom has an imbalance of positive/negative charges, we see the electrostatic force. It has been said that the strong nuclear force must be much stronger than the electrostatic force to keep the protons in the tiny nucleus together. I would propose that the effective size of electrons and protons are not as small as has been observed and that the electrons are not flying about the protons. The typical physical model of a compact nucleus with protons and neutrons with a cloud of tiny electrons flying about is not correct. Rather, electrons and protons act like hard semi-round balls. Neutrons are actually a combination of an electron and proton. Neutrons act as to glue together protons, since the protons can still Ďseeí the electron in the neutron and binds to it. Experiments have shown that neutrons do exhibit some dipole properties and are not totally electrically neutral. By having a Ďhardí physical surface, the particles maintain a minimum spacing because they are touching and cannot get any closer. The important point is that the electron and proton are glued to each other by their mutual attraction and separated by their physical surfaces. They are like two magnetic balls which are kept apart by the balls surfaces. There are no high-speed orbiting electrons. The protons and electrons simply stick to eachother in a cubic matrix of alternating protons and electrons. I have discovered a cubic atomic model which shows that atoms may actually be a specific geometric sequence of protons and electrons. Click here to see a full explanation of this theory


What causes gravity?

Gravity is caused by a slight imbalance of positive/negative charges in so called neutrally charged matter. The negative/positive charges in a neutral atom do not exactly cancel each other out. There is a tiny residual positive charge. These tiny positive charges added together over the volume of the earth produce a very large positively charged field at the surface of the earth. The diverging electrostatic field created by the earth causes dipoles in neutrally charged matter to be attracted to the source of the field. This is explained in the web site: http://www.rognerud.com/physics/. This is the same force that allows you to pick up tiny pieces of paper with a charged plastic comb. It can be demonstrated that the electrostatic field attracts everything like gravity does. You can perform an experiment where you put a metal nickle on its edge and you can see that the charged plastic comb attracts this as well. The math required to show that a neutral atom has a residual positive charge is beyond my abilities, but the rongnerud web site attempts to do the math to show that there is a force between neutrally charged atoms which is the result of the magnetic and electrostatic forces created by electrons moving about the protons. From a more intuitive viewpoint, you can see that the electrons can move around, but the protons have to stay put. This has to cause some kind of imbalance. The only way that a proton and electron could fully cancel each other out is if they both took the same space and didnít move relative to one another. Since the electrons are free to move about, they can get some distance away from the proton which would leave it positively charged at times. So the electron cannot fully shield the protons even though the electrical charge is zero. The net effect is that neutrally charged matter emits a positive electrostatic field which attracts everything.


What causes lightning?

On earth, this can help explain why we get lightning. The overall positive charge of the earth causes the charges in the clouds to separate such that the negative charges migrate to the bottom of the cloud and the positive charges migrate toward the top. When it rains, the negative charges tend to rain out and collect on the ground. This is similar to Kelvin rainstorm electrostatic generators where a positive charge near the water dropper causes negatively charged drops to go into a bucket where negative charges build up. http://www.amasci.com/emotor/kelvin.html. However, the earth really isnít positively charged, it only has the positive electrostatic field. The ground is still essentially neutrally charged. But the real negative charge falling in the rain builds up on the ground until the point where there is a large enough potential difference to cause the electrons to rush back up to the cloud to neutralize the charge separation. It is a scientific fact that an electrostatic field exists on the earth. Scientits have scientifically measured the electrostatic field at the Earth's surface at around 120 V/m. This is a fairly strong field since this means that a 120 volts of electrical potential exist for every meter in height. The voltage difference from the bottom of your feet to the top of your head is already several hundred volts!


Can we generate electricity with gravity alone?

One could try to devise an experiment to show charge separation on a smaller scale. If you took a tall cylinder and filled it water and ions which can easily separate like those in table salt. The theory predicts that if you place the cylinder vertically, you will see the negative CL ions be attracted to the bottom and the positive Na ions to the top. You might even be able to measure a voltage potential difference. If you place the cylinder horizontally, you will see no such potential difference. If true, this suggests a way to generate electricity by allowing gravity to separate charges and then extracting the charge by allowing current to flow and then once again allow gravity to re-establish the charge. Since electrons appear totally unaffected by gravity, it takes no energy to restore the charges. This is like generating electricity with a dam where the water flows back up to the top for free.


What causes Earth's magnetic field?

