"We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress." Richard Feynman
Cutting Edge
What is gravity?
Gravity remains an enigmatic force. You could be forgiven for thinking it is a well understood phenomenon, but in truth we do not understand the mechanism. It is described mathematically. See Newton quote, right. Einstein sought to improve upon this by introducing time as a fourth dimension, leading to the concept of curved spacetime a mathematical geometry where mass tells space how to curve, and space tells mass how to move but does this abstraction illuminate gravity, or does it obscure the underlying mechanism? This approach has lead to claims that we now live in an age of mathmagics, where theoretical physics has skewed reality.
"You can imagine that I look back on my life's work with calm satisfaction. But from nearby it looks quite different. There is a not a single concept of which I am convinced that it will stand firm, and I feel uncertain whether I am in general on the right track." Albert Einstein
Gravity is also described as a property of mass, of
course, but this helps little given that mass also remains
a hypothetical entity. The Higgs boson (God particle)
of the Standard model remains elusive (see below), much like hypothesised
graviton particles and gravity waves. In General Relativity,
gravity results from the curvature of space-time, whatever that means beyond pretty pictures of bending lines. Incidentally, these also seem to warp minds.
"There is no model of the theory of gravitation today, other than the mathematical form." Richard Feynman
Either way, there is not enough mass
in our own galaxy, The Milky Way, to account for it's fortunate tendency not to
disintegrate. Hence the invention of further contentious hypotheticals like Dark
Matter.
"But
hitherto I have not been able to discover the cause of those properties of gravity
from phenomena, and I frame no hypotheses." Isaac Newton
Has the Higgs boson really been discovered? Your disCERNment is recommended.
More than ten billion dollars have been spent on the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN (Conseil Europeen pour la Recherche Nucleaire) in Switzerland in the hope of finding God, or at least the Higgs boson (God particle) on which the Standard Model rests. Other experiments were planned, but the discovery of the God particle was the primary goal, no doubt about it.
The entity was originally conjured by Peter Higgs, who started out by assuming the existence of a particle that exhibits only mass and no other characteristics. In other words, the Higgs is like no other piece in the puzzle, since all normal matter is composed of electric charges. (Interestingly, whimsical Dark Matter also falls into the same mass only category.) But how can a massive particle exist without charge? What is its structure? Does this underline the problem inherent in leaving physics to mathematicians, and the burgeoning disconnect between mathematical concepts and reality? Consider epicycles: a mathematical system capable of making respectable predictions, yet ultimately detached from the underlying reality it sought to describe.
Pictured below is the hypothesised particle zoo of the standard model, with the hypothetical Higgs at the center.
More than 2100 users from various US institutes are registered at CERN, making the United States the lab's largest user community. As if in tribute to this actual fact, it was on American Independence day, 4th July, 2012, and with much fanfare, that the 'discovery' of the Higgs was announced. Given the massive investment in the LHC, they were certainly under pressure to come up with something.
After the discovery, the LHC was taken apart and rebuilt with enhancements. More recently, and with much less fanfare, physicists announced that although the LHC had shown hints the Higgs-Boson was 'real,' experiments in the 145 billion to 466 billion electron volt range have excluded its existence! Dmitri Denisov of Fermilab said:
“We do not see the signal. If it existed, we would see it. But when we look at our data, we basically see nothing.”
In another Higgs hiccup, NewScientist reports that the bad boy is "refusing to misbehave."
Physicists have spotted the Higgs boson performing a new trick, but one that brings us no closer to understanding the workings of fundamental particles. The Higgs boson, discovered at the CERN particle physics laboratory near Geneva, Switzerland, in 2012, is the particle that gives all other fundamental particles mass, according to the standard model of particle physics. However, despite the work of thousands of researchers around the world, nobody has been able to figure out exactly how it does that or why some particles are more massive than others.
It seems there may be good reason to be skeptical about the discovery of the Higgs and, by extension, the validity of the standard model. Furthermore, it is now postulated the particle may be composite. In other words, more stuff may need to be conjured up if the standard model is to be saved. Dark Higgs, perhaps?
All this is not to suggest that the CERN crew are deluded or less then intelligent. Far from it. After all, they've effectively invented a perpetual funding machine.
"The underlying assumptions of cosmologists today are developed with the most sophisticated mathematical methods and it is only the plasma itself which does not 'understand' how beautiful the theories are and absolutely refuses to obey them." Hannes Alfvén
"We are in a period of utter confusion!" Nobel laureate, David Gross
Gravity and EM
An examination of the Electromagnetic Gravity hypothesis.
