Further thoughts on the Induction of Gravity

Hans Christian Ørsted with assistant. Notice compass on the table

It is often said that if one is determined to find truth, then go back to the source. In this case, the source is an accidental experiment performed by a Danish scientist 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 underpinnings of our theoretical and applied sciences.

What was NOT discovered at that time nor since, is whether there was a simultaneous induction of gravity. 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 a direct relationship between gravity and the electromagnetic.
It is not is surprising that gravitational induction may have passed unnoticed for so long. The force of gravity is 1 x 10 to the 39 times weaker than magnetism, so that if the forces are proportionate, the induction of gravity of Ørsted's experiment would be very hard to measure indeed.

With the advances in our ability to produce large electrical discharges, such as a z-pinch, combined with a laser optical precision capable of monitoring the slightest gravitational disturbance of a beam, would it not be possible to repeat the experiment and confirm one way or the other if there is a gravitational induction? To my knowledge this has not yet been attempted, which is surprising considering what is at stake.

Since I have offered a means to make my proposal falsifiable, I will briefly explain the rudiments of gravitational induction:
Gravitational induction may be brought about by the temporary 'tearing' of the space-fabric. These momentary 'rips' may be considered absolute vacuums, or non-space. Put simply, non-space can be considered the opposite end of the black hole singularity concept, in that the absolute vacuum is an absence of mass/energy rather than a concentration thereof. The only way we can determine the existence of an absolute vacuum is by the behavior of the space-fabric surrounding it. If you have difficulty understanding the concept, think of it like this; 'hollow' is a space with nothing in it. 'Empty' is a volume with no space in it. The space-fabric attempts to annihilate the absolute vacuum, and the nature of this implosion is gravitational. Hence, we have an instances in nature where mass/energy/space may be gravitationally attracted without a corresponding quantity of mass.

If gravity is being induced, then several pieces of natures puzzle fall together without calling upon extraordinary additional particles or other intangible subatomic forces:

• 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 vast regions of space, a 'field' of gravity is maintained. Might this not explain the phenomenon that we call 'dark energy'?

• Red Shift: Entertaining the above-mentioned, that it is the collision of particles that are inducing gravity, could it be that as one looks towards the event horizon, the 'weight' of so-called empty space begins to accumulate, causing the spectral redshift?

• I have also spent considerable time wondering why our Sun behaves as it does, but that is the topic of another article on another forum

Curiously, looking back on my thirty years of speculation I appear to have begun my journey, throwing myself into the complex realm of solar observations, only to find the possible falsifiable answer in Ørsted's accidental experiment, performed 190 years ago. Is life not wonderful?

Your thoughts and comments will be appreciated,

Stephen Goodfellow

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?

Non-Space, Is Gravity being Induced? A Challenge to Plasma & Neutrino Physicists

Here's the text:
Non-Space, Is Gravity being Induced?
A Challenge to Plasma & Neutrino Physicists 2009

Hello, my name is Stephen Goodfellow.
Does Non-Space exist? Can gravity be induced? This video is an invitation, a challenge to plasma physicists and solar neutrino physicists.
I will be the first to admit that the concept of Non-Space and gravitational induction is so outrageously preposterous, that I would not have made this video, if the concept did not rest on a plasma laboratory experiment that could be performed within the limits of contemporary technology, and an observational neutrino prediction that ought to be possible in the foreseeable future.

What is Non-space? Consider the theorized black hole, an over-abundance matter falling in on itself becoming a gravitational sink that not even light cannot escape from.
It is useful to think of Non-Space as being on the other end of this spectrum.
Non-Space is a condition in which space is vacated from a volume. Thus, it is not an empty space, it is a volume empty of space. This Non-Space volume causes exterior space to implode gravitationally upon its boundary.
It is a violent reaction as space attempts to close up the non-space, and in doing so, annihilates mass into energy as it presses in upon the Non-Space boundary.
How can Non-Space come about?
Non-Space is achievable with a high energy plasma.
A high energy plasma imbued with a dynamo effect causes electrons to disassociate from protons. These then act within like camps, electrons with electrons, and protons with protons, each particle contributing its magnetic moment to the whole.
I believe it is the repulsion of these like camps that disturb the fabric of space, allowing for the appearance of gravitationally inducing Non-Space.

The plasma experiment would consist of a high energy plasma discharge, coupled with a gravimeter: An appropriate gravimeter device placed close enough to a Z-pinch discharge, will demonstrate a minute but measurable, momentary increase in the force of gravity towards the discharge, and in doing so, demonstrate that gravity can be induced without a corresponding quantity of mass.
A successful outcome of this experiment will have far-reaching implications, because it will confirm a direct link between the electric, magnetic and gravitational forces. Furthermore, Gravitational Induction will have fundamental implications upon the very foundation of contemporary physics, in that the experiment demonstrates that the relationship between mass and gravity are not inviolate.

From the many inquiries I have made over the years, I am given to understand that this experiment has not as yet been performed, nor is anyone other than myself expecting this result.
I liken it to Hans Christian Ørsted's accidental experiment, when he happened to notice a compass needle jump when inducing a current through a wire.

Solar neutrinos: The observation I seek, is a compilation of solar neutrino data: When compiled, it will show that the angle of incidence of solar neutrinos emanating from the Sun will be expressed in a concave graph rather than a convex graph. A convex graph, is what one might expect from a standard model of the sun, with neutrinos emanating from the Sun's center.
The concave graph which is what I am predicting, will demonstrate that neutrinos are emanating from the shell and atmosphere of the Sun, and not from its core. To my knowledge, no one is expecting a concave graph.

The data will infer that the Sun is a magnetically constrained Non-Space volume. This volume is sustained by an exterior shell best described as a magnetically unified high energy plasma. The interior volume of Non-Space induces gravity, causing the Sun's shell to continually implode. This implosion of the Sun's mass releases energy, magnetically sustaining the Sun's interior volume of Non-Space.
I make no claim as to the particular nuclear chain reaction leading to solar energy output, merely that it is distributed in a shell, gravitationally crushing in on the Sun's interior non-space.

A Non-Space solar interior would also explain why sunspots are dark rather than light, and why strong magnetic fields are associated with these lower depressions in the Sun's photosphere.
Also, an expanded solar shell of matter with a Non-space interior would account for the Sun's slow rotation, in that the rapid expansion from a smaller, dense proto-star to larger shell would slow its angular momentum.


Now, I expect significant skepticism for these extraordinary claims, and I realize that the experiment and observation might well return a null result, rightfully condemning my contemplations to the historical trash-heap of absurd ideas.
Consider though, that the plasma experiment is achievable with our present technology, and I suspect at a relatively reasonable cost, and the solar neutrino data-collection ought to be feasible the foreseeable future.

It would be a great shame not to perform the plasma experiment, for if by the slimmest chance the experiment produces a positive result, is that not in itself enough incentive?
And, if the proposed experiment, with the potential seed of a positive result languishes, would history not condemn today's plasma physicists for their reticence? Would we have to wait, leaving the discovery to a future generation, a generation who would look back and mock you?

I think it is appropriate to say, I am looking for my Eddington. Are you that Eddington?
Thank you so much for taking the time to watch this. Goodbye.