jsaldea12

Mercury advanced perihelion could be also equally due to attraction gravity: Orbit of Mercury is roulette around the Sun, .. on a particular side of the sun, perihelion of Mercury is advanced which the Newton law on gravitation cannot explain. Until Dr. Einstein showed/proved that it was due to the curvature of space. But the attraction gravity of Newton may also be able to explain the advanced perihelion. It could be that on the roulette orbit, the side of Mercury, which is more positive is tilted and facing equally the more positive side of the Sun thus, Mercury is advanced/pushed farther on perihelion or it could be the negative of Mercury is tilted/facing the more negative side of the sun, thus, Mercury is being pushed farther in perihelion.. It would also be noted that the mass of the sun which is not on the center has also a hand. It is suggested that our astronomers try to look into the possibility of this observation. (On the other posted, closed, experiment attraction gravity,.. Please permit me to explain.. you observe/agree that the gravitational force of the Sun BENDS light, just like the curvature of spacetime of Dr. Einstein which EQUALLY bends light. That observation is SIGNIFICANT.. Because it shows that gravitational field of the Sun is electro-magnetic, just like electro-magnetic gravitational force of blackhole, that interacts with electro-magnetic light.. that is why gravitational force of Sun EQUALLY bends electro-magnetic light of background star. I WILL PERFORM THE EXPERIMENT. DO BE PATIENT AND GIVE ME ENOUGH TIME.) jsaldea12 7.13.09 .

You all are making me nervious. But please try the magnet experiment I am also looking for local makers of soft magnet, may take some times. But earth is evidence. What makes it all attraction is its shape. The only attraction in this universe is the opposite law, re UNLIKE ATTRACT. That is no different from all attraction of earth. Both attractions are one and the same. In the meantime, here is another experiment or proof: The gravitational force of the sun bends light of a background star, just like the spacetime of Dr. Einstein which had been proven to bend light. Regards. jsaldea12 7.12.09

Thank you for the info. He should not have give up because he was on the right direction. Is there not undeniable electromagnetism in the atom? So is in micro, so in macro. But pertaining to that compass experiment, unlocated in the internet. Here is the simple experiment: Remove the compass needle, then tie the needle, at the middle with thread to hang in balance, then rub the tip of south pointing needle with magnet. As you hold up the other end of thread on which hanged the needle, the south pointing needle, instead of pointing south, will point downward toward the center of earth. Regards. Jsaldea12 7.11.09