An interesting and balanced analysis from a mainstream source. All too often the idea of gravity being of EM origin is dismissed out of hand. Because electromagnetism can be shielded and gravity can't, it is generally assumed that the two forces must be irreconcilable. Such a view is clearly too simplistic, however. This article is therefore strongly recommended.
"...The equivalence of inertial
and gravitational mass implies that gravity is also
an electrical force. Before Einstein, some noted scientists
were suggesting that the gravitational force between
neutral particles might ultimately be due to electrical
polarization within the particles. In 1882, Friedrich
Zöllner wrote in the introduction to his book,
Explanation of Universal Gravitation through the Static
Action of Electricity and The General Importance of
Weber's Laws, " we are to conclude that a
pair of electrical particles of opposite signs, i.e.
two Weberian molecular pairs attract each other. This
attraction is Gravity, it is proportional to the number
of molecular pairs." Indeed, gravity can be represented
as the sum of the radially aligned electric dipoles
formed by all subatomic particles within a charged planet
or star.
"This new electrical concept suggests
that Newton's "universal constant of gravitation,"
or "G," is a dependent variable. G depends
upon the charge distribution within a celestial body.
Highly charged objects like comets look like solid rock,
yet they have a gravitational field that suggests they
are fluff-balls. And as they discharge they suffer what
is euphemistically called "non-gravitational"
accelerations. The extreme weakness of the force of
gravity, compared to the electric force, is a measure
of the minuscule electric dipolar distortion of nucleons.
Gravity cannot be shielded by normal electrostatic shielding
because all subatomic particles within the gravitational
field respond to the dipolar distortion, whether they
are metals or non-metals.
"What about magnetism? Ampere's
law for the magnetic force between two current carrying
wires is found to be equivalent to the transverse electric
force caused by the distortion of electrons in an electric
field. This distortion causes them to form tiny collinear
electric dipoles. That is, the magnetic force is simply
another manifestation of the electric force.
"This simple electrical model of
matter has the great virtue of reducing all known forces
to a single one the electric force. However,
it has a price. We must abandon our peculiar phobia
against a force acting at a distance. And we must give
up the notion that the speed of light is a real speed
barrier. It may seem fast to us, but on a cosmic scale
it is glacial. Imposing such a speed limit and requiring
force to be transmitted by particles would render the
universe completely incoherent. If an electron is composed
of smaller subunits of charge orbiting within the classical
radius of an electron, then the electric force must
operate at a speed far in excess of the speed of light
for the electron to remain a coherent object. In fact,
it has been calculated that if released, the subunits
of charge in the electron could travel from here to
the far side of the Andromeda galaxy in one second!
"We have direct evidence of the
superluminal action of the electric force, given that
gravity is a longitudinal electric force. Indeed, Newton's
celebrated equation requires that gravity act instantly
on the scale of the solar system. It has been calculated
that gravity must operate at a speed of at least 2x1010
times the speed of light, otherwise closely orbiting
stars would experience a torque that would sling them
apart in mere hundreds of years. Similarly, the Earth
responds to the gravitational pull of the Sun where
it is at the moment, not where the Sun was 8 minutes
ago. If this were not so, the Earth and all other planets
in the solar system would be slung into deep space within
a few thousand years. Gravity is therefore an electrical
property of matter, not a geometrical property of space.
"What is the nature of light? Einstein's
special theory of relativity was disconfirmed right
at the start by the Michelson-Morley experiment, which
showed a residual due to the æther. This was later
confirmed by far more rigorous repeats of the experiment
by Dayton Miller. But by then popular delusion and the
madness of crowds had taken hold and contrary evidence
would not be tolerated. The Dayton Miller story makes
interesting reading. If it weren't for the extraordinary
power of self-delusion, commonsense would tell us that
a wave cannot exist in nothing. So Maxwell was right,
light is a transverse electromagnetic wave moving through
a medium, the æther.
"But what is the æther? In
the vacuum of space, each cubic centimetre is teeming
with neutrinos. And since neutrinos are resonant orbiting
systems of charge, like all matter, they will respond
to the electric force by distorting to form a weak electric
dipole aligned with the electric field. The speed of
light in a vacuum is therefore a measure of the delay
in response of the neutrino to the electric force.
"What about the bending of starlight
by the Sun, which discovery raised Einstein to megastar
status? The residual found in the Michelson-Morley experiments
shows that the Earth and all ponderable bodies "drag"
the æther along with them. The bending of starlight
near the Sun is simply the effect expected of an extensive
neutrino atmosphere held to the Sun by gravity. Light
will be slowed in the denser medium causing normal
refraction or bending of light..."
