Interesting Evaluation of Magnetism

Credit: Theoria Apophasis

This is what this model has shown since the the beginning. 

Jeri Ellsworth, Goddess of Gaming

Jeri Ellsworth, Goddess of Gaming

She and a partner built a totally 3d experience for gaming. This is amazing technology. Please support her in completing this by raising money on Kickstarter so this becomes a new gaming system for us to purchase and experience. 

Forgotten Technology Magnetic Logic Gates

Credit Jeri Ellsworth

This is a great video on magnetic logic. Enjoy

Sparking the Moon

The large craters on the moon are generated by plasma pulses. At www.Suspicious0bservers.org
Billy Yelverton runs plasma experiments.
At minute 4:41 a spark of material is ejected from the analog of the moon. Bright too.

Credit www.Suspicious0bservers.org

This shows how the large circular craters with a central cone are formed. The plasma strike super heats and ejects material and when the charge returns it pulls material up the center freezing instantaneously. These strikes all occur perpendicular to the surface. The walls of these craters are much taller then the surface. As if melted, pushed up out of the crater and instantaneously frozen. These plasma strikes never produce regolyth.

We may not see the actual plasma due to the vacuum of space, but we do see the result.

Whereas, meteor impacts always show bright white regolyth in an elliptical pattern from the point of impact.

Tycho Nova Video from Chandra

This is a time elapsed video from Chandra of Supernova Type 1a Tycho. In Chandra's 15 yr mission NASA has collected several images of the Supernova and put them in a short movie
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/chandra/chandra-movie-captures-expanding-debris-from-a-stellar-explosion.html

It is easy to notice material moving away from the center of the supernova, temperature changes, and if measured correctly speeds at which the material is traveling.

Image credits: X-ray: NASA/CXC/GSFC/B. Williams et al; Optical: DSS; Radio: NSF/NRAO/VLA

3d Structure of Planetary Nebula

3D Structure of Planetary Nebula. 

I found this on the Suspicious0bservers Youtube channel. It is a great paper on modeling Nebula in 3 dimensions. How they are now using 3d ideas to image objects that appeared flat. Now we are seeing details never imagined.

Much love to little Kenzie and Joe

Check the Moon for any new Circular Craters Around the Poles

A large CME erupted towards the Earth. Not only can these affect the Earth, but they are responsible for the circular craters that have mountains in the center of the craters. This is a solar electrical lightning strike that causes these circular craters.

A circular shape means the impact was direct. The mountain is caused by material freezing as the electrical strike retracts.

Asteroid and meteor impacts are not direct. The resulting crater is elliptical. The ejecta is bright white whereas solar lightning impacts are a much darker color. The lightning melts the material.

Video Credit www.suspicious0bservers.org

Winds a quarter the speed of light spotted leaving mysterious binary systems

Reference:

C. Pinto et al. ‘Resolved atomic lines reveal outflows in two ultraluminous X-ray sources’ Nature (2016). DOI: 10.1038/nature17417. - See more at: http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/winds-a-quarter-the-speed-of-light-spotted-leaving-mysterious-binary-systems#.dpuf

Winds a quarter the speed of light spotted leaving mysterious binary systems

Suspicious0bservers

Magnetic Field of Rotating Conductors

Credit: Jean De Climont

As a consequence of the Rowland effect in a rotating conductor, the motion of electrons can not be the cause of magnetic fields and the intrinsic magnetic field of electrons is not a dipole.

The experiment just performed to verify this alternative view of electron magnetic field topology is presented in a new video.

Français  https://youtu.be/fcZHGNBRxws

Deutsch   https://youtu.be/ziR30kAWm5o

The #1 Risk to Earth

By Ben Davidson
Www.suspicious0bservers.org

This is an overview of his observations on how the sun works and dangers it can produce for the the Earth.

Solar Events and Earthquakes

Credit Suspicious0bservers.org

Here is a video and paper describing large earthquakes caused by solar events. This blog has discussed this but these amateurs and scientists have made a full study of this phenomena.

