plane of ecliptic better explained Chapt14 Dirac's Ocean of Positrons= Space (and tells us what gravity is) #106 Atom Totality theory 5th ed.

You know it is hard to replace gravity with positron-space and think
entirely
in EM as the force, and it is hard because we are all so used to
gravity. But if
we think of this Positron ball as the center of the Sun and Earth and
that the
Space encompassed by Sun and Earth as positron space then we can begin
to reconcile our old view of gravity with this new view as EM. We see
it in
General Relativity where we have a Sun depressing the space fabric
around it
and then toss in a ball as Earth and how the ball revolves around the
depressed
fabric. And that depressed-fabric of where mass bends space, that
fabric
is positrons.

So what is nice about Positron-Space as gravity is that it is
everywhere, since
space is everywhere, and it takes so little of positrons to bend
space. As I wrote
earlier, a pea sized positron ball at the center of the Sun is all it
takes to hold up the Sun and the Solar System and a poppy seed sized
positron ball for Earth is all
it takes. Now I probably was wrong in saying that a orange sized and
grapefruit sized positron balls for globular clusters and for galaxies
in solid body rotation, for those positron balls are far smaller than
a orange size or grapefruit size.


Subject: Dirac's Ocean of Positrons = Space = gravity
Subject: several ways of proving positron-gravity is superior to mass-
gravity

In the prior post I started to list a partial list Â*from (a) through
(d) of where positron- 
gravity better explains the actual data of
gravity:
Here let me ramble on some more about Positron-gravity:
Positrons would have no minimum mass to form a gravitational 
bonded
system, whereas mass-gravity has a minimum that is larger than 
some
reported asteroids gravitationally bound. If you have a few positrons
in the center of a asteroid you can quickly have a bound system with
other 
asteroids.
The oblateness of planets and stars should not exist to the extent
seen with mass-gravity. The agreement between observed oblateness and
theoretical oblateness is better with positron-gravity. The
oblateness 
of Earth 
is especially discordant with Newtonian mass
gravity and with General- 
Relativity. Oblateness in a Positron-
gravity is due primarily to the 
fact that 
the positron-center-ball
itself is spinning on an axis and is oblate 
itself, which 
mirror
reflects the oblateness of the planet body.
In mass gravity systems, over time the bodies should all disappear
into a central clump as they continue to lose energy and thus 
become
swallowed up inside the central clump. However, in 
positron-gravity
there is no steady inevitable decay of orbit 
since the planet and
star have a repelling gravity of its positrons repelling other
positrons. So in the old Newton mass gravity 
you do not have that
extra term of a gravity-repulsion that you 
have with positron-
gravity. This repulsion term provides stability 
for which we see
every day in the Solar System. If Newton's 
mass gravity were true
then our Solar System would have disappeared 
some billions of years
after it was borne, simply because 
mass-gravity continually loses
energy and swallowed by the central 
star. Mercury should not have
survived for 4 billion years.

Subject: Picturing positron-gravity

Well this is not a really easy picture. First off, we realize that
ordinary matter comes in both proton and electron. And where we never
see antimatter unless we probe the vaccuum of Space.
So we have to distinguish between Positron-Space and a positron
obtained in a laboratory.
So that when I speak of a pea sized sphere at the center of the Sun
of positrons that causes all the Sun's gravity as a Coulomb force, I
do not mean a 
dense sphere of pure positrons. I mean a dense sphere
of Positron- Space.

