Visiting Gravity Again

I'm going to try to revisit this gravity dilemma again, first visited in 2013, and first observed and thought of by me in 2011.

So, basically, the idea is that gravity doesn't seem to have a very clear cause. They seem to indicate that mass plays a role. The bigger the mass, the more gravitational pull it has. However, objects seem to fall at the same rate, even though one is much heavier than the other. This could be because of the enormous size of Earth compared to a tennis ball versus a bowling ball. However, it doesn't make a lot of sense, otherwise. It seems that differences in mass would make a difference on the gravitational pull.

Also, hydrogen and helium float, even though lithium doesn't float. The atomic mass of lithium is barely more than helium. It is still less than oxygen, nitrogen, and elements in the atmosphere. If displacement of molecules were the reason why hydrogen and helium floated, then why doesn't lithium float? If displacement is not the reason, then why does helium and hydrogen float?

Interestingly, gravity seems to act on all objects, whether or not they are metal. This makes it less likely that gravity is due to polarity. However, it is interesting to note that metals tend to be more heavy. I wonder, if the enormous magnetic field could be responsible for gravity.

There is such a thing as molecules having polarity, even if they are not made of metal. Perhaps all molecules have polarity, and gravity is really due to polarity and magnetism. Scientists adamantly deny this to be the truth.

Let's think for a moment about the idea that it were polarity. What about the idea that all atoms are balanced with positive and negative charges? What if the movement of the electrons actually changed direction with the direction of the gravitational pull? If all of this were true, why would helium and hydrogen float, still? It doesn't make sense, unless lithium didn't float because it were a metal, and metals were heavier due to their increased ability to be affected by magnetism. If you look, every single element before Nitrogen is a metal except Carbon. If that were the reason, displacement could explain why they float, but Carbon is not a metal.


What is the deal with carbon, then? Why does it not float? It is considerably lighter. Could it be some kind of thing that is more magnetic than helium but less than other metals? Why are there so many contradictions here? Will we find the answers? To be continued.


If you’re thinking it’s polarity, then let me direct you to a previous essay. It points out that the masses and speeds of the planets are all out of proportion to the momentum they would need to have centrifugal force. Are they wrong about the masses and speeds?

Jupiter is 20 times the size of Mars, but Mars is smaller than Earth. The masses indicated by NASA show Jupiter having a 316 times greater mass than Earth and Mars having a mass 82 times smaller than Earth. However, Mars’ velocity is slower than Earth, and Jupiter’s velocity is slower than Mars.

If gravity did actually act equally on all masses,  then why isn’t the change in the distance from the sun directly proportional to the change in velocity? Are they wrong about those figures?

But wait, what if gravity is exponentially decreasing with distance? That would make sense. It does seem kind of exponential the proportions of distance to the sun versus velocity of the planets.

However, why would helium and hydrogen float then, if gravity acted equally on all masses?

What the f$&@?