Below is one item on "TIMES" cnn pertaining to gravity and magnetism. you are right: positive and negative, north and south pole are directions. As soon I can find again that article in internet pertaining to compass experiment, i will let you know. But one of the best is perform the suggested ball-shaped magnet experiment. It is very costly to me but as you have performed many magnet experiments, then try and let us see because i am confident the result is good in my favor. Earth is round, magnet is round. Regards. jsaldea12 7.10.09 Gravity & Magnetism Monday, Jun. 02, 1947Print Reprints Email Twitter Linkedin Buzz up!Facebook MORE...Add to my: del.icio.us Technorati reddit Google Bookmarks Mixx StumbleUpon Blog this on: TypePad LiveJournal Blogger MySpace A challenging item in the unfinished business of science is to find some connection between magnetism and gravitation. The universe is shot through & through with electromagnetism; gravitation is everywhere too. Physicists have long been convinced that the two must be related somehow, but try as they would (and the most talented have tried), they could establish no basic connecting law. Last fortnight Britain's famed, curly-haired Professor Patrick Maynard Stuart Blackett of Manchester University told the Royal Society how the problem might be (perhaps has been) solved. As everyone knows, said Blackett, the earth has a magnetic field, but no one has figured out why. The magnetism does not come from iron deep underground, because the earth's core is far too hot to be "ferro-magnetic." As early as 1891, physicists guessed that the magnetism might be due to some inherent property of revolving bodies. They could not prove it. A new bit of evidence came in when the strength of the sun's magnetic field was measured. It turned out to be closely proportionate to the earth's, allowing for the sun's greater mass and slower turning. But two observations are not enough to base a general law on; they might be mere coincidence. Guiding Star. Last year some new evidence turned up. Dr. H. W. Babcock of Mt. Wilson Observatory, Calif, performed the unlikely feat of measuring (by spectrum analysis) the magnetic field of the star called 78 Virginis. When Professor Blackett heard about it, he grabbed pencil & paper. The star's size, mass and speed of revolution could be estimated fairly accurately. Nothing more was needed. The magnetic field of remote 78 Virginis just about proved what theorizing had already predicted: it was closely proportionate to the magnetic fields of the earth and sun. Three matching bits of evidence in a row were more than coincidence. While the Fellows of the Royal Society watched intently, Blackett wrote down an equation* which may become as famous as Einstein's law, E—mc². It looked like the physical hybrid which science had been searching for so eagerly. On one side of the equation was magnetism, an electrical effect; on the other were basic gravitational quantities. Said Professor Blackett modestly: "It is suggested tentatively that . . . the above equation represents some new and fundamental property of rotating matter. Perhaps this relation will provide the long-sought connection between electromagnetic and gravitational phenomena." The new law can be checked by observing the spectra of stars, especially the dense "white dwarfs," which ought to have intense magnetic fields around their close-packed matter. It might even be proved in earthly laboratories, by spinning large masses of nonmagnetic material, such as bronze, and seeing whether they generate their own magnetic fields. Here was a fascinating assignment for a skillful (and well-financed) lab man. *P=ß (G½/2c) U, where P is the strength of the magnetic field; ß is a constant near unity; G is the gravitational constant (6.670 X 10^-8); c is the speed of light; U is the angular momentum (spin) of a revolving body. Print Reprints Email Twitter Linkedin Buzz up!Facebook MORE...Add to my: del.icio.us Technorati reddit Google Bookmarks Mixx StumbleUpon Blog this on: TypePad LiveJournal Blogger MySpace Most Popular »Full List »MOST READMOST EMAILEDWhy Are Southerners So Fat? Florida Wrestles with Its Python Problem On Tehran's Streets: Defiance and a Crushing Response Oh Crap! My Parents Joined Facebook The Outsider: Where Is Sarah Palin Going Next? Yes, I Suck: Self-Help Through Negative Thinking Advice from an Economist Who Saw 1929 America's Quirky Alcohol Laws Jackson May Play London After All, Via Footage A New General, and a New War, in Afghanistan Why Are Southerners So Fat? Advice from an Economist Who Saw 1929 Oh Crap! My Parents Joined Facebook Yes, I Suck: Self-Help Through Negative Thinking Is There Hope for the American Marriage? Florida Wrestles with Its Python Problem Why There Should Be More Oil Speculation, Not Less Can Language Skills Ward Off Alzheimer's? A Nuns' Study The Outsider: Where Is Sarah Palin Going Next? What Does Life-Extending Drug Mean for Humans? Quotes of the Day »Get & Share "It was big." MICHAEL PHELPS, sixteen-time Olympic medalist, after breaking the world record in the 100-meter butterfly with a time of 50.22 seconds More Quotes »/time/includes/article_video.xml VideoMore Videos » 10 Questions for 'NY Times' Editor Bill KellerTime.com on Digg Upcoming Popular Today 96 diggsTIME: America's Alcohol Laws - Quirky Rules Across 50 States43 diggsWhy There Should Be More Oil Speculation, Not Less18 diggsWhy Are Southerners So Fat?13 diggsWhy Southerners are fat.5 diggsLondon Tabloid Shocker: Celeb Phones Hacked!POWERED BY digg Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedBelow is partial portion article on relationship of gravity and magnetism. Regards. jsaldea12 7.10.09 Mountain Man's UseNet Archive Do Gravity and Magnetism have a Common Cause? a post from Ralph Sansbury Web Publication by Mountain Man Graphics, Australia in the Southern Spring of 1996 ________________________________________ What is Gravity and Magnetism ? Date: 11 Oct 1996 22:08:10 GMT From: rsansbury Newsgroups: sci.physics Subject: The Common Cause of Gravity and Magnetism The basic idea here is that gravity may be due to radially oriented electrostatic dipoles inside the earth's atomic nuclei; the negative pole, with some multiple of the electron's charge, is the inner pole and the outer pole has