Posted: Nov 08, 2016 9:41 pm
The_Metatron wrote:Before anyone continues here, you better back up those numbers. I'm not even going to waste the chalk on my chalkboard on numbers you pulled out of thin air.
Erm, any particular number that strikes you as wrong? If you're a hardened scientist, you
- might have 1 or 2 committed to memory already , or are familiar with the numbers
- know offhand exactly how to rework them out
- enjoy working them out
- at your desktop can do it without even thinking, your fingers should dance to the numbers and math operators by themselves.
Where the exercise in field density will get you is that it is trivial to create a local electrostatic field of a strength that would easily negate whatever it is you're selling. Why do we not see gravity negated in the presence of strong electrostatic fields?
Because the interior of the Earth is a electron plasma that will move rapidly to compensate any excess electrostatic fields in the interior, at the surface, and beyound. I've already described this in a prior post. This compensation tends to yield a smooth inverse square attraction field.
Also, you have failed to explain why gravity is not polar while electrostatic fields are. Gravity can only attract. It has never been observed to do otherwise. Electrostatic fields, however, can either attract or repel.
I've already responded to this in a prior post.
I'll add electric forces just tend to create attraction between solid celestial objects. Electric repulsion tends to be confined to small objects and fluids. That is the nature of electric force.
