Cosmology View

My views on Cosmology and Physics

site navigation menu


Review of Cosmos Without Gravitation

Section II

II. Attraction Between Two Atoms. - Inertia. - Attraction of Bodies Toward the Earth. - The Time of Descent and of Ascent of a Pendulum. - The Effect of Charge on the Weight of a Body


Thorough theoretical and experimental investigations will be necessary to build a new theory in place of the now accepted theory of gravitation. For the present we shall offer only general suggestions.

Attraction between two neutral atoms. Each atom is made up of positive and negative electricity and, though neutral as a whole, may form an electric dipole when subjected to an electric force. Thus, in the theory presented here, this attraction is not due to "inherent gravitational" properties of mass, but instead to the well known electrical properties of attraction. Two dipoles arrange themselves so that the attraction is stronger than their mutual repulsion.
Inertia, or the passive property of matter. "The equality of active and passive, or gravitational and inertial mass was in Newton's system a most remarkable accidental coincidence, something like a miracle. Newton himself decidedly felt it as such" (W. DeSitter).(33)
In Einstein's explanation, inertia and gravitation are not two different properties, but one and the same property viewed from different points in space. According to his illustration, a man in an elevator that is being continuously pulled up by a rope invisible to the man will feel his feet pressed against the bottom of the elevator and will think that he gravitates toward the floor. But someone else observing the situation from the outside in space will judge that there is a fact of inertia; the pulled elevator has to overcome the inertia of the man standing on its floor. If the man in the elevator lets an object fall from his hand, it will approach the floor at an accelerated speed because the elevator is being continuously pulled upward; to the observer on the outside it rises with acceleration.

By this illustration Einstein tried to explain the equivalence of inertia and gravitation. But it is impossible to adopt this explanation for the gravitational effect of the globe: the observer from outside cannot perceive the globe as moving simultaneously in all directions. Einstein sees the difficulty and says: "It is, for instance, impossible to choose a body of reference such that, as judged from it, the gravitational field of the earth (in its entirety) vanishes." (34)

In our explanation the active property is due to one kind of charge in the atom - the attracting (attracted) charge; the passive property, to the opposite charge, which repels (is repelled). Both exist in equal quantities in a neutral atom; this explains the equality of the gravitating and inertial properties of matter.

However, the charges must arrange themselves in such a manner that attraction proceeds: the attracting force overcomes the repelling force because the attracting poles of the dipoles are closer to one another than the repelling poles; when the repelling poles are closer, the atoms (or their combinations in molecules) repel each other, as is the case with gases.

A charged body attracts more strongly than a neutral body because of the presence of free electrons; in dipoles the charges rearrange themselves only a little, but free electrons can rearrange themselves much more.

Attraction of bodies toward the earth. The ionosphere is strongly charged with respect to the "neutral" earth; a potential difference of 100 volts per meter altitude exists near the ground, or a difference in potentials which forces the current through the electric lamps. Does any relation exist between the difference in voltage in the lower atmosphere and the difference in weight ("at the ceiling of a room 3 meters high a kilogram weighs about one milligram less than at the floor" )?
With the altitude a voltage difference per meter is not the same as near the ground, but it accumulates to a high figure: "Between a point ten miles high and the surface of the earth there is an electrical pressure difference of about a hundred and fifty thousand volts." (35)

Neutral bodies consist of both positive and negative charges. Neutral atoms form dipoles along the lines of force of the electric field with poles turned toward the earth and the ionosphere. Is the fall of objects due to their "dipole attraction" and to their movement in an electrical field as dipoles? The proximity to the ground gives its action preference over that of the ionosphere as far as the attracting force is concerned, since the distance between the opposite electric poles of the atomic dipole is much smaller in comparison to its total distance from the ionosphere than from the ground. This means, however, that when objects reach a certain altitude, they would be attracted upward. Meteorites, repelled into space, are apparently charged identically with the upper layer of the ionosphere.