enought positive charge so that the total charge is that of a proton; the distance between oppositely charged poles is between 10^-12 and 10^-18meters inside the earth's atomic nuclei; the value of each dipole increases with the distance between it and all other dipoles so the force between any two dipoles is proportional to the distance between the dipoles squared taking into account their relative orientation; this means that the instantaneous dipole-dipole force which varies inversely as the fourth power between colinear dipoles reduces to an inverse square force; the different sizes of dipoles determined by different pairwise interactions and their different forces when summed together over all pairwise interactions yields a single force and implies a single unique dipole in each nucleus intermediate to the pairwise extremes given above and closer to the the measured values of nuclear radii in different contexts, about 10^-15 meters. From this premise it is possible to derive all of the substantiated predictions of General Relativity, most of which have to do with the explicit interaction of gravity with electrical and magnetic forces, without recourse to the assumption that the force of gravity is a functon not only of properties of the force source like its size, density, location but also of its velocity and acceleration. The dependence in GR of the gravitational field on the velocity and acceleration of the force source leads to counter intuitive and subjectivist space time distortions beyond Einstein's fantasies eg. those of Hawking, Penrose, Whitten etc.. To make the same predictions as GR we must also correct a similar mistaken assumption in Maxwell's theory of electromagnetic forces. Maxwell had to withdraw his claims of a crowded if not distorted ether filled with invisible cams that propagated not only characteristics of the source like its volume, density,and location but also of its motion; the mathematics gave accurate predictions so perhaps one could ignore the cams or isomorphic mechanisms. It was like the grin of the cheshire cat in Lewis Carroll's Wonderland also of the 1860s. But one can't accept Maxwell's mathematics and ignore its absurd implications. The mathematics predicted the observed radiation but it also implied a mechanism for transmitting the effects for which there was no independent evidence, which was thus invisible but had the rigidity of iron. Such absurd implications were swept under the rug and not until Feynman's QED theory of Einstein's photons and probabilistic theory of light and its interactions with matter was the problem resolved -by substituting photons for waves at all frequencies. In Maxwell's theory, the fact that the source of a radiated force, a moving charge, was oscillating in a repetitive pattern helped; just like the regular pattern of planets orbiting the sun and the solar system orbiting the center of the galaxy etc helped Einstein's use of a similar assumption in GR. Maxwell's absurd implications can be avoided without Feynman's circumlocutions that permit some general description of the interaction of light with matter but prevent one from knowing the specific interactions of specific photons or their source with the receiver. If one acknowledges that light is not a moving thing but the result of instantaneous forces at a distance on charged matter whose inertia etc., delays the appearance of received radiation, then the interaction of light with matter can be described in terms of what actually happens and not merely probabalistically. Is such a theory of light consistent with measurements of the speed of light? Yes in all but one case the observed values can be so interpreted; the exception is Roemer's crude measurement which is far enough from the other values to be regarded as a non coincidence. Roemer's measurement is also an inconsistent one when moons of Jupiter besides Io eg Europa are taken into account. Similarly the absurd or probabilistic implications of GR can be avoided by finding an alternative to the assumption that the gravitational field is a function of the velocity and acceleration of the source of the field. This alternative is the assumption of instantaneous electrical interactions that account for the delay in the appearance of received electromagnetic radiation, for the apparent bending of light and frequency shifts of radar due to the sun, of gamma rays due to the earth, etc.. Getting back to the basics of the proposed alternative theory. The proposed electrostatic dipoles also exist in current carrying wires, transverse to and proportional to the driving force of the current, inside the atomic nuclei and free electrons of current carrying wires formerly characterized as their spin.These dipoles which also increase with the distance between interacting wires and decrease with the currents in other wires as explained below produce the magnetic field of a current carrying wire. (Experiments suggesting that electrons and atomic nuclei do not have electrostatic dipoles do so only after the effects of spin have been taken into account) These dipoles are superimposed on the dipoles associated with gravity. Electrostatic dipoles in the atomic nuclei of ferromagnetic materials can also explain the magnetic field of these materials; unlike materials composed of any of the other elements, the atoms in these materials are bound together by their electrons in configurations that prevent to some extent the nuclear dipoles from changing direction so as to line up with the gravitational field of the earth of which they are a part; that is they prefer to line up with the nuclear dipoles around them in the same domain or in the entire bulk material of which they are a part. To make the nuclear dipoles in such materials line up completely with the gravitational field of the earth it is necessary that the bulk material containing the nuclear dipoles also changes orientation - as in a compass needle. Now a magnetized piece of iron or steel held below a piece of paper with iron filings on it can cause the iron filings to line up in a certain way giving rise to Faraday's notion of invisible lines of force; a piece of copper, silicon or what have you will not be able to produce the same effect on the iron filings; the reason for this is that the electrostatic