Painius, responding to Bert writes,

i happen to believe that the strong
nuclear force *does* show an influence
beyond the nucleus in the form of
large-scale magnetic force. We disagree
in that Bill also connects the strong force with the large-scale force
of gravity, and
i happen to associate gravity with the
weak nuclear force.

Well Paine, since you make the concession that magnetism is an 'outside
the nucleus' manifestation of the strong force, why not carry the chain
of logic a little further.. Magnetism behaves as a bipolar inflow with
its polarity or 'sign' determined by spin direction, does it not? When
sufficient numbers of nuclei become aligned en masse, they collectively
generate the bipolar flow field we call a 'magnetic field'.
But what about when the nuclei are *not* aligned (are
aligned randomly)? The inflow is still happening, but lacks the spin
component of magnetism. Thus it is monopolar, the basis of the 'reverse
starburst' inflow of what we call gravity. Ever so subtly at first, it
draws together the gases of protostellar clouds into stars and star
systems, and ultimately accretes sufficient mass to produce BHs. It
operates across astronomical distances and mediates Keplerian and
Newtonian laws, yet has its genesis in the seat of the strong nuclear
force. Wolter deduced the gravity-strong force connection years before
it was echoed by Lindner/Warren.

But the connection is impossible to make under the VSP, since there is
'nothing' to flow.

IIRC, some while back you questioned why some materials are magnetic and
others not. Under the spinning flow model, apparently the atomic
structure of most matter is 'transparent' to the spin component,
rendering it nonmagnetic, while magnetic material is 'opaque' to the
spin component. Zinni'll have a field day with that oneg if he hasn't
already used his 'Plonker'.
oc