Hunting for the induction of Gravity

Hans Christian Ørsted

It is often said that if you are looking for truth, you must go back to the source. In this case, the source is an experiment performed by a Dane called Hans Christian Ørsted.
On 21 April 1820, during a lecture, Ørsted noticed a compass needle deflected from magnetic north when electric current from a battery was switched on and off, confirming a direct relationship between electricity and magnetism.

This experiment became the bulwark, the foundation of our theories and concepts of electromagnetism, the interplay between magnetism and electricity.

What was NOT discovered at that time nor since, is whether there was a simultaneous induction of gravity whenever the current was switched on and off. This is not as amazing an idea as it sounds. Scientists have believed since the age of empiricism that all the forces of the Universe are in some way inextricably linked, yet to this day no one has demonstrated the link between gravity and the electromagnetic.
It is not is surprising that gravitational induction may have passed unnoticed. The force of gravity is 1 x 10 to the 39th times weaker than magnetism, so that if the forces are proportionate, the induction of gravity of his experiment would be very hard to measure indeed.

The question is, with the advances in power and precision that we have in our possession today, could we repeat the experiment to confirm one way or the other if there is a gravitational induction?

Space Elevator - The Strategic Argument

"General Sickles, this is in some respects higher ground than that to the rear, but there is still higher in front of you, and if you keep on advancing you will find constantly higher ground all the way to the mountains."
-Major General George Meade, Commanding the Army of the Potomac, July 2, 1863

"Space elevator" ...since Google Alert became available, I have been informed whenever someone comments on this topic, providing they publish it on the web. In all that time I have never come across the obvious, darker side as to why the space elevator will be an imperative to powerful nations that are continually seeking a strategic advantage over their perceived adversaries.

When the Soviets launched Sputnik in the late 50's, the the United States was aghast, realizing only then that a perceived enemy was on their way to taking the strategic and military high ground.
Although it seems obvious to many individuals, perhaps I ought to elucidate: "High ground" in a military sense in very advantageous, because your opponent has to climb out of the gravity well in order to engage you, whereas you have the advantage of utilizing the gravity well against your opponent. In other words, it's easier to chuck a spear down hill, rather than uphill. The more resources you have available on the high ground, the greater are your chances of success.

Of course, the outcome of the Sputnik story is history. The US was galvanized out of its strategic torpor and beat the Soviets by putting a man on the moon before they did. As the space age progressed, both sides realized something significant: It would take a ruinous amount of resources to place and maintain orbital nuclear weapons outside Earth's gravity well. Both sides resolved the issue by banning weapons in space, included in the Partial Test Ban Treaty and the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. Besides, ballistic missiles lobbed in sub-orbital fashion was - and remains - an effective nuclear deterrent, minimizing the need for 'higher ground'.

Welcome to the dawning age of the space elevator.
Conceived in 1895, a Russian scientist named Konstantin Tsiolkovsky was inspired by the Eiffel Tower in Paris to consider a tower that reached all the way into space. He noted that a mass significant enough in size orbiting Earth in a geostationary manner, attached to the Earth at the equator in some fashion would make it possible to literally hoist people and material up and down, out of Earth's gravity well and into space - a modern-day Jacob's Ladder.

Fast-forward to present day, and we find ourselves on the cusp of realizing the space elevator may soon be a reality. Technological advances in carbon fiber research allow for strands as hard as diamond, making possible the magic 'rope' needed to affix satellite to Earth.

Since I started monitoring "space elevator" comments on the web, there has been marked increase in the chatter on the subject. The topic is slowly becoming part of common shared consciousness, making it ever more probable that it is an issue that will come to the forefront in the foreseeable future.

Were a single nation-state to take upon itself the task of building a space elevator, competing states ought to sit up and pay close attention: The 'higher ground' paradigm will be reborn, because it takes significantly less resources to hoist men and materials out of the gravity well than the present practice of putting objects and men aloft in chemical rockets. The implications ought to be obvious. Unlimited quantities of resources placed outside the Earth's gravity will afford a huge strategic and military advantage to the nation-state that builds the space elevator.

Perhaps the only sane approach would be an international effort, securing the means of lift out of Earth's gravity well for all nations. It ought to be easy to place under monitoring restraint, affording everyone access to space.

Of course there is the caveat that, once a given nation state has enough resources in space, who knows what they'll do with it?

Dark Energy - Non-space induced Gravity?

Dark energy: Particles in intergalactic space reach exceedingly high speeds and on those rare occasions when they collide, these produce temperatures of millions of degrees.
At the moment of collision a tiny amount of gravity/non-space is momentarily produced but collapses immediately, lacking any means of sustaining itself. However, by virtue of the volume of colliding particles over a vast region, a 'field' of gravity is maintained. Might this explain dark energy?

Vacuum, mass/energy & gravity

It struck me this morning. The simplest concept I have ever thought of, so simple I had to write it down in case I forget it:

The foci of an absolute vacuum gravitationally draws in space and converts it into mass.

Energy is an observational byproduct, with the caveat that if the absolute vacuum becomes large and powerful enough to become a closed loop, it will trap all energy, making the phenomenon unobservable by direct means.

This is in accordance with the absolute vacuum, as described in "A Vacuum Sun"
A proto-star, a concentration of mass inaugurating nuclear fusion, or it's equivalent. In the core of the proto-star, electrons and protons are disassociated and organize within their like camps, electrons with electrons, protons with protons.
It is the nature of these like particles to repel one another, leaving an absolute vacuum in their wake.
The attractive force of absolute vacuum is indistinguishable from gravity.
The new star expands, leaving this absolute vacuum in its wake.
The repelling camps of electrons and protons create a magnetic bottle, maintaining the absolute vacuum within as long there is energy to sustain it.
The magnetic bottle surrounding the absolute vacuum interior is sustained by the gravitationally imploding mass/energy/space which continually implodes upon the interior absolute vacuum.
The exterior boundary of the absolute vacuum is a factory, fusing space into electrons and protons - basic elements of matter. If able to escape the boundary, they may associate, creating hydrogen atoms.

Consequently, space is not only being gravitationally 'bent' towards a given star, it is also being consumed with mass as a byproduct.
See also "Non-Space, Is Gravity being Induced? A Challenge to Plasma & Neutrino Physicists"