dipoles in the nuclei of silicon and of these other materials change direction constantly so as to line up with the earth's radius from these atoms toward the center of the earth etc; The force of gravity can be shown to be nothing more than the collective force of an enormous number of such electrostatic dipoles. The Argument: • 1) We argue that the spin of electrons and nuclei can be better characterized in terms of charge polarization inside the electrons and nuclei; • 2) that electrostatic shielding involving the relative displacement of free electrons and lattice ions in conductive materials producing a relatively large dipole does not shield against the effects of charge polarization inside the free electrons and lattice nuclei of such materials when they are carrying a current, ie their so called magnetic effects; • 3) that the electrostatic dipoles associated with the gravitational effects of satellites, planets, stars, galaxies, clusters, superclusters etc were produced by a primordial force whose initial effect was the forward motion of the atomic nuclei within a large collection of nuclei and charge polarization transverse to the forward motion and subsequently a torque on these collections of transverse electrostatic dipoles which moved together causing the galaxies etc to spin and spin off stars and stars to spin off planets and planets to spin off satellites etc.; • 4) that the attraction of planets to the sun requires a dipole inside nuclei tracking the sun in addition to the one whose orientation is constantly changing so as to be directed toward the center of the planet etc.; • 5) that Cavendish's measurement of the horizontal gravitational force between lead balls is due to the attraction between the transverse component of radial oriented dipoles inside the atomic nuclei of the attracted balls; that to sustain the dipoles in the atomic nuclei of planets and stars the transverse dipole component fields may sustain one another; that is the radial and longitudinal dipoles transverse to a force in the latitudinal direction produce fields at right angles to one another; • 6) that the longitudinal dipole field can produce a radial dipole and the radial dipole field can produce a longitudinal dipole and thereby the radial and longitudinal fields can be selfsustaining (Note in Newton's theory the radial force of gravity comes first and the orbital motion of the earth is due to this force and a uniform velocity that was assumed always there or produced by a First Mover who then went away. Here we are assuming that a primordial force was partitioned into ever smaller circular movements and forces and that the force causing the earth ot orbit the sun and spin is a part of this total primordial force. Gravity then comes second and results from the dipoles produced by this force on particles held in orbit by electrical forces; The resulting dipoles may be self sustaining or the primordial force, perhaps initiated a finite number of years ago with a big explosion remains, however far removed from the earth and acts to sustain the Hubble accelerative expansion and may act directly and constantly to sustain the electrostatic dipoles inside every atom after thermal collsions.); • 7) that Einstein's explanation of the bending of starlight by the sun etc can be otherwise explained in terms of a small relative delay in response to em radiation due to the greater residual dipole in atomic nuclei on the side of the earth facing the sun; similarly for the red shift of radar reflections from planets. Regarding the magnetic effects of current carrying wires: Electrostatic dipoles inside atomic nuclei and free electrons can produce the magnetic force observed between parallel (or however oriented) current carrying wire segments r meters apart where the currents are nevA and nev'A' say. The Amperian force per unit length between the two parallel current segments then is 10^-7 times (nevA)(nev'A) divided by r^2. which could also be written as (9 times 10^9 divided by ((3)(10^9))^2) times ®(v/v')(nevA)®(v'/v)(nev'A') divided by r^4 which is the force per unit length between nA and nA' electrostatic dipoles which are larger the greater r is and the greater v is compared to v' etc.. That is the electrostatic dipoles are in part due to the emf causing the speed, v, of the electron and in part due to the lack of interference from other dipoles. When the current in one wire is much larger than the current in another wire, the interference effect on the smaller current is greater and so the increase in its dipoles is less than the increase in the dipoles in the wire carrying the larger current. The expansion of the dipoles inside the atomic nuclei and free electrons can be represented as K(S)res and k(s)reS where K(S) is the ratio of one dipole before consideration of the other eg S over s+S or over s; k(s), similarly. The mechanism for the expansion of the dipole can be described in terms of the elliptization of an orbital system ie of an initially circularlly orbiting particle made to move in a transverse ellipse perpendicular to an applied tangential electrostatic force at some point on the orbit. The assumption that there is only one orbiting charge and that the the magnitude of the charge being polarized is that of a single electron or positron can be modified; perhaps the simplest assumption is that the proton consists of a negative charge of -e and a positive charge of +2e so that the net charge is as observed. One might object to this theory on the grounds that electrostatic shielding is not effective in shielding against magnetic fields; the answer is that a large number of similarly oriented small electrostatic dipoes inside the nuclei and free electrons of a piece of metal produce entirely different fields than an excess of free electrons on one side of the piece of metal and a deficiency on the other; this can be shown mathematically as well as by the experiments cited below. One might also object that each pairwise force between one wire segment carrying current i(1) and many other sements would imply different dipoles associated with the same segment; Now it is true that a dipole inside one wire segment cannot at the same time be the product r(1,2)s(1) and also r(1,3)s(1) where s(1)=i(1)/c and the distance between segments 1 a