"There is no model of the theory of gravitation today, other than the mathematical form." Richard Feynman
"The machines that are first invented to perform any
particular movement are always the most complex, and succeeding artists generally
discover that with fewer wheels, with fewer principles of motion than had originally
been employed, the same effects may be more easily produced.
"The first philosophical
systems, in the same manner, are always the most complex."
Adam Smith
Plasma Aerodynamics and Boundary Layer Control
In recent decades, researchers have explored the use of plasma actuators to influence the flow of air around a surface. These devices generate a thin layer of ionized gas — plasma — along a wing or body surface by applying a high-voltage electric field across small electrodes embedded in the structure.
When the surrounding air becomes partially ionized, the charged particles accelerate in the electric field and transfer momentum to the neutral air molecules. This process can subtly alter the boundary layer — the thin region of air that clings to the surface of a wing or vehicle.
Under certain conditions, plasma actuators have been shown to:
Delay boundary-layer separation
Reduce aerodynamic drag
Suppress turbulence
Improve lift and stall behaviour on wings
Because the effect is produced electrically rather than mechanically, plasma actuators have no moving parts and can respond rapidly to changing flow conditions. Experimental systems have been investigated for use on aircraft wings, turbine blades, and even automobile surfaces to reduce drag.
While the forces produced by present systems are relatively small, the research demonstrates that ionized gases can interact with airflow in measurable and controllable ways. In principle, such effects could allow subtle aerodynamic control without conventional flaps, control surfaces, or mechanical devices.
These developments illustrate how electromagnetic processes and aerodynamics can interact in ways that were only lightly explored in earlier decades.
Eric Laithwaite, Gyroscopes, and the 'Abominable Knowmen'
Eric Roberts Laithwaite 1921-1997 was a British electrical engineer and professor of engineering best known as the 'Father of Maglev' for his development of the Linear Induction Motor and Maglev rail system.
He gave a lecture at the Royal Institution which was televised by the BBC in 1974. This can still be found on YouTube, and is well worth viewing. Fascinating about this lecture was the apparent demonstration of weight loss shown by gyroscopes. Laithwaite did not claim to have invented an anti-gravity machine. He merely pointed out that the laws of Newtonian physics do not seem to apply to objects when moving like a gyroscope! All the same, following the publication of his research in this field, many people did contact him about 'antigravity' effects. He was always cautious in his responses, but nevertheless critical of those who dismiss such anomalous effects out of hand.
Laithwaite referred to such people as 'The Abominable Knowmen'. These are the people who simply 'know' that what Laithwaite highlights is 'of no interest' because it has already been 'explained'. The trouble being that explaining something away is quite different from explaining it, as the iconoclastic philosopher Charles Forte was wont to say. Laithwaite was always keen to remind people of what science is really about – observation, exploration, curiosity, wonder, and the occasional flash of insight.
The fact that an
opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever
that it is not utterly absurd; indeed in view of the
silliness of the majority of mankind, a widespread belief
is more likely to be foolish than sensible." Bertrand
Russell
The mysterious electron
Despite
the importance of the electron, we know surprisingly little about it. For example,
we don't know whether it's a wave or a particle, as it displays properties consistent
with both (hence the term wave-particle duality) and, according to conventional
wisdom, it has no structure.
"All attempts to measure
the radius of the electron have failed! All we know is that the radius is less
than 10-18 m; that is, its radius is one hundred million times smaller than that
of the atom. All the known properties of the electron are consistent with the
assumption that its radius is zero. As far as we know, the electron has no structure."
The above is quoted from the London Science
Museum web site.
Ralph
Sansbury
Independent New York researcher Ralph Sansbury has proposed a model in which the electron is not fundamental and indivisible, but instead composed of smaller charged constituents he termed subtrons, orbiting within the classical radius of the electron.
In this framework, simple calculations imply extremely high internal velocities far exceeding the conventional speed of light constraint if interpreted literally. Sansbury argued that such internal dynamics would imply effectively instantaneous electromagnetic cohesion at subatomic scales.
Whether or not his conclusions withstand scrutiny, the broader point is provocative: any successful theory of gravity must ultimately account for how matter maintains coherence across space. The question of action at a distance remains central to that challenge.