Credit Dr. Kongpop U-yen

http://spaceweathernews.com/spf/

Tetraquark: Not Found By Other Super Colliders

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-tetraquark-particle-sparks-doubts/

Credit CERN
Credit Clara Moskowitz

The issue here is that the results were not reproduced by other labs. Nor did the original lab have 5 sigma events to check for errors properly.

The reason we only see 3 Gluon Baryons has more to do with Trigonometry and conic sections than physics. The physics must be supported by mathematics. Not the other way around. We cannot create mathematics to support ideas of physics.

Obvious Errors in Quantum Entanglement

Since you chose to block my ability to comment on this topic...

This is the failure of space-time. It is flat and 2d until a hole connects two space-time layers.

Reality shows space is 3d and time is local to the individual subatomic vibration. Time is the increase or decrease of energy in motion.
www.aaronsreality.blogspot.com

Strange Clouds Hypothesis

We are seeing strange clouds. Many people call them chemtrails. The Airforce is blamed by some.

A hypothesis has been brought forth by Suspicious0bserver.org
1. The sun is going to solar minimum.
2. This causes the earth's magnetosphere to lose power also.
3. Cosmic rays can penetrate the magnetosphere to a lower level.
4. Cosmic rays rupture co2 and h2o to their constituent elements.

That is what produces chemtrails that are at such a high altitude.
This is why there is so many being seen recently.
Cosmic rays are bad for humans.

To learn more please go to Suspicious0bserver.org 

Arizona State University picked to build spacecraft to monitor CME and meteor strikes

https://asunow.asu.edu/20160310-discoveries-asu-satellite-air-force-space-threats

Disproof of Graviity :New LHC results suggest there's a flaw in the standard model of physics

This is a great article.
By Fiona MacDonald.

http://www.sciencealert.com/the-latest-lhc-findings-hint-at-strange-physics-beyond-the-standard-model

"Right now, the standard model is the best explanation we have for how the Universe works and how it's held together. But there are big gaps - most noticeably, the fact that the model doesn't actually account for gravity"

It goes on to explain other errors that physics cannot account for. This model does account for these issues. Why things are organized in threes. Density instead of gravity. How to manage motion without gravity.

It is nice to see type LHC working on these problems.

Comet coma threw Mars' magnetosphere into chaos

Credit NASA Goddard
http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/close-comet-flyby-threw-mars-magnetic-field-into-chaos

Must read article.

Axiom Seven: Data Input photon

The electron acts as the baryon's I/O. The axiom 6 describes the output of the electron.

 The photon vibration is smaller the width than the electron and would statistically never hit an electron. In order to hit the electron a photon is captured by a W+/- Boson (magnetic torus) and bent and slowed or stops rotating until the photon hits an electron or an electron is induced by the W+/- Boson. There the electron reads the data and sends it to the gluons via the Z Boson. There it changes the status of the baryon. The Zeeman effect shows this principle.
http://aaronsreality.blogspot.com/2009/07/zeeman-effect.html

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeeman_effect

This process shows the properties of the photon in motion and capture, including how photons bend in direction and deliver data like emitting element information, magnetic lensing and magnetic redshift, spectra, heat.

When a photon hits a polished mirror, metal or glass, it reflects. The reason for this is polishing process causes all electrons to move to the rear layer. A photon never hits an electron on a polished surface. This is how reflective telescopes operate.

Where as other surfaces like paint absorb the photon and release information about itself. But the painted surface, by absorbing the photon change the baryons characteristics. A photon transmits heat along with other data. Polished surfaces reflect these photons/heat. Glass focuses this heat.

Not enough events to state 5 Sigma

https://plus.google.com/+AmineBenaichouche/posts/8qq7pfWFDzi?_utm_source=1-2-2

LIGO claims 5 Sigma on 1 event.
Higgs Boson claims 5 Sigma on 4800 events.
Then there is this.