Please note the shape of the magnet is ball-shaped, which is all around, whose dividing line from all over surface is always equal downward to interior center...not anymore from one side to the other side, like north pole and south pole. Construction of compass, itself, has uneven needle,heavier pointing north, that is why it points north. If south point needle is brushed with bar magnet, the needle points downward toward center of earth. this is according to an experiment, as indicated in internet. thus, the possibility that magnet is flexible, resileint, that if it is hall shaped,the resilient magnetism is all around equal, The construction must not be like flat round magnet where the magnetism is sprayed positive, negative. Bar magnet is advisable, with positive and negative of equal length..to be made cube..because cut and cut bars always shows, each cut, equal positive and negative. regards. jsaldea12 7.10.09

Suggested attraction gravity of Newton experiment, re- ball-shaped magnet Material: A bar magnet 4 inches in length and 1 ½ inch equal four side (width). Said magnet bar with equal positive and negative in length. Cut a cube, either on positive end or negative end, and grind to make such cube perfect circle. There should be the same magnetism all over the grinded ball-shaped magnet. Magnetism and gravity are fundamentally the same, the making of the opposite law, re with equal positive and negative property. . Jsaldea12 7.10.09.

Suggested attraction gravity of Newton experiment, re- ball-shaped magnet Material: A bar magnet 4 inches in length and 1 ½ inch equal four sides (width). Said magnet bar with equal positive and negative in length. Cut a cube, either on positive end or negative end, and grind to make such cube perfect circle. There should be the same magnetism all over the grinded ball-shaped magnet. Magnetism and gravity are fundamentally the same, the making of the opposite law, re with equal positive and negative property. . Jsaldea12 7.10.09.