Rupert Sheldrake, a professor at Cambridge University,
has popularised the idea of morphic fields. To oversimplify, he theorises that
memory is inherent in nature, and that all natural systems, from crytals to animals,
inherit a memory of their kind. Each system is shaped by this pooled or collective
memory. It is a view, of course, that has parallels with the Electric Universe,
where there is a complex dance of electric particles and sub-particles.
From the link:"The
implication is that many phenomena which until now have been regarded as purely
statistical in character — such as the distribution of fluctuations in the momentary
rates of radioactivity measured in a sample — are somehow controlled or at least
strongly influenced by an astrophysical factor..."
If
radioactive decay is linked to astronomical cycles, as these scientists argue,
then this could challenge conventional chronologies. Additionally, if the solar
system has suffered upheavals in recent millenia, especially of an intense electrical
nature as many catastrophists contend, then traditional dating methods become
almost obsolete.
"No
hand can make the clock strike for me the hours that are passed." Byron
The Diehold Foundation, Douglas Vogt, and Solar Cycles
The Diehold Foundation was founded by Douglas Vogt, who passed away in 2023. His work focused on polar reversals and ice ages — both well-established features of Earth’s geological record. Where Vogt diverged from mainstream climate explanations was in his view that long-term temperature variations are driven principally by solar cycles rather than anthropogenic CO2. This has parallels with the Electric Universe and Electric Sun models, which place greater emphasis on solar variability and electromagnetic influences than purely atmospheric narratives.
Vogt was sceptical that human-produced CO2 is the dominant climate driver. Carbon dioxide constitutes roughly 0.04% of the atmosphere, and large exchanges of CO2 occur naturally via ocean-atmosphere cycling, biological activity and volcanism. From this perspective, he questioned whether reductions in human emissions alone can meaningfully regulate climate over long timescales. While many climate scientists maintain that anthropogenic forcing plays a measurable role in recent warming, others argue that solar variability and longer cycles deserve more weight. The debate is often presented as settled, but the relative contributions of different drivers remain contested at the margins and are still actively researched.
Predictably, scepticism toward carbon-centric policy has produced a spectrum of responses — from straightforward criticism of taxation and regulation to broader institutional distrust. Some go further into speculative territory, pointing to deep underground military installations (DUMBs) as evidence that powerful actors anticipate future disruption. Whatever one makes of such claims, it is worth separating structural questions about incentives and policy from narratives that move beyond what can be demonstrated.
“In the sciences, the authority of thousands of opinions is not worth as much as one tiny spark of reason in an individual man.” Galileo Galilei
Vogt’s Solar Clock and Polar Reversals
Central to Vogt’s thesis was the idea that the Sun follows a long-term “clock cycle,” which he believed could be traced through geological and historical markers. In his model, the cycle crosses a neutral point roughly every 12,068 years, with a full oscillation of 24,136 years corresponding to two geomagnetic reversals.
On this timeline, Vogt suggested that humanity may be approaching another transition. He proposed that a polar shift could occur around 2046, potentially bringing severe climatic and geophysical disturbance. In his more dramatic descriptions, he argued that a rapid shift could coincide with a short-term disruption of Earth’s rotation, leading to catastrophic ocean displacement and widespread upheaval — an event he sometimes framed in biblical language as a “Day of Judgment.” He also maintained that preparation and mitigation could reduce the severity of some impacts.
Catastrophic cycles and end-time predictions are nothing new, and caution is warranted when precise dates are proposed. Nonetheless, the broader themes Vogt emphasised — solar variability, magnetic weakening, and geomagnetic instability — are increasingly discussed across both academic and independent research circles.
Space Weather
The work of SpaceWeatherNews.com (formerly Suspicious0bservers.org) overlaps in part with Vogt’s emphasis on solar monitoring. The organisation tracks solar flares, coronal mass ejections and geomagnetic disturbances with close attention.
In May 2023, auroras were observed at unusually low latitudes, including Spain. Some observers noted that the associated solar activity did not appear exceptional by standard flare classifications, raising questions about whether Earth’s magnetic shielding may be weakening. The geomagnetic field has shown measurable decline since the nineteenth century, with some estimates placing noticeable reduction beginning around 1850.
Whether magnetic weakening contributes meaningfully to recent warming trends — often attributed primarily to anthropogenic greenhouse forcing — remains debated. The broader question is whether increased solar variability, magnetic field variation, and long-term cycles could signal the approach of a more substantial geomagnetic transition.
At present, definitive conclusions remain elusive. What is clear is that Earth’s climate and magnetic systems are dynamic, and solar influences form an integral part of that complexity.