Quantum Physics is about particles and there really is no study of
Space as Quantum Mechanical. So in QM, talking about an atom you talk
about protons, electrons, neutrons, neutrinos, photons and other
particles, but QM is rather lacking in discussion of the Space
wherein 
these particles reside or interact. Space is sort of the
hidden assumption. And one way to 
make this picture is to think of
the center of the pseudosphere as the 
center of 
the Sun. The normal
matter of the Sun is the sphere of the Sun as a 
astronomical body and
the Positron-gravity is thought of as a 
pseudosphere-center. The Sun
in our Solar System has the largest 
pseudosphere-center as the center
of the Sun itself, with Jupiter the 
next largest pseudosphere-
center. 
And here I am trying to put Space on par with the other
particles of 
Quantum Mechanics.
So what I am saying is that a hydrogen atom is composed of several
particles, 1 proton, and 1 electron, and many photons. But a hydrogen
atom also has Space wherein that proton and electron reside and that
Space is part of the QM of a hydrogen atom. And I am going to call
that space a Positron-Space. So the hydrogen atom is composed of 1
proton, 1 electron, many photons and the Positron-Space that houses
the electron. That space in the hydrogen atom is 
a pseudosphere whose
center is identical to the center of the atom and 
which does not
house a 1 unit of positron but houses 10^-40 unit of a 
positron in
that 
individual hydrogen atom.
Now Positron-Space can be tinkered with to produce actual positrons
such as the experiment of coaxing positrons from the vaccuum of
space.
In Newton Mechanics and Classical Physics and General-Relativity,
Space is thought of as empty and ready to be filled by ordinary
matter. This is a poor assumption of physics, and even today in
Quantum Mechanics we have Space as a hidden assumption.
So since all of Quantum Mechanics that we speak of, involves
particles 
that interact in a Space but we never detailed what Space
actually is 
in QM. 
Now we begin to detail what Space actually is, as
Dirac first proposed 
that 
Space is an Ocean of Positrons. But Dirac
was not going to get any 
followers 
of his ocean of positrons as
space, simply because Dirac did not have 
the 
Atom Totality theory to
house that idea.
So here I am beginning to detail Space in QM as a particle itself and
the best evidence of what particle that Space is, is the positron
since whenever we apply energy to the vaccuum of Space out comes
positrons.
So do not think when I say that a pea sized sphere at the center of
the Sun and a poppy seed
or micron sized sphere at the center of the
Earth as positrons as 
actually tiny spheres of positrons. 
What they
are is that the entire Sun is a Positron-Space pseudosphere 
matching
the regular 
matter or ordinary matter of the Sun and that the
positrons of the 
Positron-Space are 
most dense at the center of the
Sun holding all the mass matter of the 
Sun
in a gravity hold.
So I do not want to give the impression that if someone could visit
the center of the Sun 
or center of Earth that they would see a pea
sized sphere of 
positrons or a micron 
sized sphere of positrons in
the Earth and that these tiny spheres 
give us the 
gravity.. The
picture I do want to present is that ordinary matter 
occupies space
and the 
Space of the Sun has caused a dense Positron-Space in the Sun
center that is 
the form of a pseudosphere center. And 
this 
Positron-
Space is the force of gravity itself where the positrons of 
the
pseudosphere attracts 
the ordinary matter in its vicinity. So gravity
becomes an ordinary 
Coulomb force.

Now while writing the above I thought of another supporting 
evidence
for 
Positron-gravity and dismissal of mass-gravity. There is an
obvious 
observation of our solar system which is lacking of a theory
explanation. It is the plane of the ecliptic and also the commonplace
spiral galaxies such as our own Milky Way. 
Does gravity as mass imply
that galaxies or solar-systems should form 
planes 
of revolution? The
plane of revolution of the rings of Saturn is 
another example. 
So
the question here is whether the mathematics of Newtonian gravity 
and
General Relativity gives the outcome of plane of ecliptic, of 
spiral
galaxy plane and of plane of rings of Saturn? I doubt it, yet I 
have
not worked it out, but I am 
confident that Positron-gravity is a
better explanation and the reason 
I say that is 
because if you look
at a picture of a pseudosphere, it has one feature 
in common 
with
the sphere that it is enclosed inside of, for both share the same
identical 
equator. The mathematics of the pseudosphere and sphere are
identical 
of their 
equator. The equator is the plane of the ecliptic
and the spiral of 
the elliptic galaxy and the rings of Saturn is that
pseudosphere 
equator inside Saturn.
As I understand it, the mathematics of gravity in General Relativity
is the same as in Newtonian mechanics which brings up a sphere, yet
that math does not bring up a plane of ecliptic nor the Rings of
Saturn. 
But what does bring out the plane of ecliptic and rings of
Saturn is 
the mathematics of both the sphere with the pseudosphere
included so 
that 
the equator of both are equal. So in a dynamic
system of gravitational 
attraction they end up in planes and the
superior math of Positron- 
gravity wins over the inferior math of
mass-gravity.

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies