Traditional science has not been able to provide a rational answer as to why a person standing on the planet Earth has no sense of movement even though the planet is travelling at speeds around the sun of approximately 67,000 miles per hour, with the solar system travelling around the Milky Way at approximately 500,000 miles per hour, and the Milky Way, in turn, heading towards the constellation of Virgo at 900,000 miles per hour. In my view, traditional science with its reliance on formulae cannot provide a complete understanding of how the system works. Perhaps, a fluid system design model can provide some of the answers.
As a former aero engine fuel system designer it was a constant irritation that the letter ‘g’ in an equation was not backed up by a credible fluid system design model. (The Inverse Square Law of Sir Isaac Newton is not a fluid system design model: it is a spanner to be picked up and used in calculations, hence ‘g’ was not backed up by a credible fluid system design model). Design is a question of successive comparisons between existing know-design models: this will not be found in any textbook but is simply bred into young designers over many years of training. Many years later, after careful study at the Brynmor Jones Library, University of Hull and the help of the Computer and Mathematics departments, it became clear to me that the answer to what systemic role does ‘g’ play may have a sub-atomic explanation and that creating a credible fluid system design model might help in achieving a proper understanding of gravity which is fundamental to the airship industry.
This article will attempt to explain that an understanding of the sub-atomic construction of hydrogen is vital to an understanding of gravity. And hydrogen is built into the very psyche and experience of the airship industry. Indeed, it is only through an unfortunate turn of events in the 1930’s that the practical experience and success of airships such as USS Los Angeles was not built on (disastrously) from an experimental viewpoint. In my view the study of airships, and their practical use, will greatly develop our understanding of gravity.
It is suggested that it may be impossible to observe more than a tiny fraction of all the matter in the universe. By some calculations over 90 per cent of matter in the universe is not radiating at any wavelength in the entire electromagnetic spectrum. Though there are many candidates for ‘dark matter’ it would appear to be a distinct possibility that ‘dark matter’ may in fact be ‘graviton’ or particles of gravity providing a ‘fluid’ in a universal fluid system. In my view, the universe is mostly composed of solid gravitons and we, and the rest of the everyday world are the exception. The first point to understand is that such hypothetical particles are extremely small. I understand from mathematicians at the University of Hull that the size of a ‘graviton’ would be equivalent to a 50mm diameter sphere divided in half 111 times. It is further suggested that the gravitons are so small that they might flow through the atoms of all objects like a fluid flowing through a net to the centre of the earth. The nucleus of an atom has been likened, comparatively, in terms of size to a ‘fly in a cathedral’. This would leave, theoretically at least, a considerable amount of vacant space in an atom. It would not be unreasonable, as a fluid system design model, for the flow of gravitons through the atoms, it is suggested, provides the well-known effect of gravity pinning us all to the earth. Everyone is standing in a river flow of gravitons. This is why we have no sensation of speed as we hurtle around the universe on our planet.
The next part of the hypothesis is the notion that gravitons are attracted to protons. My guess is that this is connected with space pressure which results from the dark matter and would seem to be a constant given that the speed of light is also a constant. Perhaps the process can be compared to the Coanda Effect. Space pressure cannot be present at the surface of the proton. For a moment the graviton is enticed into orbital mode about the proton by the applied force of space pressure. This removes a graviton from the space pressure system, and starts off a chain of events that we call “the effects of gravity” with differential pressure around the proton accounting for the attraction of gravitons to protons. The gravitons may be arranged in a disc around planets comparable to the ring around Saturn but much thinner (perhaps only a few centimetres) to provide a constant flow of gravitons – this ‘disc’ would explain why water rotates opposite directions, when going down a plug-hole, on either side of the equator.
But why is this so important in the context of hydrogen? The fundamental point to grasp is that hydrogen has a single proton and does not require the association of a neutron. Hydrogen is the only element that presents classification problems, and is sometimes assigned to no specific group at all the other elements. (In other words, the perfect candidate for our quest). It is perhaps the simple honey bee (or may be not so simple) that provides the key. As a matter of strict aero-dynamics a bee should not be able to fly, or hover in a storm. This suggests that it may possess a mechanism for sub venting the usual effect of gravity. In my view the only realistic explanation for this phenomenon is that the bee must have a physical mechanism that is able to prevent the usual attraction of gravity particles to protons in the nucleus of an atom. This is not to suggest that the bee is utilising the sub-atomic simplicity of the hydrogen atom’s internal structure which provides a key to understanding how it might successfully switch off the normal effects of gravity.
With the requirement for heavy-lift airships becoming of critical importance, the simplicity of the hydrogen atom with its easily detached electron would make a scientific investigation of this area most necessary.
Purpose of this article
The purpose of this article is to encourage fluid system designers to become involved and come up with their own ideas as to a systemically convincing model for gravity.
Research for the article carried out in the Brynmor Jones Library, University of Hull 92 – 2001