This part of the theory (concerning falling bodies) requires experimentation and exact calculation. It is probable that besides carrying a charge, the ground turns all of its atoms as dipoles toward the ionosphere.(36)

"In contrast to electric and magnetic fields, the gravitational field exhibits a most remarkable property, which is of fundamental importance ... Bodies which are moving under the sole influence of a gravitational field receive an acceleration, which does not in the least depend either on the material or the physical state of the body." (Einstein)(37)
This law is supposed to hold with great accuracy. The velocity of the fall is generally explored with the help of a pendulum; it appears to us that a charged object must fall with a different velocity than a neutral object. This is generally denied. But the denial is based on the observation that there is no difference in the number of swings of a pendulum in a unit of time, in the case where a charged or neutral bob is used. This method may produce inaccurate results. In an accurate method, the falling time and the time of ascent of the pendulum must be measured separately. In the case of a charged body, the increase in the velocity of descent of the pendulum may be accompanied by a decrease in the velocity of ascent, and thus the number of swings in a unit of time would remain the same for charged and non-charged bobs.

In a charged body the attracting and the inertial properties are not equal.
It appears also that the weight of a body increases after it is charged. An experiment made with a piece of hard rubber (ten grams), neutral and again charged by rubbing, on a scale with a sensitivity of one-tenth of a milligram, showed a change in weight of over ten milligrams. This appears to be the result of an induced charge in the bottom (ebony) of the balance (placed on a thick plate of glass). A grounded wire held over the scale with the charged rubber raises the scale. If "gravitation" is an electrical phenomenon, attraction by induced electricity is not an entirely different phenomenon. Nevertheless, this experiment cannot be regarded as conclusive for the present problem.

In the oil-drop experiment the action of the charges may be made equal to the "gravitational" pull: One and the same action is ascribed to two fundamentally different principles.

A photograph may provide the answer to the question of how much a charged drop revolving around a pole of a magnet is influenced by the terrestrial pull.

Would a metal container filled with gas fall (in a vacuum) with the same velocity as a solid piece of metal?


Tthe correct word in the first paragraph (which begins with Attraction) is charge, not electricity.

The atomic nucleus has positive charge while the electron shells have a corresponding number of electrons, for the atom to be neutral.

These shells have their electrons in orbits having a constant radius by the constant electrostatic force between opposite charges. This configuration is very symmetrical, making it very stable, despite any external forces.

It is impossible for the charges in an atom to arrange themselves into a non-symmetrical pattern. The result would be unstable.

This theory requires a new atomic model, where all the characteristics of the electron shells are basis of the periodic table for chemistry must arise from a completely new mechanism.

I expect a new, extremely different mechanism just for gravity, but which also affects  the behaviors used by chemists, would have been resisted in 1936, just like one could expect in 2022.

It is impossible for a neutral atom to become bipolar by an external electric field.
This new theory proposes the necleus can be displaced from is location at the center of the concentric shells.

If the nucleus ever moves, it must take its concentric shells of electrons.

Hydrogen has only 1 electron. It might be possible for the path of a single electron could be affected omentarily by an external electric field, but when it departs from its constant radius orbit, then no stability is possible, so the electon must leave the atom. This voltage would be the first ionization level of hydrogen.

The ionization energy for hydrogen is 1312 kilojoules per mole.

I believe it is pointless to show images of all the elements from 2 to 118, just to demonstrate the nucleus cannot move outsidet the concentric electron shells to somehow present a positive charge at one side of an atom. This bipolar behavior is impossible for accepted atomic models, both Standard Model and Structured Atomic Model.

CwG proposes a new atomic model. This bipolar atomic behaviorl is not viable.

later, text begins:

"In Einstein's ..."

Einstein clearly did not understand gravity.

His conclusions should be removed from physics. Relativity used only a gravitational field, so it ignored Newton's equation for the force of gravity, when space-time ignored the effect on the other mass and  also ignored when an observer having a charge must be subject to electromagnetism.

Earlier, CwG had an odd statement of balling all matter. I suspect that mistake could arise after the acceptance of of relativity.

2. My free on-line book covered the many impacts of both papers published in 1905 by Einstein.

Einstein's Mistakes with Forces and Light

Go to Table of Contents, to read a specific section.

last change 04/20/2022