Relative

The reaction to sitting down on a chair , is changing my center of mass, both I and the chair want to fall, but the force equal to I and the chair opposes us. If I change the density of the ground, to a viscosity weaker than the chair, both I and the chair fall. Even metal can be made into a liquid.... The opposing F of the ground is density, which is viscosity on a denser scale. I know what Isotropic means , the arrows represent the direction of the isotropic , I didnt need to put a load of arrows facing the same way around the sphere,, A singularity, just the one mass, no other mass in the universe, a sun on itself, gravity still exists , output still exists, do you agree with the diagram?

You are correct I do not understand Plasma, magnetic bottling, how the Tokamak uses a race track design so can never work, how the british have changed and are looking into a sphere design, accelerated gases contained to cause an action, adding electrons etc, I do not understand it depth, the maths etc, but I know without maintaining an isotropic bottling , so the plasma is isotropic, hence the sun, it will never work. The Tokamak creates centrifugal force, the energy is centrifugally forced to the outer edge, then it is too much for the magnetic field, and buckles your magnets by snaking out.

Ok that was a guess, can u please answer my questions, no one seems to be answering them, I asked about a singularity diagram and also an atom, added another atom with s1 and s2 layer

You add force to either action on the ground when it loses V and curves you do not want me to start drawing cannon balls do you? Back to this please. Fn, you add force to either the ground or object that has a net force of zero and it will move? An atom has a net force of zero but vibrates, I think I know why it vibrates. Do protons have an electromagnetic field? Is this how an atom works?

I apologize ,I do know it is my spag, I did mean ''unless there is acting force'',on what goes up, meaning thrust etc. You say the ground is a neutral , mass on the ground has a net force of zero, but the force is still there which is equal to a9.81ms2, but opposed of equal force. Mass on the ground has a singularity not accounting for the ground also has a net force of zero? an equilibrium, atoms ?

Or just simple proof that you do not understand me by my often incorrect use of terminology. You are presuming for some reason that I do not know what I am thinking, or what basic science I have read, That is saying I have a low IQ when it is the contrary.

Yes or no to the diagram , please so i can clear up my misunderstanding? What goes up must come down because there is an acting force on it, add force to what goes up and it carries on going up, I know you are clearly misunderstanding me,

In this diagram we have a singularity with no other effecting mass, Yes or no to the action tags?

There is something positive charged above you, more positive than negative for sure. Yes there is and yes there is and yes there is. I can not wait to produce the sentence that nails it on the head using correct terminology. If you switched gravity around and did the maths the results would be the same. No difference designed to fit

If we increased the electrons in our body to outweight gravity we fly off if we could find the balance of frequency

Doppler Yes that is what I am saying

I have not changed anything about the Newtonian gravity nothing changes with that, all I have done is add a stopping force. The opposite action to gravity is anti gravity. What goes up must come down, unless there is acting force. Helium and Hydrogen are anti gravity by been more towards been an Ion, Anti-gravity is a difference in energies to the equilibrium zero net force of a standard atom. A more positive Ion repels itself away. It is my terminology and formulas that are off, I assure you it is not my ideas.

Ok nothing more to discuss, I give up, obviously science is not for me, because science says one thing, I agree with it for science to then always tell me I am wrong. Einstein says we are going in a straight line, it does not even change that.

I am not guessing at anything, I am speculating from your science, your laws, your dynamics, It does not sound that complex.

Every action has an opposite reaction, So what is the opposite reaction to gravity? I do not guess, or make things up, Every I say is from your science, actions and reactions, the Raleigh effect in my opinion is has my diagram shows, and not scatterring, scattering would not have enough energy to show blue. Has any one done the maths for my gravity model ? is there any difference? The net force is zero yes?

Matter, on a quantum level, the electron is attracted to the proton, in a single atom, but also the electron is attracted to the Protons of other atoms and vice versus, electrons repelling electrons, and Protons repelling protons, so the net force of this is zero, is this how matter is able to become molecules/clusters of atoms by electrostatics and final net force of all matter been zero? And also is decay caused by an atom losing an electron, becoming an Ion, becoming a more positive so is then repelled by the off balance of the electrostatic equilibrium?

The solar wind is technically an electric wind is it not? or do you mean extracted energy from the atmosphere and get some freebies? You say the Ion becomes positively charged, yes I understand now, what You are saying about the lifter and know how it works now, The solar winds containing ions and electrons etc, so if the ions become positive charged, then the action of the single electrons is to be repelled by the now more positive ion?

I am getting confused now , there seems to be a contradictory to the earlier answers in my questions threads, the sun has a magnetic field, the earth has a magnetic field , both the shields expand outwards, towards each other, gravity wants us to join together, but the magnetic shields do not let us. 'But a magnet's field doesn't come from a large current traveling through a wire -- it comes from the movement of electrons.'' http://science.howstuffworks.com/magnet3.htm ''electrons are negatively charged and like charges repel therefore, electrons repel similarly protons repel (two +'s) but a proton and electron attract, thus causing atoms, and the universe we live in today'' https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=1006042024566 ''The other observation is much easier to understand that the already emitted positive and negative filaments do not neutralize each other in space because they are antiparallel electric currents which repulse each other stronger than they attract each other via electrostatic attraction. Electrons of a negative filament do not fly to ions to recombine it in a positive filament in a distance of only 1000km, they fly parallel to each other millions of kilometres and later diverge.'' http://www.electric-sun.info/main.html And to the diagram daytime is more compressed which suggest there is more force on the layer in the day , which shows us we are pulling towards the sun, hence blue sky. and i can draw a diagram showing you this with a basic formula using the Doppler redshift and blue shift And sorry mods this is to continue to fight that my model may have some meaning and the same subject. added to coincide with my model idea. added from forum questions from some one. ''So anyway, if we refered to an electron as having a positive charge and a proton as having a negative charge. And we changed all the equations around respectively. Would there be any real difference?'' your answers were there would be no difference, so in answer to the maths , and if you changed gravity to opposing and did the equations the results would be the same?

My first evidence i offer is this link, orbital magnetic moment, the sun emits electrons and so does the earths core, but the mantle , the surface does not emit electrons making it a negative except probably iron content which can hold electrons. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/quantum/orbmag.html sorry what you mean no net charge , no energy? The ionosphere is a shell of electrons and electrically charged atoms forgive me if this sounds really stupid , that sounds friction to me? Is the pressure released at night? ''At night the F layer is the only layer of significant ionization present, while the ionization in the E and D layers is extremely low. During the day, the D and E layers become much more heavily ionized, as does the F layer, which develops an additional, weaker region of ionisation known as the F1 layer. The F2 layer persists by day and night and is the region mainly responsible for the refraction of radio waves.'' Does the suns magnetic field rotate with the sun?

I can offer you evidence from your science, I can offer you evidence from the forum today, unless you can deny the sun emits electrons and the earth emits electrons, I think I have given you something to think about. I know the net force is equal to zero, that is what i have put the fn = 0, this does not change the maths of current, and I can explain where the orbital motion comes from, I can explain Venus, but am in fear of thread closure. I am getting use to the formulas now, I pretty much, am understanding them. Still not 100% but getting there. I now know things like a lower case g is different to a capital G , so will start to be more considerate when i post formulas. I am trying please do not shut me down again, I need to go back to fn on the ground diagrams to show, that is zero, but the object is still in motion with the spin, and aslo I need to relate to another link from one of my closed threads to show magnetic motion or something like that it was called, I need to explain that the ground is attracted to the core but also attracted to the sun and thats what gives the motion. But you will close me down.

Oh right , yea i get it now ,

I understand but your explanation of the formula looked correct to what i am saying, or something very similar...

define wire in the Cavendish experiment please? Model correction and thx. for the formula Updated the model to look better.

And the Earth has how much water contained in its oceans you could make huge filtration system through with some serious force sucking? Sorry mods for slipping off subject. Will get back to it.

I used them so you would actually understand the idea I had, I am unsure what to use, I just consider gravity and consider an opposite reaction, the opposite reaction been a stopping force that stops m1 and m2 colliding, I understand the centrifugal gravity explanation of Einstein and even the curvature of space, but from day one when I looked, I thought there was something missing. And yes probably is Coulomb force , but I do not know, like I said , to me, even a beginner in science maths is a Maxwell to me. I needed a Maxwell to put in the correct forces to my diagram and see if it works or not. My idea, his or hers maths , Just tried to copy and paste the formula from wiki to my diagram, doe snot work and can not type that in sorry