Earth's gravity due to electromagnetism

Earth's gravity due to electromagnetism

zeenews.india.com

"Findings of the study undertaken suggest that Earth's gravitational attraction may be attributed to magnetic coupling experienced between Earth's electromagnetism and all the earthly objects - electrically charged or uncharged. More precisely, terrestrial gravity is deemed to be outcome of the bound state of the planetary electromagnetism."

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
vixra.org

This study has been submitted for peer review in a journals and this looks promising !
This guy published a few other controversial papers before and he's on a roll. I haven't looked at his paper yet but from what I read, this might finally give a big push forward to the standard model of physics and become closer to a theory of everything, whatever that is.



zeenews.india.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Electromagnetism and not gravity is what's keeping us glued to our Earth?

So if Earth and its conditions for life were not exceptional enough, now one of the four fundamental forces of the Universe is subordinating to another precisely here in this remote area of the Universe?

I'll read it again. Double coffe now.

Lol. So heavenly bodies without a magnetic field will possess no gravity

this was my conclusion/speculation a few weeks ago when i was considering reality in general. somewhat amusing to see it right there in front of me -

i came to the conclusion after considering plasma theory and the sun, coupled with the micro/macro relationship which is fraught throughout the universe. the sun itself is contained within an electromagnetic field - as are we, as is every sentient being, as well non-sentient objects/beings - that being said, when one considers the behaviour of the atoms that comprise of our bodies behave in a similar fashion to that of a solar system - it is only logical then ( or it was for me ) that internally something akin to a star would be exerting a large amount of energy ( enough to melt rock into magma, and of course react in congruence electromagnetically with our exterior sun [[as above - so below]] );
that being said, we are polarised magnetically as well - each with a vibrational signature that is as easy to identify ( to a discerning ear ) as touching a short wire of copper to a headphone extension which is plugged into a receiver. It is not hard to estimate the influence of the interior sun/star on our bodies - and would entirely explain the illusive concept of gravity.

I hate to bring up Google.Earth, but have you ever looked at the poles of the Earth? You can get nose to pavement/foliage/rock/water as you'd like in nearly any spot on the globe, and yet ( if memory serves me correctly ) you can only get about 100km to the surface of the South Pole without losing all focus and detail, seemingly descending into a never ending fractal mesh of pixels. Pour Qoui?

Originally posted by purplemonkeydishwasher
I hate to bring up Google.Earth, but have you ever looked at the poles of the Earth? You can get nose to pavement/foliage/rock/water as you'd like in nearly any spot on the globe, and yet ( if memory serves me correctly ) you can only get about 100km to the surface of the South Pole without losing all focus and detail, seemingly descending into a never ending fractal mesh of pixels. Pour Qoui?

Please have a look at the Mercartor projection and its formulars/math used. As most of our maps are based on the Mercartor projection (like GoggleMaps/Earth, Bing and 99% of all street maps) you will see this on every map displaying the poles. The Mercartor projection (the formulars behind it) are not able to produce correct values for latitutes approching 90° as they reach +/- infinity. So even if they have crystal clear pictures it's not possible to map these pictures on a globe using the Mercartor projection. And nobody cares as there is just water/ice at the poles.

So maybe everyone believing that they hide the poles should start reading about projections or watch the original photos of those expeditions to the poles.

reply to post by Angelic Resurrection


Indeed.

Venus, for example, has no global magnetic field but has around the same level of gravity as earth.

Also, if Gravity was a result of electromagnetism, it could be influenced by such. As it stands, while a magnet can overpower gravity and lift an object, gravity doesn't stop working and still exerts a force on the object which is also being influenced by electromagnetism.

"The Electric Universe" theory has been around for years. I don't see anything newsworthy here, other than that this person seems to have a questionable belief that it takes a planetary body with an internal magnetic field to cause gravity. This is quite clearly not the case. The Newtonian equations regarding gravitation have been around for hundreds of years, and have been tested very thoroughly. If gravity is simply another aspect of electromagnetism, it is due to the fundamental electromagnetic nature of particles, not due to an iron planetary core. Otherwise, why would the Earth or any other body have bothered accreting into a planet to begin with?

Under Unified Field Theory gravity is a result of the vibration of the planet and the resulting waves in the space-time continuim.

Yes, I've known that for some time. Gravity is an effect, its not causal, and is related to electro magnetism. Its the unequal charge basically, in the electric universe theory, between two bodies. Its a very weak force and we don't live in a gravitational universe as thought.

In laymans terms. The stronger the binding energy of the molecules in a body, the stronger is its gravity.
Yes we live in a gravitational universe with time.

BUT...

what IS electromagnatism really? is electromagnatism explained by string theory? do we REALLY understand what it is and how it effects the universe around us.

Originally posted by Angelic Resurrection
In laymans terms. The stronger the binding energy of the molecules in a body, the stronger is its gravity.
Yes we live in a gravitational universe with time.

