> There is an easiest gravity solution and we must > always consider it > seriously. > > Previously I gave the solution for gravity as that of > (a) uneven > electromagnetic charge distribution coupled with > enormous EM power of > 10^40 stronger than gravity.
Asshole:giving links and/or references to Wikipedia or
You Boob that agree with you is not considered
a"solution" outside of your little bubble. At the end
of the day, you have done no experiments supporting
that can be replicated. So all you have to support your
theory is your personal opinion--that does not cut it
outside of your little bubble.
Trouble with that > solution is that we > still have to account for repulsion. For why would > gravity always be > attraction. > > So in the case of attraction or repulsion, I proposed > the Atom > Totality solution (b) where the Atom Totality is a > electron in our > region of Space and so all the magnetic monopoles are > of one charge > only, attraction. > > However, last night I came upon the easiest solution > of all. It may be > the true solution or it may just be an easier > solution than (b). There > are still many facts of the Cosmos that need to be > considered, such as > whether far away distant galaxies do in fact show > antigravity of a > repulsion and acceleration away from one another. And > our local > galaxies showing only attraction. But let me list the > easiest and > third solution. > > Solution (c) is the easiest of all, and it takes into > account that we > know little to nothing about magnetic monopoles. > Solution (c) says > that a magnetic monopole M- is attractive to both M- > and M+, and ditto > for M+. Now maybe M- is more attractive to M+ rather > than M-, but > still, their is no repulsion force in magnetic > monopoles. There is a > repulsion in magnetic dipoles, but not magnetic > monopoles. > > Now, we easily solve gravity because monopoles exist > where mass exists > and their abundance and distribution follows the > abundance and > distribution of mass. So we eliminated repulsion out > of EM force and > gravity is thus the smallest of the Coulomb forces > for it is just the > attraction of magnetic monopoles. > > Now, perhaps I can combine solutions (c) with (b) in > that the Maxwell > Equations do not support (c) in a elimination of > repulsion. But if we > include (b) of the Cosmos being a single atom of > 231Pu and our local > galaxies showing only attraction force because our > local galaxies are > part of the last electron Space of 231Pu, that masks > the repulsion and > allows only a residual attraction. > > We have to keep in mind also, of patches of stronger > forces of gravity > as EM, for instance the Rings of Saturn as > solid-body-rotation is a > stronger gravity field than the planets around the > Sun, and the solid- > body-rotation of many spiral galaxies is stronger > gravity than the > gravity of the planets around the Sun. So in those > cases of stronger > gravity than the usual gravity, we have to adjust the > abundance or > power of the magnetic monopoles in play. > > -- > > Google's archives are top-heavy in hate-spew from > search-engine- > bombing. Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a > excellent, simple and > fair archiving of AP posts for the past 15 years as > seen here: > > http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986 > > Archimedes Plutonium > http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium > whole entire Universe is just one big atom > where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies