🚀 go-pugleaf

RP wrote:

> The metrical approach of Einstein's is correct in principle, but
> incorrect in its execution.  The same metrical approach can be applied
> to electromagnetic interactions. Consider point charges A and B.  Each
> is considered to influence the other both electromagnetically and
> gravitationally with a delay r/c. If A jiggles, then B jiggles in
> response. B feels only one force, it has only one acceleration, and in
> simple form F is just ma. That is, forces don't have types, and so it
> is an error in logic to attempt to produce different types of it and
> incorporate them into theory. Force is actually quite redundant, there
> is in reality only the acceleration and the matter being accelerated.
> Force is a mathematical concept only.
> 
> In the case of ordinary collisions between neutral masses, the
> accelerations are all produced via electromagnetic interactions
> between the charged particles of which the masses are composed.  If we
> provide for long range electromagnetic repulsive forces between these
> masses, then the accelerating forces are all still electromagnetic in
> origin.  But in the former case, since the masses are neutral, we
> cannot distinguish these inertial accelerations from a localized
> gravitational field. This is because when we take the objects as a
> whole it is easy to overlook the complex series of electromagetic
> interactions that are actually responsible. In my estimation precisely
> this same error is commited in the case of the gravitational
> interactions that we observe. If a complexity of electromagnetic
> interactions can cause neutral objects to repel each other (ordinary
> collisions), then it must also be possible for a similar complexity of
> electromagnetic interactions to cause neutral masses to attract one
> another. And indeed, in the case of oppositly charged masses, they do
> attract, not just the charges of opposite sign, but the entire neutral
> mass to which these charges are bound. Once again, in order for
> particles of charge of both signs to be accelerated, a complex series
> of electromagnetic interactions is required, exactly as in the case of
> collision between neutral masses.  So here is an example of where the
> Coulomb force can be regarded as equivalent to a gravitational force.
> I am not saying that Coulomb forces are responsible for gravitational
> interactions between charge neutral masses however. As it so happens
> charges also exert lorentz forces, and these are dependent upon the
> relative speeds of the charges wrt each other.  Because of these,
> there really are no "neutral" masses. The positive and negative
> charges within ordinary matter do not have equal average speeds, but
> there is an assymetry between them due to their differences in mass.
> 
> This imbalance in lorentz forces can lead to net attractions, and I
> have at one point provided the math to that end.

If the universe is expanding, then it can be said that the dimension 
called space is being created, and at a necessary rate that can be 
expressed as ~c, so it follows that nothing can move at a rate greater 
than the the rate of creation, ~c. Everything within this dimension 
called space interacts with the dynamics of acceleration which we call 
gravity.

Howzat?