© Lloyd
  1. http://milesmathis.com/comet.pdf (The Cometary Antitail)
  2. Notice that the Astroprof is careful not to give the motion of the dust tail to the Solar Wind.
  3. He switches to light pressure.
  4. Why? Because the Solar Wind effect is currently given to the E/M field.
  5. The ion tail is moved by the Solar Wind precisely because it is ionic. It is charged.
  6. So the ion tail is explained as an E/M field effect.
  7. But the dust tail can't be explained that way, since the dust is not charged. It isn't ionic.
  8. So the Astroprof switches to light pressure, which is NOT thought to be an E/M field effect.
  9. Why not? Because photons are not thought to be charged.
  10. The dust follows the same initial trajectory as the ions and then curves.
  11. http://milesmathis.com/moon.html (The Moon Gives up a Secret)
  12. An E/M field continues to exist even in the absence of the expression of its magnetic component, as we now know.
  13. Venus and Mars exclude the Solar Wind just as if they had powerful magnetospheres, even though they do not.
  14. [T]he gravitational field doesn't actually change as the inverse square of the distance.
  15. Only Newton's equation changes as the inverse square, and Newton's equation is a compound equation, one that includes both the gravitional field and the foundational E/M field.
  16. The inverse square effect enters Newton's equation through the E/M part of it, not the gravitational part of it.
  17. That is precisely why gravity can vary as the radius, as I am proving in this paper.
  18. Gravity varies ONLY as the radius of the object, and no longer as the distance of separation.
  19. In fact, lead would emit a denser field, giving you the opposite effect.
  20. Dropping ball bearings above a very thick sheet of lead would be likely to yield an acceleration measurably below 9.8 m/s^2, and I recommend experiments in this line.*
  21. The math above also implies that all celestial bodies, including exotics like black holes and neutron stars, have gravitational fields that vary as their radii vary.
  22. It suggests in the strongest possible way that the huge additional forces hypothesized for exotics are either wrong or are mainly a function of a super-strong E/M field, solar winds, or other as yet unknown interactions, interactions that have nothing to do with gravity per se.
  23. December 2008: I have now discovered well-known proof for my predictions here.
  24. My number for the foundational E/M field of the Earth, .009545 m/s^2, is .1% of the total field, 9.8 m/s^2.
  25. In my paper on the Bohr magneton, I remind my reader that 80 years of experiments have shown a .1% error in the magneton.
  26. This is direct proof of the existence of the charge field at the macro-level, as I predict in this paper.
  27. I not only have found the field, I have found the right number for it.

← PREV Powered by Quick Disclosure Lite
© 2010~2021 SCS-INC.US