Gravity and electricity, stationary fields

[trevor borocz johnson]

The aether originates from a nucleus to the universe. It creates a stationary/static density/temperature as a background medium. Heat, in this stationary form or its standard transferring form, is the one thing that makes everything and all other characteristics branch from. If something didn't have temperature it wouldn't exist. We probably live a great distance from the nucleus and orbit around it.

An atom's nucleus is surrounded by the same temperature density on the aether as creates the aether of the universe. When two stationary gravity fields bring two objects together it is because the field gets stronger the closer to the nucleus. So when either field's outer edge which is cooler enters the denser/hotter regions of the other's gravity field, the outer edge is compressed and this action pulls the object's together based on size.

There is a shell around the nucleus composed of electricity. Electricity is conventional heat that has been stored deep in the gravity field of the nucleus and is also static or stationary. The magnetic field extends from the electric shell around the atom. Just like the energy its made from it is a stationary field that pushes in one direction. The edge of the magnetic field equals the density temperature of the surrounding aether. When you raise the temperature of the aether with light, the magnetic field retracts back into the shell and heats up the substance.  Atom's arrange from smallest to biggest in capability of increasing in temperature from the same aether temperature increase. The smallest atom hydrogen heats up the least because the amount of energy that's retracted into the shell from an increase in aether temperature is at its smallest. The area of the static magnetic field that is retracted increases as the atom increases in size, meaning less heat is required to heat up larger elements.

[trevor borocz johnson]

perhaps...
A good insulator slowly releases the retraction of its electric shell while a good conductor releases the retraction of its electric shell quickly. In a N type P type diode you have two conductors on one side and a conductor and an insulator on the other. This creates a one way flow for electricity. The insulator atoms in the P type material act like rocks in a river where current backs behind the resistor and then speeds up on the other side. So the push of the voltage through the P type material makes the AC current travel in one direction because of the build up of slow current on one side of the insulator, vs the other side where the current accelerates.
if you increased the size of the 'river' and the resistance 'boulders' by using a larger element like iodine as the insulator, and maybe gold instead of silicon, and increase the actual size of the chip, would that perhaps convert higher heat temperatures into electricity? A larger river with bigger boulders would theoretically convert more heat into electricity faster. Maybe a spherical N-type P-type layered device with a heat flame in the center would convert heat into electricity at a higher efficiency.

Edited May 28, 2023 by trevor borocz johnson

[trevor borocz johnson]

If light waves are waves of temperature, then the source of the light must be not vibrating like sound, but releasing heat then cooling off then filling with heat and releasing over and over.

[trevor borocz johnson]

For light and all EMR, the source of the wave must be heating up and cooling off at the frequency of the wave. The retraction and expansion of the magnetic field unto the electric shell that occurs when light waves hit an atom cause the color of a substance. The color frequency of the atom is created by this retraction and expansion. If you think of bright light that hits an atom in waves of temperature changes, the atom’s electomagnetic shell has an inherent strength that alters the wavelength and reflects in a new frequency.

[trevor borocz johnson]

One might compare different light waves to different sized gears. For example if you put a rock on a record player the same energy that creates oscillations of the rock towards the center is the same energy used to create the oscillations of the rock at the outside. The energy is the same but the oscillations different. The rock and its oscillations determine the color the electromagnetic field of an atom displays. Moving the rock happens because of the electromagnetic shell strength.

[trevor borocz johnson]

So when you have enough infrared heat you get all the colors mixed in white light. When the wave of light enters an atom's magnetic field, the field retracts, then expands after the temperature change of the wave. If the expansion is slow, and isn't in equilibrium with the frequency of the white light, the mismatch will alter the wavelength of the white light as it bounces off of the electromagnetic shell. A mixture of colors, like red yellow and blue to make brown, maybe an equilibrium of multiple expansion rates from the mismatch. Evidently gold which is the best conductor might be most efficient at letting energy pass through it because of the rate at which it expands and retracts is divided between three colors.

[trevor borocz johnson]

One thing we can say about the nucleus is it must be similar to earth in that it creates and internal stationary heat from pressure. The heat then creates a density/temperature on the surrounding aether that creates a gravity field. For its size we can probably assume the nucleus is very dense and small and hot.