Op Ed : Gravitons May Not Exist

Why Quantum Mechanics cannot Explain Gravity?

http://www.space.com/32147-why-is-gravity-so-hard-to-understand.html?cmpid=514639_20160304_58934776&adbid=z13fwzfplnmggnrhe04cdfipkv2pdz4xr3o&adbpl=gp&adbpr=109556515093730290049

By Paul Sutter at Space.com

The Data Supporting LIGO' s Failure.

LIGO data event occurred on 9/15/2015 or 9/16/2016 depending on where you live on the planet. What surprised me most is that the scientist at LIGO did not look to the Sun as the origin of the event.

The Earth experienced earthquakes on 9/15/2015 and 9/16/2016  in Chile. An 8.4 located near Santiago 20:20 local time. "The total number of aftershocks through 5 a.m. Chile time on Tuesday, September 22, 2015 (128 hours after the earthquake), has been 563, of which 29 (5%) have been between 5.5 and 7.6 on the Richter Scale. "  credit  John Cobin.

Lets look at the solar data from 9/13/2015 20:00

Notice the many Delta class sunspots. 

Then we have the solar flare monitor

What we see here are several solar flares emitting vast amounts of energy at the Earth. They happen to hit the earth at the exact time LIGO records an event.

Here is the magnetosphere being bombarded by solar flares when LIGO says two blackholes collide.

None of this was ruled out by LIGO. At best this is poor science. At its worst, it is scientific fraud. Trying to maintain Einstein's work.

Axiom Six, Data Flow and Order of Operations of Baryonic Communications Output of Data

I have understood light has always been characterized as a wave and a particle. But they are correct in say it is only received through the electron. This model suggest the photon is a lateral wave. It has electromagnetic properties, spectra records, frequency, wavelength, rotation, temperature, velocity and length. This produces all the aspects a wave and yet its temperature and length causes one to understand it as having particle properties. This is an incorrect assumption. It is a data stream.

In this model a Z Boson induces an electron to emit a photon. This process of creation of the electron causes the oscillations in the electron as it stores the nuclear data from the baryon nucleus transmitted by the Z Boson as a Birkeland current.

The electron during the storage process causes release of a perpendicular oscillation of density called the Phonon. http://aaronsreality.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-oscillators-photon-phonon-magnon.html

After the Photon data is stored in the electron it is emitted as a Photon. The electron emits the data in a stream that has length, a starting point, the stream of data, and an ending point. This accounts for the quasi particle properties.

As the electron emits the photon it releases a Magnon. This is a perpendicular wave longitudinal spiral magnetic wave.
 http://aaronsreality.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-order-of-operations-of-electron.html

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnon

So the length and data of the photon causes the other particle quasi output properties.

One electron is responsible for three output waves. 2 longitudinal and one lateral. The  two longitudinal are density (Phonon) and magnetic (Magnon) , and the lateral wave is heat, spectra, wavelength, frequency, (photon).



Attention LIGO Community

Statistical Structures require more than one datapoint. Or in this case event. How is it that you have the ability to break staticial law? Statistics is about understanding large numbers of datapoints. It is not possible to get a 5 sigma analysis from a single datapoint.

These papers from LIGO should never have been published. They fail to meet mathematical rigor.

A Free Book for Dissident Scientists

This is a fantastic 

The Failure of Pure Science

By Jean de Clemont

This is an important book for scientist working in new paradigms or models. The first part shows the questions and failures of pure science and current models.

The second part of the book shows different models and paradigms. What issues they are having and what obstacles they have overcome. He covers Information Theories, Energy Theories, Ether Theories, Light and Wave Theories, Vibration Theories, and a few more.

This Author pulls no punches in his criticism of many theories and philosophies. He is also supportative of new lines of thinking and models.

Enjoy

Gluon Contribution to Proton Spin

By Karen Mcnulty Walsh at http://phys.org

http://phys.org/news/2016-02-physicists-gluons-contribution-proton.html

The Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) is evaluating how Gluons affect Protons spin. Data is showing the Gluon as described in this model has more influence over Proton spin than Quarks.