The constant charge separation may also help to explain the Earthís magnetic field. Since there is constant charge separation, there are effectively lots of charged particles being moved about the atmosphere, these charged particles act like an electric current. It can be observed in any satellite weather photos that the atmosphere generally moves from west to east and if you consider this a movement of charges in the clouds as current, it would generate the magnetic fields that we observe. The speed of the atmosphere may not seem like much, but electrons flowing through a strong electromagnet move at the speed of molasses, so a cloud moving at 60-80 mph may indeed generate a strong magnetic force. This theory makes the very specific prediction that the strength of the magnetic field relies on the atmosphere. So no atmosphere means little magnetism and lots of moving atmosphere means big magnetic field. I believe this holds true in the solar system. The moon and mercury has little atmosphere and little magnetic field. Mars also has much less atmosphere and magnetic field. Saturn and Jupiter have much atmosphere and rotation and huge magnetic fields. Venus has lots of atmosphere, but very little rotation. A chart of atmospheric pressure rotation and magnetic fields at: http://www.astronomynotes.com/solarsys/plantblb.htm. It may be possible to explain reversals of magnetic field if the atmosphere started moving from east to west. I see no particular reason why it should go one way or the other except that perhaps the ground drags the atmosphere along in a west to east direction. Science currently thinks that the effects of atmospheric magnatisim are small and that the main field comes from the molten core, however, there is no explanation on how the magnetic field got into the core in the first place and what keeps it going. Perhaps the atomospheric magnetic force acts as a catalyst to start the main core field and to maintain its force and direction.


What causes magnetism?

Magnetism is the most difficult force to describe. To understand it, you must understand the structure of space. It is commonly thought that empty space is totally empty. However, this theory postulates that empty space is in fact completely filled with matched positive and negative charges. This could be thought of as space being completely filled with electrons and protons which are paired to form dipoles which point in a particular direction.. They arrange themselves in an extremely compact cubic structure similar to the structure of salt. This is the medium through which electromagnetic waves (light, radio, etc.) pass through. This theory would predict that light is strictly a wave phenomenon. It is commonly thought that light can be both a wave and a particle. I think the evidence for light being a photon particle is very scarce based on experiments knocking electrons off of surfaces. I think all the observed phenomenon can be achieved through a sufficiently energetic wave. The particles that we call matter is actually just a disordering of this cubic matrix by the presence of an extra electron or proton. Wherever we detect an electron, it is because there is an extra electron which is not canceled out by a matching positive charge. This extra electron disturbs the normally ordered matrix. Primarily, it causes the dipoles of the matrix to align perpendicular to the extra electron. The positive ends of the dipole will be attracted to the extra electron. Other dipoles attempting to restore the normal cubic structure align themselves in parallel around the electron. This causes an alignment such that all of the positive ends of they dipole are pointing in parallel to the surface of the electron.

A picture of how the dipoles line up around an electron, creating +/- dipole running tangent to electron

The arrangement apparently only happens when the electron is in motion. When the motion stops, the surrounding space regains is normal random arrangement. When the electron moves in a loop, it causes all of the positive charges of the matrix to point in one direction and all of the negative charges to point in the other. This forms the basis of a simple magnet. If we bring another loop such that the positive ends are facing each other, they will repel. If we switch it around so that positive and negative face each other, they attract. Similarly, if negative ends are facing each other, they repel. Thus the magnetic force is merely the action of the electrostatic force between the dipoles which permeate space. Ferromagnetic material like iron may be magnetic due to some kind of special arrangement of the atom which creates a racetrack channel around the atom for an electron. This allows the electron to loop and generate magnetic fields. There is no friction at this level, so it is essentially a room temperature superconductor. The alloys of ferromagnetic elements are more magnetic then pure elements since it may create more irregularities which increase the size of the racetracks or allow the atoms to more easily move about to align with a magnetic field. It may be possible to generate a mechanical model of the atom which shows why there are so few elements which have this ferromagnetic racetrack configuration.


One obvious objection to this is that if the magnetic force is the same as the electrostatic force, they how come a magnet doesnít attract/repel a charged object. If one end of a magnet is positive, it should attract a negatively charged piece of paper. Of course, this doesnít happen. The answer is that the magnet is not positively charged itself. It is merely causing an alignment of the surrounding space. The dipole is weak, so it doesnít add up to much overall positive electrostatic force (although there should be some). The arrangement of dipoles is still close to being electrically neutral. So no noticeable force is exerted on the paper. The only time a force is exerted is if the arrangement of space meets another arrangement which is opposite or identical. When the dipoles meet up against each other, you do see a large force because the dipoles are being brought within very close proximity to each other. The interaction is not between the atoms of the metal that make up the magnet, but rather, the space between them. This may account for the strength of the magnetic force since it is the sum of all the very tightly packed dipole particles outside of the magnet. If you put a magnetic field near a beam of electrons (like in a TV), you can see it being strongly attracted or repelled by the arrangement of the dipoles.