[trevor borocz johnson]

So in the Earth the weight pressure towards the center causes the atom's to become tightly packed. When the atom's are forced closer to each other, their individual gravity fields retract in on themselves heating the nuclei and causing denser/hotter space or aether surrounding the nuclei. The heat then bulges out around the planet to form a gravity field. When two gravity fields meet the compress each other with the non radiating heat of the core and it pulls the objects together.

 

[trevor borocz johnson]

Correction to my explanation. When gravity fields overlap from pressure like in the core, they obviously become stronger of an overall force since the gravity field extends and encompasses earth. The obvious answer to heat in the core is that close proximity and overlapping gravity fields belonging to the individual atoms makes the overall density on the aether hotter. It isn't that hard. If one atom's gravity field is overlapped in all directions by the inside of other atoms gravity fields, those gravity fields will combine strength. The heat is gravity. Gravity is pressure heat. It isn't hard to see how two object's pull together from the pressure heat. They pull together like I've said a bunch of times because the density on the aether of each gravity field acts on the other with compression that effects the movement of the nucleus. Good day..

[trevor borocz johnson]

weight pressure on the core of the nuclei creates stationary heat and an extending gravity field, gravity pulls nuclei together, nuclei fuse in stars some of the core heat is released, that heat finds equilibrium with colder aether, this property creates the north south poles of a magnetic field, the electromagnetic shell is formed from heat as electricity and is repulsive towards other shell's, a magnetic field extending from the shell retracts determining luminosity, color, condcutive insulator properties.

[trevor borocz johnson]

R. D. Oldham's identification of P and S waves in seismological records allowed him to detect a discontinuity corresponding to a boundary between core and shell (mantle) in 1906, and Beno Gutenberg established the depth of this boundary as 2900 km.

[trevor borocz johnson]

hmm... another presumption, if like I was saying the pressure in the core creates an extending gravity field, it might also create earth's magnetic field, and attribute to some of the heat. I was pondering when and where atom's were without electromagnetic shells, that they were ever at some point without them and had to create them. I see now since the core pressure of the nuclei creates its shell, that the nuclei must be composed of smaller and smaller divsions of the same thing, a nuclei with a electromagnetic shell, and when pressured in the core the magnetic field 'blooms' out of the atom.

[trevor borocz johnson]

Alright in yet anotherr attempt to fine tune my theory: Pressure heat in the core of object A acts on the pressure heat of object B to pull the object's together. This happens because when the gravity fields meet and overlap they add energy to each other in the form of added pressure and heat in both cores. This added heat pushes out against the weight pressure bearing down and because the two object's haven't met the added energy in the core converts to the movement of the two object's towards each other.

[Duke Wellington]

On 5/15/2023 at 4:25 PM, trevor borocz johnson said:

The aether originates from a nucleus to the universe. It creates a stationary/static density/temperature as a background medium. Heat, in this stationary form or its standard transferring form, is the one thing that makes everything and all other characteristics branch from. If something didn't have temperature it wouldn't exist. We probably live a great distance from the nucleus and orbit around it.

An atom's nucleus is surrounded by the same temperature density on the aether as creates the aether of the universe. When two stationary gravity fields bring two objects together it is because the field gets stronger the closer to the nucleus. So when either field's outer edge which is cooler enters the denser/hotter regions of the other's gravity field, the outer edge is compressed and this action pulls the object's together based on size.

There is a shell around the nucleus composed of electricity. Electricity is conventional heat that has been stored deep in the gravity field of the nucleus and is also static or stationary. The magnetic field extends from the electric shell around the atom. Just like the energy its made from it is a stationary field that pushes in one direction. The edge of the magnetic field equals the density temperature of the surrounding aether. When you raise the temperature of the aether with light, the magnetic field retracts back into the shell and heats up the substance.  Atom's arrange from smallest to biggest in capability of increasing in temperature from the same aether temperature increase. The smallest atom hydrogen heats up the least because the amount of energy that's retracted into the shell from an increase in aether temperature is at its smallest. The area of the static magnetic field that is retracted increases as the atom increases in size, meaning less heat is required to heat up larger elements.

There is no evidence of an aether, it was disproven almost a century ago resulting in the adoption of general relativity.