What is spacetime gravity of Dr. Einstein? The familiar illustration of Dr. Einstein spacetime gravity is that of trampoline and object dropped therein creating a dip, the heaver the object, the deeper the dip .until the deepest dip is reached: a collapsed object becomes a black hole. It appears something is wrong with this illustration. It is impossible in actual outer space. Dr. Einstein, in later years, said, “I cannot anymore recognize my relativity…”.? The spacetime gravity of Dr. Einstein appears to be better illustrated as a half floating rotating ball on body of water that creates circular ripples or curves on body of water. But as electro-magnetic sun, for instance, is totally submerged in outer space, its electro-magnetic gravitational field creates circumferential ripple or curve which a lesser object caught in the valleys of rotating curves (like van allen belt ) is. trapped therein to encircle said curve.. But the attraction gravity of Newton, that electro- magnetic gravitational field is jointly participating, attracting and binding the electro-magnetic gravitational field of the trapped rotating object in the spacetime gravity of Dr.Einstein, itself.. .. The whole outer space has skein, fabric, call it the spacetime gravity of Dr. Einstein. It exists and exerts no force, or it appears, just like a 4-kilometer deep ocean of earth that any object at bottom will feel the effortless weight by the no-force size of the whole ocean.. In like manner, the spacetime gravity of Dr. Einstein, the whole outer space, is just effortlessly weighing all over earth its size, otherwise no blackhole appears in the making without something that weighs from all over,. Though it appears as if the object collapsing into blackhole is like creating a deeper, deeper dip in the matrix (trampoline) spacetime gravity or Dr. Einstein,itself. Regards. Jsaldea12 7.5.09

What I have been telling you are facts, the atom, the nucleus, the electrons, etc. and that why they are unified inside in all atoms. Yet, you refuse to know. Regards. jsaldea12 7.1.09

The CMBR blackbody radiation. Even up to now, there is detected faint hizzing sound with faint glow all over outer space. Does inflation make hizzing sound or faint glow? Please answer. jsaldea12 7.1.09

Proton quarks 2 up 1 down; neutron quarks 1 up, 2 down. I dnt have to explain what is up and down, thus, right in the heart of nucleus, there are positive and negative. jsaldea12 7.1.09

The illustration of Dr. Einstein gravity is about the trampoline wherein an object drops therein will cause a dip in the trampoline, the heavier the object dropped therein will create a deeper dip. But, may be this is not the original illustration of Einstein...because in later year Dr. Einstein was made to comment on his relativity. Dr. Einstein responded:"I cannot anymore recognize my relativity because many persons have dip their hands on it. jsaldea12 7.1.09 Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedI must confess, it will take me time to know math. But computation of the rising of tide would depend on the complex positions of the three moving bodies: sun, earth, moon. throughout the year. Earth rotates 24 hours, the moon orbits every 27 days, and earth orbit 365 days. In each of the 365 days, the position of the moon varies in relation to earth and the sun. Because the moon orbit earth faster than earth orbit the sun, there are times when the tide created by the sun is caught up by the tide created by the moon, thus time interval of tide varies.. Times when moon and sun cover one another (eclipse),, there is also the tilting of earth to consider, the season, etc. But one thing is sure, whenever the moon and the sun, each, or both are overhead, there is tide. Regards. Jsaldea12 7.1.09.

