Magnetic Fields and MM

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by EBTX</i>
<br />In MM, gravitation is a force applied at right angles to the direction of motion ... around a central body which enables that force to operate in such fashion by providing a "shadow".<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">It is a right angle only for circular orbits. In the general case, the direction of the force is the direction of the source mass casting the shadow, even if the target body is moving right toward it.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">But if the central body is removed how would such right angle motion be explained ... as in the effect of a magnetic field on a charged particle?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">We have not discussed on this Message Board the details of how MM explains electricity and magnetism. The article explaining it was published in the Meta Research Bulletin of 12/2003, and is still under the 2-year embargo (so supporting members receive a benefit that others do not and our research can continue being supported).

But the short story is that E&M are primarily forces caused by elysium density changes, not by gravitons. So different rules apply. -|Tom|-

If gravity is a result of the bombardment of gravitons wouldn't objects on the nightside of the Earth weigh heavier
than those on the sunny side?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by 1234567890</i>
<br />If gravity is a result of the bombardment of gravitons wouldn't objects on the nightside of the Earth weigh heavier than those on the sunny side?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Earth is mostly empty space, which is why neutrinos mostly fly right through it without any interaction.

Gravitons are 10-20 orders of magnitude smaller than neutrinos, so almost all of them pass through unobstructed too. When the occasional graviton does interact, it is equally likely to interact with any matter ingredient inside the Earth, even deep in the interior or on the opposite side. That is why gravity is proportional to mass and not surface area.

So the only reason the apple falls is because slightly more gravitons strike it from above than from below because Earth does absorb some gravitons.

As for day vs. night, the Sun's blockage of gravitons at Earth's distance is fairly small. So the gravitational force of the Sun on Earth's day and night sides is almost identical because the difference of distance from the Sun is too slight. That tiny difference of distance produces what we call a "tidal force". -|Tom|-

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Earth is mostly empty space. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I was under the impression that there was no empty space in MM.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Skarp</i>
<br />I was under the impression that there was no empty space in MM.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">On the contrary. Every scale is dominated by space empty at that scale. The fact that it is occupied at some other scale is irrelevant.

What does it matter to the consumer that a doughnut has a center filled with air molecules? At the doughnut-eater's scale, the center is empty.

The trick is to realize that everything is filled only in the limit as scale approaches infinitesimal. But for any real scale, there are high-density regions and low-density (apparently "empty") regions, with the latter dominating. So motion is always possible because the high-density regions can move into the low-density ones.

So in summary:
(1) There is no scale at which all space is occupied. Space is mostly empty at every scale.
(2) There is no point in space that is empty at all scales. Every point is filled at some scales and empty at others. -|Tom|-

Perhaps you could identify some scales, or are we as humans limited to one scale? Is a humans life one scale and an ants life another scale, or does a new scale start at the atomic level? Is a galaxy another scale? Just trying to pin down a scale as apposed to another in your model.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">(1) There is no scale at which all space is occupied. Space is mostly empty at every scale.
(2) There is no point in space that is empty at all scales. Every point is filled at some scales and empty at others. -|Tom|-<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

So is the entire universe empty or full? From actual observation of any number of scales we must conclude the universe is essentially empty with a caveat that it's not set in stone. From an infinite perspective - The universe is full with no stone to rest the statement. Or is the universe both empty and full by which no clear understanding is possible?
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The trick is to realize that everything is filled only in the limit as scale approaches infinitesimal.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> How do you ever approach an infinity of scale?
278643985487584/infinity equals 547884839894867373838/infinity.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">But for any real scale, there are high-density regions and low-density<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> This can't be determined by any means whatsoever in MM if higher and lower density were even possible.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">So motion is always possible because the high-density regions can move into the low-density ones.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> Motion is untenable in MM from an infinitely dense perspective. There is no place to go that isn't taken.