Energy is a concept not a physical thing, its the capacity to do work. Basically when there is a physical pressure difference across a system that allows the high pressure to flow to the low pressure to equalise itself out, then that flow can be used to do work like turn a turbine.

Electricity is not heat, its the term used to describe a group of atomic particles called electrons. Electrons are not energy, energy is a concept not a physical thing.

Light does not reduce or contract electro-magnetic fields. If you get yourself a floating magnetic desk toy the object doesn`t float at different heights depending on it being daytime or night.

I severally struggle to understand what you are trying to say with a lot of what you write. I dont want to be rude but you can see from the lack of comments that you need to write things better. It reads like a mass of random things brought together which you dont understand, and put into sentences which people cannot read.

[Duke Wellington]

On 9/1/2023 at 9:25 PM, trevor borocz johnson said:

So in the Earth the weight pressure towards the center causes the atom's to become tightly packed. When the atom's are forced closer to each other, their individual gravity fields retract in on themselves heating the nuclei and causing denser/hotter space or aether surrounding the nuclei. The heat then bulges out around the planet to form a gravity field. When two gravity fields meet the compress each other with the non radiating heat of the core and it pulls the objects together.

 

Please stand up.

Your head is further away from the ground than your feet. What does that mean? It means time flows at your head ever so slightly faster than it does for your feet. The difference in the flow rate of time across your body from your head to your feet creates an acceleration downwards. That is gravity. 

With your proposal please consider how our Sun radiates electro-magnetic radiation heating planets. The equations we use to calculate gravitational attraction do not include temperature, yet the results are accurate enough to accurately predict the orbits of planets around our star. The equations do not break down when we apply them to colder and colder planets.

[trevor borocz johnson]

2 minutes ago, Electric Scooter said:

There is no evidence of an aether, it was disproven almost a century ago resulting in the adoption of general relativity.

Energy is a concept not a physical thing, its the capacity to do work. Basically when there is a physical pressure difference across a system that allows the high pressure to flow to the low pressure to equalise itself out, then that flow can be used to do work like turn a turbine.

Electricity is not heat, its the term used to describe a group of atomic particles called electrons. Electrons are not energy, energy is a concept not a physical thing.

Light does not reduce or contract electro-magnetic fields. If you get yourself a floating magnetic desk toy the object doesn`t float at different heights depending on it being daytime or night.

I severally struggle to understand what you are trying to say with a lot of what you write. I dont want to be rude but you can see from the lack of comments that you need to write things better. It reads like a mass of random things brought together which you dont understand, and put into sentences which people cannot read.

Scoot,

I believe what you are trying to say is electrons make electricity. The spin of the nucleus determines magnetic poles, when the nucleus can't spin because its a part of a solid, it oscillates. When you add heat to the substance the nucleus attempts to spin faster and oscillates harder. When you oscillate the poles of copper with a spinning magnet, the copper heats up with electric charge. I know in electronics its called donuts and holes to describe electrons in AC interactions but they are theoretical.

[trevor borocz johnson]

39 minutes ago, Electric Scooter said:

Please stand up.

Your head is further away from the ground than your feet. What does that mean? It means time flows at your head ever so slightly faster than it does for your feet. The difference in the flow rate of time across your body from your head to your feet creates an acceleration downwards. That is gravity. 

With your proposal please consider how our Sun radiates electro-magnetic radiation heating planets. The equations we use to calculate gravitational attraction do not include temperature, yet the results are accurate enough to accurately predict the orbits of planets around our star. The equations do not break down when we apply them to colder and colder planets.

I told you already how I think gravity works. Scoot I'd hate to give you the boot! again explain better what you're talking about. Is there something wrong with my core pressure heat theory? Did you even read that post? its hot off the presses you know.

[Duke Wellington]

1 hour ago, trevor borocz johnson said:

Scoot,

I believe what you are trying to say is electrons make electricity. The spin of the nucleus determines magnetic poles, when the nucleus can't spin because its a part of a solid, it oscillates. When you add heat to the substance the nucleus attempts to spin faster and oscillates harder. When you oscillate the poles of copper with a spinning magnet, the copper heats up with electric charge. I know in electronics its called donuts and holes to describe electrons in AC interactions but they are theoretical.