With the exception binding is not fully understood or explained. Research pilot waves in relationship to silicon droplets. You'll notice how mass is not only shaped by wave function, but also how it acts as the control.

Not sure about EM, but gravity is a function of energy density. Mass is just energy compacted into a very small space, and things like nuclear weapons seem to be a good example of that concept. The problem is, we haven't been able to do it the other way around effectively nor efficiently, nor is the one way we do know how to make it work an arbitrary process. (Just can't go splitting or fusing any ol' atoms in a cost-effective manner.)

Figure out the gravity thing, and odds are you also figure out the process that lets you change energy to matter and back in a seemingly arbitrary manner. If there is such gravity-tech, I could see why anyone in charge wouldn't want us to have it. (Not just the free energy aspect, but any possibility of weaponization really levels the playing field. Not just countries vs. countries, but if easy enough - individuals being able to wield power on par with governments.)

i dont buy it for this simple reason

take a bucket of water and you can knock it out and pour it out quite easily

however you take that same bucket of water and spin it fast that kinetic energy will keep that water in the bucket

last time i checked water doesnt have any magnetic or electromagnetic properties

we all know the earth spins at tremendous speeds and with the metallic properties of the core and mantel whose to say that electromagnetic field isnt generated from the kinetic energy.

not a geo physists and dont have any degree and most likely wrong

however not buying the study.

www.holoscience.com...

Gravity is the most familiar force. We are subject to it every day of our lives. Newton gave us his ‘law of gravity,’ which describes its effect but doesn’t explain it. “I frame no hypotheses,” he wrote. Einstein wasn’t so prudent when he introduced his “postulates.” Unfortunately, his unreal geometry doesn’t explain gravity either. The usual demonstration using heavy steel balls on a rubber sheet to represent ‘gravity wells’ relies on gravity as its own explanation!

A mechanism, yes, but what causes it? An apple falling or a centrifugal force is an outcome, its a secondary force.

When it was found that atoms are composed of charged particles, there were attempts to explain mass in terms of electromagnetism. Henri Poincaré wrote in 1914, “What we call mass would seem to be nothing but an appearance, and all inertia to be of electromagnetic origin.” It makes good sense that the equivalence of gravitational and inertial mass should be explained by the electrical structure of matter. However, it is not the philosophical concept of mass but its mathematical treatment that occupies physicists. Einstein's famous equation, E = mc2, demonstrated that mass and electromagnetic energy are directly related. But mystification resulted when the earlier concept that related mass to ‘quantity of matter’ was unconsciously substituted. Textbooks and encyclopaedias today slip unnoticeably into the error of using the words ‘mass’ and ‘matter’ interchangeably. A NASA educational website tells us that “mass is a measure of how much matter a planet is made of.” It shows that the confusion of mass with quantity of matter infects astrophysics.

The consequences are profound for cosmology. The mass of a celestial body cannot tell us about its composition. We cannot say what the Sun is made from....

The answer is ‘electrically’ by the repulsion between the outer electrons in the atoms closest to the points of contact. The equivalence of inertial and gravitational mass strongly suggests that the force of gravity is a manifestation of the electric force.

Gravity as a force relates to the electrical charge, repulsion of an unequal charge in electrons at the closest points or contact. Its electrical in nature.


Gravity Behaving Badly Part 1. Comsology and Astronomy


Gravity Behaving Badly - Part 2

Originally posted by neo96
i dont buy it for this simple reason

take a bucket of water and you can knock it out and pour it out quite easily

however you take that same bucket of water and spin it fast that kinetic energy will keep that water in the bucket

last time i checked water doesnt have any magnetic or electromagnetic properties

we all know the earth spins at tremendous speeds and with the metallic properties of the core and mantel whose to say that electromagnetic field isnt generated from the kinetic energy.

not a geo physists and dont have any degree and most likely wrong

however not buying the study.

edit on 20-9-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

Dude,I skipped Physical Science in school so I am dumb but I have a mind...as I see it if our magnitosphere breaks down so would our gravity if this study is true...correct? also by his study electricity not generated by motion would alter gravity just like a magnet and steel

reply to post by mikeybiznaz


hell i dont know

somebody explain the gravity forces on non metallic objects.

like the earths oceans and us

reply to post by stumason

Venus, for example, has no global magnetic field but has around the same level of gravity as earth.

But you weren't paying attention.
It is only Earth's gravity which is due to electromagnetism. In other places gravity is a property of matter.

Originally posted by pauljs75
. If there is such gravity-tech, I could see why anyone in charge wouldn't want us to have it. (Not just the free energy aspect, but any possibility of weaponization really levels the playing field. Not just countries vs. countries, but if easy enough - individuals being able to wield power on par with governments.)

True actually any tech can be weaponised.
But this one can be planet busting stuff and in the wrong hands
yes they can hold govts to ransom. Scary.