The Standard Vibration Model describes Gluons as the strands of nuclear densities that have active information whereas Quarks lack information.  Three Gluons form a Baryon. The Quarks are the excess storage area of Gluon strands. Thus Quarks have less of an affect upon the spin of the overall Proton.

This Research was done at Brookhaven National Lab
http://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.93.011501

First Papers Disputing LIGO Conclusions

This came to me from Suspicious0bservers Youtube channel. It shows there is room for alternative theories to gravity that would produce similar results.

Detection of gravitational waves from black holes: Is there a window for alternative theories?

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1602.04738v1.pdf

LIGO Data Skewed to Einstein's Model

I have read the LIGO Interferometer results and conclusions which can be found at 
http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061102

With other papers at
https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/page/detection-companion-papers

It is easy to say "We found it" and dance around the room. But here there is no reference to magnetism or how the Zeeman effect would be involved. The LIGO interferometer is a Michelson laser based system and would be skewed by magnetism. This is not discussed in the paper on the findings. This is poor science, since a entire set of forces I.e. magnetism is not examined as a possible producer of these waves. Is it more likely, since the Earth is a rotating magnet, that these waves would be magnetic.

 The main issue with these gravity waves is they rely on gravity. No force has been found at CERN or the other colliders showing a force called gravity. This is a problem for the conclusions at LIGO since they are based on gravity. They have been looking for the force called Gravity for 70 years at those machines. It would have been the first force found since it is suppose to permeate the universe between objects.

Also after 400 plus years Gravity is still a 2 body equation. So technically it would have no effect on the Earth since it is just a 2 body equation. 

Axiom five: Dark Matter

1. Dark Matter are Gluons without information, magnetism, or rotation.
1.1 Dark Matter densities form lattices, clumps, and other non-uniform shapes.

2. Dark Matter exists outside magnetic fields only.
2.1 When a magnetic field comes into contact with Dark Matter it excites the Gluons with information.
2.2 This simple magnetic excitation causes three Gluons to form triplets and start rotating.
2.3 This single triplet in rotation is a Baryon creating magnetism, electricity, electromagnetism and density oscillations.

3.1 Dark Matter is repelled by Magnetic Fields.
3.1.1 Dark Matter cannot exist within a magnetic field.
3.2 Dark Matter insulates / compresses electric current in open space.
3.3 Dark Matter has no effect on electromagnetism.

NASA finally agrees the sun is a magnetic object.

Many of us have come to this conclusion years ago. Yet NASA is now agreeing with our discoveries. Mine, Suspicious0bservers, Doolan, and so many others have already come to this conclusion and moved forward. We were correct but dismissed.

NASA GODDARD.

Also this proves the Zeeman Effect. It goes forth to the disproof of gravity, blackholes, wormholes, timetravel and other paradoxes created by gravity.

Spiral Galaxies are magnetic objects. These are long lived rotating objects.
Elliptical Galaxies are thermonuclear objects. These are short lived. Their lifespan is twice the halflife of the elements within the stars.

The Aether By Jean de Climont

Dear Sir,

The wrong direction was given two centuries ago to the electrical current. 

A similar error occurred with the magnetic field of electrons presently postulated with a dipole topology within the standard model, although there is no experimental evidence. 

The electron magnetic field has in fact the inverse topology: it has not a dipole structure but a rotational structure. The main consequence is the necessity of an aether.

This alternative view of electron magnetic field topology is presented in a new video. The video may be seen from the producer home page: 

http://editionsassailly.com/assailly_english.htm

Videos

English 

Français  

You will find 550 dissidents scientists proposing alternative theories based upon an Aether in the World wide dissident scientists list new issue 2016 now including more than 8000 names with many more emails and web addresses together with more information on critics and alternative theories. (Note that the coversheet is dated 2014 although the contents is 2016)

As a consequence of this increase of dissidents found in the Internet I have updated the book "The failure of pure science"

Happy New Year,

Magnetic Hypothesis by Fenton Doolan.