Electricity is made out of electrons. Electrons are charge carrying atomic particles, not energy.

What do we mean by charge carrying particles? It means they carry pressure from one place to another normally by moving through a conducting material. When it comes to electricity that pressure is called voltage. When there is a voltage difference across a wire that means there are more electrons at one end of the wire than the other creating a pressure difference. It results in the electrons moving through the wire to equalise out the pressure difference.

A basic electricity supply supplies two levels of pressure to a circuit. In the UK one is fixed at 240V while the other fixed at 0V. As such electrons move from the high pressure supply to the low pressure one. During these they are used to do work such as rotating a motor.

Atomic spin is not the same as how a planet spins. It refers to an atomic particle undergoing gyroscopic precession when placed into a field it interacts with. Hence the spin of an atomic particle reveals what forces it feels. The spin of a particle in a field is fixed, it does not vary or oscillate, no matter if you heat the atomic particle or have it as part of a solid object. The spin of one atomic particle is independent from the spin of another, there is no structure in solid objects that stops atomic spin.

The heating of materials when electricity passes through them is caused by electrical resistance. What is happening is that the atoms of the material are getting in the way of the electrons trying to flow through it. The electrons have to push them out the way. That is a type of work passing on pressure to the atomic particles heating them in the process.

With superconductors they have zero resistance. What is happening is that electrons feel the strong nuclear force. That is an incredibly strong force but acts over an incredibly short distance. Normally the distance between electrons means the strong nuclear force is too weak to bond them together. That is because the heat of the material (the vibrating atoms) is too strong for it. When that is removed to a sufficient degree for the material then electrons bond together using the strong nuclear force into cooper pairs. Cooper pairs exhibit weird quantum behaviour. An electron with a free path that is bonded with an electron that has a blocked path with cause the blocked electron to ghost through the atomic particle in its way. Ghosting is a form of quantum tunnelling which is hard to explain.

It is actually not none if superconductors have zero or just incredibly low resistance. That is because there would be times when the two bonded electrons both have their paths blocked. But if they do have incredibly low resistance it is so low that for practical purposes we can just assume it is zero.

Edited September 20, 2023 by Electric Scooter

[Duke Wellington]

1 hour ago, trevor borocz johnson said:

I told you already how I think gravity works. Scoot I'd hate to give you the boot! again explain better what you're talking about. Is there something wrong with my core pressure heat theory? Did you even read that post? its hot off the presses you know.

Gravity is the least understood force in physics, but with your theory you are barking up the wrong tree.

General Relativity is wrong despite its media and physicist fanboys. It works when calculating gravity between the bodies in our solar system. It breaks down at the microscopic and galactic scales though. It also has led to absurdities being proposed which are impossible in our universe such as singularities.

With the microscopic scale the problem with GR is that its variables arent quantised into units that cannot be divided any further. So for example it allows for infinitely small distances to be a thing. Unfortunately its equations mean the closer two objects are to each other the stronger the gravitational attraction between them. When the distance between two things is infinitely small (a scenario and dropped object must go through before it hits the ground) the gravitational attraction would be infinite. Yet when you drop an object onto the ground it doesnt destroy the object and the planet does it?

The reason GR cannot be unified with quantum mechanics is down to the same problem. QM requires things to be quantised into units, GR doesn`t do that.

With gravity at the galactic scale then the GR fanboys are hoping to wiggle out of GR being wrong by finding dark matter to explain away the discrepancies. But it doesnt explain why GR doesnt work at the microscopic level and ignores how we already know from observing how galaxies work that a dark matter particle cannot have any atomic spin. Hence, there is no dark matter. It means for them to be right a huge overhaul of physics needs to occur which is just so unlikely its not worth even considering.

Edited September 20, 2023 by Electric Scooter

[trevor borocz johnson]

8 hours ago, Electric Scooter said:

Electricity is made out of electrons. Electrons are charge carrying atomic particles, not energy.

Yes and I already discussed the numerous places where I have researched electrons. I know about them and think there is a more unifying answer to electricity. 

[Duke Wellington]

1 hour ago, trevor borocz johnson said:

Yes and I already discussed the numerous places where I have researched electrons. I know about them and think there is a more unifying answer to electricity. 