There should be equality of positive and negative, like in magnet bar, like in electricity with equal positive and negative. In nucleus shell, needs to be equal positive and negative, and in separate electron shell needs equal positive and negative. Positive and negative property of bar magnet, for instance, cut, and cut to slimmer sizes and still in every cut, there is equal positive and negative. Align the cut bars and there is equal positive and negative. The reasons why there are exchanges, transfers mutations/decays inside the atom, nucleus to electron shells, and from electron shell to nucleus is because, like water seeking its own level, positive and negative seeks equality. The truth is positive and negative are two sides of same coin. That is why even in nucleus, quarks have positive and negative property. Even fast moving electrons have positive and negative. Thus, the mutation/decaying show. jsaldea12 7.1.09

Prediction? Nothing of that sorts. But again, the unquestionable scientific unerring law of conservation which states nothing is lost nor destroyed which argument and questioning cannot shake: (a) Where does the nuclear fission and fusion come from if not from the source, the Big Bang. All the nuclear that we see are reminders/imitations from the original Big Bang. The nuclear today did not just appear from nothing, law of conservation.form changes but basically the same.. (b) The blackbody radiations is strongest evidence that Big Bang was the biggest explosion, Inflation, like bread expanding, can never do that. Regards. Jsaldea12 7.1.09

I have to repeat and repeat because you cannot understand. How can that be? Please free your mind from old notion, open your mind. No disrespect. jsaldea12 7.1.09

The atom is patterned after our solar system.. with the sun as nucleus and planets as satellites. So are galaxies, the black hole as nucleus and stars as satellites. Such is the pattern of the creation (pre-Designed) of our universe. (what evidence is there to show than that?) So is in macro, so in micro, is the guiding rule: in micro-solar system of the atom, there is the nucleus and satellites, the electrons. In the nucleus of atom proton is found out that it does not decay. In like manner, in macro-solar system, the galaxies black holes do not also decay, uncannily similar to the non-decaying proton. These are observations of reputable scientists, thus, it is their competent words, I am just repeating. Now, if the gravitational force of black hole is so strong and concentrated that it even prevents energy and light from escaping, the same patterned is also happening in the micro-solar system of atom. As evidence by the incredible explosion of the nucleus, the nucleus, most specifically, the proton must be so concentrated, compact, that its gravitational force is so strong, just like black hole. Thus, if strong gravitational force of blackhole was formerly ordinary gravity until it is concentrated, in like manner, by pre-Designed, the proton is compact, concentrated gravity made strong. But if it were not compact, it was just simple gravity. What evidence, computations can I give? All these observations are made by reputable scientists, re-black hole not decaying and proton not decaying, like Dr. Michael Turner, Ph. D. I just assemble, assimilate them together. Hope you can see now. Regards. Jsaldea12 67.1.09

Hi. Inflation like a balloon involves no sound,... only explosion, nuclear explosion makes sound and blackbody radiation.and throwing of particles all over that eventually became galaxies, stars, planets. Inflation is orderly, uniformly, and if it is inflation, all the galaxies should have been on the edges of inflated balloon..but all galaxies now scattered, though moving outward. Big Bang was the biggest nuclear explosion..and we are the residue. Regards. jsaldea12 7.1.09

Please post: Evidence is very clear: the raising of tide on earth happens only whenever the moon is overhead and/or when the sun, jointly, is/are overhead. But when the sun alone is overhead, the tide is raised half as much as when the raising of tide by the moon alone. The sun is 93 million miles away while the moon is 240,000 miles away from earth. Because of the nearness of the moon, it raises the tide as follows: the positive and negative property of the moon (please refer to details in the article) is ATTRACTED and aligned locked with the negative and positive property of earth. through the locked gravitational fields of both.. because of the salty sea water which is conducive to electro-magnetism, the salty ocean is pulled/raised/attraction, THERE IS FORCE. as the moon rolls in the gradient around earth but the created gradient is the spacetime gravity of Dr. Einstein, no force involved, cannot raise tide .on earth. Regards. Jsaldea12 7.1.09

Let us stick to issue: Equilibrium of positive and negative on mass of nucleus should be within the nucleus, and equilibrium of positive and negative on mass of electrons should be within the electrons. Such is the unerring, call it unwritten law, of opposite. What do you think? jsaldea12 67.1.09

Nothing is lost nor destroyed, law of conservation, thus, we now have fission and fusion nuclear bombs/generations.. Blackbody radiation is evidenced of explosion, not inflation. Regards. jsaldea12 6.30.09

I made aposting but it is not there anymore. I don't know why. Maybe my eyes are deceiving me or my computer has weak memory but I made posting. Do you knowe in someway why my posting disappear/ jsaldea12 6.30.09.