 18/1/16

“The Magnetic Nature of the Solar System”  

I have recently updated my alternative model of the operation of our solar system based on my observations of an unusual magnetic phenomena.

During the September school holidays in 2013 I spent a lot of time on the internet researching Einstein's theory of General Relativity in particular his ideas about space-time.

As I have become more interested I've researched more and more. I came across the following Youtube clip which explains an unusual magnetic phenomena.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyvfDzRLsiU  ( 3 mins )
( or Google search: Amazing discovery with magnets Youtube )

When I saw this clip I became aware of a possible mechanism which may explain why the moon orbits the earth.

Using this mechanism I have built up a model for the Earth and the Sun based on my observations regarding the magnets.  I have developed the following hypotheses from these observations.

The reason the moon orbits the Earth is not due to a gravitational attraction between the two and no it's not due to a curvature in space-time.

HYPOTHESIS 1: The moon orbits the Earth due to a magnetic attraction.

I believe the Earth is acting like an inverter magnet. The movement of molten rock/iron/nickel inside the Earth and its solid iron core act like the large central magnet.

These movements of molten metals create electrical currents inside the Earth which induce the Earth’s magnetic field.

Fig 1  A typical representation of the Earth’s magnetic field.

In Fig 1 The centre of the Earth is presented as acting like a bar magnet. No allowance has been given to the magnetic material (magnetite) in the Earth’s continental crust or the ocean floors (oceanic crust).
Deposits of iron oxide (magnetite) under the Earth's surface (continental crust) and on the world’s seafloors ( due to seafloor spreading from mid-ocean ridges) are acting like the small satellite magnets in the clip.

Fig 2:   Location of large deposits of  iron oxide on the continents of Earth.

Fig 3:  Mid Ocean ridge- magnetic  nature due to magnetite.

( Image Credits Fig 1/2/3 : Google Images )

I believe the magnetic field lines of the sun and planets should produce a shape very similar to concentric circles or ellipses.

These magnetic field lines produce the pushing force which we call ‘gravity’.

On Earth ‘gravity’ I believe is created by the Earth’s magnetic field pushing on our atmosphere.

Objects accelerate towards the surface of the earth due to this ‘pushing force’ produced by the Earth’s magnetic field on the atmosphere.


HYPOTHESIS 2:  The strength of the Earth’s magnetic field steadily increases to a maximum level corresponding to the moon’s orbit around the Earth then decreases in strength as the distance from the moon increases.

Near the surface of the Earth the Earth’s magnetic field is relatively weak due to its interaction with the air of Earth’s atmosphere.

The ‘virtual’ photons which create Earth’s magnetic field are absorbed by the gas molecules making up the Earth’s atmosphere.

I predict the Earth’s magnetic field increases significantly outside the Earth’s atmosphere where ‘virtual’ photon absorption is non-existing.

As the Earth rotates on its axis it produces a rotating magnetic field.


HYPOTHESIS 3: The Earth’s magnetic field (magnetosphere) and the moon’s magnetosphere couple as explained in the Youtube clip.

From my research I realize the moon does not (anymore) have a global magnetic field but does have a magnetosphere on its far side.

Fig 4:  Moon’s magnetic far side

 I believe that the moon has essentially ‘clipped’ onto the Earth’s magnetic field.

The reason why on Earth we only see one side of the moon is not because it rotates on its axis in synchrony with its orbit around the Earth.

We only see one side of the moon due to this coupling effect as shown in the Youtube clip.

My hypothesis would predict that the moon does not spin on its polar axis as it is locked in place due this coupling / inverter magnet effect.

This explains why the rotational period of the moon appears to exactly match its orbital period around the Earth.

From a sidereal view the moon would appear to rotate on its axis but I believe this to be an illusion.

Similarly this explains why the moons of the other planets, predominantly show only one face to their respective planet.

