Miles Mathis' Theory: Macrocosm AIR BUOYANCY © Lloyd If there were really a ten tonne column of air above every square meter, nothing would rise no matter the density of it. There is a lot of air above you, but it doesn't weigh anything, as I have shown . It has no net vector down. It has mass, but that mass is resisted by charge. What is really happening is that the air has buoyancy. More velocity sideways in the field gives you more buoyancy per unit time, and this creates lift. But we still need to explain the buoyancy of the air. The air keeps the airplane up, but what keeps the air up? Why doesn't the air compress and collapse? Why doesn't it fall? We are told it is the kinetic energy of the air molecules, but that doesn't serve. Where does the kinetic energy come from? Is the heat from the Sun falling on the atmosphere enough to create the pressure we see? It isn't even close. If heat from the Sun or the temperature were the main factors, we would see the sky literally fall with a large drop in temperature, and we don't see that. We don't see the ionosphere collapsing in on the lower levels at the poles or in winter. We get a bit of that, but nothing like what we would expect if the pressure of fluids and gasses was determined by heat from the Sun. Same thing with the deep oceans, which are cold and dark. We know how fluids act, but we don't know why they act that way. The other problem is that our vector with both buoyancy and lift is up. Incompressibility and the old fluid mechanics don't really explain that. Since the atmosphere does have mass, there must be a vector up to keep it from falling. Yes, it would have a weight of 10 tonnes if that weight vector weren't matched by a vector up, and it should have a weight of 10 tonnes, according to the current theory. But it can't have an unresisted vector down of 10 tonnes or it would fall. Therefore, we must have a vector up to explain both the buoyant atmosphere and lift. That vector was unknown until now, but it is charge. The charge field has an acceleration up of .009545m/s^2. It will automatically lift anything with an acceleration down that is less than that, which is why smaller ions are lifted into the ionosphere. The charge photons just push them up there, by straight collisions. This is also what keeps the atmosphere up and the clouds up and so on. This is what causes atmospheric pressure, since as the photons keep the air up, they do so by collisions, and those collisions also keep the kinetic energy up. Fluids and gasses resist compression because they are full of charge. Charge resists compression. Charge creates the vector out that balances the pressure vector in. Charge also creates buoyancy and lift, because charge is moving up. There is a real vector up in the field before anything else is computed, which is what confused everyone from the beginning. … [Nitrogen and oxygen are buoyant on Earth.] … [R]eal photons [are] moving through the nuclei, and each photon has mass equivalence. Therefore, if nitrogen is recycling more photons per second than oxygen, then in some situations, those photons have to be counted as mass in the unified field. If they are counted, then nitrogen's unified field mass gains more than oxygen's unified field mass. I have shown that if we include charge, oxygen and nitrogen weigh very nearly the same. For gases to persist in the atmosphere over long periods of time, they have to be weightless, which means the unified field has to balance very nearly perfectly. To cause any measurable motion, the charge recycling differential would have to be on the order of 1000 or more, and elements and molecules don't have differentials like that. But when we are looking at gases in the atmosphere, which are levitated and therefore in unified field balance, we have to consider these small charge imbalances. Since any imbalance will cause a failure of levitation, we have to consider all imbalances, including the small imbalance of charge recycling. That is what I just did, showing it explains the unified field equality of nitrogen, oxygen, neon, and argon. What would it require to make CO2 balance? A stronger charge field or a weaker gravity field. Since CO2 is too heavy for the Earth, we need to lower the gravity field to balance it. Well, that is just what Venus has. Its gravity is .9 that of the Earth, which matches my math above. I showed that CO2 is 10% too heavy for the Earth, Venus has 10% less gravity, so Venus should have the perfect unified field to levitate CO2. We can use the same math on Mars. Mars has a gravity .376g. What gas has a weight 1/.376 that of argon? That would be an inert gas with a molecular weight of 106.4. Since there are no common gases that match that profile at Martian atmospheric temperatures, we have a simple explanation for Mars' tenuous atmosphere. Most of Mars' atmosphere is CO2, we are told, but on Mars it doesn't fall, it rises. We can see the plume behind Mars as its atmosphere is blown off into space. We are told the Solar Wind blows it off, but we now know that it would blow off even without the Solar Wind.