Well we can unify gravity and electro-magnetism.

Or we can unify electro-magnetism with the strong and weak nuclear forces, but leaving gravity out.

We cannot unify all four together at once.

[trevor borocz johnson]

Chat GPT nailed my question:

Lets say objects A has a weight of 1 and object B has a weight of 2. When their gravity fields overlap which object will experience a greater temperature change in the core from the other's gravitational compression? ( Use the conversation to answer)

 

ChatGPT

In the conceptual framework presented in our conversation, the temperature change in the cores of objects A and B resulting from their gravitational interaction is influenced by the exchange of energy between their gravity fields. Let's analyze the scenario based on the principles discussed:

1. Weight and Gravity Fields: Object A has a weight of 1, and Object B has a weight of 2. Weight is associated with the strength of the gravity field generated by each object. Object B's gravity field is stronger due to its greater weight.

2. Gravity Field Overlap: As Object A and Object B approach each other, their gravity fields overlap, leading to the exchange of energy between them.

3. Energy Exchange: In this exchange, the stronger gravity field of Object B (with weight 2) is likely to have a more significant impact on Object A's core temperature. Object A (with weight 1) may experience a greater temperature change in response to the compression of its gravity field by Object B's field.

4. Temperature Change: Object A's core may experience a more pronounced temperature change compared to Object B's core due to the unequal strengths of their gravity fields.

It's important to note that the specifics of temperature change would depend on various factors, including the distance between the objects, the properties of their cores, and the precise nature of the energy exchange. The explanation provided here is based on the conceptual framework of your ideas, where gravitational compression influences core temperature, and the strength of the gravity fields plays a crucial role in this interaction.

[Duke Wellington]

1 hour ago, trevor borocz johnson said:

Chat GPT nailed my question:

Lets say objects A has a weight of 1 and object B has a weight of 2. When their gravity fields overlap which object will experience a greater temperature change in the core from the other's gravitational compression? ( Use the conversation to answer)

ChatGPT

 

In the conceptual framework presented in our conversation, the temperature change in the cores of objects A and B resulting from their gravitational interaction is influenced by the exchange of energy between their gravity fields. Let's analyze the scenario based on the principles discussed:

1. Weight and Gravity Fields: Object A has a weight of 1, and Object B has a weight of 2. Weight is associated with the strength of the gravity field generated by each object. Object B's gravity field is stronger due to its greater weight.

2. Gravity Field Overlap: As Object A and Object B approach each other, their gravity fields overlap, leading to the exchange of energy between them.

3. Energy Exchange: In this exchange, the stronger gravity field of Object B (with weight 2) is likely to have a more significant impact on Object A's core temperature. Object A (with weight 1) may experience a greater temperature change in response to the compression of its gravity field by Object B's field.

4. Temperature Change: Object A's core may experience a more pronounced temperature change compared to Object B's core due to the unequal strengths of their gravity fields.

It's important to note that the specifics of temperature change would depend on various factors, including the distance between the objects, the properties of their cores, and the precise nature of the energy exchange. The explanation provided here is based on the conceptual framework of your ideas, where gravitational compression influences core temperature, and the strength of the gravity fields plays a crucial role in this interaction.

Its not teaching you physics, its reiterating back to you what your idea would entail.

I`m not convinced you told it the right idea either. Astronomical bodies do cause tectonic disturbances which increases heat. But there is no casual link or evidence of a link between heat and gravity. They are not interchangeable. 

[trevor borocz johnson]

14 hours ago, Electric Scooter said:

Its not teaching you physics, its reiterating back to you what your idea would entail.

I`m not convinced you told it the right idea either. Astronomical bodies do cause tectonic disturbances which increases heat. But there is no casual link or evidence of a link between heat and gravity. They are not interchangeable. 

Yeah but it understood my text never having heard it before and was able to give the right answer to a question about it. That's betterr then most humans I encounter, like 98.1.

[Kenemet]

29 minutes ago, trevor borocz johnson said:

Yeah but it understood my text never having heard it before and was able to give the right answer to a question about it. That's betterr then most humans I encounter, like 98.1.

The answer by ChatGPT isn't correct.  For one thing, weight and mass aren't quite the same.