Synchronous rotation and Tidal locking are erroneous explanations for this observable phenomena.

Nikola Tesla’s 1919 article in the ‘Electrical Experimenter’ magazine also suggests that the moon does not spin on its polar axis.  (http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikolatesla/articles/moons-rotation-0 )

Simple demonstration which shows that the moon does not need to rotate on its polar axis for only one side to be visible from Earth:

(Tape a ping pong ball to the inside of a hula hoop. Rotate the hula hoop, since the ping pong ball is attached by tape to the hula hoop it can not rotate ‘spin’on its own polar axis. A person standing in the centre of the hula hoop will only see one side of the ping pong ball. The ping pong ball has zero polar axial rotation.)

Comment by Stephen Crothers:

I agree that synchronous rotation and tidal locking are not why the Moon maintains the same face towards Earth. The scientists have offered no rational means by which such a situation could arise and be maintained. It's just another of their many nebulous explanations for things they don't understand. That the Moon moves in the manner of the locked magnet in the film clip is very interesting. Your ideas are promising. ( Stephen Crothers )

Comment by Miles Mathis
I agree with you.  It is a sort of tidal lock, but the lock is caused by the charge field, not the gravity field.  But since the tides are also a charge effect, it isn't strictly wrong to continue to use the tidal lock term.  But I can understand why you prefer to drop it. ( Miles Mathis )

I read on the NASA website that the Earth's magnetic field has been weakening since 1850.

The strength of Earth's magnetic field varies as well; it has been decreasing slightly ever since around 1850. ( NASA Internet Article )

I have also read that the moon is actually moving away from Earth at a rate of
3.8 cm per year over the past 40 years.

I wonder if that is due to mining of iron ore over the last 166 years which is causing the Earth’s magnetic field to decrease in strength ?

HYPOTHESIS 4: Also suggests that the sun acts like a gigantic inverter magnet as well, which the planets are magnetically attracted to. The sun’s sunspots are acting like the satellite magnets in the clip.

Fig 5 Sunspot in photosphere -                                      
magnet satellite magnets in clip.

Fig  6  The suns internal magnet- inner
   in clip.

Recent article suggesting that stars have strong internal magnetic fields

Maunder’s Butterfly Diagram
www.astronomy.com/news/2016/01/strong-magnetic-fields-prevalent-in-stars

Graph 1:  Maunder’s Butterfly Diagram

One noteworthy observation is the absence of sunspots above 40 degrees in either hemisphere. However, the most important piece of information is that at a beginning of a cycle the sunspots are mostly in the 20 to 40 degree ranges in both hemispheres. As the cycle comes to an end the sunspots mainly occur close to the sun's equator. This means that over time there is a plasma flow going on beneath the sun's surface from the outer portions of both hemispheres towards the equator. This is a very important point in understanding the flow and magnetic activity of the Convective Zone. All solar events are strongly influenced by the solar magnetic cycle, since the magnetic cycle serves as the "energy engine" for all solar activities. The sun's dynamic magnetic field defines the Photosphere's features, the Chromosphere, the Corona, Solar Prominences and CMEs, the Solar Wind and eventually the shape of the Heliosphere. It is noteworthy that the sun's magnetic field and cycle effects our whole solar system.
(Reference:http://www.solarsystemcentral.com/sunspot_cycles_page.html)

Inclination of the Planets to the Sun’s equator

Inclination
	Name	Inclination to ecliptic	Inclination to Sun's equator	Inclination to invariable plane[3]
Terrestrials	Mercury	7.01°	3.38°	6.34°
	Venus	3.39°	3.86°	2.19°
	Earth	0	7.155°	1.57°
	Mars	1.85°	5.65°	1.67°
Gas giants	Jupiter	1.31°	6.09°	0.32°
	Saturn	2.49°	5.51°	0.93°
	Uranus	0.77°	6.48°	1.02°
	Neptune	1.77°	6.43°	0.72°

Table 1:  Inclination of planets to the Sun’s Equator  ( Credit:  Wikipedia )
There seems to be a relationship between the location of sunspots and the inclination of the planets to the sun’s equator.
I believe that the sun’s magnetic field permeates throughout our solar system with a sombrero like (or torus) effect emanating from the proximity of its equator.