Do you believe there is positive and negative, north and south pole, right and wrong, male and female, name it, there are opposite…..this world is made that way: it is unerring. It is up to you if you believe it or not. BUT IT EXISTS. But let us go back: it appears something is not right in concept that the mass of nucleus is equalize by the mass of electrons.. In macro-solar system, like the sun as nucleus, the sun has equal positive and negative,. In like manner, earth and other planets, as macro-electrons, have, each, equal positive and negative. So in micro-solar system, the nucleus should have equal positive and negative and electrons should have equal positive and negative. The comparison of equal positive to negative should have been nucleus in itself, and electrons in itself. What do you think? Jsaldea12 6.30

Without seeing, there is no tide though there is tide. Yes, it is salt ions that made salty sea water conductor of electro-magnetism. Can we feel gravity, not unless one makes conscious effort to feel it. Thus electro-magnetism generated by rotating locked gravitational fields, AT GRAVITATIONAL VIBRATING LEVEL, cannot be felt too. But the gargantuan size of earth and moon, their combined electro-magnetism, (like rolled strands of strings makes strong), is strong to raise tide on earth. Though weak as far as human being is concerned because only such size (human being) is covered. Newton called gravity “attraction”, thus, I call it, too, “attraction gravity of Newton, to distinguish from spacetime gravity of Dr. Einstein. The raising of tide cannot be explained by Dr. Einstein theories. The references cited do not mention of Einstein, it is attraction. Please clarify how.. …Because I know, too, the gravity concept of Einstein…is hardest to understand. but I think I know.. Regards. Jsaldea12 6.30.09 .

In some books, it is written, in others unwritten,..: that governing, unerring opposite law in physics: like repulse, unlike-attract., thus, is there equilibrium of mass of proton (positive) to mass of electron (negative) in hydrogen atom. Electricity, for instance, has equilibrium of positive and negative live wire to cause bulb to light. Thus, the question, it appears not right to compare equilibrium of negative electrons’ shell with positive nucleus shell. The reasons why it appears not right are detailed in the article. Jsaldea12 6.30.09. .

Hi! Of course we cannot feel the tide, if we cannot see it. Neither can we feel electro-magnetism generated by the motion of gravitational field of earth and the moon, both with inherent electro-magnetic property. Such generated electro-magnetism generated at gravitational extra-ordinarily weak, weak vibration level. But the huge size of gargantuan bodies such as the moon and earth feel it…because their combined electro-magnetism at their size, all rolled into one, like rolled bundle of strings, has such force, raise tide. The truth is, Newton and up to now, NO ONE CAN EXPLAIN WHAT IS THAT ATTRACTION. EXCEPT IT IS ATTRACTION. It is actually the action of law of opposite: UNLIKE ATTRACT., this is what I further refer as attraction gravity of Newton, to distinguish from the spacetime gravity of Einstein. The raising of the tide on earth can be explained by Dr. Einstein theories? PLEASE DISCLOSE HOW? Even the “predicts” of Einstein (re-light bends when passing nearby sun, and may be extra periphelion of Mercury can be explained, jointly by attraction gravity of Newton and Einstein gravity.. Evidence is very clear: the raising of the tide on earth happens only when the moon is overhead. .or when the sun, jointly is overhead. But when the sun alone raises tide on earth, it is half raised. Why because the sun is 93 million miles away while the moon is 240,000 miles. As I said, evidence is clear: because of the nearness of the moon, its gravitational pull is stronger. (Is that Einstein spacetime gravity?) A picture is worth a thousand words, an evidence is worth a thousand calculations that ultimately based its computation on actual evidence.. But I hope you could disclose how spacetime gravity of Einstein can raise tide on earth. Jsaldea12 6.30.09 .