What is antimatter?

The theory that all space is filled with charged dipoles can explain how antimatter works. If you can imagine shaking the matrix hard enough, you could knock one of the charges lose. When this happens, it generates a hole in the matrix. The hole generates a charge which is opposite of the charge knocked out. However, this charge is actually created by the surrounding charges. The hole is antimatter. When an electron meets up with an anti-electron, it falls into the hole restoring the matrix and effectively annihilating the traceable matter/antimatter. One result of this is that you would never be able to create large atoms of antimatter because an anti-electron and anti-proton are both the same thing Ė which is they are holes of nothingness. Their properties are determined by the surrounding matrix. A hole cannot attract more holes without them getting filled in by the surrounding matrix. The antimatter may in fact just get swallowed up as being part of spaces between dipoles which may explain why we donít see antimatter lasting for long. Since antimatter canít stick to itself, we donít see big clumps of it in the universe. If we did, we could probably observe that it is impervious to electromagnetic waves since they would have nothing to travel through. Perhaps the universe is surrounded by true nothingness and any antimatter generated migrates to the outer edge where it joins the rest of the nothingness. The universe would be happy to squeeze out as much empty space (antimatter) as possible. This would neatly explain, why we donít see much antimatter in the universe.


What is the electrostatic field?

The only thing we havenít explained is why charges exists and why should an electron attract a proton. Everything so far has been explained in terms of a positive/negative electrostatic field. But the nature of the electrostatic field remains a mystery. I have seen one possible answer. This is called Bjerknes forces. It has been experimentally shown that if you take two pulsating spheres in a incompressible fluid like water and you have them pulse in sync, they repel with a force 1/r^2 which is analagous to the electrostatic force of repulsion. If you have them pulse so that they are 180 degress out of sync (pulsing in opposite directions, but at the same frequency) they attract like the electrostatic force of attraction. This force has been shown both experimentally and mathematically so it is a real physical force. This is a link to a paper called Fields of Force which explores this force. http://historical.library.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/cul.math/docviewer?did=02780002&view=50&frames=0&seq=11

I would propose that an electron and a proton are just like the spheres which are pulsing out of sync. If every electron pulsed in exactly the same way, and every proton pulsed in exactly the same way but out of sync, and we assume that the spaces between electrons and protons are filled with something, we can see how the fundamental attraction works. I cannot explain how all the electrons/protons remain syncronized, but I can explain something about why they should pulse. If we think of a proton as a hollow metal sphere, if we were to hit this with a stick, it would ring like a bell with a very specific frequency or tone. No matter how many times or how randomly you strike it, it would have the same frequency and at some point wouldn't get any louder if you put more energy into striking it. Protons/electrons may also act like this when they are struck by other nearby atoms by normal thermal energy. They take random thermal energy and convert it into a very organized wave energy frequency. We perceive this energy as the electrostatic field. This would answer the question about where the energy comes from that keeps a charged balloon stuck to a wall. No matter how you think about it, it takes energy to fend off the force of gravity trying to make the balloon drop. The answer is the thermal energy of the room surrounding the balloon provides the energy. The energy level at normal room temperatures is actually quite high. It is equivalent to an atom moving at about 1000 mile per hour. This theory would predict that weird things would happen as you lower the temperature to absolute zero. At this point, the electrons/protons wouldn't be hit enough to keep ringing. You might see a loss of electrostatic field. This is an area of further research. Strange things have been reported to happen with a Bose Eientein condensate which is basically a gas cooled to absolute zero.


In conclusion, we can see intuitively how each of the forces that we see are actually all the same electrostatic force acting in different ways. This theory (except for the magnetic description) is mostly a conglomeration of ideas found on the internet. I have been pondering for months the nature of these forces and came up with a theory which was simple and could be understood intuitively without a lot of math. It makes a lot of testable predictions which help explain a lot of unknown behavior like lightning. It is not very detailed Ė I donít have time to do the math. Maybe one of you geniuses out there can confirm the math. It also flies in the face of lots of other scientific evidence and conventional thinking.It is like the broad stroke a brush which may still have a way to go, but I invite people to have a look and poke holes at it.

To leave comments, Visit My Message Board

FREE hit counter and Internet traffic statistics from freestats.com

Add Me!