Fig 7:   The Sun’s magnetic torus ( Credit: Google images )

Planet Densities

The planets are ordered by density. It helps show that mass is not the interaction that is involved in planetary motion.

Planet	Density (g/cm^3)
Mercury	5.427
Venus	5.204
Earth	5.515
Mars	3.934
Jupiter	1.326
Saturn	0.687
Uranus	1.27
Neptune	1.638
Pluto (dwarf)	1.88

Table 2:  Density of planets in our solar system
The densities of the planets show order. There are 3 main categories of the order.

 Solids        Gas           Ice  

( Reference Aaron Guerami: Aaron’s Reality )
I believe that the planets, all the moons of the solar system and the materials of the rings of Saturn all orbit their associated planet/sun due to two factors

1. inverter magnet effect
2. rotating magnetic fields

These masses are all following the rotating magnetic field lines produced.

Venus has no moons as it does not generate a large magnetic field of its own, thus has been unable to capture any matter.

Venus may have an induced magnetism from the sun. Thus Venus still follows a magnetic field line produced by the sun.
The literature states that Mars does not have global magnetic field but does have a remnant magnetic field ( or clusters of small magnetospheres). I believe these small magnetospheres on Mars do create a very weak global magnetic field surrounding Mars. Hence Mars has two very small moons orbiting it.

The following article seems to support this idea about how global magnetic fields are formed.

http://phys.org/news/2015-11-physicists-clue-formation-magnetic-fields.html

HYPOTHESIS 5: I believe our solar system operates on a magnetic basis or alternatively an electro-magnetic basis.

The sun’s rotation on its axis generates a rotating magnetic field (Parker Spiral) that results in planetary motion around the sun.

Fig 8:  Parker Spiral  (  Credit:  Google images )

My hypotheses do not require the existence of a ‘cosmological constant’ as suggested by Einstein to counteract the effects of gravity.

HYPOTHESIS 6:  The unaccounted variation of 43 arc seconds per century for the Precession of Perihelion of Mercury is caused by random variations in sunspot activity over the century.

Fig 9:  Mercury’s Precession of Perihelion ( Credit: Google images )

From my research,  it seems that Einstein knew that the unaccounted variation of the Precession of Perihelion of Mercury was 43 arc seconds per century. So he was able to adjust his value of pi.

Comment by Stephen Crothers on pi:

If you go to Einstein's book, 'Relativity: The Special and the General Theory', to Section III, the part titled 'The Possibility of a"Finite" and yet "Unbounded" Universe, Einstein argues that pi is not even a constant. His argument betrays that he did not even understand elementary geometry. He gives the following equation to make pi variable:

pi = [sin(r/R)]/(r/R)

where R he says is the radius of the world sphere and r the radius in a spherical surface. He talks of flat beings confined to the spherical surface in order to get his expression above. Einstein is talking drivel. A spherical surface does not have a (world) radius because it is a surface. Einstein's r is merely a segment of a geodesic in the surface. His expression for pi is consequently patently false. Einstein didn't even know the meaning of pi. He might just as well try to claim that Euler's number is also variable. It isn't.  ( Stephen Crothers )

In essence my hypotheses does not require the force of gravity.

Gravity I believe is a fictitious force which has for centuries dominated our collective psyches, created to allay humanities unconscious fears of the unexplainable effects of magnetism and its associated historical links to the occult.

The phenomena known as Gravitational lensing should be actually termed Magnetic lensing.

(In the paper referenced below - Manipulating Light with a Magnetic Field, Bart A. van Tiggelen and Geert L. J. A. Rikken show that light is bent through a very small angle in a strong magnetic field inside a non-scattering, homogeneous media.)

http://lpmmc.grenoble.cnrs.fr/UserFiles/...

Gravitational red-shift should be termed Magnetic red-shift ( or commonly known as the Zeeman effect ).

Einstein’s space-time fabric may actually be the magnetic field ( ‘virtual’ photon field)  produced by the sun that permeates like an ‘ether’ throughout our solar system.

I predict that the planets bend the magnetic field emanating from the sun and consequently partially couple their magnetic fields with the sun’s magnetic field.

HYPOTHESIS 7:  Pluto’s largest moon Charon is tidally locked due to it having a magnetosphere on its far side (same as our moon) which has coupled with Pluto’s global magnetic field.

Pluto’s four smaller moons are not tidally locked as they do not have any significant magnetospheres.

Orbit of Pluto’s moons  ( Animation created from New Horizons data )

http://www.space.com/31071-plutos-moons-orbit-pandemonium-new-horizons.html

Comment by Stephen Crothers

Charon and the other moons are interesting. If a magnetic field is detected for Charon then your theory would be significantly reinforced. Certainly Einstein's General Theory of Relativity is incapable of accounting for such motions. It cannot account, in principle, for the very existence of N > 1 bodies, and so it is meaningless.  (Stephen Crothers)

HYPOTHESIS 8: Black holes don’t exist. (As proven by Stephen Crothers) Dark Energy Stars are left after supernovae explosions as suggested by Professor Laughlin ( Nobel Laureate) and Professor Chapline.

These Dark Energy Stars are the mysterious Dark Matter of our universe. They form a type of  ‘magnetic well’.

HYPOTHESIS 9: I predict that the internal structure (composition) of the planets and stars (suns) are responsible for the magnetic or alternatively electro-magnetic force of attraction between these heavenly bodies.

As such I believe the Einstein’s ‘Strong Equivalence Principle’ will be invalidated by the ongoing study of the ternary system of a pulsar with two stars orbiting it.

My ideas I believe would be consistent with the Quantum Mechanical Model.
As such I would suggest that this magnetic model can also be applied at a Quantum level.

I would also suggest that in our universe there exists only 3 dimensions.

Comment by Stephen Crothers

I agree that only three spatial dimensions exist. The claim by Minkowski, and subsequently Einstein and his followers, that time is on the same footing as the three spatial dimensions, forming thereby a 4-dimensional space-time continuum, is false. This is perhaps most easily seen in the fact that the spatial dimensions are measured in units of distance, such as metres, whereas time is measure in altogether different units of duration, such as seconds. In order to make time appear to be on the same footing as the three spatial dimensions, Minkowski et. al. multiplied time by a speed, the speed of light c thus, d = ct. Then by setting c = 1, the so-called 'relativistic unit', in pro-numerals d = t. This now looks like time and space are combined. However, simple dimensional analysis on the symbols gives [d] = L, [t] = T. If the coefficient of t is taken into account then [ct] = (L/T)T = L. If the unit coefficient c = 1 is taken into account, [c] = [1] = L/T. Thus, c = 1 is a speed of 1 unit of L per unit time T, the unit of distance being the distance that light travels in 1 unit of time. The 4-dimensional space-time continuum is farce.  ( Stephen Crothers )

Einstein would not have known that our moon has a magnetic nature as he died in 1955. When moon rocks were bought back by the Apollo 11 mission in 1969  and analyzed, it is my understanding that scientists were shocked to find out they all were magnetic.

I know my hypotheses go against contemporary physics ideology but I think sometimes in Science we tend to ignore the obvious and invariable try to over complicate theories and ideas.

Comment by Wal Thornhill (EU)
I’m pleased to see you thinking seriously about gravity and magnetism. They are very similar dipole phenomena, which means that gravity doesn’t merely attract but can produce a balanced system.  ( Wal Thornhill )

I believe Einstein was correct when he stated:
“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.” ( Albert Einstein )
Thanks for reading,

F.D